Beyond3D Forum

Skinner · 18-Sep-2003, 11:42

After a visite to the Stalker forums I asked if they are still using nVidia only features, which would result in visualeffects to be seen on nVidia cards only

and why?

They stated nVidia's shaders are longer compares to ATI's but we know that's not relevant, because nVidia's shaders are way to slow to use the full length of it, Am I right?

Look at this small thread:

http://www.gsc-game.com/index.php?t=...s_game_type=xr

Maybe we can save Stalker.

K.I.L.E.R · 18-Sep-2003, 11:57

Quote:

They stated nVidia's shaders are longer compares to ATI's but we know that's not relevant, because nVidia's shaders are way to slow to use the full length of it, Am I right?

I believe few long length shaders don't lose as much performance compared to many short lengthed shaders.
Correct?

CorwinB · 18-Sep-2003, 12:39

Well, IIRC, the F-buffer isn't exposed under DX9 at the moment ?

I think the game will feature a handful of very slow longer shaders, mostly for demo purpose. And that's not a problem, I find it cool that Nvidia hardware is actually used to push the envelope. As the developer said, ATI hardware will run the game fine. I think we can all agree that Nvidia holding the development or improvement of shader games because their hardware can't handle it is bad, but I don't see anything wrong with developers using some of the most advanced GFFX features provided the performance is decent. Let's be fair...

Dave Baumann · 18-Sep-2003, 12:42

If the effects don't use alphas then they can still be multipassed fine.

Ostsol · 18-Sep-2003, 13:41

Has anyone tried to write and run a fragment program for the GeforceFX that is longer than what the R3xx series can support (ignoring the F-Buffer, of course)? Given the FX's slow FP performance and significant register usage issues, would such a program run well enough to be practical in a realtime engine?

Also, what features outside of the programmable pipeline does NVidia have an advantage of ATI in?

bloodbob · 18-Sep-2003, 14:15

F-Buffer isn't exposed peroid and I don't know if it will be.

F-Buffer is a opengl 2.0 apparently and can't be used on opengl 1.0 transparently but that basicly says either it can't be used newhere transparently or only works on glslang. Now the glslang is in 1.5 as a extentsion does that mean ati will be exposing F-Buffer I rather doubt it. F-buffer is vapourware :/

Ostsol · 18-Sep-2003, 14:27

Bah. . . ATI will probably release some extension to support it in OpenGL 1.x. It'll probably be just a new token for glEnable/glDisable.

Skinner · 18-Sep-2003, 14:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by CorwinB

but I don't see anything wrong with developers using some of the most advanced GFFX features provided the performance is decent. Let's be fair...

I agree, but aren't these effects also possible with a R9800Pro via an other way?

I'm afraid for the idea that they don't exposure the full force of a R9800 in an engine which I look so much foward too.

The F=buffer is realy vaporware?

CorwinB · 18-Sep-2003, 15:16

Quote:

The F=buffer is realy vaporware?

IIRC, the F-buffer is already exposed through an ATI-specific OpenGL extension, and may be exposed in the next revision of DX9 (together with some of the PS2.0+ features of the NV3x). I may be wrong, though.

OpenGL guy · 18-Sep-2003, 20:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ostsol

Has anyone tried to write and run a fragment program for the GeforceFX that is longer than what the R3xx series can support (ignoring the F-Buffer, of course)? Given the FX's slow FP performance and significant register usage issues, would such a program run well enough to be practical in a realtime engine?

Yes, this has already been done: http://www.ati.com/developer/ashli.html.

Quote:

Also, what features outside of the programmable pipeline does NVidia have an advantage of ATI in?

None that I am aware of. In fact, I would argue the opposite since ATI is exposing float buffers, MRTs, etc.

bloodbob · 19-Sep-2003, 11:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by CorwinB

Quote:

The F=buffer is realy vaporware?

IIRC, the F-buffer is already exposed through an ATI-specific OpenGL extension, and may be exposed in the next revision of DX9 (together with some of the PS2.0+ features of the NV3x). I may be wrong, though.

Didn't know it was exposed through the ATI specific functions but yeah its not in the arb shaders to my knowledge it wasn't in older 9800 drivers.

Yeah dunno if dx9 shaders use f-buffer but I don't think anyone has said that they use it anywhere.

Arun · 21-Sep-2003, 20:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ostsol

Also, what features outside of the programmable pipeline does NVidia have an advantage of ATI in?

Dynamic Branching support in the VS is the biggest one IMO - unless that would fit in the "programmable pipeline" category? I think not, but then again, it's 21:10 here...

Uttar

MuFu · 21-Sep-2003, 22:04

21:10?!

MuFu.

micron · 21-Sep-2003, 22:39

He has a time machine, or for whatever reason uses military time....you never know with him...

MuFu · 21-Sep-2003, 23:11

Those crazy Belgians!

MuFu.

Tahir2 · 22-Sep-2003, 00:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uttar

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ostsol

Also, what features outside of the programmable pipeline does NVidia have an advantage of ATI in?

Dynamic Branching support in the VS is the biggest one IMO - unless that would fit in the "programmable pipeline" category? I think not, but then again, it's 21:10 here...

Uttar

Ah, past your bedtime is it, Uttar?

Pete · 22-Sep-2003, 02:43

9:10 in the p.m.?! How do you stay awake that late--intravenous caffeine?

:P

micron · 22-Sep-2003, 03:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete

9:10 in the p.m.?!

Thanx for decoding that Pete

18-Sep-2003, 11:42	#1
Skinner Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Zwijndrecht/Rotterdam, Netherlands and Phobos Posts: 847	The X-Rayengine (Stalker) uses some nVidia only features :( After a visite to the Stalker forums I asked if they are still using nVidia only features, which would result in visualeffects to be seen on nVidia cards only and why? They stated nVidia's shaders are longer compares to ATI's but we know that's not relevant, because nVidia's shaders are way to slow to use the full length of it, Am I right? Look at this small thread: http://www.gsc-game.com/index.php?t=...s_game_type=xr Maybe we can save Stalker. __________________ Schieten op de beesten.

18-Sep-2003, 12:39	#3
CorwinB Member Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 274	Well, IIRC, the F-buffer isn't exposed under DX9 at the moment ? I think the game will feature a handful of very slow longer shaders, mostly for demo purpose. And that's not a problem, I find it cool that Nvidia hardware is actually used to push the envelope. As the developer said, ATI hardware will run the game fine. I think we can all agree that Nvidia holding the development or improvement of shader games because their hardware can't handle it is bad, but I don't see anything wrong with developers using some of the most advanced GFFX features provided the performance is decent. Let's be fair... __________________ "Core and Eidos believe that Tomb Raider: AOD performs exceptionally well on NVIDIA hardware"

18-Sep-2003, 12:42	#4
Dave Baumann Gamerscore Wh... Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 12,956	If the effects don't use alphas then they can still be multipassed fine. __________________ Expand. Accelerate. Dominate. Tweet Tweet!

21-Sep-2003, 22:39	#14
micron Diamond Viper 550 Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: U.S. Posts: 1,189	He has a time machine, or for whatever reason uses military time....you never know with him... __________________ "I demand the constitutional right to eat my enemies" - RussSchultz

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

18-Sep-2003, 13:41	#5
Ostsol Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Posts: 1,765	Has anyone tried to write and run a fragment program for the GeforceFX that is longer than what the R3xx series can support (ignoring the F-Buffer, of course)? Given the FX's slow FP performance and significant register usage issues, would such a program run well enough to be practical in a realtime engine? Also, what features outside of the programmable pipeline does NVidia have an advantage of ATI in?

18-Sep-2003, 14:15	#6
bloodbob Trollipop Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 1,630	F-Buffer isn't exposed peroid and I don't know if it will be. F-Buffer is a opengl 2.0 apparently and can't be used on opengl 1.0 transparently but that basicly says either it can't be used newhere transparently or only works on glslang. Now the glslang is in 1.5 as a extentsion does that mean ati will be exposing F-Buffer I rather doubt it. F-buffer is vapourware :/

18-Sep-2003, 14:27	#7
Ostsol Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Posts: 1,765	Bah. . . ATI will probably release some extension to support it in OpenGL 1.x. It'll probably be just a new token for glEnable/glDisable.

21-Sep-2003, 22:04	#13
MuFu Chief Spastic Baboon Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Location, Location with Kirstie Allsopp Posts: 2,258	21:10?! MuFu.

21-Sep-2003, 23:11	#15
MuFu Chief Spastic Baboon Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Location, Location with Kirstie Allsopp Posts: 2,258	Those crazy Belgians! MuFu.

22-Sep-2003, 02:43	#17
Pete Moderate Nuisance Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 4,653	9:10 in the p.m.?! How do you stay awake that late--intravenous caffeine? :P

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Record-Setting NVIDIA Quadro FX 4400	Dave Baumann	Press Releases	0	10-Aug-2004 00:28
NVIDIA Forceware 55 Introduces Game Profiles, Boosts FPS	Dave Baumann	Press Releases	0	17-Mar-2004 10:51
NVIDIA Sets New Performance Standard For Mobile Workstation	Dave Baumann	Press Releases	0	25-Feb-2004 00:01
A year of nVidia	Quitch	3D & Semiconductor Industry	39	12-Nov-2003 10:47
NVIDIA Extends nForce Platform Into Workstation Market	Dave Baumann	Press Releases	0	23-Apr-2003 13:10

Beyond3D Forum

Welcome, Unregistered.