Posted By: ello
and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 01/31/05 17:05
can you please tell me why:
radeon:

nvidia:

under
http://www.eartcontrol.de/downloads/molifax/molifax2.rar you find the fx-files included which can be reloaded to the demo using middle_mouse press and u/i/k - keys...
i hate this sh*t
Posted By: William
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 01/31/05 17:39
Ello, youre not the only one with these problems that drive a person mad. Is this an A6 rendering problem? I hope Conitec realizes that publishers like a fair degree of compatability with their products. I'm not directly placing the blame on Conitec, but it seems like there is many re-occuring problems with shader code and different GPU's and I am running out of options quickly.
- The link above was wrong(forgot the "h" in earthcontrol)
[url=
http://www.earthcontrol.de/downloads/molifax/molifax2.rar ][/url]
Interesting, i have not found any differnce in shaders between my radeon 9700 and my geforce 6800.. I cant imagine that if there is a difference its related to the aknex renderer..more likely you are using certain functions that are implemented differently in different hardware or drivers. You should contact Nvidia or Ati, maybe they can help you sort it out.
Posted By: William
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 01/31/05 17:57
Are you required to have a different version of your shader for every GPU out there? Well, that may have been a little over-the-top but I have had major differences with tests done between a Radeon 9200 and a Radeon 9800, both using the same shader code. Many other users have posted other differences between GPU's as well, this isn't an isolated incident(I cannot confirm what others have said in the past to be true however but do not doubt it).
Posted By: ello
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 01/31/05 18:47
matt, can you check the fx-files which come with my bug-demo?
Posted By: jcl
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 02/01/05 00:38
Not only the shader version, but also the number of shader registers can be different between Radeon and GeForce. I suggest to check the number of registers. That's the only possible reason that I could think of. The engine does not contain a 'won't work with nVidia' flag.
Posted By: ello
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 02/01/05 00:42
ah.. so i think if i want to create shaders seriously i'll have to buy me a nvidiaCard as well. oky. which one is the current state of the art ?? something like 6800??
Posted By: Team_GamesArk
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 02/01/05 01:33
hi,
GeForce 6800 Ultra, 6800 GT, 6800 are in the moment nVidias highend Cards, and
GeForce 6600 GT, GeForce 6600 are the new mainstream products. There is also
a GeForce 6200 Cards, but i think one of the first is for shadertesting the
best choice.
Frank.
Posted By: Rigoletto
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 02/01/05 04:34
Could this be to much different speed/quality switches in the driver???
Geforce looks rasterized in 8bit.
Posted By: Paul_L_Ming
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 02/01/05 08:58
Hiya.
I recently bought a new computer, video card as well. After a weeks of searching, compareing, asking around, etc., I found that the GeForce 6800 GT is your best bang for your buck. The 6800 Ultra's are WAAAAY to expensive for the performance boost you *might* get (generally, all the tests I saw put an Ultra between 0 and 7 FPS faster than the GT...might make a difference if we were talking "33 FPS" vs "26 FPS", but not noticable when dealing with "101 FPS" vs. "108 FPS". Not for an increase in price of several hundred dollars.
From what I hear, the Radeon's are better at D3D, and the GeForce are better at OpenGL (IIRC).
Posted By: iSO_BigD
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 03/08/05 14:25
Just out of curiosity...you wouldn't be testing the game/demo on DIFFERENT generations of cards, would you?...like say, a DX9 ATI card, supporting those pixel shader effects and a DX7-8 NVIDIA card that doesn't?
ATI Radeon 9500+ and NVIDIA Geforce FX+ = DX9 cards...the ones before that aren't.
Posted By: indiGLOW
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 03/30/05 19:54
From my reading up on my Radeon 9800 I learned that it supports 2.0 shader, so with much anticipation I tried some of the new shaders presented here...
Now ok, it all honesty its most likely that I have done something wrong, but it seems that most of these cool shaders just give me a black object, and don't seem to run.
I wonder why this is? Maybe the 9800 isnt really 2.0? Or is there some kind of difference between implementing an Ati shader and a Nvidia one? Would explain why games developers tend to pick one over the other....
Posted By: ello
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 03/30/05 20:16
that must be definately your fault: i think missing textures
note that i have a radeon9800, too
Posted By: indiGLOW
Re: and again : nvidia vs. radeon - 03/31/05 00:15
As much as I hate to admit it, Ello I think you are most probably correct!

I have just had a little success with a basic bump map shader from Steampipe so i just need to work from there...
If it runs on yours it should run on mine ....