HL2 30% faster on ATi

[Bigjakkstaffa]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/535/535268p1.html

I was reading this otherwise unremarkable article until i came to this:

Doug specifically stated that the ATI x800 was the card of choice amongst many of the testers, as it ran roughly about 30% faster than Nvidia's best cards.

At which point i remarked "eh?" outloud. If this comment were being made as a comparison of the FX and R3xx then it would have been unremarkable as we all know that the FX is going to struggle under HL2's DX9 path, however if by "latest card" they are referring to the NV40, then something is seriously wrong in my mind.

While the R420 series are the consistently faster of the two in D3D applications it tends to only be by marginal numbers. While we all knew HL2 would favour ATi just as Doom III has favoured nV, looking at the NV40's hardware and performance across a range of applications and the fact that the HL2 engine isnt that big a system hog, i cant see how the R420 would be 30% faster...

Still, we'll find out in due time no doubt in a flurry of press releases, but at present im thoroughly bemused.

--Jakk:t

[Someone Stupid]

It is designed to the architecture of the card (x800) more as Gabe does have a rather large monkey (ATi) on his back that he needs off of it (he did ink that deal with lies and ATi was his preferred company anyway). Just as Carmack built his engine around nVidia, Gabe did with ATi. I'm sure cash played a part in both. OGL played a major part for iD while D9 did factor in for Valve, both companies (at least used to) run it rather well after patches from nvida (which are arguable, but they at least brought the cards up together speedwise R3x and NV3x). The 6800 will either runs FP16 or FP32, it doesn't like running FP24 (Shadermark test failures prove this). HL2 is FP24, SM2.0 all the way. 2.0b and 3Dc already built in and enabled so your not seeing patchwork Crytek benches which is pretty much the only standard to measure D9 until HL2 comes out. And as we all know, in D9, one game doesn't mean squat seeing how many engines are out there. OGL is a bit easier.

Just as Crytek was (is) getting a bit of heat as people learned that a lot of the botched nvidia and crytek SM3.0 release was proven BS after someone cracked it for ATi's (just set it to reconze ATi's as nvidia and boom instance speed increase in the same areas for ATi's). They now (I think) are unlocking the SM2.x branching if they didnt' already for ATi (after claiming it wouldn't work). There is still some 3.0 code, but now the differences aren't nearly as much in terms of gains from SM3.0. Nvidia was leaning hard on them, and they wanted to at least start playing with SM3.0 codepaths as they will be needed and are more universal than 3Dc which is only on ATi. The fact that HDR is only able to be ran on SM3.0 pathways is odd (though it seems they coded it to only run SM3.0 yet the game was 2.0? - this one hasn't been overcome and I'm not a coder so I can't tell you why they chose to do that) as both brands support it even at 2.0 levels. Again, probably some leaning. So 3Dc is now pushed back to the next patch which will be after they fix the current one. What a mess.

Gaming and video cards is now like politicians and campaign contributions. Can't say I'm surprised. You have your two parties and you have your two polarities supporting them. I just hope that it doesn't become polar opposites for the cards with one doing 30 percent better or more in D9 per se but dying in OGL or vice versa. Long as it doesn't go insane and the games work at least decent on both brands, I'm happy.

Right now ATi f'ed themselves over with never really focusing on OGL that much - SM 3.0 isn't really a big issue with die constraints and SM 2.0b's. Sure you are missing displacement mapping, but the NV4x many are speculating from see -pp hints still being used at times that it doesn't have the power to run SM3.0 at full tilt (only time will tell there). With everything Carmack was throwing into D3 and knowing how messed up the OGL driver is (if a 20% increase is possible easily, how much were they ignoring it?!?). That is ATi's fault for being blinded by their success. Not as bad as what happened with nVidia wit the FX as it was hardware related, but both companies seemed to have taken their hits "lately" from being too self confident in there abilities and it takes a reality check to wake them up - though nvidia still hasn't gotten an FM approved driver set through for the 6800's. Now you can see why I am choosing to wait to buy a card? :)

[Bigjakkstaffa]

Is HL2 FP24 only?

This could burst a lot of bubbles for advocates of NV's use of FP16 out there, who were expecting it to help even up performance in HL2, and with the NV40's SM3.0 implementation increasingly looking like its not going to do "a great deal more" for the NV40 performance wise, i suppose the figure does make sense.

Still, even with the architectural bias and differences while we all knew ATi would take HL2, i wasnt expecting a figure as high as 30%, particularly with Nv's improvments with SM2.0 performance.

Still, i wont take the figure as gospel until i see some benchies (and ones not from Anandtech).

--Jakk:t

[Someone Stupid]

It's near baseline SM2.0, so it's FP24 IIRC. It can be ran at partial precision as they already have an nvidia baseline that they are having to program for as well. Don't know if he was generous to nVidia with _pp hints or not as he has made a great deal of emphasis on IQ for the higher end cards at least, and playability on a full range. So I imagine FP16 is used, just he may have had it disabled for a 500 dollar card though, though the 5900 will still run it. Time will tell on that.

If it is taking advantage of FP32 then nvidia's implementation of it has been proven very weak until further review it seems. That is why I'd have to say FP24. Might have some extensions for nVidia, but with the 300 pound gorrilla of ATi to please after apparently screwing them in the HL2 R3x XT deal I doubt much in concessions to nVidia has been made.

[JediOfDarkness]

I'd bet that they're using the nVidia GeForce FX series cards, just like Doom 3 used Radeon R3xx cards to compare to the 6800's. It's just the fact that Valve has their hands stuck in ATI's pockets and Doom 3 has theirs in nVidia's. If you look at the recommened specs for Doom 3, the highest recommended ATI card is only the Radeon 9600. Once true benchamarks come out showing each cards actual preformance, I wouldn't take any of this seriously. I highly doubt that in ANY situation the X800's could take a 30% leap over the GeForce 6800's. And, OK, I'll admit that in most situations the X800 XT PE does take the lead over the GeForce 6800 Ultra, but you could never call that a leap, as it's only a couple fps at max.

[Vampiel]

I can forsee ATI having better benchmarks than NVIDIA for Half Life 2, but I really dont see it becoming a 30% figure, that just seems to much, unless they implemented an anti-nvidia bug in the game.

[JediOfDarkness]

Oh, I can see the ATI cards pulling out on top, sure. Just like nVidia's cards pull out on top in Doom 3. In Doom 3, even the GeForce 6800 Standard pulls ahead of the X800 Pro and scores right at the top with the X800 XT, at least in all the benchmarks I've seen. I would guess that it would be somewhere like that in HL2, that the X800 Pro would be able to beat out the 6800 GT, but I don't see the X800 Pro beating the 6800 Ultra, but it could happen. And I wouldn't put it past ATI to put an "anti-nvidia" bug in the game... might be fun to watch the chip manufacturers fight dirty :D

[stalkersoftware]

Stupid can you post some screen shots?
:t

[Someone Stupid]

I don't have the alpha, and the last shots I've seen of it were from last year when it was due to be released. You can find screens nearly everywhere, I don't have any bookmarked nor do I have the connection to do a search as my dialup is acting up so it's even slower than slow.

Last I saw it was around FarCry quality, a bit better IMO. But it has been awhile, so I could be wrong on that.

[Vampiel]

http://www.planethalflife.com/half-life2/screenshots/

Better than Far Cry but not quite past Doom3.

[too_much]

To be honest, I don't mind at all if it doesn't surpass Doom3... I like nice graphics yeah, but that doesn't mean you have to go on a bump-mapping rampage.

Look at Painkiller - To me, that game looked really nice and I think it was done on the UT2k3 engine (correct me if I'm wrong.) This is an area that I know very little about, but if HL2 looks good (as it will) and plays well (as I hope it will) then looking as good as Doom3 will be irrelevant to me :)

Also HL2 will have a lot more outdoor areas I assume, so matching Doom3's appearance would probably result in near unplayability for a lot of middle-spec users. It certainly will be interesting to find out :)

[Bigjakkstaffa]

Originally posted by stalkersoftware
Stupid can you post some screen shots?
:t

I would do, but games companies tend to come down like a ton of bricks on peopel who post screens of their unreleased work

--Jakk:t

[Vampiel]

Originally posted by too_much
To be honest, I don't mind at all if it doesn't surpass Doom3... I like nice graphics yeah, but that doesn't mean you have to go on a bump-mapping rampage.

Look at Painkiller - To me, that game looked really nice and I think it was done on the UT2k3 engine (correct me if I'm wrong.) This is an area that I know very little about, but if HL2 looks good (as it will) and plays well (as I hope it will) then looking as good as Doom3 will be irrelevant to me :)

Also HL2 will have a lot more outdoor areas I assume, so matching Doom3's appearance would probably result in near unplayability for a lot of middle-spec users. It certainly will be interesting to find out :)

I agree. I would take better gameplay and story anyday than graphics.

I havent played either one yet.

[Bigjakkstaffa]

HL2's graphic's dont appear as nice as Far Cry's or Doom III's, but there is a fundamental difference between HL2 and the latter two.

As nice as Far Cry and Doom III look they smack of "computer gameness", you can clearly tell your in a game despite the beauty of what your looking at. While HL2 may not look quite as spanky you do get a sense of "reality", thats not to say its photorealistic or anything, but that its easier to visuall relate to the real world. While this may be in part due to the fact that HL2 is rooted mainly in a modern city-scape, i reckon the titles such as Far Cry have gone "too far" in graphical polish, to the point that even something as easily relatable to as tropical islands/forests look "too polished" to be real. I suppose its a bit liek the current trend in movies to use colour-tinted lenses (for example there is a lot of green tint in the matrix movies), whiel this creates quite a visual impression, we (unless we've got sight defects or something) dont actually see the world around us in this manner.

Thats just my view of the direction gaming graphics are going, its seems to be getting to the point that visuals are becoming so powerful and impressive that in striving for realism, they are inadvertently becoming unrealistic as a result.

--Jakk:t

[Someone Stupid]

FarCry looked fine, just the cutscenes you could tell needed some polishing up. HL2 from what I've seen looks very good and does create a better sense of atmosphere. But then again, I've have several FPS shooters that are more than a bit beyond their day that give you a better feeling of where you are at than some new top titles. I still play those games and have quite a few which look better which don't get touched anymore. Graphics are great, but if it doesn't contribute to gameplay, it doesn't matter.

[too_much]

I'm bored of Doom3 already... honestly! You just have to keep doing the same things all the time.

Today I played "Final Doom" for about 3 hours - Now THAT'S entertainment ;)

I think I just want different things from my gaming to lots of people. I know friends of mine who will convince themselves that a game is great, and just play it through even if it is just another FPS deep down.

It's rare that a game hooks me like Theme hospital, dungeon keeper 2, Mafia, and Half Life did, and Doom3 certainly hasn't. It has the looks, but there's just something missing.

And yeah Jakk, there's something about it not feeling realistic that just spoils it, especially true with Doom3. I was one of the "ID Software brigade" and convinced myself that HL2 probably wouldn't be that great... but now I'm pretty excited about the latter ;)

[Bigjakkstaffa]

Originally posted by too_much

I think I just want different things from my gaming to lots of people. I know friends of mine who will convince themselves that a game is great, and just play it through even if it is just another FPS deep down.


Whiel i do quite like it, there does seem to be this massive iD fan-boy brigade out there that were adamant that this would be the greatest game ever and would far surpass Half-Life and Half-Life 2. Clearly it hasnt managed this, its still a solid and IMO enjoyable game worthy of anyones time, but it is by no means ground breaking or for that matter a HL (original) beater.

The iD fanboys seem to be having a hard time accepting this, there are more than a few over at planetdoom who sound more liek theyre trying to convince themselves the game is "revolutionary" and the outraged reaction to Gamespot only giving it 8.5 out of 10 says a lot. 85% is not a score to be looked down the nose at, but a lot of people out there seem to have been so pumped up about this game that theyre either having a hard time seeing its shortcomings, or trying to persuade themselves such shortcomings dont exist.

Still, that said, this is still a must play title for anyone into games and definitley one of the more entertaining titles of recent years, let down only really by the fact iD are still largely failing to keep pace with the evolving trends and nature of the genre they invented and even then its not a let down big enough to detract from the gameplay (though there is oen glaring gameplay flaw - replay wise the heavily scripted nature of DIII doesnt give it a very long shelf life, compared to the likes of Far Cry)

--Jakk:t

[JediOfDarkness]

Well, I was a huge fan of Half-Life, and I personaly don't think there will ever be a game that will even come close to the great gameplay that Half-Life brought to the gaming community. Doom 3, even though I don't have it yet, looks to be a great visual game, but I agree with some people that it seems as though it will lack something. But on that note, every game lacks SOMETHING. Half-Life 2 seems that it may "lack" in visual preformance compared to Doom 3, but I think Half-Life 2 will be one of the funnest games to play thats ever been created.

[too_much]

That's the thing though - What creates most excitement about games these days seems to be graphics. I realise that with modern technological advancements such as those seen seemingly every day, it's incredible to witness the graphical experiences available to us in more recent times - However, the focus seems to be becoming less on the gameplay, or at least that's how I see it.

What's all the excitement over STALKER so far? Graphics generally. The reason games like Half Life 1 and Doom2, and Dungeon Keeper 2 will stay on my hard drive for a lot longer than many new games around, is because they have entertainment value that far surpasses the vast majority of new titles.

The fact of the matter is that every genre is seemingly saturated to a point where it's almost impossible to come up with something unique and fresh. The Battlefield series knocked the wind out of me (metaphorically speaking :p) because of the diversity and freedom involved, and the fact that you could do so much of the things you'd wanted to do in many other FPS games... but this is rare.

Every game manufacturer is limited to saying "Well we'll make an FPS/Strategy/Adventure" or whatever, and thus they're immediately restricted with what they can do, to an extent, which is why so many modern games go to retail ignored, and make very little if any money. Half Life 2 will have to have far more than nice graphics, and I pray that it will, as far too many classics are being ruined by modern "eye candy" showpieces, like Unreal 2, and Deus Ex 2 *spit*.

I think I'm going off my point here so I'll round up - Doom3 looks nice, and yeah it's a good solid game with a lot of great features, but it all comes down to that something missing that you can't quite put your finger on... It's been a while since I was addicted to a game, and at this rate it's going to be a while longer...

Come on developers, stop trying to impress the benchmarkers, and create a story worth faking illness to stay home and play!

*edit* I had to add this, I just read the gamespot review on doom3, which I agree with to the most part, but this bit really caught my eye:

"you can't damage most objects you see and you can't manipulate them in any way. But they're all really, really pretty"

One of my biggest complaints about Doom3 is lack of destructible environment. Any feel of realism induced by the surroundings was spoiled by the fact that a shotgun blast to a computer monitor leaves a little black mark on it. Hardly anything moves, or falls over, or explodes, or gets damaged! I want to walk into boxes and see them move! Ho hum, to keep this on topic, I still think that one of the main reasons HL2 will perform so much better than doom as a whole(as opposed to the obvious ATi focus) is because iD software focused too much on graphics, while Valve may have put more time and thought into the value of the gameplay itself... Will people still be playing Doom3 in 4 years and talking about what a classic it is? I wonder....

[JediOfDarkness]

Well, I think that because it's "Doom" the game will live on for a while. You have to admit that the graphics for Doom 3 are amazing, so in that you can overlook some things that id may have overlooked, like the overall physics of the game. And, yes, if Half-Life 2 focuses on realism and add a very good storyline like the first game, then they will have a winner for sure. Just look at how well FarCry did. Crytek put a great physics engine in the game, and along with great AI and a good storyline the game took off. I just want to see some real benchmarks of HL2, as I want to see how much eye candy they really put into the game and what kinda systems will be able to run them.

[Bigjakkstaffa]

Yeah, STALKER worries me somewhat, as while it may look fantabidabidoso the whole storyline and plot of the game seems a bit basic. This coudl of course be down to the fact the official website is VERY poorly translated into english, but it doesnt inspire confidence.

Anyone see Thresh's Firing Squad's review of Doom 3 :eek:. Firingsquad have had a serious "love thang" goin on with iD for many years now, imagine my suprise when i read a review which started with the words "I'm dissapointed"... has the world gone mad?

In possibly one of the most bizarre reviews i have ever read, the guy basically moaned about the game for three pages solid, and still gave it a rating of 85%.

--Jakk:t

[too_much]

As it stands though, it's almost as if the designers chose "copy, paste surprise teleport imp" and randomly distributed it through the levels 100 times, then repeated the same for a closet zombie, a cacodemon floating up from the ground or down from the sky, or a ceiling-crawling demon. "surprise" my ***.


Ahahaha :D Spot on! Couldn't be more accurate if they tried, in my opinion ;)

[Someone Stupid]

Since I lost my saves I'm replaying and that is so damned true. And it is bloody annoying, should have just kept it at Marine because I'm getting hammered.

[stalkersoftware]

MAX payne was one of the original clasics, Really great! The physics and things you could distroy were pretty good!

I am willing to bet HL2 will be way better than any other game so far! :)

Stalker as in Stalker Shadows of chernoby?


Do you have a link to the D3 review you were talking about?

[Bigjakkstaffa]

http://www.firingsquad.com/games/doom_3_review/

--Jakk:t

[JediOfDarkness]

From what I've seen, the majority of reviews of Doom 3 are around 90-95%. I've seen a couple at 100%, but I don't ever pay attention to those as no game is a 100% perfect game. The lowest I've seen so far is 85% (firing squad). But I just got my GeForce 6800 GT, so I'm gonna buy Doom 3 here soon and rate it for myself. May love it, may hate it.

[too_much]

Giving a game 100% is nothing short of retarded, especially a game of Doom 3's calibre.

People are too biased due to hype, it annoys me.

Anyway, how can any game be 100% without any breasts in it? (and I don't mean fatso zombies or imps!)

[JediOfDarkness]

Originally posted by too_much
Anyway, how can any game be 100% without any breasts in it?

Well, PCGamer only gave "Singles: Flirt Up Your Life" a 60%, and that game is suppose to be the Cinemax version of "The Sims" :t

[jamil5454]

I don't own doom3, but I've played it. All I can say is that at first, you're wowed. After that, it's just another visit to the dentist. There's no real diversity in gameplay or environment. They could have made the game much better if the game wasn't trying to be "scary" the whole time, added vehicles of some sort, diversified the gameplay (are there any puzzels?), and added some more allies that can actually do something. HL2 takes care of all this, and I think HL2 is one of those games you're going to play again and again. It introduces many new elements to a story-driven FPS, like smart allies, engaging story (FarCry story sucked IMO), extremely interactive environment, and of course - the gravity gun.

I am rambling now so I'm gonna stop.

[Someone Stupid]

I have to agree, in replaying it, it has taken me much longer as D3 doesn't hold my interest that long. Maybe once I get back to where I was (Delta 3 or 4 IIRC) maybe it will get interesting again, but I'm not banking on it.

[Rabbitrunner51]

To me the AI has to have some sense of unpredictability and from what I have read from most of you and the reviews I read..Doom 3 was an overall very good game for effects and graphics..but the storyline ofr scripting fell a little short.....I do not think however that htis makes it a bad game or something other than spectacular..only the fact that it is what is is and does not pretense at pertraying something else....Its Doom 3 for petes sake...The original did not have any sense of storyline either and they wanted to make it this way more on purpose..
Jak is probalby right about ID as you know more about them than I..but some game makers are better at some things than others and it may take Id some more time to put more scripting and stroyline into a game..along with the AI and free-roaming gameplay strategies...

HL2 Will be more of a storyline and more free willing game and for that it will be more enjoyable for alot of people..including myself..

The game FarCry did more for me than any game ever..in that it set a new standard for AI and the graphics and the free to go anywhere and still arrive at the same point or current goal was just awesome and incredibly entertaining...and it has replay value.

I think we all as a community of gamers expect so much more from everything and there will always be some things that are left out..and thats too bad..but remember after you play a game and find the things you are missing...drop the folks at ID or whoever a line and let them know what you want and where...

I have to totally concur that it must be a gross overstaement ot say that a card will run anything at 30% faster....If so then show us the true numbers...unbiased with Nvidias people looking on..and don't hand us that ****...they must think we are stupid gamers and do not know the facts....

I will be that the game looks and runs just as good for the top of the line cards..on both sides..and who cares if something runs a few fraps better.....as long as it runs with out hiccups and looks decent enough....:eek: :rolleyes: :-@ :t

[too_much]

Man that's a lot of full stops :D

I agree with the last line though :)

[Rabbitrunner51]

Yeah I get winded and have viewpoints all right...

HA.. HA..:x :D )-|

[JediOfDarkness]

Yeah, as long as I get over 30fps in a game, I'm completely happy. As long as I'll be able to play HL2 on at least 10x7 resolution with high detail and maybe AA/AF at 30+fps average, then I'm happy. I mean, can you really tell the difference between 30fps and 40fps, or 50fps and 60fps? Not unless you're really looking for it. Benchmarks may show a few framerates higher, and probably will, on ATI cards, but that doesn't mean that HL2 won't play absolutley great on the new 6800 series cards. Just look at Doom 3. Sure the nVidia cards take the crown on that game, but the X800 cards still get great framerates.

[Someone Stupid]

I wouldn't trust the numbers until the code is out (not the alpha) and people get to play with it. Look at the stomping the X800's took in Doom 3 in benches. With a couple of tweaks they perform much better than before. I haven't seen a review yet of a tweaked Doom running ATi and a tweaked or stock Doom 3 (whichever settings will run it best) running nVidia. I'm pretty sure if someone publishes it, the gap won't be that massive stomping it first got as some increases were immense for those with X800's.

I'm figuring the same will happen with HL2, though for nVidia's benefit this time. How it happens precisely (either driver, manual file changes, or patches) and if steam will like it or not is another question.