3dfxzone.it ~ SFFT Drivers ~ MesaFX ~ 3D-Analyze ~ 3dfx Headlines ~ 3dfx Cards ~
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | GoogleSearch | FAQ | 3dfxzone.it
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 Index
 3dfx Hardware & Software
 Hints By Advanced Users
 FXT1 in D3D?
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Print topic

Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

Grand Admiral Thrawn
Novice

Austria
40 Posts

Posted - 27/05/2004 :  14:59:16  Show Profile  Visit Grand Admiral Thrawn's Homepage  Send Grand Admiral Thrawn an ICQ Message  Reply with Quote
Recently i compared the performance of "Sacred" between a v5 5500 and v5 6000, and the 6000 is able to display the minimap, and to support smooth gameplay at full zoom level while not within a city. The 5500 was extremely sluggish here, looked like it didn't have enough texture memory left to support the game at maximum zoom.

My idea: Couldn't FXT1 be forced in Direct3D? That would GREATLY help with a few newer games that make use of rather large textures. Maybe games like sacred could be played smoothly with FXT1 forced, and even 2xFSAA might get possible.

On top of that, it'll not only do a lot for v5 6000 owners, but also for those 5500 cards.

Is this possible?

http://www.hardoverclock.com - Hard : Overclock! Professionality ...even overclocked!

dborca
Average

Romania


425 Posts

Posted - 27/05/2004 :  16:56:00  Show Profile  Visit dborca's Homepage  Send dborca a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
There is no difference between 5k5 and 6k. Both of them have 32MB memory. The memory is not "shared" between chips. If you heard otherwise, then ask your money back: you were lied to.

Next, in the war between FXT1 and S3TC, guess who's the loser? You guessed: FXT1. And you know why? FXT1 has better quality but it costs dearly in terms of the compressor speed. FXT1 needs fancy analyze techniques in order to use its full capability (the 4-in-1 encoding scheme). Without this, it's only a castrated S3TC.

So, the speed gained by the smaller amount of data being sent to the chip is overwhelmed by the complexity of the run-time FXT1 encoder.

nVidia gave written permission to the Mesa project to implement FXT1, and I am (re)coding the algorithm. No need to say it's giving me nightmares.

My question is: why not use S3TC instead? The Napalm chip can handle DXTC and since you're asking this for DyrektEks... well, it's free.

Regards,
Daniel Borca
Go to Top of Page

Grand Admiral Thrawn
Novice

Austria
40 Posts

Posted - 01/06/2005 :  19:41:58  Show Profile  Visit Grand Admiral Thrawn's Homepage  Send Grand Admiral Thrawn an ICQ Message  Reply with Quote
I however don't know how to force DXTC. There is no driver option for this, so if a game doesn't make use of DXTC natively, it cannot be enabled (i guess)?

For the memory: 32MB of memory per chip, yes, but the framebuffer is split up between the chips, no? That would mean, on a 4-way SLI setup, each chip would get a quarter of the total framebuffer, while on a 2-way SLI setup, each chip will get a half of the total framebuffer.

So i'd say, the more chips you use, the lower the memory load per chip is, and the more texture memory would be available per chip. As far as I know, only textures need to be duplicated for each chip, not framebuffer/pixel data.

Am I correct or wrong? That could explain the Sacred behaviour. Still, being able to force DXTC (if not FXT1) would help.

Thanks.

http://www.hardoverclock.com - Hard : Overclock! Professionality ...even overclocked!

Edited by - Grand Admiral Thrawn on 01/06/2005 19:46:25
Go to Top of Page

SuperFurryFurryThing
Average

385 Posts

Posted - 01/06/2005 :  19:57:59  Show Profile  Visit SuperFurryFurryThing's Homepage  Reply with Quote
On all of the VSA100 cards the texture memory available depends on the screen resolution and pixel depth, and number of buffers in the flipping chain. The number of processors has very little effect, as it only reduces it very slightly due to alignment issues. The amount of texture memory actually decreases with increasing number of chips for alignment reasons, although not by a significantr amount. Sacred is probably faster on a V5 6K becuase the V5 6K draws the triangles faster.

SFFT
Go to Top of Page

roflkopp
Average



138 Posts

Posted - 11/06/2005 :  11:30:45  Show Profile  Visit roflkopp's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Uh, i asked this question already several times, and i completely agree with GAT...

quote:

Next, in the war between FXT1 and S3TC, guess who's the loser? You guessed: FXT1. And you know why? FXT1 has better quality but it costs dearly in terms of the compressor speed. FXT1 needs fancy analyze techniques in order to use its full capability (the 4-in-1 encoding scheme). Without this, it's only a castrated S3TC.

So, the speed gained by the smaller amount of data being sent to the chip is overwhelmed by the complexity of the run-time FXT1 encoder.



I think, this won't be a problem if the textures would be saved in a swap file.

quote:

I however don't know how to force DXTC. There is no driver option for this, so if a game doesn't make use of DXTC natively, it cannot be enabled (i guess)?



You are right. So we hope that our driverwriters implement an option to force Texturecompression.
Go to Top of Page

Raff3DC
Average

Germany


348 Posts

Posted - 18/06/2005 :  01:10:09  Show Profile  Visit Raff3DC's Homepage  Reply with Quote
WickedGL can do this too. Well, I'm completely unfamiliar with driver programming, but I can imagine that it's possible. How big would the effort be to realize this?

I agree with Thrawn and roflkopp: It would give the "good old" VSA-100 cards a really big boost. A worthwhile implementation that every voodoo user would love very much. Please think about it. =)

A test with one game - like the VRAM-eating UT2004 with it's "fat" textures - would be nice for a test.

Greetings from Germany,
Raff

The biggest Voodoo5 6000 test ever: http://3dcenter.de/artikel/voodoo5-6000/

Edited by - Raff3DC on 18/06/2005 01:10:39
Go to Top of Page

Dekal
Novice

Germany
4 Posts

Posted - 24/06/2005 :  19:42:00  Show Profile  Visit Dekal's Homepage  Send Dekal an ICQ Message  Reply with Quote
First, i know nothing about programming, too. But wouldn't it be possible to drastically increase video performance with more buffers/pre-buffers before displaying the processed graphic? I have seen great increase when switching from 0 Pending Buffers to 1 Pending Buffers and would suggest to set it to min. 1 Pending Buffers by default when installing driver whitout 3dfx-tools or v.control or another tool, if possible. Sorry for my bad question, but can that T-Buffer utilized to boost 3D-performance, instead of using it for better quality? Maybe it is one of that hidden performance booster in that good old voodoo5 at least.

AMD Athlon XP-M 2600+ @ 2606 MHz (1.938v) | modified Q-Link Vantec V4A-C7040 | Abit AN7 (nVidia nForce2 Ultra 400) | 2x512MB TwinMOS TwiSTER PC4000 CL2.5 | Voodoo4 4500 AGP | Western Digital WDC WD1600PD 160 GB | Enermax EG465AX-VE(G)FMA 465 Watt
Go to Top of Page

roflkopp
Average



138 Posts

Posted - 06/07/2005 :  11:29:59  Show Profile  Visit roflkopp's Homepage  Reply with Quote
The problem is, that - nowadays - Voodoos are mainly limited by their amount of memory. More buffers utilize more memory and so some games may be faster with more pending buffers (less fps drops) but other slower...
Go to Top of Page

Dekal
Novice

Germany
4 Posts

Posted - 10/07/2005 :  05:11:09  Show Profile  Visit Dekal's Homepage  Send Dekal an ICQ Message  Reply with Quote
I know that the memory is very limited but this are/would be small buffers for a great performance boost!

AMD Athlon XP-M 2600+ @ 2606 MHz (1.938v) | modified Q-Link Vantec V4A-C7040 | Abit AN7 (nVidia nForce2 Ultra 400) | 2x512MB TwinMOS TwiSTER PC4000 CL2.5 | Voodoo4 4500 AGP | Western Digital WDC WD1600PD 160 GB | Enermax EG465AX-VE(G)FMA 465 Watt
Go to Top of Page

Grand Admiral Thrawn
Novice

Austria
40 Posts

Posted - 21/07/2006 :  09:29:22  Show Profile  Visit Grand Admiral Thrawn's Homepage  Send Grand Admiral Thrawn an ICQ Message  Reply with Quote
Again, i can only repeat myself. ;) Please integrate an option into the v4/5 drivers to force DXTC in D3D. It would do a lot for some games. Most of us already experienced what a pain it can be to play a game with hires Textures, when that game has to swap them to the main memory. This renders a game on v4/5 unplayable! If FXT1's 4-in-1 encoding is forceable too, all the better! In some scenarios it might just be the better solution, sure has to be better than swapping textures to the system memory..

Thank you very much.

http://www.hardoverclock.com - Hard : Overclock! Professionality ...even overclocked!
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Print topic
Jump To:

 

Forum Rules

Legal Info

Privacy

Contact Us

3dfxzone.it

HWSetup.it

ForumZone.it

 

All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners - Forum Graphics and Contents 2001 - 2014 3dfxzone.it - Forum Engine Snitz Forums