View Single Post
Old 05-27-03, 07:03 AM   #114
Grrrpoop
Wey aye man!
 
Grrrpoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Newcastle, UK
Posts: 162
Default

Is nVidia's "implementation" better in terms of speed? Undoubtedly
Does it output the same quality that FM intended? No way.

Quote:
Originally posted by Behemoth
ok, i also suspect ati's driver not doing the same work too, the sky and water shaders have been partially hard coded or pre-calculated.
Your suspicions are completely unfounded as it has already been shown that ATI is resequencing the shader so it can be processed faster, whilst not actually changing it. The quality is exactly as FM intended. That is not pre-calculation. nVidia pre-calculated, re-wrote and degraded the shader quality. That's the difference.

Also, the same optimisations could be used in games, admittedly that would require each game to be recognized by the drivers, but if the drivers intercepted the shader calls then I'm sure these same optimisations could enhance the gaming experience whilst nVidia would have to rewrite shaders and reduce Iq to apply their "optimisation" to real games.

Quote:
Originally posted by Behemoth
when someone refuses to disprove his suspicous cheat but only chooses to not do it again, it is also blatantly obvious he was probably cheating.
Or they don't want the negative PR nVidia is now facing.
Besides, ATI outlined exactly what they did, and said that if ppl didn't like it then fine, it's not in the next driver. That's not the same as "refusing to disprove" a cheat. They acknowledge that something they did could be percieved as a wrongdoing and rather than labour the point have backed down.

By contrast nVidia have thrown accusations around and claim it's a conspiracy to discredit their products by FM.

Who has more credibility?
__________________
Don't be Care Less with your language
Grrrpoop is offline   Reply With Quote