nvidia on crysis and dx10

Associate
Joined
15 Jun 2006
Posts
2,178
Location
Amsterdam
IGN AU has conducted an interview with Keita Iida, Director of Content Management at NVIDIA, talking about DirectX10 and the evolution of their Geforce graphics cards. Iida goes into detail on the differences between developing for the PS3's RSX graphics processor, and the latest development tools to hit the scene. They also pressed him for comment on Ubisoft's jaggy-infested PC versions of Ghost Recon, Silent Hunter and others. Here's a taster:
IGN AU: Crysis is probably the other really big DX10 example. We've heard a few reports about the performance of that under DX10 and we have an expectation of how this game will look, based on all the screens that have come out. Can you comment on the performance of that? Will we get to see all of this eye candy running on today's hardware?

Keita Iida: We have nothing but pure confidence - especially with 8800-series cards - that with Crysis, you're going to have a tremendous experience. Again, since they're developing with 8800 as a reference, their target is going to be 30, if not 60, frames per second at relatively high resolutions. With DX10, given that it's a clean break from DX9, there are a lot of new art assets that need to be created; there are a lot of special effects that need to be written. Usually what they do is, when they take the DX9 engine and port it to DX10, they need the underlying renderer to support the DX10 features, and then they add the features on top of it - whether it's art or game-building.

What happens is, first, you need to get the game up and running; get the features implemented. Right now, Crytek, with Crysis, is in the process of adding new features and will soon be at the optimisation stage. That said, we would love to show you the game running on 8800 hardware, but we're bound by NDAs, and that's a decision bound by EA and Crytek; but we have every confidence that, by the time it's ready to be demonstrated to the public on DX10 with the 8800 or whatever advanced hardware is available at the time, it's going to run perfectly fine.
IGN AU: Can you comment on what happened with NVIDIA's Vista drivers? You guys have had access to Vista for years to build drivers and at the launch of Vista there were no drivers. The ones that are out now are still basically crippled. Why did this happen?

Keita Iida: On a high level, we had to prioritise. In our case, we have DX9, DX10, multiple APIs, Vista and XP - the driver models are completely different, and the DX9 and 10 drivers are completely different. Then you have single- and multi-card SLI - there are many variables to consider. Given that we were so far ahead with DX10 hardware, we've had to make sure that the drivers, although not necessarily available to a wide degree, or not stable, were good enough from a development standpoint.

If you compare our situation to our competitor's, we have double the variables to consider when we write the drivers; they have much more time to optimise and make sure their drivers work well on their DX10 hardware when it comes out. We've had to balance our priorities between making sure we have proper DX10 feature-supported drivers to facilitate development of DX10 content, but also make sure that the end user will have a good experience on Vista. To some degree, I think that we may have underestimated how many resources were necessary to have a stable Vista driver off the bat. I can assure you and your readers that our first priority right now is not performance, not anything else; it's stability and all the features supported on Vista.


 
No. Crytek devs have said that no hardware on the game's release will run it at maximum settings. That's due to them giving the capabilities in Crysis to utilizing hardware that could come out 2-3 years from now.
 
KNiVES said:
No. Crytek devs have said that no hardware on the game's release will run it at maximum settings. That's due to them giving the capabilities in Crysis to utilizing hardware that could come out 2-3 years from now.

"Again, since they're developing with 8800 as a reference, their target is going to be 30, if not 60, frames per second at relatively high resolutions."

I guess you didnt read that line.
 
Last edited:
relatively high resolutions and 30, 60 fps doesnt equate to running the game at maximum settings at high resolutions (1920 etc).

To run the game at absolute max settings at those sort of resolutions would bring an 8800 to its knee's. That is exactly what they want to happen so the game doesnt look dated after a year or two.

Its what they did with Farcry, as newer hardware got released it just looked better and better, play it now and it looks nothing like it did when it got released.
 
MadMossy said:
relatively high resolutions and 30, 60 fps doesnt equate to running the game at maximum settings at high resolutions (1920 etc).

To run the game at absolute max settings at those sort of resolutions would bring an 8800 to its knee's. That is exactly what they want to happen so the game doesnt look dated after a year or two.

Its what they did with Farcry, as newer hardware got released it just looked better and better, play it now and it looks nothing like it did when it got released.

I've got a 17" TFT, why do you need anything bigger in size? 1280x1024 is more then fine.
 
i guess no one saw the 8800 launch video when the dev showed crysis and said it will run maxed out and running fine on the 8800gtx im sure its still on you tube if you don't trust me!!
 
dafloppyone said:
Keita Iida: On a high level, we had to prioritise. In our case, we have DX9, DX10, multiple APIs, Vista and XP - the driver models are completely different, and the DX9 and 10 drivers are completely different. Then you have single- and multi-card SLI - there are many variables to consider. Given that we were so far ahead with DX10 hardware, we've had to make sure that the drivers, although not necessarily available to a wide degree, or not stable, were good enough from a development standpoint.

If you compare our situation to our competitor's, we have double the variables to consider when we write the drivers; they have much more time to optimise and make sure their drivers work well on their DX10 hardware when it comes out. We've had to balance our priorities between making sure we have proper DX10 feature-supported drivers to facilitate development of DX10 content, but also make sure that the end user will have a good experience on Vista. To some degree, I think that we may have underestimated how many resources were necessary to have a stable Vista driver off the bat. I can assure you and your readers that our first priority right now is not performance, not anything else; it's stability and all the features supported on Vista.

Had me ******* that bit about the drivers. :D :D

Yeah your drivers are that good, Dell are buying up all the R600's instead, they cant get enough of em because of ATi's fantastic Vista driver support, they've had Vista WHQL since last November, Nvidia only released one set of WHQL after Vista was released (Feb 20th their drivers appeared) and its their only set, and XP drivers for the 8 series = 3x official sets in over 5 months, what crap support, they can't do any drivers, yet ATi release full official drivers every month for both XP and Vista, Nvidia just can not compete in the driver dept, hence why my GTS is away when R600 arrives, its a cracking card, but the drivers are utter *****, R600 + Driver Support here we come. :D
 
Last edited:
KNiVES said:
No. Crytek devs have said that no hardware on the game's release will run it at maximum settings. That's due to them giving the capabilities in Crysis to utilizing hardware that could come out 2-3 years from now.


thats wrong, what crytek have said is that the cryengine2 will not be matched in graphical quality for 2 years. i expect all other game developers will stop making game engines and just rent the use of the cryengine 2.
 
Teki187 said:
I've got a 17" TFT, why do you need anything bigger in size? 1280x1024 is more then fine.

Get yourself a decent sized tft man! That rig in your sig deserves at least 22 inches of widescreen goodness :)
 
Cyber-Mav said:
thats wrong, what crytek have said is that the cryengine2 will not be matched in graphical quality for 2 years. i expect all other game developers will stop making game engines and just rent the use of the cryengine 2.


Quote from devs in recent edge magazine begs to differ, will dig it out and photo if I have to, but they were saying it would push 8800 SLI with 4gb of ram to the limit, and still have more to offer.
 
KNiVES said:
No. Crytek devs have said that no hardware on the game's release will run it at maximum settings. That's due to them giving the capabilities in Crysis to utilizing hardware that could come out 2-3 years from now.

Theres a video of them doing a demo with crysis, playing it on a big ass projector, filmed using a HD camera, and they said they are running it on MAX settings, on a single 8800gtx.

THATS A WORKING VIDEO OF IT PLAYING WELL ON A PROJECTOR AND THEM ANNOUNCING ITS AT MAX SETTINGS ON A SINGLE 8800GTX!

Doesn't get much clearer than that. Remember how far cry could be ran on an fx5700? They know how to optimize to get market dominating visuals, to be run on older technology.
 
It's also been said in the latest interview on inCrysis.

Bernd Diemer said:
iC: What kind of features will we see (released/applied to/something) in Crysis after release?

Bernd: We're not talking about that right now. I know what you're referring to, I read that in the article... and it's... remember, with Far Cry? When Far Cry came out it was like, cutting edge, it was like right top of the line and it gave people a really incredible experience but even a year after release I heard from a lot of our fans that they re-installed the game, you know, when the next generation computers and cards came out, and they said it's another experience when you see it at this visual quality and I think what we're trying to achieve is that you'll have a similar experience with Crysis that if you buy the game when it comes out, you get to play it and then a year or maybe even two years later you re-install it on a machine you see "hey... it still doesn't look old", it looks perfectly fine on a machine which isn't even out on the market yet. That's the kind of thing we're talking about. It's not that we have this secret feature somewhere hidden in the engine which will automatically activate itself in two years when the counter switches to... whatever, but it's sort of like that we're banking on the future by keeping things scaleable: might be patches, might be an update, might be whatsoever. We're not sure yet.

Text Interview
Video Interview
 
Yes, when I find the link with that interview, you lot will be sorry :p It's a fact that 8800s won't run the game on maximum settings - 'high' settings yes, but not maximum! Only hardware 2-3 years down the line will manage maximum.

I mean, look at Farcry. My 8800GTS still can't run Farcry at a constant 45fps with 8xAAQS and 16xAF at 1680x1050. In the Farcry configurator, there are tweaks that allow all vegetation to appear as 3d objects from any distance, as well as grass appearing everywhere instead of a specified region around the player. These two settings alone kill performance even on the most hardened systems.

You are all mistaken if you think your 8800GTS'es will run Crysis on max.
 
krisboats said:
Theres a video of them doing a demo with crysis, playing it on a big ass projector, filmed using a HD camera, and they said they are running it on MAX settings, on a single 8800gtx.

THATS A WORKING VIDEO OF IT PLAYING WELL ON A PROJECTOR AND THEM ANNOUNCING ITS AT MAX SETTINGS ON A SINGLE 8800GTX!

Doesn't get much clearer than that. Remember how far cry could be ran on an fx5700? They know how to optimize to get market dominating visuals, to be run on older technology.


Oh yeah? That Farcry on an FX5700 wasnt max settings. In fact, the FX5700 couldnt even do speculars on bump and parallax maps in the game. (any avid graphics card follower would know that the FX series were awful with Direct X 9 back then) Stop kidding yourself.
 
KNiVES said:
Yes, when I find the link with that interview, you lot will be sorry :p It's a fact that 8800s won't run the game on maximum settings - 'high' settings yes, but not maximum! Only hardware 2-3 years down the line will manage maximum.

I mean, look at Farcry. My 8800GTS still can't run Farcry at a constant 45fps with 8xAAQS and 16xAF at 1680x1050. In the Farcry configurator, there are tweaks that allow all vegetation to appear as 3d objects from any distance, as well as grass appearing everywhere instead of a specified region around the player. These two settings alone kill performance even on the most hardened systems.

You are all mistaken if you think your 8800GTS'es will run Crysis on max.

Thats all well and good, but yours is a GTS, they said they were playing it on max settings on a GTX. Obviously there'll be different things to add to it that can cripple even a GTX, but what i'd imagine he meant was the in game menu sliders were all set to max, not the full potential of the game to be played on max settings by use of command line tweaks :p But then, your so wise you probably already knew i'd say that :cool:

KNiVES said:
Oh yeah? That Farcry on an FX5700 wasnt max settings. In fact, the FX5700 couldnt even do speculars on bump and parallax maps in the game. (any avid graphics card follower would know that the FX series were awful with Direct X 9 back then) Stop kidding yourself.

You clearly missed my point, i said far cry could be run on an fx5700, DESPITE them being renowned as awful cards. i think you should really read things first before you try and take the **** ;)
 
bah, no offence, but theres two things here, super high aa/af levels killing hardware performance and the actual textures in game. that quote 2-3 posts back refers to the thing saying won't run great till hardware in a couple years, its saying it was misquoted, in so far as thats not what they meant. they can release texture packs and stuff, and make it run looking better later down the line.

basically, theres an engine, theres a pretty specific point where you have insanely small increases in quality, which you can barely notice-8 to 16xaa for example and most newish games have trouble being run at those types of max settings. but the textures don't change, the highest ingame settings will be runable , most likely. they've said it, it seems likely, we've ALREADY seen the game run, and theres little point making/releasing a game right now that can't look its best, its completely pointless. they want to licence the engine, but people are paying for something they won't use, they want gamers to get what they deserve, which is not spending extra years in developement on this game on features no one will see because the next game/engine will be out by then.
 
What I heard is that Crysis will run just fine on a single 8800 card, but the devs can bring even the most powerful Quad Core Sli'd 8800GTX system to it's knees if they want.

Hell, I'm betting that my 512Mb 7900GS will run it OK in DX9 mode.
 
Back
Top Bottom