Slashdot Mirror
GeForce 3 Review on Adrenaline Vault
JWhiton writes: "The lucky folks at the Adrenaline Vault have managed to get their hands on a reference GeForce 3 board and have run it through the standard gamut of tests. Looks like it really performs well at very high res with 32-bit color due to its efficient new rendering techinques. However, it lags behind the GeForce2 in a few areas. You can find the article here." We've already run a few things about the GeForce 3, but the more the merrier.
As sites such as tomshardware.com point out, there is little reason to get buy a GeForce3 now if you are a casual user: the performance benefit in current games is small. The situation is drastically different if you are a developer, however: this card is the first to fully expose pixel shaders, vertex shaders and other cool DirectX8 stuff. These are going to form the graphical basis for 2002 games. The only real benefit of GF3 in current games is Nvidia's fast Quincunx antialising; but combine that with the $500 price tag and you see why most hardware sites are advocating against an immediate purchase.
Did you at least notice that the bars length was not proportional with the results they are expressing?
I just see the GF3 beeing less than 10% slower in 2D than a GF2 or Radeon. That's not a big deal at all...
It could be one if this continues but I am pretty sure this is due to some immature drivers.
There is a ton of focus on the fact that the GeForce 3 doesn't blow the socks off of the Geforce 2 in current limited games. I'm assuming the same idiots posting that blather asked, "What's the point of the gutenburg press, it can't reproduce full color paintings very well, and the existing technology does." Both the new idiots and the idiots back then don't get the fact that the new technology makes an array of new things possible. If you are not a developer BE GLAD that they are releasing the card publicaly so anyone who wants to try their hand at it can. It will be better games for you in the long haul.
That is all fine and good, but my fucking NVidia card doesn't work for X in either PPC or x86. Why? Becase the drivers are ASS and nobody can get in there to fix them. Now that NVidia is the only 3d card manufacturer in town, they managed to hoodwink PHBs into lucrative OEM deals and lock ins.. all of which conveniently disregard the fact that NVidia's 2d performance 1) sucks and 2) is unstable in just about ANY system, even ones that are supported.
NVidia can blow me, and as soon as somebody else topples their 3d card monopoly, I will never buy their cards ever again.
Did that. They don't work. I played with them for 2 months. I have a dual processor Celeron 500 with a BX chipset and NOTHING works.
And they don't work under PPC. I've tried. Send me a version compiled for the PPC and I'll try it.
I should clarify... I don't have the source. Care to send me a tarball, or a precompiled version for ppc?
I am absolutely positive the Nvidia drivers do NOT work on my SMP system. I have tried every option under the sun. Neither the stock nv drivers or the nvidia devel drivers work properly.
I am also absoultely postive that I can't physically build PPC binaries, since, hey, guess what? No source code.
Again, I reiterate: NVidia, blow me.
http://www.wgz.org/chromatic/nvidia/analysis.html
I was having some strange problems with the lameness filter for some reason. "Junk charector post". Here is the beyond3d link: http://www.beyond3d.com/interviews/cebit2001/index 2.php
------ 24.5% slashdot pure
As geometric detail increases, so does required bandwidth. So does overdraw. This is where the kyro shines. Take a look at some of the benches with some nice high polygon count images, the Kyro2 does REAL nice.
Lack of T&L is a BS argument that nVidia only fanboys keep putting up, which has little basis in reality.
1. The highest selling cards right now have extremely limited T&L units, or none at all. (Dell and Gateway sell machines by default with Rage128's and TNT2's). 2. Game manufactures not only look at current day cards, but what the majority of the market has, so titles that rely completely on T&L won't appear for at least a year. (Dx8 titles probably longer) ESPECIALLY with the slowing economy. 3. The software T&L implementation in the Kyro2 is extremely excellent, and makes use of extensions in modern processors, DESIGNED to do those manipulations. 4. The Kyro2 has extremely advanced texturing and can do 8 layer multitexturing in a single pass, far beyond what the GeForce can do. 5. The mere fact that the Kyro2 is coming out with a big name behind it, and will most likely get developers attention, indicates that they will design games with at least some thought to it. 6. nVidia has managed to piss of Hercules(see earlier post), and Creative will no longer be selling graphics cards, this means that the low end retail, will have severe competition between Kyro2 and the MX. (And if Creative starts making the Kyro2, as many rumors and such say, nVidia wil have further problems.) See why this is important in 5. 6. Best selling games aren't 3d anyway.
You're just using T&L as an excuse for why not to buy a Kyro2, when it performs extremely excellent on current day games.
------ 24.5% slashdot pure
The average person doesn't care about technology, they care about what works. It doesn't matter that you've written a 3d engine, which is BTW, very impressive, but what DOES matter is consumer trends. You can't design a game around high-end hardware and sell it.
You haven't addressed any of the issues I have brought up, only stated that the nVidia cards are more featured. Of course, the Kyro does have hardware EMBM and 8 layer multi texturing as features. Do they not matter?
Again, highly detailed scenes, such as those present in Doom3, have LOTS of overdraw, haven't you read the quotes from John Carmack? Funny how you kindof brushed this issue asside.
CPU requirements? Which would you rather do? Pay $150 for a video card, and put that other $100-150 to a better CPU. (Take a look at the difference $150 can make on pricewatch: Duron 750Mhz - $45, Thunderbird 1.2Ghz @ 266Mhz FSB - $193) If you were an OEM which would you rather put:
1.2 GHZ System ---- specs
750Mhz System --- specs
And of course, the argument is, simply that the GeForce has T&L makes it supperiour? LOL! People bought WinModems didn't they? And you still haven't refuted that the Kyro2 performs better or as well as several other cards in Dx7 and 8 games using T&L. Or how well it performs in GL games.
It is a budget card. Aimed at people buying MX's. NOT GeForce3's. The fact that the performance is excellent is only a side-benifit. Do you have hard numbers from several games showing your claims on hardware T&L?
Let's take a look:
* Quake3 1600x1200x32 Normal- GeForce2MX(20.1) - Kyro2(41.6) - Performance Benefit(Loss) 207% * MDK2(T&L enabled) 1600x1200x32 - GeForce2MX(23.7) - Kyro2(41.4) - Performance Benefit(Loss) 174% * UT 1600x1200x16 Min Frame Rate- GeForce2MX(10.8) - Kyro2(22.66) - Performance Benefit(Loss) 210% * Serious Sam - A new game @ 1600x1200x32 - Geforce2MX(12.5) - Kyro2(34.2) * MBTR(w/o driver fixes) @ 1024x768 - GeForce2MX(17.1) - Kyro2(30.8) - 1.80
Some of those games could be considered old tech. But serious Sam, and MBTR, both represent a sample of the type of games we will see this year. Looking at just how far ahead the Kyro2 is in front of the MX, I fail to see how the GeForce2MX, even with T&L, compares to the Kyro2.
If the rest of the card can't back up the limited geometry processing seen in the MX, it is worthless.
I would rather upgrade my CPU alone in a couple months, than my CPU and video card. Even on Dx8 titles(Aquanox) the Kyro2 performs about the same as the GeForce2 and Radeon.
You failed to make any claims regarding the utility of T&L, other than, "I want to see the industry move forward."
Quite frankly, what's best for the consumer right now, is what matters to them. They don't give a crap about what YOU do or don't want in the future. As I said before, the Kyro2 has a nice software T&L implementation. (Which, in Dx8 games, if I recall correctly, the GeForce2MX will fallback to something similar.)
Hardware T&L is cool, but it, like HDTV, will have to wait till prices come down, and the technology is a bit more developed. The GeForce3 is the first example of a developed card. It also, just like a HDTV, is too expensive for the consumer, who won't see any benefit expect in a hand-full of token titles. Titles like the SIMS, C&C RA2, and Diablo2 are the best sellers.
Well, I like to think that game developers consider people that have purchased their computer in the past year, the great majority of which own Rage128's and TNT2's, and not screw them over by forcing them to upgrade every 6 months, as some companies would.
Good game engines will know when to take advantage of features that are there, or not.
------ 24.5% slashdot pure
Nvidia PDF document link in order to avoid lameness filter.
nVidia has recently admitted that this document is real but that it was intended for marketting people only. I would contend that the document really has been sent to several businesses which several industry sources say is true.
In the PDF nvidia basically says that one of their key video card makers is a crap company. What was that makers response? They are right to be scared 3D Prophet 4500 will really be a great product Street Date May 16th 2001 - Claude Guillemot, President Hercules Technologies.
But that isn't as interesting as the news that follows:
Hercules one of nVidia's major card manufacturers will not make a new MX card.
Well Nvidia stopped the production of the MX chips these will be replaced by MX200 and MX400. We will not produce a board based on the MX200 or MX400 chips. The big problem is that the new MX series will have a bigger pricetag as the Kyro II based boards and the performance will be slower as the Kyro II based boards. So we don't think a the new MX series will sell very well.
Thought this was all a bit interesting lesson
don't go around making your big suppliers mad, even if it is with leaked documents.
------ 24.5% slashdot pure
Are there components on the card that are really costly to bring the price up?
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
And yes, I'm posting this way way late. I know. It's mainly to test my karma to see if I'm getting the +1 automatic bonus finally.
-brennan
Trust me, I have been writing graphics software for two years. T&L is important. Going from a GF2 to a Kyro II would be a major step backwards, and future games will run much better on the GF2 than on the Kyro II. As a matter of fact, the GF2 beats the Kyro II by far in current T&L-heavy games. Look at that AnandTech review you linked, under Quake3. Even at extremely high resolutions, the Ultra beats the Kyro by over a third (15fps). I'd like to see some Tribes 2 benchmarks. I suspect they will be similar. Tribes 2 actually has different system requirements based on your hardware -- GF2 requires a PII 300MHz, while a Kyro requires a PIII 500MHz.
------
Yes, I prefer UT over Q3, but that is besides the point. Games coming out *now* have high geometric detail levels--higher than Q3--, and that means you want a card with T&L support.
------
As for the DX8 not supporting GF2 T&L... The GeForce 1&2 support programmable vertex shaders a la DX8, so I'm not sure what you mean. I assure you NVidia and Microsoft would never let DX8 out the door if it didn't support current hardware.
------
I suppose buying a Kyro to tide yourself over until the GF3 is at a reasonable price is a good idea, as long as you have a nice, fast CPU to back it up. :) The tile based rendering is actually a pretty cool technology... I'd love to see a card with both tile rendering and the feature set of the GF3. I suspect NVidia's next big core change will be such a card, but that's probably a year off or more. :(
I just don't like it when people claim that a technology is useless because games don't use it. If that mentality keeps up, then people won't buy the cards with the newer features, and thus developers will continue to not use the features. Then, the industry goes nowhere. Luckily, NVidia has been the best choice for both current and future games for awhile now, and thus they have managed to keep the industry advancing despite the chicken-and-egg dilemma. Kyro is advancing the industry in its own way (tile-based rendering), but at the same time it is a step back in T&L, which I see as the more important technology at the moment. :S
------
Interesting... I just tested vertex shaders on my GF2, and they seem to be supported just fine. Perhaps Aquanox uses some special feature that isn't supported, like n-patches... Thanks for the link, though.
------
As geometric detail increases, so does required bandwidth. So does overdraw.
Usually, no. As I mentioned elsewhere, geometry data is usually pulled from AGP memory, NOT from VRAM. Thus, it isn't much affected by the VRAM bandwidth. Furthermore, geometry data takes far less bandwidth than pixel data, so even if VRAM bandwidth does affect it, it doesn't affect it much.
As for overdraw, no, increasing geometric detail does not increase overdraw. Usually, added geo detail means *smaller* triangles. The total surface area rendered is about the same, which means the overdraw is about the same.
Lack of T&L is a BS argument that nVidia only fanboys keep putting up, which has little basis in reality.
Umm... would you care to tell me what makes you think that? Personally, I tend to believe the T&L thing based on my experience in 3d graphics. Other people knowledgable in the field, like John Carmack, Tim Sweeny, all of SGI, and others, generally seem to agree that T&L is, well... a good thing.
You know, the CPU speed requirements for Tribes 2 are 40% lower if you have a GeForce 2 than if you have a Kyro. I don't think they made that number up. Perhaps, however, you think that Tribes 2 is not part of reality? I know, it's hard to believe that it was finally released. Maybe you haven't received your copy yet, and don't believe it exists. But it does.
I, instead, assert that the argument that T&L doesn't matter is a BS argument taken up by Kyro and 3dfx fanboys.
You're just using T&L as an excuse for why not to buy a Kyro2, when it performs extremely excellent on current day games.
Huh? I'm not on NVidia's payroll. Why would I support NVidia without a good reason? Hell, let me go right out and say that I like the Radeon. It's a pretty good card. It has T&L.
I'll tell you why I want people to buy T&L cards: I do NOT want to be limited by having to support cards with no geometry accelleration. I prefer that the industry moves *forwards*. Yes, the tile-based rendering is nice, but it is not worth the loss of T&L.
The argument about current games not using it is not only wrong (current games DO use T&L), but it is stupid. It's a chicken-and-egg problem. If non of the gamers buy T&L hardware, none of the developers will use it. Fortunately, NVidia has managed to, for the most part, keep their hardware competitive in current games at the same time as they add new features for future games. I like it when the industry advances. Don't you?
------
According to the NVidia GL extensions docs, NV_vertex_program is supported in hardware on the NV1x series (GeForce 1&2), but only using the R10 drivers.
------
Troll? Probably, but I wouldn't want anyone to be mislead by your words, so...
1) removing all content relating to linux.3dfx.com and 3dfxgamers.com
That was 3dfx that did that, NOT NVidia. NVidia is NOT responsible for supporting 3dfx's current product line. NVidia gave 3dfx a fat wad of cash which 3dfx is *supposed* to be spending on supporting their users. Hmm...
2) not updating either of the Linux, Mac, or MS Windows codebase for the 3dfx Voodoo products.
Again, that is not NVidia's responsibility. NVidia did NOT buy 3dfx's current product line. If you go out and buy a Voodoo card right now, the money goes to 3dfx, NOT NVidia. Thus, NVidia has no reason to be supporting Voodoo cards.
3) releasing closed-source drivers for their video cards that prevent accurate security audits
I think this has been argued enough, but just in case, here is the primary argument: NVidia's GL drivers contains MUCH MUCH more than just a hardware interface. OpenGL drivers are required to implement all of OpenGL's functionality, even if the hardware doesn't support it. Thus, NVidia's GL drivers contain software implementations of anything that isn't supported in all of their cards. This includes an extremely good T&L implementation, which every one of NVidia's competitors would probably love to have. It would not be legal for them to release that open source -- their shareholders would sue them!
4) conspiring with the enemy ala Microsoft
NVidia does not suck up to Microsoft. Microsoft sucks up to NVidia. Has NVidia ever done anything purely for Microsoft's sake? No. They are providing hardware for the X-Box, but at a price, and at the same time they are providing hardware for the Indrema, a fact which I'm sure Microsoft is not happy about. Furthermore, NVidia has the best 3D hardware drivers available on Linux (closed source or not). Microsoft has acknoledged Linux to be their primary competitor, so I'm sure they'd prefer than NVidia not support Linux. Last, but not least, NVidia has the best GL implementation of any consumer 3D hardware vendor. There is no advantage whatsoever to using Direct3D rather than OpenGL on NVidia hardware. As a matter of fact, the GL implementation is often said to be *better* than the D3D implementation. I don't think Microsoft likes that, either.
In summary, NVidia makes a point of not being manipulated by Microsoft, and they are damned proud of it.
5) not boosting and advertizing for the widespread software development on the indrema console; which has incorporated their hardware.
What the hell are you talking about!? NVidia doesn't advertise for the X-Box either. They also don't advertise for any of the graphics card manufacturers that use NVidia's chipset. As a matter of fact, NVidia does not (for the most part) advertise *any* individual product which uses their hardware. They only advertise their chipset itself.
It is Indrema's responsibility to advertise their own hardware. I want Indrema to succeed too, but NVidia is the last place I'd blame if they fail.
------
It looks like you get a speed improvement only if the application directly uses the vertex-programmable features of the new board.
There's a lack of info on how well this board works when you have multiple 2D and 3D windows open. That's important for professional users doing development. (I'm likely to have Softimage|3D, Visual C++, and an app of my own all open at once, for example.) With all that programmability in the board, context switches may be a problem. Does anybody know? If you have one of these boards, bring up a few apps in different windows and report back. Thanks.
I think what NVIDIA did was realize that we don't need an extra 50 frames per second in quake 3 when you're already getting 150. people don't realize that neither our monitors nor our eyes can take advantage of that. The only think left to improve is picture quality. wich means higher resolutions and more extra effects.
HardOCP did a comparison between the GF2 and the GF3. Of particular note are the benchmarks of DroneZ, an upcoming OpenGL-based game that has special modes optimized for the GF3's features. Using the generic settings, the GF3 was about 15-25% faster. But with the extra GF3 stuff enabled, the GF3 was faster by a factor of between two and four. Remeber that this is with an OpenGL benchmark, not D3D, so don't start worrying that nVidia is ignoring OGL. I imagine that John Carmack will be taking advantage of this kind of stuff in DOOM3, as well.
Measuring brute force speed is a very narrow analysis. The GeForce 3, albeit not worth $500, is an order of magnatude faster than the GeForce 2. You'll see this as games such as Doom3 take advantage of Bump mapping, T&L2, and higher Polys (not to mention a lot of other stuff).
It's not just "frames per second", it's the quality of the frame. GF3 didn't add much in terms of maximum throughput, they mainly added features that would allow a dramtic improvement in graphics while maintaining a high frame rate.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
Sorry, Temporal is right. If you review the press release of the aquisition on nVidia's site, you'll see that they essentially acquired "Intellectual Property" and prototypes and the VSA stuff they did with Quantum. No employees, support staff/systems, etc. 3dFX is still a company that is still operating it's own website.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
Absolutely nothing. The GeForce 2 Pro, in the tests, beat the GeForce3 handily in most areas.
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
I disagree with the aspect of closing down the 3DFX driver sites. Unless you have a really good source to back that up, I'm under the understanding that nVidia did it as a cost-cutting measure to consolidate the two companies. It was a bad decision.
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
As it stands now, I found the results to be more than a little disappointing. INAE (I'm not an engineer), but if your company makes a new card it should always be faster than your previous cards. Period.
Although, I guess what someone else said is true. This would be a fine time to buy a GeForce 2 Pro...
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
Which brings up the question of drivers for other platforms. Of course you could use generics. Some folks may like to use some of the more exotic features that you can get at by hacking the Win Registry.
But this might not be needed in some cases. For example, we all know that Linux users are all serious coders dedicated to the OS Revolution, and so *never* have any time available for something as trivial as games
[JOKE! JOKE!]
Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Why on Earth didn't they benchmark with 3DMark 2001? If you want to see how well the GF3 performs against other cards, this is one of the benchmarks that really should be used.
Why? Because it actually USES the NV20 DirectX8 optimisations. I believe the GF3 is currently the only DX8 card around, and if you compare a GF2 or Radeon against it in 3DMark2001 then it would be miles ahead.
Why they chose 2000 I have no idea, but there you go.
I own a GeForce2 GTSII with 64 MB of DDR RAM. What is the incentive of my going out and buying at $500+ video card?...None. The current one is just fine and will be just fine for a while. The price of video cards is insane, for $500 you could get AMD 1 Ghz, MB, 256 MB RAM, Case and HD plus some other stuff easy. This card shouldnt catch on quick becuase there isnt any software to take full advantage of it. I think the only people that will buy this card are those that want to stay "cutting-edge" and have too much money. I think ill wait till the GeForce4 comes out becuase it looks as though the software section has a while to catch up.
Arathres
I love my iBook. I use it to run Linux!
stainless steel
If you want to spend the cash on the Geforce 3.. I applaud your gaming dedication. I really do. If money was absolutly not an issue for me I would be there with you.
... or a few others have reviewed it aswell.... they all have glowing reviews for it..... *for the price*.
r =101
I will buy a Geforce 3 someday aswell... probably within the next 8 months.. but it wont be the first generation, otherwise known as "MX" version of the card... I will wait to buy the "Pro" or "Ultra" version of the card wich will cost as much then as this first gen card does now.
In the meantime.... the Kyro II card beats in some instances the Geforce 3 and the Geforce 2. It also only costs 150 bucks. It uses a totally different way rendering it's stuff.... and it works great on todays games... but sucks about as much as a Geforce 2 on tomarrows games. -- But for 150 bucks... I'll get it today.. (or in a week when it comes out)... and get the Pro Version of the Geforce 3... later around the time I imagine when the X-Box is released.
Read a review of the Kyro II at Anandtech.com
Also... main product page can be found here --- > http://us.hercules.com/mediaroom/pr/lookpr.php3?p
I am Jack's HTTP Server
See http://firingsquad.gamers.com/features/nvidia1215/
FiringSquad: Will NVIDIA continue driver support for 3dfx's Voodoo 3,4,5 line?
We're not purchasing 3dfx's current product line. We're only purchasing 3dfx's core assets. Support of 3dfx's current products will remain with 3dfx.
I know drivers will get better but I found really disappointing that a $500 card is so slow doing something as simple as 2D graphics. Hope they get it better.