[H]ard|OCP looks at ShaderModel 3.0

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

[H] takes a look at SM3.0 and does a few comparisons and grabs a few comments. Basic conclusion, nothing impressive so far, and FarCry's SM3.0 support is more marketing tool than actual improvment.

<A HREF="http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjA5LDE=" target="_new">http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjA5LDE=</A>


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK

 

[GeneticWeapon]

I just got off work, thank's for the heads up on this

<A HREF="http://rmitz.org/AYB3.swf" target="_new">All your base are belong to us.</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2216718" target="_new"><b>3DMark03</b></A>

 

[Slava]

Hmm. I don’t know. Maybe it is just me. But PS3 looks much better to me than PS2 in most of those screenshots. Noticeably better. At least in static images. But somehow I have a feeling that this will translate to dynamic images/animations as well, especially when new games begin to make <font color=red>full</font color=red> use of displacement mapping. If ATI cards of the next generation have no PS3 support this may hurt them badly and nVIDIA will have won the IQ battle.

<font color=green>Stingy people end up paying double. One kick-ass rig that will go strong for three years or one half-decent one every year?</font color=green>

 

[GeneticWeapon]

Displacement mapping(which I've seen plenty of instances of) doesnt wet my whistle as much as say.....ray-traced displacement mapping...

<A HREF="http://rmitz.org/AYB3.swf" target="_new">All your base are belong to us.</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2216718" target="_new"><b>3DMark03</b></A>

 

[cleeve]

There are no games with displacement mapping yet, are there?

If this is a VS3.0 feature, how the hell did Parhelia have displacement mapping demos way back when? I thought it was a part of the DX9 featureset. WTF?

I'm all wet for Displacement mapping, BTW.

________________
<b>Radeon <font color=red>9500 PRO</b></font color=red> <i>(hardmodded 9500, o/c 340/310)</i>
<b>AthlonXP <font color=red>~2750+</b></font color=red> <i>(2400+ @2.2Ghz)</i>
<b>3dMark03: <font color=red>4,055</b>

 

[GeneticWeapon]

<A HREF="http://developer.nvidia.com/object/displacement_mapping_demo.html" target="_new">nVidia</A>

<A HREF="http://rmitz.org/AYB3.swf" target="_new">All your base are belong to us.</A>
<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=2216718" target="_new"><b>3DMark03</b></A>

 

[HardWareBoss]

You buying X800Pro? Or waiting for PCI?

 

[phial]

funny, to me, i see pictures taken to emphasize detail in the pictures with PS3.0, and the ones with PS2.0 are taken of scenes that dont have much detail to begin with


<A HREF="http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4Mjc0ODY3M0szQ2kwQU9QejlfMV84X2wuanBn" target="_new"> in this pic tho</A> do you see much difference?


<A HREF="http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4Mjc0ODY3M0szQ2kwQU9QejlfMV85X2wuanBn" target="_new">and in this pic</A> the PS3.0 pic looks clearer mainly because of the angles and lighting (in the PS 2.0 pic, the ceiling/walls are at more of an angle, hence the blurrier textures)

<A HREF="http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTA4Mjc0ODY3M0szQ2kwQU9QejlfMV8xMF9sLmpwZw==" target="_new">and in this</A> one, ignore the skeleton and look at the walls in the background , compared to the ceiling shot for the PS 2.0 ones.. same detail to me. this pic is particularily bias'd , because of having the detailed skeleton in teh PS 3.0 shot, but only a distant and angled ceiling/wall in teh PS 2.0 shot

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>
<A HREF="http://www.subhi.com/keyboard.jpg" target="_new">This is you, interweb junky</A>

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

I'm waiting for at least the X880PRO/XT/non-pro or RV380+(depending on features).

PCI-EX is the only thing worth bumping the R9600Pro, it plays everyting I play well now, so not worth replacing the mobo and card with AGP since I want my next card to last through 2 generations of rigs hopefully.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

By the time any games FULLY use the palette of tools at their disposal the next generation of cards will be knocking on our doors. And if you look at what's being said initially, the NV40 (as powerful as it is) won't have enough power to fully exploit all it's features. We may not really know until further into it's life, just like the NV30 with DX9/PS2.0 support.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK

 

[CowMan]

Has anyone noticed that there are very few direct comparisons between shader model 3.0 and 2.0? The screenshots above show two very different pictures, particularly those of the two statues. The 2.0 model statue does look much less detailed than the 3.0 statue, but that's because THEY'RE DIFFERENT FREAKING STATUES!!! A few actual direct comparisons can ebe found on the [H] here http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjA2LDU=
There is a clear difference in image quality with the 5950U and the 6800, but it's the same as the difference between the 5950U and the 9800XT. Note the slight difference in lighting intensity on the dimples in the metal floor between the ATI and nVidia cards.
There's no doubt that ATI is the champ over nVidia when it comes to image quality. If anyone's seen the comparison of lighting effects on the tiles in Far Cry, the nVidia cards show very blocky sections compared to ATI's image quality. Tom's shows this pretty well here http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040414/geforce_6800-46.html This leads me to think that ATI's 2.0 shader is not only more effective than nVidia's 2.0 shaders, but also better than the famed 3.0 shaders that nVidia is basing their 6800 sales pitch on. If ATI can top nVidia's performance level with better image quality using only 2.0 shaders, than what's the point of 3.0 shaders anyway? I know all these designers are saying it's going to be the next wave (hell, even Carmack said it) but how influential will it be if gap between image qualities is so wide?

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Actually alot of that also has to do with FarCry's nV specific floptimizations as seen in <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=396685#396685" target="_new">THIS thread</A> I posted earlier today (saw last night but was in no shape to do Image Quality comparisons ).

While SM3.0 will offer alot of benifits in the future, I don't think we're anywhere near ther yet, and I don't know which will be most important VS3.0 or PS3.0, or whether PS/VS 2.X enhanced will offer almost as much. I think, like the NV30/R300 it will take a bit of time before we know for sure.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red> GA to SK