Breaking News: Halflife 2 Performance Revealed
by Anand Lal Shimpi on September 10, 2003 7:02 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
You'll see my own numbers tomorrow night at midnight, but we've been given the go ahead to reveal a bit of information about Half-Life 2. I'll keep it brief and to the point and will explain it in greater detail tomorrow night:
- Valve is pissed at all of the benchmarking "optimizations" they've seen in the hardware community;
- Half-Life 2 has a special NV3x codepath that was necessary to make NVIDIA's architecture perform reasonably under the game;
- Valve recommends running geforce fx 5200 and 5600 cards in dx8 mode in order to get playable frame rates.
- even with the special NV3x codepath, ATI is the clear performance leader under Half-Life 2 with the Radeon 9800 Pro hitting around 60 fps at 10x7. The 5900 ultra is noticeably slower with the special codepath and is horrendously slower under the default dx9 codepath;
- the Radeon 9600 Pro performs very well - it is a good competitor of the 5900 ultra;
- ATI didn't need these special optimizations to perform well and Valve insists that they have not optimized the game specifically for any vendor.
There you have it folks, there's much more coming tomorrow.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
169 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
you guys dont seem to understand how software works i guess. ATI and NVIDIA arnt to make the same cards and the coding has to do with proformance.Nvidia can run DOOMIII better ATi Cards? but then why would HAlf-life2 a game with less graphics and shading run differently? its all done with coding good for ati who is better with half-life and good for Nvidia for running best with DOOMIII. it doesnt matter anyway your ati and nvidia cards will soon be obsolete. so who cares
Anonymous User - Friday, October 10, 2003 - link
looks like the tables are turningAnonymous User - Monday, September 22, 2003 - link
hehe the 9600 Pro hangs with the best NVIDIA has to offer. you fanboys blaming developers rather than NVIDIA are a joke.Anonymous User - Friday, September 19, 2003 - link
miaowAnonymous User - Sunday, September 14, 2003 - link
This is complete CRAP!!!! I don't buy this for one minute especially with a BIG fat Advertisment for an ATI card underneath.Pffff bullshit
Anonymous User - Saturday, September 13, 2003 - link
Is the first half-life game any good? Somebody gave me the Platimum collection of the game for Christmas, but I haven't played it yet.Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
#162 - I'm there with ya. Whenever It's time for me to upgrade I buy both GPU and CPU that are around the $100 - $150 price pointFunny I always seem to get a nice performing machine at that price without resorting to eating Ramen noodles to support my hardware fix! :)
I also work on computers/network infrastructure systems all day, so I guess it's just like the mechanic drives a junker car - I am never anywhere near the bleeding edge computer technology.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Silly peeps, the Ti4200 ($76) cost a fair bit less than $100- usually almost half the price of the entry-level Ati Card (at that 'performance standard' (9500-$113)). It's not as good a card, agreed- but if you're gloating because you paid 2x-6x to get a better card, and lo and behold, you did- well DUH!Yeah- the FX class of card from nvidia is (ahem) disappointing- okay- sadly disappointing- and Nvidia does suck for pushing a card priced way over it's performance- but come one! Some people pay up to $400 so they can 'better' play a few $50 games! You gotta love this market, right?
In 6-9 months, the market will drive the technology to $99 or less (It always does)- then I buy. Maybe you early adopters who get 'cut' by the 'bleeding edge' will learn a little patience so supply & demand has a chance to work- instead of getting suckered by this hype-driven marketing. Don't get me wrong- I have always like Ati- just not to the point where I'd give them twice the price without getting twice the performance. Price <$100, then I'll be an Ati customer again.
Won't be long actually.
Maybe I'm 'out' $80, for buying this 'crappy' card. Oh well- at least it's not $150-$400 due to inadequate research or leapfrogging technology.(Come on- how many of you have a $200-$400 gfx card you had to salvage on ebay or is in your little bro's machine?) The technology evolves too quickly for me to waste my money- but that's just me- those of you who can afford to pay for performance I tip my hat to you.
This is the nature of technology after all- it's good when new technology makes old tachnology crap- and competition makes better pricing for everyone. Th system ain't perfect- but learn from it. All this "Nyah Nyah your card suck shit is juvie"
Take care.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Great review! it puts in perspective what valve did with there presentation an telling the truth of the current line of NV hardwear. One thing i have been reading everywear is that Det50 will be great for NV cards and DX9 performance but nobody mentions that the CAT's 3.8 will do the same for ATI hardwear.Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
How dare some f you criticize valves work. Have you actually read or seen some of the demonstrations? The physics alone far superior to that of DoomIII. As for the graphics? Where can you honestly say DIII is better? Sure the gamne looks great but they only ahev to model for one or two kinds of enviroments a freaking spaceship and maybe some outside terrain! HL2 folks have to make at least 8 diff. enviroments. And as for the gameplay HA don't even bring that up. Weeee im shooting zombies on a spaceship weeeeee no strategy or AI weeee. About the only thing DIII offers is per poly collision.