nVidia release new all singing all dancing dets.
- Thread starter BoardBonobo
- Start date
Theres also a difference from enabling or disabling T&L when running in DirectX.
Given the similarity between the DX7 T&L pipe and the standard OpenGL pipeline my impression would be that if the DX Hardware T&L pipe is used (which it is) so too would the OpenGL Transformation pipeline and hence if that is used it would automatically be accelerated by hardware with hardware geometry abilities.
Richthofen
Newcomer
@nevidimka
Where can i find screenshots of those hacked tabs or control settings and where can i find those reg keys to enable them.
This question goes to everyone here.
Where is a good source to get information on hidden control panels in Nvida drivers.
The only one i have is that Refresh Rate Control Pane which is available in the more direct3d settings.
Where can i find screenshots of those hacked tabs or control settings and where can i find those reg keys to enable them.
This question goes to everyone here.
Where is a good source to get information on hidden control panels in Nvida drivers.
The only one i have is that Refresh Rate Control Pane which is available in the more direct3d settings.
Re: Bah...
In the end C is the standard but I personally dont like case sensitive environments and other details.
On topic,
I am using the new driver (GF3Ti200) and up to now nothing different, only a minor improvment in nature from 28 to 31fps. Quality looks the same. I will try later some GF4 demos to see what happens.
THe only good thing is the aniso control.
Pascal is a good language, and in the past I have used some interesting improved versions with support for very large programs (compiler dependent) runing in large mainframes.ChrisK said:madshi said:
Are Delphi and Pascal considered to be different languages? I always thought of Delphi as a (convenient) Pascal IDE. It's been a long time since I've last touched anything related to Pascal, though
In the end C is the standard but I personally dont like case sensitive environments and other details.
On topic,
I am using the new driver (GF3Ti200) and up to now nothing different, only a minor improvment in nature from 28 to 31fps. Quality looks the same. I will try later some GF4 demos to see what happens.
THe only good thing is the aniso control.
The difference, however, would rest of the developer/programmer. A programmer can choose to use their own T&L engine instead of the default APIs', in which case, it would depend on the developer/programmer to specify if it is to be accelerated in hardware or by the CPU. For an app/game that has both APIs as rendering options, it will entirely depend on what the developer wants.DaveBaumann said:
Reverend said:
Yes. this is why I mentioned the similarity between DX7 transformation and OpenGL Transformation - if they had written a custom engine then its unlikely they would also write another path for DX T&L as well.
Has anybody noticed that with the new dets, default settings, the water in the nature test and also the pixel shader test has a distinct blockiness to it? This dissapears if you either set the Ansio to 1x and above or check texture sharpening in the FSAA section. You don't need to enable FSAA.
Well My GF4 Ti4200 got a nice 900+ bost and SE:SE ran a few fps faster. Did not have time to test AA, AVP2 on the D3D side as well as SOF2 or RtCW in order to see if they have gotten darker like others have clamied.
Now I noticed that my Advanced Pixel Shader scores as well as my nature scores almost doubled. Since both of those make use of pixel shaders any real good reason for that (and dont any one say its cheating)? Could it be the case of some serrious optimizations on the pixel shadders? It almost looks like there is another set of pixel shaders kickin in (again double scores).... Anyways...your thoughts on this....
Now I noticed that my Advanced Pixel Shader scores as well as my nature scores almost doubled. Since both of those make use of pixel shaders any real good reason for that (and dont any one say its cheating)? Could it be the case of some serrious optimizations on the pixel shadders? It almost looks like there is another set of pixel shaders kickin in (again double scores).... Anyways...your thoughts on this....
Doomtrooper
Veteran
Xmas said:
Is this the driver default setting ??
Hmm, I was planing to write a small article about the performance with these drivers, but I get so strange results, so it's not worth anymore work.
1. First off all: Looks like 4X aniso is the same as 8X in the drivers (therefor the pictures from UT2003 I posted earlier).
2. Aquamark is somewhat faster, but the 8X score is wrong. 4X is the same performance as 8X.
3. Vulpine GLmark is much slower with the new drivers: (1024 max).
40.41 30.82
90,7 fps 107,4 fps
4. For me Serious Sam was a little slower, but I didnt use an addon to make sure I had the same settings so the scores are pretty much worthless. Probably it's the same performance as most people have reported.
5. Mafia is pretty much the same (little slower maybe, used Fraps in the last part of the intro).
40.41 (no FSAA) 30.82 (no FSAA) 40.41 (4X FSAA) 30.82 (4X FSAA)
59 61 45 48
To sum it up. As jb said: Looks like they did some nice things with the Pixel Shaders, but other than that these drivers are mediocre. Hopefully they are just the start of a great Detonator 4 series. And hopefully NVIDIA change the default Anisotropic setting in D3D
Another thing: Changeing drivers with these new are not easy. Sure it works to uninstall the latest and install these, but after jumping back and forth a few times it suddenly refused to install the OpenGL drivers from 40.41. The control-panel was dead slow, and Vulpine crashed, SS:SE insisted on using D3D and thig was a mess. Had to reinstall WinXP and make a clean install (and then things were fine). Not sure if this is because I am completely incompetent, but hmmm....
1. First off all: Looks like 4X aniso is the same as 8X in the drivers (therefor the pictures from UT2003 I posted earlier).
2. Aquamark is somewhat faster, but the 8X score is wrong. 4X is the same performance as 8X.
3. Vulpine GLmark is much slower with the new drivers: (1024 max).
40.41 30.82
90,7 fps 107,4 fps
4. For me Serious Sam was a little slower, but I didnt use an addon to make sure I had the same settings so the scores are pretty much worthless. Probably it's the same performance as most people have reported.
5. Mafia is pretty much the same (little slower maybe, used Fraps in the last part of the intro).
40.41 (no FSAA) 30.82 (no FSAA) 40.41 (4X FSAA) 30.82 (4X FSAA)
59 61 45 48
To sum it up. As jb said: Looks like they did some nice things with the Pixel Shaders, but other than that these drivers are mediocre. Hopefully they are just the start of a great Detonator 4 series. And hopefully NVIDIA change the default Anisotropic setting in D3D
Another thing: Changeing drivers with these new are not easy. Sure it works to uninstall the latest and install these, but after jumping back and forth a few times it suddenly refused to install the OpenGL drivers from 40.41. The control-panel was dead slow, and Vulpine crashed, SS:SE insisted on using D3D and thig was a mess. Had to reinstall WinXP and make a clean install (and then things were fine). Not sure if this is because I am completely incompetent, but hmmm....
Joe DeFuria
Legend
We already went through that. And not having the card myself, this is what appears to happen: Yes, it is the default setting in the Direct3D control panel. However, it appears that 1X is actually in effect until you change the control panel to some other setting. End result:
1) Install drivers, do not tweak the control panel and run 3D Mark. Although the control panel setting is at 0x, 3D mark runs with 1X (bilinear) setting.
2) Change Control panel to 2X...3D mark runs with 2X
3) Change contol panel back to 0x, 3D mark runs with the "point sampling" 0x setting.
I am not sure about that anymore if you are reffering to my post. It might be that 0X is actually what is used when the drivers are newly installed.
I e-mailed NVIDIA about it (not that they will listen to me but), and hopefully it is changed in the new release. Must have been a mistake.
I e-mailed NVIDIA about it (not that they will listen to me but), and hopefully it is changed in the new release. Must have been a mistake.
Doomtrooper said:
It would appear to be. But having just read the above posts I realised I had already fiddled with the settings and so probbaly screwed it up.
I must admist though that these drivers seem an awful lot smoother in all the games I've tried them with (Never Winter Nights, Dungeon Siege, Battle Realms, SoF and SoFII, QIII, and UT). When I had a R8500 I noticed that games just seemed smoother than they did on the GF4, though they were running slower. Now the GF4 seems just as smooth.
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Galilee,
Actually, I think that characteristic was present in earlier drivers too. (I'll have to search this board.) At some point, there were the rumored "leaked drivers that dramatically improve Aniso" performance rumors. IIRC, those drivers had odd characteristics:
D3D aniso: it seemed that the settings were moved a "notch" from the previous ones. That is, what was called 4X aniso int he new drivers was closer to 2X aniso in the old drivers. Performance "improved" accordingly.
GL aniso: Seemd the same as old drivers, except that 8X aniso didn't appear to be any different than 4X aniso...performance or quality.
I also recall seeing some 9700 vs. GeForce4 benches recently, where the 8X aniso scores of GeForce did not drop relative to the 4X scores. Makes you wonder if 8X is doing anything compared to 4X...
Actually, I think that characteristic was present in earlier drivers too. (I'll have to search this board.) At some point, there were the rumored "leaked drivers that dramatically improve Aniso" performance rumors. IIRC, those drivers had odd characteristics:
D3D aniso: it seemed that the settings were moved a "notch" from the previous ones. That is, what was called 4X aniso int he new drivers was closer to 2X aniso in the old drivers. Performance "improved" accordingly.
GL aniso: Seemd the same as old drivers, except that 8X aniso didn't appear to be any different than 4X aniso...performance or quality.
I also recall seeing some 9700 vs. GeForce4 benches recently, where the 8X aniso scores of GeForce did not drop relative to the 4X scores. Makes you wonder if 8X is doing anything compared to 4X...
Similar threads
