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

nVidia FX cards are in trouble(according to Microsoft)...

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

E_tron

Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2002
Location
Lufkin, Texas
nVidia’s FX cards are in trouble :(

With Geforce 5(FX) cards nVidia integrated the CineFX architecture. CineFX offers 16-bit and 32-bit floating point processing. The CineFX architecture is behind nVidia's cinematic computing idea. These cards perform well in DX7 and DX8 games (in many cases it beats ATI's cards), however clouds build over the DX9 scene...

The Problem:
Microsoft's High Level Shader Language (intergrated into DirectX 9) require 24-bit floating-point processing. Bad news for nVidia's game plan, because their cards have to use the much slower 32-bit instructions thereby wasting 8-bits per cycle(making FX cards look and perform three fourths the speed of ATI DX9 cards in DX9 games). nVidia can drop their cards down to the 16-bit mode, however visual quality is lost. nVidia tries to compensate for this disadvantage by asking game developers to create games with nVidia's shader language instead of Microsoft’s DX9.


It seems that the whole design of the ATI Radeon DX9 chip is to fit High Level Shader Language. Maybe Microsoft paid ATi to create their cards this way, so they can keep DirectX on top.

The possible solution?:
Will nVidia's NV40 GPU overcome this 24-bit speed bump? Many DX9 games are not here yet, so nVidia has some time to get the NV40 right(according to Microsoft's standard...).



I like nVidia and their technology. nVidia made a stand against Microsoft with the CineFX architecture, however Microsoft and its Direct X standard is too great of a force to overcome. It's like Windows and it's domination over the Operating System market.

I am sure most of you know this, however i haven't found a post about it :rolleyes: .
 

blurry

Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2003
Location
CA
How are they in trouble?

Has DirectX 9.1 been released?

Until then, it's pointless to make a bold statement like that.
 

micamica1217

Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2002
blurry said:
How are they in trouble?

Has DirectX 9.1 been released?

Until then, it's pointless to make a bold statement like that.

DX9.1 is still a dream....not even game developers have a beta yet.
what makes you think that we will even have DX9.1?
what I find pointless is talking about vaperware....
never mind the performance of something that still does not, and may not ever arive.

btw, many of the newer games already have lots of the new 2.0 shaders.
just look at the performance in some of them.
a 24% differance in TR:AOD between the top IHV cards....
nVidia is no longer laughing.

mica
 

harryinny3

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2003
Location
New York
Does anyone actually think MS is gonna

release DX9.1? For nvidia? LOL. If you read the article, Nvidia is asking developers to use there Tech. in games. Essentially asking them to go against MS. DX9.1 made for Nvidia is a pipe dream.


Harry
 

YellowDart

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2003
Location
Mesa, AZ
I read about that somewhere, can't remember where though...

Anyway, CineFX sounds to me like nVidia was getting too cocky w/ their dominance over the 3d hardware app market. I read that they pretty much ditched out on MS's dev/standard meetings w/ 3d hardware companies. ATi attended, nVidia did not, which is why ATi got dx9 right with their 24-bit floating point processing.

If dx9.1 is in development, it would be wise for nVidia to give up on CineFX and fall in line w/ ATi. nVidia's 3d engine prolly won't ever be able to compete on any major level with Direct X in any Windows based application. Software developers are probably getting annoyed w/ nVidia too, since it's making more work for them, just to accommodate nVidia's hardware (ie: fx series poor performance in early HL2 benches & their ensuing spat w/ Valve for not using their new "optimised" drivers in the benches).
 
Last edited:

Mike360000

Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2001
Location
Stokesdale, North Carolina
I posted this here a few eeks ago. Maybe it's time to repost it...

"Source: Microsft Corp. MSDN Support

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...irectx.direct3d/e/createflags/createflags.asp

Captions from that Page Indicates that the application requested multithread safety in Microsoft® Direct3D®. This causes Microsoft® Direct3D® to check its global critical section more frequently, which can degrade performance. In Microsoft® DirectX® 9.1 for Managed Code, this enumerated value is always specified unless the resentParameters.ForceNoMultiThreadedFlag is set to true.

The above is directly related to the problems with nvidia's fx v cards.

At least this leads you to believe that Directx 9.1 is just around the corner.

BTW to put this more into prespective, try reading the original article from the 1st post."

Mike
 
Last edited:

YellowDart

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2003
Location
Mesa, AZ
Mike360000 said:
I posted this here a few eeks ago. Maybe it's time to repost it...

"Source: Microsft Corp. MSDN Support

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...createflags.asp

Captions from that Page Indicates that the application requested multithread safety in Microsoft® Direct3D®. This causes Microsoft® Direct3D® to check its global critical section more frequently, which can degrade performance. In Microsoft® DirectX® 9.1 for Managed Code, this enumerated value is always specified unless the resentParameters.ForceNoMultiThreadedFlag is set to true.

The above is directly related to the problems with nvidia's fx v cards.

At least this leads you to believe that Directx 9.1 is just around the corner.

BTW to put this more into prespective, try reading the original article from the 1st post."

Mike

Linky = broken.
 

Evnas

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Location
Seattle, WA
E_tron said:
It seems that the whole design of the ATI Radeon DX9 chip is to fit High Level Shader Language. Maybe Microsoft paid ATi to create their cards this way, so they can keep DirectX on top.

DirectX is an industry standard. CineFX will NEVER be an industry standard because its nVidia specific technology. 3Dfx's Glide, though popular (and damn beautiful i might add) because of the Voodoo line of cards, was never an industry standard by far.

DirectX is born when Microsoft sits down with all the prospective video card makers, from ATi and nVidia, to Intel and 3DLabs, and together they all decide what the standards of the new DirectX should be. nVidia decided to skip out, and not join until way to late, and thus they got pitted with a design that didnt fit the DirectX qualifications. Hell, im surprised Microsoft hasnt stepped in and told nVidia to get rid of any proclimations of DirectX 9 technology.
 

snyper1982

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2001
E_tron said:
nVidia’s FX cards are in trouble :(

Maybe Microsoft paid ATi to create their cards this way, so they can keep DirectX on top.

what is with the conspiracy theories, i was in the same boat as you guys, ati is just superior to nv right now, it is really that simple. no amount of conspiracy theories, or arguing, or denial is going to change the fact that nvidia screwed up with the fx line of cards. why is it so hard to admit that a company that you have no personal ties to, has droped the ball.
 
OP
E_tron

E_tron

Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2002
Location
Lufkin, Texas
Re: Re: nVidia FX cards are in trouble(according to Microsoft)...

I am a nVidia fan. I bought their "The way it is meant to be played" generation card, however I saw this DX9 issue in June and jumped on an ATi Video card(making it my first gaming ATi card:eek: ). Most of the people i know however bought nVidia 5600 FX cards at $200 weeks before the 5700 came out. I could not talk them out of it, because they are dedicated nVidia and 3Dfx fans:) .

I should have put this tread into the "Video and Sound section" forum. It would fit better there.
 

Mike360000

Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2001
Location
Stokesdale, North Carolina
Re: Re: Re: nVidia FX cards are in trouble(according to Microsoft)...

Well I don't think it matters where you put it, peeps will always be divided. V cards are probably the most hotly argued, analyzed and defended component of a computer system, so there will always be sides on every product.

Just as I will say I don't think the nvidia DX9 issue is so big right now or in the short term future that it will adversely affect the FX line of v cards, there will be many peeps who will argue this untill their death.... While I agree that the FX is not what it should have been and not as fast as Ati's solution, I do think it will be fine for the next year anyways. Which is as long as most of these oc'ers here keep a v card anyways.

Now for those of you who will definitely say, wait; What about all those people who will have these v cards after 1 or 2 years? I would say to those people it won't matter that much anyway, because those people are not hard core to begin with. They will be looking after value, NOT something that is 1st string 2 or 3 years down the road. And it is those same people who WILL NOT be buying the latest, most intensive games on the market with any intention of running them fast or pic perfect, if at all. So DX9 as it is being argued now about future games has very little to do with those people, and it has little to do with people who owns them now. However there might be a small window about the time the next line of Ati and nvidia v cards comes out that some games will make intense use of DX9, to such an extent that the fx line could be considered too slow. But then again most people by that time will be buying the next generation anyways, IF games do in fact make much larger use of DX9.

I don't believe MS and Ati cooked up anything together. There were just too many other companies involved that had to have some input also. The 1 BIG thing is nvidia never stayed for all the meetings, walking out or no showing. This in itself was enough to keep nvidia from getting anything they might have wanted. So Ati had more say by that fact alone. PLUS nvidia seemed to have cared so little for the meetings that they seemed to have not even looked over the outcome, the finalization of what DX9s coding was going to be. All the more reason to say nvidia was quiet a bit haughty, holier than thou over the whole the whole thing. To me they actually showed contempt for the whole process. And if there was some underlying reason as to why nvidia did this, I haven't heard it yet.

But as a strong former 3Dfx fan, and after having so many problems with past Ati v cards, I'm more than content to stay nvidia. They do have a solid line of v cards, and their drivers are the best PERIOD! (Since 3Dfx is no more.)

Cheers,
Mike



E_tron said:
I am a nVidia fan. I bought their "The way it is meant to be played" generation card, however I saw this DX9 issue in June and jumped on an ATi Video card(making it my first gaming ATi card:eek: ). Most of the people i know however bought nVidia 5600 FX cards at $200 weeks before the 5700 came out. I could not talk them out of it, because they are dedicated nVidia and 3Dfx fans:) .

I should have put this tread into the "Video and Sound section" forum. It would fit better there.
 
Last edited:

NewbiePerson

Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2001
According to the Jan issue of maximum pc direct x 10 will not be released until the release of Windows Longhorn which is scheduled for 2005 or 2006.
Also next gen cards are going to obliterate the current high end cards from the look of things.
This issue is definately worth purchasing as it goes over what to expect in the future, which is a lot of new stuff.
You should see a pic of the cooling on these cards...
Its hard to describe, like two twin jet engines. No joke.
Everything appears to be getting a nice boost in 2004. I don't wana stray to far from video cards but Native Command Queing (which will allow for better sustained transfer rates) looks very promising for the performance of HDDs which is available with serial ata 2.0 which will boost maximum transfer rates up to 300mb/s.
 

Mike360000

Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2001
Location
Stokesdale, North Carolina
Strange how PCI Express takes out the Hard Drives from that buss and then adds the video.

PCI Express video will probably work ok, but in the long run anytime you are on buss with other shared components, issues are more probable and by physics itself, bandwith itself is shared to a greater point than if the video were to itself. The whole thing being, if there is so much room for video; Why move the Hard Drives?

Cheers,
Mike
 

DayUSeX

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2003
um pci express is going to be alot better than AGP/IDE system we have going know, its raw bandwith. Plus hard drives are never going to suck up alot of bandwith. Im all for PCI express

as for nvidia, they have plenty of time to fix their wrongs, as long as they dont blow it with nv40. Plus what does MS know.......
 

Albuquerque

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Location
North America
Mike360000 said:
I posted this here a few eeks ago. Maybe it's time to repost it...

"Source: Microsft Corp. MSDN Support

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/d...irectx.direct3d/e/createflags/createflags.asp

Captions from that Page Indicates that the application requested multithread safety in Microsoft® Direct3D®. This causes Microsoft® Direct3D® to check its global critical section more frequently, which can degrade performance. In Microsoft® DirectX® 9.1 for Managed Code, this enumerated value is always specified unless the resentParameters.ForceNoMultiThreadedFlag is set to true.

The above is directly related to the problems with nvidia's fx v cards.

At least this leads you to believe that Directx 9.1 is just around the corner.

BTW to put this more into prespective, try reading the original article from the 1st post."

Mike

Two problems with your post:

Number 1, the document you referenced is a rundown of the features in the DirectX 9.0SDK, and that 9.1 reference you point out is the ONLY REFERENCE you can find on MS's website anywhere about DX9.1 That begs the question: is there only a single mention of DX 9.1 anywhere on the planet from an official source, or is that simply a typo that's in the 9.0 SDK tech knowledgebase? Looks like a typo to me...

Second, this subject is not "directly related to the problems with nvidia's fx v cards." Multithreading has nothing to do with making NV cards go slow. If that were truly the case, no fix anywhere on this planet would make an NV card go faster than it does now. If you don't know what multithreading is, just let us know and either I or someone else can explain.
 

stratcatprowlin

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2003
Location
MG,Brazil
Defense for the fx

well all i can say is the fx series suit me just fine! except the 5200"crap"! Ive been playin nfs underground at high detail levels with my 5600 ultra and it runs 60 fps avg. good enough for me. Madden 2004 np. splinter cell medium settings 800x600 runs fine,open gl games like devastation,sof2 fantastic at 800x600 high detail. what else can u ask for from a low midrange card? And anyway there aint a visual framerate difference between the top of the line fx and ati cards!