When will Fermi show up (to buy)

[Kowan]

Originally Posted by noko

I won't be getting this game, sick of hearing about it.

Originally Posted by Hapatingjaky

Still stuck on my POS 285's...

I enjoyed the game on my worthless 285s.

[razor1]

Originally Posted by pahncrd

I remember that hoopla back in the day. Course, I had an ATi card at the time so I only laughed.

I didn't really care either, but I was disappointed Valve didn't optimize thier code, if it was easy enough for someone without access to the source, it was obvious Valve didn't do the work or they weren't allowed to or they did it on purpose.

[ChrisRay]

Originally Posted by Kowan

I enjoyed the game on my worthless 285s.

You know. I played the game. Did some benchmarks. And analyzed PhysX. Then I played and beat the game. then I uninstalled it. Its a good game. And fun. But I have no interest in it beyond my single playthrough and possible future benchmark tests.

The funny thing about it is I overwrote the the default AA mode with a driver profile setting so I could enable SLIAA. So I never used the ingame's AA setting. And used a forced setting from day one.

[noko]

Originally Posted by razor1

of course AMD should work with all developers, nV does to the most extent, why was Half Life 2's FP 16 path removed? Valve stated it was easier just to program one path. But then you have a guy that didn't even have the source code change the shader for water that gave nV cards a boost in performance, where are all the people bitching about that? One shader increased the performance for nV cards substantially, but you didn't see nV say well the developer optimized it for ATi cards did you?

Of course ATI should help developers out as much as possible if asked out of courtesy. The real idea is to program with the API, the standard. Then it will work no matter what hardware is being used if the hardware meets the requirements of the API. I've been to game hell in the past where each game, actually really a minority would program for a particular hardware, your out of luck if you did't have it (mostly glide and 3dfx) one just didn't buy the game which I think most folks ended up doing. Still the endless complaints of how come it won't work for me etc.. went on forever with some rather frustrated folks. What happen was that most games just ended up programed for the common denominator which kinda suck but then again some rather good games came about that people could just buy and they should just worked.

Batman AA is not an ATI/AMD project or developement, it is not ATI/AMD job to make their game, program for it or even be concerned about it. ATI got concerned because players, users complained about it and found what they found. Nvidia was the one that started to mock ATI in not having AA for the title, not being part of developement, even though it could be forced in the control panel meaning right from the start ATI hardware actually did support AA but not as efficiently as if it was done inside the game. Of course Nvidia bragged at how PhysX was so powerful when their GPU was used and not tell anyone that the cpu path was utterly castrated by one thread while AGEIA made PhysX to be multithreaded and use as many cpu cores as was availble in a machine. Get a good I7 with eight threads working with physics and Nvidia PhysX GPU ability would probably not shine as much.

As for HL2 it was Nvidia poor support of minimum standard of DX9, initially 24bit FP was the DX standard which R300 supported and performed well. Nvidia supported 16bit FP usable and 32bit FP which was unusable or extremely slow, which caused the water looking like crude on Nvidia hardware. Nvidia also had issue with FarCry with lousy rendering using FP16. Not HL2, not Farcry, it was Nvidia FP32 was too slow to be useful while 16bit FP could be done but in many cases had quality issues and was not the API standard. So Nvidia did not support the API very good is the reason, developers had to go through hoops to make it work. I guess things don't change that much considering now what Nvidia is doing. Nvidia didn't complain to much back then because (actually they did, loudly against 3dmark because it showed how poo poo Nvidia stuff really was when using DX9) it would bring even more attention to their lack lusty hardware of that period.