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, 08:01 AM   #169
b|indeyes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 55
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

i have directx 9c as well with GT

I am looking forward to the patch
b|indeyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 08:15 AM   #170
mikechai
Aegophile
 
mikechai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 700
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/far_cry_sm30/
http://www.guru3d.com/article/gamereviews/137/
__________________
P4 1.6A @ 2382 MHz | 149x16@1.625V | Asus P4S533 |
256MBx2 Samsung PC2700 | MSI GF2gts 32MB DDR
mikechai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 08:25 AM   #171
anzak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,553
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

thanks for the links.
anzak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 08:33 AM   #172
DSC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 888
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

I don't know if FS' article is flawed or not, but they stated they used DX9.0b, which doesn't have the SM3.0 features like DX9.0c. 6800U is losing in every benchmark in FS article, which is contrary to the results on other websites.
DSC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 08:35 AM   #173
MUYA
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 6,795
Send a message via MSN to MUYA
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

it might be typo...i have emailed Brandon to ask if it was typo or not.
__________________
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, 08:49 AM   #174
pat777
NV420
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 446
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay
Apologise that this has taken So long. But please appreciate I have been pressed for time. These results are not recorded demos. They are real world results. From in Game fraps Benchmarking. I did three runs through a set spot "I" Chose in the map. Divided the results to reduce margin of Error.

Test Setup:

Athlon XP Barton 3200+
2.2 Ghz 400 FSB
1 Gig DDR400 (Dual Channel)
Geforce 6800 Non Ultra (325/850)
Albatron KX18D Pro II (Nforce 2 400 Ultra)
DirectX 9.0C





Conclusion: The spots I have noticed that show the most improvement is where Heavy Geometry is being rendered. Also anywhere there is grass being rendered. Grass areas have seen a performance improvement of 10-20%.
Looks pretty good considering the Crytek fixed the 6800U IQ problems and the 6800U still received a significant increase in performance.
pat777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 09:41 AM   #175
mikechai
Aegophile
 
mikechai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 700
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Numbers taken from Firingsquad and Anandtech and Techreport article:-

FS = Firingsquad, AT = Anandtech, TR = Techreport

System specs:-
FS - AMD64 3800+, 1GB RAM, WinXP SP1, Directx 9.0b (? typo)
AT - AMD64 3400+, WinXP SP2 RC2 with DX9.0c, Summer 2004 DirectX SDK Update
TR - AMD64 3800+, 1GB RAM, WinXP SP2 RC2, DirectX 9.0c

Training 1600x1200, 4xAA, 4xAA+8xAF
FS 6800U, 75.3, 52.4, 42.2
FS XT PE, 77.5, 55.5, 50.1

AT 6800U, 73.6, -NA-, 56.0
AT XT PE, 73.7, -NA-, 48.9

TR 6800U, 65.0, -NA-, 39.5
TR XT PE, 61.9, -NA-, 48.2

Research 1600x1200, 4xAA, 4xAA+8xAF
FS 6800U, 77.6, 57.3, 44.8
FS XT PE, 72.1, 55.0, 51.3

AT 6800U, 77.6, -NA-, 59.3
AT XT PE, 69.6, -NA-, 49.3

TR 6800U, 78.8, -NA-, 50.7
TR XT PE, 82.6, -NA-, 52.4

Regulator 1600x1200, 4xAA, 4xAA+8xAF
FS 6800U, 73.6, 47.3, 38.5
FS XT PE, 67.3, 44.3, 40.4

AT 6800U, 73.1, -NA-, 54.6
AT XT PE, 65.0, -NA-, 38.9

TR 6800U, 59.4, -NA-, 37.8
TR XT PE, 52.9, -NA-, 38.3

Volcano 1600x1200, 4xAA, 4xAA+8xAF
FS 6800U, 73.6, 47.3, 38.5
FS XT PE, 67.3, 44.3, 40.4

AT 6800U, 76.9, -NA-, 61.8
AT XT PE, 67.1, -NA-, 45.4

TR 6800U, 86.0, -NA-, -NA-
TR XT PE, 78.8, -NA-, -NA-


A few notes by looking at the above figures:-
1. There is a big difference between AT and FS numbers.
2. In FS article, from 4xAA to 4xAA+8xAF, XT PE drops very minimal (< 4 fps), while 6800U drops 9-13 fps (no TriOpt?).
3. FS article - XT PE clearly wins, AT article - 6800U clearly wins.

Any thoughts?
__________________
P4 1.6A @ 2382 MHz | 149x16@1.625V | Asus P4S533 |
256MBx2 Samsung PC2700 | MSI GF2gts 32MB DDR

Last edited by mikechai; 07-02-04 at 10:13 AM.
mikechai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 09:47 AM   #176
Gar
I like cats.
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 151
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Anand uses Dx9.0c? Could that be the diff?
Gar is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 07-02-04, 09:47 AM   #177
Nv40
Agent-Fx
 
Nv40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: everywhere
Posts: 2,216
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 2.0 vs 3.0

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivefeet8
I know it's been stated that VS3 instancing is used on the grass to raise perfomance. Is there other things that are using it as well? Say the trees or bushes? There are some scenes where you see a lot of trees and bushes. Can you guys test these areas of the game to see if there are also performance increases there? If none, then maybe we still haven't seen what Instancing is capable of. Maybe with more time, Crytek could make all the vegetation in Far Cry instanced.

indeed..

it should be pointed that this is just a quick patch .. made to a game that is already finished.. there can be a huge diference between a game optimized from the ground up for SM3.0 ,than a PS1.x/P2x game which add Sm3.0 improvements here or there..

Geometry Intancing alone fully implemented in every geometry can show 2x times the performance than not using it.Nvidia have an asteroids demo where they can render twice the polygons for the same Fps.. just using G.I.

as other pointed the best gains in performance are exactly in the places where more work in done.. Scenes with many lights can be done in just 1 pass.. and there you get huge performances benefits.
FOrest with G.I will also show great benefits. G.I can be very powerfull for Crowded scenes with many soldiers ,FOrest or for FLight simulators to add more detail to the terrain which is lots more polygons and objects in a scene.
Nv40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 09:53 AM   #178
Clay
Registered User
 
Clay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 4,993
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gar
Anand uses Dx9.0c? Could that be the diff?
There is also a new fxc.exe that needs to replace the older version in FarCry's \bin32 directory. Not sure what the results would be like if one failed to replace this but it's a possible reason for the lower scores. Just tossing that out there FWIW.
Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 09:55 AM   #179
DSC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 888
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

I have to question Techreport and Xbitlabs articles also. 6800U is losing or only on par with the X800XT, which doesn't make sense at all.
DSC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 10:25 AM   #180
OWA
...
 
OWA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Virginia
Posts: 9,481
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Quote:
I have to question Techreport and Xbitlabs articles also. 6800U is losing or only on par with the X800XT, which doesn't make sense at all.
Could it be AA/AF? AnandTech provided both results and the XT won in some of the non AA/AF tests and was also much closer overall when AA/AF wasn't used. Using AA/AF and SM 3.0 seemed to help the 6800U and Extreme pull away more. Xbit only tested without AA and AF.
OWA 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 02:40 AM
SSD and USB 3.0 Performance of the Retina Display MacBook Pro News Archived News Items 0 06-11-12 10:50 PM
My UT2003 Tweak Guide DXnfiniteFX Gaming Central 48 10-31-02 12:59 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:43 PM.


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