far cry ps3 and stuff

So in summary:

VS3.0 instancing provides 0-10% boost on average. I don't think that's going to be very noticeable.

PS3.0 dynamic branching for multiple light sources doesn't work, but static branching (which should work fine with PS2_b and the X800, if Crytek chose to implement it) gives a 50% boost.

HDR using FP16 blending, which isn't part of SM3.0, results in a nice image (not sure how it looks better yet) but isn't usable with AA and is only playable at lower resolutions.

So what again is SM3.0 going to do to massively improve this game?

Considering that Far Cry uses lots of normal maps and large textures, I'd be much more interested to see what improvements were possible if they implemented 3Dc.

 

Considering the industry in the past has never done much with texture compression, I really don't expect ATI's 3Dc to do any better. More hype then anything else and few people are even discussing it as a worthwhile option in the industry.

 

dxtc was very popular .

Compresion is used in all games

 

can you even read? . from that summary ps 3.0 isnt even being used. the only part of shader model 3 being used is instancing, and thats a 0 to 10% gain..... some people :?

 

do you enjoy being ignorant?....

 

Sorry, this paragraph just slays me!

 

doesn't AF have a much bigger performance hit than MSAA :? :?

 

I wouldn't expect anything different from a man who lives and breaths video cards, but there are people out their who arn't so picky of how their games look.

 

Some people prefer the jaggy look... no way! Way!!

 

I love how people can know everything about me without even knowing who I am.

 

I take it you haven't found the hidden camera yet then?

Nite_Hawk

 

How about reading before posting?

 

well to be fair with don't know if that is all p.s 3.0 it could just be newer drivers and p.s 3.0 .

Don't worry soon enough we will find out

 

LOL,seems that you will never run out of excuses.

 

glad you find it funny

From the info we have we do not know what drivers the nv3x path was using.

We do not know what drivers the p.s 3.0 drivers were using

In the demo the fps went up.

This is an nivida event. I'm sure they picked the best case for the demo and used the best drivers to show off p.s 3.0

I don't get what your laughing at.

Till we actually have tests from review sites we should take it all with a grain of salt

 

LOL,I always enjoy watching your show .

Nice excuse,but my suggestion is don't put all your money on one horse...

Well,here is something intersesting for you and your beloved r300 mode:

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=30854

 

whats so interesting about it ?

we know that as of now the r3x0 path provides the best image quality.

we know that fp 24 falls between fp 16/ fp32

Here is an interesting link btw

looks like when using full percision the 6800ultra is about 10fps slower than the x800xt .


that is the x800xt with out any optimizations either no trylinear.

Also note they are using 4.5 betas compared to 61.34 dets .

What that shows me is that the 6800ultra is much slower in p.s 2.0 when rendering full percison compared to nvidia .

And i'm glad my threads entertain you.

 

Unfortunately for nVidia, I have developed a technique at work that will work as a drop-in replacement of dynamic branching that works in the most important situations where you'd otherwise need or prefer ps3.0. You'll probably have to resort to very esoteric effects to really require ps3.0. The effect you mention sounds like a perfect example where this technique would work equally well (or maybe even better) than using dynamic branching, depending on how much the cost of dynamic branches are.
Another typical example is the "early-out" kind of optimization where you for instance detect that the pixel is backfacing the light or is outside the light radius and just return zero instead of going through the all the lighting computations. I have implemented this for a typical "Humus-demo" scene with four lights. With early-out enabled I get 45fps. Without it's 14fps. That's more than 3x performance improvement. If you prefer to dwell in the darkness, the difference is 136fps vs. 25fps. 8) I'm not even sure nVidia's will be able to match that performance increase with ps3.0.

 

humus when are we going to see that in games

 

I'll believe it when I see it. BTW, I like the "at work" part. It's still very interesting.

What about the other PS 3.0 effects?