The card that will make Doom 3 take it in the ass

[NiGHTMARE]

[noob]plonker said:
acording to my source its only a 9700 pro with difernt drivers

Although I know virtually nothing about the complexities of 3D cards, I can tell you that the 9800 has several new hardware features.

Here they are, though I can't tell you exactly what they all mean ;)

- support for new DirectX 9 features

- extra transistors for true 128-bit floating point values (previous cards rounded bits after 96 to 128, but now all 128 bits are calcualted - this means improved colour quality for complex shading calculations)

- F-buffer (reduces number of calculations needed on the frame buffer, and allows RGB and Alpha channels to all be stored seperately, resulting in improved handling of translucency)

- improved Smartshader and Smoothvision (enhances the speed and flexibility of the shaders, as well as the card's general efficiency)

- Hyper Z III updated to Hypder Z III+, with a bigger cache, and better optimisations (meaning that shadow volumes are rendered much more efficiently )


Finally, here are some Radeon Benchmark scores. Note that these all come from barcharts, so I may be slightly off in some cases ;)

UT 2003 (1600x1200, 2xAA, 8xAF)
- 9500 Pro: 52 fps
- 9700 Pro: 76 fps
- 9800 Pro: 88 fps

Serious Sam 2 (1600x1200, 2xAA)
- 9500 Pro: 41 fps
- 9700 Pro: 59 fps
- 9800 Pro: 65 fps

3DMark 2001 (1600x1200, 2xAA, 8xAF)
- 9500 Pro: 5 marks
- 9700 Pro: 8 marks
- 9800 Pro: 9 marks

Interestingly, the 9800 runs slightly faster than the GeForce FX5800 at lower resolutions, but slightly slower at high resolutions.

[Alientank]

Nightmare that is until you turn on AA and AF. I swear the FX HATES AA and AF because it slows down big time. The FX has a higher fill rate though.

[NiGHTMARE]

Alientank: check these benchmarks:

UT 2003 (1024x768, 2xAA, 0xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 201 fps
- FX 5800 Ultra: 190 fps

UT 2003 (1600x1200, 2xAA, 0xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 100 fps
- FX 5800 Ulta: 170 fps

Aquanox (1024x768, 2xAA, 0xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 89 fps
- FX 5800 Ulta: 78 fps

Aquanox (1600x1200, 2xAA, 0xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 45 fps
- FX 5800 Ulta: 50 fps


See, even with AA and AF remaining the same, the 9800 is faster at a lower resolution, and the FX 5800 is (much, in UT 2003's case) faster at a higher resolution... though obviously this isn't the case in all games/benchmarks.

Another thing I've noticed: While the 9800 thrashes the FX 5800 in almost every setting in 3DMark 2001 (the only one it doesn't is 1600x1200, 2xAA, 8xAF, but even then the FX only beats it by 0.1 marks) and in most settings in many games, in Serious Sam 2 and CodeCreatures, it's the other way around.

[Alientank]

NiGHTMARE said:

Alientank: check these benchmarks:

UT 2003 (1024x768, 2xAA, 0xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 201 fps
- FX 5800 Ultra: 190 fps

UT 2003 (1600x1200, 2xAA, 0xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 100 fps
- FX 5800 Ulta: 170 fps

Aquanox (1024x768, 2xAA, 0xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 89 fps
- FX 5800 Ulta: 78 fps

Aquanox (1600x1200, 2xAA, 0xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 45 fps
- FX 5800 Ulta: 50 fps


See, even with AA and AF remaining the same, the 9800 is faster at a lower resolution, and the FX 5800 is (much, in UT 2003's case) faster at a higher resolution... though obviously this isn't the case in all games/benchmarks.

Another thing I've noticed: While the 9800 thrashes the FX 5800 in almost every setting in 3DMark 2001 (the only one it doesn't is 1600x1200, 2xAA, 8xAF, but even then the FX only beats it by 0.1 marks) and in most settings in many games, in Serious Sam 2 and CodeCreatures, it's the other way around.

1) No one uses 2x aa and 0x af. Go on...put 4x aa and 8x af, the standard most use. You'll see.

[Radea`]

Nightmare,

The FX is practically doing nothing at 2X FSAA. Its practically doing nothing at 4X FSAA as well. Give it some 6XS, where it finally breaks above ATI's 2X in jaggy removal, and you've lost all your performance.

[NiGHTMARE]

I haven't got any benchmarks which should higher AA, but I have got some which show higher AF, and the FX 5800 still runs slower at low resolutions but faster at higer ones:

UT 2003 (1024x768, 2xAA, 8xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 184 fps
- FX 5800 Ultra: 181 fps

UT 2003 (1600x1200, 2xAA, 8xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 85 fps
- FX 5800 Ulta: 101 fps

Aquanox (1024x768, 2xAA, 8xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 76 fps
- FX 5800 Ulta: 75 fps

Aquanox (1600x1200, 2xAA, 8xAF)
- 9800 Pro: 37 fps
- FX 5800 Ulta: 43 fps

[Radea`]

Nightmare, those are probably the aggresive mode AF benches. When the 5800 Ultra actually does AF w/ trilinear, its performance goes away, and your left with 1/2 the performance of a R9800Pro.

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDU2

There's a whole article for you. FX gets pwned.



There's a UT2003 1600x1200 graph for you. I dont know where your getting your information from, but all sites I've read have the 9800 Pro & 9700 Pro (With new drivers) pwning the FX.

[Alientank]

Radea proved me right :D the only thing the FX has on the ATI 97 and 9800 is massive fill rate.

[NailGunner]

Son of a motherless goat; you guys are getting me lusting after buying another GPU. Must stay the course...must not spend any more money...

[Alientank]

And here are the speakers I'm buying. 6.1 sound and 600 watts power beotches.

[Goat]

NailGunner said:

Son of a motherless goat;

that wouldnt be me i know my mom

[Fletcher`]

Alientank said:

And here are the speakers I'm buying. 6.1 sound and 600 watts power beotches.

http://images2.newegg.com/productimage/36-116-127-02.JPG

That's biatches and where the hell are you gonna put that thing?

[Alientank]

ravage said:

That's biatches and where the hell are you gonna put that thing?

Sub under my desk, front channel speaker mounted infront of me on the ceiling, left front speaker on wall to left, right front speaker on wall to right, rear channel speaker drilled to ceiling behind me, rear left speaker mounted to wall, rear right speaker mounted to wall.

[NailGunner]

Goat said:

that wouldnt be me i know my mom

As do I. Sorry, didn't mean to offend...:)

Cool speaker setup, A-tank. 600 watts is quite a bit of ass; I know the Klipch 4.1's I'm running knock pretty hard, so I can only guess what those will yield.

[Alientank]

NailGunner said:
600 watts is quite a bit of ass;

o_0

I know the Klipch 4.1's I'm running knock pretty hard, so I can only guess what those will yield.

Yea I can't wait to try them out it should kick some major ass.

[aca]

Is there any point of posting pictures of what we are claiming to buy for Doom 3?

[Alientank]

Yes. When I get my system built I'll post a whole bunch of screens of it as well as benchmarks etc.

[Shaviro]

Alientank said:

Yes. When I get my system built I'll post a whole bunch of screens of it as well as benchmarks etc.

Yeah, I really can't wait. I TOTALLY care about your future system. <---sarcasm

Don't bother to post those screens in here. This is a forum for discussing everything Doom 3 Tech related. If you get a new computer and feel like bragging about it, go to "Everything Else"! This is not the place for it.

[Alientank]

Shaviro said:

Yeah, I really can't wait. I TOTALLY care about your future system. <---sarcasm

Don't bother to post those screens in here. This is a forum for discussing everything Doom 3 Tech related. If you get a new computer and feel like bragging about it, go to "Everything Else"! This is not the place for it.

Umm as I recall the thread turned into talking about a discussion between cards and playing Doom 3 so it's on topic kthxbye

[Shaviro]

Alientank said:

Umm as I recall the thread turned into talking about a discussion between cards and playing Doom 3 so it's on topic kthxbye

I was referring to whenever you got a new computer.

[Alientank]

Shaviro said:

I was referring to whenever you got a new computer.

Yes well let's try to keep this on topic

[BlueBeast]

For all who care... and even those who don't...



http://maximumpc.com/features/feature_2003-03-05.html


Specs and Benchmarks... ps pray the 256MB '9800'
comes out before DOOM3 i want it, BAD Just My humble opinion..

[sniperfrommars1]

Blah. Just more crap benchmarks. Check out hard ocps review of the card much nicer. And Im not linking to it Im too goddamned lazy

[pritch]

Alientank said:

And here are the speakers I'm buying. 6.1 sound and 600 watts power beotches.

[img]http://images2.newegg.com/productimage/36-116-127-02.JPG[img]

Heh, that's pretty 1337.

I got a 400 watt 5.1 system for $50, but I can't really put the speakers in ideal places in here.

[SupremeGeneral]

All I know is my Graphix card sucks, and so does my computer. I want 2000 dollars for a new one!!!!! (Cries)

Supreme General

[Naked Snake]

Yeah, thanks bucko, for bumping the nearly 1 month old thread. Did you even look at the FAQ?

[Fredrik]

BBG said:

Yeah, thanks bucko, for bumping the nearly 1 month old thread.

Does it matter? It's not like this forum's very active anyway.

[gatewatcher]

But, OMG, 9800 isn't at the top anymore... We have to let Alientank know, so he can get the new FX! This was a purposeful bump =)

[Radea`]

Too bad not *all* of the cheating info has leaked to the public yet. Just you wait ;)

[Alientank]

gatewatcher said:

But, OMG, 9800 isn't at the top anymore... We have to let Alientank know, so he can get the new FX! This was a purposeful bump =)

Way ahead of ya