PS3 - who's really benefitting?

Really, what's the point of this thread other than to be another fanb0y proclamation? 'Shadeposer' posted a similar thread a few weeks ago and the forum members handled it quite well (funny, too - I might add though it looks like the mods deleted the topic post). I see this thread as no different from the 'nVidia' version .

 

I think the benifit of SM 3.0 depends on game developers that use it - if its like other forms of structure programming - this could mean more re-usability of the shaders and also possible that the hardware can do with the shader in memory with out switching it out for something else. These switch could be expensive. I do program but not too much with shaders - so I am not the best one to mention.

Most of this SM 2.0 vs SM 3.0 is PR driven NVidia wants developers to use 3.0 and ATI states its a waste and not provide it.

One interesting thing that I yet seen an answer? Does NVidia drivers convert SM 2.0 shaders into SM 3.0 on the fly - if so than I could see with this option NVidia could have a signficant advantage - of course this will likely depend on Direct X 9.0c.. If this is so when Direct X 9.0c, instantly games running on 6800's would be faster than when running on DX9.0b.

Of course this is just my opinion.

 

reason i swapped to a Radeon 8500 was because i was more impressed with the image quality of the radeon at the time.


I take it you never applied full AF with it then

loved my gf3 to bits, but it was getting old - and after waiting anxiously for nvidias new card to bring new things to the table - it didn't - back then speed wasn't a MAJOR issue, not when the geforce4 was first released anyway. And having watched the tech demos for the 3 and then the 4, i felt very disappointed in nvidias decision to just bump up core speeds and get lazy on their throne.


Heh I must ask when did you buy your GF3 and then buy your 8500? If I remember right the 8500 came out in Sept-Oct of 2001 and the GF4 came out in March of 2002. GF3 came out in March of 2001. You must be inpatient if you couldnt wait a couple of months And what do you mean speed wasnt a major issue back then? Speed probably was more of an issue back then than it is now. People want eye candy now not brute strength speed.

GF4 added a second pixel pipeline over the GF3 which increased its performance greatly.


have to admit i was still waiting for the next nvidia card, but the way nvidia started acting after the release of the 9700pro just made me sick. any company that tries to decieve their potential buyers like they did will just keep on losing customers, they really thought they were infallable, and as such didn't see the 9700pro coming.


I am trying to picture this timeline for you. March-April of 2001 you get a GF3 then in lets say in Dec-Jan of 2001-2002 you get a 8500 and then a 9700 Pro in Sept of 2002? You are one busybody when it comes to purchasing video cards

Oh and btw in this time fram that you decided you didnt like the way Nvidia was acting ATI had the whole quake quack issue

Amazing how less than 9 months can change your opinion

when i speak out, it really is direct at nvidia rather than their product - i just wish they knew the meaning of honesty and trust.

Personally I wouldnt trust either company because anybody taking your money will bend the truth in order to do it.

Nvidia simply aren't in a position anymore where-by they can say/act how they want, because each time the competition beats them - and slowly but surely more and more sites/customers are moving away.


Well maybe I was reading different reviews but it appears both cards have their benchmarks there they win and others where they lose. Saying one side in this battle is a clear winner is naive IMO. This round is the perfect round because both cards are pretty damn close. Nvidia still has some issues in FarCry but other than that I cant seen any real beatings they took. Hell I even saw a benchmark where 6800U was running ahead of the X800XT platinum in Shadermark 2.0.

That tells us both companies came out firing on all cylinders and we as customers will get the benefit of no clear winner.

 

one of the misconceptions of some people seems to be that they dont realize that it isnt much of an effort to recompile existing hlsl 2.0 shaders to the 3.0 target and it doesnt break compatibility....

 

The shame of it is, one of the big reasons to want to use VS3.0 would be for displacement mapping. However NV40 doesn't have any higher order surface support, so it greatly limits the potential. Even Npatches would have been nice, even with as many faults as they have. And of course ATI doesn't even support VS3.0 which is just disappointing.

 

So tell us again WHY you weren't impressed by the GF4 although it was definitely faster than the 8500?

It's pointless of course given the several threads you've started aimed at ATI glorification and all of the criticism you've levelled at anyone criticizing ATI in any way.

Well I think RUBY sucks!!!

 

What is this, Virtual Shader Studio supporting SM 3.0 ?

Saw this on:

http://bbs.gzeasy.com/index.php?showtopic=150757&st=0

Some chinese guy, who wrote his own shader programming tool, even supporting 3.0 ?

Looks neat, but who am I

 

Then what exactly were you doing when you stated: "So to me, it really is no loss - and those that really try to brag about ps3 are either just fanboys or just gripping onto one thing that the 6800 has that the x800 doesnt. " when, at the very same time, you were advocating 3dc? Hypocrisy?

 

Uhh... that one flew right over your head didn't it?

Nevermind, it's futile.

 

I find the now revealed X800 Series rather medicore... As someone who is interested in "general programming with GPUs " scene, new cards from ATI are...hmm... really not that good.

There seems to be decent shading power, it's just that sucky Linux/OGL performance + 2 years old feature set really are not cutting it. There are so much more "expressive power" with full SM3.0 part when you are trying implement some generic algorithms as optimized GPU versions.

If people have to still wait for ONE YEAR for the (finally) real SM3.0/SM3.0+ part from ATI, things are really fuck*d up.

 

I feel the same way right now, but I hope good news will come tomorrow (well, later today). At least Dave alluded that we will get some glimpse of ATI future plans/roadmap...

 

I don't see how HOS is really that essential. I like vertex texturing for things like cloth, water, and soft-body simulation. I really think these sort of techniques could greatly improve game immersability. A fixed mesh is just fine by me.

I definately think ATI won the performance crown again this time (especially seeing the RTHDRIBL results), but vertex texturing opens up a plethora of possibilities. If I were buying one of these cards, it would likely be NV40. However, I'm going to wait for the unified pipe generation.

Hopefully we'll see some render-to-vertex-array or uberbuffer/superbuffer stuff for R3xx/R4xx soon. They should suffice for the above applications.

 

why , how many years did it take to get a p.s 1.4 part from nvidia ? how many years to get a real p.s 2.0 part from nvidia