54 Comments(s). 1 Pages(s). Showing page 1. [ 1 ]

   #3. Posted at 12:14 PM on Jan 27th 2006, Edited at 12:15 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
PRIME1
ATI or Valve needs to fix the loss of detail in HL2.

Look at the screenshots from this review at Firingsquad.
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_super_aa_vs_nvidia_sli_aa/p...

Here is the NVIDIA shot
http://www.firingsquad.com/media/article_image.asp?fs_article_id=17...

Here is the ATI shot
http://www.firingsquad.com/media/article_image.asp?fs_article_id=17...

In the ATI shot there are bushes, branches and other things missing. Rage3D ran into the same problem but could not find out why it happens other than HL2 is running at a lower detail setting. This may be on Valve's end. Can anyone else confirm this or shed some light on it?

Seems to make HL2 benchmarks as uneven.
collapse
#3, HL2 was endorsed by ATI...  :  trintron  (#17)  «
#17, really???  :  BoBzeBuilder  (#21)  «
# This all app specific optimization stuff is pure crap. Al...  :  Madman  (#33)  «
# how are MISSING OBJECTS the result of AA?  :  sativa  (#53)  «
#3, This has to do with ATI's AA method, it tries so hard to ant...  :  rgreen83  (#45)  «
#3, The HL2 engine adapts to the power of the GPU and removes di...  :  sigher  (#54)  «

   #1. Posted at 12:07 PM on Jan 27th 2006, Edited at 12:07 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
FireGryphon
I really don't care if a card can run this useless program properly or not.
collapse
#1, Because if it cannot render this properly it means that some...  :  PerfectCr  (#14)  «
#1, This "useless program" just highlighted a bug in the card's ...  :  Anomymous Gerbil  (#39)  «
#39, How often do we see image quality issues that only crop u...  :  Freon  (#52)  «

   #8. Posted at 12:44 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
A_Pickle
....There is no X1800 XTX....
collapse
#8, Well let's give him grace and assume he meant X1800 XT inste...  :  YellowElf  (#9)  «
#9, gtx 512 xxx? does it feature a naked nalu on the sink?  :  Beomagi  (#50)  «
#50, And that has exactly what to do with the newsarticle i...  :  1c3d0g  (#51)  «

   #26. Posted at 05:51 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
anand
So am I a technoplebe for thinking the "defective" X1900 image actually looks better?
collapse
#26, Nah, I couldn't tell which one was the "bad" one when I put ...  :  jobodaho  (#29)  «
#26, I'm with you on that one. Even though the x1900 is rendering...  :  Sargent Duck  (#31)  «
#26, Exactly what I thought--the ground/grass looked like it had ...  :  Rakhmaninov3  (#34)  «
#34, Please do not compound the blindness by agreeing with him...  :  Arkham  (#40)  «
#26, Yeah, you're a goddamn idiot, the (horrible) difference is ...  :  DougTanner  (#36)  «
#36, Yeah, and you are getting upset about someone else's opin...  :  jobodaho  (#42)  «
#42, I agree with you. People should be entitled to their o...  :  Shining Arcanine  (#43)  «
#26, The Geforce is clearly better in this case. The ATI card is ...  :  Rookie  (#41)  «
#41, I think it looks better with the "mistake"  :  Philldoe  (#44)  «
#44, Why am I not surprised.  :  Convert  (#47)  «
#26, it doesn't look better, unless of course you see black dots ...  :  sativa  (#46)  «
#46, That's the explanation. He's trying to be a fly, in his h...  :  1c3d0g  (#49)  «

   #48. Posted at 12:06 PM on Jan 28th 2006 Edit   Reply
fyo
AA doesn't explain the bushes that are COMPLETELY missing. There are also some shadows missing the ATI shot (check out the barrel on the right, for example).
collapse

   #38. Posted at 07:33 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
blitzy
I would only care if there was a large difference in performance, otherwise no big deal. Probably just a bug they havent got around to ironing out.
collapse

   #37. Posted at 07:28 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
SuperSpy
Yeah, bring on the mathmatical diff screenies... I always enjoyed those on the anti-aliasing tests... why not on the image quality test?
collapse

   #35. Posted at 07:00 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
Stefan
Seems like it's time again to compare output as delivered by ATI/Nvidia to that delivered by the MS reference renderer. This technique has already proven useful in the past.
collapse

   #16. Posted at 02:13 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
derFunkenstein
I couldn't tell there was anythign wrong until I looked at the 7800 version and saw the difference. That said, new cards + ATi drivers = bugs.
collapse
#16, At least the drivers don't corrupt the entire texturing of t...  :  swaaye  (#20)  «
#16, Nvidia's had their fair share of new cards + drivers = bugs.  :  Sargent Duck  (#30)  «

   #27. Posted at 05:56 PM on Jan 27th 2006, Edited at 06:10 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
Fighterpilot
How about a performance comparison chart showing the 3DMark05
results with the GTX and XTX....Its the benchmark the majority of TR members are familiar with and would have been interesting to see along with the 06 results.
Just checked out the 2 screenshots on the TR frontpage links......oh the horror....
collapse
#27, Can anyone try renaming 3Dmark06 to 3Dmurk06?  :  Madman  (#28)  «

   #24. Posted at 05:43 PM on Jan 27th 2006, Edited at 10:54 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
Krogoth
Why would anyone with a working brain give a crap?

X1900XT is just new and ATI driver developers barely had any time to refine its drivers.
collapse
#24, Or.... There is some kewl cheating involved again...  :  Madman  (#25)  «

   #23. Posted at 05:36 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
5150
Oh God, I'm so sick of this crap.
collapse

   #4. Posted at 12:29 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
Klopsik206
Bah... Can't see any dithering...
collapse
#4, As it was said "If you can't see it there, check with your o...  :  Madman  (#10)  «
#10, Where it was said?! Can't see it ;-)  :  Klopsik206  (#22)  «
# So we dont care NVIDIA had whole lot of 'bugz' with 3DM05, a...  :  Madman  (#13)  «
#13, Some games yes, synthetic junk... meh, until they get int...  :  wierdo  (#18)  «

   #15. Posted at 01:52 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
just brew it!
How important this is really depends on whether the buggy pixel shader compilation is in a benchmark-specific optimization, or the generic pixel shader support. If it's a problem with an optimization that is specific to 3DM06, then no biggie. But if it is a problem with the generic pixel shader handling, then any games which use this type of pixel shader could also be affected.
collapse

   #5. Posted at 12:31 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
MorgZ
Even when i view the X1800 image it seems that the picture is a lower quality as well, some shadows / detail are missing when compared to the nVidia screenshot which looks better.

Anyone else notice this?

Does this mean the nVidia card is processing more things as the ATi is removing detail?
collapse
#5, Just looks to me like the X1800's image is a little bit dark...  :  Damage  (#6)  «
#6, i see what 5 is saying, if you look around the forest flo...  :  reactor  (#11)  «

   #7. Posted at 12:40 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
wierdo
If this is limited to synthetic software then it's not an issue since those I skip over :P The only concern I have, though, is that if synthetic offers some glimpe into future games supposedly, then this may affect future games if ignored, eh?
collapse

   #2. Posted at 12:11 PM on Jan 27th 2006 Edit   Reply
Hanners
Any chance you can try taking a screenshot using a Radeon X1600 or X1300 for comparison, as these two parts also support Fetch4 and DF24?

Hanners
Elite Bastards
collapse
54 Comments(s). 1 Pages(s). Showing page 1. [ 1 ]
 
Name/Password: / Remember
Reply to:
[click to clear]

[RED] [GREEN]
[BOLD]
[ITALIC] [STRIKE]
[UNDERLINE]

Notice: All posts should abide by the rules, please.
Note: Ctrl-Enter submits the post. (In IE)
DThread keys: Click on a reply to position the blue bar. 'A'/'Z' move it up/down.
Jazztags: (they MUST be closed)
    r{ red }r     g{ green }g     /[ italic ]/     *[ bold ]*
    _[ underline ]_     -[ strike ]-     s[ sample ]s     o[ spoiler ]o  q[ (QUOTE) ]q