ATI's DX11 tessellation to be aided by the shader core?

Alpha to coverage looked great, ran fast. I don't understand at all why the fuck it was removed and replaced with something that's just total crap that simply can't be used. Forget Crysis... The GPU would have a coronary infarction just thinking about it. :cry:
You mean EATM, don't you? EATM was really cool and damn fast.

Other than the extreme idle power useage of the 4890, this is the only thing that really bugs me with those cards. Well, the crappy texture AF too and the less effective MSAA compared to G80 (particulary on lines, which don't seem to be AA'd at all), but that I can ignore more easily.
The AF isn't crappy, it's optimised. :LOL:



Compared to Fermi with high tesselation factor - yes.
Compared to XBOX360 - very fast
Actually it's slower: HD5000 needs three cycles to generate a tessellated triangle, Xenos two cycles.
 
Actually it's slower: HD5000 needs three cycles to generate a tessellated triangle, Xenos two cycles.
If you implement Xenos style tessellation HD5000 and 4000 are actually slightly more efficient clock for clock due to some changes around the tessellator. This is part of why the HD4000 series claimed improved tessellation. The other part was GS support. DX11 tessellation is different.
 
You mean EATM, don't you?
I suppose I do, I don't know the exact term for it, but the actual result of the technique looked just like Humus' ancient alpha-to-coverage DX9 demo to my eyes. It might have had a slight performance hit I'm not sure, but it was basically nothing worth complaining about, particulary compared to the two supersampling offerings currently in the drivers - one of which barely gives any improvement at all at a big performance sock in the jaw, and the other a slight improvement at a horrific knock-out punch... Terrible! :(

The AF isn't crappy, it's optimised. :LOL:
Well, it sure is something, that's for sure! :D

I'm very impressed with the 5000 series' AF tho, I wish I could warrant splurging for one of those cards, but not this late in the product's life cycle. I'll wait and see for what they have in store for the 6000 (guessing) series, betting my money on that they don't screw up the AF again, heh.

Hopefully there'll be a lot more tesselation oomph in those chips, and maybe they'll even hit the market as some software starts using tesselation in a meaningful way, who knows? :)

...Perhaps the 6870 will also finally be able to run Crysis at playable fps with antialias turned on, lal...
 
I'll rephrase my question would the speed of tessellation be an issue in games on a 5000 series

Debatable. I suppose eventually it will catch up to the r8x0, but will that happen during its lifespan? At the moment, it doesn't appear so.
 
Debatable. I suppose eventually it will catch up to the r8x0, but will that happen during its lifespan? At the moment, it doesn't appear so.
Given the DX11 marketshare and the number of Evergreens in developers hands....

And am I right in thinking all 5000 series cards have the same number of tessellation units ?
Redwood, Juniper and Cypress have the same per-clock geometry performance (setup and tessellation). Cedar is lower.
 
I have no real idea what redwood ect is stop using codenames ;)
what is cedar and why is it lower just clock speed ?
 
Cedar is the low end of the Evergreen chips. Radeon HD5400 I think. It's not just lower due to clock speed. Dave said "per-clock".
 
Back
Top