Reverend's NV3x architecture article

[RussSchultz]

Like DX9 having PS2.1, for example in addition to 2.0.

Who knows, I certainly don't, not being under NDA or part of the DX beta program. (Apparently embedded programmers don't qualify. )

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Like DX9 having PS2.1, for example in addition to 2.0.

Ugh...I hope that's not the case.

That would imply that DX 9.0 is being held up so that "VS/PS 2.1" can be included.

The problem with that, is that "VS/PS 2.0" hadware is shipping imminently. To hold up the API to include extra functionality for a product not yet shipping is a "bad thing."

If MS is in fact going to include NV-30 functionality "in DX 9", then the way they should do it similar to how they handled DX8. Get DX9.0 out ASAP so that available hardware can use it, and get DX 9.1 out around the time of NV30 shipping.

 

[Tahir2]

Like DX9 having PS2.1, for example in addition to 2.0.

Ugh...I hope that's not the case.

That would imply that DX 9.0 is being held up so that "VS/PS 2.1" can be included.

The problem with that, is that "VS/PS 2.0" hadware is shipping imminently. To hold up the API to include extra functionality for a product not yet shipping is a "bad thing."

If MS is in fact going to include NV-30 functionality "in DX 9", then the way they should do it similar to how they handled DX8. Get DX9.0 out ASAP so that available hardware can use it, and get DX 9.1 out around the time of NV30 shipping.

For that reason I seriously doubt Microsoft delayed DX9.0 ,cos as you state it would be a 'bad' thing and would mean MS is favouring NVIDIA over another IHV. Something that they would probably get into big trouble for, not to mention complaints from ATi.

But this is from the guy that said DX9 wont be delayed

 

[Reverend]

Doomtrooper, I'll let someone else explain to you what an "interview" is and what "a report based on a briefing" is.

If my article was an interview and you're complaining that the only interviews I have done is with NVIDIA, it is not my problem if other IHVs are not cooperative with me. I do what I can do. I try but when I am continually ignored or side-stepped, there is nothing I can do but continue trying.

Joe, I did correspond with one of ATi's engineers that actually worked on the design of the R300. Most of our discussion is revealed in this article. It wasn't my intention to question whether the "R300=DX9" or not, not in this article.

Wavey, I don't quite understand what you mean by my not getting "the complete picture just yet". Please explain.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Joe, I did correspond with one of ATi's engineers that actually worked on the design of the R300.

Ok, but my main concern is that you have "nVidia's version of R-300 capability" and "my understanding of R-300's actual capability is" in a couple places.

Did the ATI engineer clarify those things (like Swizzle and color depth?) Is that really "just your understanding" or "ATI's actual position?" You might just need to clarify your text if it's the latter. Your text reads like "this is what I believe the ATI architecture is", not "this is what ATI told me their architecture is."

Most of our discussion is revealed in this article. It wasn't my intention to question whether the "R300=DX9" or not, not in this article.

OK. But that means that some very important (IMO) questions aren't addressed. I do think that if you are going to have an article that

Explains NV3x and Cg tech, and does this primarily though:
1) Comparisons to R-300
2) and Includes reference to "DX9" functionality

It would be prudent to know specifically what R-300 and DX9 functionality are.

I don't know if you are doing another DX9 and / or R-300 article, but if you are, that one should have been done "first." Then, comparing Nv30 to it would have more meaning.

I know...the reading public is never satisfied. Overall the article was informative and worth the read. I just think that "this is not the article to discuss R-300/DX9" is a bit of a cop-out when you are using that as a basis for comparison with NV30.

 

[Reverend]

Oh and talking about "DX9 compliancy" :

Read my comments on the section about color precision, which is mostly about the R300. Any comments? Does "DX9 compliancy" mean that the pixel shader should be nothing less than 32-bit FP RGBA?

What's the "complete picture"?

 

[MDolenc]

The only "delay" that happened with DX 9 was DX 8.1... Do you guys realistically expect that MS will have a new MAJOR version of DX API ready in about 6 months?

Reverend: Can you say to yourself without a doubt: "yes I'm fully aware of FINAL DX 9 spec"? The "ps.2.0 Model" is a slide from a MS Meltdown presentation that is about one year old and that is ALL publicly available information on DX 9 pixel shaders. Do you think that spec haven't changed even a bit in one year?

 

[Doomtrooper]

Doomtrooper, I'll let someone else explain to you what an "interview" is and what "a report based on a briefing" is.

Ok I phrased it wrong with 'interview' but the title of the article is wrong..it should be 'why the Nv30 is better than the R300'
You've taken the time to take some vaporware chip specs and compare it to a real product, maybe you should take that time and try to get some other IHV contacts vs. this. Just a suggestion.

P10 would be cool or how about a 9700 ??

 

[LeStoffer]

Wavey, I don't quite understand what you mean by my not getting "the complete picture just yet". Please explain.

Heh, I was thinking the same, but I'm sure that we would be entering NDA-land here.

 

[Reverend]

Joe,

Without a R300 on hand, anything anyone (ATi engineer or not) tells me is "as to my understanding". I do not like saying something sounding definitive if I am not sure myself. About 90% of the time, anything you read is a result of what someone "tells" you, and then the author of the article either reports like as though he knows this definitively as a result of his own investigation (i.e. playing around with the board) or he mentions it as "ATi told me this..." or "It is my understanding that...". Hope you know what I mean.

Regarding your second point. Maybe everyone/every website should do an article on DX9 before they review the R300 (or the NV30 when the time comes) as all the R300 p/reviews I have read mentions "DX9" many times?

Regarding the NV3x/R300 comparisons. NVIDIA's briefing and the slides contain references/comparisons with the R300. I mention this and provide comments that refute certain aspects of what NVIDIA understands about the R300. This article is about the CineFX presentation + briefing. It is about what NVIDIA gave me. I report what they gave me. If I wanted to, I could have gone on a lot more about the R300 but, really, this article isn't about the R300. Capish?

 

[Richthofen]

"
As for going above DX9 spec..since DX9 won't expose these 'extra features' Nvidia had to expose them somehow with their own HLSL. As said before the REAL reason why CG is here today.
"

Who says NV30 specs are beyond DX9?
Just ask yourself the question "why is DX9 not released yet?"
Maybe they did a small update on specs?
I dont know but it could be true - we will see

 

[Reverend]

MDolenc, you're asking basically the same question as my post? Eh??

Doomtrooper, it is useless responding to you. FYI, this article is talking about an architecture, not about the vaporware NV30. Whether this architecture will show up in the form of a chip is still up in the air - I said this in my article (not the exact words of course). Your comment about spending time building relations with other IHVs instead of this article is just a stupid smart-ass comment. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth and tells me more about your character and adds more reasons as to why I hope there is an option to "Ignore This Poster" on this forum. It is fine to show that you're pro-ATi but it is stupid to appear, well, stupid.

 

[Doomtrooper]

Wow 1st you state "you're complaining that the only interviews I have done is with NVIDIA, it is not my problem if other IHVs are not cooperative with me", then when confronted with the question why you don't try more to get other contacts you resort to insults...grow up.

It is fine to show that you're pro-ATi but it is stupid to appear, well, stupid.

Don't bite the hand that feeds you eh Reverend ? Lets keep those freebie VT cards coming in. Your insults just show YOUR precious internet image is more important to you than reality.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Without a R300 on hand, anything anyone (ATi engineer or not) tells me is "as to my understanding".

Well, surely you don't have an NV30 on hand...and yet the NV30 capabilities don't appear to be "to your understanding," but actual fact.

...Hope you know what I mean.

Yes, I do...I just don't think you're being consistent. Simply put, here is a case of you reporting on some nVidia briefing ("what they told you"), and your presentation comes across as "what nVidia told me about their unreleased hardware is definitive", vs. "what ATI told you about their actual hardware is not quite definitive."

Maybe everyone/every website should do an article on DX9 before they review the R300 (or the NV30 when the time comes) as all the R300 p/reviews I have read mentions "DX9" many times?

But did/will those p/reviews be based on the differences between the two? All I'm saying is that the core basis for your report (and nVidia's presentation) was all about "the differences." If that is the basis for the report, I still think it's prudent to fully understand what is being compared to. It all comes down to it being "nVidia's fault" for constructing their "Cg/NV30 briefing" as a relative comparison to R-300.

This article is about the CineFX presentation + briefing. It is about what NVIDIA gave me. I report what they gave me.

Ok, then that is the core of the problem. And you certainly did a better job than most at applying a "PR" filter. (By giving "your understanding" of ATI's tech where you believed nVidia was not correct.) That is commendable.

If I wanted to, I could have gone on a lot more about the R300 but, really, this article isn't about the R300. Capish?

Sure...it's your article and you can make it about whatever you want. You have to draw your lines somewhere. I understand that.

However, you have to understand that when every one of your articles / reviews / interviews that's been seen from you personally over the past year is pretty much exclusively nVidia related where hardware is concerned....well....people are going to start to question: WHY you chose to do "this article" about Cg/NV30...and why isn't this article about the R-300...an imminently shipping product?

 

[Reverend]

Doomtrooper, please learn to read or learn to read a post in its entirety. I said I have not had much luck with other IHVs. I also said there is nothing I can do but to continue trying. Please go away if you're this stupid or so blatantly-and-blindly biased.

 

[Doomtrooper]

Doomtrooper, please learn to read or learn to read a post in its entirety. I said I have not had much luck with other IHVs. I also said there is nothing I can do but to continue trying. Please go away if you're this stupid or so blatantly-and-blindly biased.

I won't be going anywere, but I am working on a article about internet journalism..I'll make sure you are part of it

 

[MDolenc]

Reverend,

No, I ment if you can say to yourself: "Yes I know what final DX9 shader spec are". I mean how can you claim something is "beyond DX9" if you can not be sure what DX9 shaders will be like?

 

[Doomtrooper]

However, you have to understand that when every one of your articles / reviews / interviews that's been seen from you personally over the past year is pretty much exclusively nVidia related where hardware is concerned....well....people are going to start to question: WHY you chose to do "this article" about Cg/NV30...and why isn't this article about the R-300...an imminently shipping product?

Oh that makes FAR too much sense

 

[John Reynolds]

I won't be going anywere, but I am working on a article about internet journalism..I'll make sure you are part of it

I very clearly remember Rev. getting labelled as 3dfx biased by Nvidia fans a few years ago. Now he's pro-Nvidia, eh? Do an article that's even remotely favorable toward one IHV's product (and, let's be honest, both the 9700 and NV30 look to be exciting parts) and the competition's supporters will go on the attack.

That said, I think Joe has made some valid points in this thread. And the timing of such articles is. . .well. . .somewhat suspicious, what with ATi's NDA on the R300 boards sent out soon to expire.

 

[Reverend]

Joe,

I stated that this article is no more than what it is - a briefing by NVIDIA that I turned into an article. It is a fact that I was briefed by NVIDIA. It is a fact that I turned this briefing into an article. It is not a fact that the briefing will be relevant, unless we see a NV30, which is basically what I said in the last page of the article. You're arguing for the sake of arguing... or for some other motivation.

What NVIDIA briefed me on is "definitive" - they told me what they told me, it is "definite" that they told me what they told me. What the ATi engineer told me (which is not official but via private correspondence... sometimes this kinda thing gets messed up if you know what I mean) is "definitive" insofar as for me to take it as my "understanding" without it being "official correspondence". Please learn the business. I am not about to quote "ATi told..." unless I ask the ATi engineer "Can I quote you as an official ATi statement?".

The "core" of my article is, well, my article. Which means to say what was briefed by NVIDIA to me, which so happens to contain references to/comparisons with the R300, is as per my article. The "attraction" of the article may be the few CineFX/R300 comparisons but the majority of it is about CineFX. You found the CineFX/R300 comparisons attractive... that doesn't mean that my article is about CineFX/R300 comparison nor does it mean this (CineFX/R300 comparison) is what I set to to do when I wrote this article.

WRT your last para - I said this in one of my previous posts... if other IHVs are not cooperative, there is nothing I can do, is there? Why isn't this article about the R300? Why is this about CineFX? Lordy lord... please read my news post announcing this article at VE. Are you succumbing to the DT disease? I chose to create an article out of a briefing given to me by NVIDIA about an architecture that NVIDIA said would debut in the form of an upcoming chip codenamed NV30. I "chose" not to write an article about the R300 instead of this article because ATi doesn't seem to think I'm important enough to be given a similar briefing. What do I do?

Please, don't act silly.