It's more like 600mm^2
That's a monster of a die size.
It's more like 600mm^2
I am confident in my measurements of 24mmx15/16mm. The silver part in the middle is the die! You must be measuring the substrate too.
Any indication about the expected style of hardware RT acceleration from these patents? Will it be something hybrid like the revealed AMD patents? or something more pure, NVIDIA RT cores style?Hello all. A large number of Microsoft ray tracing and GPU patents for your consumption:
I don't see your lines for the invisible chip(s).
Secret sauce PSU!!!! Shortbread find it first!!!!That's because the PSU hasn't been shown yet.
bbat should present his work for peer review like everyone else who's tried die-size estimates has. You can't post 'everyone is wrong' and expect any acceptance of your assertion without it being backed up. Peer review is vital to ensure we don't make mistakes too. It's not uncommon for a scientific paper to be disproven and a fault in the original method identified thanks to peers investigating.That's a monster of a die size.
No. It’s descriptions of methods mostly.Any indication about the expected style of hardware RT acceleration from these patents? Will it be something hybrid like the revealed AMD patents? or something more pure, NVIDIA RT cores style?
Does MS need patents for the DX API? If so, then I would assume each function would have a patent.
I think it is divorced, the only thing specified are inputs and the outputs; I think the exact method in which that is completed is on the driver.Seems counter-intuitive. Aren't APIs, by their nature, divorced from a very specific method of doing something.
Further: Wouldn't WINE have to be infringing on any API patents MS might have (if that was a thing).
I don't see your lines for the invisible chip(s).
Seems counter-intuitive. Aren't APIs, by their nature, divorced from a very specific method of doing something.
Further: Wouldn't WINE have to be infringing on any API patents MS might have (if that was a thing).
bbat should present his work for peer review like everyone else who's tried die-size estimates has.
Software patents are a thing and algorithm patenting is happening in a big way.APIs aren't patentable.
Software patents are a thing and algorithm patenting is happening in a big way.
API's are software. How is MS developing a software layer with its own copyrightable design not as patentable as a piece of direct-to-hardware drawing code?
I'm not fully understanding here. So let me approach from another perspective.Imagine I get a patent on that API. Any time some piece of software sends a digit from 0 to 9 to another piece of software to do anything - because APIs are divorced from specific methods of execution, they don't implement anything - it's infringing on that patent. That would be a huge problem. Hence the war between Google and Oracle and why a lot of people were pretty pissed off when that Appeals Court shat on a smart and informed ruling (Alsup actually learned how to code in Java to better understand the case).
If DirectX cannot be patent; what's stopping another company from completely lifting Direct X and just rebranding it ?
Copyright.