• 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.

Valve sucks

Status
Not open for further replies.
yertnpixie said:
http://www.ighosting.net/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=

This site says that the findings that are being expressed here are simply not true. In fact they found no difference in running the game on the system. They even tried it on 2 systems with different specs.
Click to expand...

1.) We're not talking about CS:S and no one has said that it'll work in CS:S. :rolleyes:

2.) The screen shots he used weren't even from the same place anyways (the HL2 shot he did use was from a member here). :rolleyes:

3.) From what I read in the link I doubt he knows how to run a proper benchmark.
 
The first system is pretty low end, might be cpu limited. The other one looks promising but still on the low end. Sadly this is the only proof ive seen, does anyone with a 3ghz+ system and 5900/5950 have some time to spare?
 
People who bought the fx line deserve what they get for buying into the marketing hype and not doing any research since any review told you how bad they were in dx9 games. I don't know why everyone hates on valve and loves carmack and doom. HL2 is 100 times the game Doom 3 is.
 
CrimandEvil said:
1.) We're not talking about CS:S and no one has said that it'll work in CS:S. :rolleyes:

2.) The screen shots he used weren't even from the same place anyways (the HL2 shot he did use was from a member here). :rolleyes:

3.) From what I read in the link I doubt he knows how to run a proper benchmark.
Click to expand...



umm It shouldnt really matter since both games run off the EXACT SAME SOURCE ENGINE there is no seperate engine for hl2 and cs:s...
 
Ironically I just got done testing this with the CS:S video test. After getting the results (and retesting), I am simply amazed by the numbers I'm seeing using a GeForceFX 5900U at stock clocks (with a 2.4GHz Athlon XP-M, 1GB PC3200 Ram).

Settings: mat_dxlevel 90, 1024x768, high everything, reflect all, no AA/AF, bilinear

No Changes: 46 fps
3D-Analyze Steps w/ Device ID as 9800 Pro: 65 fps (but with some glitching)
3D-Analyze Steps w/o Changing Device ID: 112 fps

Now since this is just a benchmark, I'm sure you won't see over 100% gains in real gameplay. However for a shader intensive benchmark, that 3D-Analyze hook granted me over double the fps with no noticable change in IQ. Wow.

Think I'll go back and test some more. :)
 
Just for ppl posting FP16/FP32 comparisons, the point is not to run the whole game in FP16, as there are some shaders that will need full precision. The point is to run a mix of FP32 and FP16, FP16 for shaders that don't need full precision (most of them in HL2), and FP32 for the ones that do (such as the ones the author picked out). This results in optimal performance and image quality for the FX series, 6800 series, and next gen videocards (remember SM3.0 requires FP32 so ATI can't stay at FP24 for next gen). This is how all current intensive DX9 games work, with the exception of HL2.

I'd have to say Valve seriously stacked the cards against Nvidia by failing to provide a path with both FP16/FP32 precisions depending on what the shaders need. I find it hard to believe that after a year's delay they could not incorporate a FP16/FP32 path. Valve could have made this game playable in DX9 for FX users and given 6800 users a boost in performance, but instead they chose to go with the route that would help ATI the most unsurprisingly.
 
Pray forgive my confusion, but why does Doom 3 keep getting dragged into this discussion? I thought the issue at hand was "Did Valve omit a relatively simple piece of functionality from their code such that a line of nVidia cards suffer needless performance degradation?"
 
Becauses some want to obscure the issue by say "ID did it too" when we know that's not true.
 
CrimandEvil said:
If you read the thread you'll see an answer to that (with some pics), there are points when 24-bit precision is needed but it doesn't look like it's needed most of the time.
Click to expand...


Not nearly enough in my opinion, but you seem to be right... It's really just not enough.
 
OK, so Vavle writes code that will allow the FX series to run the game better. They are not given this code, they write it. Then the 6800 series comes out and they do not bother to finosh off the code (again they wrote it) and instead leave it off.

Exactly why cant they/shouldnt they do this?
 
tranCendenZ said:
Just for ppl posting FP16/FP32 comparisons, the point is not to run the whole game in FP16, as there are some shaders that will need full precision. The point is to run a mix of FP32 and FP16, FP16 for shaders that don't need full precision (most of them in HL2), and FP32 for the ones that do (such as the ones the author picked out). This results in optimal performance and image quality for the FX series, 6800 series, and next gen videocards (remember SM3.0 requires FP32 so ATI can't stay at FP24 for next gen). This is how all current intensive DX9 games work, with the exception of HL2.

I'd have to say Valve seriously stacked the cards against Nvidia by failing to provide a path with both FP16/FP32 precisions depending on what the shaders need. I find it hard to believe that after a year's delay they could not incorporate a FP16/FP32 path. Valve could have made this game playable in DX9 for FX users and given 6800 users a boost in performance, but instead they chose to go with the route that would help ATI the most unsurprisingly.
Click to expand...

1) 6800 users aren't seeing much if any effect of running the game entirely with partial precision, so it's a moot point of mixed mode for them.

2) NV3x performance in DX9 with forced partial precision is still comparitively very slow in comparison to the default DX8.1 mode which has slight tradeoff of some IQ and it would have been even slower with a mixed mode since not all shaders would be running in partial precision.

3) In all likelyhood they didn't do it due to time constraints and people probably would have complained since they'd be asking why a 5950U is putting up numbers equal to that of a 9600XT.
 
:rolleyes:

Boo Frickin' Hoo.

Doom 3 didn't run as good on ATI cards and nobody cried then. id even claimed so publicly.

Besides, at least HL2 doesn't have any annoying (and excruciatingly nauseating) ATI propaganda at boot like 98% of the Nvidia sponsored games out there.

This kind of stuff is old news as of August 2004.
 
I went to http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?threadid=115614
and followed the directions and saw no speed improvement either way with my NVidia GeForce FX 5950 Ultra (Flashed 5900). However I have localized the water fix. On my card water would never show in dx9.

Deleting the line labeled "NoUserClipPlanes" fixed this water problem nicely.

I have not tried limiting to fp16 shader performance yet, but, otherwise, I see no speed benefit to straight up dx9 in HL2 on an FX series video card. ;)
 
gordon151 said:
1) 6800 users aren't seeing much if any effect of running the game entirely with partial precision, so it's a moot point of mixed mode for them.
Click to expand...

Granted, the 6800 handles FP32 nicely, however in shader intensive scenes it still would have benefitted from mixed precision.

2) NV3x performance in DX9 with forced partial precision is still comparitively very slow in comparison to the default DX8.1 mode which has slight tradeoff of some IQ and it would have been even slower with a mixed mode since not all shaders would be running in partial precision.
Click to expand...

Sure, but I think many would have preferred the option of full DX9 IQ on the NV3x, because with mixed precisions it would have been playable.

3) In all likelyhood they didn't do it due to time constraints and people probably would have complained since they'd be asking why a 5950U is putting up numbers equal to that of a 9600XT.
Click to expand...

Time constraints? The game was delayed a year. Plenty of time to add a pp path, that according to Gabe Newell on ATI Shader Day 2003, Valve had already coded. What exactly happened to that path they spent "three times as long on" is a mystery, other than it is no longer in the game.
 
tranCendenZ said:
Time constraints? The game was delayed a year. Plenty of time to add a pp path, that according to Gabe Newell on ATI Shader Day 2003, Valve had already coded. What exactly happened to that path they spent "three times as long on" is a mystery, other than it is no longer in the game.
Click to expand...
Exactly. They had a full extra year so what the hell were they doing all that time? Looks like they were busy optimizing for ATI cards IMO.
 
>.> Another Summary post.

-----------------------------

1) Argument over D3 and Source Engine was settled.
2) It's bad marketing for Valve not to try and support all possible cards.
3) Mixed mode should have been done for the FX series only, to get more usable cards; and their not is fishy because they where "working on it".
4) THIS FREAKING THING DOESN'T APPLY TO ATI OR THE 6XXX+ SERIES OF NVIDIA, QUIT FREAKING ASKING HOW IT WORKS FOR THEM.
 
maleficarus said:
Well I have an overclocked Asus FX5700 256MB and to be honest the game ran perfect start to finish in 1024x768 max in game details. Using the Counter strike in game benchmark option I scored an even 60 FPS and thats how it felt through the game for me.
Click to expand...

What level of FSAA did you use?

See, 1024 is low rez by today's standards. 1024x768 was the deal back in Voodoo2 SLI days, not pushing on 2005.

so getting playable frame rates with only 1024 rez and AA disabled, isn't very impressive at all.
 
tranCendenZ said:
Time constraints? The game was delayed a year. Plenty of time to add a pp path, that according to Gabe Newell on ATI Shader Day 2003, Valve had already coded. What exactly happened to that path they spent "three times as long on" is a mystery, other than it is no longer in the game.
Click to expand...

And we later found out they hadn't really gotten very far in the development of the game at that point. There were other things that Gabe also said that we would see like HDR and 3DC, but those are missing too. There were also a number of levels we saw in the bink videos and early demos that never made it into the game. So obviously they didnt have "plenty" of time.
 
xSystemFailurex said:
:rolleyes:

Boo Frickin' Hoo.

Doom 3 didn't run as good on ATI cards and nobody cried then. id even claimed so publicly.

Besides, at least HL2 doesn't have any annoying (and excruciatingly nauseating) ATI propaganda at boot like 98% of the Nvidia sponsored games out there.

This kind of stuff is old news as of August 2004.
Click to expand...


I'm under the impression that the Doom3/nVidia relationship is that nVidia's most recent generation of cards was built with Doom3 in mind the entire time, whereas HL2 was built with ATi cards in mind. And, IIRC, there weren't any issues regarding Doom3 giving preferential treatment to nVidia hardware ... it simply worked better on the nv cards. Here, we're seeing mixed results but it appears as though Valve could have squeezed a lot more out of the FX series and simply chose not to., whether because of ATi funding or general attitude of the Valve team (I keep seeing these quotes popping up of some guy called "Gabe" having bad things to say about the FX line of cards. Makes this whole debacle a little bit more sketchy) or time constraints etc.
 
gordon151 said:
And we later found out they hadn't really gotten very far in the development of the game at that point. There were other things that Gabe also said that we would see like HDR and 3DC, but those are missing too. There were also a number of levels we saw in the bink videos and early demos that never made it into the game. So obviously they didnt have "plenty" of time.
Click to expand...


The demos at e3 2003 , strider battle, traptown etc were nearly all proof of concept demos and wree never intended to be in the full version anyway.
 
Valve has no obligation to offer a PP mode...that's just too much extra and unnecessary work for them. Why isn't everyone else flaming other game companies for not making a pp mode in their dx9 games as well? Oh that's right cause they aren't valve and people only like to hate on valve. :rolleyes:
 
xenogears said:
Valve has no obligation to offer a PP mode...that's just too much extra and unnecessary work for them. Why isn't everyone else flaming other game companies for not making a pp mode in their dx9 games as well? Oh that's right cause they aren't valve and people only like to hate on valve. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think someone pointed out earlier that 14.something percent of all the people that particiapted in the system spec submission (Which isn't nearly probably half the people out there) have FX cards... if you ask me, that's a big bit to just "give up on". Also, people have bitched at other companies, and many have implemented it; not to mention that there is a little fishyness that when selected to a ATi card that the graphic problems are "magically" cured..
 
DropTech said:
I think someone pointed out earlier that 14.something percent of all the people that particiapted in the system spec submission (Which isn't nearly probably half the people out there) have FX cards... if you ask me, that's a big bit to just "give up on". ..
Click to expand...

They gave up on nothing. The card works fine when running dx 8/8.1 mode which is the out of the box experience.
 
xenogears said:
They gave up on nothing. The card works fine when running dx 8/8.1 mode which is the out of the box experience.
Click to expand...

That's sorta missing the point of the thread.. why not run it when it is fully capable of running it with no visible IQ differences in places. And those places that it is visible, force the full percision. There's no point in running it in full percision if they don't have to, especially to keep it in DirectX9 mode. The hit would be less if they used variable (shown in previous examples) rather then forced full even full percision parts.

Even an option would suffice.

[EDIT] Wasn't meaning for it to sound directed, sorry Xeno. I'm just trying to help us both understand from both sides...
 
DropTech said:
That's sorta missing the point of the thread....
Click to expand...

No I understand the point of this thread. It's just to hate on valve some more as evidenced by the thread topic title. I don't know why everyone hates on valve cause of steam. I don't play cs so don't use the system much, but when I bought HL2 I couldn't install the game my first try cause it said steam was too busy. Did I start topics about how valve and steam sucks? No I just tried again later and it worked no probs.
 
Hey guys, I've been reading the forum today off and on, BTW the flame warz between the ATi and nVidia guys is hilarious. Anyway. Here are my system specs:

Shuttle SN85G4 rev 2
Athlon 64 3400+ (Running at 2310ghz)
1gig Kingston Value RAM
XFX 6800GT (NOT overclocked)

I tried this little hack, even though I know my computer doesn't need to, to see what would happen. Here is what I found.

While playing catch with dog I picked up the matress with the grav gun and turned on my flashlight and saw the WORST tiling I've ever seen in a game.
Then just after the combine attacks I shined my flashlight on the rocks that fall in the hall and separate you from Alex. I took pictures of these but I don't know how to post them, I'd be glad to email them to someone. Again these rocks had HORRIBLE tiling when the flashlight was shined on them.
At the end when the big explosion happens and time stops, alex's skin gets this really wierd red coloring.

After undoing the 3danalyze tweak all these glitches went away.
 
Wow... 20 pages of people bitching how bad the FX line was... Imagine this. Maybe the title of this thread should be "Nvidia FX sucks, unless it can run partial percision" instead?
 
... And before the new optimized ATI drivers for doom 3, NOBODY ever cried! They simply accepted the fact that the game was made with Nvidia in mind.

Valve comes around and makes a game with ATI in mind, and the Nvidia ph@nboyZ prepare WWIII.
 
while this is pretty nice information and would help alot of NVidia users, all the VAVLe bashing in this thread is based on the ASSumption that the game doesn't need fp24 - has that been verified at all?
 
xSystemFailurex said:
... And before the new optimized ATI drivers for doom 3, NOBODY ever cried! They simply accepted the fact that the game was made with Nvidia in mind.

Valve comes around and makes a game with ATI in mind, and the Nvidia ph@nboyZ prepare WWIII.
Click to expand...

Actually, the game was not made with nVidia in mind. It was made with both companies in mind. nVidia made the 6800 card with Doom3 in mind.
 
SnarkFish said:
while this is pretty nice information and would help alot of NVidia users, all the VAVLe bashing in this thread is based on the ASSumption that the game doesn't need fp24 - has that been verified at all?
Click to expand...
Jesus Christ, how about some of you start reading the thread? Most of the time 24-bit isn't needed but there are times when it is. :rolleyes:
 
SnarkFish said:
while this is pretty nice information and would help alot of NVidia users, all the VAVLe bashing in this thread is based on the ASSumption that the game doesn't need fp24 - has that been verified at all?
Click to expand...

Yes, forcing full percision is not needed on many of the shaders in the game. What people are saying is why didn't Valve, for the FX line put in an option to use a mixxed mode of only forcing full percision when it needed to be force, and letting it run at native 16FP when it could without IQ decreases -- this was originally going to happen according to Valve, but they mysteriouslly disbanded it; another issue that people are bringing up.
 
xSystemFailurex said:
Right.

And Nvidia's "The way it was meant to be played!" propaganda meant nothing.
Click to expand...

Dude, go freaking watch Carmacks interview..please.. Usually when a company like iD or a person like Carmack says something in the video industry, people listen. ATi somewhat failed to, and continued to ignore it's OpenGL drivers. As of late, they have been improving them. The fact is, Carmack didn't design the game to run better on one hardware, infact, he made sure that the game would run as equally as the hardware allowed it to on both sets of cards... So you can't blame ATi for their slight slip of arrogence at the time. No problem though.
 
xSystemFailurex said:
... And before the new optimized ATI drivers for doom 3, NOBODY ever cried! They simply accepted the fact that the game was made with Nvidia in mind.
Click to expand...
The difference is NV made their hardware for id's software......... Doesn't help that id used only NV hardware to code the game so pretty much same same?


xSystemFailurex said:
Valve comes around and makes a game with ATI in mind, and the Nvidia ph@nboyZ prepare WWIII.
Click to expand...
Bigger problem for the Nvidia ph@nboyZ is nobody remembers Doom3 anymore and it will be all about HL2 and it's mods for the next few years. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top