Go Back   nV News Forums > Graphics Card Forums > NVIDIA GeForce 7, 8, And 9 Series

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-22-03, 11:02 PM   #13
Matthyahuw
Registered User
 
Matthyahuw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: AZ
Posts: 919
Send a message via ICQ to Matthyahuw Send a message via AIM to Matthyahuw Send a message via Yahoo to Matthyahuw
Default

well, since nVIDIA's Bilinear looks better than ATi's Trilinear, I think it's just fine to me...
__________________
Shalom!
Matthyahuw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-03, 11:03 PM   #14
Ruined
Registered User
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,447
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
I demand absolute fidelity in audio or video. I don't compromise it.
Uncompromised fidelity impossible, and near-uncompromised is ridiculously expensive. They make speakers over $20,000 and displays over $20,000. An usually even they are compromised in ways. The funny thing is you'd probably get a much higher fidelity boost by buying a new, even higher quality display than any of the minor differences we see between these vidcards.
__________________
We're all in it together.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 2.66GHz CPU | Intel G965WH mobo | 8GB (4x2GB) DDR2-667mhz CAS5 RAM (1066MHz FSB) | BFG GeForce 285 GTX OC 1GB | Dell E228WFP 22" DVI-HDCP LCD Monitor | 1TB Western Digital RE3 SATA2 Main Drive | 500GBx2 Western Digital RE3 SATA2 Scratch Drives in RAID0 | Western Digital RE3 1TB SATA2 Media Drive | External 2TB Western Digital MyBook Backup Drive | Adaptec eSATA 3.0gbps PCI-E interface | Sandisk External 12-in-1 Flash Card Reader | LG GGC-H20L HD DVD/BD reader, DVD writer | LG GGW-H20L HD DVD/BD reader, DVD/BD writer | Microsoft E4000 Ergonomic Keyboard | Logitech Trackman Wheel | Antec P182 ATX Case | Thermaltake ToughPower XT 850w modular PSU | KRK RP-8 Rokit Studio Monitors | Windows Vista Ultimate x64
Ruined is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-03, 11:09 PM   #15
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruined
Uncompromised fidelity impossible, and near-uncompromised is ridiculously expensive. They make speakers over $20,000 and displays over $20,000. An usually even they are compromised in ways. The funny thing is you'd probably get a much higher fidelity boost by buying a new, even higher quality display than any of the settings we are talking about on these vidcards.
You can have the best speakers on the planet, and if you pair it with a preamp and an amp that aren't very good, they'll sound like CRAP.

And, you know what I mean. I don't want IQ sacrificed for speed unless I tell it to be sacrificed for speed. I bought the thing, it should be my damn choice how fast it runs.

And for the record, they make speakers that are $100,000. $20 grand is nothing to spend on a speaker.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-03, 11:52 PM   #16
SlyBoots
Registered User
 
SlyBoots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: La Grande, OR
Posts: 339
Cool lol

Quote:
Originally posted by Matthyahuw
well, since nVIDIA's Bilinear looks better than ATi's Trilinear, I think it's just fine to me...
I'm sure Stevie Wonder & Ray Charles would think so too
SlyBoots is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-03, 12:03 AM   #17
Hellbinder
 
Hellbinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: CDA
Posts: 1,510
Default

Quote:
Actually im surpzied we havent seen any threads about ATi pushing for HardOCP to change their review.

Isnt nvidia handleing that waaaaaay better than ATi?
I cant believe you even wrote that. Go back and read the article, the issues in Question and [H] constant conclusions. Thentell em somehow that ATi getting upset about it is Wrong...
Quote:
well, since nVIDIA's Bilinear looks better than ATi's Trilinear, I think it's just fine to me...
You know what I honestly feel sorry for people like you. becuase for no other reason than Blind bias as far as I can see you are totally happy with less and calling it better.
__________________
Overam Mirage 4700
3.2ghz P4 HT
SIS 748FX Chipset 800mhz FSB
1Gig DDR-400
60Gig 7200RPM HD
Radeon 9600M Turbo 128 (400/250)
Catalyst 4.2
Latest good read. [url]http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTc4LDE=http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTc4LDE=[/url]
Hellbinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-03, 12:18 AM   #18
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Unreal 'optimization' a non-issue?

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruined
But that site only deals with the FX5600 - it is possible Nvidia used a different optimization for the FX5600 hardware to make it more playable with UT2k3 since it does not have the fillrate or memory bandwidth of the FX5900.
the method for AA and AF should be the same on the nv35 as on the 31... unlss they really have changed something drastically...

there is also a unified driver setup is there not? for FX gpu's ?

I fail to see how issues raised with the 5600 will not carry on into the 5900..
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-03, 12:28 AM   #19
Ruined
Registered User
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,447
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by The Baron
[b]You can have the best speakers on the planet, and if you pair it with a preamp and an amp that aren't very good, they'll sound like CRAP.
Right, but both sources in this case are excellent.

Quote:

And, you know what I mean. I don't want IQ sacrificed for speed unless I tell it to be sacrificed for speed. I bought the thing, it should be my damn choice how fast it runs.
OK, but if reviewers stare at two systems playing the same game with the intention to find IQ differences, but cannot, is IQ really being sacrificed?

Quote:

And for the record, they make speakers that are $100,000. $20 grand is nothing to spend on a speaker.
Of course, the sky is limitless. But $20,000 is most certainly not 'nothing' to spend on a speaker. In fact, most would argue anything over $500 is a lot to spend on a speaker. And, being that I used to work in a hifi store, I can tell you that as you go up the ladder, the differences dramatically get smaller and smaller as the price goes up. Just out of curiousity, what are you running for audio?
__________________
We're all in it together.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 2.66GHz CPU | Intel G965WH mobo | 8GB (4x2GB) DDR2-667mhz CAS5 RAM (1066MHz FSB) | BFG GeForce 285 GTX OC 1GB | Dell E228WFP 22" DVI-HDCP LCD Monitor | 1TB Western Digital RE3 SATA2 Main Drive | 500GBx2 Western Digital RE3 SATA2 Scratch Drives in RAID0 | Western Digital RE3 1TB SATA2 Media Drive | External 2TB Western Digital MyBook Backup Drive | Adaptec eSATA 3.0gbps PCI-E interface | Sandisk External 12-in-1 Flash Card Reader | LG GGC-H20L HD DVD/BD reader, DVD writer | LG GGW-H20L HD DVD/BD reader, DVD/BD writer | Microsoft E4000 Ergonomic Keyboard | Logitech Trackman Wheel | Antec P182 ATX Case | Thermaltake ToughPower XT 850w modular PSU | KRK RP-8 Rokit Studio Monitors | Windows Vista Ultimate x64
Ruined is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-03, 12:56 AM   #20
reever2
Registered User
 
reever2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 489
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruined
OK, but if reviewers stare at two systems playing the same game with the intention to find IQ differences, but cannot, is IQ really being sacrificed?
It all matters on te game, how the perosn reviewing can see the game, and where the person is in the game. I think even Kyle or Brent said themselves that they can find places which would show iq loss and differences really well while others its a little harder
reever2 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-03, 01:34 AM   #21
XForce
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 40
Default Re: Unreal 'optimization' a non-issue?

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruined
So, basically, it appears the optimization many have been complaining about is a non-issue.
I'd say basically it appears that Brent & Kyle have lost their eye-sight.
Poor guys..
__________________
www.hardware-mods.de
XForce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-03, 01:57 AM   #22
extreme_dB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 337
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruined
OK, but if reviewers stare at two systems playing the same game with the intention to find IQ differences, but cannot, is IQ really being sacrificed?
I doubt people would be able to tell the difference between 100% image quality and 98%. But then, what about 95%? Or 93%? If it's a fast-paced first person shooter, then how about dropping to 90%? Companies can cut a few corners here, a few there...and most people wouldn't notice the gradual decline. Then, when the competition is forced to do the same to keep up (like ATI switching to partial trilinear in their quality AF setting after Cat3.1), they'll cut just a little more to maintain that extra edge.

This is the same type of rationale people use to justify any detrimental measure - do it little by little so it's hardly noticed. But one day you might suddenly realize just how far the measures have gone.

There will always be corners that can be cut, but would you rather have full control to make your own choices, or have your choices limited little by little? Consumers have to make a stand somewhere and not give up a single inch.

Even if image quality is barely affected, wouldn't you rather decide for yourself? There's a principle that needs to be upheld.

The other issue is making sure the cards are compared as fairly as possible. What if the competition can lower quality unnoticeably just the same to benefit performance-wise? Shouldn't we compare them at that level? But why are we comparing them at that level when we set out to test a higher level? Why are we lowering our standards?



Quote:
And, being that I used to work in a hifi store, I can tell you that as you go up the ladder, the differences dramatically get smaller and smaller as the price goes up.

"the differences get smaller and smaller"...exactly! You get diminishing returns at higher costs. The same can be said for video cards. It takes more and more performance for that extra little bit of IQ.

Using the speaker analogy, if a $100 000 speaker were to sacrifice quality just a little bit then it could end up sounding like a $20 000 speaker. Most people probably wouldn't notice because they wouldn't be able to distinguish and appreciate the slight difference a $100 000 speaker makes. If a rich person who doesn't know a lot about speakers wants to spend money for the best, they'll buy the $100 000 speaker and be happy, even though they could be getting ripped off!

Do you see what I'm getting at here?
extreme_dB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-03, 03:08 AM   #23
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Unreal 'optimization' a non-issue?

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruined
Yeh, but is that sensible, finding a particular screenshot that when studied might show some differences for one card or another? Maybe in another screenshot the Nvidia output would look better than ATI? If HardOCP ran through the levels on both cards and couldn't see any difference, isn't that really what matters, since playing Unreal consists of running through levels shooting people, not taking screencaps of, studying, and zooming in on far away textures?
The big problem here is when trying to exculpate NVIDIA you don't show screenshots where the issue is not present. Sure, you can show such shots. But you also have to present the worst case scenario too.

Let me give you an analogy since you seem to like those so much. Let's say there are 100 banks in a city. 50 of them have been robbed. As a reporter, you want to do an expose on bank security to find out what the problem is. Towards that end, you visit the 50 banks that have not been robbed. This doesn't tell you anything about what is wrong with the security of the 50 banks that have been robbed! In effect, you have uncovered nothing.

I will now copy and paste what I wrote in another thread, as it sums up what I feel about the [H] article:

[H]'s article was hardly "in-depth." In fact, it was a joke.

Quote:
The ATI driver control panel was set to “Application Preference” on both AA and AF so that we could test with AF disabled. Then we set the AF slider to Quality AF when AF was tested.
Not, only did Brent miss the boat, he missed the port and the whole damn city!

For those not in the know, let me explain further: ATI does not do full trilinear on all texture stages with AF enabled when you force on AF via the control panel. This has been documented, and furthermore, the issue was expounded on when the NVIDIA issues were discovered. Brent was told exactly what the issues were, and how to see the differences.

The differences are, ATI is doing full trilinear with AF off, while NVIDIA is using the hacked mode with AF on or off. This brings up the question, what was Brent comparing NVIDIA's mode to? Wasn't the whole point of the article to distinguish whether or not NVIDIA's methods differed from full trilinear or not, and to what extent they did?

There are also several obvious flaws in his conclusion
Quote:
1.) UT2K3 is a first person shooter. You run around real fast fragging people, you don’t exactly stand around to smell the roses. While you are doing this constant running around you are concentrating on so many other things that texture filtering between mipmaps is the least of your worries. Obviously there is a point at which the banding could be bad enough that it would bother you while playing the game. However, the transition between mipmaps is not something you will notice during gameplay with either card.
Dodging the issue. So because he cannot see the mipmap transitions that means no one can? The problem is, and always has been, that NVIDIA is not allowing you to select full image quality, and furthermore is advertising Quality mode as providing proper trilinear filtering. The issue is also easier to see in some stages than in others...[H] didn't exactly do a thorough investigation. It seems that they picked places to look at random, and without a very big testing bed.

Quote:
2.) Probably even more important is the fact that these are high-end video cards, and as such you will or should be playing with Anisotropic filtering enabled. When AF is enabled each card uses its own adaptive algorithm. Each card, as you can see in the screenshots, has very good AF quality. You will probably play with some level of AF enabled on mainstream cards as well, and possibly even on value cards. So when AF is enabled this whole issue is moot in our eyes.
It has been proven that the issue exists and is noticeable when AF is enabled. Let me expound on this. I cannot see any differences in screenshots using ATI's Performance AF and Quality AF. However, I can tell the difference in games when in motion. If you can see a difference in static screenshots, that means it will be more obvious when playing.

Quote:
It does seem quite obvious to us that NVIDIA is going about the Trilinear and Anisotropic Filtering quite different in this game than what we were familiar with in the past and quite differently from ATI. NVIDIA has seemingly found a way to do less work doing Trilinear Filtering than ATI while producing an IQ that easily comparable with ATI's.
Still some problems. The old "compared to what" question has not satisfactorily been answered. Brent did not compare NVIDIA's best achievable quality with ATI's best achievable quality, as outlined above. Not only that, but Brent's claims of NVIDIA finding a great new method of adapative trilinear are ludicrous, UT2003 is the only game that has it. Anyone want to take a gander why?

Not only that, he claims that ATI cards cannot have a comparable IQ/performance tradeoff with regards to trilinear AF in UT2003, which is again false, although true for the r9800 he was reviewing.

Discussion

Brent's article was a waste of time. Either you compare the cards at equivalent settings for an apples to apples approach(and it's the reviewer's job to play with settings to find this), or if that is not possible you add a disclaimer that one IHV's cards are not doing the same amount of work, therefore inflating the score.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-03, 05:58 AM   #24
Ruined
Registered User
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,447
Default Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Unreal 'optimization' a non-issue?

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
Brent's article was a waste of time. Either you compare the cards at equivalent settings for an apples to apples approach(and it's the reviewer's job to play with settings to find this), or if that is not possible you add a disclaimer that one IHV's cards are not doing the same amount of work, therefore inflating the score.
So I assume you'd agree that every review with the R9800PRO vs FX5900Ultra should include a disclaimer that the ATI's scores only are done at FP24, possibly inflating the score over the FX5900Ultra which can do FP32, which is more work, and therefore ATI may have an inflated score?

Or, when Doom3 benchmarks are released, since Nvidia's cards have the new Ultra Shadow feature that the ATI cards lack, which allows them to not draw parts of shadows that aren't being seen onscreen without affecting IQ thereby increasing fps, the reviewer should add a disclaimer that Nvidia is doing less work due to this and therefore may have an inflated score?

It seems like every review would be adding that both cards are doing less work for different games at times and both cards scores may be inflated... Then have a whole page dedicated to it. Like this?

"*For Unreal Tournament, Nvidia seems to use a filtering method that though not discernable while playing is less work for the card, and therefore Nvidia's score may be inflated. However, ATI also cannot operate at the same level of FP precision as Nvidia in UT, so ATI's score also may be inflated as they would be doing less work at the lower precision. For Doom3, Nvidia uses their new ultrashadow technology, which speeds up fps without loss of IQ, and since this feature is not available on ATI cards, Nvidia's scores may be inflated. Then again, they also may not be inflated since Nvidia can operate at FP32 when ATI cannot. Over the coming weeks, we will have to investigate the percentage gain when Ultrashadow is used in this game versus the percentage loss of when FP32 is used in this game to truly convey whether or not the NVidia card is doing more or less work than the ATI card, and therefore whether Nvidia's score in this game is inflated or not.. For game xxx... etc"

That sound about right? Reminds me of 'dual of wits' scene in 'The Princess Bride.'

P.S. -- I felt Brent's article was less a waste of time, and more a breath of sanity/rationality.
__________________
We're all in it together.

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 2.66GHz CPU | Intel G965WH mobo | 8GB (4x2GB) DDR2-667mhz CAS5 RAM (1066MHz FSB) | BFG GeForce 285 GTX OC 1GB | Dell E228WFP 22" DVI-HDCP LCD Monitor | 1TB Western Digital RE3 SATA2 Main Drive | 500GBx2 Western Digital RE3 SATA2 Scratch Drives in RAID0 | Western Digital RE3 1TB SATA2 Media Drive | External 2TB Western Digital MyBook Backup Drive | Adaptec eSATA 3.0gbps PCI-E interface | Sandisk External 12-in-1 Flash Card Reader | LG GGC-H20L HD DVD/BD reader, DVD writer | LG GGW-H20L HD DVD/BD reader, DVD/BD writer | Microsoft E4000 Ergonomic Keyboard | Logitech Trackman Wheel | Antec P182 ATX Case | Thermaltake ToughPower XT 850w modular PSU | KRK RP-8 Rokit Studio Monitors | Windows Vista Ultimate x64

Last edited by Ruined; 07-23-03 at 06:11 AM.
Ruined is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NVIDIA Responds to Reports of Kepler V-Sync Stuttering Issue Rieper NVIDIA GeForce 600 Series 13 03-03-13 10:56 PM
Gorgeous Unreal Engine 4 brings direct programming, indirect lighting News Archived News Items 0 06-08-12 09:20 PM
Star Wars 1313 running on Unreal Engine 3 on PC at E3, will be linear and light on Je News Archived News Items 0 06-08-12 05:20 AM
Intel's Ivy Bridge Core i7 3770K Overheating Issue Detailed News Archived News Items 0 05-16-12 10:40 AM
Does anyone like the cool water reflection effect in unreal 2003? imtim83 Gaming Central 15 09-20-02 10:18 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2014, nV News.