NVIDIA GF100 & Friends speculation

Crysis Warhead benchmarks HD 5870 against GTX 4x0

1003072041dc4a662c1b865e9c.jpg

10fps or 3fps, it's a slideshow. This had better be a gtx 470, because if the 480 is losing to the 5870 in a TWIMTBP title nVidia might as well forget about releasing anything.
 
Don't recall anything coming from Nvidia that was dismissive of DX11. There was one comment about "DX11 isn't everything" and of course the usual suspects took that innocuous statement and ran with it.

IIRC, there were also gems like, "because of physics, our $129 gpu is faster than their $400 gpu. "
 
10fps or 3fps, it's a slideshow. This had better be a gtx 470, because if the 480 is losing to the 5870 in a TWIMTBP title nVidia might as well forget about releasing anything.

IMHO, it is a dead heat. 5870's atrocious min fps is the only standout data point.
 
Good minimum rates for GTX470 in this bench. The cap on maximum FPS could indicate limitation somewhere in the raw fill-rate or frame-buffer bandwidth front.
 
IMHO, it is a dead heat. 5870's atrocious min fps is the only standout data point.

I'm guessing due to 20% more video memory this is gonna be a repeating pattern. In those memory limited situations, 470 and 480 will pull ahead.

HD5870 with 2GB will prolly be a different story though. Overclocked to 1GHz and even GTX480 will have a hard time matching it.
 
Look at the RAM. It is a 470. ;)

Oh right. But again the extra memory on the 470 is a bit of an x-factor so it's too early to tell whether the higher min-fps is due to something else.

IIRC, there were also gems like, "because of physics, our $129 gpu is faster than their $400 gpu. "

Yep, but I thought we were talking about DX11. That bit of comedy was about promoting PhysX IIRC.
 
I'm guessing due to 20% more video memory this is gonna be a repeating pattern. In those memory limited situations, 470 and 480 will pull ahead.

HD5870 with 2GB will prolly be a different story though. Overclocked to 1GHz and even GTX480 will have a hard time matching it.

So far, 470 (and to a limited extent 480) looks to be within reach of more RAM, more clocks part. Increasing bandwidth might be an issue for them however.
 
I'm guessing due to 20% more video memory this is gonna be a repeating pattern. In those memory limited situations, 470 and 480 will pull ahead.

HD5870 with 2GB will prolly be a different story though. Overclocked to 1GHz and even GTX480 will have a hard time matching it.

sure, look here (again the same gif ;) ):

1gb-vs-2gb.gif


Different res. but the overall effect should be the same.
 
In gameplay crysis benchmarks, 4890 already was head-to-head with GTX 285 in higher resolutions:
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/aid,6...ectX-11-Preisbrecher/Grafikkarte/Test/?page=7
So, nothing new here.

Strange how the minimum of the 5870 is so low in ambush compared to the lows in your benchmarks for Hells Heart.

Are we looking at a single point in the ambush bench where the 5870 falters? Or is it a series of lows combined with a few high spots keeping the averages on par with the 470?
 
Here's how the 5870 behaves in 1920x1200, couldn't find that diagram in 2560x1600:

1258499856BbWqNvEaGR_5_4_l.gif


The increase in resolution might explain a very short drop to about 6FPS, but dropping to only 2FPS has to mean it ran out of RAM.
 
As for the second time, per the entire frame(all states) average culling rates are 76%/69% for untessellated/tessellated respectively, with 13.6 times more input primitives in the tessellated case.
Aha. In theory tessellation lowers percentage of culling, because the number of triangles varies with distance to camera and "back faces" with lower triangle density are further from the camera. Also, tessellated stuff that's occluded by the dragon should have lower triangle density than the dragon, again due to LOD-adaptive tessellation.

13.6x primitives implies that there's only around 120,000 in the untessellated version, assuming the 1.6 million referenced in the B3D article. Fairly rough estimate though, because amplification varies with distance from camera. Despite that, 120,000 is paltry for a game scene these days, isn't it?

The base idea was(and still is) that there are ample benefits to be had via more clever use of amplification rather than smashing it in.
I agree.

Doing extra vertex shading for some 200k primitives that get discarded is something that tends to get lost in the noise, but doing domain shading for the vertices of a few mln primitives that get eventually discarded is a different kettle of fish, IMHO. We can guess that it's one of the areas where the updated Heaven demos will improve.
It's quite a technical challenge, though. Until a triangle's vertices have passed through DS, you can't know precisely if the triangle's possibly occluded.

I think the question rests on how dense the triangle mesh needs to be in order to provide a reasonable degree of detail on the farthest-displaced "vertices", e.g. on the dragon's body or roof tiles. It seems like the mesh is too dense on the body but too coarse on the spikes, for instance.

The original triangle mesh (untessellated) is so coarse that tessellation isn't being adapted to the locality of required geometric detail. Though if high density is required to produce nice specularity, for example (which would be anti-aliased by MSAA) then high density is required even in areas of low/smooth displacement.

Jawed
 
Plus wrong Texel-Fill. :) And not even close to the launch-driver.
Bad (paint) job, Marc!
 
Back
Top