The 2econd gpu...

[overclocked]

Lots of info has been told about a second gpu "primitive" unit.

The qustion i ask is becasue all new games seems to be limited by the cpu at 1600x1200+ anisi + aa...

Simulatorgames seems to be VERY cpu limited indeed.

What i want to know is if this"new" unit of the gpu(someone called it PPP?)
will bring that instant frames to games because its offloads the cpu?

Or is this frames spared to the Hammer??

 

[OpenGL guy]

Simulatorgames seems to be VERY cpu limited indeed.

What i want to know is if this"new" unit of the gpu(someone called it PPP?)
will bring that instant frames to games because its offloads the cpu?

CPU limited games are likely to be CPU limited no matter what. How can a game that is written to generate data on the CPU suddenly gain from this new technology? The application would have to be written (at the API level for easiest implementation) to use this new coprocessor in order to see any potential benefit.

 

[overclocked]

Well i have the impression that many still are waiting the uppgrade that voodoo2 gave to voodoo1...

So ít´s now 50/50 cpu/gpu increase that should be considered..

 

[OpenGL guy]

Well i have the impression that many still are waiting the uppgrade that voodoo2 gave to voodoo1...

We have that already. Perhaps you missed the Radeon 9700 Pro results with AA and AF vs. the competition?

 

[KimB]

The GeForce DDR was also similar in magnitude (With respect to the previous high-end, the TNT2 Ultra).

 

[Bigus Dickus]

The GeForce DDR was also similar in magnitude (With respect to the previous high-end, the TNT2 Ultra).

What????? In many benchmarks the TnT2 Ultra was neck and neck with the GF SDR. The DDR version didn't give that big of a performance leap over the SDR... nothing like the 2x/3x figures we're seeing in some cases now.

I'd love to see some old reviews that prove me wrong.

 

[KimB]

http://www17.tomshardware.com/graphic/99q4/991011/geforce-13.html

Here's an example of one. While it certainly didn't double the performance of the TNT2 Ultra at low resolutions, it did at higher resolutions.

In other words, in the highest-detail scenarios available at the time, the GeForce DDR did outperform the previous most powerful, the TNT2 Ultra (Yes, the DDR wasn't available until after the SDR, but they were officially launched at the same time...) by approximately a factor of two. Yes, it isn't quite as good as the Radeon 9700 vs. GeForce4 Ti 4600 with aniso/FSAA, but it's close, and it's similar to the move from the Voodoo1 to the Voodoo2 (especially later, after some driver updates...).

Update:
Here's another example:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1107&p=6

This review was a bit later, meaning the GF had slightly more mature drivers.

 

[overclocked]

Well i have seen the results of radeon 9700 with aa+ aniso.

Thats why i wondered if there is something that this extra unit would offer in speed when dealing with cpu-limited games.

I´m not saying that you cannot increase the speed of 1600x1200+aa+aniso but that it seems that gfx card has come to a certain level of performance that you may as well wait for a k8 etc instead of just waiting for a new gen gfx-card.

 

[martrox]

Does anyone else find it truly amazing that 2 to 3 gig processors cannot keep up with top level (read 9700 or NV30) video cards(even if it's only in some things)?

 

[Nagorak]

Does anyone else find it truly amazing that 2 to 3 gig processors cannot keep up with top level (read 9700 or NV30) video cards(even if it's only in some things)?

Not really...seeing as they're designed just for playing games.

What does amaze me is how useless 3D sound is (due to crappy performance) and how 3D sound cards don't seem to accelerate anything at all...

 

[alexsok]

What does amaze me is how useless 3D sound is (due to crappy performance) and how 3D sound cards don't seem to accelerate anything at all...

Couldn't agree with you more there...

Why the hell do I need EAX if the game becomes practically unplayable? Need examples? Sure thing, try every single game out there that supports EAX and disable it... your gaming experience will be completely different, the jerkiness will go away and will be replaced by a smooth & fluid gaming experience... and i'm talking from experience...

All this Audigy 2 crap is driving me mad... 3d sound might offer some additional features that might have an influence on your gaming experience, but the fps tradeoff is just ain't worth it! Just my two cents...

P.S
And we're talking about dedicated to 3d sound hardware here, hardware that is supposed to free the cpu from additional calculations...

 

[no_way]

What does amaze me is how useless 3D sound is (due to crappy performance) and how 3D sound cards don't seem to accelerate anything at all...

Quite a part of the blame probably rests on the shoulders of developers. It IS possible to use DS3D along with EAX on EMU 10k1 chips with very little CPU utilization ( dunno about audigy ). Its just that in many cases software fallbacks are used in drivers, and you have to be very careful to avoid such situations.

 

[antlers]

I always thought this forum should cover 3d sound as well, since it does count as 3d technology and hardware...

It's a real shame that Aureal is no longer around. My 5-year old Aureal Vortex 2 card with ancient drivers was delivering excellent 3d sound until that machine was retired as my gaming machine. Aureal also seemed to have good plans for moving A3D forward as a sound API.

 

[KimB]

What does amaze me is how useless 3D sound is (due to crappy performance) and how 3D sound cards don't seem to accelerate anything at all...

The nForce seems to do a reasonable job One of these days, I'll get some nice Dolby Digital speakers to pair with my nForce....

But yes, the Aureal Vortex2 was awesome. I'm amazed that nobody else has come up with a similar API since. If you've never heard A3D 2.0 in its full glory, you haven't heard good gaming sound! The only problem is, this type of 3D sound cannot help but be at least somewhat CPU-intensive (but Aureal really did screw up...it was far more CPU-intensive than it should have ever been...).

 

[martrox]

I'm so tired of dealing with Creative Labs lousy drivers...... Just when the heck is Via going to come out with a consumer soundcard using the Envy chipset.......

 

[Hyp-X]

Quite a part of the blame probably rests on the shoulders of developers. It IS possible to use DS3D along with EAX on EMU 10k1 chips with very little CPU utilization ( dunno about audigy ). Its just that in many cases software fallbacks are used in drivers, and you have to be very careful to avoid such situations.

Actually a good software mixer uses less CPU than the hardware "accelerated" version...
Hence the software fallback.

(Good software mixer := almost anything except DSound software mixer)

 

[Andergum]

Couldn't agree with you more there...

Why the hell do I need EAX if the game becomes practically unplayable? Need examples? Sure thing, try every single game out there that supports EAX and disable it... your gaming experience will be completely

The same could be said for FSAA or aniso or any other feature that enhaces the gaming experience.

Personally I find that EAX does add much to the gaming experience as does 3d positional sound if it is done well.

I guess it depends on what games you like to play. 3D sound is great in FPS games where it allows you to hear what's behind you but pretty useless in strategy games. EAX can be usefull in both types of games.

I guess it all depends on what matters more a few FPS or better sound.

 

[Tagrineth]

and it's similar to the move from the Voodoo1 to the Voodoo2 (especially later, after some driver updates...).

Voodoo2 was three times faster than Voodoo Graphics in most situations - i.e. VoodooG would average 20FPS, Voodoo2 would average 60FPS.

And that doesn't even account for SLI - arond 5x Voodoo Graphics speed, or 100% CPU-limited for a very, very long time.

5x the previous generation probably will never again be achieved.

 

[John Reynolds]

http://www17.tomshardware.com/graphic/99q4/991011/geforce-13.html

Here's an example of one. While it certainly didn't double the performance of the TNT2 Ultra at low resolutions, it did at higher resolutions.

In other words, in the highest-detail scenarios available at the time, the GeForce DDR did outperform the previous most powerful, the TNT2 Ultra (Yes, the DDR wasn't available until after the SDR, but they were officially launched at the same time...) by approximately a factor of two. Yes, it isn't quite as good as the Radeon 9700 vs. GeForce4 Ti 4600 with aniso/FSAA, but it's close, and it's similar to the move from the Voodoo1 to the Voodoo2 (especially later, after some driver updates...).

Update:
Here's another example:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1107&p=6

This review was a bit later, meaning the GF had slightly more mature drivers.

Q3 is/was only one game. The Gamegauge suite of eight games showed a TnT2 Ultra outscoring the initial GF1s, though largely due to drivers. Regardless, the GF1s were in no way comparable to the V2 or 9700 for performance improvements between generations.

 

[arjan de lumens]

IIRC, Voodoo1 was available in SLI configurations, just like Voodoo2.