bad openGL implementation????

D

DirtyApe

Gawd
Joined
Nov 6, 2003
Messages
860
whats with all this talk about the x800 models having bad openGL implementations??? and is it strictly hardware or just a driver problem that will get fixed with the next update? cuz im buying a new card next week and im torn between which one i should buy. ive been watching the forums and reading the reviews and all but i cant make up my mind...if the openGL thing is only driver based then ill go with the ATI cuz thatll be fixed in no time. but if its hardware then ill go with Nvidia. ARGH what do i george?!?!what do i do?!?!?
 
definitly hardware, drivers are bad too but ATi should be able to eek out another 1-2%.

Forgot to add this is why ATi wasn't able to get thier ogl drivers ready for Doom 3 unfortunately.
 
There was an article on the front page that i thought was a really good read. It talked of some of the reason that ati was lagging behind in doom3. It was posted today, if ya got the time definately check it out. They didn't seem to think it was as opengl related like you here so much talk of lately.
 
hmmyah said:
There was an article on the front page that i thought was a really good read. It talked of some of the reason that ati was lagging behind in doom3. It was posted today, if ya got the time definately check it out. They didn't seem to think it was as opengl related like you here so much talk of lately.
Click to expand...

Then again a lot of that article has to be taken with a grain of salt as they are only basing it on conjectures based off of their knowledge of the two architectures.
 
Its definitly hardware, I work with ogl, and if it was driver related, the engine I'm working on, I would have found a way to fix it in the engine.
 
I think most people just don't know what they are talking about when it comes to ati's opengl driver problems. Personally I play Doom3 at the same settings I play Far Cry and Painkiller at with similar performance, and look at benchmarks from this site and you will see the same thing. Anyone who thought / still thinks drivers are going to make doom 3 run like the 6800's run it is just crazy. The 6800 series was designed to play doom3 so no shit it’s going to hand ati cards their ass. Ati's opengl problems have always been with stability, as seen with most all opengl titles (except doom3 where I have had no problems). I guess now they have a compelling reason to try and squeeze a little more performance out of the opengl side.

/rant
 
the problem is not with Doom 3, how about the games that come out on the D3 engine, they are going to be more intensive then Doom 3, if they newer games use off set bump mapping and replace normal mapping that will automatically use 20% more gpu. The 6800 line will have no problems, ATi on the other hand will.
 
More than anything else I think Doom3 gives a great chance for ATi to finally figure out a fast OpenGL from a backwards perspective.

There aren't "too" many OpenGL games out there, and writing code for something that you think a programmer might use, is not a good way to get great performance. IE: ATi can now look at what data Doom3 is requesting (types/sizes/frequency/quirks) and adjust accordingly, quicker and better that you could ever do on a forward looking driver set.

But its true, the NV30/40 was designed around Carmacks .plan specifications, which seems to be, lots of lights, lots of shadows, lots of unseen textures, and close confined areas.
 
rancor said:
the problem is not with Doom 3, how about the games that come out on the D3 engine, they are going to be more intensive then Doom 3, if they newer games use off set bump mapping and replace normal mapping that will automatically use 20% more gpu. The 6800 line will have no problems, ATi on the other hand will.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you and that’s what I am saying. What I was getting at is the general ignorance as far as the state of ati's opengl driver and everyone thinking it's a sack of shit when, aside from stability issues which are a pain in the ass, is on par with the d3d side.


EDIT: I have comma problems, I, feel, like, putting, them, all, over, the, place.
 
ZenOps said:
More than anything else I think Doom3 gives a great chance for ATi to finally figure out a fast OpenGL from a backwards perspective.

There aren't "too" many OpenGL games out there, and writing code for something that you think a programmer might use, is not a good way to get great performance. IE: ATi can now look at what data Doom3 is requesting (types/sizes/frequency/quirks) and adjust accordingly, quicker and better that you could ever do on a forward looking driver set.

But its true, the NV30/40 was designed around Carmacks .plan specifications, which seems to be, lots of lights, lots of shadows, lots of unseen textures, and close confined areas.
Click to expand...

Very true Zen exactly what happened to nV with Dx
 
I'm still a little confused on the subject. Are ATi's general issues with OpenGL performance in other games also due to hardware? Does OpenGL naturally do stuff to throw ATi's hardware off track or is it Carmack's engines?
 
there are other opengl games besides doom 3,

go take a athlong 64 and 9800 play farcry then play, jedi academy or KOTOR , COD or any of hte other opengl games..

its what always pissed me offf about the 9800 was their piss poor open gl, meteocre id have been happy with since not many games use it. but seriosly certain levels on KOTOR 2-3fps with certain driver sets..

anyhow i love my new 6800gt
 
ATi's card thrive on the flexibiliy of Dx, in Ogl there is no flexibilty in most cases some things have to be done in certain ways. So ATi can't bend the rules to increase speed on thier cards, this is what is happening. Thier architecture can't handle ogl.
 
its hardware + software, mostly hardware it seems

ati's hardware can't do 32x0, FP16pp, or ultrashadow2, leaving them at a big disadvantage for Doom3 and future Doom3 engine games (quake4, rtcw2, etc).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top