Go Back   nV News Forums > Software Forums > Gaming Central

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-25-04, 07:35 PM   #13
tEd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 61
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Malfunction
Why are there more polygons on the top pic than the bottom pic?

Peace,

because it has more fps

with my 9800pro the ps20 version is around 44fps(with 8x AF it's around 40fps) in that scene while ps1.1 is around 54fps

1024*768 vhq

Last edited by tEd; 01-25-04 at 08:42 PM.
tEd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-04, 07:58 PM   #14
MikeC
Administrator
 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Virginia
Posts: 5,480
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
the second screenshot is closer than the first one to the wall , looks bigger ,also notice the floor. can you take screenshots at the same distance? use the square in the floor as reference and the same angle in the weapon.
Or you can save the game. The starting position of the player is restored when the saved game is loaded. Use the save and load commands in the console.

\save_game nameofsavedgame
\load_game nameofsavedgame
MikeC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-04, 08:26 PM   #15
Viral
Registered User of Women
 
Viral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,523
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Malfunction
Why are there more polygons on the top pic than the bottom pic?

Peace,

That just reinforces the case further anyway.. even when rendering less polys than it did using PS1.1 it is still way slower.
__________________
Q9550 w/ Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme | 4GB Team Xtreme Dark 800MHz CL4 | Gigabyte X48-DS5
ASUS Radeon 5870 | 240GB OCZ Vertex 2 | 1TB WD Green Power | BenQ V2400W 24" LCD
Corsair HX-1000w | LG GGW-H20L 6x DL Blu-Ray Burner/HD-DVD Reader | Coolermaster Cosmos S

Acer TravelMate 4002WNLCi: Pentium M 725 @ 1.6GHz | Mobility Radeon 9700/64MB | 2GB DDR400 | 15.4" WXGA
Viral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-04, 02:00 AM   #16
shim
GF-FX 5800
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Aust
Posts: 44
Default

when i tryed this on my 5800 it didnt like it much due to textures being very glitchy.. nice post tho
shim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-04, 03:14 AM   #17
-=DVS=-
.:. Lafiel .:.
 
-=DVS=-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Outerspace
Posts: 3,009
Talking

Quote:
Originally posted by tEd
because it has more fps

with my 9800pro the ps20 version is around 44fps(with 8x AF it's around 40fps) in that scene while ps1.1 is around 54fps

1024*768 vhq
Obviously FX line can't even keep up at 16FP PS 2.0 , but what CPU did you had ?

ATI_Dude had
P4 2.53@3.02 GHz
Asus P4P800
512 MB PC3200 (Dual channel)
Leadtek A380 TDH MyVIVO GeForce FX 5950 Ultra 256 MB @510/1020
__________________
.:. Lian Li X500FX .:. i7 2600k .:. PNY GTX 680 .:. Corsair DDR3 8GB .:. Silverstone 800W PSU .:. Asus P8P67-M Pro .:. Crucial M4 SSD 512GB .:.
-=DVS=- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-04, 03:22 AM   #18
ATI_Dude
Registered User
 
ATI_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 396
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by SH64
Dosent work for me .

it recognize it as a R300 hardware but its uses PS_1.1 only!
Do i have to check any option on 3danalyzer list ??
Make sure "very high" is selcted for all graphics option. Then restart the demo using 3Danalyzer.
__________________
Regards,
ATI_Dude

Desktop: | Intel Core i7 2600K@ 3.4 GHz | Asus P8P67 Pro | 8 GB DDR3 1600 Corsair (2x4 GB) | Asus GeForce GTX 580 | Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty FPS soundcard | Segate Momentus XT 500 GB Hyprid SATA HDD | Samsung SyncMaster T220HD 22'' LCD | 650 watt Corsair HX650 PSU |

Laptop1: | MacBook Pro Uni-body | Core2 Duo 2.53 GHz (FSB 1066 MHz) | GeForce 9400M 256 MB DDR3 | 4 GB DDR3 1066 RAM | 500 GB Hitachi 5400 RPM HDD | 13'' LED 1280x800 | Dual Boot Mac OS X Snow Leopard & Windows 7 Home x64 |

Laptop2: | Dell Inspiron XPS Gen 2 | Pentium M Centrino (Dothan) 2.13 GHz (FSB 533 MHz)| GeForce Go 6800 Ultra 256 MB DDR3 450@1063 MHz (12 PS, 5 VS)| 1 GB DDR2 533 RAM | 100 GB Fujitsu 5400 RPM HDD | 17'' WUXGA LCD 1920x1200 | Creative Soundblaster Audigy 2 ZS Notebook |
ATI_Dude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-04, 04:34 AM   #19
ATI_Dude
Registered User
 
ATI_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 396
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Viral
That just reinforces the case further anyway.. even when rendering less polys than it did using PS1.1 it is still way slower.
It doesn't render fewer polygons, but fewer polygons PER SECOND using PS 2.0. From the two poly count stats one can see that PS 2.0 is about 40 % slower than PS 1.1 on my NV38 card. I'm sure the same would be true for a R3xx card although the difference between PS 1.1 and PS 2.0 would be smaller.
__________________
Regards,
ATI_Dude

Desktop: | Intel Core i7 2600K@ 3.4 GHz | Asus P8P67 Pro | 8 GB DDR3 1600 Corsair (2x4 GB) | Asus GeForce GTX 580 | Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty FPS soundcard | Segate Momentus XT 500 GB Hyprid SATA HDD | Samsung SyncMaster T220HD 22'' LCD | 650 watt Corsair HX650 PSU |

Laptop1: | MacBook Pro Uni-body | Core2 Duo 2.53 GHz (FSB 1066 MHz) | GeForce 9400M 256 MB DDR3 | 4 GB DDR3 1066 RAM | 500 GB Hitachi 5400 RPM HDD | 13'' LED 1280x800 | Dual Boot Mac OS X Snow Leopard & Windows 7 Home x64 |

Laptop2: | Dell Inspiron XPS Gen 2 | Pentium M Centrino (Dothan) 2.13 GHz (FSB 533 MHz)| GeForce Go 6800 Ultra 256 MB DDR3 450@1063 MHz (12 PS, 5 VS)| 1 GB DDR2 533 RAM | 100 GB Fujitsu 5400 RPM HDD | 17'' WUXGA LCD 1920x1200 | Creative Soundblaster Audigy 2 ZS Notebook |
ATI_Dude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-04, 09:05 AM   #20
SH64
MAXIMUM TECH
 
SH64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Indiana
Posts: 12,202
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by ATI_Dude
Make sure "very high" is selcted for all graphics option. Then restart the demo using 3Danalyzer.
Wow thanks it works now . my mistake that i used the command \d3d9_ ForcePS11 & forgot to disable it !!

the Fps goes from 39fps (PS1.1) ---> 25fps (PS2.0) ! thats about 35-40% performance hit!
settings were : 1024x768 ,4xAA , 0xAF , all very high [5950u + P4:3Ghz +1 gb ram] . at EXACTLY same distance


5950u using PS1.1





5950 using PS2.0

SH64 is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 01-26-04, 09:10 AM   #21
SH64
MAXIMUM TECH
 
SH64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Indiana
Posts: 12,202
Default

Hmmm looking at the screenshots proves what ATI_dude said .

the same amount of polys being rendered in the 2 sences , but the polys rendered per /sec using PS2.0 is lower !

Polygons = 12,949
Polygons /sec (PS1.1) = 0.504
Polygons /sec (PS2.0) = 0.323

And after testing the 5950U system with 4xAA ,8xAF the framerate dropped to 21 fps .
& after a few calculations with the other screenshot i posted on the other thread for the 9800XT with same settings + 4xAA ,8xAF we got around 35 fps i can say that the 5950u is slower than the 9800XT roughly 40% percentage when PS2.0 is used .(w/o taking in consider the view distance of the screenshots taken )

Last edited by SH64; 01-26-04 at 10:01 AM.
SH64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-04, 01:16 PM   #22
ATI_Dude
Registered User
 
ATI_Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 396
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by SH64
Hmmm looking at the screenshots proves what ATI_dude said .

the same amount of polys being rendered in the 2 sences , but the polys rendered per /sec using PS2.0 is lower !

Polygons = 12,949
Polygons /sec (PS1.1) = 0.504
Polygons /sec (PS2.0) = 0.323

And after testing the 5950U system with 4xAA ,8xAF the framerate dropped to 21 fps .
& after a few calculations with the other screenshot i posted on the other thread for the 9800XT with same settings + 4xAA ,8xAF we got around 35 fps i can say that the 5950u is slower than the 9800XT roughly 40% percentage when PS2.0 is used .(w/o taking in consider the view distance of the screenshots taken )
It's fair to say that while the game is playable with PS 2.0 with NV 3x hardware it'll take an NV40 or lower precision (FP16) to maintain tolerable frame rates at higher resolutions.
__________________
Regards,
ATI_Dude

Desktop: | Intel Core i7 2600K@ 3.4 GHz | Asus P8P67 Pro | 8 GB DDR3 1600 Corsair (2x4 GB) | Asus GeForce GTX 580 | Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty FPS soundcard | Segate Momentus XT 500 GB Hyprid SATA HDD | Samsung SyncMaster T220HD 22'' LCD | 650 watt Corsair HX650 PSU |

Laptop1: | MacBook Pro Uni-body | Core2 Duo 2.53 GHz (FSB 1066 MHz) | GeForce 9400M 256 MB DDR3 | 4 GB DDR3 1066 RAM | 500 GB Hitachi 5400 RPM HDD | 13'' LED 1280x800 | Dual Boot Mac OS X Snow Leopard & Windows 7 Home x64 |

Laptop2: | Dell Inspiron XPS Gen 2 | Pentium M Centrino (Dothan) 2.13 GHz (FSB 533 MHz)| GeForce Go 6800 Ultra 256 MB DDR3 450@1063 MHz (12 PS, 5 VS)| 1 GB DDR2 533 RAM | 100 GB Fujitsu 5400 RPM HDD | 17'' WUXGA LCD 1920x1200 | Creative Soundblaster Audigy 2 ZS Notebook |
ATI_Dude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-04, 06:29 PM   #23
Nv40
Agent-Fx
 
Nv40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 2,216
Default

thanks SH64 for the screenshots .. the diference is noticeable.

can u post now an R3xx screenshot in Ps2.0 with an Nv35 in pS2.0 ,at the same distance? it will be interesting to see if there are diferences between both when they are in full Ps2.0.
Nv40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-04, 07:08 PM   #24
SH64
MAXIMUM TECH
 
SH64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Indiana
Posts: 12,202
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nv40
thanks SH64 for the screenshots .. the diference is noticeable.

can u post now an R3xx screenshot in Ps2.0 with an Nv35 in pS2.0 ,at the same distance? it will be interesting to see if there are diferences between both when they are in full Ps2.0.
Here ya go ...
aah .. took me much time to get the right spot approx. becuase i'm using 2 PC's as you know .

Nvidia PS2.0



ATI PS2.0


Obviously ... the ATI renders the PS2.0 better than Nvidia in this screenshot . (even that the brighness is changed a lil bit)
BUT keep in mind that we forced the Nvidia card to use the PS_2.0 by the 3Danalyzer trick !!
so that may dosent reprsent the final quality for Nvidia's Full percsion shaders.

another note : the polys renderd per sec for Nvidia is less than the ones rendered by ATi . maybe that explains why it looks better ?!


EDITED : As for OWA 's question : Look at my post below .
it looks like there are some other places use PS2.0 . & dont forget its just a demo .
i agree with you .. they are hard to be noticed unless you keep stairing at them for a long period!
however i may need to take a look at the water shaders & make a comparsion between the 2 cards to see which one render better & at what performance .

Last edited by SH64; 01-26-04 at 11:27 PM.
SH64 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
BF1942 demo and Refresh Force cricket Gaming Central 2 09-04-02 09:29 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:39 PM.


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