Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing the Ultimate 3D Community as a guest. This means that you can only read posts, but can not create posts or topics by yourself. To be able to post you need to register. Then you can participate in the community active and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you are already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
XBOX Graphics Using U3D 2.1; Texters And Looks
Topic Started: Sep 11 2008, 07:26 PM (1,820 Views)
Eansis
Member Avatar
ghost
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Gandalf20000
Sep 15 2008, 11:07 PM
High res textures aren't a big problem if you have a decent to large amount of RAM. However, if you don't have a lot of RAM, it eats it all up and kills your frame rate. Not to mention they take up enormous amounts of hard drive space. My personal opinion is to not use 1024x1024 or bigger textures unless you have absolutely no choice (e.g, a light map, or a large object that needs tons of detail, not just a repeating texture).
also they eat up a lot of gpu and look bad with poorly implemented mipmapping.
VOTE FOR BUDDY ROEMER HE'S A STRAIGHTFORWARD, DOWN TO EARTH AMERICAN GUY WHO ISN'T PART OF THE BIGBROTHER CONSPIRACY

Til'c
 
Things will not calm down Daniel Jackson. They will infact calm up.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ashrat3000
Member Avatar
u3d raytracer
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Eanbro
Sep 15 2008, 04:58 PM
ashrat3000
Sep 12 2008, 04:11 AM
Eanbro
Sep 12 2008, 04:09 AM
ashrat3000
Sep 12 2008, 04:07 AM
Lemme guess, well over 60.

I mean, quad core (is it core 2 extreme?), and 3 way sli quadro 280's.
Come on.



I wouldn't be suprised if it was under 30.
No way dude.

I have a single core amd athlon 64 3500+ and 1 GeForce 8600 and I can run it on medium setting at 25 fps.

Quad core with 3 280s? That has to be a high frame rate.

Not with Crysis.


Andrew75
 
on this rig... I haven't seen crysis go below 50 FPS in 1920 x 1200 ...
antialising set at 16xQ with everything else on the highest settings...
...average is around 65-70 FPS....
...Ive seen it go above 90 fps in some sections...



Yes with crysis. :P




Edited by ashrat3000, Sep 15 2008, 11:27 PM.
그대를 사랑해


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eansis
Member Avatar
ghost
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
50 fps isn't fast. Besides, he overclocked to the extreme.
Edited by Eansis, Sep 15 2008, 11:30 PM.
VOTE FOR BUDDY ROEMER HE'S A STRAIGHTFORWARD, DOWN TO EARTH AMERICAN GUY WHO ISN'T PART OF THE BIGBROTHER CONSPIRACY

Til'c
 
Things will not calm down Daniel Jackson. They will infact calm up.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ashrat3000
Member Avatar
u3d raytracer
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Eanbro
Sep 15 2008, 11:28 PM
50 fps isn't fast. Besides, he overclocked to the extreme.
But over 90 is. :D
And yeah he did overclock it (I wish I could do that, but I'm too scared)


그대를 사랑해


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eansis
Member Avatar
ghost
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
ashrat3000
Sep 15 2008, 11:44 PM
Eanbro
Sep 15 2008, 11:28 PM
50 fps isn't fast. Besides, he overclocked to the extreme.
But over 90 is. :D
And yeah he did overclock it (I wish I could do that, but I'm too scared)


Frustrum culling. And any FPS that isn't constant is troublesome.
VOTE FOR BUDDY ROEMER HE'S A STRAIGHTFORWARD, DOWN TO EARTH AMERICAN GUY WHO ISN'T PART OF THE BIGBROTHER CONSPIRACY

Til'c
 
Things will not calm down Daniel Jackson. They will infact calm up.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gandalf20000
Member Avatar
Geek
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Eanbro
Sep 15 2008, 11:17 PM
Gandalf20000
Sep 15 2008, 11:07 PM
High res textures aren't a big problem if you have a decent to large amount of RAM. However, if you don't have a lot of RAM, it eats it all up and kills your frame rate. Not to mention they take up enormous amounts of hard drive space. My personal opinion is to not use 1024x1024 or bigger textures unless you have absolutely no choice (e.g, a light map, or a large object that needs tons of detail, not just a repeating texture).
also they eat up a lot of gpu and look bad with poorly implemented mipmapping.
Um, the GPU gets eaten because it provides video RAM. Although, I do agree with the mipmapping.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fayte
Elite Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
We should make a highly heavy graphical engine, then work on getting the frame rate up.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Andrew75
Member Avatar
Andrew75
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Eanbro
Sep 15 2008, 11:28 PM
50 fps isn't fast. Besides, he overclocked to the extreme.
comeing to u live from the roadtrip....
here's Andrew! (news music playing in the background)
and after that the weather forcast...

Did i mention that im useing antialising at 16X Q and 1920 x 1200 res?
also all the settings are maxed out on both the graphic card and on the game.

with all that, and not going below 50 FPS is very damed good in crisis.
it hit 55 fps once and awhile in some areas of the game.
actually i didn't even see it hit 50 FPS.
i just said that it never went below 50fps.

also.... may i repete? 65-70 is the normal frame rate most of the time.
while in some areas above 90FPS.
im useing the latest drivers and Crysis fix patch.

what FPS can you get with the same settings?
maybe 1 -10 FPS? lol
Because thats what the avarage very well is, with the same settings im useing on most of the older cards out there.

also keep in mind that people with a single 8800GTX cant run the game with 8x antiasailing above 60 FPS)
let alone 8X Q now imagin 16XQ....
Edited by Andrew75, Sep 16 2008, 04:50 PM.
Posted Image
(SONIC CD REMIX)
check out my vids
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=tuxmask75
Check out our projects vids
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=AXSXProject
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Reikyrr
Forum God
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 

what FPS can you get with the same settings?
maybe 1 -10 FPS? lol
Because thats what the average very well is, with the same settings I´m using on most of the older cards out there.
I get 0,2125 fps if I max everything out
EDIT quote system was messed up..

Andrew you got an too fast pc. I will now join the police and confescate you pc for security reasons. (my pc might blow up if I max crysis out) (not that the power supply would pull trough it) ;)
Edited by Reikyrr, Sep 16 2008, 05:06 PM.
~Inspirational quote~
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Andrew75
Member Avatar
Andrew75
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
roelor
Sep 16 2008, 05:03 PM
Quote:
 

what FPS can you get with the same settings?
maybe 1 -10 FPS? lol
Because thats what the average very well is, with the same settings I´m using on most of the older cards out there.
I get 0,2125 fps if I max everything out
EDIT quote system was messed up..

Andrew you got an too fast pc. I will now join the police and confescate you pc for security reasons. (my pc might blow up if I max crysis out) (not that the power supply would pull trough it) ;)
Yeah i know, its the shit huh? lol
but actually i dont really play to many PC games hahah,,,
I'm more a home console type of guy when it comes to gaming.

Before i started using ult 3d i was mostly into just 3D rendering with the computer and liked to have high specs.
but now i have another reason, Ult 3d and C4 game engine lol.

I'd like to see my artwork run in real-time. at almost render quality visuals.
The tech is still way far off for what id really like to do.
but you know? its all good. Because i can still get the same visual quality i need by faking stuff.
thank god for render to texture and parallax mapping,
and also Skarak's multiple layered materials,and his new reflectionmap and specularmap filter shaders.
Man i cant wait to go home and mess around with them.
Posted Image
(SONIC CD REMIX)
check out my vids
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=tuxmask75
Check out our projects vids
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=AXSXProject
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bazza
Member Avatar
Forum God
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
lol my pc sux i can only barley run bioshock w/out crashing ^_^
My instinct is to hide in this barrel, like the wily fish.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Andrew75
Member Avatar
Andrew75
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
bazza games
Sep 16 2008, 06:42 PM
lol my pc sux i can only barley run bioshock w/out crashing ^_^
personally, for me, bioshock has much more going for it in its art department than Crysis dull drag and drop looking landscapes.
Edited by Andrew75, Sep 16 2008, 10:56 PM.
Posted Image
(SONIC CD REMIX)
check out my vids
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=tuxmask75
Check out our projects vids
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=AXSXProject
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eansis
Member Avatar
ghost
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Andrew75
Sep 16 2008, 10:55 PM
bazza games
Sep 16 2008, 06:42 PM
lol my pc sux i can only barley run bioshock w/out crashing ^_^
personally, for me, bioshock has much more going for it in its art department than Crysis dull drag and drop looking landscapes.
Yeah but Crysis has better graphics. The artistic appeal of each levels is a matter of opinion. If BioShock had Crysis's maps I am sure you would say Crysis has better artistic moods.
VOTE FOR BUDDY ROEMER HE'S A STRAIGHTFORWARD, DOWN TO EARTH AMERICAN GUY WHO ISN'T PART OF THE BIGBROTHER CONSPIRACY

Til'c
 
Things will not calm down Daniel Jackson. They will infact calm up.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Andrew75
Member Avatar
Andrew75
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Eanbro
Sep 20 2008, 02:51 AM
The artistic appeal of each levels is a matter of opinion. If BioShock had Crysis's maps I am sure you would say Crysis has better artistic moods.


I think you mean Crysis has better graphics by a technical standpoint? right?
I don't believe that's the case... Bioshock uses much of the same features and graphical tricks as crysis, ..
As you say its a matter of opinion. but yet both games use very similar graphical shaders and such,
The thing that separates the 2 games are creativity with level layouts and texture placement and so on.
crysis may have destructable objects and biger environments but that dosnt mean that bioshock's engine cant do that,
U know which engine im talking about right??

let me restate that in my opinion that crysis level design looks like it was put together by someone that really didn't care where to place trees and rocks and such,
it just looks like everything was strewn out.... including: Exaction of how textures are applied to models, UV mapping of the environment... its just garbage,
crysis dosn't even have many texturemaps everythings recycled till it gets redundent to look at.

ive been doing 3d design for over 10 years now and can easily spot cheaply thrown together level art or design in an instant.
you can see when designers take there time...or do it the fast way for a quick dollar.
alot of the high-end companies really piss me off lately with the overrated games there releasing with rushed design teams and the overuse of the so called high end graphics hardware effects that are all copied and reproduced in almost each and every game that's on the market today, it sickens me.

everything done visualy in bioshock can be done in crysis and everything that can be done in crysis can be done in bioshock.
we could even load crysis models and complete levels into ult 3d and run it. ( probibly would need a better multi object management system though lol)
and we could probibly reproduce shaders if we wanted, but i feel that would be a wast of time on a crap game like that,
(well,, i dont think crysis is a crap game but its graphics sure are cheeply done but with a bit of cheep gimik like effects that arnt nessary)

graphics in the end become a matter of opinion.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics
yada yada yada and so on...
Edited by Andrew75, Sep 20 2008, 08:05 AM.
Posted Image
(SONIC CD REMIX)
check out my vids
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=tuxmask75
Check out our projects vids
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=AXSXProject
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gandalf20000
Member Avatar
Geek
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
crysis level design looks like it was put together by someone that really didn't care where to place trees and rocks and such,

Trees and rocks appear in random places in nature. Unless you have a tree in or on a house or another ridiculous place, or way too close to the house, (Never mind. I just remembered the enormous pecan tree right beside my house.) it shouldn't seem like they really didn't care.
Quote:
 
crysis dosn't even have many texturemaps everythings recycled till it gets redundent to look at.

Now, please keep in mind I've never played Crysis. I'm just getting this next part from the system requirements online. It needs 12+ GB of space. From looking at pictures, Crysis has some pretty high-poly models (of course, bump maps are probably part of it looking so good.). Also, the textures on some models in pictures look extremely large and detailed. I imagine those take up most of the space. I've never played Crysis, so I don't have any truly useful opinions on its graphics, I'm just stating my opinion based off of what very little I do know.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Questions about Ultimate 3D · Next Topic »
Add Reply