Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › DailyTech Digest: DirectX 10 Performance
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DailyTech Digest: DirectX 10 Performance - Page 4

post #31 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElMikeTheMike View Post
LOL

So it's okay to say "wait and see" now when the GTX is threatened??? If someone says that about the 2900XT they get pounced on like a fat woman on a snickers bar.
Someone say Snickers Bar
Mighty-iTX
(12 items)
 
One foot in..
(17 items)
 
mATX
(12 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4770K M7-Impact Strix GTX980 Samsung 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M4 256 Glacer 240L W8.1 K272HUL 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Seasonic X-650 Prodigy MX518 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
4770K/45/43 Maximus VI Extreme R290X R290X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung Crucial M4 64GB RAIDR LSSWM 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Cooler Master Glacer 7 Ultimate 64 SyncMaster Eclipse 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX 1050 BE 600T Silver MX518 Desk 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-4330 Z87 Gryphon GTX690 G.Skill RipJawsX 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
WD Blacks Hyper 212 W8.1 ACER 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Ultra X3 1000w Corsair 230T Orange Razer 
  hide details  
Reply
Mighty-iTX
(12 items)
 
One foot in..
(17 items)
 
mATX
(12 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-4770K M7-Impact Strix GTX980 Samsung 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Crucial M4 256 Glacer 240L W8.1 K272HUL 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saitek Seasonic X-650 Prodigy MX518 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
4770K/45/43 Maximus VI Extreme R290X R290X 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Samsung Crucial M4 64GB RAIDR LSSWM 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Cooler Master Glacer 7 Ultimate 64 SyncMaster Eclipse 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX 1050 BE 600T Silver MX518 Desk 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-4330 Z87 Gryphon GTX690 G.Skill RipJawsX 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
WD Blacks Hyper 212 W8.1 ACER 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Ultra X3 1000w Corsair 230T Orange Razer 
  hide details  
Reply
post #32 of 52
Remember the $500 9700PRO? Yea, lets see how that old top of the line GFX card handles Oblivion

Same applies to current gen DX10 cards and future DX10 games.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4430 MSI H81M-P33 MSI GTX960 2x4GB GSKILL DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse
Samsung EVO 850 256GB Win 10 EVGA 500B Zowie EC2-A 
Mouse PadAudioOther
Zowie GSR SHP 9500S + FIO E10K ASUS VG248QE Black 24" 144Hz 1ms  
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 4430 MSI H81M-P33 MSI GTX960 2x4GB GSKILL DDR3 1600 
Hard DriveOSPowerMouse
Samsung EVO 850 256GB Win 10 EVGA 500B Zowie EC2-A 
Mouse PadAudioOther
Zowie GSR SHP 9500S + FIO E10K ASUS VG248QE Black 24" 144Hz 1ms  
  hide details  
Reply
post #33 of 52
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatal05 View Post
Remember the $500 9700PRO?
That's a pretty bad analogy. I wouldnt expect an old video card to run Oblivion at all. So by that logic, I shouldnt expect today's DX10 cards to run DX10 games at all?
ElRigTheRig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 G0 @ 2.4 GHz Asus Maximus Formula Asus EN8800GT 512MB 4GB G.Skill DDR2-1000 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1.858TB (3x JBOD) HP 16x DVD Burner Vista Ultimate x64 SP2 24" FPD2485 Gateway LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Lycosa Ultra X3 1000w Antec P182 Logitech G5 
Mouse Pad
Razer Xact Mat 
  hide details  
Reply
ElRigTheRig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 G0 @ 2.4 GHz Asus Maximus Formula Asus EN8800GT 512MB 4GB G.Skill DDR2-1000 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1.858TB (3x JBOD) HP 16x DVD Burner Vista Ultimate x64 SP2 24" FPD2485 Gateway LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Lycosa Ultra X3 1000w Antec P182 Logitech G5 
Mouse Pad
Razer Xact Mat 
  hide details  
Reply
post #34 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElMikeTheMike View Post
That's a pretty bad analogy. I wouldnt expect an old video card to run Oblivion at all. So by that logic, I shouldnt expect today's DX10 cards to run DX10 games at all?
Now that doesn't make any sense at all.
D-Core
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 (3.16GHz) Intel 945GCT-M ZOTAC 8800GT AMP! Edition Patriot PC6400 DDR2 (4x2)4GB RAM 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 750GB 7200RPM CD-RW/DVD+RW Reader Windows Vista Ultimate x64 20" Widescreeen AOC 1680 x 1050 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Generic European Keyboard Case Stock 380W Rosewill TU-155 Razer Copperhead 
Mouse Pad
  hide details  
Reply
D-Core
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 (3.16GHz) Intel 945GCT-M ZOTAC 8800GT AMP! Edition Patriot PC6400 DDR2 (4x2)4GB RAM 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 750GB 7200RPM CD-RW/DVD+RW Reader Windows Vista Ultimate x64 20" Widescreeen AOC 1680 x 1050 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Generic European Keyboard Case Stock 380W Rosewill TU-155 Razer Copperhead 
Mouse Pad
  hide details  
Reply
post #35 of 52
Yeah that's a bad analogy. 9700 Pro was an introductory Direct X9 card. It came out in 2002, almost half a year before any Direct X9 games were even in production. Oblivion is NOT a DX9 launch game. You guys aren't making the right analogy.

When DX9 games came out, it slaughtered again. It did so well in Direct X9, its core was recycled for the next generation in the 9800XT and bundled with arguably one of Direct X9's peak performance titles: Half Life 2.

9700 Pro /= 8800/ 2900

What we're seeing here, is the equivalent of what would've been the case, had Unreal Tournament 2003 came out and brutally murdered the 9700 Pro's performance, which wasn't the case.

We're talking about Direct X10 performance being less than stellar on $600 video-cards.

And the 9700 Pro was NOT $500 when it launched. It was more like $350-400. Remember graphics cards costing more than $400 was a new thing only 2 years ago in the 6800/X800 days. Hell even the X850XT flagship was only like $300-350.

Saying Oblivion runs like crap on a 9700 Pro doesn't mean crap, because Oblivion didn't come out when DX9 was launched. The same analogy is like saying "OMG try running Crysis 2 on an 8800GTS, itll run liek crap too".
Reaper 1.0
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
*TBD ASRock 775Dual-VSTA *TBD* *TBD* 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSPower
WD 40GB 7200SATA / 80G Maxtor IDE 18x CDRW Windows XP SP2 / Fedora 64 / Vista 64 *TBD* 
CaseMouse
Cooler Master RC-330 Elite Microsoft Intellimouse USB 
  hide details  
Reply
Reaper 1.0
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
*TBD ASRock 775Dual-VSTA *TBD* *TBD* 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSPower
WD 40GB 7200SATA / 80G Maxtor IDE 18x CDRW Windows XP SP2 / Fedora 64 / Vista 64 *TBD* 
CaseMouse
Cooler Master RC-330 Elite Microsoft Intellimouse USB 
  hide details  
Reply
post #36 of 52
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachor View Post
Now that doesn't make any sense at all.
Dude, lol. WHYYyyyy are you so confused by everything I post? It's like you follow me around and everything you post has one of these guys lol

Either I need to start speaking more clearly or learn how to speak 'fanboy'.
ElRigTheRig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 G0 @ 2.4 GHz Asus Maximus Formula Asus EN8800GT 512MB 4GB G.Skill DDR2-1000 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1.858TB (3x JBOD) HP 16x DVD Burner Vista Ultimate x64 SP2 24" FPD2485 Gateway LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Lycosa Ultra X3 1000w Antec P182 Logitech G5 
Mouse Pad
Razer Xact Mat 
  hide details  
Reply
ElRigTheRig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 G0 @ 2.4 GHz Asus Maximus Formula Asus EN8800GT 512MB 4GB G.Skill DDR2-1000 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1.858TB (3x JBOD) HP 16x DVD Burner Vista Ultimate x64 SP2 24" FPD2485 Gateway LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Lycosa Ultra X3 1000w Antec P182 Logitech G5 
Mouse Pad
Razer Xact Mat 
  hide details  
Reply
post #37 of 52
Thread Starter 
From the inquirer:

Quote:
DX10 benchmarks spotted

HD XT Out in the wild


By Wily Ferret: Tuesday 15 May 2007, 09:36

ONE OF THE noticeable things about yesterday's Radeon HD launch was that a number of hardware wibblewobbles chose to benchmark the card using a DX10 pre-release game.
The bench in question was a demo of Call of Juarez, a shooter that has been out for a while now but which is imminently to get a DX10 patch. ATI gave out this demo to selected press outlets in Tunis, and while many avoided it, since both ATI's drivers and the patch itself are not quite there yet, a couple of folks came up with some interesting stuff.

Guru3d not only has the benchmarks, but some great little comparison videos, too, which show the difference between the DX9 and DX10 paths. There's some nice shadowing effects on the DX10 path, but the swanky effects come at the expense of performance - even the 768MB 8800 GTX is barely able to poke its nose above 30 FPS.

Meanwhile, Nate 'Legit' Kirsch has some more numbers from the demo, and an interesting conclusion. "What started out as a benchmark that was sure to destroy Nvidia and praise ATI actually showed that NVIDIA had better image quality and performed better at lower (playable) resolutions," says the smooth talker. "Oh Snap! That didn't go as planned I wouldn't think."

No confirmed date on the CoJ patch yet, but expect a few more driver revisions before it's officially let out to play. µ
ElRigTheRig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 G0 @ 2.4 GHz Asus Maximus Formula Asus EN8800GT 512MB 4GB G.Skill DDR2-1000 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1.858TB (3x JBOD) HP 16x DVD Burner Vista Ultimate x64 SP2 24" FPD2485 Gateway LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Lycosa Ultra X3 1000w Antec P182 Logitech G5 
Mouse Pad
Razer Xact Mat 
  hide details  
Reply
ElRigTheRig
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 G0 @ 2.4 GHz Asus Maximus Formula Asus EN8800GT 512MB 4GB G.Skill DDR2-1000 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1.858TB (3x JBOD) HP 16x DVD Burner Vista Ultimate x64 SP2 24" FPD2485 Gateway LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Lycosa Ultra X3 1000w Antec P182 Logitech G5 
Mouse Pad
Razer Xact Mat 
  hide details  
Reply
post #38 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElMikeTheMike View Post
Source

Doesn't 33 FPS seem real low for the GTX at that low res??
What the hell? You have to have SLI to have any sort of decent framerate in DX10, apparently. Ridiculous.
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #39 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by NamelessMC View Post
Yeah that's a bad analogy. 9700 Pro was an introductory Direct X9 card. It came out in 2002, almost half a year before any Direct X9 games were even in production. Oblivion is NOT a DX9 launch game. You guys aren't making the right analogy.

When DX9 games came out, it slaughtered again. It did so well in Direct X9, its core was recycled for the next generation in the 9800XT and bundled with arguably one of Direct X9's peak performance titles: Half Life 2.

9700 Pro /= 8800/ 2900

What we're seeing here, is the equivalent of what would've been the case, had Unreal Tournament 2003 came out and brutally murdered the 9700 Pro's performance, which wasn't the case.

We're talking about Direct X10 performance being less than stellar on $600 video-cards.

And the 9700 Pro was NOT $500 when it launched. It was more like $350-400. Remember graphics cards costing more than $400 was a new thing only 2 years ago in the 6800/X800 days. Hell even the X850XT flagship was only like $300-350.

Saying Oblivion runs like crap on a 9700 Pro doesn't mean crap, because Oblivion didn't come out when DX9 was launched. The same analogy is like saying "OMG try running Crysis 2 on an 8800GTS, itll run liek crap too".
For the record, "not equal to" is represented by "!=".
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #40 of 52
And here's more food for thought:
Half Life 2 Performance @ 1280x1024


The catch? Half Life 2 came out in late September 2003. When did the 9700 Pro come out? August 2002. So the 9700 Pro came out over 6 months before an DX9 software was out, destroyed GeForce 4 TI in DirectX 8 performance, introduced better image quality, and the core was so good, in 2003 instead of using a new core, ATI just re-manufactured the R300 core and clocked it higher with the 9800 Pro/XT.

In a title released over a year later, the one year old card was able to pull over 35FPS on what was considered a high resolution at the time.

1280x1024 in 2003 was what 1600x1200 is now. It was literally just a resolution hardly anyone gamed at. 800x600 and 1024x768 were the resolutions of choice. At 1024x768 the 9700 Pro pulled over 60 FPS in Half Life 2. We're talking about a game that's literally one of the top 10 most graphically intensive Direct X 9 titles.

You're really going to compare Call of Juarez and Lost Planet to what Half Life 2 was when it came out? What the 9700 Pro did in Half Life 2 is like an 8800 GTS playing Crysis with maxed out settings at 1600x1200, which at this point I really don't see happening.

The way this DX10 performance looks, it would be the equivalent of 9700 Pro pulling 15-20 FPS at Half Life 2.

So yeah, don't compare these cards to the 9700 Pro, because the 9700 Pro is probably 90% of the reason ATI is even in the enthusiast market right now. I was right there in the middle of it when it came out and trust me, it really knocked a lot of people on their butts.
Reaper 1.0
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
*TBD ASRock 775Dual-VSTA *TBD* *TBD* 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSPower
WD 40GB 7200SATA / 80G Maxtor IDE 18x CDRW Windows XP SP2 / Fedora 64 / Vista 64 *TBD* 
CaseMouse
Cooler Master RC-330 Elite Microsoft Intellimouse USB 
  hide details  
Reply
Reaper 1.0
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
*TBD ASRock 775Dual-VSTA *TBD* *TBD* 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSPower
WD 40GB 7200SATA / 80G Maxtor IDE 18x CDRW Windows XP SP2 / Fedora 64 / Vista 64 *TBD* 
CaseMouse
Cooler Master RC-330 Elite Microsoft Intellimouse USB 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › DailyTech Digest: DirectX 10 Performance