Why is NVIDIA against 3DMark03?

[swanlee]

I had 3 3dfx cards and they were all great, greatest drivers of any video card maker. The drivers were always rock solid on the initial release and then later twaked a bit to give huge performance gains. and yes and the 5500 the AA was outstanding My AIw 9700 pro comes close but it's still not quite as good lookingg in the AA department.

I don't doubt Nvidia has a lot of good people working there, like with any company, just seems now the louder portion of nvidia is a babbling bunch of hypocritical morons that don't seem to grasp how stupid they sound.

Hello nvidia you practically put 3dmak on the map pushing it to the moon since it made older Nvidia cards look good. Now they are ticked off that 3dmark is impartial and uses a straight DX8/9 path instead of a propriatray Nvidia path.

[StealthHawk]

merged Swanlee's thread with this one since it falls under the whole 3dmark03 topic.

[Hellbinder]

I had 3 3dfx cards and they were all great, greatest drivers of any video card maker. The drivers were always rock solid on the initial release and then later twaked a bit to give huge performance gains. and yes and the 5500 the AA was outstanding My AIw 9700 pro comes close but it's still not quite as good lookingg in the AA department.

Heh... Talk about rose colored glasses. and remebmer the alamo... ;)

*perhaps* you could make a case that the VSA 100 had better 2x or 4x FSAA... Which is really pushing it imo. Both ATi and 3dfx use Rotated Grid/Jittered sample patters. I think 3dfx's were a little different. But Ati's AA is also Gama Corrected. The line is drawn there however. Nothing ever produced touches ATi's 6x FSAA. Which is also about 6x faster than the voodoo5's 4x AA.

What also separates the Two is the VSA 100 had minimal Anisotropic support. which is basically Texture AA in a nutshell. when taken into accound that ATi's AA and AF are virtually never seperated... I just dont think that 3dfx stands a chance. Especially when you consider most 9700pro users have 4x FSAA+16xAF on by default in nearly every game they play.

[jbirney]

Originally posted by Hellbinder
Heh... Talk about rose colored glasses. and remebmer the alamo... ;)

*perhaps* you could make a case that the VSA 100 had better 2x or 4x FSAA... Which is really pushing it imo. Both ATi and 3dfx use Rotated Grid/Jittered sample patters. I think 3dfx's were a little different. But Ati's AA is also Gama Corrected. The line is drawn there however. Nothing ever produced touches ATi's 6x FSAA. Which is also about 6x faster than the voodoo5's 4x AA.



Well first of all 3DFX use SS method so for old games like HL and what not that make use of Alpha textures then the 3DFX method was "better". However that was a long time ago, isnt like 3 years in Graphic Card time aceint history :)

[Hellbinder]

Well first of all 3DFX use SS method so for old games like HL and what not that make use of Alpha textures then the 3DFX method was "better". However that was a long time ago, isnt like 3 years in Graphic Card time aceint history

yes this is True. 3dfx used RGSS and ATi uses RGMS.

You do have a very good point about alpha textures. However the edge AA on the 9700 is a lot better due to its Gamma Correction, and 6x sample pattern. Also, using 16xAF really minimizes the blurring affect that MSAA has. Although it does not entirely eradicate it.