nV40 info w/ benchmarks

Yeah, different in the sense that the first doesn't matter much, if any whatsoever, on software for the foreseeable future, while the second has immediate VAST visible imperfections right now.

You haven't even been able to produce a significant example of where 24-bit fp won't have sufficient quality, so why should anyone worry about this?

Before fp24 becomes a real problem, you have already got a shader so slow no current hardware can deal with it in realtime, and in the future that will be true for no hardware a normal person is willing to spend money on (sub-$200 bracket), and stay true for QUITE a while. Years, likely, due to developer slowness and lagging adaption in low-end of PC marketspace.

That you can have some shader somewhere that gives some visible imperfection somewhere at fp24, in what way is that a problem, really? I mean, compared to the glaring banding errors of old with transparent textures and 16-bit frame buffers?

Seems to me you're desperately trying to make a problem out of something that is not a problem at all, really. By the time fp24 has *actually* become a problem, hardware will already have moved on past that point, but NOW is not that point in time. We won't get there for a long while. Hell, we don't have a single title yet built with DX9 in mind and you're worried about shader precision??? You've definitely got your priorities screwed up, dude.

 

I take it you've never done any large scale program managment before Chalnoth? Because if you had you'd nevre had made that comment. People don't go spending hundred of millions without studying, in great depth, the implications of all their decisions. Even nvidia probably realised the implications of the NV30 design but probably just misjudged both ATi and the market.

And has been said the difference ATi's development and nvidia, seemingly, doing bugger all with their FSAA and completely different issues. One has an immediate impact the other is a much longer term issue.

 

Then maybe you shouldn't have been pimping the nv30?

 

On the contrary you did. Otherwise this post of yours:

is pointless.

 

Has good ol' Fuad's been collecting info and rumors from this forum again and posted it up on the inquirer as NEWS?

 

No, I think Fudo just (finally) got his hands on that NVIDIA presentation


Uttar

 

Got any slides?

 

No, I've never seen the presentation. Just one (or should I say two?) very nice guy(s) summarized it for me


Uttar

 

So how high is the BS-factor this time when NV claims 4x faster in D3 and 7x faster in HL2 etc...?

Let's just say, after the total and utter dissapointment that was the NV30, I'm somewhat sceptical of any miraculous performance numbers coming from their direction.

 

Sounds like it, yeah - exactly the same performance projections they've been throwing around recently.

What a scoop though - 8 memory chips and an "Ultra" version which will be faster than the non-Ultra. WHODATHUNKIT?!!!

MuFu.

 

Knowing the weakness (performancewise) of the nv3x was poor fp32 performance and slow AA > 4x...my guess is if those numbers are accurate at all they were with AA > 4x and fp32 shaders. Anything else would suprise me greatly...even though those numbers are already very suspicious.

 

Oh, another dependable pre-release milestone hit? "Possibly technically true in just the right conditions but utterly misleading performance benchmark reliably sourced to IHV hits net." Yeah, that would be about T-30, wouldn't it? But damn it, where are our pics?

And ATI still hiding in the bushes. . .

 

It's definately not a good thing when he screws up in the first paragraph.

Isn't NV35 GeForceFX 5900 and NV38 GeForceFX 5950?

 

The author obviously needs to learn a thing or two about memory. It's 600MHz DDR so who cares how difficult it is to clock a card at 1200MHz. Nothing will run at 1200MHz. It'll just use the rising and falling edge of the clock.

edit: in case it wasn't clear the quote was from the Inquirer article.

 

Of course they study the implications. That doesn't mean they judge correctly. That's what I was talking about. And the fact that companies don't often judge correctly is born out almost daily.

 

As can be seen by the fiasco that was the nv30.

I still find it amazing that you try to pick apart the r300 to pull some magical flaw out of thin air, yet ignore what a complete and utter disaster the nv30 was/is.

 

Or in the case of nVidia, for the past year.

 

Yeah it's a shame nvidia misjudged the situation so badly, never thought I'd hear you admit it though Chal.

Seriously though, you still show no real appreciation of the complexities of project management. The fact that the R300 and it's derivatives achieved such popularity on their own strengths proves ATi made a significant number of correct decisions. Defining 'correctly' is a very ambiguous in black and white is next to impossible unless you get a complete implosion of the company who made that decision and even then there are still benefits for the industry (whatever industry that is) assuming they're willing to learn.

In our specific case it could actually be argued that Nvidia is in a better theoretical position than ATi because they have more to learn from the NV3* project than ATi has to learn from the R3** project.

The only important questions are:
1) Can they learn from what's occurred? (So far the consumers seem more bothered about performance and IQ, and not theoretical objections to the differences between FP24 & FP32)
2) Can they (or more importantly are they willing) to apply these lessons to next generation parts?

If the answer to either question is no then nvidia is in trouble, ATi's issues are less appparent but still no less important for them to answer. Hopefully both companies are up to the challange as resting on your laurels and believing things rosy, while dissing the opposition, is the easiest thing to do in the world.

 

so is it 4x in D3 and 7x in hl2 faster than nv30 with cheats or without?

or are they both cheating?

IMHO to make that kind of performance delta on the same process same mem bus width they'll have to remove most cheats and brilinear for nv3x from next driver set.

Which is very decent of them, only that it will leave nv3x owners out in the cold.

 

Well, considering it's nVidia we're talking about here, I fully expect the numbers are not using the NV3x "optimized" paths in either software, a cheating driver for the NV40 and maybe even some ?xAA that requires the NV30 to fall back to (partial) SS.

cu

incurable