Half-Life 2 like krevende som Doom3 med full detaljer

[Mala]

Samme kjøss. Min Geforce 3 Ti500 denger alle spill på 1024x768 med full details. Riktignok uten AA og AF, men hva trenger vi det til? Spill er bra nok uten nå for tida.

 

Det er ikke jeg enig i. AA og AF på gir mye penere og bedre grafikk

 

Hvis man liker dårligere grafikk betyr ikke aa og af noe nei...

Enig her, er veldig opptatt av AA og AF, en av grunnene at eg valgte ATI

[fomlepung]

Jeg har aldri brukt spreke skjermkort og stor båndbredde som noen penisforlenger... så lenge systemet jeg har driver spillet tilfredstillende for min del så gir jeg en lang brun en i om man får noen fps bedre med et annet system som koster x3 av hva jeg selv har.

 

Systemet jeg har nå kommer likevel til å ikke ha noe problem å dra HL2 når det kommer.

[BBernes]

Jeg har heldigvis så det holder da tydligvis!

GF FX 5800, P4 2,4GHz og 1GB Corsair XMS RAM!

 

Tjah - Ville ikke jubla så voldsomt av skjermkortet ditt men

Bråker masse, yter lite -- R9700PRO yter mer i 15 av 22 tester - og det er BETRAKTELIG mer faktisk. Samt - det bråker mindre.

 

I tillegg ville jeg ALDRI hatt nVIDIA-kort før jeg fant ut at de hadde funnet en fix til AA/AF-problemet de har. ATi har ingen slike uløselige problemer

 

Tror nok jeg skal klare meg jeg og... Kunne tenkt meg ett kit på 512MB RAM til...

 

Må dere slutte med dette tullet det er max 10 fps som skiller alle disse

topp kortene , det er bare en smakssak .

 

Wow mitt har 3 fps mere wow da må alle ha det ? eller ?

[Civilix]

de har her en spillmotor som ved max detaljer i 1280x1024 kjører fint på et middels gpu(9700 kan vel kalles det nå, vertfall prisen ligger i det markedet) og en gammel cpu(hvem har _ikke_ over 2ghz(/PR-rated) cpu nå?)...

 

:-? er det bare meg eller høres dette litt for teoretisk ut...

[krist2]

 

I tillegg ville jeg ALDRI hatt nVIDIA-kort før jeg fant ut at de hadde funnet en fix til AA/AF-problemet de har. ATi har ingen slike uløselige problemer

 

 

viss du tenker på problemet i HL2' date=' så er det fikset...

 

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/27762

[josh]

Ettersom demoen til Valve på E3 gikk på ett Radeon9800 kort, så bekymrer jeg meg ikke nevneverdig. Det så jo OK ut, gjorde det ikke?...

[fomlepung]

 

I tillegg ville jeg ALDRI hatt nVIDIA-kort før jeg fant ut at de hadde funnet en fix til AA/AF-problemet de har. ATi har ingen slike uløselige problemer

 

 

viss du tenker på problemet i HL2, så er det fikset...

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/27762

 

Hey, der quota du meg feil, er ikke meg som skrev det der med AA/AF problemet.

Jeg har jo et Nvidia kort selv (FX 5800) som jeg er knall fornøyd med!

[Blib]

Hmmm..

 

Så jeg kommer til å få rundt 40FPS ja. Det var hyggelig. Hadde regnet med en del mer egentlig. Usj. Ingen FSAA da iallefall

[Slabbedasken]

Tror eg prøver det uten AA først så får vi se kor bra maskina drar spillet :smile:

 

Ja skal prøve det jeg og, men når den testen er over tror jeg jeg kommer til å kjøre i 1280x1024 og 4xAA / 16xAF og max detalj

[MistaPi]

Hmmm..

 

Så jeg kommer til å få rundt 40FPS ja. Det var hyggelig. Hadde regnet med en del mer egentlig. Usj. Ingen FSAA da iallefall

 

Som jeg har nevnt tidligere så er det veldig trolig at Half-Life2 er fillrate begrenset og med det kan du ha så såpass mye båndbredde ledig at MSAA ikke vil gå utover ytelsen.

Men det er uansett ingen som tvinger deg til å kjøre spillet med full detaljer. Med kanskje noen små justeringer kan du få ~20FPS mer med en forholdsvis liten nedgang i grafikken. For alt det jeg vet kan texture compression være avslått med full detaljer.

[MistaPi]

Mye interessant info om Half-Life 2 fra Halflife2.net

 

Q: Is a ATi 9800pro card really alot better for HL2 then Nvidia's FX5900? Or is the difference not that big (quality & fps wise)?

Articles like this worry me:

http://www.beyond3d.com/misc/traod_dx9perf...f/index.php?p=1

 

A: I have been a long-time NVIDIA card user. Currently I have ATI 9800 Pro's in both my work and home machines.

 

The DX9 performance described by the Beyond3D article is consistent with what we've been seeing.

 

Q: I have a P4 2.0 with 512 MB RAM and Radeon 9600 Pro... Is there any point of upgrading for HL-2 ? Will I have playable (30-40) framerates in 1024*768 max detail on that rig ?

 

A: Your system will be fine at 30-40 FPS at 1024x768. (max detail)

 

Q: Will i get minimum 30fps, with a 512 ddr ram, amd athlon

xp2700+,GeForceFX5600

 

A: You should be right around 30 FPS if you run with fairly high detail levels.

To get 30 FPS with a 5600 you'll probably have to turn off high dynamic range lighting and character bump mapping (this will be done for you automatically or you can tweak it).

 

Q: I'm on an AMD XP 2000+ processor, Geforce 3 gfx card, 512 DDR RAM and WinXP...

 

A: Your machine will have a good framerate, but won't have DX9-specific visual features.

 

Q: I am torn between the two newest cards, the 9800 Pro and the FX 5900. So if you were me, which card would you go with, and if you want to elaborate on your answer that would be great!

 

A: 9800 Pro. It's faster and has better image quality.

 

Q: A lot of people seem to be arguing over what system the game was run on at E3...

 

A: Dell XPS, 2.8 GHz P-IV, ATI Radeon 9800 128 MB RAM. Anti-aliasing off, anisotropic filtering off. 60 FPS.

 

Q: The settings are at the max in Bink Videos, yes? I mean this is how it'll look with all the settings to the max?

 

A: There are a few more visual effects added after E3.

 

Q: What difference will I see on screen between DX8/8.1, and 9 systems?

 

A: DX9 will be faster as you can do more in a single pass. There will be a number (which increases over time) of DX9 features like high dynamic range lighting which only work on DX9 cards. The list is fairly plastic, as we will be adding new DX9 features, and as we figure out how to do something in DX8 that we initially didn't think we could get to work.

 

"The way Source is designed, hardware manufacturers can update materials to take advantage of new hardware as it comes out by shipping updates (probably via Steam). So if they come out with a 512 MB card or double the number of instructions possible in a pixel or vertex shader, then customers who have that card can be updated to take advantage of that."

 

"i asked if half-life 2 would use front-to-back rendering, so polygon occlusion/HyperZ III on radeon cards would work to their fullest, as opposed to engines like morrowind which draw back-to-front, so there are oodles of overdraw. half-life 2 will be front-to-back, thankfully."

 

Q: Will the Source engine support view distorts such as fisheye lense and pinchusioning?

 

A: Yes, on dx8 and above cards, you will be able to do these effects as a mod author.

 

Q: We've all been hearing that Valve has been promoting the ATI Radeon 9800 card over Nvidia cards. I was curious if there was a reason behind this, like maybe ATI cards have some sort of advantage over Nvidia cards? Will HL2 even support Nvidia cards? If so, will Nvidia cards run slower with HL2 because the game is more optimized for ATI cards? We're all kind of wondering what these comments mean and what graphics cards will run the game effectively.

 

 

A: We work with all the graphics card manufacturers. ATI and NVIDIA have made the biggest investments in time and engineering to make sure Half-Life 2 and their hardware work well together. We are not trying to give an advantage to one company over another, as the people who play our games certainly wouldn't want us to do that.

 

With that said, Half-Life 2 appears to be the first game to really be pushing the capabilities of DX9-level hardware. At E3, we ran on ATI hardware because ATI's hardware did the best job. Since then both ATI and NVIDIA have worked diligently to improve performance and quality, not just because they think Half-Life 2 will be a title that will help sell DX9 hardware, but also because it is a good test case that will aid them in understanding the behavior of their hardware for future games.

 

As we get closer to shipping we will release Source based benchmarking tools that will let people analyze this themselves.

 

"Just got this reply from Brian Jacobson clearing up the issue of 128mb vs 256mb graphics cards:

 

The game will run fine on a 128 MB card. Most of the benefits of the 256 MB cards you'll see we expect will be more long-term, received via updates over Steam:

 

1) Something which happens immediately, we're able to store more data on the card instead of in AGP memory, which you might think would be a perf win, but so far, we're not finding ourselves to be AGP bus-bandwidth limited.

 

2) We expect to release a local-specular solution, perhaps at ship, perhaps over Steam at some point, which is a major texture memory consumer. In addition, we've made it easy for major HW vendors to write new shaders for us to take advantage of the extra memory.

 

3) A *lot* of memory is consumed by normal maps, since they can't be compressed well. We may ship uncompressed normal maps for the 256 MB cards if it turns out to be a big enough visual improvement. Future updates (not to mention mods) will contain high-end content that use ever-larger amounts of normal maps.

 

Q: I'll have to ask if the water effects are DX9, ultra-next-gen (FX, Radeon 9800) card-only?

 

A: Water effects actually scale back reasonably well.

 

Q: Will Half-Life 2 have any special optimizations for 64-bit processors?

 

A: I would expect we would run about 30% faster clock for clock comparing an Athlon running 32-bit code and an Athlon 64 running 64-bit code. Release of the 64-bit client will be gated on MS releasing 64-bit Windows.

 

Q: Will Half-Life 2 support Hyper-Threaded CPU's?

In theory shouldn't it take alot of load of the system? Example, the first processor does all the physics, while the second does some other tasks, like AI, 3d Sound etc

 

 

A: Hyperthreaded CPUs attempt to extract thread-level parallelism, as opposed to traditional pipelined architectures which attempt to take advantage of instruction level parallelism. Hyperthreading can be somewhat unpredictable in terms of the performance impact, as you can, in some cases, run slower.

 

Implementing and maintaining a "deeply" multi-threaded version of Source would be a pain (i.e. multi-threading the renderer). Implementing a hacky version (e.g. having a discreet physics thread or running the client and server in different threads) is something we may do depending upon how much bandwidth we have before we ship. Right now we don't get nearly as much bang for the buck working on hyperthreading as we do on other optimizations. That may change as we run out of things to optimize.

 

64-bits, in contrast, is a one-time cost and is fairly simple to take advantage of. It's a huge win for tools as it not only gets more work done per instruction, but it also gets us past the current memory limitations, which are a problem for us today on tools.

 

Distributed computing is harder than hyperthreading but it has the potential to increase performance by a huge amount (8X on our tools) as opposed to hyperthreading (30%). All of our tools are going to a distributed approach.

 

So the taxonomy looks like this:

 

- general algorithmic optimization (general good thing to do)

- DX9 optimization (big gains, long term direction)

- 64-bits (not that hard, solves memory problem as well as performance gains)

- hyperthreading (hard initial cost, on-going code maintainence cost, limited unpredictable performance gains, benefits in multiprocessor environments as well)

- distributed computing (hardest to do, biggest potential gains, great for tools, may be great for servers, not sure how it works with clients)

 

Q: I am kinda involved in a short discussion about wether Half-Life² does or does not support dynamic shadows like DooM³.

 

A: Yes, we have dynamic shadows. We use a different approach than Doom3.

 

Q: At the moment are you done with the major content of the game and just making some last minute finishing touches or is there still some way to go?

 

A: Finishing up

[Kenny000]

Jeg tror nok at resten av maskinen min henger alt for langt etter i forhold til skjermkortet mitt.

 

Synes ikke det har vært så enorm stor forkskjell da jeg gikk fra GeForce3 til 9800Pro. Er dette fordi resten av maskinen er så sliten? Den er jo ikke så altfor gammel heller!