ms/nv/ati=bad iq for games; ?'s

[Tokelil]

The most suprising about this thread IMO is that it took 25 posts before OP was called a troll. And maybe that some many "good" people took the time to reply.

there's many different formats called "lossless."

Yes there is a few. Could it be because some techniques are better for compressing stuff than other? If better compression means you loose data, which is basically what you are claiming, does that mean RAR and 7z throws away data as well compared to Zip?

the option to rip cd tracks to wav lossless (almost 500 kbps higher than the best wma) wouldn't be in windows xp if wma lossless was as good.

It couldn't be because of people like choices? If I want to save my music as FLAC, there is no reason to use the time to encode in WMV lossless first and wasting a lot of time. (And power...) Also if I rip just to burn out to CD, Wav is the most compatible format with burners. For storing audio "long term" Wav makes no sense!

940kbps isn't enough, no matter how "lossless" it may be.

Please go look up some articles on what lossless means before commenting further. Please!

 

[2008 IQ is unacceptable]

there's a difference between fog used to cover up/reduce the draw distance/hide low precision, and fog used as an effect, like in the real world.

ok, ok, lossless audio is lossless, meaning that no one can hear any difference between uncompressed and lossless and that I'm just imagining a difference no one else is.

but lpcm does sound better than dd. dd is lossy, lpcm is lossless. there's no denying that.

 

[Albuquerque]

there's a difference between fog used to cover up/reduce the draw distance/hide low precision, and fog used as an effect, like in the real world.

Maybe you can also realize that "covering up" or reducing draw distance is a design decision (ie, driven by the developer and not the API) versus hiding low precision. And again, DX and OpenGL support the same precision levels, so that too is down to a developer choice. Which brings us back to the obvious: you're complaining about developer choices, not API or vendor limitations.

ok, ok, lossless audio is lossless, meaning that no one can hear any difference between uncompressed and lossless and that I'm just imagining a difference no one else is.

No, that isn't correct. Here is your statement, reworded for correctness, bolded words are mine:

Ok ok, lossless audio is lossless, meaning that there is no output difference between uncompressed and lossless and that I'm just imaging a difference that doesn't exist.

 

[Davros]

back to a question I asked before why did dx10 hardware do away with 16bit dithering ?

ok, ok, lossless audio is lossless, meaning that no one can hear any difference between uncompressed and lossless and that I'm just imagining a difference no one else is.

yes...

where are you getting this from where are your examples of lossless compressed audio sounding worse than uncompressed audio ?
as far as i know there is not a single game that lets you choose between uncompressed audio and losslessly compressed audio

 

[Albuquerque]

back to a question I asked before why did dx10 hardware do away with 16bit dithering ?

Somewhat akin to asking why 64-bit versions of Windows don't support 16-bit apps. The reality is, why the hell would you want it to? Nobody has used 16-bit dithering in years, maybe even a whole decade. Why keep it?

 

[Rys]

Albuquerque is right, it just costs area and nobody cares to devote transistors to dead features. The thread went silly, so I'll prune it of the dead wood and lock it so it's still there for future folks who want to learn something. Create new threads to talk about any specifics.