I don't get it. I expose a very real current problem with the Radeon 9700, uncover some evidence that it will likely also apply to DOOM3, and people get upset?
How did you 'expose' something thats written in black and white for everyone to see?
I don't get it. I expose a very real current problem with the Radeon 9700, uncover some evidence that it will likely also apply to DOOM3, and people get upset?
SirPauly said:I don't really play that many games
I figured as much but it's nice to know for sure.
Believe it or not, I usually try.Althornin said:How about you LEAVE IT OUT?
So? The more problems exposed in current chip architectures the better. This brings greater liklihood that they'll be fixed.Chalnoth, you seem to delight in coming up with "problems" for ATI.
Already stated.What makes you think this problem wouldnt exist in the GFFX
That's like saying nVidia's S3TC image quality issues are a problem with S3TC implementations in general. This is most probably just a failure of ATI's Hyper-Z to include optimized pathways for specific rendering methods. For example, why single out "stencil depth fail?" Shouldn't the hardware be able to do the same thing with a "stencil depth pass?" The fact that it doesn't on the Radeon 9700 speaks of a limitation wherein ATI failed to properly-aniticipate the direction games would be going.And, who says its a "bug" - isnt it just a possible problem with Hier-Z implementations in general?
John Reynolds said:On the good side, my elf ranger (oh-so-creatively named Legolas) is now 12th level.
Chalnoth said:Yes, 8x AF and 2x AA. The only game that has real problems with this is UT2k3, so I run it at 800x600x32 instead of the usual 1024x768x32. Anyway, when playing UT2k3, the Radeon 9700 really shows its stuff, but I won't turn the settings down any further when I'm using the GF4. Can't stand to play anymore without FSAA/Anisotropic.
Reverend said:Stencil OFF :
9700 Pro = 78.1fps
GF4Ti4600 = 67.5fps
Stencil ON :
9700Pro = 33.7fps
GF4Ti4600 = 27.1fps
Percentages between Stencil ON and OFF :
9700Pro = -56.85%
GF4Ti4600 = -59.85%
Stencil ON includes disabling scissoring (much more stencil fillrate requirement). Full mirror effects also enabled (not sure if the Tenebrae author uses stencil for his mirror implementation). Don't forget, of course, per-pixel lighting is used all the time.
John Reynolds said:Question: are you using Rivatuner or any other 3rd party tweaker to adjust AF performance? Not trying to trap you into admitting anything wrong. . .simply curious.
Sharkfood said:I see ZBuffer errors on both the Ti4600 and the 9700 Pro with the most current drivers for both. The interesting thing is- the list of games you see this occurring are almost totally mutually exclusive between the two cards, hence why they can be categorized as ZBuffer errors.
Chalnoth said:Very interesting. Did you do this with FSAA enabled? What level? Of course, the really interesting thing here is how incredibly close to one another the tests are between the Radeon 9700 and GeForce4.
Sharkfood said:Obviously, the unique implementations of ZBuffer optimizations is going to piss off some games and cause these issues, with the 9700 Pro's optimizations being the most aggressive. 16-bit Zbuffer on the 9700 Pro is almost laughable as you can count the number of games without problems on one hand, with the remaining majority having massive problems when using 16 bit Z.
DaveBaumann said:I doubt its using two sided stenciling either.
Rev - was this done with Trilinear or Bilinear?