06.26.03




h o m e : n e w s : r e v i e w s : d o w n l o a d s : a r t i c l e s : d i s c u s s i o n : l i n k s : a b o u t : a d s









"NV35 Specifications"

Intel Canterwood Chipset reviews

Radeon 9600 Pro reviews

First Mobile 9200 and Geforce Go 5200 benchmarks

Geforce FX 5800 Reviews

ATI announces AIW 9800 Pro

NVIDIA to show a First Look at E3

OpenGL Meeting Notes

Ignore the left column links

Radeon 9800 Pro review from Guru3d




<< archive







How many GeForce boards do you own? Choose below.

More than 10!

5-10

1-5

None








home : news : news@pcrave.com : have a comment?





Friday, June 28, 2002

Carmack again on Parhelia and P10 - Benjamin Sun
I'll let his words speak for him
Welcome to id Software's Finger Service V1.5!

Name: John Carmack
Email:
Description: Programmer
Project:
Last Updated: 06/27/2002 21:18:25 (Central Standard Time)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 27, 2002
-------------
More graphics card notes:

I need to apologize to Matrox -- their implementation of hardware displacement
mapping is NOT quad based. I was thinking about a certain other companies proposed approach. Matrox's implementation actually looks quite good, so even if we don't use it because of the geometry amplification issues, I think it
will serve the noble purpose of killing dead any proposal to implement a quad based solution.

I got a 3Dlabs P10 card in last week, and yesterday I put it through its paces. Because my time is fairly over committed, first impressions often determine how much work I devote to a given card. I didn't speak to ATI for months after they gave me a beta 8500 board last year with drivers that rendered the console incorrectly. :-)

I was duly impressed when the P10 just popped right up with full functional support for both the fallback ARB_ extension path (without specular highlights), and the NV10 NVidia register combiners path. I only saw two
issues that were at all incorrect in any of our data, and one of them is debatable. They don't support NV_vertex_program_1_1, which I use for the NV20 path, and when I hacked my programs back to 1.0 support for testing, an issue did show up, but still, this is the best showing from a new board from any company other than Nvidia.

It is too early to tell what the performance is going to be like, because they don't yet support a vertex object extension, so the CPU is hand feeding all the vertex data to the card at the moment. It was faster than I expected for
those circumstances.



Talk about this post >>

Tuesday, June 25, 2002

John Carmack on Parhelia - Benjamin Sun
I've decided to post JC's entire plan file for today without comment. Click here to read the plan file.

Name: John Carmack
Email:
Description: Programmer
Project:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 25, 2002
-------------
The Matrox Parhelia Report:

The executive summary is that the Parhelia will run Doom, but it is not performance competitive with Nvidia or ATI.

Driver issue remain, so it is not perfect yet, but I am confident that Matrox will resolve them.

The performance was really disappointing for the first 256 bit DDR card. I tried to set up a "poster child" case that would stress the memory subsystem above and beyond any driver or triangle level inefficiencies, but I was
unable to get it to ever approach the performance of a GF4.

The basic hardware support is good, with fragment flexibility better than GF4 (but not as good as ATI 8500), but it just doesn't keep up in raw performance.With a die shrink, this chip could probably be a contender, but there are probably going to be other chips out by then that will completely eclipse this generation of products.

None of the special features will be really useful for Doom:

The 10 bit color framebuffer is nice, but Doom needs more than 2 bits of destination alpha when a card only has four texture units, so we can't use it.

Anti aliasing features are nice, but it isn't all that fast in minimum feature mode, so nobody is going to be turning on AA. The same goes for "surround gaming". While the framerate wouldn't be 1/3 the base, it would still probably be cut in half.

Displacement mapping. Sigh. I am disappointed that the industry is still pursuing any quad based approaches. Haven't we learned from the stellar success of 3DO, Saturn, and NV1 that quads really suck? In any case, we can't
use any geometry amplification scheme (including ATI's truform) in conjunction with stencil shadow volumes.


Talk about this post >>

Anand's Parhelia review - Benjamin Sun
To add another to the growing list . Anand has put up his review up . Click here to read his review.

Talk about this post >>

64MB or 128MB Ti4200? - Benjamin Sun
SharkyExtreme has a article up that shows the pros/cons of either Ti4200 configuration

Click here to read the article

Talk about this post >>

Anand's Ti4200 comparison - Benjamin Sun
Anandtech has a comparison up of 5 different Geforce4 Ti4200s.

Click here for the comparison

Talk about this post >>

Parhelia reviews - Benjamin Sun
Our Parhelia review will , due to unforseen circumstances (having received the board just yesterday), be up as soon as I can give the Parhelia my usual thorough look. I felt it was important to be thorough and not just post a few benchmarks and comments.

Click here for Hot Hardware's Parhelia review.

Click here for Extreme Tech's review

Click here for Tech Report's review

Click here for Tom's Hardware's review

Talk about this post >>

Monday, June 24, 2002

Visiontek Geforce4 Ti4200 Review - Benjamin Sun
Bjorn has a review of the Visiontek Geforce4 Ti4200 up. Click here to read the review . In a related note my 4200 Visiontek review will be up pretty soon.



Talk about this post >>








a Filnet solution



Copyright 2000 pcrave. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement. Terms of Use.
Site Design by Filnet, Inc.