Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Radea`

  • Rank
    Green Marine
  1. Radea`

    Is nVidia betting on the wrong horse?

    Im curious as to what used ideas its taking :)
  2. Radea`

    Is nVidia betting on the wrong horse?

    Sure, Carmack mentions how floating point can (Granted, very smally) impact the look of the shader, which is originally an INT-based shader for DX8 cards, used to reduce the ammount of rendering passes from that of the DX7 cards (Which still look *nearly* identical). Doom's codebase is still based arround DX7, with added performance benefit (The visual benefit is barely realized) of DX8 and DX9 shaders. (DX9 being nearly pointless unless you run a R3x0-based card, since the perf. hit is non-existent). Now Source engine's codebase is built around DX8-level technology, with added DX9 benefits for image quality rather than performance reasons. It doesnt mean Doom looks bad, it just means Source, technically using a more advanced engine, heavily dependant on DX8-level and DX9-level technology. Now replace the DX8 and DX9 terms with fixed function/integer shaders and programmable/floating point shaders. And to comment on shaders in the Quakecon interview, he isnt exactly talking about the same type of shader...
  3. Radea`

    Is nVidia betting on the wrong horse?

    Funny. Thats the exact opposite of everything I have seen on Doom (Even Beyond3D's most prevalent members are saying the exact same thing I am). Now What I beleive is the only prevalent use of shaders in doom is to reduce the number of rendering passes, while the code base itself is "DX7-hardware"-level. Do you have any sources to proove me wrong? :)
  4. Radea`

    Is nVidia betting on the wrong horse?

    So your telling me Doom3 isnt based on simple "DirectX 7"-generation effects (Yes I know its OpenGL) like fixed function dot-3 shading, perpixel lighting done without HDR lightsources, and simple dot-3 at that? Honestly, Doom requires "DirectX 7" generation cards to run nearly everything, it just requires them to be really fast. Its using brute force methods for the majority of the engine, and no matter how you look at it the source engine is using a more modern way of rendering, using HDR and heavy use of shaders. Again, I fail to see where doom rendering is dependant on shaders? It really only uses one for the lighting, which is hardly affected by FP anyway. It may look good, but I think we have opposite philosophies on this. Im more interested in the technical aspect of how its acceived than how it looks :)
  5. Radea`

    Is nVidia betting on the wrong horse?

    Uhm? Doom using more advanced technology than the Source engine? Its not the NV30's poor OGL support, rather it's poor FP-shader support (Due to having a combination of FP & INT units in its pipeline). How many shaders is Doom upto now? 1? Thought so. And FPP ('DX9'-level shading) masssivly affects this one shader, right? (No, im being sarcastic) Im sorry, The source engine is much more advanced compared to doom in just about every way mentionable, excluding the lighting. (Though it does support soft shadows, but to what degree I am uncertain). Doom 3 hardly is a step forward, the only thing it really brings to the table is efficient use of stencil-shadows. Yes, I realize my confidence in the doom engine has taken a '180' since more details on the source engine have been released.
  6. Radea`

    Physics in Doom3

    Except for the pointy heads ;), but that doesnt bother me :P
  7. Radea`

    Physics in Doom3

    Anything support T&L, but Im not sure if the 7000 (RV100 core) does support T&L; ATI may have ripped it out (Cant remember :/) I dont think Doom will be as demanding as everything thinks it will be either. There are tradeoff's being made, instead of ultra-high polgygon counts we have ultra-realistic lighting, and so on. Even HL2's renderer seems like it will be more demanding.
  8. Radea`

    Yet another shadows question

    No. Thats the rendering technique for shadow volumes in general. If its not done that way, its not known as shadow volumes.
  9. Radea`

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

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

    Doom 3 as a 3rd Person Survival Horror???

    But well over 100 years in human time spent on the game :)
  11. Radea`

    Yet another shadows question

    IIRC shadow volume's take place after the scene has been lit up. Then the shadows are applied to the scene, contrary to other shadowing methods. So I beleive Doom's engine does render everything whether or not its "covered by shadows", just because the shadows are the last thing to be rendered
  12. Radea`

    The NV35 Doom3 Advantage

    To be honest the only reason he's doing this for the new nVIDIA GPU's is because they have piss poor, almost non-existant floating point performance. Given the information gained on NV3x, it is now definite that the main performance increases come from 32FPP->FX12 (INT) instead of 32FPP->16FPP. Anyhow, I dont understand how one can say ATI actually "cheated". 2% is very modest compared to 24% (And considering more cheats were just found today, its a lot more with anisotropy).
  13. Radea`

    correct me if im wrong,

    Doom is using the full capabilities of DirectX-7-level hardware (Yes, I know its OpenGL), so thats GeForce256/ATI Radeon and up for minimum requirements. It was first presented at macworld on a GF3 :/
  14. Radea`

    8 GPUs compared using a current build of DOOM3

    I dont feel like posting much, but let me say this ;) nVIDIA had specific Doom3 optimized drivers, ATI did not. ATI did not even know that this was going on, and when attempting to contact id about this matter, they were told to see nVIDIA. That is all.. Edit: Might as well read this ET article, it tells of just the beginning of what we will found out with NV35 & CHEATING!! http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1086025,00.asp Here's a Beyond3D one for you as well, http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5833
  15. Radea`

    w00t! 1200 MHZ FSB speeds. 2.4C canterwood review

    Yeah, they arent bad :). I just ordered a 1700+ tbred ($50 :) ), It should be here on Friday. Im hoping for 2400MHz :P :) Edit: As for the video card bottleneck, well yeah. Any card at launch should be limiting Doom3's frame rates, not the CPU. Remember, this isnt the Unreal engine here, Mr. Carmack usually puts out engines that are coded correctly :).