GeForce FX reviews

[vampireuk]

I received this in a email from hardocp:

It looks as though the bad IQ conclusions in many GeForce FX reviews might not be justified afterall….Kyle thought of something and ran it by NVIDIA…..looks like we have a bug of sorts…



( from [H] )



===================================================================================================================================================================

GeForce FX Reviews Wrong?

While we are still looking into this, it seems that the in-game screen shots posted on the Net yesterday showing off IQ produced by the GeForceFX 5800 Ultra are "wrong".

There is not doubt that we criticized the GFFX for its AntiAliasing, and now it seems that we may have not had the proper evidence to base our conclusions on. To quote ourselves from this page:

With NoAA you can see the aliasing is quite predominant. 2X AA and Quincunx don’t seem to do much on the GeForceFX visually, but the FPS are effected comparing the shots to the original with no AA enabled.


Of course all of this left us a bit puzzled, and wondering about the AA abilities of the drivers, but the "facts" are the fact correct?

We have been working with NVIDIA on this to get an answer and it seems that now we have the preliminary information to give us a bit more insight on the question.

The GeForceFX's technology applies filters that effect AntiAliasing and Anisotropic filtering after the frame has left the frame buffer. In short, this means that all of our screenshots do not accurately represent the true in-game visual quality that the GFFX can and will produce, as the screen shot were pulled from the frame buffer. We have come to conclusions about the GFFX IQ (Image Quality) that are simply wrong.

While we cannot answer for other reviews of the GeForceFX it is very possible this is an issue with those articles as well, if they were in fact thorough enough to cover IQ.

We are currently working on a way to capture the images properly and will be revisiting the GeForceFX 5800 Preview by covering the IQ portion of our preview with proper screen shot comparison or further addressing the truth surrounding this situation.

Certainly this is a huge issue it seems that NVIDIA was not even aware of when they issued us the review units. Having 48 hours to preview the card over Superbowl weekend compounded this, and while that is no excuse for improper evaluation on our part, it did certainly impact our ability to do a better evaluation. We are sorry for any incorrect evaluations we have made and are working now to remedy the situation. Any new information will be posted here.

http://www.hardocp.com/

 

[Tagrineth]

I can believe the part about FSAA, but... well this has already been discussed a little at Beyond3D.

Basically AF can't be done via a post-filter... the AF quality really IS subpar.

 

[Slougi]

I was wondering where I had seen you before
I am a B3D lurker

 

[AlphaWolf]

Dude, "Hardware" does not mean "without a performance hit"!

I understand that. What I am getting at here is I want a card that can do FSAA without this performance hit. I want FSAA to use it, not to tell everybody that I just have it.

The math and RAM requirements are VERY HIGH

Yes.

there is NO GETTING AROUND IT

....

except by attempting an "intelligent" algorithm like Matrox, but that doesn't always work very well.

What?

FSAA implementations have refined like crazy recently, as I said 4x on a Voodoo5, Radeon 8500, or GeForce2 results in losing 75% of your performance, whereas on a Radeon 9500/9700 it only takes of ~30%.

Obviously they haven't tried everything to fix the problem yet. Maybe the solution would be expensive, but so are $400 video cards.

 

[Slougi]

Alphawolf, do you understand how AA works? It is done by rendering the image multiple times, each with slightly different coordinates, then "combining" them into one. What Matrox does in their FAA implementation is look for edges that need to be AA'd and AA only those. Unfortuantely the algorythm is somewhat broken and not all edges that need to be AA'd get AA'd. That is why it is an "intelligent" implementation. Similarly MSAA does not antialias everything, although it works very differently. SSAA, as seen on GFFX iirc, antialiases everything, thus is slow, but provides the best results.
FSAA on the Radeon 9700 and GeforceFX seem to be very usable from a speed perspective. They are fast enough to antialias current games even at high resolutions. That may not be true for Unreal2 or Doom3, but even UT2003 is playable at 1600x1200 with 4x AA and 8x AF.
So while it is true that current implementations can be improved, your statements that antialiasing is not usable are not true.

 

[vampireuk]

I am a B3D lurker

Lurk at nvnews kthnx:happy:

 

[Slougi]

Lurk at nvnews kthnx:happy:

Sorry vamp, nvnews forums are just lame
B3D forums are a pleasure to read, and the people there know their shit (mostly). Hellbinder does annoy me sometimes though, as does Chalnoth

 

[thine_impalor]

hmmm....

i think the fx is just too ummm...advanced so to speak, it is just desinged for the NEXT generation of game gfx...
personally i hope both nvidia and ati will do well bcuz nothing drives prices down better! we've seen the SAME thing happen in the case of intel and amd..
i've bought a radeon 9500 bcuz it seemed to have the best price to performance ratio, its faster than the 4400 and in some cases the 4600 and it didn;t cost a bomb, i paid 120 pound sterling for it(ex vat)..

 

[vampireuk]

Sorry vamp, nvnews forums are just lame

Devil child!!

The forums are cool as long as you ignore the trolls and blatant fan boys. Plus we are now having a offical arsehole crackdown.

 

[sytaylor]

anyone noticed a scary influence of 3dfx? vodoo 5500 huuuge card touted for FSAA, but ultimatley over priced and underperforming... "nVidia" 5800 "FX"

 

[Slougi]

anyone noticed a scary influence of 3dfx? vodoo 5500 huuuge card touted for FSAA, but ultimatley over priced and underperforming... "nVidia" 5800 "FX"

Did you not see my post on the first page? At the bottom

 

[AlphaWolf]

Alphawolf, do you understand how AA works? It is done by rendering the image multiple times, each with slightly different coordinates, then "combining" them into one. What Matrox does in their FAA implementation is look for edges that need to be AA'd and AA only those. Unfortuantely the algorythm is somewhat broken and not all edges that need to be AA'd get AA'd. That is why it is an "intelligent" implementation. Similarly MSAA does not antialias everything, although it works very differently. SSAA, as seen on GFFX iirc, antialiases everything, thus is slow, but provides the best results.
FSAA on the Radeon 9700 and GeforceFX seem to be very usable from a speed perspective. They are fast enough to antialias current games even at high resolutions. That may not be true for Unreal2 or Doom3, but even UT2003 is playable at 1600x1200 with 4x AA and 8x AF.
So while it is true that current implementations can be improved, your statements that antialiasing is not usable are not true.

I suppose. After all, I do get a good frame rate in quake3 with FSAA on a geforce 2, but what happens when I want doom3 or UT2?

 

[Slougi]

I suppose. After all, I do get a good frame rate in quake3 with FSAA on a geforce 2, but what happens when I want doom3 or UT2?

We'll see. It might even run okayish on a GFFX/r9700 with AA, if it runs decently on a geforce3/r8500.