View Single Post
Old 04-06-03, 11:19 PM   #117
Chalnoth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,293
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by pancakebunny
Well, I'm going 9800 Pro but I just want to state that, the NV30 is just garbage. Why? Because the design of the thing does not have DX9 in mind.
Now, why? DX9 was designed after nVidia had essentially finilized the specs for then NV30. nVidia got screwed because Microsoft doesn't believe in data types (apparently).

It's hardware first, software later. Microsoft designs the next DirectX release based upon upcoming hardware.

And the number of PS instructions available is only one part of programmability. The GeForce FX still has more available instructions in the pixel shader (such as DDX/DDY, as one example, that are necessary for filtering in the pixel shader, which can be used for a variety of purposes), and has quite a bit over the R350 in vertex shader capabilities.

Quote:
That's not MS's fault and Nvidia has alot of gall requesting for MS to lower the precision requests in DX9 when they KNEW what DX9 was going to call for.
Hardware before software. The NV30 architecture is based upon the supposition that different types of processing require different precisions to work optimally. Different data types have been used in CPU's for quite some time, why should GPU's be any different?

Quote:
CG might be useful and then again CG could just be Nvidia's way of fixing their mistake. I see CG as another Glide 2.0 if it doesn't support other programmable GPU cards.
It does.

Quote:
And frankly, for NV35, if its the same GPU like the NV30 but with a 256-bit memory interface...big whoop then. Sure it'll be faster, but it still will be a crap design product.
Aren't your complaints with the NV30 based upon speed? Do you see the problem with the above statement, then?
__________________
"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - Richard P. Feynman
Chalnoth is offline   Reply With Quote