A bad trend?

[Brent]

I was just reading some of this stuff and came across this: http://discuss.microsoft.com/SCRIPTS/WA-MSD.EXE?A2=ind0402d&L=directxdev&D=1&F=&S=&P=7149

I am most disturbed about that response at the top.

Having to run the card in DX8 class just to get acceptable performance.

That makes me sad, i want to see graphics go forward, not go backwards

In my Personal Opinion

 

[Quitch]

Considering most devs only realise the limitations of the GeForce FX range (so it seems to me) once they start on their DX9 game, I'd say it isn't really holding up GFX progression... just so long as ATI still have a strong DX9 part, and nVidia can still run DX8 well.

At worst, it's holding up games you want.

 

[digitalwanderer]

Well, it ain't gonna hold ME up any....

 

[jb]

Brent,

no offense but why do you say this now? Gabe from Value told us the same thing back on the ATI shader day (yea I can see how listening to one IHV event my swade your judgment, but after looking at the TONs of results of many different synthetic most of us could see that Gabe was right to avoid the weekness of the FX line, its DX9 path). We also have had other developers in this forum echo Gabe's comment:

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7873

Thus I am bit puzzled on the timing of the post is all good sir

Edit: Added linkage

 

[John Reynolds]

Brent,

no offense but why do you say this now? Gabe from Value told us the same thing back on the ATI shader day (yea I can see how listening to one IHV event my swade your judgment, but after looking at the TONs of results of many different synthetic most of us could see that Gabe was right to avoid the weekness of the FX line, its DX9 path). We also have had other developers in this forum echo Gabe's comment:

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7873

Thus I am bit puzzled on the timing of the post is all good sir

Edit: Added linkage

I agree. Brent, this only strengthens the reasoning why it's important to try and test all facets of new graphics chips. If current games don't expose certain technology to testing, then use a synthetic.

 

[Doomtrooper]

FarCry developers think the same way...some images I saw on Nvnews when using Thomas's 3Danalyze and forcing a FX card to PS 2.0.

log files :-
NV3x card
Vertex Shaders version 2.0
Pixel Shaders version 2.0
Use Hardware Shaders for NV3x GPUs
Pixel shaders usage: Replace PS.2.0 to PS.1.1
Shadow maps type: Mixed Depth/2D maps

R3x0 card
Vertex Shaders version 2.0
Pixel Shaders version 2.0
Use Hardware Shaders for ATI R300 GPU
Pixel shaders usage: PS.2.0 and PS.1.1
Shadow maps type: Mixed Depth/2D maps

You can see why Far Cry drops to DX8 PS 1.1 for FX cards:

PS 1.1 Default FX 5950

Now forced to PS 2.0 using 3Danalyze(notice the difference in frames per second!!!): http://www.tommti-systems.de

Now comparisons from FX5950 vs a 9700 Pro

FX 5950 PS 2.0 Forced

Radeon 9700 Pro PS 2.0 Default

More examples:

NV38

R360

 

[jb]

Speaking of FarCry, Brent when is your article ready?

 

[Magic-Sim]

Well, you could say this to sme "developpers" going to some great french forums..... You'll see that :

no-no, by default the nV3x uses PS 2.0 fully........

I've just noticed : pipes don't shine on nV38 on the last screenshot......

 

[Brent]

Speaking of FarCry, Brent when is your article ready?

its done, its in the editting phase

 

[Brent]

Brent,

no offense but why do you say this now? Gabe from Value told us the same thing back on the ATI shader day (yea I can see how listening to one IHV event my swade your judgment, but after looking at the TONs of results of many different synthetic most of us could see that Gabe was right to avoid the weekness of the FX line, its DX9 path). We also have had other developers in this forum echo Gabe's comment:

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7873

Thus I am bit puzzled on the timing of the post is all good sir

Edit: Added linkage

why now? i just read that and felt like posting it, it reminded me of how i don't like the fact that that is happening

thats all

 

[jb]

Brent,

fair enough. I thought that you JUST had this revolation today...and I was thinking most of us knew about this 5 months ago where was Brent back then

Thanks for the info on the Farcry stuff.

 

[Magic-Sim]

Maybe one dayt people will also admit that Valve wasn't late and by missing a holliday release due to recoding (Leak thingy) they did like with HL1 and just went on the polish route until it is better done.....

 

[Dave Baumann]

Bookmark this topic and revisit it later.

 

[Mariner]

Bookmark this topic and revisit it later.

It's just tease, tease, tease with you today, Dave!

 

[Colourless]

I'm curious why someone would link to a file that has dontlinkthefile in the name

 

[digitalwanderer]

Bookmark this topic and revisit it later.

Damn it Dave, I've got to go pick me Mum up from the airport and I don't have a mobile connection yet....how am I 'sposed to keep refreshing the page all afternoon? :|

 

[Brent]

uh oh, was it wrong of me to post that link?

is so i'll remove it

 

[Joe DeFuria]

No...you're fine. Colourless is referring to Doomtrooper linking directly to 3DAnalyze, instead of the page.

 

[Magic-Sim]

Bookmark this topic and revisit it later.

Have you cheerleader genes Dave ?

 

[digitalwanderer]

Have you cheerleader genes Dave ?

I ain't never met a cheerleader who was as big a tease as Dave was, and I have met some TEASING cheerleaders!