PDA

View Full Version : DirectX Shader Model 3.0 ??



Buff1 (The Original)
07-01-2004, 10:23 AM
No doubt this question has been asked and answered and I missed it.

Will 'PF' take full advantage of DirectX Shader Model 3.0? Just trying to decide whether to pick up a Radeon X800 XT now or wait a month or so and get the Nvidia 6800 Ultra which supports Shader 3. Other than that, the cards are almost a dead heat.

I've always been an Nvidia user, but I just ordered a new NEC 2141-22"SB Pro CRT monitor and I want to take full advantage of it at 2048x1536 at 85mhz in our favorite SIM as soon as possible. :]

Buff1 (The Original)
07-01-2004, 10:23 AM
No doubt this question has been asked and answered and I missed it.

Will 'PF' take full advantage of DirectX Shader Model 3.0? Just trying to decide whether to pick up a Radeon X800 XT now or wait a month or so and get the Nvidia 6800 Ultra which supports Shader 3. Other than that, the cards are almost a dead heat.

I've always been an Nvidia user, but I just ordered a new NEC 2141-22"SB Pro CRT monitor and I want to take full advantage of it at 2048x1536 at 85mhz in our favorite SIM as soon as possible. :]

VW-IceFire
07-01-2004, 01:03 PM
You've probably also read that Shader 3.0 doesn't add anything new except for potential performance enhancements in the future.

I doubt PF will have sufficiently complex shaders to require the useage of Shader 3.0.

Maybe BoB will. Thats the kind of forward thinking you need to have with respect to that technology. Consider that not even Half Life 2 will really take advantage or having pixel shaders of sufficient complexity to need that...yet http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

OldMan____
07-02-2004, 05:27 AM
No.. you are wrong. I work in game devel and have a 6800 and we currently support PS 3.0 in our game projetc. It is a completely NEW LEVEL of possible things to do. The shaders we can make with shader model 3.0 are IMPOSSIBLE to make with 2.0. That is specially true in Vertex Shaders (no.. I cannot say the name of the game I work on...yet)

That ATI propaganda against SM 3.0 is pathetic.. don't beleive them.. SM 3.0 is REALLY great.

Agree that no all scenarios must beneffict from it, but it is impossible to beleive in a game for next year that does not at least evaluate the possibility of using it.

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!

Amanda_Hugnkiss
07-02-2004, 01:25 PM
Well isn't IL2 written in OpenGL? So why would any improvement to DirectX help out IL2?

OldMan____
07-02-2004, 07:04 PM
Because Shader MOdels are not restricted to Direct X.. OpenGL supports EVERYTHING D3D does (and usually earlier due to its extension mechanism)

Only the name is not called PS 1.0 2.0 or 3.0... but otherwise same stuff.

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!

ASH at S-MART
07-02-2004, 08:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by OldMan____:
Because Shader MOdels are not restricted to Direct X.. OpenGL supports EVERYTHING D3D does (and usually earlier due to its extension mechanism)

Only the name is not called PS 1.0 2.0 or 3.0... but otherwise same stuff.

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hey Oldman.. thanks for the heads up.. I was actually thinking of buying the ATI over the nVida due to that very hype..

But to really sell me on that.. could you give me your advice with regards to the following notion..

See.. Im under the impression that FPS typically make use of all the new stuff.. And actually are what drive new things happening.. Flight sims, in the past, have allways lagged the FPS in taking adv of the cutting edge stuff..

Due to that impression.. Im still kind of thinking about the ATI card.. In that if it takes a year for flight sims to make use of PS 3.0.. Well by then this ATI x800 card will be old school anyways and time for an upgrade..

Basically I hate to pay for something.. When my only real interset is flight sim perfomrance.. And they tend to follow not lead in the area of using cutting edge hardware.

Is that a fair impression to go on? Or do you see flight sims taking adv of PS 3.0 in the next 12 months?

PS what is your take on the EXPRESS PCI bus? Does nVid take adv of that? From my current readings it looks like ATI is only supporting that?

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

Buff1 (The Original)
07-03-2004, 12:17 AM
Well, I guess I'm glad I asked the original question. Seems I'm not the only one thinking along these lines..... So it would seem that the Nvidia NV40 set ( 6800 in lay terms ) is the way to go for great IL2, PF, BoB gaming. No surprise. Nvidia has never disappointed me. ATI isn't bad, but it seems Nvidia is just enough better to be 'better'. As someone who makes a living with quality images day in and day out, I can say that Nvidia always looks a little smoother, a little cleaner, and more 'polished' to my eye. I think it really comes down to personal taste.

One thing that ASH said is (in my mind at least) quite untrue. ["Flight SIMS, in the past, have always lagged behind the FPS in taking adv of the cutting edge stuff.."] Perhaps that has been true in the past 5 or 6 years years, but it certainly wasn't true in the late 80's - mid-late 90's. In fact, for much of that period, Flight Sims were almost always THE cutting edge stuff. While they are dated to the enth degree now, Battlehawks 1942, SWOTL ( Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe for you 'under 30' crowd out there ), Falcon 3.0, and the great Dynamix SIMS like Aces of the Pacific and Red Baron were as good as cutting edge gaming got back then. For Online gaming, Air Warrior was heaven on earth at $6.00 an hour to many of us oldtimers. It broke new ground and led the way in online MMP before anyone even knew what MMP was. Without SIMS like those, this forum and the reasons for it wouldn't even exist today. And quite honestly, it was often the games that drove the hardware to new heights rather than the other way around as it is now.

Just one mans humble thoughts...... Your mileage may vary.

Nub_322Sqn
07-03-2004, 04:12 AM
Buying a card now because it supports PS 3.0 is rather silly, by the time it's actually used in games they got a better card anyway for the same price you pay for a 6800 right now.

So basicly by the time PS 3.0 is actually used in games the 6800 is old school.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rcma/banners/Nubarusbanner.jpg

OldMan____
07-03-2004, 04:48 AM
Yes you will have a flight sim for february with SM 3.0 (not from Ubi http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) Cannot speak much details.. its not exactly IL2 idea since its other sub-genre... but is just an example that this will happen.

One good example of where it could be used is in cloud layers and etc.. we currently can make things much more complex than curent simple clouds around (layers, transforming clouds etc...). Wind glass distortions with almost no performance penatly etc.. all this is possible.


But FPS will for some long time be the leading in graphics due to high income related to them and lots of them in the market.


Just advise.. If I would buy a card in a few months.. would wait the 6800 GT price settle down and buy one...(In fact I will.. since have one only at work) ATI card is great.. but has NOTHING that their previous card didn´t have (texture compression is not that better than it was) so I would buy it ONLY if was MUCH cheaper.

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!

VF-2_John_Banks
07-03-2004, 05:15 AM
Old Man, are you working on "Knights over Europe"?

Harh
07-03-2004, 06:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tara_King:
No doubt this question has been asked and answered and I missed it.

Will 'PF' take full advantage of DirectX Shader Model 3.0? Just trying to decide whether to pick up a Radeon X800 XT now or wait a month or so and get the Nvidia 6800 Ultra which supports Shader 3. Other than that, the cards are almost a dead heat.

I've always been an Nvidia user, but I just ordered a new NEC 2141-22"SB Pro CRT monitor and I want to take full advantage of it at 2048x1536 at 85mhz in our favorite SIM as soon as possible. :]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you noticed shader model in FB AOE. It is very simple. I mean that in PF we'll not get any "brand new graphics features". PF would be the same. As about BoB I doubt to see more than standart 1.3 or 2.0 shaders.

OldMan____
07-03-2004, 06:50 AM
Just can´t tell guys. Srry.. work is like that.

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!

Buff1 (The Original)
07-03-2004, 10:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nub_322Sqn:
Buying a card now because it supports PS 3.0 is rather silly, by the time it's actually used in games they got a better card anyway for the same price you pay for a 6800 right now.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

With that kind of thinking, nobody would ever buy a new video card!!! Thats like saying your ready to buy a new 2005 Audi A4 Quattro, but when it comes out you don't buy it because the 2006 models will be out in another year and may have some additional features so you decide to wait for that model instead. So what do you do in 2006? Wait for the 2007? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif I'd rather buy the absolute very best available when I'm ready to upgrade than to buy a lesser card and then have to upgrade sooner with another, more expensive one later which together make for a much higher total investment. That's just playing the hardware manufacturers favorite game. Pay me now... AND... pay me later.

Plus, as I said above, I personally prefer Nvidia's 'look' to ATI's anyway, so logic dictates me going with the best Nvidia card available whether it has a 'currently' minor feature over ATI or not.

So it seems what we're really saying here is that:

A: The ATI X800 is a fine card, but....
B: The Nvidia 6800 w/Shader 3.0 is enough better to be considered a better buy now as it will hold up to industry advancements longer than the ATI X800. However.....
C: DX Shader 3.0 won't be a significant factor in the next 6-12 months, but buying a card that has it as part of its architecture is the logical way to go if your buying a new card right now or in the near future. If your not in the upgrade market at this moment, then holding off till the next generation of cards is probably advisable.

Does this seem to summarize?? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

Nub_322Sqn
07-03-2004, 10:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buff1 (The Original):
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nub_322Sqn:
Buying a card now because it supports PS 3.0 is rather silly, by the time it's actually used in games they got a better card anyway for the same price you pay for a 6800 right now.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

With that kind of thinking, nobody would ever buy a new video card!!! Thats like saying your ready to buy a new 2005 Audi A4 Quattro, but when it comes out you don't buy it because the 2006 models will be out in another year and may have some additional features so you decide to wait for that model instead. So what do you do in 2006? Wait for the 2007? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif I'd rather buy the absolute very best available when I'm ready to upgrade than to buy a lesser card and then have to upgrade sooner with another, more expensive one later which together make for a much higher total investment. That's just playing the hardware manufacturers favorite game. Pay me now... AND... pay me later.

Plus, as I said above, I personally prefer Nvidia's 'look' to ATI's anyway, so logic dictates me going with the best Nvidia card available whether it has a 'currently' minor feature over ATI or not.

So it seems what we're really saying here is that:

A: The ATI X800 is a fine card, but....
B: The Nvidia 6800 w/Shader 3.0 is enough better to be considered a better buy now as it will hold up to industry advancements longer than the ATI X800. However.....
C: DX Shader 3.0 won't be a significant factor in the next 6-12 months, but buying a card that has it as part of its architecture is the logical way to go if your buying a new card right now or in the near future. If your not in the upgrade market at this moment, then holding off till the next generation of cards is probably advisable.

Does this seem to summarize?? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I much rather buy a DX Shader 3.0 card when I acutally need one, not to mention that there also more choice between Shader 3.0 cards then only one model of one brand in 6 to 12 months.
By that time the GeForce 6800 is much lower in price then right now or in the near future.

But it seems that you are unable to read what was actually said since I never said not to buy a new card in like a few years from now.

Then there is the rather silly metafore between pc hardware and a car. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif
The pc industry works at a much faster pace then the car industry and extra features on a car are nice but not needed.
Besides when you own that new Audi (Which I know nothing about anyway because to me a car is a car) you are already using the extra features since they don't bring out cars that have axtra stuff that you cannot use for another 6 to 12 months because they need to invent/design a use for the extra features now is it?

What we have here is a classical Nvidia fanboy that feels to need to open yet another Nvidia vs ATI thread, like we didn't have enough of them already.

Besides, I am very happy with my current graphics card, I can play all my games with 4xfsaa and 8xaf, some with max settings others just below max settings with smooth framerate and without stutter.
So I will get a Shader 3.0 card when it's actually needed instead of right now.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rcma/banners/Nubarusbanner.jpg

ASH at S-MART
07-03-2004, 10:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buff1 (The Original):
One thing that ASH said is (in my mind at least) quite untrue. ["Flight SIMS, in the past, have always lagged behind the FPS in taking adv of the cutting edge stuff.."] Perhaps that has been true in the past 5 or 6 years years, but it certainly wasn't true in the late 80's - mid-late 90's. In fact, for much of that period, Flight Sims were almost always THE cutting edge stuff. While they are dated to the enth degree now, Battlehawks 1942, SWOTL ( Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe for you 'under 30' crowd out there ), Falcon 3.0, and the great Dynamix SIMS like Aces of the Pacific and Red Baron were as good as cutting edge gaming got back then. For Online gaming, Air Warrior was heaven on earth at $6.00 an hour to many of us oldtimers. It broke new ground and led the way in online MMP before anyone even knew what MMP was. Without SIMS like those, this forum and the reasons for it wouldn't even exist today. And quite honestly, it was often the games that drove the hardware to new heights rather than the other way around as it is now.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Well, your correct, in that my IN THE PAST statment was with regards to the point where video cards starting takeing over the processing of graphic.. ie not software mode. To be more specific, time line wise, that would be around the LONGBOW time.. When 3Dfx came out and changed everything. From that point on is what my statment was refering too.. With regards to the AW1, AW2, AW3 days (not to be confused with the ROCKY movies) been there done that! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Back then there were not that many FPS to speak of.. Unless you count the likes of DOOM in the mix.. Which I dont! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Back in the RB, AOTP, AOE days it was what ever the CODE could do on the PC.. So the only cutting edge back then was a smart programmer! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif So In summary I think it is a fair statment that sense the LONGBOW days... FPS have been driving the hardware advancements more than flight sims have.

PS I remeber when AW was $12/hr and the ac were just black wire frames! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

ASH at S-MART
07-03-2004, 10:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nub_322Sqn:
Buying a card now because it supports PS 3.0 is rather silly, by the time it's actually used in games they got a better card anyway for the same price you pay for a 6800 right now.

So basicly by the time PS 3.0 is actually used in games the 6800 is old school.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rcma/banners/Nubarusbanner.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That is the same line of reasoning I have been using.. But in light of what old man said about clouds/fog.. I can see where flight sims would be motivated to take adv of such feature.. So Ill probally go with the nVidea... Just encase.

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

blackTIE
07-03-2004, 11:08 AM
Normally developers write for the most common standard. Nvidia supports Shader model 2.0 and 3.0, ATI just brought out cards with 2.0 (but much faster than the previous generation due to the doubling of the pipelines).

As a developer (which I'm not) I would go for the biggest market and in half a year to a year time that's still Shader 2.0. Especially when the visual differences between 2.0 and 3.0 are neglicable.

I think both are great cards.

ps. Only Pixel Shaders (1.3?) are used in IL2-Forgotten Battles for the water. Everything else is more T&L-work. Maybe BoB will make more use of advanced features, but Oleg will not go the 3.0-only route. That's carving a niche into a niche-market...

Buff1 (The Original)
07-03-2004, 11:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASH_SMART:
So the only cutting edge back then was a smart programmer! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Essentially what I meant by "the games drove the hardware". http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Ok, I go back a long,long way in AW, but not to black wire frames.... That's scary..... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

Buff1

Buff1 (The Original)
07-03-2004, 11:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nub_322Sqn:

What we have here is a classical Nvidia fanboy that feels to need to open yet another Nvidia vs ATI thread, like we didn't have enough of them already.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Absolutley not, my friend! I could care less which card I use so long as it does the job I need it to do and does it well. And I'm much too old to be a "fanboy" of anything. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I think in our own ways, we're both right on when and how to buy. It's just a matter of perspective and circumstance. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

OldMan____
07-03-2004, 04:12 PM
Just correcting .. visual differences between SM 2.0 and 3.0 are VERY big.. bigger than most of you can expect. Its a language of a complete higher level, more expressive. You can do things that are impossible without branches.

If this is the correct decision or not.. lets see. Last season ATI puted its efforts on 2.0 while NV sticked with the tought 1.3 would rule for more one year while 2.0 would be only marketing and scientific stuff.. who was right?

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!

blackTIE
07-04-2004, 05:51 AM
Just correcting, the programming differences are big, with all the branching and other stuff. More flexible and as I heard also faster (as in framerates) than 2.0.

BUT looking at the demo's of Shader 3.0 the VISUAL differences next to 2.0 are less than the change from 1.3/4 to 2.0.

That's why the cockup with the false comparison between Far Cry in ATI's 2.0 (which was in fact 1.3 I guess) and Nivia's 3.0.

[update] the Firingsquad article on Far Cry 1.2 looks promising I must say: http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/far_cry_sm30/page18.asp

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by OldMan____:
Just correcting .. visual differences between SM 2.0 and 3.0 are VERY big.. bigger than most of you can expect. Its a language of a complete higher level, more expressive. You can do things that are impossible without branches.

If this is the correct decision or not.. lets see. Last season ATI puted its efforts on 2.0 while NV sticked with the tought 1.3 would rule for more one year while 2.0 would be only marketing and scientific stuff.. who was right?

If brute force does not solve your problem... you are not using enough!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Alexi_Alx_Anova
07-04-2004, 06:39 AM
The Far Cry 1.2 patch has already enabled SM 3.0. Sounds like they have not recoded Far Cry to add NEW effects, just converted what was already there to use the more efficient SM 3.0. See anandtech for an analysis that demonstrates the incresed fps;

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=2102

I can't remember the names, but on a completely different forum I've heard that at least nine new software titles with immenent release dates are already using SM 3.0 and that it is relatively easy (I did say relatively) to update an old title for SM 3.0 and so gain performance increases. It looks like the use of SM 3.0 will be much faster than what the ATI boys are claiming. In fact, the rate limiting step will most likely be Microsoft's release of DX9.0c.

The differences between X800 and 6800 based cards are not consistent between different reviews which suggests either incompetence or bias among the reviewers. But what is clear is NO overall superiority of one over the other when it comes to fps scores and the graphics quality differential has all but dissapeared as well. The only outstanding difference is SM 3.0.

Personally I'm holding out for the 6800 GT as it can be stabily overclocked to Ultra speeds. Then, this time next year or maybe a little later it will be a completely new computer with PCI-express, etc.

Alexi

-----------------------------
Drug of choice....coffee

http://web.onetel.net.uk/~alx_747/coffee.jpg
-----------------------------

Buff1 (The Original)
07-04-2004, 12:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alexi_Alx_Anova:

The differences between X800 and 6800 based cards are not consistent between different reviews which suggests either incompetence or bias among the reviewers. But what is clear is NO overall superiority of one over the other when it comes to fps scores and the graphics quality differential has all but disappeared as well. The only outstanding difference is SM 3.0.

Personally I'm holding out for the 6800 GT as it can be stabily overclocked to Ultra speeds. Then, this time next year or maybe a little later it will be a completely new computer with PCI-express, etc.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Alexi hits the nail on the head in a number of ways.

Serious published reviews of these 2 cards are almost useless in that there is no clear consistency between the reviews. Even the benchmarks for the same software are different in some cases. The suggestion of bias on the part of some reviewers is ugly but not unreasonable. A quiet thousand in the handshake and suddenly one card has a slight edge or the other has a subtle failing.

As Alexi also says, and what I said earlier, is that there seems to be no clear cut difference between these 2 excellent cards with the only significant difference being Shader Model 3.0. Just how significant is that difference? From what I'm reading and hearing from those in the know like Oldman, it's significant enough to make the decesion if the cards are at the same price point.

Lets not beat it to death. I'm not even remotely interested in another ATI vs Nvidia thread as was suggested earlier. I just want to know which direction is best for all of us who play IL2 and are so anxiously looking forward to playing PF and BoB at the very best graphic res and detail possible.

ASH at S-MART
07-04-2004, 02:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buff1 (The Original):
Essentially what I meant by "the games drove the hardware". http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well back in the AOTP days.. flight sims were not really driving any hardware except maybe sound cards... It was all creativity of the programers and what they could do on dad's PERSONAL COMPUTER with Word Perfect 5.1 installed. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Unless you consider MMX? But it came out about the same time that video cards started catering to gamers.. and thus put MMX out of business with regards to graphics.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buff1 (The Original):
Ok, I go back a long,long way in AW, but not to black wire frames.... That's scary..... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>LOL! yup.. black wire frames that were filled in.. and logging into the Genie network for $12/hr.. or was it $16/hr? I forget.. but it was worth it! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ASH HOUSEWARES
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

Nub_322Sqn
07-05-2004, 02:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buff1 (The Original):
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Alexi_Alx_Anova:

The differences between X800 and 6800 based cards are not consistent between different reviews which suggests either incompetence or bias among the reviewers. But what is clear is NO overall superiority of one over the other when it comes to fps scores and the graphics quality differential has all but disappeared as well. The only outstanding difference is SM 3.0.

Personally I'm holding out for the 6800 GT as it can be stabily overclocked to Ultra speeds. Then, this time next year or maybe a little later it will be a completely new computer with PCI-express, etc.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Alexi hits the nail on the head in a number of ways.

Serious published reviews of these 2 cards are almost useless in that there is no clear consistency between the reviews. Even the benchmarks for the same software are different in some cases. The suggestion of bias on the part of some reviewers is ugly but not unreasonable. A quiet thousand in the handshake and suddenly one card has a slight edge or the other has a subtle failing.

As Alexi also says, and what I said earlier, is that there seems to be no clear cut difference between these 2 excellent cards with the only significant difference being Shader Model 3.0. Just how significant is that difference? From what I'm reading and hearing from those in the know like Oldman, it's significant enough to make the decesion if the cards are at the same price point.

Lets not beat it to death. I'm not even remotely interested in another ATI vs Nvidia thread as was suggested earlier. I just want to know which direction is best for all of us who play IL2 and are so anxiously looking forward to playing PF and BoB at the very best graphic res and detail possible.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

PF won't be using Shader Model 3.0 since it's build on the graphics engine of FB.

BoB will use a complete new graphics engine according to Oleg and is due in 2005 and most likely it will use Shader Model 3.0 but this has not been written in stone yet.

I will be looking out for a Shader 3.0 card when I buy a PCI-E system in 2005.
I am sure by that time there are better cards with Shader Model 3.0 support as well as a wider choice instead of just one model.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rcma/banners/Nubarusbanner.jpg

blackTIE
07-05-2004, 04:30 AM
I've been reading a little bit more about Shader model 3.0 and I must say that lighting of planes can be sped up with it and more important maybe, 'Instancing' (did I spell that correctly) could allow many more planes in the air, with more CPU cycles devoted to the AI of those planes and flightmodels.