Originally Posted by Exposed
So you made the claim, and the burden of proof is on me to disprove it? You know what that sounds like?
We already know the work/rendering is done by the GPU internally in their own code. It's the output that matters. For some reason you singled out SSR by stating "AMD's SSR" is different than "Nvidia's SSR". Which is absurd, as others have noted. That's like saying "AMD's game models" or "AMD's textures" are different than "Nvidia's game models" or "Nvidia's textures" in the same game with the same settings.
You said Nvidia cards were "gimping" SSR on purpose. Or that AMD does it better ("blows it out the water"). So, prove it. The burden of proof is on you, not me.
I did not claim it did, as I already stated above, I don"t know. I simply said I bet it does. Just if I said I bet a corvette can beat a challenger... I really don't know that either. It was a general statement that you latched onto, just to argue.
Textures doesn't use algorithms or calculations to render, where SSR does so no, it is not the same. It sounds like you are trying to say that both AMD and NVidia uses the same algorithms and rendering techniques? Which is false. I mean you just stated all the work/rendering is done on the GPU within it's own code, and all that matters is the output that matters.. so, unless AMD and MVidia use identical code/techniques/technology within their own code and hardware (they don't), then they obviously use different methods at getting to the end result.
You are more than welcome to show proof if you disagree. I mean please, show us that both Nvidia and AMD are identical with how they calculate and render each frame.
I also did not say that NVidia did gimp their drivers. I said "do you not believe that NVidia wouldn't gimp their drivers to make sure that their RTX looks better?". That was a question. Your argument shows that your answer is you don't believe they would.
Might help if you stop taking things out of context just so you can aegue.