[H] gunning for NV again.

[Acanthus]

NVIDIA + SM3.0 article

With all his talk about how great SM2.0 was back in the day, hes is really playing down 3.0.

And i hate his accusing attitude throughout ALL of his articles now.

Im not reading HOCP anymore

 

[g3pro]

I mentioned this in Anand's blog. The two articles on SM3.0 are night and day, and it seems like {H} is seriously a front for ATi. That guy is an idiot. :roll:

 

[VIAN]

I like ATI, but how is it that they don't include SM3, wth is up with that, at least get it for the efficiency which gives more performance, they must have some weird problem to not be able to release it now.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: VIAN
I like ATI, but how is it that they don't include SM3, wth is up with that, at least get it for the efficiency which gives more performance, they must have some weird problem to not be able to release it now.

Because they didnt change the core design of the chip, they just refreshed it.

Adding SM3.0 would mean they would have to let go of the ArtX design and make changes to the core. (If there are 8 or more shading units it wont really matter, as their PS2.0 speed will probably match NVs 3.0 the only issue would be devs would have to code everything twice.)

 

[Genx87]

Well the rumors are the R420 is a scaled up version of the R3.xx chips. So while they may have extended the pixel pipes to 16 deep the underlying arch limitations such as shader instruction count and flow control are still missing.

I am not sure if this will be a big deal or not. But it is interesting to note that the chances of having more PS 3.0 titles by years end than PS 2.0 titles is a real possibility.

It will be interesting to see if the titles that come out will have the ability to actually make real use of PS 3.0 and its possible speed gains. This is where Nvidia could really take it to ATI if they can get get a game or two with a great implementation of PS 3.0

 

[Acanthus]

It shouldnt be a big deal as long as ATi makes a 2.0 shading monster. Performance between the R420 and NV40 will be VERY similar if this is the case. BUT, if there are PS3.0/VS3.0 games with very complex shaders this year, ATi will take a devastating hit, as it may have to do 4 or 5 passes to do the same effect as the 6800 can do in a single pass.

 

[Jeff7181]

Pffft... who needs SM 3.0? Trash it, we don't need it right now. Who needs 64-bit processing? Trash it, we don't need it right now. There's some logic for ya... :roll:

*EDIT* Sounds a lot like the reverse of the PS 2.0 debate back when the HL2 demo benchmarks started floating around. nVidia users said "who cares? every card will be obsolete by the time we actually get our hands on HL2." Now ATI users are saying "who cares? PS 2.0 looks just as good as PS 3.0 and HL2, which is supposedly a shader intense game, doesn't push the limits of PS 2.0."

 

[JJN]

ya who needs anything better :S

 

[Jeff7181]

On a side note... I swear I read somewhere that pixel shaders can be used to perform anti-aliasing. If someone could find something that confirms or denys that I'd like a link to it.

 

[nemesismk2]

"The only effect then that is unique to these screenshots in Shader Model 3.0 is Displacement Mapping; it appears to HardOCP that everything else could be done in Shader Model 2.0."

"This seems to simply further our thoughts that SM3.0 is not bringing much in terms of Image Quality to the table currently that cannot be done in SM2.0 and that is what will be important to the gamers buying the video cards."

With comments like this it seems to me that HardOCP is doing the ground work for ATI and preparing everyone for the soon to be released ati video cards which (according to good rumours) will not support any of the latest technology like the fx6800 ultra!

 

[Dman877]

Personally, I don't see PS3.0 as such a big deal, more of a gimmick imo, as PS2.0 and 1.4 were as well. All I care about is speed and geometric detail which isn't associated with pixel shaders. Personally, I think games like CoD and UT2K4 look as good as games need to look, they just need faster cards to do bigger maps and more model/terrain detail. Certainly, PS3.0 is a plus, but to me it's offset by the lofty psu req and the 2 molex connectors req. It's gonna come to price/performance for me, as always.

In price/performance, if:
NV40 = R420 I'll probably go NV40 unless my arctic silencer fits the R420
NV40>R420 Obviously go NV40
R420>NV40 obviously go R420

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Dman877
Personally, I don't see PS3.0 as such a big deal, more of a gimmick imo, as PS2.0 and 1.4 were as well. All I care about is speed and geometric detail which isn't associated with pixel shaders. Personally, I think games like CoD and UT2K4 look as good as games need to look, they just need faster cards to do bigger maps and more model/terrain detail. Certainly, PS3.0 is a plus, but to me it's offset by the lofty psu req and the 2 molex connectors req. It's gonna come to price/performance for me, as always.

In price/performance, if:
NV40 = R420 I'll probably go NV40 unless my arctic silencer fits the R420
NV40>R420 Obviously go NV40
R420>NV40 obviously go R420

PS 3.0 may not be... but VS 3.0 is. Displacement mapping... hello? This is a HUGE development in realism. Treaded tires... dented fenders... rough bark on trees... stone walls with stones actually popping out... realistic looking rocks and boulders... need I go on?

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: Dman877
Personally, I don't see PS3.0 as such a big deal, more of a gimmick imo, as PS2.0 and 1.4 were as well. All I care about is speed and geometric detail which isn't associated with pixel shaders. Personally, I think games like CoD and UT2K4 look as good as games need to look, they just need faster cards to do bigger maps and more model/terrain detail. Certainly, PS3.0 is a plus, but to me it's offset by the lofty psu req and the 2 molex connectors req. It's gonna come to price/performance for me, as always.

In price/performance, if:
NV40 = R420 I'll probably go NV40 unless my arctic silencer fits the R420
NV40>R420 Obviously go NV40
R420>NV40 obviously go R420

What if PS3.0 can rendering the same effects twice as quickly as PS2.0, I bet you would be interested in it then?

 

[Vernor]

If PS 3.0 is really so great, it's up to Nvidia to demonstrate it.

And if they spread deliberate misinformation, they deserve the fisking.

 

[LTC8K6]

Doesn't the Parhelia already do hardware displacement mapping?

 

[Regs]

I took the time to read the article as well. He wasn't gunning for NV but he did not glorify NV for its PS3 support. PS3 is mostly a win for the game developer than it is for the end user anyway. Far Cry's engine uses mostly PS2 with minimal shader instruction length without looping. Ps3 seems more like for the Unreal 3 engine right now.

But it's still a feature I would rather have than not have thats for sure. Especially for RTS games.

 

[LTC8K6]

ATI's TRUFORM was a form of displacement mapping too, wasn't it?

 

[Acanthus]

I would like to see AT do a direct comparison of PS2.0-3.0 on NV4X and R4XX sometime in the future when we have 2-3 titles out. Id like to see the performance hit between 2.0 and 3.0, and of course the detail changes if there are any.

 

[nemesismk2]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
I would like to see AT do a direct comparison of PS2.0-3.0 on NV4X and R4XX sometime in the future when we have 2-3 titles out. Id like to see the performance hit between 2.0 and 3.0, and of course the detail changes if there are any.

I would like to see that as well, hopefully the new video cards from ATI do support PS3.0 and not just PS2.0 because it would be alot more interesting then.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: Acanthus
I would like to see AT do a direct comparison of PS2.0-3.0 on NV4X and R4XX sometime in the future when we have 2-3 titles out. Id like to see the performance hit between 2.0 and 3.0, and of course the detail changes if there are any.

I would like to see that as well, hopefully the new video cards from ATI do support PS3.0 and not just PS2.0 because it would be alot more interesting then.

According to that "leaked" doc. ATi is avoiding it because it's too slow on their hardware, but who knows....

 

[cm123]

I'm with you :disgust:

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
Doesn't the Parhelia already do hardware displacement mapping?

IIRC, yes, yes it did. It did it real slowly though.

ATI's TRUFORM was a form of displacement mapping too, wasn't it?

No, that was vertex interpolation. Didn't work well unless the models and game were designed with it in mind.

- M4H

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
Doesn't the Parhelia already do hardware displacement mapping?

i believe so yes, it was the 1st.

 

[ronnn]

I found this article very supportive of the Nvidia card and ps 3.0. What did I read wrong? The only real negative thing he said was that Nvidia can be deceptive and that games really using this feature will be a while off. If you guys want more positive stuff, read toms and anand.

 

[Dean]

Don't knock H for clearing up some fud that was passed around the internet(including here) from Nvidia PR. PS3.0 and sm3.0 is a step up from 2.0, but its a baby step and not a leap by any means. Do not knock a site for spreading TRUTH!

Nvidia should have more people like Tony Tamasi spreading proper PR. That interview at TR was the first one from Nvidia in a long time that did not have my head shaking in disgust. He gave real answers to direct questions on what Nvidia is capable of.