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

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-17-03, 04:01 PM   #109
Skuzzy
Bit Bumper
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Here
Posts: 782
Default

I wrote that early this morning (early for me anyways) and was trying to be polite about it. There are a couple of posters following me around that seem to get a kick out of flame baiting me if I say anything that could be construed as negative towards NVidia.
The guys here keep telling me not to post on bulletin boards, as "They are just gonna toast yer cookies there Skuz".
But I feel there is a lot of disinformation running loose so I contribute when I can to help reduce it.

Yes, there is no specific shader support in the MX cards. I, personally, do not have any in the test systems.

However, they do support T&L, which implies some level of shader support, it is just not exposed to the developer. Fair enough?

Last edited by Skuzzy; 02-17-03 at 04:08 PM.
Skuzzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 04:27 PM   #110
Spiritwalker
Headstone
 
Spiritwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary, Ab
Posts: 169
Send a message via ICQ to Spiritwalker Send a message via Yahoo to Spiritwalker
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Skynet
That's an awefully vague statement from a developer. the MX line has ZERO shaders it is a cut down DX8 card with all the good shader hardware disabled/removed totally.
Make that a cut down DX7 card. All the mx cards are based on the GF2 series
__________________
In the fight between you and the world, back the world.
Spiritwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 04:33 PM   #111
kyleb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 364
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
1) show me the trend of recent technology leading games that are not CPU limited, or are more specifically video limited only.
first off "cpu limited" is a different thing that does not "need a fast cpu" sence the fastest cards on the market are still cpu limited to begin with i cannot realy fufill your request. however i can say that my tbird@900 does nicely with ut2k3 and anything else i have throw at it. regardless we are not talking about games aleady released here.

Quote:
2) show me quotes from ATI or another video card company that thinks games will follow this trend.

ati and another video card company. also i don't spupose anyone still has a copy of that nvidia release to best-buy empoyees traget which bashed the kryoII t for its lack of t&l among other things?


Quote:
3) show me game developer quotes that say the CPU will be idling because everything will be done on the video card, and AI and physics won't be enough to stress the CPU fully.
no devloper in their right mind would just close their options like that. however, to most of them that also means makeing it run well for the wideist userbase possable. also, the wide range imlementation of harware t&l has made the cpu less of an issue; take a look at the recomended system reqirements on any game box you can find, hardly any even come close to half the speed of the top of the line cpus, not to mention they are toughting numbers from architectures 2-3 generations below the top of the line cpus. i doubt you could name any grapicly intensive pre t&l games that were avalable to such a wide range preformace range of cpus at the time of their release.

Quote:
i mean, really. enough is enough. time to show the hand you're holding. all i see and hear is a bunch of rhetoric with no actual substance to it.

if there is anything you have not found me fourth comeing about or consider rhetoric and at i have yet to adress to your satistaction, please feel free to reference it directly so i can atempt to rectify the situation.

Quote:
you can ignore all the above if your statement is just based on personal opinion and nothing else, but if it is, then please just say so.
like i eluded to above above, you are not going to get that from me as i feel that ingoreing a person, or even just one of their openions, is the lowest of the low. i also feel i have been good about makeing the difference beteween my openion and facts clear; however i am just as human as the rest of us and i am more than willing to admint that i could be mistaken. again, if there is anything you have not found me fourth comeing about or consider rhetoric, and at i have yet to adress to your satistaction, please feel free to reference it directly so i can atempt to rectify the situation. lastly, please rember that as long as you like fun videogames and nice card to play them on, we are on the same side.
kyleb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 07:42 PM   #112
Chalnoth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,293
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by StealthHawk
that point being that games in the future will stay CPU limited.

so take your pick. either video cards have not been offloading the work from the CPU in newer games, or they have and the CPU cycles are being spent elsewhere. either way we still have the more pretty tech-pushing games being CPU limited.
I think this is pretty much true. That is, the CPU is still spending too much time with just graphics on DX8-level cards to not be CPU-limited. This may change once games go fully-DX8 (which has not yet happened, and we may instead just go fully-DX9 first).

As a side note, I think the next big step in making use of the CPU will be fluid dynamics. This will be most visible in smoke-like effects, but could also be used to great effect for foliage and hair (not to mention water).
__________________
"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - Richard P. Feynman
Chalnoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 07:47 PM   #113
Kruno
TypeDef's assistant
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,641
Send a message via ICQ to Kruno Send a message via AIM to Kruno
Default

Quote:
As a side note, I think the next big step in making use of the CPU will be fluid dynamics.
I want the video card to do that.
DX 9 level cards can with PS/VS 2.0 as shown in 3dmark03.
__________________
"Never before has any voice dared to utter the words of that tongue in Imladris, Mr. Anderson" - Elrond LOTR
Kruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 07:52 PM   #114
Chalnoth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,293
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by K.I.L.E.R
I want the video card to do that.
DX 9 level cards can with PS/VS 2.0 as shown in 3dmark03.
I don't think it's ever going to be done on the video card.

And the ability to do the real calculations won't be available in realtime until we have a few more orders of magnitude worth of computational power. In the meantime, there should be lots of cheap hacks, but even those cheap hacks will take a lot of power.
__________________
"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - Richard P. Feynman
Chalnoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 07:55 PM   #115
Kruno
TypeDef's assistant
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,641
Send a message via ICQ to Kruno Send a message via AIM to Kruno
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Chalnoth
I don't think it's ever going to be done on the video card.

And the ability to do the real calculations won't be available in realtime until we have a few more orders of magnitude worth of computational power. In the meantime, there should be lots of cheap hacks, but even those cheap hacks will take a lot of power.
If you are talking about realistic physics of planes of grass etc..., you are then looking at a good 500 years+.
Quantum computers will be the ones doing it all, not our ****ty Athlon's and Pentium processors.
__________________
"Never before has any voice dared to utter the words of that tongue in Imladris, Mr. Anderson" - Elrond LOTR
Kruno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 08:09 PM   #116
Chalnoth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,293
Default

Heh...quantum computers may come along sooner than you think. An estimate I saw about three years ago put them at 10 years out.

Regardless, remember that there are a large number of technologies on the horizon that could dramatically improve processor power for more traditional systems, including MRAM (which will be much lower power and may be higher-speed than DRAM, aside from its non-volatile nature), and non-silicon semiconductors. There's a ton of research going on in these fields right now.

As a side note, I recently saw a presentation by a physicist talking about a new substance that, while there are apparently significant manufacturing problems, is capable of in the range of 1-10 Terabits per square inch (most of the presentation centered around a computational method that was much better at determining the magnetic anisotropy than the more standard methods).
__________________
"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - Richard P. Feynman
Chalnoth is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-03, 08:37 PM   #117
Spiritwalker
Headstone
 
Spiritwalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary, Ab
Posts: 169
Send a message via ICQ to Spiritwalker Send a message via Yahoo to Spiritwalker
Default

Just the fact that Gordon Moore has no question as to the continuance of Moore's law is enough to get excited about. The continual doubling over the next ten years will take us to computers that run at 20GHz
__________________
In the fight between you and the world, back the world.
Spiritwalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 08:50 PM   #118
Chalnoth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,293
Default

I don't think that frequency will continue to advance as quickly as it has in the recent past. More parallelism will become a necessity for improving performance.
__________________
"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - Richard P. Feynman
Chalnoth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 08:59 PM   #119
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Chalnoth
I don't think that frequency will continue to advance as quickly as it has in the recent past. More parallelism will become a necessity for improving performance.
that would seem to be the case

whoever was saying 20ghz systems in 10 years or so... that depends ENTIRELY on economic situations..

no company is going to invest in fabs to build smaller/faster products of there is no market due to no free cash in the pockets to be spent by consumers..

economy drives investment and some techs may hit the backburner for a bit if the market has no current demand for it..
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-03, 08:59 PM   #120
StealthHawk
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Skynet
That's an awefully vague statement from a developer. the MX line has ZERO shaders it is a cut down DX8 card with all the good shader hardware disabled/removed totally.
actually the gf4mx has "optimized" software vertex shading routines that do indeed add some extra speed. same thing used by Xabre.
  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
NV30 name poll sancheuz NVIDIA GeForce 7, 8, And 9 Series 72 10-19-05 02:23 AM
Any details on Nvidia's failed NV2 for SEGA? suburbanguy Rumor Mill 1 08-21-02 11:30 PM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:21 PM.


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