Anywhere I can see x800's ps2.0 vs 6800's ps3.0?

[Snarfy]

on the subject of far cry image quality on the 6800, you may want to check out this site here:

http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040414/geforce_6800-46.html

doesnt look very good, does it? mabye thats the only reason the 6800 performs well in far cry...

 

[2senile]

Too many reviews suddenly popping out and I can't find one to compare ps2.0 and 3.0's speed from both companies.

I'll make a wild guess that the best way to look at this particular situation is to wait for FutureMark/Shadermak to introduce an SM3 synthetic test.


Need to make sure nobody "cheats" tho.

 

[WaltC]

Nope, i'm of the opinion that there are no true PS2.0 game here yet. Not that PS2.0 wasn't here yet. And as i said earlier, some people might disagree.

It won't be possible to agree or disagree with your opinion until you explain what you mean by "true ps2.0 game"...

But if you want to see a game shipping for sometime in which the difference between rendering is evident between ps1.x and ps2.0, look at Halo. Certain effects visible with naked eye are not rendered at all under less than ps2.0. The game's read.me puts that into writing, in case you're tempted to think that's my opinion instead of the developer's testimonial... But my opinion is that I believe the developer, since I can clearly see the difference between ps1.x and ps2.0 by running the game with the appropriate command-line switches on my R3x0.

Forget about the ratio of shaders. As i see it, look at the Half Life 2, Unreal Engine 3 videos and see how they look ?

Hmmm...so I'd guess you'd say that Carmack is wasting his time supporting 2.0+ shaders in D3, now that he's decided to do it? But if you don't think the "ratio" of shaders in a game is what defines a "true ps2.0 game," and you think it's image quality--then no need to wait 2 months for HL2 or two years for UT3--just look at Halo and run the tests yourself (uh, providing you have a card which actually lets you run ps2.0 shaders and doesn't drop them back in the driver to 1.x, of course...) Isn't it grand that with currently available nVidia gpus you can never really be sure of what you're seeing, or not seeing?....

 

[2senile]

I'm not a "techie" person so I'll state my opinion from a simple user perspective:

If it looks good, fine. If it is not delivering what I believed I was paying for (ie, full precision, full featured under MY control) not good.

In a game I want to see the best IQ my card is capable of & have the option to choose for myself what I am willing to sacrifice in order to gain the best playing experience ... for me.

Talking about a "real" PS2 or PS3 game is irrelevent to a gamer. They play games!

You will just have to rely on synthetics, for over a year IMO, to gain an understanding of pure shader performance between cards.

 

[Bjorn]

....just look at Halo and run the tests yourself (uh, providing you have a card which actually lets you run ps2.0 shaders and doesn't drop them back in the driver to 1.x, of course...)

I already answered this imo but you left that part out of your quote:

Are there any of those features/effects available in any game yet ? IMO no. Far Cry with the SM2.0/SM3.0 patch will probably be the first though.

Isn't it grand that with currently available nVidia gpus you can never really be sure of what you're seeing, or not seeing?....

I thought that what you see is actually what you see ?

I'll agree if you change it to "never be sure of what you get"