confusion about doom3 vs HL2 benchmarks

Richard Dower wrote:
"maximised"?...is that like "optimised", why do they have to do this?...it
justs leads to accusations of cheating and missing detail levels. Can't we
just get them to work and kick ATI's ass without "optimisation"?

Another explanation is that ATI made their optimization (or whatever you
called it) sooner
Either way, ATI did well, and much better than nVidia, for the time being.

--
XandreX
/I'm that kind of people your parents warned you about/

"who be dat?" wrote in message
...
That's an interesting question. The first thing that pops into my head:
what Doom 3 benchmark? As I recall, Id hasn't released a Doom 3
Benchmark.
However, an extremely early beta of Doom 3 from an E3 preview was leaked
and
floating around. Like I said, this was very early beta and it had some
more
optimizing to be done to it. If this was the doom 3 benchmarks that were
posted, then these are quite frankly a waste of time as they aren't
anywhere
near accurate reflection of the final code. Plus, who's to say that since
it's early beta that the game wasn't more optimized for one game as
compared
to another? Since the game is in OpenGL, you in effect right the game for
each vid card. Speaking of OpenGL...

It should be pointed out that Doom3 uses OpenGL while HL2 users D3d, which
is a big difference. I think the vid actually have more capabilities
exposed in OpenGL than they do in D3d, for example. Depending on if
Nvidia
has a feature that the ATi doesn't and it's exposed in their drivers, then
possibly Nvidia may perform faster than ATi. I do seem to recall that
Nvidia has the ability to handle shadows a bit better than ATi in OpenGL.

Due to the fact the games are on different subsystems, it will be tough to
draw any comparisons between two when it comes to performance.

Chris Smith
Except Doom makers have already admitted they have had trouble with FX cards
and have had to write code specific for it.
Whatever is going on I think it is clear that the Nvidia cards ARE having
hardware problems and no amount of wriggling is going to get them out of it.
Have you been reading things? Nvidia'[s press release has already tried to
say there is no picture quality difference between dx8 and 9 and the shaders
used, they have had MS now breathing down their necks about this, they also
blamed valve for not using beta drivers, what else was it, 3d mark 03, they
blamed them for the problems and they also blamed the poor quality of Tomb
Raider for the problems there too. How much can one company squirm? They
have to accept responsibility at some point.
As more and more games come out, and these elusive 50 drivers appear, we
shall see whats really going on, nvidia will be caught out then, until that
time they can keep squirming, keep blaming everyone else but it will come
out.

In both games neither of them are out yet and neither of them have gone gold
and as drivers are always been improved its way to soon to judge either of
the cards.

--
CLAN JAGUAR
-------------------------
www.clan-jaguar.co.uk
"Sumedh" wrote in message
om...
Hi all,

This recent controversy about Nvidia cards underperforming in HL2
benchmarks sure makes me feel good about my 9600Pro purchase, not to
mention seeing the FPS/$ chart!

Anyways, in Anandtech.com's review of the 5900 Ultra, he performed
Doom3 benchmarks, and Nvidia clearly shines compared to ATI.

Whats the discrepancy here? Doesnt Doom3 make use of DX9 features? Is
that benchmark reliable? Or are we caught up in a media hype after
Gabe Newell's damning report on nvidia?

any thoughts?

sumedh

"NAZGUL" wrote in message
s.com...
In both games neither of them are out yet and neither of them have gone
gold
and as drivers are always been improved its way to soon to judge either of
the cards.

Except this isn't about drivers if you actually read anything you will see.
The controversy is that Nvidia will "optimise" drivers meaning you don't get
what you pay for in terms of the advertised technology, this is purely a
hardware issue not drivers. Yeah sure, drivers will help, but like nvidia
said, theres no difference between pixel shading 1.4 and 2, and theres no
real difference between dx8 and 9, enjoy your fx :s

"ho alexandre" wrote in message
...
Either way, ATI did well, and much better than nVidia, for the time being.

Not for the time being, period. The Nvidia hardware isn't up to the task at
all.

Wrong. Both games are far into development and tweaks to the engines
and improvements in the drivers aren't going to drastically change the
results. Especially for HL2 which is almost done.

Anyone who thinks that Nvidia is going to magically improve shader
performance without impacting quality is confused.

In article m,
says...
In both games neither of them are out yet and neither of them have gone gold
and as drivers are always been improved its way to soon to judge either of
the cards.