Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > Benchmarking And Overclocking

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-21-03, 01:31 AM   #109
hovz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 201
Default

in the det 50s, the objects in the backround are much blurrier, so they definatly sacraficed lod settings for performance
hovz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-03, 01:45 AM   #110
fivefeet8
Ngemu Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 1,886
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by hovz
in the det 50s, the objects in the backround are much blurrier, so they definatly sacraficed lod settings for performance
Much blurrier? Hmm. I don't think it looks much blurrier at all. In fact, a few of the shots show the 51.75's look less blurry.
__________________
[i7 2600k @4.4ghertz][2x4 GB DDR3 1600][EVGA GTX570 1.280GB SC][EVGA GTX460 physx][Asrock Extreme7 Gen3 Z68][2xSeagate 160 Gb SATA HD raid0][Seagate 250 GB SATA2 HD][Sony Bravia 40' 1080p LCD HDTV][NEC 3520a DVD+-DLw][Windows 7 Ultimate x64][Rosewill 1000w]
fivefeet8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-03, 10:29 AM   #111
hovz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 201
Default

if i had photoshop or something id draw red circles, but ill just point out the obvious one, in the rightmost picture of rust level, in the backround the textures are much blurrier in det 50, and actually i shouldnt have used much, its more of a minor sacrafice
hovz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-03, 10:55 PM   #112
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

Just wait till the official Dets 50s are out and they are modified for quality as it is the case with the StarStorm Detonators.

Then Nvidia will have the speed and the IQ to handle those maps.

I'm using the StarStorm Dets 45.23

You can check the quality here. performance wise is not much different than the official detonators at all for UT 2003. However DM-Icetomb does run like crap for me since it is based on Dets 45.23.

Quility wise is well you can see the difference. Much sharper images. awesome AF.

Check these shots for quality.

http://www.ngemu.com/forums/showthre...&pagenumber=19

http://www.ngemu.com/forums/showthre...&pagenumber=20
saulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-03, 10:58 PM   #113
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
Just wait till the official Dets 50s are out and they are modified for quality
o_0
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64
jAkUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-03, 11:11 PM   #114
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

Nice AF I wonder if ATI can do that.

http://www.ngemu.com/forums/attachme...chmentid=48303

http://www.ngemu.com/forums/attachme...chmentid=48299
saulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-03, 11:13 PM   #115
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
Nice AF I wonder if ATI can do that.

http://www.ngemu.com/forums/attachme...chmentid=48303

http://www.ngemu.com/forums/attachme...chmentid=48299
o_0


/take it from personal experience. nvidia cannot touch ati's image quality.
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64
jAkUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-03, 11:19 PM   #116
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

actually Nvidia's AF seems to be better. On the other hand ATI does have better FSAA and less performance hit which is sweet.

If you compare shots of the regular dets against my shots above you will find that Nvidia makes the image blury.

That's why I said that when the Det's 50s are modified like this they will be sweet!!!

Seriously the AF on these drivers is pretty sweet. So you guys can't bring that talk about blury graphics.
saulin is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 09-21-03, 11:22 PM   #117
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ah yes, NVIDIA's awesome UT2003 graphics, now with even less Trilinear Filter^H^H^Hling.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-03, 11:28 PM   #118
Hellbinder
 
Hellbinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: CDA
Posts: 1,510
Default

I think its pretty obvious that Any major speed Nvidia is gaining from the DET50 betas is primarily from not rendering any fog. As well as other detail reducing tricks. I'd be willing to bet its the same reason that performance is up in NFS and any other games.

To think they went on tech TV claiming they did not understand why Valve refused to have them used.

Not to mention they are still stating any HL2 benchmarks are "invalid" without them...

Disturbing.
__________________
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 09-21-03, 11:31 PM   #119
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
Ah yes, NVIDIA's awesome UT2003 graphics, now with even less Trilinear Filter^H^H^Hling.
anyways this article should explain it better.

Quote:
So there you have it, in the tests we've shown you today, ATI tops NVIDIA in anti-aliasing quality while NVIDIA bests ATI in anisotropic filtering.
http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardwa...tout/page3.asp

Oh well I'm off to bed...

laters dudes.
saulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 12:24 AM   #120
Hellbinder
 
Hellbinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: CDA
Posts: 1,510
Default

I have issues with that entire FS review. Not to mention their conclusions about AF are simply OFF. (actually I was thinking of their latest 5900U review)

Its funny how people will pick the one review out of 10 that *somehow* comes up with a conclusion they like to *prove* their point of view.

lets look at some of the other Quotes from this article.
Quote:
EDIT 8/22/03: Taking a closer look at the image, you can see slight differences between the RADEON 9800 PRO and the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, specifically if you look at the white rock on the left, just above the shoreline. Textures on the ATI card are slightly crisper than the GeForce FX, giving the 5900 Ultra a slightly blurrier look in comparison
and
Quote:
There is a much more pronounced discrepancy with 4x antialiasing enabled. The RADEON 9800 Pro maintains sharp textures and smoother lines, while the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra applies a more washed-out effect to the image. To illustrate the difference, check out the rock in the blown-up image (200 percent):
and
Quote:
The anisotropic filtering shots are not very conclusive. Both images are of comparable quality ; even blown up to 200 percent, the variance between them is too subtle to note.
and
Quote:
It’s a close race with all of the “eye-candy” turned up. NVIDIA continues to maintain a clear filtering advantage, while ATI’s anti-aliasing implementation is undoubtedly better. This one would have to go to subjective preference, as there are trade-offs apparent in each architecture.
Which i have a HUGE problem with because these guys went out of their way to chose screenshots that happen to be at the Peak weakest point of Atis Adaptive method. If you were to look at other shots from a normal Field of view the Radeon image would undoubtedly be BETTER. Especially at 16x AF. Combine that with the AA and its a no brainer. All these shots used to compare are taken out of normal game experience.
Quote:
The same issues that surfaced in NASCAR crop up once again in IL2. The RADEON 9800 Pro does a better job with anti-aliasing, while the GeForce FX demonstrates superior anisotropic filtering.
Again.. these screenshots are CLEARLY taken intentionally at the worst case sinario for ATi's Adaptive method. I have to wonder why they keep doing that. Most of the rest of the time the AF will look equal or Superior (16x).

Pretty Suspicious behavior if you ask me. their recent 5900U article is even more troubblesome.
__________________
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]

Last edited by Hellbinder; 09-22-03 at 12:33 AM.
Hellbinder 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
My UT2003 Tweak Guide DXnfiniteFX Gaming Central 48 10-30-02 11:59 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:57 AM.


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