rec.autos.simulators

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

Gonz

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Gonz » Sat, 23 Jun 2001 21:37:06


I know this sound bad but green smoke in NFS:PU is "Normal".  That's what I
read somewhere anyway so if you smoke is not green,  there may or may not be
a problem with your D3D rendering LOL.

Gonz

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Gonz » Sat, 23 Jun 2001 21:42:07


What I was trying to say is that a lot of problems that appear to be fixed
by going from 16bit to 32 bit can actually be fixed via drivers or setting
options.   That for me would be the prefered route so as to keep my 16bit
speed.

Somebody else pointed out that 32bit fixed their ugly dithering when IMHO
there may have been other ways to fix it besides giving your PC a 32bit
slowdown.

Torlie Omegelterster

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Torlie Omegelterster » Sat, 23 Jun 2001 18:57:10


Your opinion is 12bit, with heavy compression.

:)

Jus because your monitor is: 1. Small 2. Ugly 3. Old ...doesn't make the
nature of 16bit vs 32bit change 1 iota.

Pasha

Simon Brow

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Simon Brow » Sat, 23 Jun 2001 23:25:23

The main problem I have with 16-bit modes is that the driver often forces a
16-bit depth buffer as well, and as you know 16-bit z-buffers are prone to
inaccuracy.  W-buffering reduces the problem, but it's still not as good as
a 24-bit or 32-bit depth buffer.

As for how 16-bit looks, in some games, GPL for instance, it doesn't cause
any problems, but in others, Quake 3 and Homeworld for instance, you get
definite colour banding.  Having said that Quake 3 is the only game I run in
32-bit colour/textures, because it's the only game I have that's still very
smooth in 32-bit.


Stephen Powel

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Stephen Powel » Sat, 23 Jun 2001 23:19:02

On the Fri, 22 Jun 2001 12:42:07 GMT in article


 (I of course, believe none of it)



> > Thanks everybody for all the answers.

> > > 16 bit vs 32 bit color most often has nothing to do with what your are
> > > pointing out.  This is a dithering problem that can or can't be fixed in
> > the
> > > driver settings (depending on what card you own).

> > Not true.  32 bit color is not dithered.  No reason to dither 32 bit color
> > unless the internal calculations of each color component (ARGB) are more
> > than 8 bits each.

> > It's interesting to hear that most people see no difference and are happy
> > with 16 bit.  I agree that this is a feature that few appreciate and is
> more
> > a marketing bullet than anything else right now.  In the future, however,
> > DX8 and certainly DX9 and beyond cards will require 32 bit color for the
> > many blending passes they will use and probably higher internal precision
> > per color component (12 or greater).  Dithering may come into play for 32
> > bit color at this point.

> What I was trying to say is that a lot of problems that appear to be fixed
> by going from 16bit to 32 bit can actually be fixed via drivers or setting
> options.   That for me would be the prefered route so as to keep my 16bit
> speed.

> Somebody else pointed out that 32bit fixed their ugly dithering when IMHO
> there may have been other ways to fix it besides giving your PC a 32bit
> slowdown.

The reason 32 bit colour is important now is because of the extra colour
precision it allows in calculations.  When you are combining textures,
the less colour precision you have, the more likely it is that errors in
calculations will be compounded.  This is easily noticeable in 16bit
games by colour banding.  Precision at 32-bit is much better, and so less
banding takes place. (Incidentally John Carmack is asking for 64-bit
precision, to combat colour banding in the 32-bit colour space).

If you have internal 32-bit colour precision, then 16-bit colour can look
almost as good as 32-bit.  For examples of this, please se the Kyro2,
which always works internally at 32-bit, and then dithers down to 16-bit
if thats required.

Other issues such as that extra green bit leading to a green bias in
images have already been touched on elsewhere, so I wont bother, suffice
to say I play in 32-bit all the time, because I find the image quality
preferable.

--
SteveP

http://www.naplesfl.net/~tbates/gravity/ <-I like this

Aaron Turne

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Aaron Turne » Sun, 24 Jun 2001 00:41:10


: The main problem I have with 16-bit modes is that the driver often forces a
: 16-bit depth buffer as well, and as you know 16-bit z-buffers are prone to
: inaccuracy.  W-buffering reduces the problem, but it's still not as good as
: a 24-bit or 32-bit depth buffer.

Yep. 16 bit z buffer stops WB 3 working properly, for example. 16 bit
colour and 24 bit Z would be fine. I am sure there is some sort of GF2
tweak utility that might allow it, but it all gets hazy....

        Aaron Turner

Michael Bai

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Michael Bai » Sun, 24 Jun 2001 01:48:20

Stephen> If you have internal 32-bit colour precision, then 16-bit
Stephen> colour can look almost as good as 32-bit.  For examples of
Stephen> this, please se the Kyro2, which always works internally at
Stephen> 32-bit, and then dithers down to 16-bit if thats required.

The Kyro2 is a different beast.  I saw benchmarks where there wasn't
much difference between running in 16-bit and 32-bit mode.

Anybody have recommendations for using a Radeon in Tribes2?  I'll go
back to the speed of 16-bit if it looks nearly as good as 32-bit.

(Yeah, I could test it myself, but I may be missing something.)

--
Michael Bain

Stephen Powel

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Stephen Powel » Sun, 24 Jun 2001 02:13:05

On the 22 Jun 2001 09:48:20 -0700 in article


 (I of course, believe none of it)


> Stephen> If you have internal 32-bit colour precision, then 16-bit
> Stephen> colour can look almost as good as 32-bit.  For examples of
> Stephen> this, please se the Kyro2, which always works internally at
> Stephen> 32-bit, and then dithers down to 16-bit if thats required.

> The Kyro2 is a different beast.  I saw benchmarks where there wasn't
> much difference between running in 16-bit and 32-bit mode.

Thats what I mean.  Colour precision wise, to get 32-bit precision most
cards need to be in 32-bit colour mode.  The Kyro2 is *always* uses 32-
bit precision, hence no speed gain when going to 16-bit, and quite a
small ammount of image degredation (compared to other cards).

--
SteveP

http://www.naplesfl.net/~tbates/gravity/ <-I like this

Chain R

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Chain R » Sun, 24 Jun 2001 04:15:50

Undying looks good in 16bit but looks gorgeous in 32bit.  The lighting
effects appear way more "natural", and with my geforce 2 mx there was not
too much of a performance hit in 32 bit.
I haven't played any other game that looks so much better in 32bit vs 16
bit.  Haven't noticed any difference in UT which is strange because it uses
the same engine as Undying...

Gonz

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Gonz » Sun, 24 Jun 2001 05:25:25




> > IMHO, the folks that
> > say they can see a difference either have an expensive 20+ inch monitor
or
> > they are simply saying it to win an argument.

> Your opinion is 12bit, with heavy compression.

> :)

> Jus because your monitor is: 1. Small 2. Ugly 3. Old ...doesn't make the
> nature of 16bit vs 32bit change 1 iota.

What goes from my monitor to my eye is the only thing that matters.  What is
on other peoples desktop doesn't concern me.  BTW, I just purchased a 17"
Xflat KDS today so don't be making fun of my Honda just because you own a
Porsche!
Bard

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Bard » Sun, 24 Jun 2001 09:36:35

well, i've noticed those problems from switching ONLY 16 bit and 32 bit
colors, no other fiddling.

--
Bard
http://www.1vvfsc.org  - vancouver flight sim club
http://www.eq-clan.com  - EQ counterstrike clan
http://www.1vvfsc.org/sb - Steel Beasts RW base


> I would like to elaborate on that...

> 16 bit vs 32 bit color most often has nothing to do with what your are
> pointing out.  This is a dithering problem that can or can't be fixed in
the
> driver settings (depending on what card you own).  For example,  My Radeon
> has the option to change the dithering type using "Radeon Tweaker" or I
can
> leave it ugly and benefit from the speed.  32 vs 16bit has nothing to do
> with it although sometimes going to 32bit will fix dithering problems.
But
> again, this is card specific and can even be driver specific or setting
> specific AFAIK.

> HM looks gorgeous in 16bit on the Radeon and I can't tell the difference
> either way.  Now in Quake III the smoke has some banding or cheescloth
> effect but this can be changed via options settings.  I don't play Q3
anyway
> as I prefer UT though LOL.



> > color banding in clouds or fog are usually the biggest problem.

> > homeworld, quake3arena are 2 which immediately come to mind where i
> noticed,
> > probably cfs2 but haven't looked, jf18 definitely needed 32bit color as
> the
> > clouds are very banded.

> > haven't had enough time lately ;)

> > --
> > Bard
> > http://www.1vvfsc.org  - vancouver flight sim club
> > http://www.eq-clan.com  - EQ counterstrike clan
> > http://www.1vvfsc.org/sb - Steel Beasts RW base

Aaron Turne

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Aaron Turne » Sun, 24 Jun 2001 18:42:25

: The main problem I have with 16-bit modes is that the driver often forces a
: 16-bit depth buffer as well, and as you know 16-bit z-buffers are prone to
: inaccuracy.  W-buffering reduces the problem, but it's still not as good as
: a 24-bit or 32-bit depth buffer.

Actually, what _is_ the W-buffer?

What I'd like would be an ability to use 24 bit Z buffer on my GF 2 MX
with 16 bit colour. On the WB 3 beta at 1024x768 with refresh set to 85 Hz
(maximum my old SGI monitor will do) I get 37 fps average with 16 bit
colour, 16 bit Z, and 27 fps for 32 bit colour, 24 bit Z, with just a
single f6f at 10,000 feet (some cloud haze). It can be higher with less
action, lower with more, and ideally I'd like to keep it more towards the
37fps level. But if I go down to a 16 bit Z buffer then there are all
sorts of artifacts on coastlines in WB3. I can't seem to force the GF 2
into 16 bit colour, 24 bit Z, or find another way around the coastline
jaggies. Any hints?

My system is:
        win 2k, celeron 600 o/c 900, 256 Mb RAM, soundblaster live value,
        elsa gf 2 mx (32mb sdr RAM), GTU set to fast options (but with
        24 bit Z allowed).

Thanks

        Aaron Turner

Torlie Omegelterster

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Torlie Omegelterster » Sun, 24 Jun 2001 19:02:51


I am watching the internet channel on a Yugo, I just imagine it can look
better.

Pasha

Gonz

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Gonz » Sun, 24 Jun 2001 22:28:59




> > What goes from my monitor to my eye is the only thing that matters.
What
> is
> > on other peoples desktop doesn't concern me.  BTW, I just purchased a
17"
> > Xflat KDS today so don't be making fun of my Honda just because you own
a
> > Porsche!

> I am watching the internet channel on a Yugo, I just imagine it can look
> better.

My condolences Pasha.

I just noticed some strange lines on my screen this moring.  It looks like a
giant fingerprint and only shows up on a dark screen.  I may have to trade
this one in but damn I love this flat screen.  Decisions decisions.

Andrew Dayto

Ugly 16 bit mode vs. Pretty 32 bit mode

by Andrew Dayto » Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:29:36

Z is a normalized depth value between 0.0 and 1.0.  It is non-linear and has
problems the closer you get to 1.0 when you have lots of depth range.

W is a non-normalized depth value that is the objects actual distance from
your viewpoint.  It is linear and does not have some of the problems that Z
has.

I don't believe any of Nvidia's cars support mixed rendering modes (16 bit
color/32 bit depth or 32 bit color/16 bit depth).

Mud


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.