Slashdot Mirror
Official Doom 3 Benchmarks Released
Rogerpq3 writes "Before the game goes on sale, id Software has been kind enough to release some benchmarks for DOOM 3 with the latest video cards on the market from NVIDIA & ATI. HardOCP has published the five page article which should help anyone trying to decide if they should upgrade their video card for DOOM 3. There's also an introductory note from John Carmack, mentioning: 'The benchmarking was conducted on-site, and the hardware vendors did not have access to the demo before hand, so we are confident that there is no egregious cheating going on.', and the HardOCP writers comment: 'As of this afternoon we were playing DOOM 3 on a 1.5GHz Pentium 4 box with a GeForce 4 MX440 video card and having a surprisingly good gaming experience.'"
I guess an upgrade is in my future, although I'm not sure I'll get to the "cinematic" level that's possible in D3's rendering.
Sigs cause cancer.
Of course Nvidia's card is going to do better. Doom3 has a specialized codepath for nvidia hardware, while the ATI card does not.
If a codepath were written for the X800 series of cards, I'm sure the scores would be closer to each other.
I take the superiority of one card over the other with a grain of salt.
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
It'll be interesting to see how ATI responds to this. They pulled ahead in the last generation, but it seems to be Nvidia has learned from their mistakes. Nice to see that uberhardware isn't needed to get decent framerates. Too bad for the hardware industry though...
Vandemar.org
"If I had to make a list of high end video cards to purchase to play DOOM 3, the GeForce 6800Ultra and GeForce 6800GT would easily take the number 1 and number 2 spots with the ATI Radeon X800XT-PE rounding out the number 3 place."
6800GT continues to look by by far the best price/performance card currently available.
I'm just glad I won't have to go out and upgrade my video card for this game. Seems like every time there's a new game out, I'm upgrading.
Oh, yeah, Linux is better than Windows... blah blah blah.
Any news on the possibility of an Amiga port? The new Amigas have some awesome hardware. G3 800mhz or higher than 1GHz G4 cpus, DDR and some kind of Radeon.
I think it's a quite obviously untapped market there for games authors, an entire community that grew up on THE games machine clamoring for more.
That's the most important question... would my p3-450 with a voodoo2 break 1 fps or not?
Speed Demos Archive - Lots of speed runs!
How about some benchmarks for a card I actually have, like a ti4800? ;-) Saying "suprisingly good gaming experience" on a GF4MX means nothing... are you seeing a creepy title screen and playing a pong minigame, or actually seeing 30fps+?
Sorry, but dropping $500 on a video card is just not an option, this would be more useful if we had some everyday specs.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
Second, they did not run these benchmarks, and they were done at the iD offices: "Today we are sharing with you framerate data that was collected at the id Software offices in Mesquite, Texas. Both ATI and NVIDIA were present for the testing and brought their latest driver sets." It sounds as though Hardocp was not even present for the tests.
Their review of the BFG 6800GT OC convinced me to get that card. This article, however, does not convince me of...much of anything. I do have certain questions about their journalism, but it's best saved for a more appropriate time.
So my 750Mhz Duron w/GeForce MX 440 is *not* going to work? That sucks. I guess I'll go back to playing nethack...
By the way, if people are still playing Doom 3* twenty-five years after it comes out, *then* we can start talking about the benefits of emphasizing gameplay over gee-whiz special effects that won't be gee-whiz in 6 months. Until then, call me elitist, call me old-fashioned, but don't call me bored!
*or any game based on its engine
Well I didn't expect this. Not even released yet, Doom 3 runs at 1600x1200 on "high quality" at 68 fps on the Nvidia 6800 Ultra, or 42 fps with 4x antialiasing. In other words it can just barely make use of the best hardware at the time of its release. That's fairly conservative in my book.
...I won't need to sell some organs on the black market, after all?
they have only 3 cards listed in the test and none of htem are widely in use
i hope htey did the same kind of hardware polling that valve is doing/has done with regards to hl2 to see where their customer base actuallys tands in terms of hardware so that they don't end up with a flood of game returns for shit that doesnt' work.
i'm curious if there are console versions of the game planned that would require that it run on something set in stone and a couple years off from bleeding edge.
For almost every game i've ever played there were problems, little glitches that demanded certain versions of drivers, stuff like that. Even if the game was well behaved it ran like a dog on my PCs (which are all really old and crap).
But when Quake 3 came out i could run it on a P233 (with MMX!), voodoo 2 12meg and 128MB ram. iD engines scale all the way.
I will be interested in seeing how low people can get Doom 3 running.
a surprisingly good gaming experience
Are they saying they were surprised it worked well, or surprised it was an enjoyable game?
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
Have any of you noticed that the comps they're using to run these benchmarks have a minimum of 2 GB RAM? I wonder how much that actually affects the performance, because the majority of we gamers have 1 GB (like myself) or 512 MB.
Also, seeing as how this is one of the most hotly anticipated games in recent memory, it's really painful to see ATi's cards lose out so severely to the Nvidia offerings. I mean, the $300 (MSRP) 6800 GT beats out the top of the line X800 XT ($500 MSRP).
What exactly is holding ATi back with writing better ATi drivers? They can write decent drivers for Direct3D, but what's with this years long problem with OpenGL? I'm not bleeding edge or incredibly demanding; I own a Radeon 9600 myself, but I'm always saddened by ATi's generally poor performance in OpenGL.
www.google.com
Didn't an ATI employee leak the demo for Doom III? If so then this could explain why the game runs so much better on Nvidia cards. If ATI wants to stay in the market for cards aimed at running Doom III then they need to start releases new drivers soon.
Wonderful! They showed that you can indeed play Doom3 on top of the line hardware ... but didn't bother to benchmark the game on hardware that ID say is the minimum "1.5GHz Pentium 4 box with a GeForce 4 MX440"
Or in fact anything in between those ranges :-(
Pointless review as only the minority of people have extreme PC's ... even most Slashdotters don;t have extreme hardware!
for the weak graphics card. And if you have a MB that supports a P4 (not cheap at all) you most likely have AGP 8X so it's only ~$100 to spring for a GeForce FX 5200 and you're done.
A new MB (if you can't support 8X AGP already), Barton or P4 (unless you've got a 1.5Ghz+ CPU and 8X AGP), plus new memory if you aren't already using DDR and the graphics card is going to run you under $500. You can pick up a GeForce FX 5200 for around $100. If you had to buy everything listed you'd come in under $500 if you shopped smart. A 2500+ Barton is ~$130 and plenty fast and easily upgradable when the faster CPUs come down in price.
If you really want to play this game and are lagging behind it's time to just suck it up and get back into the mid range.
It's $500 or less and you now have a system that will last another 2-3 years.
This is really a good excuse to get your system filled with components that can be upgraded. My current system is maxed out. It's old (4 years or so) and can't go anywhere.
You can look at it this way, you can pretend that it's good enough and continue to become obsolete and be forced to spend over a thousand bucks in a couple years when it finally dies. Or, you can spend a few hundred now, get back in the upgrade path and save some money in the long run.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
For those of use who are still stuck on Intel 386 hardware with a VGA card, can somebody please convert those benchmarks into something understandable? Also, if I did upgrade to more recent hardware, how many extra monsters could I have in DOOM1 for the same frame rate? Ach, mein Leben!
no
This message was brought to you by the death of 30 brain cells.
Page 1:
"X800XT-PE may not be worthy of being included on the same graph"
Later...
If you would have told me a year ago that I could play DOOM 3 on a GeForce 3 64MB video card and 1.8GHz AthlonXP and have a good gaming experience, I would have called you crazy, but that is exactly what we are seeing.
Translation:
Save your money, DOOM 3 has the most insane graphics, and still plays just fine on the ~$150 cards. Which means most other games are totally fine. (I play Lineage 2 on a Rage fury pro with 32MB, and it's an Unreal 2 based game)
Also, nVidia designed more for DOOM type games, just like every reviewer has been saying for 6 months.
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
It's comforting to know that said vendors are so honest and reliable, that if you make it physically impossible (or at least extremely improbable), that they will not "egregiously cheat" on published benchmarks.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
DoomIII wont be your only use for the video card though, will it? Half-Life 2 should be a bit ATI biased, and many games out now perform better on the ATI cards. Check HardOCPs other reviews. But regardless of which card you buy, all do well overall.
This talk about Nvidia coming out on top makes me worry, since the talk is that ATI cards are tops for Half-Life 2.
I'm hoping the differences are exaggerated, but I'd hate to see it become a one-or-the-other situation as far as optimal performance goes.
If you're running the most recent CPU/GPU with a $hitload of RAM.. you're going to have a good gaming experience
WELL NO SHIT! What did you expect? The game to only run acceptably on hardware that doesn't exist yet? Geez..
As of this afternoon we were playing DOOM 3 on a 1.5GHz Pentium 4 box with a GeForce 4 MX440 video card and having a surprisingly good gaming experience
Why no benchmarks of this? IMO much more useful than a benchmark of a P4 3.6GHz system with 4GB of RAM and a 6800 Ultra..
I am the maverick of Slashdot
Must also agree with parent - this article is useless. The worst card they benchmark is the absolute top of the line for the generation of cards that is only just starting to be replaced. If I recall correctly the X800 and the new nvidia cards have been known about for what, 3-4 months, and available for even fewer.
I would like to see a benchmark from a Radeon 9600 or worse up. That might actually help.
Read Pynchon.
Weren't we seeing the ATi cards outperforming nVidia by disgusting margins on HL2 benchmarks?
Is there some kind of under-the-table manipulation going on here? Is ATi trying to leverage HL2 to sell more cards? Is nVidia doing the same with Doom3?
Or are both companies going to release new drivers soon and even the whole thing out?
I'm just going to wait and see. And upgrade after HL2 has been out for six months. THEN I'll play these games. I usually buy a game after it has earned a reputation. Then I'll know for sure whether it's good or not. Besides, I'd like to afford double the system requirements for these things when I finally do upgrade. Can't have choppy frames ruining the immersion effect.
The question I have is... how well do the quadro cards perform???
I have a brand new Quadro FX 1000 in my laptop and a year or so old Quadro 4 in my Desktop (Both with 128MB) - I wonder how well they'll run Doom3?
They're fairly optimized for opengl - so I remain hopeful!
Friedmud
Sorry, but dropping $500 on a video card is just not an option
> help drop
syntax: drop on video card
What $500USD... erm... I'll be playing Doom3 in the future when I go to Mars... nah what's the point?
But if it's going to run on Xbox, then how well will it go?
... those of us that can't (or won't) upgrade to the latest and greatest will just be stuck playing yet another FPS. The graphics are what will build the atmosphere, the fancy effects will take the experience and immersion to another level. My Ti4200 will just give me a pixelated experience. I'll stick with playing Splinter Cell on the PS2 just a bit longer in that case.
Hell, by 3rd parties, doom/doom2 are still being updated/upgraded:
see Doom Legacy, ZDoom
Now, Doom3 is not really original anymore in terms of theme, so it might not do as well. But it could very well become one of those "old classics" several years from now.
Another big hotspot is the Doom3 engine, as we'll probably see several later games developed from companies that have licensed the engine for use in their own products.
6800 and FX 5x range of Nvidia are using teh SAME CODE PATH (ARB2) as R300+ .. writing a specific R300+ codepath will improve nothing..
i togi-video-hl2-wxp-1280.html
The code paths are
NV10 -- geforce 2/4 MX
NV20 -- Geforce 3/4
R200 -- Radeon 8xxx/Early 9xxx like 9000
ARB2 --- NV30/R300 and up
ie Carmack isn't favoring a card..
http://www.ixbt-labs.com/articles2/digest3d/0604/
as you can see here, NV4x performs just as well as R420 with Halflife 2 Beta, and the final should see the same thing.. ATI Fanboys, Just accept things are even now, yes hte FX still sucks but meh its even at the top.. Nvidia Fanboys, yep you guys are in the lead, but don't go too nuts or you end up like the die hard ATI fanboys..
US in the middle (who switch between makers card based on performance and price) enjoy, we can make a choice and not be wrong..
They spelled "bated breath" properly! That must be a first for the Internet.
main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
I played all the way through that freeware level. Awesome.
I have a decent computer, and I have been through the hell that many new games will never understand. These FPS above 10 don't concern me as long as I get some detail and fun.
People are too spoiled these days. 5 feet of snow and all that jazz.
Wow, it looks like I'll even be able to get a decent framerate on my two-year-old computer that I slapped together for $A1000. I'd sort of resigned myself to the fact that I'd have to upgrade, this makes me very happy.
Presumably because they were able to play a hand of poker while waiting for each frame to be rendered.
Never, ever lose a file again. Ever.
They were surprised it even ran on a GeForce4 MX 440. That in itself is a good gaming experience. ;)
"nVidia's back, I guess. This will sell a lot of 6800GT's. "
Well, I guess that depends on what you thing "a lot" means. At $661CDN for a 6800GT, I don't see too many being sold in the near future. The Radeon X800XT is even worse, at $800CDN. WTF!? This is narrowed down to the very hardcore of gamers, and they represent a very small percentage of the gaming population.
Many people likely will upgrade, but I just don't see this game selling $600+ cards to a large number of folks.
For all Radeon X800-Pro owners when I say.... "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" :)
Well at least we have HL2 to look forward to
D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
Those numbers show that Doom 3 runs well on 3.2 (or 3.6) ghz machines with either current generation or last generation cards. Now how about with a 2 ghz machine? I'm curious how much difference the processor makes as opposed to the video card.
3.6 ghz is not exactly mainstream, thats bleeding edge and still cost a whole lot of money...
That's not the best way to look at the market. I look at the high end cards and I think, hey, that's where gaming will be for everyone with a budget system in 12 or so months, that's great.
I always buy at the budget end of the curve, having just bought a great 9600XT for $230AUD, which more than doubles the performance of my last card. I upgrade every 12-18 months depending on how rich I'm feeling, and how the market looks compared to the way my games are running.
So I'm looking at these benchmarks with great interest.
I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
C'mon John, I'm sure you can meet the technical challenge! Take pity on all those people with 486s !
The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
I'm going to buy a G4 powerbook, any comments on that, taking into considering the architecture and hardware used?
Can you people PLEASE stop making stupid jokes about old hardware, or that your ATARI can't play Doom 3. They were funny once when the "Quake 3 Test Released" thread was opened on on Slashdot 5 years ago.
I mean, they're really corny.
---
Regardless, I would seriously doubt John Carmack himself would hold back his technology on someone's card (ATI), just because they most likely did steal from them. God knows I would if I was in his place, not only because their dumb, canadian theifs (The worst kind, because many Canadians are nice, and the Kids in the Hall rocks, eh word up homie) But because of the fact that yes they have SHIT for opengl driver support, AND their Linux support is next to non-existant.
They provide like 3 RPM's, and if your lucky even whatever distro (some god awful old mandrake or redhat setup most likely) that the packages are intented for will come through.
NVidia has support for MANY operating systems (FreeBSD, 32 and 64 and AMD64 Bit Linux, oh yeah, and that windows thing)
I myself am opting for a 6800 Ultra if I can find one in time, for my Slackware Linux Box running a gig of ram and an AMD64 3200+. It will be replacing my 5900 (5950 overclocked with a bios upgrade to the card) that I was able to installed with a screwdriver, and a simple installtion script from Nvidia.com, or an ebuild in my old Gentoo days (last week).
To any computer gamer, I recommend an NVIDIA card, even if you are on Windows. I have tried both brands of cards in both environments, and yes OpenGL performance on ATI is terrible. So yes, ATI will have a harder time playing this game.
Buy a 6800 GT. If you can, go for the 6800 GT OC from BFG, overclocked out of the box. Enjoy DooM3.
In addition, not only do both brands of cards have their own set of rendering paths for their older models, the r200 and nv20 path, for the geforce 3/4 and 8500/9000 cards respectivly, but the latest of both brands run on Carmacks ARB2 path, a set of more generalized (arb=arbitrary im supposing) extenstions. Its the total package path, and its called, and whoever said the that ati ran slow because it didnt have its own specific paths is a moron.
Thanks.
P.S
Slackware rules. Fuck Bill Gates. Fuck him right in his rectum.
You have to wonder if NVIDIA and ATI didn't get together and just pay ID to write a game to get everyone to upgrade their video cards.
You're right about the 5200 performance, but the price range is wrong - you can get it for ~$60. Good enough for some people, I guess (say you need a cheap DX9 gpu to tinker with).
Are you implying that Carmack made the above statement? Because...he didn't. That's Kyle Bennet, the author of the HardOCP article speaking. Carmack only made the brief statement at the beginning (it's color coded to help you spot it), which states that "all of the modern cards play the game very well," and "there is no egregious cheating going on," and most importantly, "Nvidia drivers have been tuned for Doom's primary light/surface interaction fragment program."
I don't think Doom3 will be significantly changed to help out ATI, but I'm positive ATI will change their drivers to help out Doom3's performance. As Carmack pointed out, the Nvidia drivers have already been fine tuned for Doom. My guess is that ATI, after the fiasco with releasing the Doom alpha, hasn't had as much opportunity to optimize for Doom.
On the other hand, it's no surprise to see ATI losing to a card that obviously has more horsepower. Frankly, I'm impressed that a card that's so much cooler, smaller, and quieter does so well against Nvidia's monster. But in this case, at least, we see Nvidia's power fully utilized. Hopefully, ATI gets so more performance out of theirs, though.
-Dan
I would rather play with a card that has a lower average but has a higher minimum which occurs usually at the most important times in the game.
I know, "do it yourself". Well aren't the benchmark sites looking for new ideas? Come on!!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
'The benchmarking was conducted on-site, and the hardware vendors did not have access to the demo before hand, so we are confident that there is no egregious cheating going on.'
thats not true for the ATI HL2 benchmark.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
you are the gaming industries bitch. ;)
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Is there going to be one? Screw all this conjecture and benchmarking, I'd rather try it out on my machine and see how well it works and if I like it before dropping fifty bucks on a videogame.
Too pragmatic?
There's something suspicious about companies that don't bother with demos.
Its, its, its. ITS. Fucking ITS. Not "it's"!
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
I'm wondering what HT and/or SMP rigs will perform with the new smp aware doom3 engine....
||| I still can't believe Parkay's not butter.
Hey just realized while typing this that JC's initals are JC, it all makes sense...
for all nVidia owners when I point and say "Ha-Ha!" ;)
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Just a couple of quick notes. First off, you must bear in mind that all of the cards they tested are DX9 capable, this is going to help out framerates quite a bit. In fact, when you look at benchmarks for the newer games, framerates drop off quite a bit when you start looking at cards like the GeForce 4.
:-D
More importantly, the boxes they did the benchmarking on were maxed out with specs like 2GB of DDR400 and an Athlon 64 or comparable processor. Unless you've got all the other specs to match the test box, you're looking at the best possible framerates you can get under the very best possible conditions on those systems. In addition to that, they had anti-aliasing turned off for several of those benchmarks.
Now compare those 60-70fps on that kind of box with whatever setup you've got...then swap out the video card for a GeForce 4Ti 4X00 and you're looking at maybe25-30fps with medium effects at 1024x768. That's almost unplayable.
Granted, I'm doing a good bit of guessing here, but this comes from a number of years of experience playing the latest games on older hardware. The basic sys-req's for the game are a GF3 or better - we can interpret that to mean it'll give you about 25fps at 800x600 with all the eye candy turned off if you're sporting a top-of-the-line GeForce 3. I doubt you're going to see good performance out of Doom 3 without anything better than a GeForce FX 5600.
Luckily, we'll all find out in a little less than two weeks
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
this was able to run on linux the current setup should handle it ok?
:/
AMD 3400+ (2.2Ghz)
1G RAM
Geforce FX 5600, 256MB
I dont really know a lot about games
Giving IE users a taste of their own medicine since 2005 - http://pods.-is-a-geek.net/
I'm playing Doom III, right? Man, I wouldn't know. On my 6800, every game sounds like IL-2 Sturmovik.
Careful ... while there is a high-quality mode, I believe there is also an "Ultra" quality mode, mentioned in PC-Gamer, which HardOCP doesn't even touch (I imagine id didn't bother benchmarking because it's too slow). According to PC-Gamer, you need a card with 512MB on it to even think about running that mode at reasonable levels.
You are in a twisty little maze of passages all alike. There is a pink demon here.
Use rocket launcher
You died. Play again?
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
Its, its, its. ITS. Fucking ITS. Not "it's"!
I think someone NEEDS to lay off the caffeine!!!
'By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes'
When two or more companies control the market and set pricing structures so as not to compete with each other it is an oligopoly. Different word, same effect as a monopoly.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
As of this afternoon we were playing DOOM 3 on a 1.5GHz Pentium 4 box with a GeForce 4 MX440 video card and having a surprisingly good gaming experience.
I've got a faster processor and the same video card. I'm in business baby!
I will probably need a new hard drive though, I'm almost out of space.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I've seen the demo movie for gameplay on the XBox and it is more than decent. If you can't afford to get the latest video cards and gear, get Doom III on the Xbox! You can buy an XBox for less than a video card these days, and it honestly did look well playable. Sure, the res isn't going to be as great as your PC, but it will have Dolby Digital sound, and it will still look great on the XBox. Good option for the students among us.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
...can be seen here: click
After reading these benchmarks I feel the need to mention something many gamers already know. The D3 engine renders using OpenGL, which ATI's cards have never been good at and NVIDIA is known to be good at. If you were to take a look at benchmarks from a Direct3D game you would be seeing the X800XT blowing away the 6800. If you don't believe me take a look at this.Another point you may want to notice is that ID software is partnered with NVIDIA (Expect to see the the little way it's meant to be played logo). Also from what I have read about Carmack, he seems to be biased towards NVIDIA anyway.
Isn't is obvious that the slower machines take 7 days longer?
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
Unfortunately, when you buy an Alienware a lot of your money goes towards the Alienware name.
Back in February I bought a new computer. I built it by myself, with parts gotten entirely from NewEgg.com
For $2500 I got:
P4 @ 2.8 ghz
1GB RAM (PC3700, I think; it's been a while)
GeForce FX 5950
120GB Maxtor HD
74GB Western Digital 10000RPM Raptor
DVD+RW
CD-RW
Antec case (don't remember the model)
400W power supply
19" ViewSonic G90fb
Miscellaneous stuff (keyboard, mouse, cables, etc.)
All for $2500. Do you really think you'd be able to get that much from Alienware for the same price?
Probably that ATI will have to get their heads out of their asses and work a tad more on their OpenGL support. What does that mean for me?
City of Heroes runs in OpenGL, yay!
(They do use DirectX for sound though).
---- Take the Space Quiz!
Also, which ones is better supported in Linux?
Thanks.
http://www.masquilier.org/republic/election/ Condorcet, Plurality voting and alternative voting enabled bulletin board.
I keep reading people recommending ATI's cards, for various reasons (price, performance etc.) but ATI's support for Linux sucks. I'm almost on the verge of upgrading my PC and so tempted to go ATI, but then I remind myself how crappy their Linux support is and head straight back to look at NVidia's cards.
It's no surprise to me that this review only contains the top of the line cards and none of the good cards most gamers currently have. No mention of Radeons, Geforce 4's, or any Matrox (okay, j/k on that one).
With representatives present from ATI and Nvidia, I'm sure they see D3 as a golden oportunity to justify their new line of $500 cards. Why would they want to confuse you by showing that your own card might actually work with the game?
free online diet tracking.
I'm pretty much ready to upgrade my card from a 64mb ti4200 to a 6800gt.
My problem is that I would have liked to see someone at HardOCP test the BFG 6800GT card on doom3. Carmack's overclocking warning got me a little worried that the BFG card may give me trouble since it's overclocked out of the box.
If it could give me problems, I might just buy the EVGA card and overclock it myself.
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
Wolfenstein 3D - 1991 or 92 - runs on a 386 - DOS only
Wolf3D required a 286. In fact, it played incredible on a 286.
Quake after this, all are playable over the internet- 1996 - runs on a P-66 - DOS, Win32, linux port some time later.
Don't forget the 3D acceleration offered by GLQuake and VQuake that were released shortly after the game
Games like PoP, DE:IW, and Thief3 don't run on GF4MX's. Because they're a piece of shit graphics card ? Well, yes. But the problem is usually attributed to the game's mandatory pixel shaders. The GF4MX's don't have any pixel shading whatsoever. So if you design a game that you cannot turn off the shaders, it's not going to run without a GPU that supports them.
ID simply coded their engine to use different rendering paths depending on what card you're using. So if you lack the pixel shaders, it will still run without them.
--LordPixie
It appears that nVidia is kicking ATI's ass in Doom3. As someone who owns or owned a Rage Fury, Rage Fury Pro, Radeon 64, AIW 9600, and a Radeon 9700 Pro, I'm glad. Competition is a good thing.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Standard NTSC and PAL television run at only 25 - 30 fsp.... I think anything over 30 and you will not be able to tell the difference.....
P.S. Anything more than two speakers in a sound system is waste because you only have two ears.
I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
I believe you've convinced yourself that someone is NOT cheating, which is resoundingly not the case. Everyone is cheating, except maybe Carmack.
Nvidia Cheating
ATI Cheating
Awwww, the wide-eyed innocents are posting! Look at this one-- he actually believes that one of the graphics card manufacturers is NOT cheating! It's tough life-lesson time, kiddo-- they BOTH have a history of cheating. Also, there is no Santa Claus or Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny was paid $5M by ATI to optimize his egg-rendering scheme for their hardware.
Nvidia Cheating
ATI Cheating
Apparently a doom3 benchmark with other cards is in the works, according to the author of the article..
My email addy? should be easy enough.
Okay, so who wants to help me build the best possible box for Doom 3 for $2000? *GRIN*
How about if people post URLs to their NewEgg wishlists, here?
Education is the silver bullet.
I want a GeForce 9000, then.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Does anyone else think this benchmark is pretty much pointless?
What good is a benchmark if the only included cards are the latest top of the line models?
Maybe we should draw the conclusion that if you have anything less than what was benchmarked, don't buy Doom 3.
Some weeks ago, for the first time in my life I bought an ATI card (9800Pro, 256MB) to go with my shiny new AMD64 system. Shortly after attaching the watercooling, I realized that I'd been badly burned concerning ATI's linux drivers... my fault, really, to believe that the very existence of linux drivers (which was all I checked prior to purchase) would enable me to at least play Tuxracer or similar under linux - but I did not reckon with ATI not supporting either 64-Bit systems (and AGPGART messing up with KT-800 Boards)... For some time now, only the fact that attaching the watercooler to a new 6800U (I do get into a sweat when doing that) would mean voiding the warranty on a ~$500 product kept me back.
With these benchmarks now, however, I feel no reason not to return once again to nvidia (remember Homer getting his job back at SNPP?)...
ghaa... all the wasted money...
If you look at the table here
V EVx7HppJJ_3_2.gif
http://www.hardocp.com/images/articles/1090364971
you can see the ATI X800 Pro performs 21.5 fps yet the graph bar is clearly not extending past the 20fps threashhold on the graph backing.
I have just finished playing Far Cry on my aging box that has a 32 meg GEFORCE 2 GTS in it and it ran fine at 1024 x 768, sure the settings were on low, but it still looked good, especially considering that the minimum requirement for the game is a 64 meg 'direct x 9 compatible' card.
I'm sure that doom 3 is a little more advanced than far cry, but who know's I'll try it out. Besides, isn't the Geforce 4 mx just a geforce 2 anyway? I'm sure a ti4800 will be just fine.
Im.
Since Doom 3 is OpenGL, what does DirectX 9 do for you? Is there some sort of DX vs OpenGL comparison chart to explain this?
Contrary to the original plans, the AGP versions of the card...will carry a dual-slot cooling solution.
I was looking at planetdoom and found this page.
Recommended requirements are about what I'd expected:
GF Ti4200, Athlon 2500+, 512MB RAM
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
o/~ Join us now and share the software
As an owner of a 9700 and a hobbyist developer, I'm very familiar with the limitations. The shader length is highly restricted, conditional branching can't be done, so loops have to be unrolled. For this reason, even the latest ATI cards can't fully support the OpenGL Shading Language. What can be done on an FX or a Geforce 6 in one pass could take 10 or more passes on an X800. Many important features for shadow mapping are hopelessly missing, such as rendering to a depth texture, and hardware linear filtering.
Copying from ATI's web site, the specifications
for RADEON 9800 PRO say:
# SMARTSHADER(TM) 2.1
* Full support for Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0 programmable vertex and pixel shaders in hardware
* 2.0 Vertex Shaders support vertex programs up to 65,280 instructions with flow control
* 2.0 Pixel Shaders support up to 16 textures per rendering pass
* New F-buffer technology supports pixel shader programs with unlimited instructions
* 128-bit, 64-bit & 32-bit per pixel floating point color formats
* Multiple Render Target (MRT) support
* Shadow volume rendering acceleration
* Complete feature set also supported in OpenGL® via extensions
So, it seems that ATI cards do support flow
control (i.e. loops) and infinite pixel shader
length. Shadow volume acceleration might be
somehow limited as you say, but I haven't
really looked into it. Maybe some ATI white
paper will clarify these details.
NOTE that I'm referring to a 9800 product and
not to the high-end X800.
P.
My extreme distaste is for rushed-out-the-door drivers. Rarely does a day go by without my video card crashing at the desktop. Sure, they rock at running games and making lots of noise and heat, but when it comes to basic computing they fall short, very short.
This is why I love Matrox, because normal people spend more time working than playing. That said, I hate the Parhelia 512 because it's overpriced and underperformant. Give me a triple-head card that can run Doom3 at 1920x1440 and I will gladly plunk down 500$, just like I did several long years ago with a Geforce2 GTS when it was just a newborn, while everyone else was still giddy over their Voodoo 2 and TNT2. That same Geforce2 just recently fried after 4 long years of duty, and it was still fine for many games.
500$ / 4 years is 125$ per year, or 10$ per month for mind-blowing speed. Buy a budget card that you'll upgrade every year and you'll spend just as much in the end, except you'll always be in the bottom performance tier. That's how you measure the value of something.
-Billco, Fnarg.com