Print

[deftonesmx17]

On the GFX card notes, whenever something is optimized for a specific chip it will run great. Here is the deal with the AA babel and the R500. I guess as current xbox owners we don't even notice the following, which is sad. I would like anyone with a Geforce 3 to go home and even attempt to run something like Splinter Cell:CT or DOOM 3 with their Geforce 3. Then even at 640x480 go ahead and try to run AA with that Geforce 3. You might get 5-10fps if you are lucky. On the flipside the xbox with its Geforce 3 variant is able to do AA on most xbox games just fine. With that in mind, can you really fool yourselves into believing the Nvidia chip in the PS3 will have trouble with AA?

Back to the thought of optimized for a specific type of chip. Lets talk Half-Life 2 for now. A game that was optimized for ATI chips. Lets use a 9800 Pro (no not even an XT) for this example. With this chip I am able to run every setting to the max. Yes @ 1024x768 I can have 6xAA and 16xAF and still never drop below 30fps. This chip, which is old, doesnt even come close to what the ATI R500 or the Nvidia RSX are packing. Now once again, how can anyone even attempt to say the RSX will have trouble with AA?

I guess what I am saying is, dont act like the edram(the Gamecube has a small amount and we see how well it works) is some miracle thing. Don't forget that M$ touted around the XNA as a miracle development tool, then NDA's began to lift and we come to find out that some developers don't even like to use it.

This post has been edited by deftonesmx17: Aug 5 2005, 04:50 PM

[Deftech]

kill the AA in the same res you play halflife in and see how much better it runs. thats my point. The 360 gets it for almost free without a hit(supposedly), lmore room to add shit on screen, more possibilities. and the GC's edram doesnt come close to the bandwidth of 256GB/sec. and surely doesnt run at 700 mhz. Different beasts altogether.

remember Im going by whats on the papers, I sure hope it turns out as good as promised.

I think thats the biggest advantage of the systems architecture honestly. HD res with AA and little hit to overall performance. I wouldnt be getting it if it did otherwise.

when I read about this concept, that was the clincher, I knew then that I was buying this machine. sex for the eyes  :luv:

[deftonesmx17]

QUOTE(Deftech @ Aug 5 2005, 12:23 PM)

kill the AA in the same res you play halflife in and see how much better it runs. thats my point.

Ok at the title screen where the train rolls by with no AA and 16xAF I get 103 FPS, with 2xAA it drops to 99fps, 4xAA 96fps, 6xAA 93fps.................so at 6xAA on a old vid card that is about a 9% impact compared to no AA

see my point, a game that is optimized for a single chip(not even just a single brand like HL2) will run fine. the RSX will have very little trouble with AA, and 1080p will never happen.......$ony is full of it. With only 720p and 1080i the max impact might be like my HL2 example 9%

plus i am in a crabby mood today

I still hate Grill Master Ken though...........  

[Deftech]

optimized for one chip you say.

Now take a cross platform title and assume the ps3 version gets no special attention.

Lets use Dark Sector for example...

you get AA for free with the 360, the ps3 starts slight slowdown with AA being used(remember its not manadatory, so that in itself is a huge + for the 360)

both versions are to be released at the same time, no time to better utlilize the almighty RSXIYUIBN SynthesizerFromHeaven nvidia quadruple setup. The 360 should give is a smoother looking, smoother running title.

again, thats just an example, please dont go nuts on me. Youre crabby and im sensitive today

muwhahahahaha  

dont make me open the safe  

 

wheres sonys building at in Japan anyways?

anyone have coordinates  

[deftonesmx17]

QUOTE(Deftech @ Aug 5 2005, 12:43 PM)

he 360 should give is a smoother looking,

duh anything ATI gives you better image quality

Sorry I will try not to be crabby with you


Like you can't find the $ony building      

[Deftech]

QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Aug 5 2005, 02:56 PM)

duh anything ATI gives you better image quality

Sorry I will try not to be crabby with you
Like you can't find the $ony building :rolleyes:      :lol:

lol, dont stop being crabby on my account

sony here I come!!

[twistedsymphony]

Yeah I have no doubt that the RSX is perfectly capable of AA without much of a performance hit, I'm with deftech though: the clincher is that MS is REQUIRING it.

Just say it out loud "Absolutely every game will be in 720p with FSAA" I get all warm and fuzzy when I say that... it's a guarantee...

Think of it this way EVERY woman COULD potentially have sex with you but not every woman will actually do it. Every PS3 game COULD have 720p and FSAA, but WILL every game have that? probably not... MS guarantees every woman will have sex with you  :lol:

[Deftech]

hahaha

I'd need to pop a lot of viagra for such a task.

I just cant get over that all games will come to us looking clean and in hd. Oh these are good times!

[deftonesmx17]

QUOTE(twistedsymphony @ Aug 5 2005, 01:52 PM)

the clincher is that MS is REQUIRING it.

Yeah I know and I am very happy about that. I force at least 2xAA on every computer game I play.

[Jason9875]

QUOTE(deftonesmx17 @ Aug 5 2005, 09:28 AM)

Ok at the title screen where the train rolls by with no AA and 16xAF I get 103 FPS, with 2xAA it drops to 99fps, 4xAA 96fps, 6xAA 93fps.................so at 6xAA on a old vid card that is about a 9% impact compared to no AA

see my point, a game that is optimized for a single chip(not even just a single brand like HL2) will run fine. the RSX will have very little trouble with AA, and 1080p will never happen.......$ony is full of it. With only 720p and 1080i the max impact might be like my HL2 example 9%

If you want true results you should be running a time demo and then average out the frames you get, and run in a higher resolution.

1080i with AA will lower performance greatly, look at the 6800 GT when running 1600x1200 (I am unsure as to what exact resolution 1080 is but I am pretty sure 1600x1200 is similar to it....) with 4xAA enabled loses 32% of its performance.

And as for the x850 XT PE it loses 25% of its performance, with the settings above.

Also the 7800 GTX when running 8xS AA (4xMSAA and 2xSSAA) it loses ~45% of its performance in 1600x1200, and thats without its uber special transparancy AA enabled.

(results above taken from http://www.guru3d.com/article/Videocards/229/19/ )

Though one thing the RSX has going for it, assuming they keep the extra AA stuff from the 7800 GTX, is that it can produce a much better image, just with a huge performance cost that enabling 8xS AA, and transparancy AA have on high res games.

[deftonesmx17]

1080i is realistically 540 on the vertical resolution

[Carlo210]

You are right. 1080i is seperated into lines of resolution, vertical and horizontal, more vividly. The reason I prefer P over I is because with P you don't get the lines in between hich speerates the pixels. With progressive, in this case the vertical and horizontal lines are meshed together, providing a more smooth , but 1080i can provide a 'sharper' image since the edges of each pixel are seperated and clearly marks edges of objects on screen.

etc etc  

[JimmyDeushku]

Quake 4 looks pretty crappy, like it was rushed or something. F.E.A.R. looks awesome though, better than HalfLife 2.