This whole HalfLife2 thing is ridiculous

methylenedioxy wrote:
the beta 50's aren't working either so their response to the valve
claims about using the beta 50 drivers to solve the problems is nonsense,

Why ? the beta 50 are BETA. Have you never written code ? There are many
other pieces of evidence that tend to proove nVidia has ****ed, why take
a false one ?

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

william bell wrote:
Nothing at all to do with the game, its all about DX9 and how its supported,
even ATI Cards have a problem with no Z Buffer or a limited one..

But are you sure that Valve uses Direct3D 9 only ?


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

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 16:47:27 +0200
"Flow" wrote:

When minimum specs of such games is too high many ppl are gonna pass
on halflife2 and doom3 etc.
There are not too many ppl willing to pay so much cash for a high end
video card.
This is something game developers know and therefor they have problems
now,they want to sell to as many ppl as possible.

The _minimum_ requirements for Doom3 are supposed to be 1 GHz CPU and
GF1 or Radeon 7500. The_minimum_ requirements for Tomb Raider AOD are
1.5 GHz and 8 MB video board _or_ 500 MHz and 16 MB TnL video board.
The _minumum_ requirements for HalfLife 2 are supposed to be 700 MHz,
128 MB RAM, and TNT2 or better video.

Tomb Raider Angel of Darkness runs very nicely on my Radeon 8500DV and
Athlon Thunderbird 1400. I suspect it would look a lot prettier on an
Athlon 64 with an 9800 Pro, but they aren't necessary to play.

There's a difference between a minimum spec and what is required to
utilize every feature of the game.

"Danny" schreef in bericht
...

I am beside myself with how the Nvidia line is suddenly being
considered
second-rate compared to the ATI line, simply because of one
game.

Umm, sorry to bust your bubble man, but ever heard of 3dmark 2003?
Shadermark? Aquamark? Tomb Raider 4?

It's actually Tomb Raider 6.







--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

I am beside myself with how the Nvidia line is suddenly being considered
second-rate compared to the ATI line, simply because of one game.

Umm, sorry to bust your bubble man, but ever heard of 3dmark 2003?
Shadermark? Aquamark? Tomb Raider 4?
Hello McFly!

Basically anything that makes heavy use of DX9 runs ass-like on the GFFX
line unless it is "optimized" by Nvidia.

But, Valve has basically come
out and acted as if their new game is 100% representative of how video
games
will be made in the future.

I think that is your twisted interpretation of things. They have acted as if
HL2 is 100% representative of how HL2 will perform, but Doom3 for example
performs better on GFFX line (when properly downgraded in quality anyway).
Didn't see Valve saying anything about that.

That's certainly egotistical, and downright incorrect.
The other 100s of game developers are not going to suddenly say,
"ooh, here's how Valve does things, so we need to copy it."

Here you're putting words in their mouths. Unethical debating technique.
Please stop doing that, you know the Valve team isn't here to defend
themselves from your accusations!

I guess what really frosts me is that Valve (obviously in bed with ATI)

"Obviously", since DX9 games simply happen to perform better on current ATi
hardware compared to current GFFX hardware. Geez man, why don't you take
Valve on their word when they say their relationship with ATi grew from that
fact, and not the other way around? Not even Nvidia is claiming Valve
sabotaged Nvidia performance on purpose. It's only irate internet fanboys
doing that!

comes out with their own benchmarks - which are not being validated by any
independent source

Tell me which benchmarks are validated by ANY independent source! Ok, you
got Rightmark, which is an open-source bench, but that's STILL not watched
over by any independent organization of any kind.

and all of the other benchmarks out there, showing the
GeforceFX line beating the ATI line in many other games are thrown out the
window.

You have to understand HL2 is a game which uses lots of DX9 pixel shaders.
GFFX hardware simply does not perform well when executing DX9 pixel shaders.
Not that difficult is it?

Valve can say all they want that Nvidia shouldn't make "game-specific"
drivers - but I'll bet that the last few Catalyst revisions have had
updates
for HL2 in them.
but Valve acting like the supreme entity in all of this is ridiculous.

Well, if you hadn't let your own bias blind you, you'd see that Valve
criticized MORE than one company in their Shader Days presentation for doing
funny stuff in their drivers. It's not just Nvidia who's fooling around,
though it's probably safe to say they're doing it to a greater extent than
ATi since they're in greater need of doing so. Check Aquamark quality
comparisons for example. Det 50 driver compared to det 44 is blurrier and
less color saturated in comparison. It is faster however, yayy!

Kinda proves mine and Valve's point now doesn't it?

I think I'm going to pass on HL2, just out of principle.

Out of what principle? The principle of ignorance?

"Lenny" wrote in message
...

But are you sure that Valve uses Direct3D 9 only ?

HL2 supports DX8 and 8.1 fallbacks for pixel shader effects. They'll look
worse and perform slower (unless you own a GFFX, haha), but it's not a
DX9-ONLY game.

In fact Valve have said themselves that they will default fx cards to dx8
due to the poor performances.

I am beside myself with how the Nvidia line is suddenly being considered
second-rate compared to the ATI line, simply because of one game.

Umm, sorry to bust your bubble man, but ever heard of 3dmark 2003?
Shadermark? Aquamark? Tomb Raider 4?

It's actually Tomb Raider 6.

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 19:11:17 +0200
ho alexandre wrote:

J.Clarke wrote:
Nothing at all to do with the game, its all about DX9 and how its
supported, even ATI Cards have a problem with no Z Buffer or a
limitedone..

?!?!?!?! Anyone who claims "ATI Cards have no Z buffer" is simply
ignorant.

william bell did not say that, he said that ATI
cards can't handle application that do not use Z-buffer.

He did? Where did he say that?

And if an ATI card can't handle an application that does not use the
Z-buffer then that must mean that it crashes Windows notepad and every
other 2D application, as none of them use a Z-buffer.

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



--
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

When minimum specs of such games is too high many ppl are gonna pass on
halflife2 and doom3 etc.
There are not too many ppl willing to pay so much cash for a high end video
card.
This is something game developers know and therefor they have problems
now,they want to sell to as many ppl as possible.

"Danny" schreef in bericht
...

I am beside myself with how the Nvidia line is suddenly being
considered
second-rate compared to the ATI line, simply because of one game.

Umm, sorry to bust your bubble man, but ever heard of 3dmark 2003?
Shadermark? Aquamark? Tomb Raider 4?

It's actually Tomb Raider 6.

J.Clarke wrote:
Nothing at all to do with the game, its all about DX9 and how its
supported, even ATI Cards have a problem with no Z Buffer or a limited
one..

?!?!?!?! Anyone who claims "ATI Cards have no Z buffer" is simply
ignorant.

william bell did not say that, he said that ATI
cards can't handle application that do not use Z-buffer.

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

methylenedioxy wrote:
Why ? the beta 50 are BETA. Have you never written code ? There are many
other pieces of evidence that tend to proove nVidia has ****ed, why take
a false one ?

Erm but the so-called Beta's are out in 2 weeks :s So to be fair, they are
only beta in name, only because they haven't actually been released yet.

Well, that may be true. But back when I programmed, I remember the very
last days were soooo productive for my projects.
I hope it will be the case, otherwise I'll be waiting eagerly to read
nVidia's new argument why their cards behave under what's been promised.

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