Inno3D Home Page Inno3D Home Page

FAQ News Search Archive Forum Articles Tweaks Technology Files Prices SETI
Visit NVIDIA's home page.
Review Menu
  Preface
  Introduction
  GPU Overview
  Transformation
  Lighting
  Cube Mapping
  Vertex Blending
  Fill Rate
  Specifications
  NVTweak
Benchmarks
  Configuration
  Summary Results

Games
  GL Quake
  Quake 2
  Quake 3
  Kingpin
  Expendable

CAD/MCAD
  Indy3D
  SPECviewperf

More 3D
  GLAZE
  3D ExerciZer
  3D WinMark 99
  3D WinMark 2000

T&L Spotlight
  TLCMark
  Experience
Wrap Up
  Overclocking
  Conclusion
Favorite Pics
Click to Enlarge
Articles/Reviews
OCZ Tech Titan 3
Absolute MORPHEUS
1.0GHz Pentium III
eVGA MX Shootout
nForce Preview
AMD AXIA CPU
VisionTek GeForce3
2001 Spring Lineup
GeForce3 Preview
eVGA TwinView Plus
VisionTek GF2 Ultra
OCZ GeForce2 Pro
Winfast GeForce2 MX
GeForce2 vs Quake3
Linksys Cable Router
GF2 FSAA Shootout
GeForce2 MX Preview
Benchmarking Guide
Quake 3 Tune-Up
Power DVD Review
Live! Experiences
Sponsors
Memory from Crucial.com


FastCounter by bCentral

 Visitors Are Online
Powered by Perlonline.com
Drivers/FAQ
NVIDIA
3D Chipset
Gamers Ammo
Reactor Critical
GeForce FAQ
Associates
Dayton's Misc.
G-Force X Sweden
Maximum Reboot
Media Xplosion
NVchips-fr
nV Italia
Riva Station
3D GPU
nV News Home Page

NVIDIA GeForce 256 Review

Fill Rate


Fill Rate vs Transform & Lighting

Early reviews of the GeForce 256, which were published during the time NVIDIA's non-disclosure agreement was in effect, caused much debate over the chips' fill rate capabilities. Attention was drawn away from the fact that currently, the GeForce 256 has the highest theoretical fill rate (480 million pixels per second) of any consumer based chip available. Those reviews were also based on early driver revisions which have since been optimized even further. One review actually provided benchmark results using TNT drivers!

Rather than debate on the fill rate versus the transform and lighting issue, let's leave that one to the game developers to decide. Voodoo Extreme continues to maintain a page with comments on this subject from todays leading game developers. Many of the developers see transform and lighting processors as the wave of the future. Mike Dussault of Monolith Productions makes an excellent point on the subject:

The PC bus is the bottleneck we need to circumvent to take PC games to the next level of realism. By using hardware T&L, we can avoid sending the same vertices across the bus over and over. This problem is very similar to the texture memory problem that kills cards.

Hardware T&L allows us to store the vertices on the video card in the same way that we cache textures on the video card. Then we can essentially send a really small command across like "draw a triangle setup using vertices 100 thru 300." By doing this, we've kept the card busy, we haven't maxed out our bus bandwidth, and the processor gets a lot of extra free time to do better collision detection, process more enemies, etc.



Next: GeForce 256 Specifications


Last Updated on Octobet 21, 1999

All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners.