New Shader Model 3.0 for eq2 :) - Page 8

Valdrane · 06-29-2009, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pitty

Pics would be nice

Taken from eq2wire:
Shaders 3.0
EQ2 is getting a graphical facelift!
Shaders are small pieces of code which take the textures and apply an effect to them, providing metallic appearances, glows, bump mapping, caustics (rust, decay), lighting effects, etc.
These are being upgraded from the ancient Shaders 1.0 to Shaders 3.0. Nearly any graphics card since GeForce 3 will be able to handle the new GPU Shaders. At higher resolutions, preliminary tests have shown that framerates stay largely the same. At lower resolutions, framerates of GPU shaders seem significantly improved.
This will not be a substantial download. Each shader is just a few kilobytes. So far, 3,000 shaders have been upgraded.
Nek Forest looks awesome now. The whole idea of a torch in the darkness, lighting up trees, rocks, and enemy mobs looks head-and-shoulders above the current “flat” pea soup grey haze and flat colors on everything.
When the EQ2 developers saw the first screenshots, they thought it was another game.
In addition, Flora Displacement which moved to the GPU last year will still get further performance tweaks (known issue on nVidia cards).
Finally, he’d like to move particles to the GPU but due to some design decisions, some particles are tied to animations. Will have to go back and separate them out.
There is developer interest in a torch slot, so this is being considered. Devs would also like to do High Dynamic Range (HDR) in a future update, but nothing is immediately planned.

Or you can wait, just like everyone else who didn't go...

Pitty · 06-29-2009, 12:47 AM

Or i could look at pics of fat cunts dancing

Gaige · 06-29-2009, 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gungo

Cry all you want but its completely true. Just because your still running on a dell you bought 3 years ago doesnt mean it doesnt happen. Although I do not raid with partical effects on because they annoy me. And you do not need a 10k system because frankly you wont gain much out of that and a good 3k system. So you can call bullshit all you want and claim outragious price tags but its obvious you have no fucking idea what your talking about. Get a good I7 chipset, a decent motherboard, a high end graphics card, and some quality memory. Slightly overclock the core speed with a good aftermarket heatsink. And you can put your computer on extreme quality without ever needing to touch the settings.

The fact is you are probably running on a doucore or quad core chipset that was released in 2007. With an 8000 or 9000 series geforce card released in late 2006 to early 2008. I am sorry but a 2-3 year old machine is not modern.

100% complete BS. Just saying.

i7s are nice but trying to insinuate that someone with a C2Q and a 9800 series card can't run EQ2 is beyond retarded.

gungo · 06-29-2009, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gage

100% complete BS. Just saying.

i7s are nice but trying to insinuate that someone with a C2Q and a 9800 series card can't run EQ2 is beyond retarded.

welcome to the conversation gage, apparently in your skimming of the thread from 2 weeks back you completely missed the point.

The point wasnt that you can run eq2 with a c2q or 9000 series card. The point was you can run eq2 on playable conditions on extreme settings with modern computer hardware even in raids. You can run the game fine on a c2q and 9000 series card, obviously not as well as the next series equipment.

Gaige · 06-29-2009, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gungo

You can run the game fine on a c2q and 9000 series card, obviously not as well as the next series equipment.

I didn't skim it, I saw the extreme quality shit. I'm saying with a properly optimized C2Q/9800 GTX system you can run on extreme just the same.

i7s are nice, but not wtf amazing. The 200 series is nice, but not wtf amazing. Triple channel DDR3 means shit.

There is nothing about the specific "new" parts you listed that kick the shit out of EQ2.

The problem is most people have no idea how to utilize the hardware they do have.

gungo · 06-29-2009, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gage

I didn't skim it, I saw the extreme quality shit. I'm saying with a properly optimized C2Q/9800 GTX system you can run on extreme just the same.

i7s are nice, but not wtf amazing. The 200 series is nice, but not wtf amazing. Triple channel DDR3 means shit.

There is nothing about the specific "new" parts you listed that kick the shit out of EQ2.

The problem is most people have no idea how to utilize the hardware they do have.

Probably I lay no claim to the system you are stating all I know is that going from a 8400 overclocked to 3.6 to an I7 overclocked to 4.0 there was a noticable difference in framerates. The qoute you referenced was from someone saying it was not possible with normal modern day equipment. I am just saying it is. From all accounts the i7 is a noticable bump in quality.

Gaige · 06-29-2009, 03:32 PM

Dual core at 3.6 to quad core at 4.0 with more L2 cache, obviously you'd see a difference.

firamas · 06-29-2009, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gungo

Probably I lay no claim to the system you are stating all I know is that going from a 8400 overclocked to 3.6 to an I7 overclocked to 4.0 there was a noticable difference in framerates. The qoute you referenced was from someone saying it was not possible with normal modern day equipment. I am just saying it is. From all accounts the i7 is a noticable bump in quality.

Why was your E8400 not clocked to 4.0 as well? Those chips are stable at 4.2-4.4 with a good air cooling solution. You're comparing apples to oranges. No wonder you saw a framerate increase, eh? Clock both to the same speed and then do an ACCURATE framerate test (i.e. character staring at the exact same scene both times).

The extra 2 cores and different chip architecture aren't going to make an appreciable difference for EQ2's framerate, unless you're multitasking enough random apps to load down 2 cores to the point where having 4 starts to become meaningful.

feldon30 · 06-29-2009, 05:38 PM

Now I wish I'd taken more pics. It was just really hard to get good pics of the Shader stuff.

gungo · 06-29-2009, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firamas

Why was your E8400 not clocked to 4.0 as well? Those chips are stable at 4.2-4.4 with a good air cooling solution. You're comparing apples to oranges. No wonder you saw a framerate increase, eh? Clock both to the same speed and then do an ACCURATE framerate test (i.e. character staring at the exact same scene both times).

The extra 2 cores and different chip architecture aren't going to make an appreciable difference for EQ2's framerate, unless you're multitasking enough random apps to load down 2 cores to the point where having 4 starts to become meaningful.

There was alot of heat in that system. Even in an antec 900 case with 7 fans and the biggest zalman that could fit. I had 2 8800gt in SLI that added to the heat. The 8400 clocked to 4.0 while it didnt crash came up with errors under testing. I kept it at 3.6 because it was safe. The southbridge was also extremely hot. It probably would of been stable with water cooling, but at the time I wasnt in the mood to mess with all the tubing and shit. And 4.2-4.4 is pushing even the 8400 chip.

The I7 went straight to 4.0 without a hitch. It can probably go higher but it is such a good chip I don't feel like increasing the voltage and increasing the heat. I plan to stay with that chip for at least 2 years. Point being the I7 is a phenominal chip and that is not by just my experience. That has been stated all over as well.

Basically for me the I7 was able to push it to a point where I get 30+ fps in raids on extreme quality. Usually anything below ~20-25fps annoy me with the stuttering and graphical lag.