![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
best for HL2
- Thread starter liljohnny51
- Start date
Rollo said:No response to the "no soft shadows", "no HDR", "no SM3 for SC:CT" so you resort to calling me a "!!!!!!"?
If ATI put out a new hardware feature more than Pink Floyd puts out new CDs these days, I wouldn't have to say this stuff?
Because Iv seen pictures of OpenEXR HDR compared to Regular ATI HDR, there is no diffrence except for the clouds buisness.
ATI support HDR, stop saying it doesnt because it does/
Also, about you sayin "What about game after Splinter Cell that only support SM3.0" thos games arnt coming out for a while. Look at all the games coming out within the next 3 or 4 months, there are few that are really graphically intensive. SM3.0 wont become the maistream for a while.
Hate_Bot said:
You're not "2H4ME Hate_Bot- you've got nothing!
P3wnd, way behind in the debate, no help forthcoming from your Canadian God, you're reduced to calling me names ("!!!!!!", "drug user") like a little kid on a schoolyard, backed into a corner.
That's what it comes down to Hate_Bot, ATI left you with nothing to argue with. nVidia has owned them for the last year and will continue to do so until the R520 comes out, maybe beyond....
What if nV has insider info that the R520 really is just 24 pipes, the feature set they already have, and some fast RAM? Do you think they can't tack on 8 pipes, buy some fast RAM? Their SLI will probably be a year old by the time ATIs sees the light of day, who's do you think will run better?
You can post "Wait for the (woot)R520" all you want, but the fact of the matter is ATI currently has nothing.
Generally as a game dev you want to make as many people like your game as possible. Its great seeing a dev basically sell out because of money rather than keeping their fans happy. Keep telling yourself that this was not the case. I'm sure Nvidia likes seeing it go on with people giddy about it.
I think you'd be surprised that the average gamer is not using a card above a 9800 Pro. I'd say only about 5% of gamers actually have a current gen card. This is why games are coded to run on older hardware as well as current hardware.
Once again, HDR can easily be done without SM3.0. It'll be done this way in the Unreal 3 engine on the X8XX cards. And it will be done this way in several other games.
Its fun watching people who have no clue at all to realize what you say. SM3.0 is useless. All the effects in SP:CT can be done with SM2.0. SM3.0 really didnt offer them anything besides a nice check from Nvidia to cash in the bank.
OpenEXR is a crappy way of doing HDR. It'll soon be replaced but a real engine like Unreal 3. The method is totally flawed and can not run on a single card high end or not without extremely big sacrifices on other things. Its pointless.
I think you'd be surprised that the average gamer is not using a card above a 9800 Pro. I'd say only about 5% of gamers actually have a current gen card. This is why games are coded to run on older hardware as well as current hardware.
Once again, HDR can easily be done without SM3.0. It'll be done this way in the Unreal 3 engine on the X8XX cards. And it will be done this way in several other games.
Its fun watching people who have no clue at all to realize what you say. SM3.0 is useless. All the effects in SP:CT can be done with SM2.0. SM3.0 really didnt offer them anything besides a nice check from Nvidia to cash in the bank.
OpenEXR is a crappy way of doing HDR. It'll soon be replaced but a real engine like Unreal 3. The method is totally flawed and can not run on a single card high end or not without extremely big sacrifices on other things. Its pointless.
Rollo said:You're not "2H4ME Hate_Bot- you've got nothing!
P3wnd, way behind in the debate, no help forthcoming from your Canadian God, you're reduced to calling me names ("!!!!!!", "drug user") like a little kid on a schoolyard, backed into a corner.
That's what it comes down to Hate_Bot, ATI left you with nothing to argue with. nVidia has owned them for the last year and will continue to do so until the R520 comes out, maybe beyond....
What if nV has insider info that the R520 really is just 24 pipes, the feature set they already have, and some fast RAM? Do you think they can't tack on 8 pipes, buy some fast RAM? Their SLI will probably be a year old by the time ATIs sees the light of day, who's do you think will run better?
You can post "Wait for the (woot)R520" all you want, but the fact of the matter is ATI currently has nothing.
Read the review on the front page of HardOCP....... oh what is that? ATi's card performes better than an OC'd 6800 Ultra? Just shut up. The 6800 Ultra's are not faster X850 XTs, they werent faster than X800 XT's most of the time either. Nvidia is simply a master of marketing.
Hate_Bot said:
Sure it does, there are just no games that use their primitive version, just like their soft shadows?
Let's see: Better to have the kind in games, or the kind "possible"? Tough call, but I'd have to say "in games" so I can actually use it?
So you know how many SM3 or nV features only games will be relesed this year? Hmm. Where do you come by that info no one else has, and are you breaking NDA?
Rollo said:You're not "2H4ME Hate_Bot- you've got nothing!
P3wnd, way behind in the debate, no help forthcoming from your Canadian God, you're reduced to calling me names ("!!!!!!", "drug user") like a little kid on a schoolyard, backed into a corner.
That's what it comes down to Hate_Bot, ATI left you with nothing to argue with. nVidia has owned them for the last year and will continue to do so until the R520 comes out, maybe beyond....
What if nV has insider info that the R520 really is just 24 pipes, the feature set they already have, and some fast RAM? Do you think they can't tack on 8 pipes, buy some fast RAM? Their SLI will probably be a year old by the time ATIs sees the light of day, who's do you think will run better?
You can post "Wait for the (woot)R520" all you want, but the fact of the matter is ATI currently has nothing.
You know what Ive noticed, there are 3 big fan boys on these forums, Rollo, Riko, and Redifined, there is 1 distinguishing characteristic between them, they all start with R!
I think every user with R at the beginning of there names should be watched for !!!!!!ism
ATI Has had AMR for years, for professional years.
Yeah, even though ATIs cards are faster in terms of power.
What I dont understand, you call me a fan boy, even though I like both companys, I just buy whatever is available and fine for my uses (See: I have an Nvidia card, I didnt get that with the system, I actually chose that card) yet you have a heart attack whenever someone buys an ATI card.
I feel sorry for you, blind fan loyalty is quite a curse
Skrying said:
This all boils down to "Those grapes were sour anyway" and the fox slinking away dejected.
http://www.umass.edu/aesop/foxgrapes/
{NG}Fidel said:
I don't need to "read any other posts" NGFidel.
FACT- There are no games using ATIs method of HDR.
FACT- There are no games using ATIs method of sof shadows.
FACT- SC:CT can only be played in SM1.1 on ATI hardware, resulting in reduced IQ.
FACT- SLI offers far higher performance than any ATI hardware.
DO you have a link to anything that refutes those four points? If not, I guess what I'm saying here is correct?
BTW- Hate_bot- I was lucky enough to cast my first presidential vote for Ronald Reagans first term, my second to help re-elect him. I voted for George W. both times as well, and his Dad. I campaigned door to door for Nixon as a child. So you could say "I'm a Republican" and proud of it!
Skrying said:
The unreal 3 Engine WILL be using SM3.0. OpenEXR is a very good method of HDR it just won't work on the ATI hardware because it is outdated. IF HDR could be done without 3.0 or OpenEXR, then a bunch of games would be doing it.
Skrying said:
Actually the review on the front page is for a XT-PE which is an OC'd XT. And if it were all about speed we would all have Intel processors because those have the most GHZ. However you have to look at features and the overall product.
![[RIP]Zeus](/data/avatars/m/69/69225.jpg?1478204720){kind=avatar}
[RIP]Zeus
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 2,590
Hate_Bot said:
Thats a liberal...Not a republican
Also liberals will be the death of america.....
now anyways ati is getting there ass handed to them cause they don't have SM3.0 and all the other features nV has....it was only time till a game started really using SM3.0 and not the half ass sm2.0
oh well once a fan boy always a fan boy....this is why i stay with nVidia muahahah lol!!
Rollo said:I don't need to "read any other posts" NGFidel.
FACT- There are no games using ATIs method of HDR.
FACT- There are no games using ATIs method of sof shadows.
FACT- SC:CT can only be played in SM1.1 on ATI hardware, resulting in reduced IQ.
FACT- SLI offers far higher performance than any ATI hardware.
DO you have a link to anything that refutes those four points? If not, I guess what I'm saying here is correct?
BTW- Hate_bot- I was lucky enough to cast my first presidential vote for Ronald Reagans first term, my second to help re-elect him. I voted for George W. both times as well, and his Dad. I campaigned door to door for Nixon as a child. So you could say "I'm a Republican" and proud of it!
FACT - There is no such thing as ATI's method, there is a such thing as a correct method, that though is not OpenEXR
FACT - I could care less about "soft shadows" even [H] said they made little difference
FACT - SP:CT dev's got paid a large amount of money from Nvidia
FACT - A single 6800 Ultra in most games is slower than a single X850 XT or XT PE
PRIME1 said:
Oh yes, OpenEXR owns because, its reduces performance by an extreme amount, it doesnt work with AA, and its got the Nvidia name on it. I see how great OpenEXR is now.
Unreal 3 engine will use a method both cards can use, that's a good example of HDR.
[RIP]Zeus
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 2,590
Skrying said:
FACT - ati can't do OPENEXR
Show me proof the devs for SP:CT got paid by nVidia?
i know of some proof ati paid vavle LOADS of cash for a shit can game
[RIP]Zeus said:Thats a liberal...Not a republican
Also liberals will be the death of america.....
now anyways ati is getting there ass handed to them cause they don't have SM3.0 and all the other features nV has....it was only time till a game started really using SM3.0 and not the half ass sm2.0
oh well once a fan boy always a fan boy....this is why i stay with nVidia muahahah lol!!
Err what? Liberals are the hippys that protest everything. Republicans are the smartasses that just make equally smartass jokes all the time, ignoring the issue at hand.
Skrying said:
ATI can do soft shadows.
Also, byt the time we can se any game with the Unreal 3 engine, first of all there will be new cards out, second of all even with SM3.0 there are features being used by Unreal 3 engine that no current card(s) can render them.
I see [RIP]Zeus is spouting more BS. They paid to have the game bundled with their cards. Not for special treatment. Crap game? Try far better than your precious Doom3 to most people.
So? It should still be an option for those cards. I think Valve should have enabled DX9 within HL2, too. People should have the choice for running the game how they want, if their card can support a feature.
You've tried that poit of view before, and its still wrong. You say they should not support a card from 2004? Then explain why they are supporting cards from 2001? 1.1 is FAR older than 2.0, they its in the game. Heck, by your reasoning, they should only support 3.0, and not the other 98% of the cards out there.
The fact is, they had PS2.0 in, when developing the game. Why not continue with it? Perhaps because the FX cards sucked at 2.0? Perhaps because they're just lazy? Or perhaps because they cant code very well. If memory serves, the first game didnt even support AA. Pretty shoddy coding there.
Is there any good reason to not support the LARGEST base of cards? There are far, far, more DX2.0b cards than there are 3.0 cards. Thats a fact.
Seeing how HL2 supports cards from several years ago, with different DX levels, from a consumers standpoint, that is out it should be done. A gamer can play the game to their cards highest graphical capability from a GF2, to the latest of cards. Doom3 is another example of supporting cards that are not the newest.
Shifra said:
So? It should still be an option for those cards. I think Valve should have enabled DX9 within HL2, too. People should have the choice for running the game how they want, if their card can support a feature.
Rollo said:
You've tried that poit of view before, and its still wrong. You say they should not support a card from 2004? Then explain why they are supporting cards from 2001? 1.1 is FAR older than 2.0, they its in the game. Heck, by your reasoning, they should only support 3.0, and not the other 98% of the cards out there.
The fact is, they had PS2.0 in, when developing the game. Why not continue with it? Perhaps because the FX cards sucked at 2.0? Perhaps because they're just lazy? Or perhaps because they cant code very well. If memory serves, the first game didnt even support AA. Pretty shoddy coding there.
Is there any good reason to not support the LARGEST base of cards? There are far, far, more DX2.0b cards than there are 3.0 cards. Thats a fact.
Seeing how HL2 supports cards from several years ago, with different DX levels, from a consumers standpoint, that is out it should be done. A gamer can play the game to their cards highest graphical capability from a GF2, to the latest of cards. Doom3 is another example of supporting cards that are not the newest.
fallguy said:
Exactly my point, SM3.0 wont become mainstream for a while, Game companys arnt really interested in Having the best Uber graphics, using the best features only available on 8 cards on the market, They want EVERYONE to buy there game, 90% of consumers are using older tech, they want that 90%.
[RIP]Zeus
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 2,590
Skrying said:
You still haven't answered my question on where is your proof the devs for SP:CT got paid by nVidia
i really want to see this proof you have...or are you asuming they got paid by nVidia cause everyone knows valve was paid by ati.
how do you know the devs for SP:CT didn't just wanted to put in SM3.0?
So if by your logic. game devs that put in new features from nVidia cards is auto paid by nvidia?
[RIP]Zeus said:
http://www.splintercell.com/us/splintercellchaostheory/index.php
What is that I see at the bottom of the page? Oh yeah, the Nvidia logo.
[RIP]Zeus
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 2,590
Skrying said:
Thats holds no water...omfg your going by a LOGO a logo...come on
so if any game has this logo of nVidia..there paid by nVidia...you have to be fucking kidding?
what about the games that have the ATI logo???
they paid by ati...fucking come on
i want [H]ard proof. not a logo....holy shit...
[RIP]Zeus
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 2,590
Here we go
Painkiller
http://www.painkillergame.com/index2.php
so with the logo's there...alienware paid painkiller devs to program for there computer?
so nVidia paid painkillers devs here to?
here to
http://www.eagames.com/official/battlefield/vietnam/us/home.jsp
was BFV paid by nvidia to???
come on...i can do the logo thing all day
http://www.guildwars.com/
look to the left and scroll down a bit
I SEE ATI
i guess guild wars was paid by ati....
Painkiller
http://www.painkillergame.com/index2.php
so with the logo's there...alienware paid painkiller devs to program for there computer?
so nVidia paid painkillers devs here to?
here to
http://www.eagames.com/official/battlefield/vietnam/us/home.jsp
was BFV paid by nvidia to???
come on...i can do the logo thing all day
http://www.guildwars.com/
look to the left and scroll down a bit
I SEE ATI
i guess guild wars was paid by ati....
[RIP]Zeus
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 2,590
Hate_Bot said:
wow all this over a logo
show me some proof plz....REAL proof...not a logo...logo's mean nothing.....
damn
oh no....i don't see nVidia or ATI paying these dev's
http://www.uo.com/
who paid them?????
[RIP]Zeus
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 2,590
Skrying said:
Wrong they where all sponsered...doesn't mean they where paid...do you have PROOF of them getting paid besides a logo?
what about the companys that don't have the logo's?
but yet they use newer features?
what about them??
[RIP]Zeus said:wow all this over a logo
show me some proof plz....REAL proof...not a logo...logo's mean nothing.....
damn
oh no....i don't see nVidia or ATI paying these dev's
http://www.uo.com/
who paid them?????
sorry man, but the logo signifies a partnership between the companies exclusively. You think its there for fun? Its called marketing, and its most certainly not free. They may of made a concious decision to not include as SM2.0 support before hand, but its unlikely. The ownders of X800s and 6800s are literally making up 5%-8% if that of todays gamers. Half of that can run a game in a better quality shader the other half get stuck with a 2002 standard. Keep in mind thats not including the majority of owners out there who all own SM2.0 cards. Its not an RTS or MMORPG. You load it, beat it, and delete it. Thats what most people who play this game do. Now as i said, i think it looks fine in 1.1 (the two previous versions used 1.1 and some 1.4), so im not complaining, but since you're saying it was done because it looks better then 2.0, im telling you it makes no sence. Its a game with 14 hours worth of single player missions, they release a new splinter cell every year, and most importantly, its the same exact engine as used in the past. They either did no SM2.0 because they were extremely lazy or they were nudged not too.
Rollo you're so fuckin far gone if you think the 6800's DX9.0C technologies give them this clear lead. How about ATI's tempral AA and bringing 3Dc to the market, not to mention the 9700Pro being the first and only true graphics card for almost 2 years to fully support DX9. Im sorry, ATI hasnt done anything new on their own? Until the 6XXX card, did you know Nvidia never followed Microsofts DX reference recomendation to the letter? Infact they still havent with no FP24 which was the max under DX9. Year after year ATI constantly finds out what they have to offer, and supports it. As far as this year goes, i absolutly believe they were too far along with a finished product to drop it and restart for support. Its still a hell of a card so i think they made the right choice. You babble on like an idiot about how superior it is, do you even notice you're the only one?
Skrying said:
Man, I wish. (but I voted for Ronald Reagan, remember)
Your arguments were full of flaws, so I had to fix them for you.
No one really cares if you think EXR HDR is right or wrong, it's the only version we have and it makes the game look better. (waits for ATI !!!!!! comeback "Well, it's no good if you can't run it at 8X FSAA at 16X12! Because I say so!)
No one really cares if you think Soft Shadows "aren't worth it" because it's how the game is meant to be played? Saying otherwise is like saying "HL2 is meant to be played at DX8.1 because it's faster that way!" Doesn't make sense?
No one cares if you think UBI was "paid off" because that won't help them play the game with modern shaders, only a nVidia card will.