FarCry 1.3 available for DL

[j1nx]

A little specifics explains alot

Hehe sorry, here straight off the ATi website:

3Dc is an exciting new compression technology designed to bring out fine details in games while minimizing memory usage. It is the first compression technique optimized to work with normal maps, which allow fine per-pixel control over how light reflects from a textured surface. With up to 4:1 compression possible, this means game designers can now include up to 4x the detail without changing the amount of graphics memory required and without impacting performance.

as far as I know that is only available on the X800 series of video cards atm.

 

[Marsumane]

Originally posted by: j1nx

A little specifics explains alot

Hehe sorry, here straight off the ATi website:

3Dc is an exciting new compression technology designed to bring out fine details in games while minimizing memory usage. It is the first compression technique optimized to work with normal maps, which allow fine per-pixel control over how light reflects from a textured surface. With up to 4:1 compression possible, this means game designers can now include up to 4x the detail without changing the amount of graphics memory required and without impacting performance.

as far as I know that is only available on the X800 series of video cards atm.

lol no no i meant that them saying "3dc" would have explained alot. And also then why does it say "Normal Map Compression. Requirements: NVidia: Geforce FX Family or better". Or can the nvfx series on up also use 3dc?

 

[j1nx]

Oh, right I didnt see that, I dunno then, heh. :frown: I've never seen anything about nV cards using 3Dc, or something similar of their own..

 

[OnEMoReTrY]

Any video card can run normal map compression, however it will run much faster on ATI hardware because of 3Dc...

 

[j1nx]

Ah, I see, well thats neat.. I wonder if we'll see some new benches with 1.3 anytime soon.. would like to see how stuff performs with the 3.0/2.0b shaders and normal map compression..

 

[LordPhoenix]

2-3 More weeks until I can play a game with better graphics than WC3.

 

[Travis6586]

Thought you guys might be interested in my personal benchmarking endeavors. My computer specs are listed in my sig...

All tests were performed with v-sync off, maximum detail, 1280 x 1024 resolution with the Far Cry Benchmark program (Version 1.3.1) running the PC Games Hardware Demo. The demo was run 2 times at each setting to verify the accuracy of the results. Here goes:

Far Cry (1.1)

8x AA, 16x AF: 34.88 FPS
6x AA, 16x AF: 50.46 FPS
4x AA, 16x AF: 34.57 FPS

Far Cry (1.3)

8x AA, 16x AF: 46.93 FPS (+12.05 FPS)
6x AA, 16x AF: 52.29 FPS (+1.83 FPS)
4x AA, 16x AF: 59.85 FPS (+25.28 FPS)

At all three settings, performance was increased with the new patch available.

 

[MidasKnight]

Thanks !

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Originally posted by: Marsumane

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
BAH! HDR doesn't work on X800 cards, only 6800 cards, even though we've seen these kinds of effects on ATI hardware before. What utter nonsense!

F**king hell. Do these developers really need to pick sides when doing stuff like this? I can put up with it if they make it perform better on one hardware or another but to hold out features like this altogether!? A pox on them!

It probably was impractical to run it on ati's hardware. It can run, but it would require more passes to do the same thing as compared to nv's 6xxx archetecture. I also think they should have enabled it, but maybe they had good reason not to is what im saying. Or maybe theyre working on it for the "next" patch which we all know will come out within a '04.

I lost the link but there was an interview (perhaps at Sharky Extreme) about it and their excuse is pretty weak, and a thinly veiled ploy.

They talk about how for quality they decided to code HDR for FP32 instead of FP16 (they neglect to even mention FP24, which half of the market uses).

Then the interviewer asks something to the effect of "oh, so if it supports FP32 then it should work on the FX 5900's then (obviously with lower performance)" and the Crytek guy says something about "well, no, because the FX6800 has a type of blending technique that we use (so it's 6800 only)" .

It's bollocks - just a convenient excuse to cut out owners of older cards and ATI users for not having FP32 (funny, HDR seems to be working fine in HL2 on both ATI and Nvidia cards).

It shouldn't even be an issue of "ATI vs Nvidia," it's just common sense - support what your userbase runs. Perhaps FP24 would run faster than FP32 on the X800 series vs the 6800 series. So what? It's an apples to oranges comparison anyways, as the 6800 series is running it at a higher quality (whether this would make a significant difference or not in actual visual quality is currently unknown). It's just annoying. ATI has the support for HDR right there. It runs fine in RTHDRIBL and Pixel Shader demos...

Sheesh Jiffy take it easy.
When I enable the HDR, anomalies abound. The water does indeed look better, but it replaces the land? Walls become see-through?

If anyone knows of a way to enable other than "\r_hdrrendering 1", LMK, because to me it looks like it's not working.

The patch works great though and seems to improve performance, IQ.

 

[element]

Originally posted by: Travis6586
Thought you guys might be interested in my personal benchmarking endeavors. My computer specs are listed in my sig...

All tests were performed with v-sync off, maximum detail, 1280 x 1024 resolution with the Far Cry Benchmark program (Version 1.3.1) running the PC Games Hardware Demo. The demo was run 2 times at each setting to verify the accuracy of the results. Here goes:

Far Cry (1.1)

8x AA, 16x AF: 34.88 FPS
6x AA, 16x AF: 50.46 FPS
4x AA, 16x AF: 34.57 FPS

Far Cry (1.3)

8x AA, 16x AF: 46.93 FPS (+12.05 FPS)
6x AA, 16x AF: 52.29 FPS (+1.83 FPS)
4x AA, 16x AF: 59.85 FPS (+25.28 FPS)

At all three settings, performance was increased with the new patch available.

for the 1.1 patch, why are you getting lower framerate at 4x AA than the other 2?

 

[Sylvanas]

they didnt code HDR for ATI cards because of the crytek/nvidia agreement, sorry i dont know any more on this subject i saw it on another forum.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Sylvanas
they didnt code HDR for ATI cards because of the crytek/nvidia agreement, sorry i dont know any more on this subject i saw it on another forum.

That's essentially what I was alluding to; an obvious agreement between the two companies where they'd develop HDR only for the NV card.

Although Rollo assures us that the imperfect state of HDR in Far Cry means we're not missing much, I've seen the pictures and I want to try it out on my new $500 (Canadian) toy, dammit . I think it looks pretty cool, albeit a bit over the top. I have heard that it kills performance (at least as badly as lots of AA) but I still would like to try it out for a bit.

Otherwise, the patch is quite good - performance seems smoother (haven't had time benchmarking, I've been too busy playing it).


Rollo- there are 11 different 'filters' or types of HDR enabled with the patch, apparently, so you type \r_dhrrendering (a number 1 through 11). Apparently 7, the "bloom" effect is the best looking one, according to the big thread at Nvnews.

This obviously isn't ruining my life or anything silly like that (and I'll be thinking of much more pleasant things when I go to bed soon), but I just find it annoying that HDR, a feature that should work on any DX9 card, is only coded to work on the 6800 cards. What about the millions of 9500-9800 users, the X800 Pro and XT users, the GeForce FX 5 series users (who have sh!tty enough performance in FC as it is, but might want an HDR slideshow )?

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

I lost the link but there was an interview (perhaps at Sharky Extreme) about it and their excuse is pretty weak, and a thinly veiled ploy...

That doesn't sound right; if it was just a matter of fp32 then the fx cards could do it too. From what I understand, you basicly need a 16-bit floating point frame buffer to pull off HDR with alpha channels; so with Far Cry and it's alpha channel heavy vegitation HDR is really only a viable option on nv4x hardware. However, the Geforce6 cards can't do a 16-bit floating point frame buffer and AA at the same time, and at least on my 6800gt the HDR in Far Cry is too damn hard on framerate to really play with it on anyway; so this really isn't much of a loss for Ati anyway.

Yeah, the quotes in that interview confuse me. I think both the interviewer and the interviewee didn't know exactly what they're talking about. GF6 exclusively has GPU transistors dedicated to FP16 frame buffers/blends/whatever this is, and this goes beyond just pixel shaders capable of FP32 precision. As ATi doesn't include this HDR hardware yet, I'm guessing this is what Crytek implemented. So it's exclusive to nV simply b/c ATi's cards don't support it.

Or Crytek really is paying nV back for their support by limiting HDR to sufficiently fast cards with FP32-capable pixel shaders, in which case that nV marketing guy was lying when he said/implied there wasn't any quid pro quo involved with TWIMTBP (in another interview). Big surprise, I know.

In short, everyone's smokin' a little crack. Now let's see more numbers, dammit! Thanks for kicking off the benchmarkfest, Travis.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Pete

Yeah, the quotes in that interview confuse me. I think both the interviewer and the interviewee didn't know exactly what they're talking about. GF6 exclusively has GPU transistors dedicated to FP16 frame buffers/blends/whatever this is, and this goes beyond just pixel shaders capable of FP32 precision. As ATi doesn't include this HDR hardware yet, I'm guessing this is what Crytek implemented. So it's exclusive to nV simply b/c ATi's cards don't support it.

Or Crytek really is paying nV back for their support by limiting HDR to sufficiently fast cards with FP32-capable pixel shaders, in which case that nV marketing guy was lying when he said/implied there wasn't any quid pro quo involved with TWIMTBP (in another interview). Big surprise, I know.

In short, everyone's smokin' a little crack. Now let's see more numbers, dammit! Thanks for kicking off the benchmarkfest, Travis.

Hmm, isn't that Nvidia link just explaining their implementation of HDR?

One thing which is funny though is the idealistic (and ironic) example in that Nvidia link, where they talk about the colour:

"In the image on the right (using HDR), note the subtle lighting variations on the floor and on the nature scene on the wall versus the harsh, over-lit conditions in the image on the left (without HDR). "

This is funny because harsh and over-lit are the perfect terms to describe the HDR in many of the Far Cry 1.3 screenshots I've seen. It still looks neat to try out, though .

 

[BFG10K]

If anyone knows of a way to enable other than "\r_hdrrendering 1",

There are 11 options for HDR (1-11). Of course it's in beta so I wouldn't expect perfection just yet.

 

[Genx87]

I think it is because the NV4.x supports floating point blending and filtering in hardware where the X800 does not. The 5900 wont work in this instance either because it lacks the hardware to do this. I am sure they could have done something to work around it but at what cost? If the NV4.x is choking on it using dedicated hardware. It is obvious the X800s would be a slideshow.



Edit:btw I guess there is 1 good thing about having a cold and being up at 5:00 in the morning. No wait in line for the patch at fileplanet

 

[Rottie]

after install 1.3 patch and start to play game I don't see anything much.

 

[BFG10K]

You won't see a difference unless you benchmark and/or force HDR.

 

[Genx87]

HDR looks nice but holy smokes does it kill performance hehe.

Ok I am in the first room on training where the light comes in through holes in the ceiling. Nice looking room.
1600X1200 everything maxed except AF.

With HDR = 15-18 FPS
without HDR = my cap of 60 fps.

Yikes!

 

[nRollo]

Hmmm. I forgot I had AA on and turned that off, but I'm still doing something wrong as I lose the land underneath me on any of those options. (1-11)

More investigation necessary.

In any case, I think you're being unrealistic if you don't expect TWIMTBP developers to give nVidia something back for their investment Jiffy.

Did you complain when S3 had devs put MeTal in games as well? Or when 3dfx had Glide? Or for that matter, you don't see me complain about my lack of TruForm or 3dc?

I don't think you can expect "fair" in business.

 

[Travis6586]

for the 1.1 patch, why are you getting lower framerate at 4x AA than the other 2?

I'm not sure. I figured it had something to do with the combination of my GPU and CPU. My CPU is bottlenecking my video card, so I figured that at those particular settings, my CPU was being relied on more than my video card. I'm not positively sure though.