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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-02-04, 05:56 AM   #157
Evildeus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 309
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay
Ati
Low:2x
Medium:2x
High:6x
You meant 4x i suppose
__________________
But if they think they're going to hold onto it, they're smoking something hallucinogenic - Jen-Hsun Huang
Evildeus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:05 AM   #158
Drax
Registered User
 
Drax's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 130
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

I did some rechecking on the AA I mentioned, and either it was different with the 60.11's (I had my 6800 very early on) or I was on crack at the time , but I remember having a noticeable reaction to how much less blury the picture was, and I was only changing the AA setting after having it on medium for a few days. But yeah it appears medium and high are the same AA settings for the 6800U
Drax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:10 AM   #159
Arioch
Registered User
 
Arioch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,087
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

I do notice a performance and IQ difference between low and medium on my X800XT card.
Arioch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:16 AM   #160
Drax
Registered User
 
Drax's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 130
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

I do wish the 6800's had a 6X mode. I didn't get to use it in FarCry on my 9800 pro but it was nicer then having a completely useless 8X mode that's good for.... er, Quake 2.

But then I think about SLI and I get happy again...
(not a bash, just being honest)
Drax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:19 AM   #161
Morrow
Atari STE 4-bit color
 
Morrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 798
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drax
Does the SM3.0 functions also take some work off the CPU?? (I kinda doubt it helps much there, but I'm no hardware expert) It would be nice if the larger battles saw some improvement as well.
Geometry instancing like it is used for the vegetation in the new FarCry patch does decrease CPU load noticeable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drax
It's not like ATI isn't ever going to have SM3.0 anyways. With the next batch of cards this will no longer be an issue, so Valve will no doubt have SM3.0 in the Source engine (before or after ATI's next launch will be the big question).
yes I know, next year ATI will also have SM3.0 capable hardware and they will actually profit as much as nvidia from the games which by then already support SM3.0.

However till the day arrives when the first SM3.0 Radeon ships, nvidia will have the advantage of being the only one supporting SM3.0 all along and offering increased performance in many big gaming titles. That's the reason why nvidia has been pushing SM3.0 for a few months. They want to make sure that SM3.0 matters before ATI supports it.
Morrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:19 AM   #162
MUYA
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 6,794
Send a message via MSN to MUYA
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drax
I do wish the 6800's had a 6X mode. I didn't get to use it in FarCry on my 9800 pro but it was nicer then having a completely useless 8X mode that's good for.... er, Quake 2.
you forgot Quake3 III too
__________________
I5-2500k@4.7GHz - MSI Z77A-GD65 - 4GB X2 A-DATA DDR3 1600 - Corsair H100 - Antec Quatro 850W
Gigabyte Windforce X3 GTX 680 OC - Dell 24" IPS
Intel 320 300 GB SSD - 1 TB Hitachi HDD - 2x 250 GB WD HDD
Corsair K90 - Corsair Venegance 2000 Headset - Razer Naga Epic
Corsair 600T Case
MUYA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:23 AM   #163
Morrow
Atari STE 4-bit color
 
Morrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 798
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drax
I do wish the 6800's had a 6X mode. I didn't get to use it in FarCry on my 9800 pro but it was nicer then having a completely useless 8X mode that's good for.... er, Quake 2.

But then I think about SLI and I get happy again...
(not a bash, just being honest)
The 8xS mode is no longer useless since nvidia changed the multi- and supersampling ratio in the latest drivers. Performance is still lower than 4xMSAA (would be strange if it wasn't) but the new 8xS makes games actually playable and still offers texture supersampling.
Morrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:23 AM   #164
Drax
Registered User
 
Drax's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 130
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

I'm a SP kinda fel'ah.

[edit] oh nice to hear 8X is approaching useability! I haven't even tried testing it out. The initial reviews showed it being slower the slow, serves me right for not playing with my toys to their full potential.

With an SLI rig I can see 8X being very useable and that makes parts of my body tingle in ways that no one wants to read about.
Drax is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 07-02-04, 06:26 AM   #165
MikeC
Administrator
 
MikeC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,387
Lightbulb Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

Wow! Heck of a thread

I updated my original post with information about the benchmarking capabilities in version 1.2. It covers console commands, command lines, batch scripts, and sample output.

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=31104
MikeC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:34 AM   #166
MUYA
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 6,794
Send a message via MSN to MUYA
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

Now the waiting for ppl with NV40s and Far Cry for the patch. Those with Far Cry and NV40s...now you know how to bench with SM 3.0 enabled

dun forget dx9c too
__________________
I5-2500k@4.7GHz - MSI Z77A-GD65 - 4GB X2 A-DATA DDR3 1600 - Corsair H100 - Antec Quatro 850W
Gigabyte Windforce X3 GTX 680 OC - Dell 24" IPS
Intel 320 300 GB SSD - 1 TB Hitachi HDD - 2x 250 GB WD HDD
Corsair K90 - Corsair Venegance 2000 Headset - Razer Naga Epic
Corsair 600T Case
MUYA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:41 AM   #167
anzak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,553
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

Quote:
Originally Posted by MUYA
dun forget dx9c too
I already have DX9.0c installed. So I'll be ready when ever best buy decides to cough up my GT.
anzak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:46 AM   #168
MUYA
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 6,794
Send a message via MSN to MUYA
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

cool

Do post your results nice to have a forum members consolidated numbers. In fact I will start a thread where you post your system, drivers and the far cry numbers
__________________
I5-2500k@4.7GHz - MSI Z77A-GD65 - 4GB X2 A-DATA DDR3 1600 - Corsair H100 - Antec Quatro 850W
Gigabyte Windforce X3 GTX 680 OC - Dell 24" IPS
Intel 320 300 GB SSD - 1 TB Hitachi HDD - 2x 250 GB WD HDD
Corsair K90 - Corsair Venegance 2000 Headset - Razer Naga Epic
Corsair 600T Case
MUYA 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
Faster USB 3.0 Performance: Examining UASP And Turbo Mode News Archived News Items 0 06-20-12 01:40 AM
SSD and USB 3.0 Performance of the Retina Display MacBook Pro News Archived News Items 0 06-11-12 09:50 PM
My UT2003 Tweak Guide DXnfiniteFX Gaming Central 48 10-30-02 11:59 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:04 PM.


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