View Single Post
Old 03-26-03, 08:56 AM   #16
Grrrpoop
Wey aye man!
 
Grrrpoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Newcastle, UK
Posts: 162
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Nutty
No, what he means is, the developers probably use nvidia cards as their primary work machines. They then test on other cards to make sure it works okay. But initial testing, research, and getting things right are done on their cards.

As JC said, the majority of his work on doom3 was done using an nvidia card in his work machine.
That's certainly true for cards pre-FX.

IIRC Epic didn't even bother doing exhaustive testing on the 9700pro, they dev'd UT2k3 with nVidia cards and it still worked fine on the 9700Pro right off

With FX it seems to be different tho - S.T.A.L.K.E.R is being dev'd on 9700pros as the dev's have to put in extra work on the FX. Seems to be similar to what JC reports with the FX needing its own path as it doesn't perform to its full potential on a generic path. The 9700pro does perform well on generic paths tho..

Why is that? I'm not being facetious, seriously, someone explain why that could be

Is something not quite right with how the FX interprets standard DX and OGL, or are they deliberately making dev's put in extra work on nVidia cards?


Getting back OT, I'm not surprised nVidia didn't respond to Futuremarks decision. IIRC the dodgy Det's were meant to be an example of how drivers could be manupulated to increase synthetic benchmark performance, thus invalidating 3Dmark2k3 .. except most ppl have jumped on it saying "look! nVidia are cheating!!". I think it was reasonable for Futuremark to ban drivers which decrease IQ for extra points, and no doubt nV don't want to give FM any more publicity by continuing a tit-for-tat b*tch-fest at each other.
__________________
Don't be Care Less with your language
Grrrpoop is offline   Reply With Quote