DOOM 3 & DX9 [Sep 17, 2003, 7:08 pm ET] – Share – Viewing Comments
With all the discussion lately about how Half-Life 2 will run on ATI hardware
compared with NVIDIA accelerators, BonusWeb.cz
shot off an email to id Software's John Carmack to ask how DOOM 3 and other
games are likely to be impacted by the difference between the two graphics
platforms running DirectX 9. Here's how he responded:
Unfortunately, it will probably be representative of most DX9 games. Doom has a custom back end that uses the lower precisions on the GF-FX, but when you run it with standard fragment programs just like ATI, it is a lot slower. The precision doesn't really matter to Doom, but that won't be a reasonable option in future games designed around DX9 level hardware as a minimum spec.
"I'll add this, has anyone thought that maybe the FX line's poor performance in default DX9 is because it runs FP32 by default (instead of FP24 on the Radeons)? So it could be Nvidia's attempt at pushing higher detail turning around to bite them in the ass. I wonder how the cards would match up against each other if the FX ran FP24, or the Radeons ran FP32."
nVidia can do FP16, and FP32. ATi can only do FP24, the minimum spec for DX9. Sure, you can praise nVidia for trying to raise the bar in doing FP32. But then you have to wonder why they put in FP16. Especially since they write their drivers to operate in FP16 and not FP32.
nVidia can do FP16, and FP32. ATi can only do FP24, the minimum spec for DX9. Sure, you can praise nVidia for trying to raise the bar in doing FP32. But then you have to wonder why they put in FP16. Especially since they write their drivers to operate in FP16 and not FP32.
Date
Subject
Author
Copyright © 1996-2025 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Privacy Policy. Manage Cookie Settings.
News CGI copyright © 1999-2025 James "furn" Furness & Blue's News. All rights reserved.
Chatbear v1.5.0/blue++: Page generated 20 June 2025, 19:24.