Thread: R520 Infomania
View Single Post
Old 02-May-2005, 22:34   #1404
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY, NY
Posts: 2,680

Originally Posted by radeonic2
Originally Posted by Razor1
Originally Posted by whql
Originally Posted by Razor1
Well Crytek didn't optimize only for one set of cards, they did it for both ISV's thats the difference, plus they don't need ATi making shaders for them they are very competent at making thier own.
So why insunuate anything in the first place? The rumour was, ati paid them some money to include a shader path to improve the perfomance on the game on their onw boards - big whoop. The fact is, far cry has a big nvidia logo on the box, so we know some money has gone from nvidia to crytek there.

Then why changing one water shader change benchmarks so dramatically on the gf 6 line of cards?
Because there is a clip plane issue. iirc, if you do the same on an fx board the water doesn't appear at all, because it can't handle the clip plane in the same fashion - gf6 obviously can so it get a performance boost when using the ati path, which does have this clipping enabled.

Nvidia doesn't pay in that program thats not what TWIMTBP is about. The only thing they do is do so free advertising for you and make sure everything runs well. So you really think every game in the TWIMTBP program gets money? Is that what its about? If that was the case, 2 years ago with the FX line Nvidia would have paid every developer to mak ethier games optimized for the fx line, did that happen? NO. They would have bought out Valve to box with thier cards if that was the case. They didn't because they don't need to, they never needed too. ATi has to because they are just starting off thier dev rel program.

Nvidia has Unreal, it has ID, it had Crytek.....
I'm not convinced the TWIMTBP makes sure nvidia hardware runs the game good, or better thant he competetion, since there has been a large number of titles that run better on ati hardware, far cry and EQ2 come to mind.

Dev rel only does so much, the rest is up to the developers them selves to do, Nvidia isn't going to make an entire engine for you. If a publisher pushes the developer to get the game out as fast as they can yeah there will be issues. You saw that with the 1.2 patch in Far Cry which was pushed out way too fast, really messed up ATi cards, the 1.3 fixed all that they needed a couple of months to do so.

the leaked beta, yeah I saw that one, the russians (xbit?) had benchmarks "highly expected directx9 game" and you saw ati win all over the board, this was in the time that ati's lead in hl2 went from 40% to 20% (remember it?)
Yes I do

Where did it beat it by 20%?

Here is the one from Xbit
Razor1 is offline