I need a really awesome stencil shadow demo

Blitz3D Forums/Blitz3D Beginners Area/I need a really awesome stencil shadow demo

sswift(Posted 2004) [#1]
I just got a Geforce 6800 OC, and I want to see what it can do! Anyone know any cool demos with stencil shadows I could take a look at?


Mustang(Posted 2004) [#2]
DOOM3?


Tracer(Posted 2004) [#3]
he cleary said "cool" Mustang :)

Tracer


Rob Farley(Posted 2004) [#4]
3DMark?


Mustang(Posted 2004) [#5]
3DMark?


That would be '03 then... We have moved on from stencils ages ago... '05 uses PSM, which is going to be Carmack's next choice too. From 3DMark05 docs:


3DMark05 uses a type of depth shadow maps called perspective shadow maps (PSM). The implementation is actually a refinement of what is commonly known as PSM, since these have problems with certain angles of light in their simplest form. Here not only are the objects rendered from the direction of the light, as in projection shadow maps, but the depth of each texel in the shadowmap is also stored. Compared to stencil shadows used in 3DMark03, PSM has no need for object edge polygon selection, does not add the vertex load with shadow volume polygons and does not add fill load with the invisible but usually large and numerous shadow volume polygons. PSM (or our refined implementation) still offers a global lighting solution that projects shadows correctly, including self shadowing, and is suited for a wide range of different types of 3D scenes and lighting types.

Shadows from directional light sources use a 2048x2048 resolution depth map of the format R32F. If the hardware supports depth stencil textures (DST), a D24X8 depth map is used of the same size. DST use can be disabled, if a more exact rendering performance comparison is desired, but DST is on by default, because this is a more optimal and logical way to render perspective shadow maps. Shadows from point light sources use a 512x512x6 cube map of the format R32F as depth map.

All color maps in the game tests are DXT 1 compressed, the alpha maps are DXT3 compressed, and all normal maps are DXT 5 compressed.




Rob Farley(Posted 2004) [#6]
You'll the one to know... I stopped looking at 3D Mark at 2001 after that ground my system to a dramatic slideshow!


Robert(Posted 2004) [#7]
3DMark05 really is demanding. I set up a new PC recently - 1GB RAM, 3Ghz AMD64 Processor, Radeon 9700 Pro. I get about 5 FPS in the ship demo!

It looks utterly amazing though - the 3D in that is better than some professionally rendered CGI I have seen on the BBC recently.


Kanati(Posted 2004) [#8]
3Ghz AMD64 Processor


Don't exist. :)

Fastest one I think is 2.4 ghz. I know my 3500+ is running at 2.2ghz I believe. Don't confuse their "comparison rating" to actual speed. That said... With my 9800XT I get just a bit better than that if I remember right, but not too much so. It's definitely a benchmark for future hardware and not what's out today. MAYBE an FX55 and dual 6800GT-OC (when a mobo with dual pcix slots is available) could get acceptable framerates out of it, but I sure can't. :)

Kanati


sswift(Posted 2004) [#9]
Hm... 3DMark05 is has a couple very nice looking demos, (the third crashed), but it really sucks that you can't even lower the resolution without buying it. Also, there is no sound, and there is an annoying and distracting blue bar with the framerate on the bottom of the screen at all times.

I guess I'll take a look at the older 3D Mark versions, at least those might run at a decent speed.

[edit]
Well upon looking at the second 3D Mark demo, I noticed that there is an option which gives you sound... There are both "run 3d mark" and "demo" buttons on opposite sides of the wondow, and the demo button will give you sound... But in 3DMark05, the demo only showed the sci fi portion, and there was no forest or boat sections shown, though the credits rolled over a portion which looked like it might be from the boat demo. And both 3D Mark 03 and 3D Mark 05 have crashed on me a few times. And I still can't run 05 at 800x600.

But the art in 05 is rather impressive anyway.
[/edit]


Braincell(Posted 2004) [#10]
What is it swift, now you're doing stencil shadows too? :)


sswift(Posted 2004) [#11]
No no... I just got an early christmas gift from my dad for saving 300 Disney vacation photos from his friend's hard drive that her family had formatted in an attempt to get them back after their PC stopped working, and I wanted to see what it was capable of. :-)

Good thing I got it too... My All-in-Wonder Radeon 7500 was on its last legs. The fan on it died a month ago, and since then I have had a large fan blowing on the inside of my case to keep it cooled.


Braincell(Posted 2004) [#12]
Oh good work lad.
If you're going for stencil shadows testing, theres a nice program in Tom's first thread on stencil shadows. If you're testing your new cards capabilities, just get a FarCry demo or something and crank the details up. Stencil shadows take very little to process. I'm sure you'll be pleasently surprised as that card should be pretty decent quality though.


big10p(Posted 2004) [#13]
sswift: how did you retieve the photos from a formatted drive? You really can perform miracles. :)


wedoe(Posted 2004) [#14]
http://www.runtime.org
http://www.data-recovery-software.net
http://www.yosemitetech.com/products/disaster_recovery.htm
http://www.quetek.com/prod02.htm
http://www.active-undelete.com
http://www.octanesoft.com/products.html


sswift(Posted 2004) [#15]
Big10:
I used a program called File Scavenger.

I tried Norton utilities, but that product is so damn confusing and I don't think that any of the tools it has are capable of fixing a formatted drive. Searches indicate they had an Unformat utility, but that apparently only worked on Fat32 partitions, not NTFS.

Then I searched the web for recovery tools and tried lots of them... But none of those I tried which advertised that they could recover data even from formatted drives actually worked. Lots of them would happily find the new partition and allow me to recover deleted files, but they could not find files created before the format.

Then I found File Scavenger, and that allowed me to search for "defunct data", and that basically scanned the hard disk surface and found all the executables, jpegs, avis, etc that had gone missing. Though I think many of the filenames were unrecoverable.

I don't know if any of those tools wedoe has listed work or not... Most tools you have to pay for to recover anything. File SCanever allowed me to recover files smaller than 64K so I was able to see that it could recover a few jpegs, and the price was only $40, so it was a bargain.


wedoe(Posted 2004) [#16]
I don't know if any of those tools wedoe has listed work or not...
4th link is File Scavenger :)


Kanati(Posted 2004) [#17]
oh SUUUUUURE wedoe... Steal his magical thunder by revealing the sekrits!!! Bastich. :)


wedoe(Posted 2004) [#18]
I'm a bad bad boy ! ;p


Mustang(Posted 2004) [#19]

Well upon looking at the second 3D Mark demo, I noticed that there is an option which gives you sound... There are both "run 3d mark" and "demo" buttons on opposite sides of the wondow, and the demo button will give you sound... But in 3DMark05, the demo only showed the sci fi portion, and there was no forest or boat sections shown, though the credits rolled over a portion which looked like it might be from the boat demo. And both 3D Mark 03 and 3D Mark 05 have crashed on me a few times. And I still can't run 05 at 800x600.



We (I) have to make money too, so the free version is limited featurewise. Once you buy it (20$) you can change the resolution and test configuration - and see all parts with sounds... well worth the measly 20$ if you ask me :)


sswift(Posted 2004) [#20]
Mustang:

I understand that you and whoever else worked on 3D MArk needs to make money, but I would expect that your primary clients would be reviewers, graphics card manufacturers, and anyone else who needs detailed statistics on a video card.

I on the other hand was just looking for a neat demo to see what my card could do. Even if your product was only $5, I still wouldn't buy it, becuase I'd only view it once and then never again. Even if I couldn't try it at all without paying for it, I still wouldn't buy it. I'd just find a free demo elsewhere.

Your work deserves to be rewarded, but maybe you are going about it the wrong way. I see 3DMark pro is only $19.95 and there is no higher license available. If I were futuremark, I would consider selling primarily to professionals who need to benchmark stuff for their magazines and websites, like Tom's Hardware. And I would charge a price to match that clientelle. Like Sysmark is $400.

Of course I don't know how many regular users do buy the product and make you money. I'm just telling you what I would think should be done looking at it as an outsider. It just seems like a product more useful to benchmarkers than end users like myself.

And you know I don't know anything preventing you from having a more expensive license which allows you to publish the results of tests with the product, and/or disallowing tests which would be very important to benchmarkers and not at all important to end users who just want to see how fast their video card renders. The quality benchmarks for example... Do I care if my card is cheating at trilinear mipmapping? Not really. I only care if the picture looks good (which I can see with my eyes) and whether the framerate is high.


Mustang(Posted 2004) [#21]

but I would expect that your primary clients would be reviewers, graphics card manufacturers, and anyone else who needs detailed statistics on a video card.

I would consider selling primarily to professionals who need to benchmark stuff for their magazines and websites, like Tom's Hardware. And I would charge a price to match that clientelle. Like Sysmark is $400.



That would be something like <1000 sales and no one here would have any job left because we would have been out of business ages ago... 3DMark is not a pretty & free demo, it's much more and there are enough peeps who do buy it as a valuable tool.

In the past we gave away too much for free and that wasn't a good thing for us, obviously. Of course peeps now say that 3DMark sucks because you have buy it to get all the features... tough luck, we have to eat :)

And since any new 3DMark requires very good (the best) cpu+gpu when released, any casual "hey let's check out some cool demo" audience is quite small. And only one version? I can count four + one upgrade... pricing being from US$9.95 to US$250.00 :)

https://shop.futuremark.com/shop/


sswift(Posted 2004) [#22]
"https://shop.futuremark.com/shop/"

Argh!

Since you're here I can bitch at you unlike most websites.

I HATE JAVA!

I just clicked on the link for the business editiion info while holding down ctrl to open in a new tab, and then I went up to the URL bar and typed in the main page to go look for something, and then I went back to my NEW TAB to see the business info, and what do I see? NOTHING! Just a java link in the URL bar!

Stop using Java for basic web links and screwing up my browsing! :-)


sswift(Posted 2004) [#23]
And here is why I went back to the main page...

This is why I did not see any other licenses.

http://futuremark.com/products/3dmark05/

I went there. I see a very busy page with lots of words. I don't have time to read all the words, and besides, there is a nice bright white bar on the right side of the page that has CLICK TO BUY! over and over. I looked down that sidebar, and I did not see any more expensive licenses for 3DMark05. Which is silly. You should have the business licenses there!

Also the word "pro" to me says business. PROFESSIONAL. Not the sort of thing I would be looking for as a consumer.

Okay but now I look in the middle of the page since you said there's another license and lo and behold I see it. But while one says "for business use" it doesn't actually specify there what license you have to buy. I mean if I am a 3D card reviewer, is that business use? Do I need the comemrcia license? What are the differences? What do I have to do load two more pages and compare and contrast between them! I am impatient!

Plus I go to click for more info and there is no place to click for more info on which license I need. I don't want to click the click to BUY buttons... cause I know those will take me to a shopping cart anyway...

But... Since I want to look up the information for the sake of this argument, I ctrl click both commercial and personal click to buy just to see what they say and...

ARGH! More blank tabs! Damn you JAVASCRIPT! Burn in HELL SUN CORPORATION!

ARrrr!

FINE. I RIGHT CLICK _ONE_ of them.

And I see that I am at a shopping cart which does not tell me if I need to buy the commercial or personal license for my particular use.

I rest my case your honor. :-)


Mustang(Posted 2004) [#24]
You ignorant and illiterate savage... :) top left navigation >

http://futuremark.com/products/3dmark05/?features

describes different versions and has pricing info too... REALLY, [Main > PRODUCT INFO: > Pro & Business Features] should be clear enough *sigh* (and obviously it isn't because you missed it...)


sswift(Posted 2004) [#25]
Actually I didn't even read that side of the page. I wasn't really looking that hard for the info when I went there the second time. I was trying to show you why I missed it. I don't go to websites and read every word on the page. I can't be bothered with that. If I go to a page to find information and it's not immediately obvious where to go I get frustrated with it and may say screw it.

Lots of companies out there have horrible page designs when they could be sooo much easier to browse and more obvious where to go, but they make the site look pretty insead of making it easy to find information. And sometimes they do this intentionally, like when they don't want you to find their contact info so you can email them complaints.