Not searching, it popped up at another forum and users began reporting them in by themselves. A natural Emergence I would say.
It's something that occurred in the last three months.
- Status
Not searching, it popped up at another forum and users began reporting them in by themselves. A natural Emergence I would say.
It's something that occurred in the last three months.
Same place that got the RV770 scores first :/
So it's not just dutch, but chinese 8800's that are failing too?
Seems to go the way of the 9800 (radeon)
Shipping equipment completely built is the last thing a professional should do. There's a reason components come in boxes.
Right, reiterating what Rys said above, dare I suggest we abandon the 1 liner exchange that has little to do with the thread topic (yes, even if G80s are too strained and thus fail in China or Holland, and R700s strain PCBs in horrible ways that make them non-functional). The alternative is to have this locked, and that would be a bit of a waste. Thank you!
Don't thank me, thank the efforts of our Dev Rel team.
Even though tweakers is not an english language site it can't honestly be called obscure. What it lacks in editorial content it makes up by a very large and vocal community.
That makes it a fair sample size for spotting trends. Which means that the handful links with reports of incidents with G80s hardly qualifies as an 'alarming rate'. There are literaly thousands of people on that site with such cards.
DegustatoR
Veteran
Well, that's what it looks like to me most of the time.
Oh sure they've got performance increase in HAWX. Were they faster than NVIDIA? Nope. So what they've done has nothing to do with improving gaming graphics. They've just used their fraction of API to improve their performance but were still slower than NV thus bringing no possibility for improving graphic quality.
That's the question you need to ask AMD because it was their decision to effectively ruin common DX10 API in favor of their DX10.1 update.
Condemn DX10.1 then. Condemn proprietary 6x0/7x0 tesselator (ended up being not used at all?).
What we're discussing here is NVs provided MSAA support in BAA. What's that has to do with APIs and PC platform fragmentation? NV can use whatever it creates for profit. NV has no reason to support anyone but itself. And AMD has exactly the same goals and rights. Or should we comdemn them for porting Havok to their hardware and not optimising it for NV GPUs? (Where is that OpenCL Havok port, btw? Ended up being AMD's marketing speeches again while PhysX got it's second AAA title released?)
"Noticable implementation" means quality improvements or at least visible performance advantage. HAWX has neither.
Ubisoft removed 10.1 support from AC because it was buggy. And from what i've heard it's inclusion in AC v1.0 was a mistake.
But even if it's true -- where was AMD when that happened? Doing marketing speeches again instead of pushing Ubisoft for proper 10.1 support in AC? See now what i'm talking about?
Mirror's Edge uses it's own renderer with it's own MSAA support implementation.
I'm pretty sure DevRel for either AMD or Nvidia is pretty far OT for this topic. Even some early trend spotting on failure rates of older cards (exception --further developments in the well known NV laptop issues that have been reported to death already) is a bit afield unless the natives in arms start rising to the level where the big sites start to take editorial notice of it.
/Davros hands GEO a brick wall "here bang your head on this"
/me reholsters the delete stick on one hip, then rests his hand on the Warning/Infraction stick on his other hip and glares at the room.
Well, there is a reliable rumour that one B3D'er who often wears a black and green shirt invited another B3Der who prefers red and white polos out for a drink tonight before the festivities were entirely over. . . but I tend to think that doesn't really count as an attempt at "spoiling". . .anything but brain cells.
- Status
Similar threads
