Futuremark: 3DMark06

Discussion in 'Graphics and Semiconductor Industry' started by trinibwoy, Dec 23, 2005.

  1. ERK

    ERK
    Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    287
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    SoCal
    Thanks, Chal. Seeing all those _PPs in that shader reminded me that there may be some performance help from such for 7800GTX in 3DMark06, but perhaps as you say it is small.
     
  2. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,873
    Likes Received:
    767
    Location:
    London
    Yes.

    There's the register bandwidth problem to contend with in G70 - maximum of four FP32 registers as operands in any one clock - which will get in the way of certain combinations of instructions, the obvious one being dual-issued MADs:

    MAD r0, r1, r2, r3
    MAD r2, r1, r4, r5

    can't be issued if all the source registers are FP32s - but it's fine if they're all FP16s (or some mixture of FP32/FP16, since two FP16s actually "fit" into one FP32).

    Jawed
     
  3. ERK

    ERK
    Regular

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    287
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    SoCal
    Follow up question for the experts. How much does _PP help the 7800GTX in the shader above?
    For any willing to speculate...
     
  4. poly-gone

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not too much, I guess, at least to a lesser extent than the NV4x cards. The NV3x series needed it badly, the NV4x slightly (though in some cases it did help) but hopefully doesn't matter too much for the G70. More than the _pp gain, nVIDIA cards gain performance from using lookup tables over straight math. Also, the DST thing is a big performance gainer.
     
  5. poly-gone

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Probably, but it wouldn't make a difference if they're using 8 test samples (which is probably why they're using DB! Mwahahahaha). I don't see the water using DB either (from what's given in their whitepaper - 2 scrolling normal maps and 4 Gerstner wave functions). The Heterogenous Fog is another likely candidate, though they clearly mention that they're able to get away with just 5 samples (which wouldn't require DB).
     
  6. KimB

    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    12,902
    Likes Received:
    218
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    I believe Nick mentioned somewhere in this thread that they use a custom 16-sample pattern.
     
  7. poly-gone

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    May 22, 2004
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, that can be done by encoding the offsets in a 3D volume map. You use 8 test samples to check if the pixel is fully shadowed (then exit the shader quickly), otherwise fetch the remaining 8 samples to soften the edges. It doesn't require DB though, if you skip the testing.
     
  8. mongoled

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2003
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sotira, Cyprus
    Slightly off topic, but could someone explain the reason Intel dual core CPU's are providing a significant boost to SM2.0 and HDR/SM3.0 scores in comparison to AMD dual core CPU's? I just saw the review over at AMDZone

    http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?...s&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=229&page=3

    Breakdown of results:

    SM2.0
    P4 840D+7800GT: 1458
    FX-60+7800GT: 1266

    P4 840D + X1800XL: 1251
    FX-60 + X1800XL: 1178

    HDR/SM3.0
    P4 840D + 7800GT: 1451
    FX-60 + 7800GT: 1264

    P4 840D + X1800XL: 1317
    FX-60 + X1800XL: 1212

    The CPU scores show a completely different picture

    CPU Score
    P4 840D + 7800GT: 1416
    FX-60 + 7800GT: 1891

    P4 840D + X1800XL: 1388
    FX-60 + X1800XL: 1863

    -EDIT-

    silly mistake :)
     
    #628 mongoled, Jan 27, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 27, 2006
  9. KimB

    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    12,902
    Likes Received:
    218
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    You've got a typo in your CPU score results, mongoled :)

    But yeah, that definitely seems very strange to me.
     
  10. ANova

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,226
    Likes Received:
    10
    Probably has to do with the chipsets, Intel's tend to be very good and fast.
     
  11. KimB

    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    12,902
    Likes Received:
    218
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Both used the nForce4. So it more likely has something to do with hyperthreading. But what, I don't know.
     
  12. mongoled

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2003
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sotira, Cyprus
    Thanxs for tht, sorted it out. Still interested to see if someone else can shed more light on this as the difference in the scores is quite obvious. Would the CPU's be doing work with regards to SM2.0 and SM3.0?
     
    #632 mongoled, Jan 27, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 27, 2006
  13. Neeyik

    Neeyik Homo ergaster
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    1,231
    Likes Received:
    45
    Location:
    Cumbria, UK
    Thread closed for a minute to do some post separating.

    Edit: Threads pertaining to the discussion about SSAA and MSAA have now been moved to here:

    http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27848

    If anyone can think of a better title for the thread though, please let me know! Don't forget that this thread is for discussing Futuremark's 3DMark06.
     
  14. Fox5

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,674
    Likes Received:
    5
    Weren't both cpus used dual core cpus?
     
  15. KimB

    Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2002
    Messages:
    12,902
    Likes Received:
    218
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Yes. But that doesn't necessarily mean that hyperthreading wouldn't have had an effect. It is, after all, the primary advantage available for the P4.
     
  16. OpenGL guy

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,357
    Likes Received:
    28
    Just because 8 samples lie within, or out of, the shadow doesn't mean all 16 will! A better solution is to generate an edge mask so that only pixels within the edge mask get all 16 samples. Pixels outside the edge mask only need 1 sample to determine whether they are shadowed or not.
     
  17. Geo

    Geo Mostly Harmless
    Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,116
    Likes Received:
    213
    Location:
    Uffda-land
  18. Moloch

    Moloch God of Wicked Games
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    72
    Quack:!: ;)


    edited so it's clear I'm joking.
     
    #638 Moloch, Jan 27, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 28, 2006
  19. Farid

    Farid Artist formely known as Vysez
    Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,844
    Likes Received:
    108
    Location:
    Paris, France
    Cheat! Cheat! Cheat! Cheat! Cheat! Cheat!

    I think it's time for Ati to admit that they lost the IQ crown in favor of the technologically superior nVIDIA™ cards.

    This bug on a particular surface in a particular test of 3DMARKS 2006™ is a clear indicative that Ati are not only cheating with their drivers, but are also deceiving their customers, their friends and all the humankind, plus Rys (Since he's not exactly a part of the humankind, he's like an evolved hamster according to some folks).

    Here's another unrelated and inconclusive anedoctical evidence to go with the TR one, the other day I saw an ati logo in a magazine, and the logo had clearly image quality issue, like color dithering or something.
    You know what that means? Ati cheats with their Drivers. Yeah, even the paper drivers!

    I think it's time to call for a general boycott of all Ati products. i'm starting an Online Petition right away!

    And before someone points out that it's maybe a simple anecdotical driver bug, and that the TR wanted a few cheap clicks. Let me tell you this you folks of little faith,... You're probably right.
     
  20. Jawed

    Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,873
    Likes Received:
    767
    Location:
    London
    Funny that, don't we already have Hanners's word that DF24/Fetch4 isn't actually working on X1900XT and is only working on X1600XT (no comments either way for X1300)?

    Jawed
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...