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, 02:15 PM   #205
Arioch
Registered User
 
Arioch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,087
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Heh just got to my friend's house - it's about 60 miles away from Austin where I live.

I guess the bottom line is that now all the new cards can run this game at 1600x1200 with 4xAA/8AF and maintain playable frame rates throughout - that's a good thing!
Arioch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 02:47 PM   #206
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Ok I have updated my performance results to include Levels Archive and Fort.

As you can see. the SM 3.0 pathway doesnt improve performance everywhere. Paticularly the archive scene.

I used the same method for ingame benchmarking with fraps as well.

Chris






*edit* Fixed.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members

Last edited by ChrisRay; 07-02-04 at 04:05 PM.
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 04:17 PM   #207
fivefeet8
Ngemu Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 1,886
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisRay
Ok I have updated my performance results to include Levels Archive and Fort.

As you can see. the SM 3.0 pathway doesnt improve performance everywhere. Paticularly the archive scene.

I used the same method for ingame benchmarking with fraps as well.

Chris




*edit* Fixed.
1025x768 resolution? Hehe. Nice graph btw.
__________________
[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 07-02-04, 04:20 PM   #208
ChrisRay
Registered User
 
ChrisRay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivefeet8
1025x768 resolution? Hehe. Nice graph btw.
Sigh its always some damn thing...


Anyway fivefeet its been fixed.
__________________
|CPU: Intel I7 Lynnfield @ 3.0 Ghz|Mobo:Asus P7P55 WS Supercomputer |Memory:8 Gigs DDR3 1333|Video:Geforce GTX 295 Quad SLI|Monitor:Samsung Syncmaster 1680x1080 3D Vision\/Olevia 27 Inch Widescreen HDTV 1920x1080

|CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 Black Edition @ 2.5 Ghz|Mobo:Asus M3n HT Deluxe Nforce 780A|Memory: 4 gigs DDR2 800| Video: Geforce GTX 280x2 SLI

Nzone
SLI Forum Administrator

NVIDIA User Group Members receive free software and/or hardware from NVIDIA from time to time to facilitate the evaluation of NVIDIA products. However, the opinions expressed are solely those of the members

Last edited by ChrisRay; 07-02-04 at 04:35 PM.
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:28 PM   #209
Waffles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 140
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Hey Chrisray - I don't know how difficult it is, but XBIT is showing the MIN FPS on the bar graph, would you be able to do the same thing? I think min fps is just as important as the average...
Waffles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:39 PM   #210
Arioch
Registered User
 
Arioch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,087
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Have you guys seen the thread at Beyond3D that explains why the Anandtech review is showing bigger gains than some of the other websites? Apparently Anandtech did not use AA as they thought they did when running the benchmarks according to this thread:

Beyond3D Thread on Anandtech's SM3.0 Testing

I thought the score discrepancies seemed a bit off between some of the websites. The 6800 Ultra is still getting a nice performance boost but it appears both equal level cards are about the same performance - faster than hell which is not a bad thing.
Arioch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 06:46 PM   #211
SH64
MAXIMUM TECH
 
SH64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Indiana
Posts: 12,202
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Looking at the GT vs Pro numbers in X-Bit bench .. i can see some clear advantage for the extra pipelines ! ( or extra qaud pumped pipelines as MUYA like to call it )
__________________


- "My name is RAM and my tank is full"

http://warhawk64nv.mybrute.com/ <-- pupils go thaarrr! Or,
http://silenthunter64.mybrute.com
SH64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 11:29 PM   #212
Bad_Boy
god of war.
 
Bad_Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: greensboro, nc.
Posts: 2,912
Send a message via AIM to Bad_Boy
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

anandtech fixed the numbers. GT still looks like the card to get for the value.
__________________
[PS ID: Bad_Boy]
Bad_Boy is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 07-02-04, 11:29 PM   #213
Drumphil
 
Drumphil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: BANNED!
Posts: 290
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Quote:
sorry but couldnt resist..
can any one imagine all top titles Hl2/Doom3/Stalker/Thief with this kind SM3.0 improvements? and this is just the begining
from anandtech:
Quote:
Image quality of both SM2.0 paths are on par with eachother, and the SM3.0 path on NVIDIA hardware shows negligable differences. The very slight variations are most likely just small fluctuations between the mathematical output of a single pass and a multipass lighting shader. The difference is honestly so tiny that you can't call either rendering lower quality from a visual standpoint. We will still try to learn what exactly causes the differences we noticed from CryTek.

The main point that the performance numbers make is not that SM3.0 has a speed advantage over SM2.0 (as even the opposite may be true), but that single pass per-pixel lighting models can significantly reduce the impact of adding an ever increasing number of lights to a scene.
what conclusions did the other reviewers come to?
__________________
not banned
Drumphil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-04, 11:31 PM   #214
jAkUp
eat. sleep. overclock.
 
jAkUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chino, California
Posts: 17,744
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Quote:
UPDATE: It has recently come to our attention that our 4xAA/8xAF benchmark numbers for NVIDIA 6800 series cards were incorrect when this article was first published. The control panel was used to set the antialiasing level, which doesn't work with FarCry unless set specifically in the FarCry profile (which was not done here). We appologize for the error, and have updated our graphs and analysis accordingly.

For a more positive update, after a discussion with CryTek about the new rendering path, we have learned that the lighting model implimented in the SM3.0 Path is exactly the same as was used in the SM2.0 Path. The only exception is that they used the conditional rendering (branching in the pixel shader) to emulate multipass lighting in a single pixel shader. The performance gains we see actually indicate that PS3.0 branching does not have as significant a performance hit as previously thought (and proves to be more efficient than using multiple pixel shaders in a scene).
...
__________________
965xe || evga x58 classified || 3x evga gtx 480 || 6gb g.skill || win7 x64
jAkUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-04, 12:02 AM   #215
Jarred
OUTCAST
 
Jarred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: south cali
Posts: 1,033
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Quote:
Originally Posted by jAkUp
...
are they talking about sm3.0 in general? becasue thats not what I'm seeing in the graphs
__________________
3d Artist
http://www.industryoutcast.com

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
Albert Einstein
Jarred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-04, 06:21 AM   #216
shinrai
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 158
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

I wouldn't mind seeing what hardocp come up with.

Yes i know their not popular here but hey, it's a good site.
shinrai 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 05:27 AM.


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