View Single Post
Old 05-21-03, 06:57 PM   #37
Sazar
Sayonara !!!
 
Sazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 9,297
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Fusion
No, thats called double standards.

Let me ask you something,

Do you believe that a company COULD perfect Hidden Surface Removal algorythms in their drivers ?

If the question was towards ATI, then ATI owners would say yes.

If the question was towards Nvidia, then ATI owners would say no, and add thats it's just PR BS Spin.

Yep, looks like double standards to me.
occlusion culling is a method used both by nvidia and ati in games... ie they are using less workload to deal with materials that are not being shown on screen... hence you get better frame rates for what you CAN see...

however... the situation from a fixed POV as in 3dmark03 where the camera is moving on a track effectively and rendering the same scene time and again... if an IHV decides to clip off a part of the scene... they are reducing the workload that they are SUPPOSED to do in order to have a fair comparison with other cards...

the workload has to be the same in order for a comparison to be made between various cards... this idea is not so difficult to understand...

the entire controversy has arisen due to the fact that the culling apparently reduces the workload that nvidia FX gpus have to do in 3dmark03... hence allowing them to achieve a score which is NOT representative of the real performance in this particular benchmark...

if ati had ventured out and done the same.. they would get it in the neck too.. because for me... as a consumer... it is imperative to have some faith in the company I am handing over my hard earned money to... I place a great deal of value in my purchases... if ati had been involved in this case I would have a lowered standard for them and would actively try out other products...

thats just my opinion though
Sazar is offline   Reply With Quote