backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 28 comment(s) - last by Axbattler.. on May 19 at 10:44 AM

Graph courtesy of FiringSquad
The first DX10 (WGF2.0) benchmarks have been released thanks to AMD and Nvidia.

AMD during its R600 launch released an early working demo of the previously released DX9 title, Call of Juarez. The working demo is in reality a soon to be release patch that adds DX10 support and effects. NVIDIA in return "leaked/released" an alpha demo of the DirectX 9/10 game "Lost Planet."

Shown here courtesy of FiringSquad is a preview bench of Call of Juarez running at 1280X1024 with 4XAA. The cards running it are the Nvidia 8800 GTX, AMD Radeon HD 2900 XT and the slightly overclocked EVGA 8800 GTS, whose general performance falls between a stock 8800 GTS and a 8800 GTX.

We have the Lost Planet benchmarks as well courtesy of Beyond3D. Also from Beyond3D we have in depth DirectX 10 benchmarks courtesy of forum member "aeryon". Benchmarks can be found near the bottom of this page.

It seems that finally, seven months after the first DX10 compatible cards launched we have some programs starting to take advantage of their abilities. Shortly in the pipeline we have DirectX 10 patches for Company of Heroes and Supreme Commander, as well as having the DirectX 10 title Crysis and Unreal Tournament 2007 due to be released shortly. This is truly shaping up to be a wonderful era for the graphics industry and the computer gaming industry as well.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Let's end this myth.
By ahkey on 5/15/2007 1:30:07 AM , Rating: 3
Bungie have stated that Halo 2 is DX9 only. It is in no way a DX10 title. It is a mediocre DX9 port and nothing more.




RE: Let's end this myth.
By Anh Huynh on 5/15/2007 2:36:08 AM , Rating: 4
http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=88368&A...

Although not full DX10 hardware support, DX10 hardware will have some type of edge over DX9 hardware.

GamePro.com, as well as many other game media outlets, have reported that Halo 2 will support Direct X 10 visual effects. This is not the case, according to an update from Microsoft. Though the Windows Vista version of Halo 2 will be based on Direct X 9 graphics technologies, owners of Direct X 10 hardware can expect to see "certain performance benefits." What those benefits are remains to be seen, though faster frame rates seem likely.

I would classify that in the DX10 category, if its only DX10 hardware that's receiving gains.


RE: Let's end this myth.
By ahkey on 5/15/2007 10:01:57 AM , Rating: 1
Reviews disagree.

"If it had been a pure DirectX 10 thoroughbred, dripping with freshly processed pixels, then maybe the Vista-only tag might have made sense somehow. As it is, this is a weird, ugly botch that I can't imagine anyone upgrading to Vista for."

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?i...

"While many players will be sad to hear that this game doesn’t support DirectX 10, it does sport some new lighting features and a fairly wide variety of resolutions ranging from 800x600 up to 1680x1050."

http://www.gamingtrend.com/Reviews/review/review.p...


RE: Let's end this myth.
By ahkey on 5/15/2007 10:16:16 AM , Rating: 6
Finally, Bungie forum's FAQ:

Q: Why will Halo 2 for Windows Vista not support DX10?
A: Halo 2 will certainly support DX10 graphics cards but the game itself is not being re-written to specifically take advantage of upcoming DX10 features. The more robust your graphics card, the more visual features and fidelity you will be able to enjoy.


RE: Let's end this myth.
By BMFPitt on 5/15/2007 7:58:29 AM , Rating: 4
I'm sure Halo 3 will be DX10, when the PC gets it in 2017. If you're not going to port the game in a timely fashion, Microsoft, just give the 360 a mouse already.


RE: Let's end this myth.
By KaiserCSS on 5/15/2007 10:07:05 AM , Rating: 3
Amen to that!

Give me mouse compatibility or give me death!

Actually, I'm sure mouse-keyboard support would definitely attract more PC-native gamers to the console market. Then again, where do you draw the boundary line? What with Live Anywhere coming out, it might be that the next iteration of the Xbox will be linked closer than ever with your computer.


RE: Let's end this myth.
By Kefner on 5/15/2007 10:46:33 AM , Rating: 2
I'll stick with my pad, I am not as good with a M/KB combo. But I am still with you guys. I have been hoping for a true M/KB combo for the 360. This just helps to bring in the non-console gamers, and helps grow the community!!! I am behind you guys 110%!!!!


RE: Let's end this myth.
By Ringold on 5/17/2007 5:07:34 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure they would give it a M/KB combo, but then people would quickly realize "Gee, this is just a really cheap-ass computer", and lead those with higher incomes or the more tech-savvy to just build/buy an HTPC.


RE: Let's end this myth.
By dflynchimp on 5/15/2007 10:18:56 PM , Rating: 2
lol, the irony thing is you might actually be right about the port-to-PC date for Halo 3...


ATI is Doomed
By IntelGirl on 5/15/07, Rating: 0
RE: ATI is Doomed
By ioKain on 5/15/2007 9:22:31 AM , Rating: 2
The XT was made to compete against the GTS. I would wait for some driver revisions before I would start saying owned, especially since the gap is only 2 frames.


RE: ATI is Doomed
By ioKain on 5/15/2007 9:35:51 AM , Rating: 2
If anything you could look at the gap between the GTX and XT which is only 8 frames. Then you could ask yourself, is that 8 frames worth justifying an increase in almost 200 dollars?

The XT a failure, I think not. By the way, I'll be picking up a GTS in the near future.


RE: ATI is Doomed
By peldor on 5/15/2007 9:57:32 AM , Rating: 2
By the way, I'll be picking up a GTS in the near future.

Precisely why it's failed. The 2900XT has failed to offer most consumers much value compared to the cheaper 8800 GTS (currently starting at $270 after rebate).

I don't think AMD is necessarily doomed in the graphics arena. The 8600 isn't that impressive. AMD could score a win there if they'll ever release a mid-range part.


RE: ATI is Doomed
By Unknown Exile on 5/15/2007 11:46:35 AM , Rating: 2
AMD isn't dead… yet, one must remember that those tests are being done using DX 9/10 hybrids there aren’t true DX10 games there just demos. Honestly Nvidia has had 7 months to get the drivers right for DX9, one would hope that they have got it right by now. And they have also been playing around with there DX10 drivers for longer too. Essentially we won’t really know until we see real DX10 games, by then AMD will no doubt have fixed any problems they have had with there drivers. Also you should remember that the AMD cards GPU’s also supports just about every GPU related application, tests done using GPU related video encoding/editing applications, physics, and CAD modelling programs show that there cards do in-fact perform better then Nvidia’s solutions. Of course most users won’t be using any of those EVER but…hey it has it.

Also benchmarks I’ve seem on DX9 games show that over the 8800 GTS 320 & 640MB the HD 2900XT does in-fact perform better (now for AMD flaming) the problem is its about as much gain as the difference from the 320MB and the 640MB versions of the 8800, in other words not a whole lot. The AMD card also uses more power, MUCH more power in comparison. And because it uses more power it has a nice big fan that’s also noisy (I’ve been told it’s relatively noise). Last on this is that AMD’s card also costs about $120+ more then the stock 8800 GTS 320MB’s for the small performance gain many are saying that its really not worth it.

Also just to mention 2 stock 8800 GTS 320MB cards run in SLI show in many benchmarks better performance then a 8800 GTX, and costs about the same. And since some factory overclocked cards are almost as cheap as the stock cards running them in a SLI can only be a good thing (probably not for your cooling system an power supply QQ). When I finally do move to Vista and DX10 games I’ll probably use this.

What we should expect / hope to see are better drivers from AMD (honestly in comparison to the first drivers that Nvidia supplied for its 8800’s AMD’s are better), a real DX10 game benchmark, a decent price drop in the cost of AMD’s cards over the next few months, that the new version of Crossfire finally works out all the bugs, and an unbiased benchmarks and reviews (That’s more a hope, that will probably never happen).


RE: ATI is Doomed
By ioKain on 5/15/2007 11:55:19 AM , Rating: 2
I'm only getting a GTS because my motherboard does not support Crossfire. If it had I would most likely get an XT. It actually sickens me to get another Nvidia card, but I'm not going to get another motherboard. Nvidia's driver support is absolutely horrible. I've had nothing but trouble with my two 7600's and the 4800 I had way back. My 9800 pro worked flawlessly.

Besides the 8800 GTS you reference is the 320MB not the 640MB which is what the XT is up against.


RE: ATI is Doomed
By Unknown Exile on 5/16/2007 1:05:07 AM , Rating: 2
I agree totally that Nvidia's driver support really sucks. I had a notebook PC that had a Series 6 Go card in it. Nvidia doesn’t make drivers for those cards, it’s either the manufacture or the company that build the notebook PC. However Nvidia support failed to mention this to me and I was stuck looking for the drivers on Nvidia sites. Besides that I've never had trouble with Nvidia, and since I won't upgrade until I'm ready to, by then everything will be working properly or close to it. I may get an AMD card, it’s just that until I see better drivers, more benchmarks and more on there new Crossfire setup I probably won't. And yes I do know I would be gluttonous by running 2 Pre-Overclocked 8800GTS in an SLI, but so is everyone even just thinking of getting 2 2900XT’s and running them in crossfire.

quote:
Besides the 8800 GTS you reference is the 320MB not the 640MB which is what the XT is up against.

Do you know the difference between the 2 versions of the 8800 GTS, besides the difference in memory? Nothing...they have the exact same number of everything else, yes its true that tests show that the 640MB version is slightly better then the 320MB but the difference is mediocre at best. The XT was meant to compete with the 8800 GTS both of them, and yes I know the XT does in-fact perform better but it’s not that big of a difference. But now we have Factory overclocked versions of the 8800 GTS 320MB that boost performance to close stock 8800GTX performance which in most cases can be bought for $50-150 more then the standard stock GTS price. And the same goes for the 640MB version. If your going to look at it from any perspective take the price of any 2900XT cards and see if you can match or outperform it with any other 8800 card for less or equal price, overclocked or not.

Now I’m not a AMD/ATI hater, I don’t hate the cards and honestly I wouldn’t be surprised if AMD released drivers for the card that cause its performance to go through the roof, but I also don’t expect it to happen that way, it could be quite a while before we see anything really change.

But as I’ve said it’s going to be a wait and see approach until DX10 games and better looking benchmarks popup.


RE: ATI is Doomed
By Mojo the Monkey on 5/17/2007 4:26:23 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but check the Lost Planet benchmarks linked in the article. Thats kind of depressing.


RE: ATI is Doomed
By Axbattler on 5/19/2007 10:44:34 AM , Rating: 2
At 0xAA/16xAF, the XT is right in between the GTS and GTX in that article.

The XT is also quite often between the GTS and GTX in DX9 games (including the Lost Planet at DX9 - check out the follow up article on FS), including at 4xAA/16xAF.

Based on the DX10 Lost Planet benchmarks, it seems that the XT does not handle DX10 combined with AA. Perhaps it is caused by an architectural weakness within the XT. But IMO, it is too early to come to this conclusion. The Lost Planet, according to FS, was meant to perform better in DX10, but it does not. So things may change with the final product (of course, it could also mean a wider gap between nVidia and AMD). And of course, both nVidia and AMD can still tweak their drivers. But even discounting all those factors, the XT remains more often than not between the GTS and GTX.


FPS
By Preyfar on 5/15/2007 2:14:54 AM , Rating: 3
I thought the DX10 architexture was supposed to streamline the way graphics are processed to produce better both framerates AND graphics in the end.

Those framerates just seem... poor. Very, very poor. I won't deny the image quality and graphics probablyI'd have expected to have an average of at least 60FPS, and at that resolution, that seems exceedingly low -- especially for an 8800 GTX!




RE: FPS
By someguy123 on 5/15/2007 3:57:48 AM , Rating: 3
it does give better framerates when compared to similiar quality output by dx9. 4xAA can be very, very hard to when there are many more edges over longer distances to sample.

vista also reduces the framerate a bit, but probably not drasticly. these are 1st gen dx10 cards as well, so "low" performance is to be expected.


RE: FPS
By JimFear on 5/15/2007 9:05:59 AM , Rating: 2
Don't forget the current driver shambles from both camps.


interesting
By Viszpi on 5/15/2007 9:38:49 AM , Rating: 2
With AF and no AA the hd 2900XT beats even the 8800GTX...
http://prohardver.hu/cikkek/2007-05-14/r600_elkesz...
(at the bottom of the page)

I think it's still needs driver optimization too and time to see how deos this family perform,let's not jump the conclusion too soon.




RE: interesting
By maroon1 on 5/15/2007 12:28:54 PM , Rating: 1
Go to hell, ATI fanboy

8800GTX beats HD2900XT in all benchmarks
8800GTS beats HD2900XT in many benchmarks

http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4946&s=12
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2988...


RE: interesting
By Viszpi on 5/15/2007 2:36:58 PM , Rating: 1
http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=4946&s=22
Here's what I said 10-40% speed up whit a newer driver and I linked a directx 10 game demo test. I know how "poorly" this card perform in directx 9.0, but there is a lot of game in wich it close to it's opponent the 8800GTS.

(How about not sending me to hell will you? Thanks. Just for the record I'v got nvidea cards since I've upgraded from ATI 9600Pro 2 years ago. Be objective thanks.)


Numbers suck
By scrapsma54 on 5/15/2007 2:01:22 PM , Rating: 2
There is solid evidence that the HD 2900 out performs the other cards at higher resolutions and has less variable frames so what it lacks in useless frames that are not going to be even veiwed unless you have a 150Hz monitor, it makes up in stability and resolution. Am I throwing spit in the wind or am I actually using good judgement? Its up to you to look at the benchmarks to believe it or not.




RE: Numbers suck
By Unknown Exile on 5/16/2007 1:26:51 AM , Rating: 2
Technically yes your right that at higher resolutions that the HD 2900 will perform better if not more stable then other cards. However it’s not what were really seeing at the moment but I don't expect that to last, just wait for new drivers and hopefully there should be a world of difference. I know some benchmarks indicate much better performance then Nvidia cards at higher resolutions its just that else where I see plain improvement not a great difference.


Why not XP
By DanTheManRIP on 5/17/2007 3:54:31 PM , Rating: 2
Probably a question asked a million times before, but what does Vista have that XP doesnt that means we have to upgrade before using DirectX 10.
Is it some complex compatability thing?
Or just a way to force people to upgrade?




PC gaming still going strong?
By wallijonn on 5/17/2007 4:39:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This is truly shaping up to be a wonderful era for the graphics industry and the computer gaming industry as well.


All I see is less and less PC game real estate in the major retail chains, like Fry Electronics, Best Buy, Circuit City. If you couple that with less people wanting to switch over to Vista, I see a 50% decline in PC games. What there will be is about a dozen AAA titles coming out as opposed to 300 games coming out.

When Doom3 came out there was a surge in graphic card sales. I don't see the same happening with PCI-E because it means that a whole new computer has to be bought. I heard that Vista doesn't like playing with older DX9 games, so why bother? Everyone might as well wait another year until there are DX10 games out. Then maybe the gamers will buy Vista.




"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki