3dfx Archive
http://www.falconfly.de/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl
This & That >> This & That >> FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
http://www.falconfly.de/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1093686094

Message started by FalconFly on 28.08.04 at 11:41:34

Title: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 28.08.04 at 11:41:34
Okidok, I created its own Topic in order to keep the Doom3 Thread focussed on Doom3.

As requested, the Screenshots taken with the DeltraChrome :

(note : Gamma Correction had to be applied to them, and since the Game already writes the Screenshots as .jpg , they've been effectively compressed twice, 2nd time 85% Quality to save space)

Max. Detail (no FSAA/Aniso) :
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0001.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0002.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0003.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0004.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0005.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0006.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0007.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0008.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0009.jpg

Medium overall Detail, w/ max. Texture & Particle Detail re-selected :
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0030.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0031.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0032.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0033.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0034.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0035.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0036.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0037.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0038.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0039.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0040.jpg

==================
Overall observations :
FarCry runs very playable (30-40fps) on the DeltaChrome on Medium overall Detail, with max. Texture and Particle Details.

Only maximum Pixel Shader effects and number of Dynamic Light sources can hog it down (~10-15fps).

For a "budget" 256MB Card positioned in the Radeon9600 price region running the latest Beta Drivers, the results were nothing short of excellent, I'm absolutely positively surprised :)

Since FarCry V1.1 is about the worst-case scenario, I'm absolutely sure the performance will still increase, and more resource-hungry DirectX9 rendering features will become usable.
(FarCry's enhanced DX9 modes, including HDR Lighting and alike, were as of now not selectable within the Game on the DeltraChrome).

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by fish on 28.08.04 at 13:37:47
Thanks for the Information.
I'm really interested in the DeltaChrome S8. Do you think it's a good choice?

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 28.08.04 at 14:19:38
Yes, Doom3 is a "special" case, but it is so for ATI (poor performance) and XGI (display errors) as well.
So it is no surprise to see Problems on non-NVidia Cards.

I'll have to do more testing with other current Games to make a final verdict.

Of course, if you're just looking for the most troublefree Gaming, you'll (as of now) always be best settled with an ATI or NVidia product.

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 28.08.04 at 16:51:20
30fps at medium details?
bleh

an old radeon8500 64meg beats that at stock speeds

getting a 9500pro off ebay is a much wiser choice to be honest, for anyone who's looking into a dx9 budget card.

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 28.08.04 at 17:01:52
A Radeon 64MB certainly won't, at maximum Texture and Particle Details running Beta Drivers, please read my postings correctly.

But I agree, for a safe bet, you couldn't go wrong with an ATI Card like you said ;)

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 28.08.04 at 18:49:34

wrote on 28.08.04 at 17:01:52:
A Radeon 64MB certainly won't, at maximum Texture and Particle Details running Beta Drivers, please read my postings correctly.


i beg to differ
FarCry 2004-08-28 19-42-04-89.jpg

All settings set to medium, except particle count and texture detail which are set to very high.
and i even kept aniso 8x on :)

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 28.08.04 at 20:27:34
Well, I stand corrected then ;D

Before I get called an S3 Fanboy *g* :

I even encountered the first Bug...
UT2004 is unstable for me (machine resets) with both the latest WHQL, and the Beta Driver.
(an oddball, since Performance and Image Quality is very good while it runs)

Reading up on it, seems to affect 50% of people, for some it works, for some it just doesn't.

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 29.08.04 at 22:28:37
Odd.

I've put in a Radeon 8500 myself, left all Settings as they were, and the performance dropped somewhat (not matching DenisF's numbers)

Settings :
- Overall System performance : Very high
- Quality Settings : Medium, except Texture and Particles (Very High)

4x Aniso Filtering was selected for the 2nd Screenshot inside the Game engine, first one is without.

http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0096.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0095.jpg

I also noted quite some Display/Texture errors when zooming on the Ground ???

http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0085.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0086.jpg

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 29.08.04 at 23:43:24
What drivers were you using falcon?

also i took mine from the research demo, i don't have the full game.. [maybe that makes a difference ???]

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 29.08.04 at 23:54:09
Hm, I used Catalyst 4.8, and the full Retail Game.

Might actually be, since Demos usually don't ship with the full Quality Textures (to keep the Demo reasonable small, same happened with UT2004 for example)

Found the Demo, downloading it now :)
(> 500MB, not quite small :o  ;D )

==========================
Images of the Card/Retail Box :



1600x1200 :
Front
Tilted
Ensemble

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 30.08.04 at 21:05:28
Just took another comparison (Re-installed the Catalyst 4.8 to make sure).

This is what I persistently got with the Radeon 8500 64MB AGP (Very High Detail, same scene as the first Test Shots with the Deltachrome) :

http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0099.jpg
http://www.planetfalconfly.de/img/FarCry0100.jpg

Generally approx. 30% lower performance than the Deltachrome across different Levels/Scenes (tested multiple Saved Games), and rendering issues (Textures, Pixel Shaders) at anything beyond Low Detail...

( ??? )

@DenisF :
What Drivers and what OS did you use ?
Maybe the Radeon 8500 & FarCry doesn't like Cat4.8 on Win2000 I use...

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 30.08.04 at 21:50:53
Very odd, your one looses while mine one surpasses :s

my system;
Windows XP SP2 [DX9.0c]
ATi Catalyst 4.8
ATi Radeon 8500 275/275 64mb [fastwrites on, sidebands on, agp4x, 128mb agp aperture]
Abit NF7-S rev2.0, 3D-FIRE D23 bios [by tictac]
AMD Athlon XP-M 2600+@3200+ [400fsb]
GeIL Golden Dragon DDR400 PC3200 Dual Channel kit [2x256mb] cl 2-2-2

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 30.08.04 at 21:59:59
Hm, except for the different Motherboard and your WinXP, we're using the same setup.

I'm gathering some infos as to why it happens on me, seems not normal.

It's just 3D Quark, but its typical Benchmark performance seems nominal, I get 11299 Quarks in 3D Quark 2001SE b330 out of it (which seems reasonable).

If you can please look for something out of the order in the Detailled results here :
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8084303

Maybe you notice something unusual, that would indicate something's wrong. Otherwise, I'll just roll-back to my 100% clean HardDrive Image, and re-test everything :)

(a quick re-test with Aquamark3 is also within ~2% of my known figures for that Card, so that looks okay)

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 30.08.04 at 22:38:35
And now another mystery, my most recent benchmark [when i used old single-channel memory, before i got my dragon sticks] does 343 points less than your setup, BUT look at the differences, in some test my board scores much higher than yours..

[ex; fillrate, nature, bump mapping, and all of the shaders]

url; http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8037523

EDIT
just noticed, your setup is 64bit, mine's 32bit..

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 30.08.04 at 22:52:16
Hm, your System is FSB Overclocked from 2500+ to 3200+ ?

Since 3D Mark 2001 reacts very sensitively towards FSB, that could explain your Scores in CPU bound situations.

(my system is 32bit as well of course, no 64bit extensions are used)

But in general, our Cards seem to perform roughly the same.

--------------
Once we're at it, some Aquamark3 comparisons (which seems more GPU bound than 2001SE)  :

[ all Benches were done on the same System ]

S3 Deltachrome 256MB :
http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=1824985852

Radeon 9600 128MB :
http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=1757211302

Radeon 8500 64MB :
http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=2024645638

SiS Xabre 400 128MB :
http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=1621991736

ATI Radeon 9000 128MB :
http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=1286391988

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 30.08.04 at 23:17:28
Yeh, my cpu's original FSB was 133, oc'd to 200. [200x11]

"But in general, our Cards seem to perform roughly the same."

37&23fps difference in bump mapping isn't "excatly" the same ;)

check this out;
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7938137

even my old P3 733 outperforms you in some tests..

that just doesn't make any sense m8
you must have some serious crap going on in your pc..

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 30.08.04 at 23:35:01
Well, that's an utter extreme FSB overclock, that will literally make 3D Mark 2001 explode in perfomance.

Hence the comparison of the Video Card is not 'quite' possible; it's not my System that's wrong, it's actually yours that's overclocked to achieve those performance spikes ;)

We'd have to settle on much more GPU bound benchmarks to still compare the Video Card. Otherwise, your extreme FSB will eat up my (stock clocked) machine in isolated spots easily.

(I've noted your P3 was overclocked as well, 133 > 140?)
---------------
Let's chose something as GPU bound as possible :
3D Quark 2003 b340 for example...

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 30.08.04 at 23:49:16
the barton core was made to withstand such overclocks, and no one really buys an XP-M 2600+ to keep it at stock speeds ;)

and yes my p3 was also oc'd a bit, 140fsb, just a li'l humble oc :p

3dquark03 it is then, * starts benching

EDIT
Hm
can't find a proper mirror that has quick upload *argh* best i found was 30kBsec

u got a faster one maybe falcon?
otherwise you can just go to sleep and i'll have the benches ready by the morning *g*

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 30.08.04 at 23:54:08
I know *g*
But since the beginning of FSB Overclocks, people noted 3D Mark 2001 series take massive jumps by it ;)

Here's the 2003 one :
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3035932

I saw you have FastWrites Enabled (Smartgart won't let me enable this). I know this can result in performance increases on intel Systems, but so far was generally thought to be of little effect on AMD Systems.

So apart from what we did so far, we could only sqeeze the Radeon 8500 further to its testing limits by moving to 1600x1200 Resolution and/or enabling FSAA/Aniso.

Download Link :
http://www.4players.de/rendersite.php?sid=&LAYOUT=download_info&GAMEID=3702&UPDATEDATE=&TYPE=Downloads&gameid=3702&STARTTIME=&DOWNLOADID=5711&sm4p01=1

PS.
One of the official Mirrors should provide adequate speed though ;)

Otherwise, Aquamark3 should serve our purpose "okay" as well however, although not as extremely GPU bound as the Quark2003 b340.

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 31.08.04 at 02:06:20
I ended up resorting to multi-source downloads..
all of them official mirrors suck real bad.. 10kBps avg..

anyhow; http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3036405

My cpu shows up as weaker than yours, but on anything that stresses the card more than the cpu, mine outbenches your card..

EDIT
Just like in the previous 2001se bench, my fillrate is much higher than yours.. [for some reason that's beyond me]

3dquack2001se;
Falcon; 815.1 MTexels/s
DenisF; 911.8 MTexels/s

3dquak03;
Falcon; 669.7 MTexels/s
DenisF; 784.9 MTexels/s


Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 31.08.04 at 02:29:44
Quick question :

Does your Motherboard have a fixed PCI/AGP divisor ?

If yes, it remains an oddity (maybe the WinXP does the trick?)...
If no, not only your FSB, but also your AGP and PCI Ports would clock a hell lot faster.

I wouldn't call the difference dramatic though, Single Texturing is irrelevant to modern Games, and the average end Result is 9.7% above mine.

Would be interesting however, to see how things turn out at complete stock speeds, no Overclock.
That would also show the effects of it quite nice (and maybe solve alot of questions regarding our ability to compare otherwise identical Video Cards)

I'd still say your Overclock (and to some extend WinXP) do the trick. I've seen the XP machines somewhat outrun my Win2000 a bit on other comparisons as well, I just can't put a fixed % advantage to it.

After all, an old rule says :
Never compare an overclocked system to a non-overclocked one, when looking for reliable comparison of single, identical items in them ;)

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 31.08.04 at 02:56:09
Yeh my motherboard locks down PCI to 33mhz and AGP is variable, though iv'e set it to 66 mhz iirc

Otherwise i agree with you, there's just too many variables in this equation to be able to compare both systems and call it equal grounds..

your one is a ViA 64bit, mine's an nForce 32bit, you got 2k, i got xp, you probably have every safety feature turned on in the bios, while mine is optimized down to the smallest setting to give highest possible speed..

bottom line; i'm sticking to my trusty 8500 64meg, and when the time comes, i'll upgrade to a radeon card that will support directx10 :)

and about the stock thing, i think that my p733 would probably outrun my axp-m if i run it at stock speeds :P

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 31.08.04 at 03:07:22
You're correct, I run PC333 RAM's at SPD (moderate) timings, and stability of the System is paramount.

After all, this Rig is serving data 24/7 a day to 23 other Systems, so I need it on an uptime of 100%.
(I might start tweaking this & that however *g* )

Anyway, apart from all comparisons, the good old Radeon 8500 indeed still packs a punch :)

------------
Hm, tweaked the Bios and enabled Fast Writes myself.
(I left RAM timings alone, however)

Surprisingly, the Envroinment Bumpmapping score rocketed, the rest increased with the expected tiny amount by the tweaking :
3D Mark 2001SE b330
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8086842

3D Mark 2003 (only minimal gains)
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3036692

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 31.08.04 at 04:38:31
Hehe congratz! :D

you still need some work on dot3 bumps and on the shaders though. ;)

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 06.09.04 at 02:00:45
Hehe, after applying the optimized Settings in my Bios, and using a new Driver, the Deltachrome does better than ever :

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8100523

Bumpmap and shader performance are now alot closer to where one would expect them :)

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 06.09.04 at 10:16:51
Still, even with that granted, I don't see a reason why me [or anybody else, for that matter] would want to "upgrade" their trusty GeForce3/GeForce4Ti/Radeon8500 to an S8 deltacrap.

C'mon.. a 512 meg card from 2004Q3 that can bearly compete with 2~3 year old 64mb cards? that's just pathetic imho..

As i see it, this card's biggest audience will be people who just don't know better.
ie those who buy pre-assembled "TOP OF THE LINE ULTRA FAST!!!11111111" sempron 2200+ systems with 256 megs of ram.

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 06.09.04 at 12:22:22
Given the Driver Situation, right now , that's (partly) correct of course.

As I said earler, plain Gamers cannot go wrong with the established Cards to avoid Problems; but do note a mere 2 weeks worth of Driver work got about 5% out of it throughout the envelope + likely some more bugs fixed (didn't test in Detail)

The way I see it, it is just an interesting piece of Hardware that is slowly being given the right Drivers to show its performance, a completely natural development.

The process naturally puts the Hardware far below envelope at first, and it is in the process of achieving progressivly higher performance almost every month.

Bottom line : It's getting there, it's just not quite there yet
=====================
If we didn't honor that, hardly any 3D Accelerator would have seen the light of the day, and we'd still use our ET4000/6000 in highly optimized VESA Modes :P

And as this is S3's first serious step into performance 3D since a very long time, it has to take the hard road of gathering experience with the Rules of optimizing and closely collaborating with the Gaming Industry.
(while the big tiers already can utilize their >5 years worth of know-how in that field)

Putting that in perspective (which I found many people and reviewers simply don't do), it remains a solid piece of Hardware, for those that have the time to spare to get into it.

If we would put that attitude "everything must run bug-free right from the get-go at max. performance and Quality" towards all pieces of Hardware, we'd probably wouldn't even have 3D Accelerators, nor a PCI/AGP Bus or some other HighTech bits right now... All put down and failed prematurely because of initial bugs or problems.

What you (and other Critics) need to understand, is that the Radeon 8500 (as an example) has absolutely topped off by all means (Drivers, Performance, Support, Optimization), while the Deltachrome in turn is just beginning to catch serious throttle in all of those fields.

The Kyro1/2 had exactly the same Problems at first, were put down because of Drivers and still working with SD-RAM.
The end we know, they actually turned out as excellent and highly efficient Gaming cards in the end (for those that knew what they were doing).
==============
Mind you, I might test the freshly arrived XGI counterpart later today ;)
(looking at the Retail Box, the Game of Marketing those guys already play very well *g* )

And yes, this is serious fun for me, that's what I got those Cards for  ;D

PS.
It's a 256MB Card, don't actually know why 3D Quark insists on claiming it was 512MB

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 06.09.04 at 12:49:12
Thing is, that you're evaluating this card based on past expirience with /other/ GFX vendors.
[ie the -very- low performance that the radeon 8500 had when it just shipped]

BUT, ATi didn't take that crappy performance for granted, and released beta drivers practicly on daily basis.

however, S3, is a completely different story.
i can go own on how much support and driver development their savage2000/xp got, and their 'highly adopted' S3 MeTaL api, but frankly i think that you know that already, so i'll spare the keystrokes.

And based on those past expiriences of mine [and of others] with /s3/, i just don't think that they will go very far with these chips, this time.


... But then again, none of us is a prophet..
I'm just hoping, that for the sake of those who put high-hopes into those cards, S3 will continue to support them, and find some unemployed 3dfx devs to help them out with the drivers.

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 06.09.04 at 13:13:51
I know ;)

Well, so far it looks like they're serious.
The next (possible) breakpoint we'll have to see, is when they release a successor, and if they'll still support the 2nd line of Cards then.

Having their 'infamous' past in mind as well, the development so far looks quite good, and I see no reason for them to stop doing that.
(that was maybe the most positive experience I got out of them so far)

Hence I'm pretty positive about the Deltachrome, I saw no absolute showstopper in that Card so far (which I was afraid to see).

PS.
Had some close look at the XGI, and *ugh*, that must be the heaviest piece of PC Video Card I've ever seen...
Talking about a serious "brute force" approach to things hehe :o

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 07.09.04 at 00:32:02
Agreed, you should do some benches in 3~6 months and see how far are s3 gonna take it.

ow and how does the XGI [volari v8?] compare to the deltachrome s8? is it faster/slower? some benches?  ;D

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 07.09.04 at 02:04:26
Well, I'd rather open a new Thread about the Volari.

First quick bench :
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=8102655

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by DenisF on 09.09.04 at 12:24:34
So crappy bump mapping and shader performance is a new trend now or what ???

neway, agreed, the volari v8 deserves it's own thread :)

Title: Re: FarCry on S3 DeltraChromeS8 256MB
Post by FalconFly on 09.09.04 at 12:30:07
I you call it crap plain because the Radeon 8500 had expeptionally high performance for its time...

Well, it becomes pointless to discuss any futher with you.
Cards do have different Architectures, in case you haven't noticed ::)

3dfx Archive » Powered by YaBB 2.4!
YaBB © 2000-2009. All Rights Reserved.