[Geo]

Originally Posted by Joe DeFuria

Dave mentioned in some other thread (or perhaps earlier in this one), and I agree, that going with a "radical" departure in architecture (ala R500) in a PC system where you need to run existing software that was designed to run on "traditional" architectures, is much more of a risk than doing it in a closed box upon which software is being designed specfically for it.

With such a relatively small difference (between SM 3.0 and 2.0), it doesn't make all that much sense to bring an entirely new architecture in. It makes the most sense when there is a more radical change in the API / programming model.

So I don't expect to see R400 typw architecture appear in the PC space until MS is ready to release WGF 2.0 / Longhorn.

Of course the problem with arguing with Dave is, as he once told DC --retrospectively-- that sometimes you just have to accept that maybe he knows something you don't. Well, easy for him to say, as he knows when he knows, and he know's when he's shrewd guessing on partial info, and he knows when he's S/WAGing with the rest of us. We gotta guess which mode he's in.

What I've always thot on this matter --which prima-facie means its probably wrong -- is that you are faced with that transition hit no matter what you do, all you can control is timing. Tho admittedly we tend to throw the tiaras and brickbats around here based on how well you manage that timing as a company (in part, see NV30). But anyway, I look at most non-shader-limited games aimed at "traditional" architecture and I generally see modern cards kicking their ass big-time. So why not take part of the the hit now, when you can mask it with a major process move that should give you enough performance margin to at least not "take a step back" on the traditional-aimed games while you daintily start (admittedly, you can't complete the journey) your way across the bridge?

Edit: I should add, based on some comments upstream, I have pegged Dave this time around as somewhere between SWAG (Sophisticated, etc) and "shrewd guessing on partial info", rather than "veiled ex-Cathedra". This makes me marginally willing to argue the toss with him this time --politely, of course.

[PeterAce]

Originally Posted by Jawed

This is hardly a game:

http://graphics.stanford.edu/~yoel/notes/ - 21 February

but it shows problems. I believe he's using the technique Humus came up with in his early-Z demo (what's its name?) in order to solve the problem he's having with NV dynamic branching performance.

SC:CT apparantly uses dynamic branching in a fairly global shader, but I'm pretty vague on that. Plainly performance there isn't a problem (SM3 mode with the same eye-candy as SM1 mode runs 5-8% faster I think).

So I think it's unfair to generalise about NV40's dynamic branching performance as there are scenarios where it works without a hitch. I just get the feeling developer's hands are somewhat tied by GPU architecture gotchas. But aren't they always?

Jawed

I was under the impression (from Demirug's post below) that the SM3 path for SS:CT was only using static branching on NV4X:

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewto...=468009#468009

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewto...=468891#468891

[Unknown Soldier]

Originally Posted by geo

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22486

You'd think they are a 24hr cable news outlet the way they operate whether they have anything to say or not.

I believe TheInq is just covering their bases. The more info they put out .. even though how inaccurate it might be .. at least one might be right .. and then they'll shout that they said it first.

US

[hoom]

So R400 Forever architecture is waiting for the Windows Forever operating system and the killer app Duke Nukem Forever :?

[tEd]

I assume SC:CT is using DB for shadow map filtering/soft-shadows

[jvd]

Originally Posted by arrrse

So R400 Forever architecture is waiting for the Windows Forever operating system and the killer app Duke Nukem Forever :?

r400 is gone , its offspring the r500 will be seen later this year in the xbox 2 and a pc part the r600 will be released most likely next year in 2006

[Demirug]

Originally Posted by PeterAce

I was under the impression (from Demirug's post below) that the SM3 path for SS:CT was only using static branching on NV4X:

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewto...=468009#468009

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewto...=468891#468891

One of the shaders use dynamic branching. All the others use static branching only. Some use all 16 booleans.

[PeterAce]

Thanks for the info Demirug.

May I ask - which effect is dynamic branching shader being used for in SS:CT?

[Demirug]

Originally Posted by PeterAce

Thanks for the info Demirug.

May I ask - which effect is dynamic branching shader being used for in SS:CT?

I am not sure. I believe it is used for the softshadows.

[Megadrive1988]

Originally Posted by Jawed

Because R600 is a WGF2 part, and WGF2 hasn't been finalised (or at least won't have been finalised early enough for R500 in Xbox 360 aka Xenon).

R500 should be finished right now... prolly has been for a few months.

Jawed

I believe that Xenon GPU (R500) will do some things that R600 won't do, and R600 will do some things that Xenon GPU won't do. because Xenon's R500 will have things not in R600, and R600 will have things not in Xenon's R500. even though both GPUs are most likely based on the same architecture (re-worked, re-tooled and beefed-up R400)

not unlike NV2A and NV25. each had some things that the other did not have. NV2A had more shader ALUs (right DaveB?) and some geometry features that didn't show up on the PC side until NV30. and the NV25 had things that NV2A did not have like totally new anti-aliasing unit, AccuView, among other things.

[Unknown Soldier]

Another month and a half to go .. how depressing.

I see that the Multi-VPU may be talked about at WinHEC.

ATI's Multi-VPU Technology May be Touted at WinHEC

ATI's technology that would allow two or more graphics cards in a personal computer to render a single frame in 3D games in parallel thus increasing performance and quality may be discussed later this month during WinHEC show in Seattle, Washington.

“PCI Express is also returning the graphics subsystem to a general-purpose, highly scalable interface, which brings new opportunities to scale graphics performance by adding additional graphics cards to a system. Today, graphics industry leaders NVIDIA and ATI are offering graphics solutions that leverage the power of multiple GPUs in a single system,” reads a description of the session called “PCI Express: Spurring New Ideas in Graphics”.

“There is nothing new… We’ve been doing dual GPU for a long time. Right now there are E&S systems with 16 ATI GPUs in it,” an ATI spokesperson said when asked for comment.

US

[hoom]

Gah I hate when people don't get the joke :?

[Pete]

Originally Posted by tEd

I assume SC:CT is using DB for shadow map filtering/soft-shadows

What does Dave Baumann have to do with CT's shadows?

Oh, riiiight....

[ANova]

Wow, over 61000 views and almost 1000 posts. And not a shred of fact.

[Vegetto]

Originally Posted by ANova

Wow, over 61000 views and almost 1000 posts. And not a shred of fact.

and that's something new? the same happened with NV40 :P, the only difference was, that topic had some info and it was right :P

[Pete]

Heh, how about a repeat performance, Veg?

[Vegetto]

Originally Posted by Pete

Heh, how about a repeat performance, Veg?

i don't get it, are u being mean?

[DegustatoR]

There is some info that is right in this topic 8)

[ANova]

Originally Posted by DegustatoR

There is some info that is right in this topic 8)

If you consider a bunch of tech nerds arguing over speculation and rumors right then yes.

[Vegetto]

Originally Posted by DegustatoR

There is some info that is right in this topic 8)

yeah is right that the R520 is a R300 pushed to the limits

[Ostsol]

Originally Posted by Vegetto

yeah is right that the R520 is a R300 pushed to the limits

I still don't understand why people say that. . .

[Dave Baumann]

Actually, I've heard people from ATI refer to it as such albeit glibly; however, it should mark a radical development of it. Personally I look at the R300 architecture lineage as the DX9 architecture and they will move to a unified architecture for WGF2.0.

[Vegetto]

Originally Posted by DaveBaumann

Actually, I've heard people from ATI refer to it as such albeit glibly; however, it should mark a radical development of it. Personally I look at the R300 architecture lineage as the DX9 architecture and they will move to a unified architecture for WGF2.0.

That was what i mean

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Vegetto

i don't get it, are u being mean?

Not at all! You brought us early NV40 numbers, didn't you (the ones with the [at-the-time] improbably high single-textured fillrate)?

BTW, what happened to the EX in your name? Or maybe I'm confused about that, too.

[Geo]

Originally Posted by DaveBaumann

Actually, I've heard people from ATI refer to it as such albeit glibly; however, it should mark a radical development of it. Personally I look at the R300 architecture lineage as the DX9 architecture and they will move to a unified architecture for WGF2.0.

Ah, a little tease that makes everyone happy!