ATI R420 WONT SUPPORT 3.0 SHADERS

W

wired and confused

http://www.theregister.com/2004/03/11/ati_drops_pixel_vertex_shader/
ATI 'drops pixel, vertex shader 3.0 support' from R420
By Tony Smith
Published Thursday 11th March 2004 09:59 GMT
ATI's upcoming R420 graphics chip will not support DirectX 9's version three
pixel and vertex shaders.

So claims German web site 3D Center, saying that the absence is "beyond
doubt".

The site argues that since the R420 is derived from the older, proven R300
architecture, it would never have been easy to 'bolt on' pixel and vertex
shader 3.0 support, so ATI instead decided to focus on improving shader 2.0
support. Indeed, it concludes that ATI even believes shader 3.0 support
isn't as important as some gamers and other graphics chip fans might think.
Shader 3.0 is "a beautiful, but rather useless check list feature", the site
says.

Essentially, shader 3.0 support won't be necessary until the next generation
of graphics chips arrives with the upcoming 'Longhorn' version of Windows in
mind. By then there should be much better shader 3.0 support in games, too -
there aren't any yet.

Much better, then, to focus on the technology that today's - and
tomorrow's - games do support, and make it work faster. That means shader
2.0.

The R420 will deliver that through its eight rendering pipelines containing
an unknown number of texture units and six vertex units. The 160 million
transistor chip will be fabbed at 130nm by TSMC. It will support DDR, GDDR 2
and GDDR 3 across a 256-bit interface. It is expected to be used in AGP 8x
boards.

Of course, Nvidia will tout shader 3.0 support when it launches the
long-awaited NV40 later this year. ®
 
M

Minotaur

wired said:
http://www.theregister.com/2004/03/11/ati_drops_pixel_vertex_shader/
ATI 'drops pixel, vertex shader 3.0 support' from R420
By Tony Smith
Published Thursday 11th March 2004 09:59 GMT
ATI's upcoming R420 graphics chip will not support DirectX 9's version three
pixel and vertex shaders.

So claims German web site 3D Center, saying that the absence is "beyond
doubt".

The site argues that since the R420 is derived from the older, proven R300
architecture, it would never have been easy to 'bolt on' pixel and vertex
shader 3.0 support, so ATI instead decided to focus on improving shader 2.0
support. Indeed, it concludes that ATI even believes shader 3.0 support
isn't as important as some gamers and other graphics chip fans might think.
Shader 3.0 is "a beautiful, but rather useless check list feature", the site
says.

Essentially, shader 3.0 support won't be necessary until the next generation
of graphics chips arrives with the upcoming 'Longhorn' version of Windows in
mind. By then there should be much better shader 3.0 support in games, too -
there aren't any yet.

Much better, then, to focus on the technology that today's - and
tomorrow's - games do support, and make it work faster. That means shader
2.0.

The R420 will deliver that through its eight rendering pipelines containing
an unknown number of texture units and six vertex units. The 160 million
transistor chip will be fabbed at 130nm by TSMC. It will support DDR, GDDR 2
and GDDR 3 across a 256-bit interface. It is expected to be used in AGP 8x
boards.

Of course, Nvidia will tout shader 3.0 support when it launches the
long-awaited NV40 later this year. ®

Not that there isn't a hope in hell it shall be able to run at more than
5FPS on the nVidia 6800U, in a FPS game. Yes it has PS3 support, but it
runs like a dog, something they didn't tell you :)
 
D

Dark Avenger

Not that there isn't a hope in hell it shall be able to run at more than
5FPS on the nVidia 6800U, in a FPS game. Yes it has PS3 support, but it
runs like a dog, something they didn't tell you :)

Actually it seems as if they this time made a card that didn't need
Cheat Drivers. Oh and you can shut off brilinear filtering and go for
full trilinear filtering!
 
J

John Lewis

Not that there isn't a hope in hell it shall be able to run at more than
5FPS on the nVidia 6800U, in a FPS game. Yes it has PS3 support, but it
runs like a dog, something they didn't tell you :)


Two words that describe your reaction to the 6800:-

Sour grapes !

Hope you didn't buy a 9800XT/256 meg. The extra 128 meg
is practically useless anyway with a card that slow - no way
it will run at resolutions requiring 256Meg without being a slide-
show.

John Lewis
 
A

Andrew

Hope you didn't buy a 9800XT/256 meg. The extra 128 meg
is practically useless anyway with a card that slow - no way
it will run at resolutions requiring 256Meg without being a slide-
show.

Resolutions don't require 256MB, large textures do, and a 9800XT
handles them very well.
 
A

Asestar

Resolutions don't require 256MB, large textures do, and a 9800XT
handles them very well.

Actually, both do. The more ram, the higher the resolution you can go with
AA or AF enabled.
A crude example: if you have a 128mb card, running a game with normal
textures at 800x600 will require say 4mb for framebuffer, add another 8-16mb
for AA or AF. This leaves about ~100mb for textures. However, the higher the
res., the larger is framebuffer (even bigger if trippel buffer is enabled)
thus leaving less memory for the textures.
 
A

Asestar

Ati's decision will indeed hurt some sales, depending on how smart is
customer, and how well nvidia publicize their card.
The fact is that life span for any gaming card is like 18-24 months, 30
months at the top!

So lets imagine 8500 that came out about 4 years ago, it can still play new
games quite nicely. And still today there are MOST games don't use Shaders.

DX9 games that uses ps2 came out on market this year, so for almost 3 years
there was no real benefit of having DX9 support. Also note that radeon9700
came out 3 years ago. So it had to wait 2 years to get any real dx9 enabled
game.

While most people bought this card cause it was faster/smoother in DX8 and
DX7 games.
 
L

Les

Asestar said:
Ati's decision will indeed hurt some sales, depending on how smart is
customer, and how well nvidia publicize their card.
The fact is that life span for any gaming card is like 18-24 months, 30
months at the top!

So lets imagine 8500 that came out about 4 years ago, it can still play new
games quite nicely. And still today there are MOST games don't use Shaders.

Aren't there a good few new games requiring shaders?
DX9 games that uses ps2 came out on market this year, so for almost 3 years
there was no real benefit of having DX9 support. Also note that radeon9700
came out 3 years ago. So it had to wait 2 years to get any real dx9 enabled
game.

July 2002 is not 3 years ago.
 
M

Minotaur

John said:
Two words that describe your reaction to the 6800:-

Sour grapes !

Hope you didn't buy a 9800XT/256 meg. The extra 128 meg
is practically useless anyway with a card that slow - no way
it will run at resolutions requiring 256Meg without being a slide-
show.

John Lewis


LOL, no I still have my 9700Pro *8) quiet happy with 50-70FPS+ in
Battlefield Vietnam, with everything on HIGH @ 1600X1200X32.

No Sour Grapes, because nothing uses PS3 yet in a big way!
Farcry has a patch for PS3, but from reviews, it does nothing to the
performance or quality of the game.

Unfortunatly for you PS3 fanboys, PS3 won't be in wide use for a few
years from now! Reason I am keeping this 9700Pro for now, why swap?
when there is nothing new to take advantage of, on a newer card, besides
just extra raw speed..


Minotaur *8)
 
D

Danny Greaves

Thank you for making me laugh. ("with a card that slow") I was having such a bad
week that a smile seemed impossible. Funny how a burst of laughing can help so
much. Heck now I even feel like doing a little online racing.

Seriously though, every body I know thinks that i'm off the deep end with
computers. And there right. Years of multiplayer racing almost every day is off
the deep end. But stuff like "with a card that slow" might cause an intervention
by loved ones.


Must really suck getting smoked by someone (like me) using a aiw7500! Even when
I replace this PC the 7500 will go in that one.

--end
 
J

John Lewis

Thank you for making me laugh. ("with a card that slow") I was having such a bad
week that a smile seemed impossible. Funny how a burst of laughing can help so
much. Heck now I even feel like doing a little online racing.

Yes, I was smiling as I wrote it.
Some of the fish did rise to the bait...........
Seriously though, every body I know thinks that i'm off the deep end with
computers. And there right. Years of multiplayer racing almost every day is off
the deep end. But stuff like "with a card that slow" might cause an intervention
by loved ones.


Must really suck getting smoked by someone (like me) using a aiw7500! Even when
I replace this PC the 7500 will go in that one.

And why not, if that is all the power you need for your favorite
applications.

John Lewis
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top