HDR Discussion

[Synergy6]

The below is a discussion I had on IRC (as Ronaldo38741). Somebody please tell me I'm not totally insane.
Synergy6

<%teza> cant but help feel hdr is like over exposure on crt
<%teza> i can see how it would benefit lcd and especially plasma
<Ronaldo38741> I don't know enough about CRTs to comment
<Ronaldo38741> Changed years ago
<%teza> so uve got ur vid card that will do fsaa and hdr at same time
<%teza> leads me to wonder what sort of cpu power u need to use it to its advantage
<Ronaldo38741> Not as much as you might have thought
<Ronaldo38741> Most games hit GPU bottlenecks long before CPUs are an issue
<%teza> so the added "gifts" of the new ati are really going to maybe cost you GPU speed
<%teza> cause its trying to pump out more fun through the same throat and reaching its bottleneck quicker
<Ronaldo38741> Well, yes, FSAA+HDR does tax the GPU
<Ronaldo38741> But, nVidia just doesn't offer it at all, so it's not really quicker
<Ronaldo38741> You can always turn off HDR if you don't want it
<%teza> lol
<%teza> indeed
<%teza> i can understand why nvidia isnt offering ability for both to run at the same time
<Ronaldo38741> Why?
<%teza> hmmm
<%teza> well lemme see
<%teza> if running both makes ur GPU choke its guts out then why offer the ability for both to run
<Ronaldo38741> ...
<Ronaldo38741> This is like getting blood out of a stone
<%teza> why sacrifice GPU power for sake of something that will work nice short term
<Ronaldo38741> ATI offer the ABILITY to do it
<Ronaldo38741> When you turn it off, the GPU is as quick as if it never existed
<Ronaldo38741> nVidia isn't quicker, it just doesn't have the ability
<Ronaldo38741> Your argument is similar to "It's wrong for CPU makers to let us run anything more than MSDOS, because it slows the system down"
<%teza> no not at all
<Ronaldo38741> Yes, yes at all
<%teza> when ati brought out the 9xxx range they were much much better than nvidia
<%teza> the core speed
<%teza> the aa and af ability
<%teza> everything
<Ronaldo38741> 9xxx trumped 5xxx, yes
<Ronaldo38741> I know
<Ronaldo38741> I was there and alive at the time
<Ronaldo38741> ATI have the top-end crown, which is why nVidia have their half-assed quadGPU systems
<%teza> since the advent of the x range and up ati has been behind at every turn of the race always offering an ability to do this or that as opposed to nvidia only offering 1 of the options at a time in an attempt to be better than the nvidia card
<Ronaldo38741> ...
<Ronaldo38741> You've listened to nothing I've said
<Ronaldo38741> And, I'm pretty sure, you won't even when I explain it again
<Ronaldo38741> So I'll not bother
<%teza> where in fact its realy not as u cant make use of all the benfits at the same time for any length of time cause ofthe churn it creates
<%teza> fair enough ronaldo
<Ronaldo38741> teza, you are talking some of the most illogical BS I've heard in a while
<%teza> ok
<%teza> im not actually
<Ronaldo38741> Some research would be in order
<Ronaldo38741> Actually, you are
<Ronaldo38741> Ask some people who know what they're talking about
<%teza> man when u actually come down of your holier than thou soapbox uve had urself on for as long as i have ever known you you might actually appreciate people other than yourself have an pinion on matters
<%teza> i am lol
<Ronaldo38741> ...
<%teza> but its all good
<Ronaldo38741> Your argument is so wrong I couldn't be bothered to respond
<%teza> that my fried coming from you is to be expected
<Ronaldo38741> Mainly because I've already pointed out why it's totally wrong, but you ignored it
<Ronaldo38741> It's like saying the RivaTNT owns the GF1, because offering HT&L is a bad thing
<Ronaldo38741> teza is in a dreamworld
<%teza> i didnt say it was bad lol
<%teza> i said to me its pointless
<%teza> to offer the ability to do something..
<Ronaldo38741> You're saying it's good to not have the ability
<Ronaldo38741> What kind of BS is that
<%teza> lol
<Ronaldo38741> If you don't like it, you can turn it off
<%teza> ok yah cock listen
<Ronaldo38741> What do you gain by physically not having the ability?
<%teza> i said i can understand why nvidia doesnt offer it
<Ronaldo38741> They don't offer it because it's cheaper not to
<Ronaldo38741> Simple answer
<Ronaldo38741> That's why the 7900GT is much cheaper than the X1900XT, IQ is lower
<%teza> if it cause ur GPU to slow down cause it bottlenecks quicker it may in fact be viewed as a disadvantage as opposed toa boon
<Ronaldo38741> But... you... can... turn... it ... off
<Ronaldo38741> Having the ability to do something is never a disadvantage
<Ronaldo38741> Whether you use it or not is up to you
<%teza> lol
<%teza> how many people are going to spend al lthat fucking money on a new ati and not use it
<%teza> come on man get real
<Ronaldo38741> teza... you make no sense
<%teza> everyone who gets 1 is going to use it
<Ronaldo38741> You're jumping from performance to price
<%teza> ati creates an acceptable deniabilty clause by sayng...But but but you can turn it off
<Ronaldo38741> Could somebody translate "Having the ability to do something, whether you use it or not, is a good thing" into moron for me?
<%teza> LOL i did not
<Ronaldo38741> "fucking money" = price
<%teza> heh
<Ronaldo38741> So you're running MSDOS, right?
<Ronaldo38741> It doesn't offer many features, but it has the best performance
<Ronaldo38741> Why would you want any new features, they just "bottleneck"
<%teza> ahh man this is classic ronaldo
<Ronaldo38741> I'm sorry, I get annoyed when I talk to morons
<Ronaldo38741> It's a curse but somebody has to bear it
<%teza> always with the suposed superior intelligence degenrating a friendly debate over the merits of hardware we neither have into a base and schoolyard insult trading match
<%teza> well my friend your a wank
<%teza> uve aways bee a wank
<Ronaldo38741> It's not a debate
<%teza> and u will always contnue to be a wank
<Ronaldo38741> tux, help me out here
<Ronaldo38741> I have a guy arguing in *favour* of being forced not to do something
<Ronaldo38741> And he gets annoyed when I point out it's total bull
<%teza> lol
<Ronaldo38741> One side force you not to use it. The other side let you use it if you want. Hmm, which is better, that's a toughie
<%teza> ronaldo..wank...i think it was you who declared you were annoyed
<Ronaldo38741> I am annoyed, yes
<Ronaldo38741> I haven't heard as moronic an argument in weeks
<%teza> me i find it funny ati reverts to its old markettingploy of saying Hey every1 buy our stuff cause WE CAN do something nvidia cant
<Ronaldo38741> It's not a ploy, it's a fact
<Ronaldo38741> It would be a ploy if they actually couldn't do it, and were making it up
<Ronaldo38741> But, surprisingly enough, they can do it
<%teza> we caznt guarantee its good to use all the time but for short term it looks great
<%teza> ahh he true intelligence shows
<%teza> i dont mind being a moron
<%teza> being an anally retentive fucktard is far worse hey linux fanboy

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Well you're both working on some assumptions, but he on more (and larger ones), and yours smaller errors.

I'd say either he's deliberately being obstenant to yank your chain or else he's to uninformed to even begin to understand the basis of the argument.

That the cards can do A and still outperform in everything else is an obvious benifit, that sometimes they even outperform with HDR+AA enabled versus just AA is also a clear bonus.

There rest of the argument kinda trails off into his preconceptions and then you both kinda break down into the name calling.

Beginning was solid but you both lose marks at the end, not that that doesn't happen to everyone.

 

[Synergy6]

True, by the end I was so bored I knew stuff was wrong before I typed it, but it didn't seem worth fixing/explaining. I just wanted some sort of sane voice, rather rare on some parts of IRC.

I.e., just the concept "Having the ability to do something, whether you use it or not, is bad." Boggles my mind. 8O

Synergy6

 

[pauldh]

I only read about 3/4 of it but I'd have to agree with him on some of his earlier points. I see AA + HDR as a big plus and have used it through most of Oblivion as well as messed around with it alot in Farcry. I think the hardware limitation preventing NV's current cards from doing both in those games is a big drawback, especially for the beastly 7950GX2 and High end SLI. I don't see AA + HDR as an advantage for a less powerful card, like a X1600 pro. But for The X1800XT and above I see it as an advantage. And dual cards, a big advanatge, even if currently only in a few games.

But his/your discussion deteriorates over time so I stopped reading as things turned ugly. I Don't know the history between you two, but I take it there is one. He seemed to start trash talking you like he's holding a grudge.

Anyway, not sure if this helped at all. Just my humble opinion.



Out of curiousity, since you mention NV having an advantage since R98vsGFFX (which I far from agree with), then I take it you think that SM3.0 support was an advantage to the GF6 series, even though most to all of them struggled to have enough power to use HDR and Sm3 eye candy. How is this different than if they struggled to run AA & HDR at once. Firingsquads review shows that ATI cards can handle it and I persoanlly find HDR + AA a very nice feature to have, as well as having more power to use it on my current card than just running HDR on my past GF6.

I had a 6800U OC, the king of the GF6's, and I found HDR in Farcry, and HDR + softshadows in the Splinter Cell:CT demo to just hammer my card to a point I wouldn't play with HDR in either game. I also owned a X800XTpe which to me really was just as good a card even outperforming the 6800U in some of the games I liked best. As an owner of both who gamed mostly on the 6800U, I saw at best very little advantage for the 6800U to have SM3.0, never mind a 6600GT and the likes. And had I owned the X850XTpe I would have used that one for sure over the slower 6800U.

 

[pauldh]

lol, there were no replies when i started to type that. :tongue:

 

[Synergy6]

Yes there was/is a history. I thought cold logic would win the day, perhaps not.

As for the SM3 bit, I presume you're refering to :

<Ronaldo38741> 9xxx trumped 5xxx, yes
<Ronaldo38741> I know
<Ronaldo38741> I was there and alive at the time
<Ronaldo38741> ATI have the top-end crown, which is why nVidia have their half-assed quadGPU systems

I said ATI "have" the crown, not ATI "have had" the crown (since). I'm well aware that SM3 support for most of the 6xxx range was a waste, and the X800/X850XTPE especially beat them soundly. I was however, trying to move the discussion back towards the topic, i.e. the advantage (or not) of being allowed to use HDR+FSAA.
Synergy6

 

[pauldh]

<%teza> since the advent of the x range and up ati has been behind at every turn of the race always offering an ability to do this or that as opposed to nvidia only offering 1 of the options at a time in an attempt to be better than the nvidia card

No I mean your reply to those comments. I didn't follow what you were trying to say with "since the X range and up ATI has been behind". I only see the two compainies leap-frogging each other in performance when a new release comes out, with NV having the early (although unuesable IMO) feature advantage in X8xx vs GF6. Anyway, that's the line I was refering to, maybe I misunderstood especially since I went with the first part wondering why you'd say ATI was behind yet I didn't follow you in the "always offering an abilitity to do this or that...." and remaining part. That got me curious, and I still can't figure it out. I feel ATI's PS3.0 timings were right on with the X8x0 series not needing it and offering better SM2 performance for the dollar was better for the card owner, even if NV's marketing of SM3.0 hurt ATI's sales. But If you don't feel like taking the time to explain what you meant, no biggy.


EDIT: HOLY smokes, you are Ronaldo, LOL. Sorry. Obviously past my bedtime. No I don't see his points, I agree with your's and wonder what he was trying to say with that part. Yeah, actually I do agree with you through most of it, although I guess it's you who seemed to turn on him out pf past frustrations/history.

 

[Heyyou27]

You're both sounding fanboyish; I see you insulting the useful ness of Quad SLI and comparing it to the FX series. Do I wish I had the ability to use antialiasing with HDR in all situations? Hell yes I do, but I also I feel Quad SLI does have its place in the market and could be a viable solution if your monitor's resolution is very high. (2560x1600)
ATI has done a great job with their HDR support, but Nvidia does have its advantages too; no single solution is the best, and each does some things better than others.

 

[Synergy6]

teza is the other guy in the discussion. The pure illogic nature of the comments he made drove me to start this thread in the first place.

Ronaldo38741 = Me. teza = Not me.

Synergy6

 

[Synergy6]

You're both sounding fanboyish; I see you insulting the useful ness of Quad SLI and comparing it to the FX series. Do I wish I had the ability to use antialiasing with HDR in all situations? Hell yes I do, but I also I feel Quad SLI does have its place in the market and could be a viable solution if your monitor's resolution is very high. (2560x1600)
ATI has done a great job with their HDR support, but Nvidia does have its advantages too; no single solution is the best, and each does some things better than others.

I started with a GF1, then a Radeon 9000, then a 9800, then a GF6800, and my next card will probably be the R600 (ATI). I'm not a fanboy in the slightest, I was just trying to explain that being able to use FSAA+HDR is a *good* thing. I didn't say "therefore, don't touch nVidia products". In a previous discussion with someone that didn't hate me, who wanted to spend about $150-200, I advised the 7600GT primarily, or the X1800GTO/7900GT as options.

As for comparing Quad-SLI, I threw that in as some sort of counterweight. (Hoping the spark the "Hmm, if nVidia are so great, why do they need 4-cards while ATI restrict themselves to 2?" logic trail.) I'm not saying QuadSLI is worthless, just that it seems a rather dense approach to ATI's high-end threat, especially when you see the data putting QuadSLI at barely faster (if not slower) than X1900XTX CF in tests.

I'm not sure what you mean about comparing it to the FX series. All I see that I said about QuadSLI was "<Ronaldo38741> ATI have the top-end crown, which is why nVidia have their half-assed quadGPU systems ". The comparison was 1900XTX vs 7950, the FX wasn't involved.

I don't love/hate any company, I just wanted my logic to be accepted.
Synergy6

 

[pauldh]

Yeah, LOL, I just noticed that on my own and edited my emabarassment above. :roll: :roll:

I guess I proved why you should'nt glance over the the first line thinking you got it. I read it as you had a disccusion WITH Ronaldo, not AS Ronaldo, and then read on to see that He (I mean you) actually made the most sense. LOL, I wondered why GrApe was agreeing with you and not Ronaldo. Must be the different time zone, his mind is still working.

Anyway, now you see what I thought of your comments, even while thinking I was talking to (and trying to be nice to) him. :lol:

 

[Synergy6]

It's ok, everybody makes mistakes Yeah, I probably did turn on him first, just the thought that banging my head off the wall was preferable to following his logic put me in a bad mood.
Synergy6

 

[Heyyou27]

You're both sounding fanboyish; I see you insulting the useful ness of Quad SLI and comparing it to the FX series. Do I wish I had the ability to use antialiasing with HDR in all situations? Hell yes I do, but I also I feel Quad SLI does have its place in the market and could be a viable solution if your monitor's resolution is very high. (2560x1600)
ATI has done a great job with their HDR support, but Nvidia does have its advantages too; no single solution is the best, and each does some things better than others.

I started with a GF1, then a Radeon 9000, then a 9800, then a GF6800, and my next card will probably be the R600 (ATI). I'm not a fanboy in the slightest, I was just trying to explain that being able to use FSAA+HDR is a *good* thing. I didn't say "therefore, don't touch nVidia products". In a previous discussion with someone that didn't hate me, who wanted to spend about $150-200, I advised the 7600GT primarily, or the X1800GTO/7900GT as options.

As for comparing Quad-SLI, I threw that in as some sort of counterweight. (Hoping the spark the "Hmm, if nVidia are so great, why do they need 4-cards while ATI restrict themselves to 2?" logic trail.) I'm not saying QuadSLI is worthless, just that it seems a rather dense approach to ATI's high-end threat, especially when you see the data putting QuadSLI at barely faster (if not slower) than X1900XTX CF in tests.

I'm not sure what you mean about comparing it to the FX series. All I see that I said about QuadSLI was "<Ronaldo38741> ATI have the top-end crown, which is why nVidia have their half-assed quadGPU systems ". The comparison was 1900XTX vs 7950, the FX wasn't involved.

I don't love/hate any company, I just wanted my logic to be accepted.
Synergy6I don’t need a videocard history report from you; both ATI and Nvidia have had their set of failures and successes. ATI's HDR setup is by far the best to date, while Nvidia currently has the better multi GPU setup and OpenGL/ workstation setup. You claim Nvidia needs 4 GPUs to compete with ATI’s two? Why is it that a 7900GTX SLI pair outperforms X1900XTs in most games, while ATI dominates single GPU setups? They all have there strong points and gain more in certain situations.

 

[Synergy6]

I don’t need a videocard history report from you; both ATI and Nvidia have had their set of failures and successes. ATI's HDR setup is by far the best to date, while Nvidia currently has the better multi GPU setup and OpenGL/ workstation setup. You claim Nvidia needs 4 GPUs to compete with ATI’s two? Why is it that a 7900GTX SLI pair outperforms X1900XTs in most games, while ATI dominates single GPU setups? They all have there strong points and gain more in certain situations.

I would compare the X1900XTX to the 7900GTX, in which the XTX seems to generally win, but that's neither here nor there. The discussion wasn't about nVidia vs ATI in terms of their cards. It was about the very narrow point of an advantage in having HDR+FSAA. That's *all*. If you didn't want a card history report, fine, I didn't want to be called a fanboy but I got it anyway.

"ATI's HDR setup is by far the best to date" - That proves my argument. Thanks.

"You claim Nvidia needs 4 GPUs to compete with ATI’s two? Why is it that a 7900GTX SLI pair outperforms X1900XTs in most games," - Why did you presumably read the whole thing of about 100 odd lines, and concentrate on 1 line which is rather off topic? I just wanted a validation of my concept, not "Yes, every line you write in IRC is 100% accurate, well done."

Synergy6