hahahaha crappy nvidia *ducks head*
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,3973,1261768,00.asp
half life 2 early bench marks
42 public posts in this discussion.
Post 2
awwww, apparently im going to get 11 fps :'(
Post 3
That is so lame.
Why release a game that 70% of the market will get shit fps in?
Post 4
Geforce 4 ti4200 128mb card go good?
Post 5
because 70% of the market should get their arses into gear and get an ati card
Post 6
That's quite wierd. Least my 9700 Pro will do nice ^_^ What quality and res were they running the games on, does it say?
Post 7
70% of the market probably own a GF4 ti and it seems to run HL2 very well in DX8.1 mode.
It's when you turn on DX9 for the FX cards that things start to go down hill. FX cards are shit at doing DX9 at the moment, it could just be coincidence that every DX9 benchmark performs poorly compared to ATI but i doubt it. Could be a driver thing like nVidia say but that seems unlikely to me and any improvment will probably come at a price of image quality etc. Carmack has said that Doom 3 only performs well in 12 and 16 bit precision modes and that 32 bit drops performance to much for FX cards. ATI runs 24 bit flat, thats all it does and it does it well...looks like they found the middle ground nicely.
Be interesting to see how things go when the game is actually released....who knows when that is, sept 30th but thats looking less likely :?
Post 8
My 9800pro should do nicely by the look of it... now all I need is a new CPU. :)
Ruin, re: quality settings - 640x480.
Post 9
The 5900 almost doubled its performance when switching from DX9 to DX8. I say again people that Pixel Shaders can always be disabled. Look at the performance of the GF4 4600, why is it doing so well? Because it doesn't suport PS2.0 (thank god)
I refuse to run any game with any PS support weather I'm running an ATi card or nVidia. I disable them :idea:
Pixel Shader gayness :oops:
Post 10
man, from looking at the results, seems like i wont even get 4fps with my geforce4mx, AMD 1800+...........
my only hope is that they tested the cards with every setting on highest.
Post 11
i got GF 4 ti4200 128mb
CPu: P4 2.4ghz
much fps would i get, would it be good quality?
Post 12
ull cope man, i have gf4 ti4200 64 and xp2100+, itll run, as long as the graphics aint turned up to full u should be fine. how do games like UT2003 and BF1942 run on ur computer when u pump the graphics up?
Post 13
o yeah, the Ti4200 is a better card then the fx5200, only it dont support dx9, so on dx 8 itll be be fine
Post 14
The settings used in the benchmark must be pretty hight. The requirements for the game is a DX6 video card with 16Mb ram. People need to take a chill pill.
Post 15
my comp runs fine on full UT2003 and BF
Post 16
Quote from rec:
Ruin, re: quality settings - 640x480.
"The result shown were measured in 1024x768-32bit without FSAA and Trilinear Filtering (No Anisotropic)"
Post 17
i have a Duron950
Gforce4 Ti4400.
Can you say Chug?
Post 18
Well looks like i wont be playing it on this machine
*Chucks computer out the window and askes becky to buy me a faster 1 * :twisted:
Post 19
Quote from reload!:
because 70% of the market should get their arses into gear and get an ati card
Damn straight, that'll teach those NVidia Whores :twisted:
Quote from Bond007:
Well looks like i wont be playing it on this machine
*Chucks computer out the window and askes becky to buy me a faster 1 * :twisted:
Yeah, like that'll happen
Post 20
Quote from Milenko:
i have a Duron950
Gforce4 Ti4400.
Get a new CPU, Athlons are bloody cheap 8)
Post 21
Quote from Wrathlon:
[quote:7b4a874d47="reload!"]because 70% of the market should get their arses into gear and get an ati card
Damn straight, that'll teach those NVidia Whores :twisted:
Quote from Bond007:
Well looks like i wont be playing it on this machine
*Chucks computer out the window and askes becky to buy me a faster 1 * :twisted:
Yeah, like that'll happen[/quote:7b4a874d47]
i wouldnt say i was an nvidia whore but im sticking with my ti 4400 for quite a bit loger. Neither Ati or Nvidia have inpressed me with there latest offering :)
Plus i only play cs and d2. Both games run awesome on my pc.
Post 22
Will my Atari 2600 with a broken joystick handle it?? Dont tell me I got to upgrade, i just got it working again ffs...... :shock:
Post 23
get a ath xp2500+, a volcano 9, a good overclocking mobo (all this for under 400) then OC it to 3000+
Post 24
Quote from PlayinG ShithousE:
get a ath xp2500+, a volcano 9, a good overclocking mobo (all this for under 400) then OC it to 3000+
Or not get the fan and use a stock AMD fan and don't get a motherboard that is designed for overclocking ie around $200 and just buy an 3000+ proc.
Post 25
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1863
Some more benchmarks for yous :D
Post 26
Thanks for that site jono. Heaps better site.
Maybe Nvidia should stop trying to blamn valve and had made sure their drivers were working properly before they released the card.
Post 27
http://www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/ati_vs_nvidia/dx9_desktop/hl2_followup/002.htm
Post 28
LIGHT REFRACTION!!! *orgasms*
Post 29
Is the benchmarking tool seperate to the game or does it need the game to run. If it is will it be available to the public before the game is released.
Would like to see if my laptop can pull more then 1fps :lol:
Post 30
is there any stats for older Ti4200 am i going to be able to play this on my xp2600+ and 128 meg GF card??? :cry: :cry: :cry:
Post 31
You should be able to easily (maybe even in high detail). Just may not look as good as on newer cards as its not run in DX 9 mode.
Post 32
Quote from Tachi (aka KILLER):
Maybe Nvidia should stop trying to blamn valve and had made sure their drivers were working properly
They did, the current version of HL2 (the one benchmarked) is optimised for ATi cards, but not nVidia. They specifically went out of their way to use an older version so that ATi cards would run much faster.
Post 33
hehehe.
It may be cheap, but its more expensive than i can afford atm.
Oh, does anyone else remember the HL2 teaser video chugging at one point? I remember seeing it, seeing the game chugg in a section then thinking "Holy shit, if THEIR comps are chugging to do that, then whats mine gonna be like?"
I can answer my own question.
Poxy.
Post 34
http://www.sharkyforums.com/showthread.php?s=557c145b7aa42dc1f8496778c54530ec&threadid=206959
Ody - i recommend you read it. you'd find it interesting - and you'd see why i believe you are wrong about this:
Quote from Odyssey:
They did, the current version of HL2 (the one benchmarked) is optimised for ATi cards, but not nVidia. They specifically went out of their way to use an older version so that ATi cards would run much faster.
Post 35
Yeah from what i read it seems that have spent a lot more time optimising the game for nvidia cards so it can run decent on them.
Post 36
Here should explain some of the reasons for Nvidia being Nshittier:
http://www.3dcenter.org/artikel/cinefx/index_e.php
Post 37
ATi and nVidia have both worked with Valve to optimise their products. ATi's was done at an early stage. nVidia's was done later (build 50) they benchmarked build 45 :?
Quote from nVidia's comment:
We're confused as to why Valve chose to use Release. 45 (Rel. 45) - because up to two weeks prior to the Shader Day we had been working closely with Valve to ensure that Release 50 (Rel. 50) provides the best experience possible on NVIDIA hardware.
NVIDIA's Rel. 50 driver will be public before the game is available. Since we know that obtaining the best pixel shader performance from the GeForce FX GPUs currently requires some specialized work, our developer technology team works very closely with game developers.
Post 38
From AnandTech
Quote:
The most obvious is through updated drivers; NVIDIA does have a new driver release on the horizon, the Detonator 50 series of drivers, however Valve instructed us not to use these drivers as they do not render fog in Half-Life 2.
Post 39
Quote from Flammable:
i only play cs and d2. Both games run awesome on my pc.
A Voodoo3 will play both those games with excellent performance and quality. If BattleField wasn't around I would run mine.
Glide 1337ness 8)
Post 40
Purposefully making a game that doesn't run well on a series of cards that have such a large marketshare is very bad business. Unless ATi payed TOP dollar but:
1. It'd hurt Valve's respectability if it ever got out.
2. With a game like HL2, one of the most anticipated games in a LONG time, it's gonna sell like fkn ice-cream in a heat wave and so the market with Nvidia cards is worth shiznatloads.
Anandtech put it far better than I could why they don't believe Valve intentionally made a game favouring one type of card.
Post 41
As I said both ATi and nVidia have both been working with Valve. It's just that work has been left out on the nVidia cards, not the ATi so those specific benchmarks are biast. I'll wait until the game is released, then I'll buy a Kyro Series5 :lol: Both ATi and nVidia suck in their own ways.
Post 42
[Image: http://www.users.on.net/dykstra/HL2prop.jpg]
[Image: http://www.users.on.net/dykstra/iraqividia.jpg]
btw HL2 isn't the only DX9 benchmark to bring about embarrasing scores for nvidia's FX cards.
Boohoo nvidia stuffed up...it happens, can't always be the best, sooner or later you get superseeded. ATI got it right, lucky them yay now all lets whine that oh no theres a game being made that will run shit. Simple, don't run DX9 mode if you don't own a DX9 ATI card. Upgrade or continue whineing, up to you but I know which option i'd prefer.
DX8.1 mode will run fine on all the other cards that support it anyway, just wont get all the added eye candy.