Will Half-Life 2 use PS 2.0?

[aeroripper]

Is it going to use it? Just a little or extensively? I wonder if they will eventually release a patch for PS 3.0...

 

[Sai]

not to sound retarded but....ps?

 

[ShinRa]

Pixel Shader.

 

[lePobz]

PixelShader... but to dumb it down a bit... 2.0 is good, but 3.0 is better.

 

[aeroripper]

... i wonder if they'll use any of it... i think even far cry did a little

 

[Aphal]

The 6800 is the only card that can use PS3.0, and Valve is designing HL2 for mid-low spec hardware, so I doubt they'll bother to use 3.0 a lot.

 

[Goombatommy]

If I can remember correctly, HL 2 will use PS 2.0. They said that they might release PS 3.0 in a patch in the future.

 

[Gossoon]

I heard 3.0 was going to be an add-in later, with a patch thru steam. Just what I heard.

EDIT: Doh, too slow

 

[Arc. KiLL]

I heard 3.0 was going to be an add-in later, with a patch thru steam. Just what I heard.

EDIT: Doh, too slow

same i heard that too :thumbs:

 

[KagePrototype]

PS 2.0 will only be for DX9 cards, while DX8 cards will have to settle for 1.1. I think.

 

[Arc. KiLL]

PS 2.0 will only be for DX9 cards, while DX8 cards will have to settle for 1.1. I think.

not really, if you card has enough juice to support it, i can do ps 2.0
just with less fps

 

[Paintballer]

actually only dx9 cards will do ps2.0... dx8 cards are ps1.4 i believe

 

[SMT]

Wow, there are so many Pixel Shader 2.0 / HDR topics now. This is awesome.

 

[Asus]

Yeah, HL2 will be released with PS2.0 support.
3.0 may come later as a patch, so they say.

I wouldn't think of PS3.0 as better but just different.
It's Nvidia's version of DX9.0 while PS2.0 is ATI's version of Pixel shader support in DX9.0.
There is only one plus I can thing of in PS3.0 that ATI may like to take advantage of in the future. The main thing Nvidia likes about it is that it's more efficent so they should beable to compete better with ATI's better shader performance in shader intensive games.

 

[Dr. Freeman]

Yeah, HL2 will be released with PS2.0 support.
3.0 may come later as a patch, so they say.

I wouldn't think of PS3.0 as better but just different.
It's Nvidia's version of DX9.0 while PS2.0 is ATI's version of Pixel shader support in DX9.0.
There is only one plus I can thing of in PS3.0 that ATI may like to take advantage of in the future. The main thing Nvidia likes about it is that it's more efficent so they should beable to compete better with ATI's better shader performance in shader intensive games.

different? can u explain that a bit more?
certainly one would think a newer version would be better because of new technology.. and updates to the existing stuff and all.. but.. mehh.. i don't know much about this stuff so i'll leave it to the pple who actually know something about it.

 

[Ahnteis]

PS3 is just faster. It doesn't add new effects.
(Allows for long instruction sets though, so may see cooler effects eventually)

 

[BlumenKohl]

PS3.0 and PS2.0 are VERY much alike as far as any end-user features go. Visual quality (with the exception of displacement mapping) is pretty much 100% the same as PS2.0.

You'll Pixel Shader 3.0 advantages if you're a developer, or if you're hardware.

 

[RogueShadow]

if there weren't a lot of differences wouldn't it be PS2.1 or 2.2 ? I haven't read up on 3.0 yet.

 

[deathryuu]

wish it was 2.0 vs 3.0 but this is all i could find


Shader Model 1.1(SM)

Shader Model 3.0(SM)

keep in mind this is SM 1.1 vs 3.0, NOT 2.0 vs 3.0.

 

[Shuzer]

wish it was 2.0 vs 3.0 but this is all i could find


Shader Model 1.1(SM)

Shader Model 3.0(SM)

So deceiving, too. Considering the first shot is at minimum detail, while the second is at maximum :|

Oh well, if they had PS 2.0 and 3.0 running side by side at max detail in that scene, you'd see no discernable difference I suppose

 

[deathryuu]

So deceiving, too. Considering the first shot is at minimum detail, while the second is at maximum :|

Oh well, if they had PS 2.0 and 3.0 running side by side at max detail in that scene, you'd see no discernable difference I suppose

which is exactly why they did 1.1 vs 3.0 and not 2.0 vs 3.0, cuz theres almost no seeable difference between the two. but anyways getting back on topic..yes hl2 will support PS 2.0.

 

[Sparta]

Whats the difference between PS 2.0 and PS 1.4? Even though this question is kinda off-topic

 

[Shuzer]

which is exactly why they did 1.1 vs 3.0 and not 2.0 vs 3.0, cuz theres almost no seeable difference between the two. but anyways getting back on topic..yes hl2 will support PS 2.0.

Well, my problem is why not show PS 1.1 with max details compared to PS 3.0 with max details?

I'm talking other stuff, like normal maps, and what have you.. the water is even at minimum, you can't even really see any pixel shading going on in that scene running PS 1.1 due to the low settings

 

[Kazuki_Fuse]

That Pixel Shader 3.0 pic looks exactly the same as Pixel Shader 2.0 on my computer. There's no visual difference between 2.0 and 3.0.

 

[Shuzer]

That Pixel Shader 3.0 pic looks exactly the same as Pixel Shader 2.0 on my computer. There's no visual difference between 2.0 and 3.0.

That's because there really isn't a visual difference between the two. PS 3.0 is more efficient, and allows for longer shader instructions.

Hence the reason why they didn't show 2.0 side by side 3.0

 

[Wolf]

PS3 is just faster. It doesn't add new effects.
(Allows for long instruction sets though, so may see cooler effects eventually)

That's almost correct - SM (Shader Model) 3.0 does true displacement mapping which is not just a speed issue.

Apart from that though it is not like the leap from PS1.4->PS2.0. All you really need to know is that SM3.0 can be faster because it is smarter (because it does things like shader instantiation) and it can do things at higher precision. I wouldn't stress over this if you're a Radeon owner though because by the time serious SM3.0 games are out in quantity the 6800U will be a dead duck anyway.

--

@the original thread starter. Of course HL2 will have SM2.0 - it is the most PS2.0 intensive, shader limited mainstream game thus far...

 

[Asus]

The reason I think it isn't PS2.1 rather than PS3.0 is because it is Nvidia's version rather than ATI's.
It's DX9.0b (PS2.0) vs DX9.0c (Includes PS3.0).

 

[Dr. Freeman]

ahh.. well these explanations u guys have given about PS 2.0 vs 3.0 make it easier to understand the differences

i guess for anyone purchasing video cards, this area is not something to really worry about since game devs are only beginning to use more complex shading..

 

[Asus]

Actually, if I'm understanding what I have read correctly, Nvidia's implementation of PS3.0 in their hardware is not yet complete. What I mean to say is the version in their hardware is not the full PS3.0 which supports displacement mapping fully. Vertex Shader 3.0 is supposed to beable to create geometry from provided information and also create vertices if no addictional information is provided. Currently Nvidia's implemetation can only do the first.

I would assume later implementations, from both ATI and Nvidia, will fully support Vertex Shader 3.0.

Vertex Shader 2.0 (SM2.0) can currently do virtual displacement mapping but it isn't quiet the same. AFAIK

 

[aeroripper]

What i was really meaning is like what areas of the game will we see it?

Is it only used in the water effect or all over the game?

Or what sort of things are they used for

 

[Asus]

I would assume just about any surface they wish.
Water, the wood floors, walls, and models.

Also effects.

 

[Scotchy]

mmhmm

The 6800 launch demos at nvidia looked nice ehough though.

 

[blahblahblah]

Actually, if I'm understanding what I have read correctly, Nvidia's implementation of PS3.0 in their hardware is not yet complete. What I mean to say is the version in their hardware is not the full PS3.0 which supports displacement mapping fully. Vertex Shader 3.0 is supposed to beable to create geometry from provided information and also create vertices if no addictional information is provided. Currently Nvidia's implemetation can only do the first.

I would assume later implementations, from both ATI and Nvidia, will fully support Vertex Shader 3.0.

Vertex Shader 2.0 (SM2.0) can currently do virtual displacement mapping but it isn't quiet the same. AFAIK

Linky, linky por favor

It sounds like you are right about that, I don't remember about Nvidia/ATI bragging about new Vertex Shaders. Just want to read up about it.

 

[shapeshifter]

not really, if you card has enough juice to support it, i can do ps 2.0
just with less fps

no only dx9 cards can do ps2.0 dx8 cards will do ps1.1/1.3/1.4

Ps3.0 is exactly the same as ps2.0, you won't see any "MAGIC" image quality improvments etc, all it does is exactly what ps2.0 does, but more "efficantly"

Basically its like the improvemnt from ps1.1 to 1.4, the code becomes cleaner, and thus its possible to get some more fps out of it (if done right)

 

[slicktick]

Does anybody know if your card has to support PS 1.1 at least, or you cant play, a la Deus Ex IW? Just asking because of my brothers comp which wouldnt run dues ex because of no pixel shader support, he has a geforce 4 MX, I know it sucks, but my dad bought it for him. If anybody knows it would be appreciated.

edit: thanks kage

 

[KagePrototype]

The minimum is still DX6 level cards, so no, you don't need a card that supports shaders. However, you won't be able to admire the bulk of HL2's graphical sweetness.

 

[Crusader]

They use shaders for ropes and water don't they? Will you be able to see ropes and water if you don't have a shader-supporting card?

I guess they will replace it with just plain textures or something. I am really wondering how bad shader-less water will look

 

[Cypher19]

Man alive, we need some more people knowledgeable in modern Direct3D.

I'm gonna go through this bit by bit:

Will Half-Life 2 use PS 2.0?

Yes it will, but if your current hardware doesn't support it, the game will instead use the shader 1.x model.

PS 2.0 will only be for DX9 cards, while DX8 cards will have to settle for 1.1. I think.

That is correct. Only "DX9 cards" such as the Radeons 9x00 (except 9000 and 9200), or the GeForce FXs can run version 2.0 shaders.

not really, if you card has enough juice to support it, i can do ps 2.0
just with less fps[/qupte]
It doesn't matter if your card has enough juice, it must be a feature directly supported on the hardware. If you have a pre-shader2.0 card, you can run 2.0 shaders, but you must first have the DirectX SDK reference drivers, and run all the graphics on your CPU, and bask in the glory of 0.10 frames per second.

I wouldn't think of PS3.0 as better but just different.

PS3.0 is literally a stepup from PS2.0. While PS2.0 allowed for a lot of different math calculations, and enough data space to send in more variables, PS3.0 basically adds control structures, so it can run a bit more efficiently, if the dev codes it in, and it also adds a ridiculous amount of data that can be used in the pixel shader execution. PS3.0 IS NOT DIFFERENT, IT IS JUST AN EVOLUTION OF 2.0.

if there weren't a lot of differences wouldn't it be PS2.1 or 2.2 ? I haven't read up on 3.0 yet.

3.0 could *ALMOST* be redefined as 2.1 or 2.2, but the amount added is just a bit too much to increment the tenth's place.

Whats the difference between PS 2.0 and PS 1.4?

More data can be used, meaning more complex algorithms are possible. A lot of new math calculations are added as well, further allowing PS algos to be more complex.

SM (Shader Model) 3.0 does true displacement mapping which is not just a speed issue

That is correct, as it can allow for more effects not possible without exceptionally slow speeds. The texture look-up feature of vertex shader 3.0 (which allows displacement mapping) will enable a dev to have some fairly fancy effects.

Vertex Shader 3.0 is supposed to beable to create geometry from provided information and also create vertices if no addictional information is provided.

Vertex Shader 3.0 was never meant to be able to create new geometry. Vertex shader 4.0, for DirectX Next (ETA: 2006, don't worry if you just bought a new card) will allow for geometry generation in the shader area. Currently geometry must be created on the CPU, and sent to the video card: a nice lil' memory bottleneck.

Vertex Shader 2.0 (SM2.0) can currently do virtual displacement mapping but it isn't quiet the same.

You're thinking of PIXEL shader 2.0. Virtual displacement mapping (aka offset mapping) is a per-pixel operation, which warps the texture on an object based on the view, and creating the illusion that there is a small extrusion, as parts of a triangle are obscuring other parts of the triangle. HOWEVER, it is not a real extrusion like what is allowed in VS 3.0.

What i was really meaning is like what areas of the game will we see it?

Is it only used in the water effect or all over the game?

We will likely see a lot of pixel shader effects being used for water, refractions (such as a prism), reflections (including little shines on an object), certain camera effects such as light blooms, shadowing, and so on.

They use shaders for ropes and water don't they? Will you be able to see ropes and water if you don't have a shader-supporting card?

Ropes: Yes. Those are generated on the CPU, and sent to the video card every frame (so if you have higher memory speed between your mobo and video card, i.e. AGP 1x vs. AGP 8x, it'll run faster).
Water: It'll probably be a simple animated texture, probably not unlike Far Cry's shaderless water, which you can see in the HardOCP shader 1.1 (actually, I think they use NO shaders) vs shader 3.0 article.



GodDAMN I hope someone reads that....

 

[denlife7]

I read it...

now, what's the difference between ps1 ps2 and ps3 again??

 

[Cypher19]

now, what's the difference between ps1 ps2 and ps3 again??

Okay, I'll just answer the question straight out if you are serious. This includes information taken from the MSDN library, which you can see here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/e...aders/pixelshaders/pixelshaderdifferences.asp

First off, I should probably define what a register is: Basically, a place where data can be stored, and each register can contain 4 floating point numbers. The registers in the shaders oftentimes have only one purpose, and they can range from constants (data sent in by the program), to texture coordinates (so that colour look-ups for each texture can be done. The info stored in the colour can be height, normals, anything the dev wants), output (like the resultant colour or depth of the pixel), or temporary (for data that has been calculated that is unique to each pixel, such as the pixel's location relative to the camera).

In short, a register is a very specialized variable.

Anyways, in PS1.1, it was quite limited, as only 12 instructions could be done, it had very few registers (8 constants, 2 temporary, 4 texture, and 2 color), and not a ton of instructions (read: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/e...lshaders/instructions/ps_1_x_instructions.asp ). It was fairly limited in what you could do, and as a result not many applications of it.

PS2.0 however was a revolution, and why you hear so many people raving about it. The number of registers was expanded to up to 32 temporary, 64 constant (32 float, 16 integer, 16 boolean), and 8 texture registers. All of a sudden, you can have a LOT more data being used, meaning more complex shaders, resulting in better reflections, better lighting effects, etc. PS2.0 was a literal revolution compared to 1.1.

Now on to 3.0. It adds flow control support, in the form of loops and if statements (actually, if statements were introduced in PS2.x, which I believe the Radeon X800 card uses), which can, in some ways, help speed up some rendering. With an if statement, you can skip some parts of a shader that don't matter, and with a loop, you can have things that would require multiple renderings to be done in one. For example, if you have per-pixel lighting, all the objects have to be rendered for each light, and have all their results added together. This requires processing the same vertices over and over again each frame, which is inefficient. Using PS3.0's loops, you can send in all the light data in a scene, and do it all in one pass. However, there are not many practical applications of loops outside of faster per-pixel lighting, so you can see how it's not as useful as it may seem. Also, the registers have been expanded even further, with 32 temporary, 256 constant (224 float, 16 int, 16 bool) and 16 texture registers. However, because devs are still far from filling up the registers given in PS2.0, the added registers in PS3.0 aren't really required, which is why PS3.0 isn't that big of a deal, and should not be a huge consideration if you're buying a GeForce 6 or Radeon X series card.