• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

NV35, cheating, 3DMark, and DOOM

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Why Quake4? Because DOOM3 isn't intended to be a good game, rather it's a technology showcase (good engine)...

first I thought Raven was making Quake 4? and it was going to be a more Quake 2 based event (rather than Quake 3, and Quake 1 dont count :))

and Doom3 not being intended as a good game...? well you could of fooled me :rolleyes:
 
OC Noob said:

What about D3D or that openGL 2.0 support?

No D3D in Doom3 and ARB2 path is the OpenGL 2.0 support.


knif_00 said:

Dude! Are you trying to make some sense??
I dont think that is true. Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but I use an old 8500 and its the R250 GPU. . . i dont know. . correct me if I'm wrong (you guys always do, even when im NOT wrong)

I will correct you :D
Radeon 8500 = R200 core.
Radeon 9000 = RV250 core. Not as good as R200.
Radeon 9100 = R200 core again.
Radeon 9200 = RV280. Basicly the same as RV250, but with AGP8X (no real performance gains).

Confusing huh? Pretty messed up naming scheme, just like with Nvidia...
 
breez said:


No D3D in Doom3 and ARB2 path is the OpenGL 2.0 support.




I will correct you :D
Radeon 8500 = R200 core.
Radeon 9000 = RV250 core. Not as good as R200.
Radeon 9100 = R200 core again.
Radeon 9200 = RV280. Basicly the same as RV250, but with AGP8X (no real performance gains).

Confusing huh? Pretty messed up naming scheme, just like with Nvidia...

no, i think thats the one thing Nvidia has on ATi right now, a simple (though stupid sounding) naming scheme:D
 
cruc1fy said:


He got ****ed off at them for leaking the alpha, so I doubt very much he'd go back (at least for a long time).

. They currently have the best available high-end gaming card, but they certainly don't have the market share than nVidia does. .

Nvidia 58% of market
ATI 33% of market

hardly amd vs intel
 
zabomb4163 said:


Nvidia 58% of market
ATI 33% of market

hardly amd vs intel

I don't think those numbers are correct anymore. I know ATi has 20% market share and nvidia has 30-31%, while intel extreme graphics holds something around 27-30%.

The numbers you posted definetly don't include intel, it might be a comparison of video card market share while my numbers include integrated graphics as well as video cards. Either way I don't think they are acurate, mine are acurate as of a month or so ago.
 
Evnas said:
Winning in one benchmark doesnt make a card the best.
And it wasnt ATi that leaked the alpha demo. It was an employee of ATi, not a decision made by ATi. Carmack had already said that he wasnt going to consiquence the company from which the demo came.

Winning one benchmark doesn't make a card the best... unless that card is intended for one specific purpose, in which case, the card that best accomplishes that task is the best, regardless of its across-the-board performance. In my case, the next card I buy will be specifically for running the DOOM3 engine. If there's some card that kicks the hsit out of all the other cards at DOOM3, and is second best in other applications, I'll buy it, because it is the best for my application.

That's why we use WildCats at work. Best for the specific application (Catia).

There's a difference between "consequencing" a company and being leary about giving them proprietary information. Whether or not it's intentional, he will have reservations about ATi for a while.

ninthebin said:
first I thought Raven was making Quake 4? and it was going to be a more Quake 2 based event (rather than Quake 3, and Quake 1 dont count :))
Raven is making it... on the DOOM3 engine. Yes, it's supposed to continue Quake2.
 
In my case, the next card I buy will be specifically for running the DOOM3 engine.

Then you shouldn't even be considering the R9800PRO or NV35.

Both the R500 and NV45 will suit your needs much better.

Unless you feel like waiting until DOOM3 actually comes out, the best card on the market, at the TIME DOOM3 actually hits retail shelves will most likely be the R360, maybe Loci (R390/420) or the NV40 will have arrived as well.

Another question you may want to ask yourslef, how important is AA quality in a top of the line graphics card? If it's not important, the Nvidia solution may indeed be better.

If I was looking for the next card to run DOOM3, I think it would be wise to actually wait until DOOM3 was for sale, and make you choice of the best options available at thet time.

~Swine
 
Re: Re: oh boy

Evnas said:


Ive played the Alpha, and Doom 3 definatly wont just be a "grab the nearest rocket/grenade launcher and aim at the feet." game. The damn nice graphics, teamed up with the best sound ive ever heard in a game, and what seemed like a very nice story line, Doom 3 is gonna be one hell of a game.

Hi,

Please provide us details about your experience playing an alpha version of Doom 3 (bugs, fps, etc.)

Did you use the system specified in your footnote?

THanks.

Mito
 
Re: Re: Re: oh boy

Mito said:


Hi,

Please provide us details about your experience playing an alpha version of Doom 3 (bugs, fps, etc.)

Did you use the system specified in your footnote?

THanks.

Mito

we arent really supposed to talk about that...
 
Re: Re: Re: oh boy

Mito said:


Hi,

Please provide us details about your experience playing an alpha version of Doom 3 (bugs, fps, etc.)

Did you use the system specified in your footnote?

THanks.

Mito

The alpha was laggy as he** on my little old R8500, but I'm certain that the final version will be able to run much smoother. I wouldn't put *any* stock in how the alpha ran as far as how the final version will run.

However, the version which was displayed on the FX5900 ULTRA is *much* closer to a final version, but I don't think anyone has had a chance to play around w/ it.

As far as the game itself, it was pretty much like any other game where you just shoot up zombies, just a lot darker (literally, it was really dark, as in, not light, as in very hard to see), and alot of blood...tons of blood...gallons and gallons of blood. The graphics were quiter good, with alot of shadows effects, swinging lights and such...pretty immersive atmosphere. Did I mention there was alot of blood?
 
PreservedSwine said:
I think it would be wise to actually wait until DOOM3 was for sale, and make you choice of the best options available at thet time.
~Swine


I am... I guess I thought that was implied. Whatever runs it best when it comes out will be in my system. I would think that the NV40 would be out, but the 45?



As to the alpha, i played it (the one from e3 2002) on my encoding rig. It's amazingly graphical (obviously). I killed one of the revanants and then proceded to lay into his body and so much blood was produced that it locked up my system (heh). It's not one of those games where you can either hit legs, torso, or head... I was shooting at knuckles and seeing the effects.

It gets really bloody when you shoot the head/eyes.
 
CrashOveride said:


no, i think thats the one thing Nvidia has on ATi right now, a simple (though stupid sounding) naming scheme:D

What about GF4MX losing to all GF3 cards? What about FX5200 being slower than GF3? What about FX5600 being slower than Ti4200? FX cards = the suxor...
 
I think ATI's lineup is relatively in order, minus the 9500 pro > 9600 pro but maybe the new chip will put it ahead. When I went to Best Buy to get my 9700 Pro, I saw many confused faces looking at the shelves. The three people I watched buy cards ALL simply bought whatever product hit their predetermined dollar cap. (Which appeared to be $100, because all three bought the GF FX 5200)

And BTW... that HL2 Demo makes Doom3 look like nothing but a tech demo. The only difference I saw was the reduced abuse of lighting effects. (Doom3 went overboard)
 
Mag22 said:
And BTW... that HL2 Demo makes Doom3 look like nothing but a tech demo. The only difference I saw was the reduced abuse of lighting effects. (Doom3 went overboard)

Actually Doom 3 graphically looks IMO a lot better then HL2. The lighting effects didnt go overboard...thats the exact lighting you would want for a story setting like that. Think of it like a scary movie...lighting can make or break its scaryness...to bright and you dont get that spooky feeling...to dark and you cant see anything.

Now that i think of it...the Doom 3 lighting effects remind me a lot of the movie Aliens
 
Last edited:
Doom 3 uses a completely new type of lighting system that is dynamic rather than static. It blows Vertex and Lightmap away. The engine itself is suppose to revolutionize the gaming industry and i think it will live up to all expectations just as much as Half Life 2 will. Both games look great but IMO Doom 3 has the better graphics. I will have to reserve judgement on the physics when i actually play both. I would assume that Doom 3 would have the same types of physics as most Quake 3 Engine games. ID has been pretty consistent with that end of their engines for quite a while now.
 
Back