Half-Life 2 Performance Benchmark Preview
by Anand Lal Shimpi on September 12, 2003 12:34 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
By now you've heard that our Half-Life 2 benchmarking time took place at an ATI event called "Shader Day." The point of Shader Day was to educate the press about shaders, their importance and give a little insight into how ATI's R3x0 architecture is optimized for the type of shader performance necessary for DirectX 9 applications. Granted, there's a huge marketing push from ATI, despite efforts to tone down the usual marketing that is present at these sorts of events.
One of the presenters at Shader Day was Gabe Newell of Valve, and it was in Gabe's presentation that the information we published here yesterday. According to Gabe, during the development of Half-Life 2, the development team encountered some very unusual performance numbers. Taken directly from Gabe's slide in the presentation, here's the performance they saw initially:
Taken from Valve Presentation
As you can guess, the folks at Valve were quite shocked. With NVIDIA's fastest offering unable to outperform a Radeon 9600 Pro (the Pro suffix was omitted from Gabe's chart), something was wrong, given that in any other game, the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra would be much closer to the Radeon 9800 Pro in performance.
Working closely with NVIDIA (according to Gabe), Valve ended up developing a special codepath for NVIDIA's NV3x architecture that made some tradeoffs in order to improve performance on NVIDIA's FX cards. The tradeoffs, as explained by Gabe, were mainly in using 16-bit precision instead of 32-bit precision for certain floats and defaulting to Pixel Shader 1.4 (DX8.1) shaders instead of newer Pixel Shader 2.0 (DX9) shaders in certain cases. Valve refers to this new NV3x code path as a "mixed mode" of operation, as it is a mixture of full precision (32-bit) and partial precision (16-bit) floats as well as pixel shader 2.0 and 1.4 shader code. There's clearly a visual tradeoff made here, which we will get to shortly, but the tradeoff was necessary in order to improve performance.
The resulting performance that the Valve team saw was as follows:
Taken from Valve Presentation
We had to recap the issues here for those who haven't been keeping up with the situation as it unfolded over the past 24 hours, but now that you've seen what Valve has shown us, it's time to dig a bit deeper and answer some very important questions (and of course, get to our own benchmarks under Half-Life 2).
111 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Anand, when using the Print Article feature in Mozilla 1.4, I was shown only graphs from one map throughout. For instance, after clicking Print Article, all graphs were of the bug level. Hitting F5 showed them all to be of techdemo. In both cases, some graphs didn't correspond to your comments.This may be b/c the article was just posted, but thought I'd give you a heads-up anyway.
Thanks for the interesting read, and hopefully we'll see screenshots of the differences between the DX8.0. 8.1, 8.2, NV3x, and DX9 modes soon (the only thing lacking from this article, IMO)!
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
.. goddammit, all the flashes are arranged improperly. (Techdemo on bugbait pages, city on techdemo...) FIX IT.Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
I was hoping anand would compair a 128mb 9800pro to a 256mb one, guess I'll still have to wait =(Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Hey Anand, you have a 9500 Pro lying around?Eh, well, it doesn't need to be included anyway. We all know how it would do: 5% worse than the 9700 Pro.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
#5 & #6 : +1I ll keep my G4 Ti 4200@300/600.
I m sure HL² will still rocks in DX 8.1
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Where are the numbers with AA/AF enabled? I know the article intimates that there's a negligible performance hit, but I'd still like to see the numbers.Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Man, the Ti series has been doing this for a while!http://www.amdmb.com/article-display.php?ArticleID...
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
I feel the same way about the GF4Ti series. Never did like the FXes much...Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Hahahahaha.Go you Ti4600, GO! I BELIEVE IN THE Ti4600!
If all I am going to lose is a bit of image quality, then no great loss. At least it isn't back to 640x480!
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Wow 9800 pro barely edges out 9700 pro. 9600 pro seems to be the best deal if people are still waiting to upgrade.Obviously Nvidia lost this round with nv30 and nv35.