View Single Post
Old 07-02-04, 12:03 PM   #195
Registered User
Clay's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 4,992
Default Re: Far Cry Benchmarks - Shader Model 3.0 performance

Originally Posted by schuey74
I think you took my statement out of context. I have absolutely no problem with a path being released which enables a ton of 3.0 effects. My problem was with there being no fallback to 2.0 when possible, and it is possible in the majority of situations. You can't complain cause you have a 2.0 card and you're not able to experience 3.0 effects. You can complain when you card is purposely being held back, despite being capable of producingthe effects. I would have the same problem if HL2 does not have all the 2.0 effects available to FX 59xx owners just because they would run it slow. Their card's capable of it, albeit at lower rezes, so they should have the option to enable them or not.
Truform was exclusive to ATI and SM 3.0 is not exclusive to Nvidia. The more 3.0 games out there, the better it is for everyone, especially in the long run. I applaud Nvidia for getting SM 3.0 into this generation of cards and for pushing it so hard with developers. Obviously they do this with their interests in mind, but a definete side effect is that there will be a ton more advanced DX9 games out there.
You're right, I did take it out of context (and also fudged up the TruForm-to-SM3.0 comparison ). My mistake and apology.
SLI GeForce 7800 GTX 512MB @ 550/1700 | MSI K8N Neo4/SLI | A64 X2 4400+ Toledo | CORSAIR XMS 2GB (2 x 1GB) TwinX PC 3500 | Silverstone ST65ZF 650W| 93.71| XP SP2 and a Dell 2405FPW

I personally believe that us americans are unable to do so because osama.

People out there in our nation don't have that, And I believe that our education like such as south africa and such as the Iraq.

everywhere "such as". And I believe our education should help the US should help the south africa and the iraq and the asian countries so we can build up our future.
-- Miss Teen South Carolina

Clay is offline   Reply With Quote