PDA

View Full Version : PF - will ATI users get advanced waves?



ContrailKing
10-03-2004, 02:46 AM
Hi guys,

The new waves in Pacific Fighters look truly special - but as they're made using Shader Model 3.0, which is exclusively used by NVIDIA's new 6800 series of cards, will ATI users get to see the same effect? Is there going to be a version of these new waves created for Shader Model 2.0?

While I'm asking hardware related questions, can anybody give me an indication about how well PF will perform? I'd guess that it performs even better than FB, as most of the action takes place over relatively simple seascapes?

ContrailKing
10-03-2004, 02:46 AM
Hi guys,

The new waves in Pacific Fighters look truly special - but as they're made using Shader Model 3.0, which is exclusively used by NVIDIA's new 6800 series of cards, will ATI users get to see the same effect? Is there going to be a version of these new waves created for Shader Model 2.0?

While I'm asking hardware related questions, can anybody give me an indication about how well PF will perform? I'd guess that it performs even better than FB, as most of the action takes place over relatively simple seascapes?

Extreme_One
10-03-2004, 06:34 AM
1st Q - apparantly not http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

2nd Q - yes IMO it does perform better for the reasons you prescribe to it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ContrailKing
10-03-2004, 08:07 AM
Doh, please say it ain't so! Don't they realise that around 50% of all gamers use ATI cards? And that when it comes to pixel shaders, ATI whip NVIDIA in regards to performance?

Slick750
10-03-2004, 09:03 AM
The tide has turned...I think ATI shoulda put PS 3.0 in their new cards.

Heavy_Weather
10-03-2004, 11:58 AM
they will, you'll see http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

VW-IceFire
10-03-2004, 12:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ContrailKing:
Doh, please say it ain't so! Don't they realise that around 50% of all gamers use ATI cards? And that when it comes to pixel shaders, ATI whip NVIDIA in regards to performance? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I figured it'd be like that anyways. The new X800 generation still uses PS2.0. The new shader 3.0 stuff is pretty neat and this is one of those ways that you can take advantage of it.

Consider however that most people will not have a rig capable of running it. I see the new water as two things. Firstly, its probably a trial run of the types of effects to be used in Battle of Britain. Secondly, only a small number of people have the advanced CPU/GPU to handle this. It'll still look bloody amazing on Perfect mode...just not quite as good.

Remember that when FB came out, a very small number of people could run Perfect mode water. A whole lot of people still can't...this is the next level above even that.

This sort of thing is cutting edge...its great to see it there. I'm sure its part of what they have planned for BoB and it was a great way to test out a new technology in action.

tHeBaLrOgRoCkS
10-03-2004, 12:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ContrailKing:
Doh, please say it ain't so! Don't they realise that around 50% of all gamers use ATI cards? And that when it comes to pixel shaders, ATI whip NVIDIA in regards to performance? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah but that also means that 50% don't doesn't it ? Case of glass half empty or half full me thinks. I dont think your gona have much time to stare at the water when PF comes out anyhow.

KevinTheFruitBat
10-03-2004, 03:50 PM
I read somewhere that shader model 3.0 doesn't create new effects, it is just more efficient and therefore faster at producing certain effects.
It must be true... I read it on the internet!

PriK
10-03-2004, 04:17 PM
Yeah, shader 3.0 isn't a fancy new effect you flip some hardware switch for it's a means for making much more complex shaders (programmed effects) using less strain on the GPU and CPU.

So it's not that it's impossible for ATI cards to do the effect just that it would take up too much in the way of resources. ATI will likely catch up with their next batch of cards but right now it seems the pendulum has swung Nvidia's way.

Hunter82
10-03-2004, 04:30 PM
To enable a larger die size to use PS3.0 does not make sense currently as it creates too much heat...which is why so many Nvidia users currently are having issues with some of these cards and graphical errors resulting in many to have to underclock their cards if enough ventilation is not available.

Think of it this way PS 3.0 and Nvidia equals the current Intel problems with Prescott and LGA 775 systems. Large power consumption and much greater heat creating unstable environments.

Hey I could care lesss what cards people buy, I sell them both. Personally I think PS 3.0 is one generation too soon and they were not ready to deal with the other issues the same as Intel did earlier this year. SO you don't think I'm an ATI fanboy I think they made a big mistake hedging all their bets on PCI Express and not getting enough cards out to the end user.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PriK:
Yeah, shader 3.0 isn't a fancy new effect you flip some hardware switch for it's a means for making much more complex shaders (programmed effects) using less strain on the GPU and CPU.

So it's not that it's impossible for ATI cards to do the effect just that it would take up too much in the way of resources. ATI will likely catch up with their next batch of cards but right now it seems the pendulum has swung Nvidia's way. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hunter82
10-03-2004, 04:32 PM
And to answer the first question it's can be programmed to use those types of waves in the ATI environment using PS 2.0b

-HH-Quazi
10-03-2004, 05:08 PM
And I bet some folks are actually considering switching to Nvidia to play PF with PS 3.0

steve_v
10-03-2004, 05:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunter82:
And to answer the first question it's can be programmed to use those types of waves in the ATI environment using PS 2.0b <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
YEA! http://home.earthlink.net/~viner45/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/553.gif

LEXX_Luthor
10-03-2004, 05:20 PM
I hope I never see advanced waves on my ATI. Only pond water reflects like the screenshots.

mmm, maybe pond water can even reflect the top deck of ships too, mmm

Obi_Kwiet
10-03-2004, 06:08 PM
I heard somewhere that ATI was going to give PS 3.0 support through their drivers, which is not as fast is having it dirictly in the hard ware, but still works. Any truth in this?

DJKruse
10-03-2004, 06:21 PM
Correct me if Im wrong, but I think that's impossible.

adlabs6
10-03-2004, 06:24 PM
I'm not up at all on how shaders or effects work in the code world. But I have noticed that FS2004 has a really basic water effect that reflects the sky color, shimmers, and shines pretty good and even animates in a basic way. Also, this water is fully usable at a nice framerate on my PC.

For me, even though it's really a simple effect, it looks better than the flat blue water picture like LOMAC and FB seem give on low settings. I wish something like this could be included in PF for those using lower settings.

ContrailKing
10-04-2004, 02:27 AM
I wonder if they will implement similar waves using Pixel Shader 2.0b? It appears that using this method, ATI cards can render effects equal to that of Shader Model 3.0, but much faster than NVIDIA can render SM3.0.

Or did the devs get a nice little payout from NVIDIA not to do this http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Jasko76
10-04-2004, 02:41 AM
KING -

YOu might have a point here. Why jump from PS 1.3 to 3.0 directly, skipping PS 2.0 and thousands of Radeon 9500/9700/9800/X800 users that would benefit from it?

Anyway - I'm really glad that nVIDIA and ATi are exchanging punches again. FX-line was porked and never a match for R3XX-series of GPUs. In the end, we all benefit from their attempts to better eachother.

Vassago5k
10-04-2004, 08:51 AM
If ATI tried to make PS 3.0 possible in software (drivers), it would run horribly slow. You probably wouldn't get more than 10-15fps at most.

And no, it isn't possible to do these waves with PS 2.0. PS3.0 allows the user to create infinite strings for their shaders, which 2.0 doesn't allow. It also has many other features that make it stand out greatly above 2.0 technology.

As far as Nvidia heating goes - I haven't experience a single problem with my GT card. The only time it crashed, is when I o/c'd the card to above ULTRA specs. At that rate, it was running 1600x1200x32 @ 4xAA and 8xAF, around 50fps, with trackIR running. Not bad, but locking up defeats the purpose http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

At stock speeds, I'll run the card @ 1024x768x32, 4xAA 4xAF w/trackIR and still get around 65-75fps.

VFA-195 Snacky
10-04-2004, 11:28 AM
Who was the genius at 1C Maddox who decided to exclude the most popular video cards on the market? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Lunix
10-04-2004, 11:35 AM
Its shader model 3.0 that pacific fighters is using. This allows vertex shaders to do texture lookups. As far as I know ATI does not give its vertex shaders, as powerfull as they are, the power to do texture lookups. This texture lookup thing is the reason NVIDIA can run the whole 32x0 architecture and is very NVIDIA specific.

ContrailKing
10-05-2004, 01:54 AM
****, suddenly PF doesn't look quite as compelling as I'd first imagined =(

Still, I'll probably end up purchasing it anyway.

choxaway
10-05-2004, 04:01 AM
Are any sample pictures of each shader version's water effects available that could be posted side by side for comparison? It would then be easier to judge whether it's worth making the change from Ati to Nvidia, assuming budgets allow.
I'm pleased with my 9800Pro but can't help thinking I might seriously want the extra eye candy if I'm to be flying over (or into!) lots of nicely rendered waves - no don't tempt me . . .
And will shader version 3 affect anything else in the game - or perhaps, more importantly, BoB next year?

Jasko76
10-05-2004, 07:27 AM
Choxaway -

You will need a new gfx card for the BoB if you want to enjoy it in all it's glory. But for PF? Nah, stick with your 9800!

If you wish to see how this old fighter stacks against newer cards, go to tomshardware.com and check out the latest test of past and current cards. The 9800Pro does very well, imho!

Here's a link: http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041004/index.html

RedDeth
10-05-2004, 11:00 AM
to answer someones earlier question if someone buys a 6800 card then they have the basics to make it work and can fly in perfect mode easily also in PF.

another stated the 6800s run too hot. i bought a 6800 GT which states it needs only a 300 watt power source and it doesnt heat up my system . maybe the ultra would but the GT has 98 percent of the speed so its just fine

most computers now and certainly every new computer bought can run PF in perfect mode on a 6800 card.

you can also buy the base model 6800 with 128 megs ramm and it has the 3.0 shaders and its only 275 bucks.

finally PF isnt snubbing ATI users who are half the market. PF is integrating new technology to use if you buy cards with the same ability.

its up to you to decide whether you want to buy a card with the tech to handle PF. if not you can still play the game fine with great graphics in perfect mode.

the answer is simple if you want the super cool shading that makes the water look REAL then put your ati card up on ebay and buy NVIDIA.

crazyivan1970
10-05-2004, 11:21 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Chivas
10-05-2004, 04:30 PM
I recently upgraded my 9800Pro to a 6800 GT OC for a few reasons. One was I missed the Nvidia Digital Vibrance setting that really brought FB to life. IMHO... I was never able to recreate that effect with my ATI cards.

JG27_Arklight
10-16-2004, 05:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ContrailKing:
****, suddenly PF doesn't look quite as compelling as I'd first imagined =(

Still, I'll probably end up purchasing it anyway. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


You were going to buy PF for the water?

lol

JG27_Arklight
10-16-2004, 05:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chivas:
I recently upgraded my 9800Pro to a 6800 GT OC for a few reasons. One was I missed the Nvidia Digital Vibrance setting that really brought FB to life. IMHO... I was never able to recreate that effect with my ATI cards. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Ditto.

The digital vibrance settings are great. As each day passes I wonder more and more why I bought an ATI card. This 6800GT I have kicks my 9800XTs ***.

Marek_Steele
10-16-2004, 05:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ContrailKing:
Doh, please say it ain't so! Don't they realise that around 50% of all gamers use ATI cards? And that when it comes to pixel shaders, ATI whip NVIDIA in regards to performance? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Things just turned now, nvidia didn't support shaders 2.0 by spec because they told could do the same with their proprietary ps "1.4" in less passes, but in practice, instead of a specific nv 1.4 path, most games forced the fx series to run in pure dx9 ps 2.0 mode where they weren't up to a job they weren't supposed to do, altough compatible, they had to do a lot more passes.
Now they returned with 3.0, by the same way ati marketing bashed nvidia's lack of native support for 2.0 (they have it since r300, but at that time almost nothing used them, but still 955/9700 remain very capable today), now they try to say that 3.0 has no importance. This will be true for a while, as it was with nvidia fx's performing decently in the beggining, but with the advent of true 2.0 games (doom3 doesn't count, as it uses nv35 path for the fx series), they started to get really behind, there aren't still that many 2.0 games today, but if major companies do the jump from 1.1 to 3.0, ati will be in serious trouble (I guess in the last roadmad there was already a hurried chip with it's support). This proved to be deadly for nvidia in the past, and it will surelly be with ati, but unlike then (when most users didn't even have shaders), shader 3.0 is starting to be applied right now.
Shaders or not, GL support on nvidia cards has almost always been much faster unlike d3d, maybe this will change in gl 1.4, who knows...

james_ander
10-16-2004, 08:52 AM
I have been considering upgrading to a 6800 GT but I am waiting to see how it soes when PF comes out. My current system is P4 2.8 1G PC3200 RAM, 9800 pro.

With my current setup, I can run perfect mode, but my rig doesn't have quite enough muscle to run it all the time with the fps I want. So I end up turning it off.

How does the 6800GT handle perfect mode with AEP? Does it give good enough FPS to run perfect all the time?

Also, I am waiting to see whether the 6800GT will give good fps with the new water. If it gives nice water, but good for screen shots only, then it's not worth it to me. If I end up turning the water off anyway, then I will stick with the 9800 pro. If it gives good fps with everything maxed out, then it's a no brainer.

Daytraders
10-16-2004, 11:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>One was I missed the Nvidia Digital Vibrance setting that really brought FB to life. IMHO... I was never able to recreate that effect with my ATI cards <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

what is Digital Vibrance setting and have you got any screenshots to show it exactly thx

WUAF_Badsight
10-16-2004, 12:52 PM
boy ATI users can be really snobby

my old GF4 Ti4200 has been the most stable , most reliable GPU ive ever owned

& ATI cards , until recently , never had the same quality in colour the Nvidea had

it seems like the same deal with people running AMD based computers because they dont like Intel http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

WUAF_Badsight
10-16-2004, 12:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Daytraders:
what is Digital Vibrance setting and have you got any screenshots to show it exactly thx <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Digital Vibrance boosts your colors

untill recently ATI didnt have a counterpart setting , & because they run with 24 bit colour , Nvidea cards had nicer looking colour

now ATI also have the ability to alter colour in the the setting panel similer to what Nvidea user were able to do

1.JaVA_Razer
10-16-2004, 03:34 PM
@ badsight:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
boy ATI users can be really snobby

my old GF4 Ti4200 has been the most stable , most reliable GPU ive ever owned
& ATI cards , until recently , never had the same quality in colour the Nvidea had

it seems like the same deal with people running AMD based computers because they dont like Intel

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I fail to see why ATi users are snobs. I used both ATi and Nvidia and like ATI more then Nvidia for a number of reasons,
1) Cheaper, my 9800PRO cost less then a 6800GT or a FX so I bought that one.
2) Performance , the 9800 I have outperforms almost any card of his generation except the XT version.
3) smaller, the 9800 was the only card that fitted into my rig. If I wanted a 6800 or FX then I need to remove a HD

Also, ATi users are not complaining about being left out. I don't care about SM 3.0 but the fact is as some said the technology might not be up to it yet.

Nvidia's 6800 ULTRA's need 2 molex connectors, 480 WATTS of power (adviced by Nvidia) and run hot as hell.
GT's are cooler indeed, and don't cost as much true, but then again the X800 pro will whip GT in some test and vice versa.

Personally I need to go with ATI's point of vieuw.
SM3 is just more efficient then SM 2.0 but SM 3 isn't mature enough I think because the cards running it are hotheaded power hogs ( 6800ULTRA) which take up way to much space in my case.

now, I have no problems with SM 3.0 being used in PF but I don't like it when people go for the better sounding idea when the other hasn't been streched to it's lilits yet, not even come close to it's limits.

Same like AGP vs PCI express.

I'll buy PCI express sure, but we haven't even come close to the transfer limit of the AGP slots and we are implementing a new technology.


And a little sidenode on the AMD vs Intel reply of you, I bought my AMD because it was cheaper, better at 3D applications and all I needed.

No one buy's something because they don't "like" the other brand if you do that you'r a A-classe moron.

WUAF_Badsight
10-16-2004, 04:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 1.JaVA_Razer:
I fail to see why ATi users are snobs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
lately i dont at all


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 1.JaVA_Razer:
No one buy's something because they don't "like" the other brand <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
really ? . . . . . i see lots of people posting otherwise

RedDeth
10-16-2004, 04:42 PM
james ander i have less of processor than you and i can run perfect mode in 6800 GT with constant average fps of about 70. it varies from 55 to 95.

always.

Willey
10-16-2004, 05:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vassago5k:
And no, it isn't possible to do these waves with PS 2.0. PS3.0 allows the user to create infinite strings for their shaders, which 2.0 doesn't allow. It also has many other features that make it stand out greatly above 2.0 technology. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If those SH3 waves can be rendered with just PS 2.0, those PF waves should ne no problem.

http://www.silent-hunteriii.com/ss/bogue_stern_shot.jpg

I think it's some kind of marketing. Flight simmers usually put more bucks into hardware and stuff like Pedals, Track IR, big CRT and so on. They try to catch customers that buy their Card instead of ATI's. PF will be the first game that uses PS 3.0 AFAIK, I just know Far Cry 1.2 otherwise and AFAIK it's not out yet. Dunno about Doom‚¬≥ right now, but I think it still has just PS 2.x.

Rogodin
10-17-2004, 12:17 AM
I've never like Digital Vibrance on any of my Nvidia cards (just not accurate representation of color AT ALL).

I'm not worried about the difference of vertex shaders between 2.0and3.0 on a game where only the screenshot guys might POSSIBLY notice a difference (and by the time it's playabe, PF, @ 1600x1200, perfect, FullAA FullAF-the 6800 will be $120Retail).

Rogo

F19_Orheim
10-17-2004, 02:20 AM
hmmmm I am amazed the Watereffects are more important for a few than XXX new flyable planes, new theatre, Carrier operations etc ect etc........

VW-IceFire
10-17-2004, 08:02 AM
I think everyone forgot that Water=2 is still enough to bring most peoples computers to a dead crawl. Nevermind the super advanced level 3.

PF_Coastie
10-17-2004, 08:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RedDeth:
james ander i have less of processor than you and i can run perfect mode in 6800 GT with constant average fps of about 70. it varies from 55 to 95.

always. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can do that too with my 9800 non pro. That statement means nothing without further explanation.

What are your AA/Aniso settings?
What resolution?
What forest/water settings?
What IQ settings on your card?
What map?
How many planes?
How much AAA?
Over large cities?
In CP or out of cockpit?


I could go on for another 2 pages. The bottom line is that IQ is in the eyes of the beholder. Your idea of great IQ may make someone else wanna puke!

Get my point?