SM3.0 is a scam.

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Pr0d1gy

Originally posted by: Drayvn



So in the end Prodigy, we shouldnt have GFX cards because theres no point in advancement, because everything was a pointless scam right?

Is that how you really feel? I made my point quite clearly. Thanks for attemtping to put words in my mouth though, now go pull your foot out of yours.

The only point you made clear is that you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[MegaWorks]

SM3 is the future, because it?s easier for developers to code games with it. If ATI is implementing it in their next generation core it?s because they know exactly what there talking about. But I truly believe that nVidia implemented SM3 in the Geforce 6 series to trick users on buying their cards over the X800 line of ATI.

 

[5150Joker]

Ok the title of this topic is pretty strongly worded and could be perceived as trolling. However I would have agreed with you last generation (x800 vs 6800) since SM 3.0/HDR provided no real benefit. However, now that the next iteration of GPUs are here (7800 GTX) or on the horizon (R520) that statement no longer holds true. The 7800 GTX in particular handles HDR very well and this is coming from someone who wasn't really impressed by HDR very much. SM 3.0 is a natural progression of the industry and the 7800 GTX does a fine job of utilizing it as I'm sure R520 will do.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: DRavisher

Originally posted by: munky
SM3 is not a scam, and it will be used more and more in future games, but what is a scam in Nvidia trying to convince people that the gf6 series will actually be able to run future games with sm3 eye candy, and that such a feature is reason enough to chose a gf6 card over a x850 card. We have already seen that sm3 does not turn a weaker 6600gt into a x800-crushing monster , and we have also seen instances where a x800xt with sm2 is still faster than a 6800gt with sm3 running the same effects.

Sm3 will be needed in the gf7/r520 cards, but it's use in the gf6 series is limited at best.

Unless my 1337 h4xx0r predictions kick in, in which case having SM3.0 will be a blessing, since R400 will be stuck with inferior SM2.0 vanilla.

Yeah? We'll see, because it doesnt look like a blessing in current games, much less so in future, more demanding games. I wish somebody would run benches on the FEAR demo, we'll see if it turns out to be a blessing in that case.

That has already been done. Remember? Even the 6800GT scored better than a X850XTPE. We thought initially that maybe SM3.0 had already paid off here. But many people floored the gas pedal in saying it wasn't. I don't know for sure if it was because of SM3.0 or not, of course. But you see, benchmarks will tell the SM2.0 faithful absolutely nothing. Maybe if the game was forced into 2.0.? Dunno

 

[sparkyclarky]

Originally posted by: Pr0d1gy

Originally posted by: Busithoth
I can't believe this is the first time this has come up here, but, I would say it's overhyped now, but will become more relevant in the next couple years (maybe).

Hardware T&L was similar to this, in its day. Some people were jumping up and down calling it a gimmick, since no games actually accounted for it in the code, so it was a zero gain.
Then, after more than a year of being on the shelves, games were released which could take advantage of it, and some people saw the benefits.

Right now, it's not a biggie, but it could, if developers find it easier to write for and easy to adopt. It's kind of a chicken or egg situation. I think video cards have outpaced programmers for the last couple years.
Happily, we've been able to up the resolutions and AA eye-candy.

Exactly my point. T&L was another pointless add on "feature" that turned out to be all but useless. Thanks to the nVidia fanboys for calling fanboy & troll, but it's not really a fanboy or troll statement when the last 2 cards I owned before this x800xl were nVidia cards. I was happy with both, but I am sick of seeing nVidia fans use sm3.0 as a good reason to buy nVidia because it's not.

Yeah, because there aren't a bunch of games that utilize/require T&L, like oh say BF1942 and WoW (pretty sure) amongst others.

 

[BFG10K]

T&L was another pointless add on "feature" that turned out to be all but useless

Nonsense.

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: DRavisher

Originally posted by: munky
SM3 is not a scam, and it will be used more and more in future games, but what is a scam in Nvidia trying to convince people that the gf6 series will actually be able to run future games with sm3 eye candy, and that such a feature is reason enough to chose a gf6 card over a x850 card. We have already seen that sm3 does not turn a weaker 6600gt into a x800-crushing monster , and we have also seen instances where a x800xt with sm2 is still faster than a 6800gt with sm3 running the same effects.

Sm3 will be needed in the gf7/r520 cards, but it's use in the gf6 series is limited at best.

Unless my 1337 h4xx0r predictions kick in, in which case having SM3.0 will be a blessing, since R400 will be stuck with inferior SM2.0 vanilla.

Yeah? We'll see, because it doesnt look like a blessing in current games, much less so in future, more demanding games. I wish somebody would run benches on the FEAR demo, we'll see if it turns out to be a blessing in that case.

That has already been done. Remember? Even the 6800GT scored better than a X850XTPE. We thought initially that maybe SM3.0 had already paid off here. But many people floored the gas pedal in saying it wasn't. I don't know for sure if it was because of SM3.0 or not, of course. But you see, benchmarks will tell the SM2.0 faithful absolutely nothing. Maybe if the game was forced into 2.0.? Dunno

Munky: first off, what do you have against Sm3? Are you just angry because you don't have newer features? If SM3 sucks on 6 series in next gen, an x800 sure as hell wont do much better on SM2. So i think we're a little "safer" over here, and that saves us the risk of having to buy a Sm3 card later because we bought an x800 and other crap that i just forgot.

And about current games...which is really funny, you are a silly person ...NONE OF THEM ARE BUILT FROM THE GROUND UP WITH SHADER MODEL 3 IN MIND. No wonder they don't get better IQ or Uber performance boosts!!!

And last time i check, FEAR was an ATI game. (now this is on MP beta too) Last time i checked, WITH SM3, a 6800gt nonOCed beats an ATI x850???WHAT??? ON AN ATI GAME??? Thats right. in fact, on 16x12 with full AA/AF, it still ties with it (at 9fps)!!!
I would assume (considering people complained about crappy performance) that it got a good boost to beat the x850.

Last time i checked, the x850 pwnz the 6800gt.

Is this just not clicking in your brain? Hello???
yes, I do want to see Sm2 benchies. Im just assuming the performance boost was good.

Oh, and SM3 is fair game. You cant say "well the x850 beats it if you run it in SM2" because frankly, who cares? When all games use is Sm3, you won't be boasting about an x800.

But yeah, I agree with keysplayr2003....except i talk and talk and talk all the time. No wonder everyone hates me at least i try hard to put sense and facts into what i say. I'd love to have a nice conversation about it, but whenever Sm3 is brought up, all the SM2 fans start flaming.

Right, done talking.

 

[BenSkywalker]

SM3.0 is like Dx9.0x, or whatever they call the next version, and shouldn't be the reason you buy a video card right now. It's nice that nVidia created these features but this shouldn't be the reason you buy a video card.

SM 3.0 is a MICROSOFT standard. nVidia has no control over what MS decides its standards will be(remember FP16 anyone- I'm sure nVidia would love to forget it ).

 

[Ranulf]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

T&L was another pointless add on "feature" that turned out to be all but useless

Nonsense.

Indeed. It was useless for the most part on my Geforce 1 (aka Geforce 256 with 32mb ram) for about the first year and a half I owned it. Then games started coming out using T&L more and more. Sure I probably didn't get max use out of that feature but it also kept me from having to buy a new card for a year or so longer than if I'd gone with a TNT2.

And WoW does require T&L Sparky.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Sounds like another jaded ATi fanboy who's favorite card just can't keep up with nvidia's latest. Nothing to back up his statement that SM 3.0 is a 'scam', just worthless nonsense. Yawn...

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: hans030390

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: DRavisher

Originally posted by: munky
SM3 is not a scam, and it will be used more and more in future games, but what is a scam in Nvidia trying to convince people that the gf6 series will actually be able to run future games with sm3 eye candy, and that such a feature is reason enough to chose a gf6 card over a x850 card. We have already seen that sm3 does not turn a weaker 6600gt into a x800-crushing monster , and we have also seen instances where a x800xt with sm2 is still faster than a 6800gt with sm3 running the same effects.

Sm3 will be needed in the gf7/r520 cards, but it's use in the gf6 series is limited at best.

Unless my 1337 h4xx0r predictions kick in, in which case having SM3.0 will be a blessing, since R400 will be stuck with inferior SM2.0 vanilla.

Yeah? We'll see, because it doesnt look like a blessing in current games, much less so in future, more demanding games. I wish somebody would run benches on the FEAR demo, we'll see if it turns out to be a blessing in that case.

That has already been done. Remember? Even the 6800GT scored better than a X850XTPE. We thought initially that maybe SM3.0 had already paid off here. But many people floored the gas pedal in saying it wasn't. I don't know for sure if it was because of SM3.0 or not, of course. But you see, benchmarks will tell the SM2.0 faithful absolutely nothing. Maybe if the game was forced into 2.0.? Dunno

Munky: first off, what do you have against Sm3? Are you just angry because you don't have newer features? If SM3 sucks on 6 series in next gen, an x800 sure as hell wont do much better on SM2. So i think we're a little "safer" over here, and that saves us the risk of having to buy a Sm3 card later because we bought an x800 and other crap that i just forgot.

And about current games...which is really funny, you are a silly person ...NONE OF THEM ARE BUILT FROM THE GROUND UP WITH SHADER MODEL 3 IN MIND. No wonder they don't get better IQ or Uber performance boosts!!!

And last time i check, FEAR was an ATI game. (now this is on MP beta too) Last time i checked, WITH SM3, a 6800gt nonOCed beats an ATI x850???WHAT??? ON AN ATI GAME??? Thats right. in fact, on 16x12 with full AA/AF, it still ties with it (at 9fps)!!!
I would assume (considering people complained about crappy performance) that it got a good boost to beat the x850.

Last time i checked, the x850 pwnz the 6800gt.

Is this just not clicking in your brain? Hello???
yes, I do want to see Sm2 benchies. Im just assuming the performance boost was good.

Oh, and SM3 is fair game. You cant say "well the x850 beats it if you run it in SM2" because frankly, who cares? When all games use is Sm3, you won't be boasting about an x800.

But yeah, I agree with keysplayr2003....except i talk and talk and talk all the time. No wonder everyone hates me at least i try hard to put sense and facts into what i say. I'd love to have a nice conversation about it, but whenever Sm3 is brought up, all the SM2 fans start flaming.

Right, done talking.

Hans, I already explained this to you a million times, and yet you seem to blissfuly ignore whatever part I'm trying to explain. Lets go over this one point at a time:

1. I can run the FEAR demo using sm2 on a x800, at 10x7, 4xAA, 8xAF, medium settings, and I get a playable fps average somewhere in the high 40's or low 50's. What fps do you get on your 6600gt using sm3 at those settings? Dont bother telling me, I already know it's not gonna be even close. I have nothing against sm3, but I'd rather have a more powerful sm2 card than a weaker sm3 card. 12 pipes and 256-bit mem will always help in all the games, whereas sm3 might only help me in some games. Unless a game requires sm3 to play at all, a more powerful sm2 card will be safer than a 6600gt.

2. About the whole sm3 from the ground up thing: IT DOESNT MATTER. Sm3 or sm2 only determines the shaders that run on the gpu. All the shaders are written in a common high level language, and then are compiled into either sm2 or sm3 code. And these shaders make up only a small part of the game engine, and it makes absolutely no difference if the game was designed with sm3 only or with sm3 and sm2 - most of the code is still the same and it will still run at similar speed.

3. Regarding the FEAR demo - the game is not in it's final form, so we can't make any assumptions on how the product will run on any card yet. It's possible that sm3 will help the 6800gt beat a x850, but in other finished games, like Chaos Theory, a x800xt with sm2 still runs faster than a 6800gt with sm3, and I think it's a Nvidia game too. So it could go either way with this one.

4. The thing about my x800 is that I don't plan on keeping it for more than half a year. It's a pretty fast card, and I got it at a nice discount too, but by the time a lot of games start using sm3, you can be sure I'll be running some other card that supports sm3. For now, though, I'd rather take a faster sm2 card than a slower sm3 card.

 

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: munky

Hans, I already explained this to you a million times, and yet you seem to blissfuly ignore whatever part I'm trying to explain. Lets go over this one point at a time:

Can you please type that again, using the Kim Jong Il voice from Team America?

 

[BenSkywalker]

2. About the whole sm3 from the ground up thing: IT DOESNT MATTER. Sm3 or sm2 only determines the shaders that run on the gpu. All the shaders are written in a common high level language, and then are compiled into either sm2 or sm3 code. And these shaders make up only a small part of the game engine, and it makes absolutely no difference if the game was designed with sm3 only or with sm3 and sm2 - most of the code is still the same and it will still run at similar speed.

I can't grade you very high on effort here, you should have gone on for much longer. Obviously you fail miserably in terms of accuracy but I assume you already knew this.

 

[mindgam3]

Wow .. only hardcore geeks argue about this crap like its the meaning of life or something. Enjoy the games stop arguing about this sm3.0 crap or better yet get a life!

 

[Nickrand]

I think the OP has a very good point, but only specifically to the folks on this board, and then obviously he went about communicating it the wrong way.

Most people here upgrade their video cards so frequently that if you look at the card you have in your system right now, that card will likely get very little SM3.0 use. By the time good SM3.0 games come out you'll have something different under your hood (again, this is much more true of the people who frequent this board that the common end users who buy from Best Buy, walmart or wherever).

Rolle makes a good point about supporting the company that is pushing the envelop and the new technology, which IMO, is a good reason to buy a card. But the card in my rig today will likely get very little SM3.0 use as I plan on upgrading in 6 months to a year (which I believe is the case for alot of people here).

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: mindgam3
Wow .. only hardcore geeks argue about this crap like its the meaning of life or something. Enjoy the games stop arguing about this sm3.0 crap or better yet get a life!

Wow, you can get the hell out of these forums then :thumbsdown:

-Kevin

 

[piddlefoot]

.3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 shaders or whatever
who cares its not all that great when you see things like ppu comming, puts shading back to .0000000000000000000000000001. hahaha
The differences are there although very minor, being the first dudes piont, or one off, a physics cpu is looking like it will work and be introduced , and well that changes everything, there old shader tech engines wont work and will need re doing, as everything can now actually have mass, and objects with mass can come apart in many fragments, it will be very interesting where this new ppu tech goes...
A hell of alot more interesting than a boring fake shadow, l really dont understand all the hype over shader tech, the advances are slower than cpu s ...........and rarely dramatic...

 

[hans030390]

Munky:
1. You have a much better rig than I do (see mine below...512mb ram...w00t!) and I do you have an x800 or x800pro/xt? that could make a difference. I'm also well aware that your x800 beats my 6600gt. But I still get playable framerates at settings I like for all game I play, so I'd sacrifice performance (which still ends up being playable) in order to have a slower Sm3 card (though its not slow really)

2. Do you have any evidence to support this? It's pretty well known that when a game is built up from a certain shader, it does better on that certain shader...

3. Well aware that FEAR was just in beta stage during those benchies, but its still interesting and proves my points about SM3. About the SC game, that is interesting too and brings up more questions.

4. Well munky, the fact that we disagree so much comes from the fact that you plan to upgrade soon (when sm3 comes heavily) and I upgraded knowing that I had little money, and that I couldnt upgrade for a couple years. So, I completely understand what you're saying, though I hope you realize that what I say applies to all people who plan on upgrading soon (and can't choose between a 6800 or an x800) and what not.

So I haven't been ignoring what you say. Just, had I known you plan to upgrade soon, I would have understood quicker. Sure, if i had money and could upgrade often, I woulda gotten an x800 card knowning they're faster and knowing I could just get a SM3 card when needed. Just my circumstances caused me to have to think "future proof" and SM3 was the answer (or I hope, I could be wrong, rembember, but then an x800 wouldnt help me any more....)

 

[lavaheadache]

QFT

Originally posted by: munky
SM3 is not a scam, and it will be used more and more in future games, but what is a scam in Nvidia trying to convince people that the gf6 series will actually be able to run future games with sm3 eye candy, and that such a feature is reason enough to chose a gf6 card over a x850 card. We have already seen that sm3 does not turn a weaker 6600gt into a x800-crushing monster , and we have also seen instances where a x800xt with sm2 is still faster than a 6800gt with sm3 running the same effects.

Sm3 will be needed in the gf7/r520 cards, but it's use in the gf6 series is limited at best.

Originally posted by: Hacp
I agree with Ackmed and IeraseU. The reason the OP suggested that SM 3 was a "scam" was because some people say its a MUST HAVE feature. Well it isn't a must have feature. Sure its nice but not having it isn't devastating to this generation of games. This is one of the big reasons people suggest the 6800GT over the x800XL even though they perform similarly, Cause the 6800GT has SM 3.0... Well, by the time most of the next generation games come out, the people with teh 6800GTs will have to turn off AA and AF, just like the 9800PRO crowd, so the extra performance gain won't mean much because even with the performance gain of SM3, it will be hard to run AA and AF... Don't let SM 3.0 decide your next graphics cards like Nvidia wants, let benchmarks and performance decide what card you will buy.

Originally posted by: MegaWorks
SM3 is the future, because it?s easier for developers to code games with it. If ATI is implementing it in their next generation core it?s because they know exactly what there talking about. But I truly believe that nVidia implemented SM3 in the Geforce 6 series to trick users on buying their cards over the X800 line of ATI.

Originally posted by: Nickrand
I think the OP has a very good point, but only specifically to the folks on this board, and then obviously he went about communicating it the wrong way.

Most people here upgrade their video cards so frequently that if you look at the card you have in your system right now, that card will likely get very little SM3.0 use. By the time good SM3.0 games come out you'll have something different under your hood (again, this is much more true of the people who frequent this board that the common end users who buy from Best Buy, walmart or wherever).

Rolle makes a good point about supporting the company that is pushing the envelop and the new technology, which IMO, is a good reason to buy a card. But the card in my rig today will likely get very little SM3.0 use as I plan on upgrading in 6 months to a year (which I believe is the case for alot of people here).

 

[Topweasel]

Whether or not you have need for SM3.0 or not doesn't make it a scam. I have a HD on my DTV connection I can only watch 10 channels out of 200 in HD is it a scam no. By buying a HD reciever and paying for the Service I am increasing the Install base, The faster an install base grows the quicker the industry adopts it. DVD was the same way, I remember Spielberg in an interview saying his movies weren't going to DVD till at least 2-3 million players were sold because whats the use if he could only sell X number DVDs at most. Now many of you guys have DVD players.

How many time have you heard a Game company say they had to cut back here or their to make sure their game work on most systems. Nobody wants to make another Tresspasser (which I found out is only works with a 7800GTX SLI rig). So you have 3 Choices 1. Make a game that won't sell because it unplayable 2. Make a card that Pushes new possibilities while runs plenty fast on current games 3. Stay stagnant and have no increase in realism. As for Nvidia pushing it, Why not it pushes innovation, the more people who buy the larger the install base (which pushes adoption by others), and the quicker it is adopted the sooner not only ATI users but FX and older users will have to replace their cards. Now someone who purchases a cheap $100 5700 or someone with 2-3 year old 5900 would be a little more understanding o the need to upgrade, How would people with $500 850XT PEs feel if they have to replace their cards next year because SM3.0 is in everything. There is a good chances that by always having the "new tech" that more and more people who are screwed out by not getting a card with T&L and SM3.0 and HDR and so on that people will shift to Nvidia even if slowly. Why would. people stick with the same company that always seems to be a generation or 2 behind in tech even if they are a little bit a head in current games.

I Know when I buaght my Geforce DDR my 9800 and now My 7800GTX that I was pushing tech to devlopers while adding a little bit extra in longjevity to my card.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Whether or not you have need for SM3.0 or not doesn't make it a scam.

QFT!!!

 

[n7]

SM 3.0 isn't a scam, but it certainly is useless at the moment, & will continue to be useless for a bit longer.

I loved my 6800GT, but i love my X850XT PE even more

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

2. About the whole sm3 from the ground up thing: IT DOESNT MATTER. Sm3 or sm2 only determines the shaders that run on the gpu. All the shaders are written in a common high level language, and then are compiled into either sm2 or sm3 code. And these shaders make up only a small part of the game engine, and it makes absolutely no difference if the game was designed with sm3 only or with sm3 and sm2 - most of the code is still the same and it will still run at similar speed.

I can't grade you very high on effort here, you should have gone on for much longer. Obviously you fail miserably in terms of accuracy but I assume you already knew this.

While I can see how building a 3D engine from the "ground up" expecting/requiring shaders in general could increase overall rendering efficiency somewhat, I'm failing to see how only supporting SM3.0 shaders would dramatically improve performance over supporting both SM2.0 and SM3.0. In fact, for many simple shaders, there would be no difference whatsoever between SM2.0 and SM3.0 implementations.

Unless you're referring to performance improvements from only supporting a single shader path -- but that's not really feasable for any game that's going to release in the next year or two. We've only just started seeing games that require SM1.4 -- requiring SM3.0 would limit your audience way too much at this point.

 

[hans030390]

Yes, it would limit the audience, but there's really nothing developers wont do. If you can't play the games, too bad. Many people upgrade systems to play new games. many people also buy games not realizing their system wont play it.

Still, even if games just now need sm1.4, what kind of games are those and do they run on sm1.4 cards? Probably. So, when SM3 is a minimum, the 6 series will be like that sm1.4 card (sucks, but still plays games). I'm assuming this due to a pattern i've seen before.

And you're right about the Sm3 ground up thingy, but its like this: Sm3 boosts performance when using a code previously meant for 2.0. Now, when you make a code just for Sm3, it will either boost performance even more than if it was just "ported" from sm2 to sm3, or it would be as fast as Sm2 or slower, but look much better (and if Sm2 tried to look like what Sm3 can deliver, it would go much slower than sm3).

I've heard rumors that next gen is Sm3 only, and since xbox 360 is sm3 only, i could see it happening. i dont think its smart, but it COULD happen, in which case, i hardly see Sm3 being "a scam"

 

[Gamingphreek]

If you can't play the games, too bad.

You wouldn't be saying that if your job depended on the success of the games you produce.

-Kevin