View Single Post
Old 11-13-03, 12:42 PM   #18
euan
Fully Qualified FanATIc
 
euan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Glasgow, Scotland.
Posts: 387
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Uttar
AAARGH!
The compiler is for real guys. Stop inveting BS - everyone is, and it's just annoying me.

The effects of the compiler cannot be as good as hand-tuned code most of the time, but it's pretty darn good. And developers will have making better than what the compiler does.

Disabling the compiler seems like BS though. It's still on, or their scores would be even significantly lower.


Uttar
Uttar,

Even if the "complier" is not as good as the hand crafted stuff, NVIDIA should just take it like mature grown ups and use the compiler. Then we can all stop having to fight about hand crafted shaders being cheating which is exactly what they are (application detection by shader).

If they had used the compiler (assuming it is real) then when FM changed their code, the results would have changed. However, when they changed them again, the next results would be slightly different (less or more optimal). That maybe acceptable to some. IE those who except shader replacement as being valid. However, to change the code all the results flatline appears to be cheating.

If the compiler had kicked in now that the handcrafter shaders for 3dmark2003 cannot be used then it shows us clearly that the compiler is pretty much useless for real world applications. Hence it is a POS.

Why does changing code disable a compiler??? Because it is not a compiler.
__________________
Sys.txt
euan is offline   Reply With Quote