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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-22-03, 09:35 PM   #133
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Oh God. Why did you link Doom 3 benches? We all know they're about as representative of the performance of the final game as version 0.02 was. We all know that NVIDIA was using a path with lower IQ than ATI. We know it's not running in high quality and is instead using medium quality. But yet some of us helpfully ignore all of that and continue to proclaim the NV35's Real Ultimate Power based on the PR Doom 3 benches.

If you look at the floor in the distance in your pics, it is blurry. Why? Because NVIDIA does not apply trilinear filtering at all to UT2003. ATI, helpfully, does not have this problem. They apply trilinear filtering to the first texture stage in UT2003 when anisotropic filtering is enabled, so that trilinear is pretty much all you need. They do real trilinear if you enable anisotropy from within UT2003. NVIDIA NEVER does trilinear in UT2003 when anisotropic filtering is enabled anywhere. It JUST AIN'T THERE.

NVIDIA's IQ is poor in regards to AA. That's the only place where their IQ is naturally poor. They are making their IQ worse by implementing application-specific cheats that decrease IQ for speed.

And re this:
Quote:
Tri Linear filtering is still enabled in other PC games? Or no?
Not as of 51.75. Oh, I love the wondrous Det 50s already.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 09:37 PM   #134
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by fivefeet8
Why would Tri Linear filtering be disabled in UT2k3 anyways? It doesn't decrease performance that much does it?

Tri Linear filtering is still enabled in other PC games? Or no?
NVIDIA is performing an extra aggressive version of ATI's AF. ATI does trilinear AF on texture stage 0 and bilinear AF on all other texture stages. NVIDIA does trilinear AF on texture stage 0 and 2x bilinear AF on all other stages. Looking at benchmarks the only place where performance is gained by this optimization is in games where IQ is lost.

The difference between the two IHVs is that you can get full trilinear AF on ATI cards, whereas there is absolutely no way to get full trilinear AF on NVIDIA cards. Also, when AF is off NVIDIA cards are doing the tri/bi mix unlike ATI cards. NVIDIA has been doing this since 44.03 for UT2003. With 51.75 they are doing this in all D3D games.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 10:05 PM   #135
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

You guys amaze me...

Of course the floor is a bit blurry when looking far and so is in the Radeon image. And if you compare both images you'll see the difference is like almost nothing.

That difference in AF is something you would not notice while running like crazy in the game.

Also who said you have to use the latest beta driver always?

Heck I'm waiting to see if the Dets 50s final will be worth it. If the image quality is gonna suck then of course I'll stick with the older drivers.


Also if you can't notice the IQ difference between the GF4 and the FX I'm not sure how you can tell the diff between the Radeon and the FX then.

The Gf2 GTS had better image that the GF 256 and the GF4 had much better IQ and the FX does indeed have better IQ. When I first saw my desktop on the FX I did notice the difference.


Want one more review?

http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews...lld19JRD01OTE=

I guess soo many people can't be all wrong or can they?


So to summarize this:

- FX IQ is more than descent in fact I could not get you guys make my FX IQ look like trash.

- Speedwise the 9800 Pro kills the FX in DX9 and in some of the current games. However I can see the FX has the lead in many current games.

- Nvidia is indeed *****ing up with the new Dets 50s. I'll just wait and see how the final product ends. I doubt they would sacrify soo much IQ for performance on the final product.

- With my overclocking I'm really not disappointed with the performance I get out of my card. I'm happy with the IQ is pretty damn good. I bought my card specially for Emulation and there it beats the crap out of the Radeon anytime.


So there you have it. I just wanted to let you guys know that the FX IQ is not as bad as it is said to be by Nvidia haters. I wanted to let you know that it performs better than the Radeon in many current games.

And I never said Nvidia has better IQ and that it will rule the DX9 world so don't even try to bring that up. I did say it does have better AF and that seems to be true in some games. As you saw in the link I posted. Also the driver I used for UT 2K3 are not the ones that are said to have the best IQ. In fact I read a couple of days ago that since 44.03 well 44.03 have the best IQ.

The End.
saulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 10:11 PM   #136
The Baron
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Also if you can't notice the IQ difference between the GF4 and the FX I'm not sure how you can tell the diff between the Radeon and the FX then.
*hits forehead*

They're the same. In everything. There is absolutely no image quality difference between the two. They have the same AF, they have the same AA, they have the same *everything.*
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 10:26 PM   #137
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

OMG you are so wrong dude. You notice it specially in 2D.

And how can it be the same when the FX can do 12X FSAA in D3D and 16X FSAA in OpenGL, well not officially but can be done. When the GF4 can not.

NVIDIA to improve 2D image quality on NV30
by Julio @ 2:20 AM - [Comments]

http://www.3dspotlight.com/



Quote:

Nvidia is working on this problem since the time of Geforce 3 TI 500 when we first time urged them to do something about this and we saw nice progress on Geforce 4 TI cards and learned that the real improvement will come in NV30 where engineers will pay special attention to this problem.

The company realises that the problem comes from some of their 15 or more partners who still have the freedom to use capacitors, resistors, RF filer parts or any other small component when making that Geforce cards. Some use cheap low quality components, you'll be horrified to learn.

Nvidia's answer to this problem is that with the NV30 it will start a new quality control process where it will make strongly encourage its partners to use the same parts that Nvidia uses for the reference design.

Read more: The Inquirer.

Last edited by saulin; 09-22-03 at 10:29 PM.
saulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 10:30 PM   #138
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
You guys amaze me...

Of course the floor is a bit blurry when looking far and so is in the Radeon image. And if you compare both images you'll see the difference is like almost nothing.

That difference in AF is something you would not notice while running like crazy in the game.
ROFL. "There is no difference in IQ but just in case there is you wouldn't notice it anyway."

Quote:
Also who said you have to use the latest beta driver always?
Just to reiterate, every driver since 44.03 does not do trilinear in UT2003. That includes two official releases, 44.03 and 45.23, and all beta drivers in between and since then. 44.03 is the driver that shipped with gfFX5900. It's not just the latest beta driver that has IQ problems.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 10:31 PM   #139
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
OMG you are so wrong dude. You notice it specially in 2D.

And how can it be the same when the FX can do 12X FSAA in D3D and 16X FSAA in OpenGL, well not officially but can be done. When the GF4 can not.
WTF are you talking about. The GeForce3 can do 12x FSAA in D3D

Discussion
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 10:37 PM   #140
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

???

I've been using aTuner for a long time and I never got those options untill I got my FX.

Yes using the same version too.

The best I got on my Ti 4600 was 8XS not 12X or 16X.

BTW can you confirm that the GF3 or GF4 can do 16X?

A quote from that same discussion link you posted.

Quote:
I wished 4xS was available in OpenGL. That is much better then 4x multisampling especially in motion. Except for my GF3 Ti200 at 240/500 core/mem the performance hit almost makes it unusable. For older games especially like flight simulators this is great stuff. ATuner works great by the way and wished Nvidia would have had these settings in their drivers for the GF3 owner crowd. I do get some lag though when using 4xS so maybe that is why Nvidia decided not allow GF3/4 owners the luxury of these settings.
So I guess Open GL does not have the extra modes then?

I never saw 16X on a GF4 that is for sure. I know cause I use OpenGL a lot for emulators and I went like WTF when I saw all the extra modes on my FX.

Last edited by saulin; 09-22-03 at 10:44 PM.
saulin is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 09-22-03, 10:45 PM   #141
saturnotaku
Apple user. Deal with it.
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The 'burbs, IL USA
Posts: 12,502
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
- Speedwise the 9800 Pro kills the FX in DX9 and in some of the current games. However I can see the FX has the lead in many current games.
Then what's going to happen when DirectX 9 becomes current? Say in two weeks when Halo hits the shelves?

NVIDIA's AF might look better in some cases, but the performance hit doesn't justify the IQ increase in most cases. And NVIDIA still hasn't fixed the lack of trilinear filtering in UT2003. And this was a major sore spot/contributing factor to my going back to ATI (along with the DX9 performance, inferior AA quality, etc).
saturnotaku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 10:56 PM   #142
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

You guys continue to amaze me after I posted screen shots for you to compare and all you could say is. Well far ahead there is some blurry spot. For fu@k sakes the Radeon has the blurry spot as well.

saturnotaku I don't think the FX will be able to handle all DX9 games. At least not with FSAA and AF.

At least Doom3 and Quake 4 I would think they would run fine.

Both companies should have new cards soon BTW soo the FX 5900U or the Radeon 9800 pro won't be the only solution for DX9 games and future games then.

You guys talk like these cards will be here for years. In fact I don't think even the Radeon 9800 Pro can last that long in future games if they will require the power HL2 does or more.

So you saw HL2 running at 60 fps in a benchmark?

Well what about in all other maps? What will happen when the action gets so intense in the game. I bet your FPs will drop like a wh0re on her knees.
saulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 11:03 PM   #143
saturnotaku
Apple user. Deal with it.
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The 'burbs, IL USA
Posts: 12,502
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by saulin
At least Doom3 and Quake 4 I would think they would run fine.
The FX will run Doom 3 just fine on its lowered precision codepath.

Quote:
Well what about in all other maps? What will happen when the action gets so intense in the game. I bet your FPs will drop like a wh0re on her knees.
UT2003 4xAA, 4xAF, 1280x1024 seems to run just fine for me with a whole lot of bots.
saturnotaku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-03, 11:17 PM   #144
saulin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
UT2003 4xAA, 4xAF, 1280x1024 seems to run just fine for me with a whole lot of bots.
It runs fine for me too with those settings. Of course that is not including the new maps like DM-Icetomb. Performance goes to hell there. Performance is back in the new Dets 50s still to be released. Of course I said I will wait for the final product where I hope I won't see much IQ loss. Or else fuc* the new dets. I would stick to the current drivers I'm using.

However HL2 may be a different story. Remember it is a DX9 game and it does demand a lot of horse power. I really would not espect UT 2K3 speeds on that game even if I had a 9800 pro.

My Scores at 1280x1024 4XAA and 4XAF

Last edited by saulin; 09-22-03 at 11:21 PM.
saulin 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 10-31-02 12:59 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:11 AM.


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