[newzhunter]

In the last couple of days there has been a little confusion about the DirectX version supported by Far cry 2. Now a statement of Vincent Greco, Worldwide Production Technical Coordinator at Ubisoft, was released:

Vincent Greco: "The Ubisoft team wanted to enhance the Anti-Aliasing through the reading of the multisampled depth Z-buffers. This feature was enabled by either using DX10.1 or using a DX10.0 extension supported by NVIDIA DirectX 10 GPU's. Since NVIDIA supports this in their hardware, we were pleased to be able to accelerate this feature. In the case of Far Cry 2, either option will work with similar performance.”


http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...ement_at_PCGH/

[NyTr0g3n]

Read the article, my young Padawan!

It is interesting to see that Ubisoft uses some kind of unofficial DX10 extension to utilize the DirectX 10.1 Anti-Aliasing technology. This requires manual programming, since those features are not exposed in the DX10 API as they are in DirectX 10.1.

The article clearly says that NVidia secretly supported some of DirectX 10.1's instruction sets. And Ubisoft was just using that DX 10.1-esque instructions to supported advanced AA effect ONLY available to DX10.1

In the end, IT'S JUST DX10.1. The only difference is AMD is fully supporting DX10.1 and NVidia is at least partially supporting DX10.1 via unofficial extension to DX10.

[konstantine]

Originally Posted by xfrgtr

Where are the ATI fanboys?

I don't know what's your problem with ATI/AMD....
Because of ATI/AMD you can get your geforce 200 card now for 40% less than it's original price at the launch.What's so special about that N-vidia that you defend it that hard.Their beautiful prices....
You do realize that we need at least two players in the field to get a competition------>less prices------>better products.....
We need AMD , Nvidia and Intel to achieve that.
Now talking about DX10.1,Have you ever tested assassins creed on Dx10.1 and compared the performance to the one on DX10?
I did.And guess what.There's is a noticeable increase in performance.Over 25% with aa enabled according to techreport..Now Im gonna ask you...is it AMD's fault that N-vidia did not adopt DX10.1...?
Actually it's N-vidia's fault that we didn't get Crysis and all the other games running in DX10.1 with over 25% increase in performance.

I just don't get your LOGIC.... N-vidia fanboiz...

[psolord]

Konstantine don't bother my friend. Some people are uneducated and wish to stay that way.

[xfrgtr]

Originally Posted by NyTr0g3n

Read the article, my young Padawan!



The article clearly says that NVidia secretly supported some of DirectX 10.1's instruction sets. And Ubisoft was just using that DX 10.1-esque instructions to supported advanced AA effect ONLY available to DX10.1

In the end, IT'S JUST DX10.1. The only difference is AMD is fully supporting DX10.1 and NVidia is at least partially supporting DX10.1 via unofficial extension to DX10.

Read this Vincent Greco: "The Ubisoft team wanted to enhance the Anti-Aliasing through the reading of the multisampled depth Z-buffers. This feature was enabled by either using DX10.1 or using a DX10.0 extension supported by NVIDIA DirectX 10 GPU's. Since NVIDIA supports this in their hardware, we were pleased to be able to accelerate this feature. In the case of Far Cry 2, either option will work with similar performance.”

[xfrgtr]

Originally Posted by konstantine

I don't know what's your problem with ATI/AMD....
Because of ATI/AMD you can get your geforce 200 card now for 40% less than it's original price at the launch.What's so special about that N-vidia that you defend it that hard.Their beautiful prices....
You do realize that we need at least two players in the field to get a competition------>less prices------>better products.....
We need AMD , Nvidia and Intel to achieve that.
Now talking about DX10.1,Have you ever tested assassins creed on Dx10.1 and compared the performance to the one on DX10?
I did.And guess what.There's is a noticeable increase in performance.Over 25% with aa enabled according to techreport..Now Im gonna ask you...is it AMD's fault that N-vidia did not adopt DX10.1...?
Actually it's N-vidia's fault that we didn't get Crysis and all the other games running in DX10.1 with over 25% increase in performance.

I just don't get your LOGIC.... N-vidia fanboiz...

Review Geforce 180.42: Far Cry 2 runs 30% faster
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...rozent_faster/

[RapaDogma]

Originally Posted by xfrgtr

Review Geforce 180.42: Far Cry 2 runs 30% faster
[/url]

False codes in NVIDIA's drivers - history number two.

[W.o.l.f]

Originally Posted by xfrgtr

Review Geforce 180.42: Far Cry 2 runs 30% faster
http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...rozent_faster/

NVIDIA fan boi -> Geforce 180.42: Far Cry 2 runs 30% faster

ATI Fan boi -> Continuation: Far Cry 2: AMD Hotfix delivers up to 98% better performance

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,6...=664125&page=2

Get the picture NVIDIA fan boy?

[Mario26JT]

Originally Posted by W.o.l.f

ATI Fan boi -> Continuation: Far Cry 2: AMD Hotfix delivers up to 98% better performance
Get the picture NVIDIA fan boy?

And where you see 98% better perf?
Open eyes,NV cards here tested with 178.13 for some reason (even at the game launch NV have way faster 178.24) so with 180.42 it goes way better and faster than ati.
One more proof,that NV drivers (and even cards,who have "less" perf according ati fboyz) have upper hand here.ati with own dx10.1.
Konstantin - you been away for a while,you definitely got ban Dont worry,i see antoher coming
People dont have problem with ati,neither NV,just with blind fanz like you

[psolord]

Mario, consider this:

Far Cry 2 is an Nvidia game and still it runs just as well on ATI cards if not better. That says a lot.

[Bloodbound]

Originally Posted by konstantine

I don't know what's your problem with ATI/AMD....
Because of ATI/AMD you can get your geforce 200 card now for 40% less than it's original price at the launch.What's so special about that N-vidia that you defend it that hard.Their beautiful prices....
You do realize that we need at least two players in the field to get a competition------>less prices------>better products.....
We need AMD , Nvidia and Intel to achieve that.
Now talking about DX10.1,Have you ever tested assassins creed on Dx10.1 and compared the performance to the one on DX10?
I did.And guess what.There's is a noticeable increase in performance.Over 25% with aa enabled according to techreport..Now Im gonna ask you...is it AMD's fault that N-vidia did not adopt DX10.1...?
Actually it's N-vidia's fault that we didn't get Crysis and all the other games running in DX10.1 with over 25% increase in performance.

I just don't get your LOGIC.... N-vidia fanboiz...

Reported for an off-topic trollpost.

[psolord]

Originally Posted by Bloodbound

Reported for an off-topic trollpost.

You should have reported 90% of the KING Troll's posts before reporting Konstantine's!

[batuchka]

How come with a thread with "Far Cry 2" in its title no one has posted about how much fun (or lack of) they had with its predecessor or thoughts about actual gameplay on Farcry 2 I for one didn't play Farcry but may read up on this game and consider it if the gameplay appeals to me

[Megalord]

Originally Posted by psolord

You should have reported 90% of the KING Troll's posts before reporting Konstantine's!

Well, i gotta concur with you. Afterall NV most hardworking employee is in action.

[Bloodbound]

Originally Posted by psolord

You should have reported 90% of the KING Troll's posts before reporting Konstantine's!

You're not a very good troll, PSOLord. Keep trying, though. I like to add people to my "VR-Zone News around the web! troll list".