Bit-tech tests Bioshock

[Marvelous]

Check out my 3dmark 2k5. Tweaked some settings now 2600 points better than my 1900gt.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=3400422

 

[Sr7]

Better scores on Nvidia cards on an Nvidia-branded game. Predictible

Ya, cause we all know NVIDIA get's what ever they want and get to completely re-write whatever they want, whenever they want when they partner with a game developer! Cmon guy. Some hardware just run some things faster than other hardware.. "tweaks" will only get you so far.

 

[Sr7]

Way too obvious.

[rant]

Nvidia sure has their hand up a lot of game company's asses these days.
I remember when you could buy a game that wasn't optimized for ANY company.

"Gee I wanna play HL3 with somewhat decent frames but i CANT because its not optimized for my card and have to BUY A NEW $600 VIDEO CARD" Only cause company A bought out the coders who code the game.

Monopolizing bastards. I bet if we stopped buying cards and games for awhile they'd get the hint to stop that shit.

What are we going to have to start doing, switching out video cards in our rigs just to play different games? WTF?

Game companys who favor one video card company over another can GARGLE ON MY YAMBAG.

Truly pathetic.

[/end rant]

Are you stupid? Since when does a NVIDIA or ATI partnering with a game developer mean you can't play a game at all on your card?

Also, if you were actually informed you'd know that NVIDIA doesn't "buy" game developers. They have a program where they help promote the game to get them additional sales, and help them optimize the game to run on more hardware configurations SO THAT users with lesser systems can play at higher settings. An article came out about this a while back.

Can't necessarily say the same for ATI though.

 

[Sr7]

Source

Genius, there's a difference between making sure users get the best experience by testing and fixing issues for a company's hardware and purely tweaking code until the competitor suffers.

 

[Sr7]

Not only that, he completely ignores the fact that the jest of my post is that the difference between DX9 and DX10 of Bioshock is minuscule. I even provided a link to justify my reason for it. You see, what he did has a name and it's called "spin doctoring". He's in fact spinning it differently other then what I implied about Bioshock in DX9 to DX10 to re-interrupt it as a "spin" for ATI vs. Nvidia. Sometimes, someone can spin someone else's post because they lack comprehension to properly understand what's either implied or actually stated. However, regardless if it's lack of comprehension to what is stated or because they cannot provide no rebuttal it changes nothing regarding what I've posted earlier regarding Bioshock in DX9 vs DX10. The comparison SS from firingsquad reflect that the differences are minuscule to none depending on what you look at.

What? There are tendencies here... one of which is that R600 currently sucks ass DX10, and does average in DX9. G80 does much better in all DX10 cases, and better in a lot/most cases for DX9 (obviously not all, this is one case to the contrary). Regardless of any particular win or loss with an individual game, you should be able to be reasonable and acknowledge that the fact is that R600 can win a battle, but is losing the war...

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

Oh you know perfectly well where I was trying to get and what I was calling you indirectly. Using your own words, you can "spin" whatever you want, but many of us know your agenda, since R600 debutted. The last one I remember, were those Falcon Northwest Crossfire benchmarks, which were a joke.

Sorry, I don't base my posts on your emotion. If I have an agenda its logical truth not ignorance. But thanks for proving my point on harboring a grudge on past events LOL.

Anyway, in this forum, we already discussed the current DX10 implementation in the games that support it. It's been proven over and over, that none uses DX10s full capabilities, yet these games are what we currently have, meaning DX10 cards will have to prove themselves in these games. The only thing to note, is that a proper evaluation/review, will obviously point out, that it's still early to say that these cards suck in DX10 and it's NOT an indicative of performance in DX10 games across the board, but it IS an indicative for that specific game, which is the purpose of the evaluation anyway.

This is pure double talk. This thread discuss the Bit-tech benchmarks of BIoshock.

Also, you (and others like you, in this same thread) have the tendency to choose the specific benchmark that suit your agenda (again reference to those Falcon Northwest benchmarks, among many others), so I'm really not seeing how ones opinion, is more biased than yours, when it comes to deal with the fact that the HD 2900 XT is not a great performer. And I'm not even disputing these Bioshock benchmarks. I just prefer to wait for [H]'s real world gameplay numbers.

This is pretty stupid as the content of what you posted here is so generic and vague that you fail to make any valid point. Other then do the "he has an agenda...no he has an agenda, no he.."
The truth of the matter remains the same, R600 did well in Bioshock. As for DX10 there is room for improvement.

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

Genius, there's a difference between making sure users get the best experience by testing and fixing issues for a company's hardware and purely tweaking code until the competitor suffers.

Here read it again

We asked Roy what the report contained, in general terms. “The report is quite simple – we want to make the gaming experience as good we possibly can on all of our hardware. We give the developers a list of per-GPU optimisations that they can make to their code to help improve the experience at any given spec – in our opinion, this is vital for any developer that is serious about making a great PC game.”

 

[Sr7]

Here read it again

Wow... shame on NVIDIA for wanting to make the experience as good as it can be for the people who pay their salary! What are they thinking??? They should OBVIOUSLY be trying to help ATI out however possible, and let them know when they have issues with ATI products.

You're really pretty bad at reading. You probably failed business class too.

Aside from the fact that I already know that they do general case optimizations, even based on what he said you can tell. These are not "make only NV go faster" optimizations. That's not to say they won't help NVIDIA performance, but you'd be kidding yourself if you believe a publisher or developer would let ATI or NVIDIA come in and hurt the other company's performance (aside from the exception of ATI implementing shit to slow down NVIDIA performance on CoJ DX10).

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

What? There are tendencies here... one of which is that R600 currently sucks ass DX10, and does average in DX9. G80 does much better in all DX10 cases, and better in a lot/most cases for DX9 (obviously not all, this is one case to the contrary). Regardless of any particular win or loss with an individual game, you should be able to be reasonable and acknowledge that the fact is that R600 can win a battle, but is losing the war...

That maybe your opinion but that hasn't stop anyone from buying the card does it? And why just DX10 ? It's because that R600 did well in DX9 so thanks for stating the obvious.
How often do you have to post how good the G80 before you have the confidence to know it for yourself? The only person not being reasonable is you. I will not confirm your pov just so you can validation your opinion! Grow a pair...

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

Wow... shame on NVIDIA for wanting to make the experience as good as it can be for the people who pay their salary! What are they thinking??? They should OBVIOUSLY be trying to help ATI out however possible, and let them know when they have issues with ATI products.

You're really pretty bad at reading. You probably failed business class too.

I see, you are resorting to middle school wit. The truth of the matter is simple, the R600 faired pretty well with Bioshock if you don't like it, to bad.

 

[Sr7]

Sorry, I don't base my posts on your emotion. If I have an agenda its logical truth not ignorance. But thanks for proving my point on harboring a grudge on past events LOL.


This is pure double talk. This thread discuss the Bit-tech benchmarks of BIoshock.


This is pretty stupid as the content of what you posted here is so generic and vague that you fail to make any valid point. Other then do the "he has an agenda...no he has an agenda, no he.."
The truth of the matter remains the same, R600 did well in Bioshock. As for DX10 there is room for a playable framerate.

fixed.

 

[Sr7]

I see, you are resorting to middle school wit. The truth of the matter is simple, the R600 faired pretty well with Bioshock if you don't like it, to bad.

I just stated that... you can't contest that. It runs DX9 great for Bioshock... better than NV does.

The question is not about the battle though.. it's about the war. Does one game that you will play through and probably not play again (no multiplayer) justify the LACK of performance in other apps, and the laughable DX10 performance, and the large hit you take when you want to run AA in ANY app?

That's up to the buyer to decide, but obviously you know my opinion is that superior performance in 1 game is not worth all that.

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

fixed.

Thats some pretty dry wit you have there. But you are trying none the less. However, even at 50FPS it's more then playable. So, either you are lying or you simply don't know better.

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

I just stated that... you can't contest that. It runs DX9 great for Bioshock... better than NV does.

The question is not about the battle though.. it's about the war. Does one game that you will play through and probably not play again (no multiplayer) justify the LACK of performance in other apps, and the laughable DX10 performance, and the large hit you take when you want to run AA in ANY app?

That's up to the buyer to decide, but obviously you know my opinion is that superior performance in 1 game is not worth all that.

You are now making stuff up. There is no war, no battle. Ultimately, the decision is left up to the consumer. For example for a game that lacks AA it's doing very well. So by your standards this shouldn't be happening. Because like you said, if you enable AA you take a hit. So why are they still buying a game with no AA? LOL Simple, it's a game they can enjoy, the lack of AA in game isn't noticeable unless you look for it. It's not like other games were it's obvious, among other reasons. Who said anything about superior performance in one game? I said that the R600 did well, if you are going to paraphrase me do it right and stop adding your emotion filled interpretation. That's why you are having such a hard time understanding what I and others are saying.

 

[Marvelous]

fixed.

LOL... Playable? I think it's plenty playable... Depends on the resolution i guess.

2900xt pulls 42.9fps average 25fps minimum @ 1920x1200 16xAF maximum quality according to bit-tech. Nvidia had their card out a year ago and ATI had their card out couple months ago? There's room for improvement just by looking at dx9 results in windows xp.

 

[Silus]

Sorry, I don't base my posts on your emotion. If I have an agenda its logical truth not ignorance. But thanks for proving my point on harboring a grudge on past events LOL.

I'm glad you don't, otherwise you would be out of here, with your "agenda". It gets tiresome to see your approved "selection" of benchmarks...

This is pure double talk. This thread discuss the Bit-tech benchmarks of BIoshock.

No, of course it doesn't
You dismiss DX10 numbers, because your "favorite" card, doesn't do so well in it, when a couple of months back, it was supposed to beat everything in it. That's your agenda and it's pretty sad...

This is pretty stupid as the content of what you posted here is so generic and vague that you fail to make any valid point. Other then do the "he has an agenda...no he has an agenda, no he.."
The truth of the matter remains the same, R600 did well in Bioshock. As for DX10 there is room for improvement.

Oh my point is made every time you post. You resort to name calling and "try" to put down people's opinions, when you have nothing more to say, other than support your agenda and discredit everything else, even if it's proven over and over again, in the past couple of months, concerning new games that take advantage of DX10.

People come here to get and receive advice and to discuss whatever subject maturely. If you can't do that, by respecting others opinions, you surely do NOT belong here, or any forum for that matter.

 

[Silus]

I told you your secret is safe with me.

I feel much better now.

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

I'm glad you don't, otherwise you would be out of here, with your "agenda". It gets tiresome to see your approved "selection" of benchmarks...

Its you arguing with me on my opinion. I cannot help it if you are easily offended by it. If you are going to use "agenda" learn to use it properly. Also, stop generalizing the word.

No, of course it doesn't
You dismiss DX10 numbers, because your "favorite" card, doesn't do so well in it, when a couple of months back, it was supposed to beat everything in it. That's your agenda and it's pretty sad...

No, I actually didn't however, it shows your lack of comprehension in what I've stated all along.

Oh my point is made every time you post. You resort to name calling and "try" to put down people's opinions, when you have nothing more to say, other than support your agenda and discredit everything else, even if it's proven over and over again, in the past couple of months, concerning new games that take advantage of DX10.

Pot...kettle...black

People come here to get and receive advice and to discuss whatever subject maturely. If you can't do that, by respecting others opinions, you surely do NOT belong here, or any forum for that matter.

This is a hypocritical statement when you don't let anyone with a opinion different from your own post.

As I've stated before, the R600 did well in Bioshock and regardless if you played it on the PC or 360 it's a very popular game to play with no AA (who's dodging now).

 

[Silus]

Getting off topic, no doubt, so I'll just reply to you, one more time.

Its you arguing with me on my opinion. I cannot help it if you are easily offended by it. If you are going to use "agenda" learn to use it properly. Also, stop generalizing the word.

Unfortunately, you only have an opinion, when it suits your needs. You don't recommend what's better, only what your "agenda" allows (and yes that's the proper use) and only when some "benchmark" shows what you want.

No, I actually didn't however, it shows your lack of comprehension in what I've stated all along.

Right...

Pot...kettle...black

I'm sorry, I don't understand troll.

This is a hypocritical statement when you don't let anyone with a opinion different from your own post.

As I've stated before, the R600 did well in Bioshock and regardless if you played it on the PC or 360 it's a very popular game to play with no AA (who's dodging now).

Not at all, it's only with you. Marvelous is also a ferverous ATI fanboy, yet he can still maintain a normal conversation, without resorting to name calling and say everyone else is wrong, because it suits his needs.

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

Getting off topic, no doubt, so I'll just reply to you, one more time.

What you are replying to has nothing to do with what I've posted. You've been ranting ever since you took notice towards I and others having an opinion different from your own.

Unfortunately, you only have an opinion, when it suits your needs. You don't recommend what's better, only what your "agenda" allows (and yes that's the proper use) and only when some "benchmark" shows what you want.

I never recommended anything in this thread but there it is again, comprehension problem. And, your use of agenda is vague. You are using it for the sake of using it as you have no real rebuttal to what I've said about the results.

I'm sorry, I don't understand troll.

My statement is very valid as you do not see yourself carrying on in this thread.

Not at all, it's only with you. Marvelous is also a ferverous ATI fanboy, yet he can still maintain a normal conversation, without resorting to name calling and say everyone else is wrong, because it suits his needs.

Again, you don't see yourself and is easily offended by the mere opinion that is different from your own.

So far we've seen a few reviews that reflect what people are experiencing with Bioshock on the PC. There is no reason why they should think differently. If you agree with the results of Bit-tech/gamespot or not isn't relevant unless you actually have the card to make a comparison with.

 

[phide]

Now you know something about that guy ... These corporations even pay people to do the PR work for them in forums.

Interesting insinuation.

The UT3 engine uses differed shading which doesn't use AA (at least for DX9)...brilliant!

Deferred shading. You don't even know the names of the subjects for which you're attempting to debate.

So at 1680 x 1050 on a GTS 640 mb, it gets an average of 58 FPS and with a GTX it gets 71 fps? I wonder which card I should get now

An 8800 Ultra, of course

Here read it again

I don't think you have a competent enough grasp of shaders, and how they're written, to be able to really comment on this issue with such authority.

I've already addressed this.

 

[Marvelous]

Not at all, it's only with you. Marvelous is also a ferverous ATI fanboy, yet he can still maintain a normal conversation, without resorting to name calling and say everyone else is wrong, because it suits his needs.

Did I like ATI in the past? Sure... Does this make me a fanboy? If you say so. ATI gave me the best image quality all the way up to geforce 7 series. Oh I've used bunch of Nvidia cards in my past but the image quality was lacking compared to ATI's offering. Now I like Geforce 8 series because Nvidia finally cleared up Aniso issues. That was my biggest gripe with them. With geforce 8 series Nvidia is the clear leader in the performance dept and slightly in image quality (subjective).

What I don't get is you blindly go against ATI cards? Every single time you recommend Nvidia cards although image quality isn't as good and slower in modern games.

Now with 2900xt it performs great with bioshock. Vista drivers are still lacking yet a $400 card is beating out a $600 card in windows xp and slightly slower in dx10. Okay make that much slower in Vista yet it stays in there with 2900xt's real competitor. THE 8800GTS.

 

[Silus]

Did I like ATI in the past? Sure... Does this make me a fanboy? If you say so. ATI gave me the best image quality all the way up to geforce 7 series. Oh I've used bunch of Nvidia cards in my past but the image quality was lacking compared to ATI's offering. Now I like Geforce 8 series because Nvidia finally cleared up Aniso issues. That was my biggest gripe with them. With geforce 8 series Nvidia is the clear leader in the performance dept and slightly in image quality (subjective).

What I don't get is you blindly go against ATI cards? Every single time you recommend Nvidia cards although image quality isn't as good and slower in modern games.

Now with 2900xt it performs great with bioshock. Vista drivers are still lacking yet a $400 card is beating out a $600 card in windows xp and slightly slower in dx10. Okay make that much slower in Vista yet it stays in there with 2900xt's real competitor. THE 8800GTS.

I didn't go "blindly against ATI cards". I went against fanboys that ruin these threads. Fanboys, either from NVIDIA or ATI or whatever, are not productive and do this "benchmark" selection, to fit their needs.

Also, I recommend what's best, given the person's needs. It doesn't matter if they are NVIDIA or ATI. They just need to be the best at the time or cheaper, in the case where both have similar performance.
Please do point out some recommendation I've made, that does not reflect this.

Oh and don't worry, your secret is also safe with me

 

[Marvelous]

I didn't go "blindly against ATI cards". I went against fanboys that ruin these threads. Fanboys, either from NVIDIA or ATI or whatever, are not productive and do this "benchmark" selection, to fit their needs.

But the numbers don't lie and we have quite bit of sources telling us the same thing. 2900xt perform really good in winxp with a possible of fixing their vista performance in this game. It's no way slow in vista but it doesn't burn rubber like winxp. We know 8800gts is more of a balanced card that constantly get steady results with many games. 2900xt at times beat out 8800gtx in some games while not so in others for the price of 8800gts. Sure the card is power hungry but it is what it is. An alternative to 8800gts for possible hopes of burning rubber with better drivers.

I didn't even read the whole thread so I don't know exactly what you guys are talking about but I did read some parts and you were being unreasonable and I think I replied to you couple of times.

Also, I recommend what's best, given the person's needs. It doesn't matter if they are NVIDIA or ATI. They just need to be the best at the time or cheaper, in the case where both have similar performance.
Please do point out some recommendation I've made, that does not reflect this.

Are you sure? You don't want me to point it out for you?

Oh and don't worry, your secret is also safe with me

Shheeeee.. Don't tell anyone.

 

[Silus]

I didn't even read the whole thread so I don't know exactly what you guys are talking about but I did read some parts and you were being unreasonable and I think I replied to you couple of times.

I'm really interested in knowing, where I was being unreasonable. Is it the fact that I was upset, in seeing such a display of fanboyism ?
Well, then yes. I can't stand it. You yourself call me a fanboy, because I recommend what's best at that time. Right now, they are mostly NVIDIA products, but that can't be because NVIDIA's products are better now can it ? No, these suggestions must just be the ramblings of a fanboy...

Are you sure? You don't want me to point it out for you?

No, I do. I really do.

 

[Marvelous]

I'm really interested in knowing, where I was being unreasonable. Is it the fact that I was upset, in seeing such a display of fanboyism ?
Well, then yes. I can't stand it. You yourself call me a fanboy, because I recommend what's best at that time. Right now, they are mostly NVIDIA products, but that can't be because NVIDIA's products are better now can it ? No, these suggestions must just be the ramblings of a fanboy...

I didn't think I called you a fanboy. I asked you through PM if you were and that your secret is safe with me even if you were. And I think we both laughed it off.

I guess it wasn't you. I got you mixed up with Sr7. This is unreasonable. http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1031387311&postcount=51

http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1031385411&postcount=21
There's really not enough dx10 games really to show what these cards can really do. I don't really understand what you were trying to get at or you were quoting what that guy said. So far 2900xt has been able to pull its weight against 8800gts with dx10 titles.

No, I do. I really do.

I keep getting you mixed up with all these guys with their screen name that starts with an "S".... I remember having lot of debates with people that blindly favor Nvidia cards. There are so many of them it seems or just hate ATI cards all together. I don't see too many ATI fanboys here.

Come to think of it. I've only had 1 debate with you in ATI subsection and it wasn't about favoring what cards but why 2900xt sucked. I think that's about it. I keep getting mixed up and think it's you. Weird... huh..

 

[Ionium]

I still am not sure which card would be necessary for this game, the 640 mb GTS or the 768 mb GTX.

 

[Marvelous]

I still am not sure which card would be necessary for this game, the 640 mb GTS or the 768 mb GTX.

Either will do. Depends on what resolution.

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

Interesting insinuation.

Yet you don't deny it

Deferred shading. You don't even know the names of the subjects for which you're attempting to debate.

Yes, "i" was used instead of an "e" and missing an "r" yet when you responded you understood exactly what I was saying. This alone debunks your statement. Also, for someone who implies they understand it you never proved it. By the way, it's "name" not names and "subject" not subjects.

I don't think you have a competent enough grasp of shaders, and how they're written, to be able to really comment on this issue with such authority.

It's never good to second guess yourself. Blathering about it in an attempt to "win an argument" only discredits yourself. It's obvious you are attempting to blow a spelling mistake out of proportion. I believe this link examples it best.

"Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people."

Now Bioshock is a great game, lots of people enjoy playing the game. The game's performance is not an issue for most who play on the PC or console. We have seen a few benchmarks showing it runs well on the R600.

 

[phide]

Yet you don't deny it

It could very well be true, but I did think it was interesting. It'd surprise me if it were true though.

Yes, "i" was used instead of an "e" yet when you responded you understood exactly what I was saying. This alone debunks your statement.

Were we discussing a gentleman named Bob, and had you typed Brob, I would have understood that you meant Bob, sure. If you say "differed", when you meant "deferred", I again understand what you mean (I can problem solve). Does that necessarily mean you actually know what the concepts you're discussing are in any meaningful capacity?

By the way, it isn't just a case of one letter having been swapped for another. Can you spot other differences between "differed" and "deferred"? The first to spot them will win a special prize!

Cereal box hint: it has to do with consonants! Prize void in all locations.

It's never good to second guess yourself. Blathering about it in an attempt to "win an argument" only discredits yourself.

I don't believe my so-called "blathering" could end up discrediting me, nor my arguments, unless I were actually wrong. Not knowing what one is talking about usually discredits one's self, which unfortunately seems to be the position you're in at the moment (though you could be playing dumb for all I know).

Frankly, I feel pretty comfortable about what I've said so far. If you have reason to suggest I shouldn't be, be sure to speak up.

Their have been a few benchmarks that show that it runs well on the R600.

And run well on R600 it does (in XP, anyway). Debating that point seems senseless given what information we have at the moment. I don't think bit-tech or FS are tampering with the results in any way, just reporting what they're seeing.

In any case, keep that trademark misdirection rollin', kiddo; it's very entertaining.

 

[Kowan]

Keep it up guys. I'm bored and enjoy these card wars.

 

[Marvelous]

Keep it up guys. I'm bored and enjoy these card wars.

You want to go? Come on turkey.

 

[Frosteh]

A card that can't do AA in DX9 has lost before it's even started.

The 2900 keeping up with 8800 cards is a lame metric because we all know that the game runs well enough to have AA on with the 8800 cards and we all know that the 2900 has terrible performance hits with AA turned on.

These reviews should be left until the 2900 can do AA, then we can properly test.

Hopefuly [H] will do a review of the game and performance, at least their system of enabling the best graphics available while maintaining a steady frame rate will show AMD's shortfalls rather than just ignoring them and pretending the addition FPS is useful for something...

 

[Caffeinated]

He's in fact spinning it differently other thenwhat I implied about Bioshock in DX9 to DX10 to re-interrupt it as a "spin" for ATI vs. Nvidia.

However, regardless if it's lack of comprehension to what is stated or because they cannot provide no rebuttal it changes nothing regarding what I've posted earlier regarding Bioshock in DX9 vs DX10.

There is a big difference in comprehending what I posted and my POV (which can be interrupted as an opinion). As I stated before, the jest of my post is that the PQ of Bioshock between DX9 and DX10 is minuscule if you reviewed firingsquad's comparison shots. Which ultimately has nothing to do with how you or anyone else interrupts the opinions of others months ago regarding R600 vs G80. Harboring grudges by spinnning it based on how you felt through your own interruption of other's opinions from months ago as a response to Bioshock's PQ by definition is OT to the very post you are responding to.

If you are going to use "agenda" learn to use it properly.

Can you please learn to use the word interpret instead of the word interrupt?

Also, I'm not finding many "jests" (jokes, comments made in fun) in your posts, though I did get the gist of what you were saying. The double negatives aren't very nice, either.

It is quite arrogant to criticize someone else's usage of language when one has just offered several egregious examples of incorrect grammar and word usage. I was cringing halfway through the page at your continued use of interrupt instead of interpret, and then you had the nerve to criticize someone else.

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

It could very well be true, but I did think it was interesting. It'd surprise me if it were true though.

Not very good rebuttal considering the fact that your argument is based on your offense of someone else's opinion.

Were we discussing a gentleman named Bob, and had you typed Brob, I would have understood that you meant Bob, sure. If you say "differed", when you meant "deferred", I again understand what you mean (I can problem solve). Does that necessarily mean you actually know what the concepts you're discussing are in any meaningful capacity?

Yes, the word is spelled incorrectly. However, the context remains the same. Honestly, you avoid the points that I have made so far.

By the way, it isn't just a case of one letter having been swapped for another. Can you spot other differences between "differed" and "deferred"? The first to spot them will win a special prize!

Read above

I don't believe my so-called "blathering" could end up discrediting me, nor my arguments, unless I were actually wrong. Not knowing what one is talking about usually discredits one's self, which unfortunately seems to be the position you're in at the moment (though you could be playing dumb for all I know).

I don't require your approval for my opinion. Nothing you've posted is on point to the topic of this thread.

Frankly, I feel pretty comfortable about what I've said so far. If you have reason to suggest I shouldn't be, be sure to speak up.

This is a personal opinion. Hint: When you feel comfortable you do not need to express it to others.

And run well on R600 it does (in XP, anyway). Debating that point seems senseless given what information we have at the moment. I don't think bit-tech or FS are tampering with the results in any way, just reporting what they're seeing.

Yet you still arguing about it. Again, discrediting yourself ... Another observation is that even though you agree, your argument with me discredits your own post.

In any case, keep that trademark misdirection rollin', kiddo; it's very entertaining.

Name calling doesn't help your pov.

It's obvious that you haven't offered anything to this thread.

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

Can you please learn to use the word interpret instead of the word interrupt?

Also, I'm not finding many "jests" (jokes, comments made in fun) in your posts, though I did get the gist of what you were saying. The double negatives aren't very nice, either.

It is quite arrogant to criticize someone else's usage of language when one has just offered several egregious examples of incorrect grammar and word usage. I was cringing halfway through the page at your continued use of interrupt instead of interpret, and then you had the nerve to criticize someone else.

It goes both ways. No one is perfect and I never implied that I was. The intent of my posts is to defend my position. Regardless of your "take" on it. Others have made grammar and word usage errors throughout this thread (in which I made one example in a previous post).

 

[Marvelous]

A card that can't do AA in DX9 has lost before it's even started.

The 2900 keeping up with 8800 cards is a lame metric because we all know that the game runs well enough to have AA on with the 8800 cards and we all know that the 2900 has terrible performance hits with AA turned on.

These reviews should be left until the 2900 can do AA, then we can properly test.

Hopefuly [H] will do a review of the game and performance, at least their system of enabling the best graphics available while maintaining a steady frame rate will show AMD's shortfalls rather than just ignoring them and pretending the addition FPS is useful for something...

I read in a sub-forum here that you could use AA by renaming bioshock.exe to something like oblivion.exe by tricking the drivers to use AA. Why don't people just test it and get it over with?

 

[Kowan]

It can be forced, but its a poor work around.
http://www.tweakguides.com/Bioshock_5.html

Antialiasing can only be forced in BioShock through the graphics card control panel in both Windows XP and Windows Vista, but only in DX9 mode, not in DX10, and also only on GeForce 8 or ATI X1X00 series cards or newer. Note that in Vista, "proper" DX9 mode will have to forced via the -DX9 switch (See DirectX 10 Detail Surfaces further below for the reason).

For Nvidia users, make sure to use the 163.44 Forceware or newer which are specifically designed for BioShock compatibility. In Windows XP you can force AA through the Forceware Control Panel as normal, but in Windows Vista you will need to go to the \Program Files\2K Games\BioShock\Builds\Release directory and rename the BioShock.exe to R6Vegas_Game.exe. Then right-click on your BioShock launch icon, select Properties and in the Target box add -dx9 one space after the end of the line and click OK. It should look something like this:

"E:\Program Files\2K Games\BioShock\Builds\Release\R6Vegas_Game.exe" -dx9

For ATI users, you can only force AA in XP or Vista if you rename your Bioshock.exe file to Oblivion.exe, make sure Catalyst AI is activated in your Catalyst Control Center, and then right-click on your BioShock launch icon, select Properties and in the Target box add -dx9 one space after the end of the line and click OK, similar to the example above.

 

[Eastcoasthandle]

I read in a sub-forum here that you could use AA by renaming bioshock.exe to something like oblivion.exe by tricking the drivers to use AA. Why don't people just test it and get it over with?

You can force it by renaming bioshock.exe. However, I really didn't find that much of a difference. In some areas it can make a difference, in others there is no obvious difference. Bioshock is not like other games were AA is necessary IMO.

 

[phide]

Not very good rebuttal considering the fact that your argument is based on your offense of someone else's opinion.

There was no argument. I'm not particularly sure what you're referring to.

I don't require your approval for my opinion. Nothing you've posted is on point to the topic of this thread.

I don't think bit-tech or FS are tampering with the results in any way, just reporting what they're seeing.

I believe the topic reads "Bit-tech tests Bioshock", though I suppose it's possible that I'm mistaken (albeit somewhat unlikely).

Hint: When you feel comfortable you do not need to express it to others.

I suppose the key word here would be "need".

Another observation is that even though you agree, your argument with me discredits your own post.

I don't recall arguing with you about this point. I recall arguing with you on TWIMTBP, shader optimization and on other unrelated points.

It's obvious that you haven't offered anything to this thread.

See above.

In any case, I feel as if I've gone back and forth with you quite enough at this point, and it seems clear to me that any further discussion with you would be a rather fruitless endeavor. In any case: have fun.

The 2900 keeping up with 8800 cards is a lame metric because we all know that the game runs well enough to have AA on with the 8800 cards and we all know that the 2900 has terrible performance hits with AA turned on.

The 2900 performs solidly with AA in CoJ. Granted, that's something of a special scenario with gamma-correct AA, relying upon shader resolve with both G80 and R600 (unless I'm mistaken).

Yeah, the evaluator should try to get AA working, but that isn't always feasible. I don't agree with the idea that AA isn't necessary in BioShock (there are some pretty high-contrast scenes that can be particularly distracting), but you're saying that we shouldn't evaluate performance because of the lack of multisampling support? That doesn't seem at all reasonable. Oblivion didn't support HDR and multisampling when it was first released (and it still doesn't, at least not natively), and R6:Vegas doesn't either, so this isn't exactly new territory.