Doom 3 Benchmarks at [H]

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: ZimZum

Originally posted by: BFG10K
ATi's response is typical PR rubbish. The real problem here is that they've allowed their OpenGL ICD to sit unoptimized for such a long time and only now when Doom III is almost out they're scrambling to do something about it.

As a consumer I'm annoyed that I've been running unoptimal OpenGL drivers for over two years. I'm also annoyed that ATi lambasted nVidia for not delivering drivers that work well in all applications yet here they are, ready to produce drivers just for Doom III.

ATI is currently completely rewriting their OpenGL drivers from the ground up.

We know, the question is why wasnt this done 2 years ago.

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: gururu
I seriously see no future for OpenGL. Old diehards like Carmack are going to be fading away (can you say Armadillo?). DX is just making too many leaps and bounds to ignore in terms of features. Plus microsoft is now so intimately involved with game development. I am also inclined to believe that DX drivers run DX games better than OGL drivers run OGL games. I'm not sure, any speculation or fact analyses?

From what I understand, any "features" that are possible within DirectX are also possible within OpenGL. As for games running well, I have yet to see a game run more efficiently than Quake3 does under OpenGL. The problem with DirectX is that it only run on Windows computers. Anyone on a Mac or a Linux system will use OpenGL, along with every professional workstation such as Sun/SGI. Basically if Windows disappeared tomorrow there would be no use for DirectX. Why not use an open standard that everyone can use? It works just as well. The only value I can see in DirectX is that it sets the standard for the graphics card makers in terms of what features they need to implement in their next graphics card releases.

Exactly. I, for one, support the continued use of and development of OpenGL because it is an open-standard. I actually dislike DirectX, because MS seems to force it upon so many developers, in an attempt to have a complete monopoly on the game market.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
I hope you enjoy Half Life 2. I don't think even the term slideshow covers it. Maybe blurry slideshow can suffice.

Prove that Half Life 2 will run as a blurry slideshow or are you talking complete crap yet again? ;

 

[Johnbear007]

Originally posted by: thedude80

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
If you really want to play DoomIII then the 9800Pro is OK but any Nvidia card 5900Xt and up should do it better.

A 6800NU is around 260$, i would get that then a 5900XT and then a 9800Pro. That is if your only gonna play DoomIII. The 9800Pro beats the 5900XT (though marginally in some tests) in about 70% of todays games.

-Kevin

Thanks for the hint. I´ll go with a 5900XT then. Good bang for the buck...

I think that is a bad idea. I would definitley go with the 6800 standard. Should be quiet enough, and much MUCH better than a 5900 for only a little more money

 

[Johnbear007]

Originally posted by: Johnbear007

Originally posted by: thedude80

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
If you really want to play DoomIII then the 9800Pro is OK but any Nvidia card 5900Xt and up should do it better.

A 6800NU is around 260$, i would get that then a 5900XT and then a 9800Pro. That is if your only gonna play DoomIII. The 9800Pro beats the 5900XT (though marginally in some tests) in about 70% of todays games.

-Kevin

Thanks for the hint. I´ll go with a 5900XT then. Good bang for the buck...

I think that is a bad idea. I would definitley go with the 6800 standard. Should be quiet enough, and much MUCH better than a 5900 for only a little more money

And if it isnt quiet enouygh for you, later on you can add an aftermarket silent cooler to it. problem solved

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Prove that Half Life 2 will run as a blurry slideshow or are you talking complete crap yet again?

Well, let's see, you get a combination of very low framerates and lack of directx 9 effects. Why choose one when you can have both? If you don't believe Gabe Newell, you don't believe me, there's evidence all over the net, and I am not wasting time trying to convince anybody.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Grevious you are so biased... every post. Im not trying to flame or start a flamewar but take a step back and look at whart your saying.

Some people dont need 200FPS to play a game. Yeah HL 2 is more like 60 but still the 5900s might not run it as fast as the 9800's but they still run it perfectly fine. Also when you look back yeah the 9800Pro wins about 70% of the benchmarks but a lot of them are marginal or use AF. Neither card is bad i think that the 9800Pro is more balanced but 5900 is still a very good fast card easily capable of playing HL2 at pretty highend settings. Not to mention both can be OCed.

-Kevin

 

[mAdMaLuDaWg]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

Prove that Half Life 2 will run as a blurry slideshow or are you talking complete crap yet again?

Well, let's see, you get a combination of very low framerates and lack of directx 9 effects. Why choose one when you can have both? If you don't believe Gabe Newell, you don't believe me, there's evidence all over the net, and I am not wasting time trying to convince anybody.

Gotta love Fanboys!

 

[dfloyd]

Why is everyone so woo hooed on the GT performing well?

I mean you pay over $400 for a card that is just released it better be performing up to snuff. And in all honesty I am not sure this paints a really clear picture about performace. Why do I say this? Well for one Atis OpenGL has always been bad, most seem to agree this is a programming thing and can be fixed with a complete rewrite of their opengl stuff. Not a easy task I am sure but if they do it we should see some nice gains and who honestly knows what the card is capable of. I prefer to look at a cards overall performance, vs basing its speed on one game.

But back to my main point, If I pay $400 right now for a card it better perform very dang well on a game thats coming out in a month. Thats 1/3 most peoples systems cost. So I really dont understand the excitement about the GT doing well in it. Nor am I suprised that Ati is getting beat on a OpenGL benchmark. Poor OpenGL implmentation... Which can, at least I think it can, be fixed. Or at the very least improved.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Hmmmm, who should I believe? Gamingphreek or Gabe Newell? You've seen several benches of HL2 and just toss them out the window. So far, you've accused Toms, Hardocp, digit-life, and firingsquad of being ATI biased. :roll:

Even if you don't believe what I say, you might want to actually do some research before making your own foolish conclusions. By the way, I have yet to see any set of benchmarks where the 5900XT beats the 9800 Pro in 30% of tests. Care to show us your source?

Gotta love Fanboys!

Indeed. Except I am just quoting almost exactly what anand said in his HL2 testing.

It's not even just me. With the release of the 6800 LE at $200, it looks like even Nvidia has effectively killed the 5xxx series. A good move IMO, the 6800 series are far superior products..

 

[gururu]

Originally posted by: Excelsior

Originally posted by: SickBeast
From what I understand, any "features" that are possible within DirectX are also possible within OpenGL. As for games running well, I have yet to see a game run more efficiently than Quake3 does under OpenGL. The problem with DirectX is that it only run on Windows computers. Anyone on a Mac or a Linux system will use OpenGL, along with every professional workstation such as Sun/SGI. Basically if Windows disappeared tomorrow there would be no use for DirectX. Why not use an open standard that everyone can use? It works just as well. The only value I can see in DirectX is that it sets the standard for the graphics card makers in terms of what features they need to implement in their next graphics card releases.

Exactly. I, for one, support the continued use of and development of OpenGL because it is an open-standard. I actually dislike DirectX, because MS seems to force it upon so many developers, in an attempt to have a complete monopoly on the game market.

The problem is Windows isn't disappearing tomorrow, if you consider that a problem. I have to extend kudos to microsoft for investing so heavily in gaming. they are knee deep now in game development tools partly because of the xbox. their continued support for game development companies is also good to see. if they were being lazy about it, and not contributing, I'd find their monopolizing efforts reprehensible. But this seems to not be the case, and if anyone has factual knowledge of how they are holding back the development of games, I'd be very interested to know.
Also, I found the UT series to run just as smoothly as Quake3. Many new games coming out with opengL support don't run as well as when Directx is implemented (especially with regard to visula quality).

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
Hmmmm, who should I believe? Gamingphreek or Gabe Newell? You've seen several benches of HL2 and just toss them out the window. So far, you've accused Toms, Hardocp, digit-life, and firingsquad of being ATI biased. :roll:

Even if you don't believe what I say, you might want to actually do some research before making your own foolish conclusions. By the way, I have yet to see any set of benchmarks where the 5900XT beats the 9800 Pro in 30% of tests. Care to show us your source?

Gotta love Fanboys!

Indeed. Except I am just quoting almost exactly what anand said in his HL2 testing.

It's not even just me. With the release of the 6800 LE at $200, it looks like even Nvidia has effectively killed the 5xxx series. A good move IMO, the 6800 series are far superior products..

Well i would put more faith in Gabe Newell as he is a designer for HL2. However benchmarks show the truth. I never said that the 5900 beats the 9800 in HL2. I NEVER SAID IT!!! Also i have not accused any of those sites of doijg anything.

Ok as fore the 30% thing it is a ball pak maybe off by a couple of percentage points but Nvidia dominates in OpenGL which is at least 30% of benches. Also Nvidia dominates at low settings ie any without AF and at low resolutions.

Overall yes the 9800Pro is an all around better card, however the 5900 is a great card for about 30$ less, and it comes with VIVO. Also if he is only looking to play DoomIII unlikely but if thats what hes looking for than the Nvidia cards are for him.

Also by no means are there any games that will make the 5900 a blurry slideshow. If there are like max settings on far cry and DoomIII and HL2 then they will be that way on a 9800Pro also.

-Kevin

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

Prove that Half Life 2 will run as a blurry slideshow or are you talking complete crap yet again?

Well, let's see, you get a combination of very low framerates and lack of directx 9 effects. Why choose one when you can have both? If you don't believe Gabe Newell, you don't believe me, there's evidence all over the net, and I am not wasting time trying to convince anybody.

I wanted frame rates you muppet, saying "very low framerates" means nothing to me. How low 30fps 10fps 5fps 1fps??? You don't know do you because you are once again talking complete and utter crap!

BTW what ID did you use before you changed to "GeneralGrievous" because I get the impressive that you have trolled here before?

 

[Gamingphreek]

No General has been here a while. Normally he just has a bias towards ATI and tends to throw out random figures. He is a good poster to have at Anandtech sometimes though he seems to just post without thinking just like everyone does at one point. He just does it more than than the avg poster.

-Kevin

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

Prove that Half Life 2 will run as a blurry slideshow or are you talking complete crap yet again?

Well, let's see, you get a combination of very low framerates and lack of directx 9 effects. Why choose one when you can have both? If you don't believe Gabe Newell, you don't believe me, there's evidence all over the net, and I am not wasting time trying to convince anybody.

I wanted frame rates you muppet, saying "very low framerates" means nothing to me. How low 30fps 10fps 5fps 1fps??? You don't know do you because you are once again talking complete and utter crap!

BTW what ID did you use before you changed to "GeneralGrievous" because I get the impressive that you have trolled here before?

If people are that worried about NV30 and HL2, they have the option to run the game on the DX8 path. It will certainly not be a "blurry slideshow". It will probably be the reverse of the current DoomIII situation, if that. The 6800 series will probably run HL2 very nicely. If tweaked properly, I'm certain a 5900XT will run the game very well. It won't look as nice or run as fast as a 9800PRO, but it will be far from a blurry slideshow.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: gururu
Many new games coming out with opengL support don't run as well as when Directx is implemented (especially with regard to visula quality).

Are you somehow questioning DoomIII's visual quality?
I was under the understanding that the general consensus was that DoomIII (OpenGL) has better graphics than HL2 (DX9). Maybe you can correct me on that.

You seem to be forgetting that anything that is possible from a visual standpoint in DX is also possible under OpenGL.

On top of this, you praise Microsoft for what they're doing. They bought a bunch of patents from SGI back in the day to basically try to elminate OpenGL, just like they do with anything that stands in their path to world domination. I don't call that good for the gaming industry.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

Prove that Half Life 2 will run as a blurry slideshow or are you talking complete crap yet again?

Well, let's see, you get a combination of very low framerates and lack of directx 9 effects. Why choose one when you can have both? If you don't believe Gabe Newell, you don't believe me, there's evidence all over the net, and I am not wasting time trying to convince anybody.

I wanted frame rates you muppet, saying "very low framerates" means nothing to me. How low 30fps 10fps 5fps 1fps??? You don't know do you because you are once again talking complete and utter crap!

BTW what ID did you use before you changed to "GeneralGrievous" because I get the impressive that you have trolled here before?

If people are that worried about NV30 and HL2, they have the option to run the game on the DX8 path. It will certainly not be a "blurry slideshow". It will probably be the reverse of the current DoomIII situation, if that. The 6800 series will probably run HL2 very nicely. If tweaked properly, I'm certain a 5900XT will run the game very well. It won't look as nice or run as fast as a 9800PRO, but it will be far from a blurry slideshow.

I agree with you 100%... speak the truth!! :thumbsup:

-Kevin

 

[GeneralGrievous]

I wanted frame rates you muppet, saying "very low framerates" means nothing to me. How low 30fps 10fps 5fps 1fps??? You don't know do you because you are once again talking complete and utter crap!

Ok, fine.
Framerates

Now you are going to claim somethin like "this is a beta benchmark".
Anand's halflife 2 report. Note the section on mixed shaders.

Nvidia issued a PR response, similar to what ATI did on x800 Doom 3 performance.

Ok as fore the 30% thing it is a ball pak maybe off by a couple of percentage points but Nvidia dominates in OpenGL which is at least 30% of benches

Which opengl games? The 5xxx doesn't dominate in doom 3. It doesn't dominate in Call of Duty.

I was under the understanding that the general consensus was that DoomIII (OpenGL) has better graphics than HL2 (DX9).

That depends on who you ask. Personally, I'd agree with you. But doom 3 is a slower paced, creepy horror story kind of game not designed around mass multiplayer as much as half life 2 is. digitlife's benches have HL2 as a more demanding game than Farcry is, both CPU and GPU wise. The physics engine on HL2 is going to be amazing.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
digitlife's benches have HL2 as a more demanding game than Farcry is, both CPU and GPU wise. The physics engine on HL2 is going to be amazing.

That contradicts what I read. I was reading about this guy who was playing CS: Source on a 9800XT and was locked at 60FPS at 1920x1200 (Apple 23" Cinema Display).

Oh, and he had all the options set to maximum.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

That contradicts what I read. I was reading about this guy who was playing CS: Source on a 9800XT and was locked at 60FPS at 1920x1200 (Apple 23" Cinema Display).

I read that too. To be honest, I have no idea what was going on. His description of the graphics noted them as amazing, but the screenshot he took had such bland texturing they looked like HL1 graphics.

If people are that worried about NV30 and HL2, they have the option to run the game on the DX8 path.

You can, but anand's tests have the Ti4600 performing at 5900 levels under their mixed mode path.

Who knows. Rumor has it that HL2 is currently in bug fixing mode, and that they should be done with that by end of August, and going gold early September. It's also interesting to see how much of the game will be lost on the Directx 8 path. Hl2 is supposed to be the first true directx9 game onto market.

On another note, ati must be furious on how well the 6800s are performing in this game.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

That contradicts what I read. I was reading about this guy who was playing CS: Source on a 9800XT and was locked at 60FPS at 1920x1200 (Apple 23" Cinema Display).

I read that too. To be honest, I have no idea what was going on. His description of the graphics noted them as amazing, but the screenshot he took had such bland texturing they looked like HL1 graphics.

Who knows. Rumor has it that HL2 is currently in bug fixing mode, and that they should be done with that by end of August, and going gold early September. It's also interesting to see how much of the game will be lost on the Directx 8 path.

On another note, ati must be furious on how well the 6800s are performing in this game.

I believe CS:Source is still using the levels from the original CS (at least for now), with new models and effects (thus, the levels look like crap, but the game probably 'looks' a lot better in action, what with the new physics engine and all that). Unless they've changed things around since the last time I heard news about it.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

I wanted frame rates you muppet, saying "very low framerates" means nothing to me. How low 30fps 10fps 5fps 1fps??? You don't know do you because you are once again talking complete and utter crap!

Ok, fine.
Framerates

Now you are going to claim somethin like "this is a beta benchmark".
Anand's halflife 2 report. Note the section on mixed shaders.

Nvidia issued a PR response, similar to what ATI did on x800 Doom 3 performance.

Ok as fore the 30% thing it is a ball pak maybe off by a couple of percentage points but Nvidia dominates in OpenGL which is at least 30% of benches

Which opengl games? The 5xxx doesn't dominate in doom 3. It doesn't dominate in Call of Duty.

I was under the understanding that the general consensus was that DoomIII (OpenGL) has better graphics than HL2 (DX9).

That depends on who you ask. Personally, I'd agree with you. But doom 3 is a slower paced, creepy horror story kind of game not designed around mass multiplayer as much as half life 2 is. digitlife's benches have HL2 as a more demanding game than Farcry is, both CPU and GPU wise. The physics engine on HL2 is going to be amazing.

Well Wolfenstein, Quake III you know the OpenGL games. Also how do you know that the 59xx doesn't dominate in DoomIII. So far only a 9800XT and a 5950U went at it in one test and they tied one and the 5950U slaughtered in the other.

-Kevin

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Also how do you know that the 59xx doesn't dominate in DoomIII. So far only a 9800XT and a 5950U went at it in one test and they tied one and the 5950U slaughtered in the other.

Actually there were 3 tests, and they tied in the only 2 that matter. Who's going to play DoomIII w/ AA/AF on a 5950 at 1024x768? 32FPS is not enough for me; I'm sure there are many places where it dips far below that at those settings.

In any event, the simple fact that the 9800XT is able to keep pace w/ the 5950U is a victory for ATi.

 

[gururu]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: gururu
Many new games coming out with opengL support don't run as well as when Directx is implemented (especially with regard to visula quality).

Are you somehow questioning DoomIII's visual quality?
I was under the understanding that the general consensus was that DoomIII (OpenGL) has better graphics than HL2 (DX9). Maybe you can correct me on that.

You seem to be forgetting that anything that is possible from a visual standpoint in DX is also possible under OpenGL.

On top of this, you praise Microsoft for what they're doing. They bought a bunch of patents from SGI back in the day to basically try to elminate OpenGL, just like they do with anything that stands in their path to world domination. I don't call that good for the gaming industry.

no, actually I was thinking specifically of UT2K4, which is supposed to be lacking when run under OpenGL.
As far as questioning D3's visuals.... well, do we really think they are going to be revolutionary? I saw the leaked demo eons ago, and it didn't seem like all that. I think the game is riding moreso on the 'experience', but I guess we'll see what the final product looks like visually.
I don't believe anything done in DirectX can be done in OpenGL. Why is that belief so widespread?

As far as Microsoft and gaming, well I don't see how they've stifled or prevented game technologies. I'd argue that they've actually accelerated them. Silicon Graphics was in no position to carry the torch of the 3D API because they'd been struggliing financially for decades. They didn't have to sell their patents to microsoft. As far as Opengl being used in workstations, well it serves the purpose, but that doesn't really seem to bear on the gaming industry.

here's a general question, is OpenGl used to make the graphics in movies like Finding Nemo?

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Well Wolfenstein, Quake III you know the OpenGL games. Also how do you know that the 59xx doesn't dominate in DoomIII. So far only a 9800XT and a 5950U went at it in one test and they tied one and the 5950U slaughtered in the other.

I googled quake 3 benchmarks, and came up with this.

http://www.ninjalane.com/display.aspx?docname=ultra1600xp&page=7
http://www.extremeoverclocking.com/reviews/video/Sapphire_Ultimate_12.html

The 5xxx cards can dominate in some opengl games, not all of them, and not the 2 more important ones of this year.