FEAR Beta

[dhw200]

i didnt hear about that. Monolith using Source engine? If they were, it would be optimized for ATI.

@Beedubya, i doubt the difference between ATI and Nvidia will be that extreme. prolly like medium - medium high vs high as opposed to low vs high

 

[hu_xu]

FEAR isn't using the Source engine. It is using an engine developed in house.

 

[HAVOC]

Optimized for Pixel Shader 2 huh?

HOW MANY FREAKIN' POSTS HAVE I READ IN THIS FORUM, WITH "KNOW IT ALL TECHIES" SAYING... DON'T GET A HIGH END ATI CARD BECAUSE THEY DON'T SUPPORT PIXEL SHADER FREAKIN' 3!!!

GAMES LIKE F.E.A.R WON'T RUN ON YOUR $500.00 ATI CARDS...

BLAH..BLAH... FREAKIN' BLAH!!!

 

[gaara]

PS3 is an important instruction for enjoying a game at its full potential but I think there's a bit of a mob mentality here, and somehow people seem to believe that if you don't have this instruction on your GPU you're stuck with DX8, despite the fact that there is still DX9b...

Oh well, I have a 6800GT specifically for HDR lighting, I want a 64 bit operating system just so I can try out the revised Far Cry too, but it just isn't worth it.

 

[hu_xu]

Optimized for Pixel Shader 2 huh?

HOW MANY FREAKIN' POSTS HAVE I READ IN THIS FORUM, WITH "KNOW IT ALL TECHIES" SAYING... DON'T GET A HIGH END ATI CARD BECAUSE THEY DON'T SUPPORT PIXEL SHADER FREAKIN' 3!!!

GAMES LIKE F.E.A.R WON'T RUN ON YOUR $500.00 ATI CARDS...

BLAH..BLAH... FREAKIN' BLAH!!!

The question is not would it run. I don't know of ANY devs making a game solely to run on GPUs with SM 3.0. Posters should not say stuff like that because it gives the wrong impression as well as misinformation. To make a game like that could mean suicide for the company because they would be alienating many customers.

The question is a matter of economics. Many people who buy a $500 GPU consider three important factors during purchase decision:

1) Visual Quality
2) Performance
3) Durability (most in material and time sense)

Now it is true that an ATI X850XL will outperform Nvidia 6800 Ultra in many applications especially those which are designed to complement Direct3D. So performance is considered there. BUT when more games adopt and implement SM 3.0 features in their games one of it's benefits IS performance.

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?articleid=550

But the question whether or not an Nvidia GPU running SM 3.0 is faster than an ATI GPU of the same tier running SM 2.0 is still DEBATABLE.

So we move onto visual quality. There is no question that SM 3.0 is more visually advanced than SM 2.0. It's not a dramatic jump like DX7.0 to DX9.0 afterall they are BOTH still DX9.0 tech. Furthermore, many games out now that have implemented SM 3.0, the visual differences are not very noticable especially to casual gamers/PC users. But the question is not about NOW. It never has been and that is what ATI has tried to argue. That if we go by now or more appropriately during last year, implementation of SM 3.0 was NOT necessary and they are right. In fact, ATI has blamed Nvidia for the push of SM 3.0. I will leave it at that for the moment.

So now we move onto durability and this is where I think is the most important. Unless you're a tech geek I only expect you to change your GPU every FOUR years. Of course tech geeks will say four years the GPU will be basically obsolete considering GPU maturity lives are generally one year or even less today. But here is where people will recommend that you buy a GPU with SM 3.0 instead especially if you want to spend $500.

For the people who bought a $500 ATI card last year I won't say anything. But for anyone who bought a $500 ATI card in the past few months many of them might experience post purchase dissonance. Anyone who wants to buy a $500 ATI card now must be cautioned. Why? Because coming this fall many games will start implementing SM 3.0. By doing so buying a $500 ATI card now fails on two of the three purchase criterias I listed above. Performance is still debatable. SM 3.0 is the new next gen card and although you can't call a 6800U next gen anymore it does carry a feature of next gen GPUs and that is SM 3.0. The high end ATI cards right now simply don't. Therefore, it is not wrong to say that investing on a $500 ATI card now is not a wise decision.

Of course many ATI owners from the last few months who are satisfied with their purchase (afterall they upgraded from a worse card) might say: Who cares? My performance has gone up. That is all I care about.

But I would say to those people: Right now SM 3.0 benefits are minimal so of course caring about SM 3.0 is worthless if we go by NOW. But in the upcoming months especially after Fall when more games use SM 3.0 benefits will increase and it is when it becomes noticable that you might finally want it as well.

For the tech geeks they wouldn't care because they already planned on upgrading. But to the people who change every four years or even later THOSE are the ones which will most likely be victims of post purchase dissonance. If you bought your X8XX last year and ever earlier you have gotten much more worth from your investment than a person who buys it...today. So you will feel less post purchase dissonance.

To conclude THAT is why many people recommend a Nvidia solution over an ATI solution right now. Even so most people are recommending that you DO NOT change now but rather wait until the next gen GPUs are released and see if there is a price drop or re-evaluate your purchase decision to include the next gen GPUs. But if one is so intent on buying the current flagship cards, I think a Nvidia solution will have better value if you consider all three criterions.

Wow that was a long post I could have probably said this in one paragraph. I apologize if I put you or anybody else to sleep!

 

[HAVOC]

hu_xu,

Very nicely put. At least you outlined "why" recommending PS3 over PS2 cards "now" is a smarter option.

Everyone else just says, "PS2 cards suck" Don't buy them.

I agree with your post. GJ