|
|
| Post Number: 101
|
Sithiee 
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 1941
Joined: May 2000
|
 |
Posted on: Jun. 11 2000,00:06 |
|
   |
first id like to point out i did research this, and i did use examples, so shut your fucking mouth. second id like to point out that nowhere in my reply did i say "youre all wrong", so again, shut your fucking mouth...on the topic of ad hominem arguments, wasnt that what yours was?..and besides, what do you want? a pre-emptive response to what you havent already said?...gimme a break, im only human.i do consistently run my geforce SDR above 1024x768x32, and i rarely have framerate drops, mind you this is on a p2 450, so you dont know what your talking about. maybe you shoudl start running tests before you start stating things about my computer. how do you figure the closest will be the 128 board?...considering the memory on the v5 6000 has to be duplicated per processor, that means that the 128 must be split down to 32...wait...isnt thats whats on the v5 6000?...hmmm.... q3 has some T&L support, but it also is one of the most known games, and most graphics intensive. if people used something like SS2 for benchmarks, it would be dumb, because its not a limits pusher, and it wouldnt give anyone a very good idea of how the card performs. and besides, if 3Dfx cant see that T&L is teh future, then their benchmarks should be hampered. about nVidia lying, sure that may not be the greatest thing, but can you seriously tell me that you would expect them to say "we have FSAA, but it doesnt work at all, and will not work with anything"?..no, so they say it does work, and hope that someone will make it work
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 102
|
Avenger
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: Jun. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 12 2000,03:20 |
|
 |
quote:
Originally posted by TiresiasX:
Concerning memory bandwidth:Two processors accessing shared memory does not equate to twice the sustained bandwidth. Memory access between requesting
That may be true, but the GF2 and V5 5500 have about the same theoretical memory bandwidth, 5.2 GB/s. However, in high resolutions, when memory bandwidth is crucial, the V5 usually wins out. quote:
And as for 3Dfx's anti-aliasing approach, their approach plus their aging architecture requires implementing more than one processor unit, if you read 3Dfx's own white paper on it. 3Dfx considers it a reasonable assumption that it can be done on one chip in the future (still with a severe performance hit), but they either haven't developed their drivers that far or do not have the capability in hardware. This is why the single-chip Voodoo4 has FSAA disabled.
The fact that the V5 requires 2 processors for FSAA is irrelevant to the end user. The V4 is a low end card, designed largely for OEMs and meant to compete with cards that don't offer FSAA. 3dfx's architecture may be old, but look at what Intel has done with the 5 year old ppro core. AFAIK, they still hold over \%70 of the x86 market.
Thanks for the reasonable and rational post.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 103
|
Avenger
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: Jun. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 12 2000,03:48 |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sithiee:
first id like to point out i did research this, and i did use examples, so shut your fucking mouth. second id like to point out that nowhere in my reply did i say "youre all wrong", so again, shut your fucking mouth...on the topic of ad hominem arguments, wasnt that what yours was?..and besides, what do you want? a pre-emptive response to what you havent already said?...gimme a break, im only human.
You didn't have a single reference in your post. It was simply a mixture of common knowledge and opinionated heresay. I never accused you of saying "you're all wrong". I was pointing out that individual responses from _me_ were better than _me_ posting a message attacking the whole board. I attacked arguments, not the people who originated them. Why are you being so hypocritical? What makes you think that I asked for a response to something I have yet to say? quote:
i do consistently run my geforce SDR above 1024x768x32, and i rarely have framerate drops, mind you this is on a p2 450, so you dont know what your talking about. maybe you shoudl start running tests before you start stating things about my computer.
At those resolutions it's still a lot slower than a DDR Geforce. quote:
how do you figure the closest will be the 128 board?...considering the memory on the v5 6000 has to be duplicated per processor, that means that the 128 must be split down to 32...wait...isnt thats whats on the v5 6000?...hmmm....
Even the 128mb GF2 won't approach the V5 6000 and it still costs more. Only the textures need to be duplicated for each processor. As a result, 128mb is plenty of memory, especially with the texture compression employed by 3dfx, except for insanely high resolutions such as 2048x1536x32 and nothing until the NV20 or Rampage has the fillrate to handle that. quote:
q3 has some T&L support, but it also is one of the most known games, and most graphics intensive. if people used something like SS2 for benchmarks, it would be dumb, because its not a limits pusher, and it wouldnt give anyone a very good idea of how the card performs. and besides, if 3Dfx cant see that T&L is teh future, then their benchmarks should be hampered.
There are dozens of other system intensive games that can be tested. IMHO, tile based rendering is the future. quote:
about nVidia lying, sure that may not be the greatest thing, but can you seriously tell me that you would expect them to say "we have FSAA, but it doesnt work at all, and will not work with anything"?..no, so they say it does work, and hope that someone will make it work
I think they should be honest and admit that they added FSAA as an afterthought and it only works on certain games. They designed the GF2 and are responsable for making it work as designed; no one else is.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 104
|
|
|
| Post Number: 105
|
|
|
| Post Number: 106
|
|
|
|
|
|
