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).
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
111 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
==="full 32-bit would be required" not 24-bit. So that leaves all ATI cards out in the cold.===By the time full 32-bit becomes standard (probably with DX10 in 2-3 years) there will be NEW cards that make current cards look like sh!t. ATi will have DX10 cards for under $100, same as nVidia and their 5200. People have been upgrading their PC's for new games for YEARS! Only an [nv]IDIOT would attempt to use an old card for new games and software (TNT2 for Doom3? NOT!).
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Funny that you guys think nVidia will be still "plugging along" with the GFFX if the DX spec changes to 32bit... you _do_ know what happens to the GFFX when it's forced to run 32bit prcession don't you? You'd get faster framerates by drawing each frame by hand on your monitor with a sharpie.Pete - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
#23, the second quote in the first post here may be of interest: http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7839... Note the last sentence, which I surrounded by ***'s."nVidia has released the response as seen in the link. Particularly interesting, however, is this part of the e-mail sent to certain nVidia employees ( this was not posted at the given link ):
'We have been working very closely with Valve on the development of Half Life 2 and tuning for NVIDIA GPU's. And until a week ago had been in close contact with their technical team. It appears that, in preparation for ATI's Shader Days conference, they have misinterpreted bugs associated with a beta version of our release 50 driver.
You also may have heard that Valve has closed a multi-million dollar marketing deal with ATI. Valve invited us to bid on an exclusive marketing arrangement but we felt the price tag was far too high. We elected not to participate. ***We have no evidence or reason to believe that Valve's presentation yesterday was influenced by their marketing relationship with ATI.***'"
If this document is indeed real, nV themselves told their own employees Gabe's presentation wasn't skewed by Valve's marketing relationship with ATi.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Link please #38Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
LOL! 19, I saw that too. Looks like I'll be replacing my nVidia 'the way it's meant to be played in DX8 because our DX9 runs like ass, and we still sell it for $500+ to uninformed customers' card with an ATi Radeon. Thanks for the review Anand; it will be interesting to see the AA/AF benchmarks, but I have a pretty good idea of who will win those as well.Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
>>>>>>>ANYONE ELSE CATCH THE FOLLOWING IN THE ARTICLE<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<""One thing that is also worth noting is that the shader-specific workarounds for NVIDIA that were implemented by Valve, will not immediately translate to all other games that are based off of Half-Life 2's Source engine. Remember that these restructured shaders are specific to the shaders used in Half-Life 2, which won't necessarily be the shaders used in a different game based off of the same engine.""
So I guess the nvidia fan boys won't be able to run their $500 POS cards with Counterstrike 2 since it will probably be based on the HL2 engine.
buhahahaha
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
Valve specifically said "full 32-bit would be required" not 24-bit. So that leaves all ATI cards out in the cold.Pete - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
#23, I believe you're inferring far too much from ATi's HL2 bundling. Check TechReport's article on Gabe's presentation, in which Gabe is noted as saying Valve chose ATi (in the bidding war to bundle HL2) because their cards quite obviously performed so much better (and look better doing it--keep in mind, as Anand said, all those nVidia mixed modes look worse than pure DX9).In short, Valve doesn't need to do much to please others, as they're the one being chased for the potentially huge-selling Half-Life 2. Everyone will be sucking up to them, not the other way around. And it wouldn't do for Valve to offer nV the bundle exclusive, have consumers expect brilliant performance from the bundled FX cards, and get 12fps in DX9 on their DX9 FX card or 30fps on their $400+ 5900U. That would result in a lot of angry customers for Valve, which is a decidedly bad business move.
People will buy HL2 regardless. Valve's bundling of HL2 with new cards is just an extra source of income for them, and not vital to the success of HL2 in any way. Bundling HL2 will be a big coup for an IHV like ATi, which requires boundary-pushing games like HL2 to drive hardware sales. Think of the relationship in this way: it's not that ATi won the bidding war to bundle HL2, but that Valve *allowed* ATi to win. Valve was going to get beaucoup bucks for marketing tie-ins with HL2 either way, so it's in their best interests to find sponsorships that present HL2 in the best light (thus apparently HL2 will be bundled with ATi DX9 cards, not their DX8 ones).
You should read page 3 of Anand's article more closely, IMO. Valve coded not to a specific hardware standard, but to the DX9 standard. ATi cards run standard DX9 code much better than nV. Valve had to work extra hard to try to find custom paths to allow for the FX's weaknesses, but even that doesn't bring nV even with ATi in terms of performance. So ATi's current DX9 line-up is the poster-child for HL2 almost by default.
We'll see what the Det50's do for nV's scores and IQ soon enough, and that should indicate whether Gabe was being mean or just frank.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
#33 To be pedantic, the spec for DX9 24bit minimum, it has never been said by Microsoft that it was 24bit and nothing else, 24bit is just a minimum.Just as 640x480 is a minimum. That doesn't make 1024x768 non standard.
But considering you are right, and 24 bit is a rock solid standard, doesn't that mean that Valve in the future will violate the DX9 spec in your eyes? Does that not mean that ATI cards will be left high and dry, in the future? Afterall, there will be no optimizations allowed/able?
32bit is the future, according to Valve after all.
Nvidia may suck at doing it, but at least they can do it.
XPgeek - Friday, September 12, 2003 - link
edit, post #32-should read, "my ATi is so faster than YOUR nVidia"