nvidia shader compiler details

[hoom]

Well ATI had a field day with marketing anyway & NV got a lot of people extremely pissed off.

 

[Tim Murray]

Well ATI had a field day with marketing anyway & NV got a lot of people extremely pissed off.

What, Valve's deal at Shader Day? That's not what ATI wanted Valve to do--apparently, they were supposed to just give a presentation, not some crazy benchmark shenanigans.

 

[hoom]

No, I mean the whole 'fx = dx8' & ATI dominating ps2.0 performance as well as top end sales.

Valve just said what most shader benchmarks had already proven.
At least that was what I saw, having made up my mind to get an r3x0 before then.

 

[KimB]

As it is, I hope nv40 bombs & NV goes bye bye because they have lost the right to be at the top through all their bs & cheating.

ATI has done similar things in the past too. Why don't you think the same of ATI?

 

[DemoCoder]

As it is, I hope nv40 bombs & NV goes bye bye because they have lost the right to be at the top through all their bs & cheating.

You certainly have an appropriate handle to fit your attitude.

 

[digitalwanderer]

As it is, I hope nv40 bombs & NV goes bye bye because they have lost the right to be at the top through all their bs & cheating.

ATI has done similar things in the past too. Why don't you think the same of ATI?

They've never done it to the same extent, or when they did it was before the enthusiast crowd started noticing, or else YOUR ARGUMENT IS JUST BS!

 

[John Reynolds]

PS 2.0 will be the standard for DX9 games until PS 3.0 parts become affordable and have good market penetration at the mid level range.
As I've been told many times developers code for the installed user base...I'm looking forward to see PS 3.0 in action and if it offers more visuals than 2.0.

I'm all for progression

There were lots of GF3s on the market by fall of '01 and yet you raised unholy hell about PS 1.4 when the 8500 shipped and how nVidia was holding technology back. Hmmm. . . .

I'm really not trying to pick a fight, but it is interesting watching an apparent flipping of opinion to whatever best defends a preferred company's current part.

 

[digitalwanderer]

I'm really not trying to pick a fight, but it is interesting watching an apparent flipping of opinion to whatever best defends a preferred company's current part.

And for those of us trying to pick some fights it sounds like there is going to be a LOT of that "flipping of opinion" with the upcoming battle 'tween R420/nV40....I expect to laugh meself silly watching all the arguments flip-flop sides!

 

[Big Bertha EA]

I expect to laugh meself silly watching all the arguments flip-flop sides!

You getting the popcorn or me?

 

[digitalwanderer]

I expect to laugh meself silly watching all the arguments flip-flop sides!

You getting the popcorn or me?

You get the popcorn, I'll bring the happy.

 

[Big Bertha EA]

You get the popcorn, I'll bring the happy.

Buttered or plain?

 

[John Reynolds]

Don't make me bring the ban stick.

 

[tEd]

Don't make me bring the ban stick.

It's gonna be a rough next week for mods i mean

 

[digitalwanderer]

Don't make me bring the ban stick.

Nah, we'll just keep a clue-by-four leaning up against the couch in case we gotta jump in real quick and do a bit of attitude adjusting.

 

[KimB]

They've never done it to the same extent, or when they did it was before the enthusiast crowd started noticing, or else YOUR ARGUMENT IS JUST BS!

Besides the Quack debacle, there were very similar practices to what nVidia has been caught doing in 3DMark back in the days of the Rage Pro.

I guarantee you that if ATI again releases a graphics chip that acts like a square peg trying to be fit into a round hole, ATI will switch into damage control mode instantly and start doing everything they can to bring up the performance (or, at least, perceived performance) of their parts.

 

[jb]

[I guarantee you that if ATI again releases a graphics chip that acts like a square peg trying to be fit into a round hole, ATI will switch into damage control mode instantly and start doing everything they can to bring up the performance (or, at least, perceived performance) of their parts.

While I agree that could happen (with any company not just ATI), I dont think it will thanks to the new managment they have. Or at least untl their management changes

 

[Althornin]

They've never done it to the same extent, or when they did it was before the enthusiast crowd started noticing, or else YOUR ARGUMENT IS JUST BS!

Besides the Quack debacle, there were very similar practices to what nVidia has been caught doing in 3DMark back in the days of the Rage Pro.

I guarantee you that if ATI again releases a graphics chip that acts like a square peg trying to be fit into a round hole, ATI will switch into damage control mode instantly and start doing everything they can to bring up the performance (or, at least, perceived performance) of their parts.

wow, a guarantee!! And with such evidence! Please, like saying "I guarantee" makes your evidenceless argument stronger. LOL
EH, i dont think so, they didnt do it for their 7xxx or 8xxx series cards - why change that?
And quack - pfft, at least it had the chance for being a bug (whatever you believe, you have to admit the chance is there) and performance was the same without the IQ hit later. Can the same be said for any of nVidias cheating?
Yeah, didnt think so.

 

[KimB]

EH, i dont think so, they didnt do it for their 7xxx or 8xxx series cards - why change that?

Well, let's see. During the lifetime of the 7xxx and 8xxx graphics cards, they were accused of having drivers that only optimized for benchmarks. You could see this borne out when a somewhat out-of-the-mainstream game was benchmarked, the nVidia card would invariably do much better.

And it was during the lifetime of these cards that the "Quack" issue came into light, where it became obvious that ATI was detecting and optimizing for that specific game.

I'm just saying that it is really silly for people to claim that nVidia is an "evil" company for what has been happening, not when other companies have done very similar things, if not exactly the same in some circumstances.

 

[I.S.T.]

EH, i dont think so, they didnt do it for their 7xxx or 8xxx series cards - why change that?

Well, let's see. During the lifetime of the 7xxx and 8xxx graphics cards, they were accused of having drivers that only optimized for benchmarks. You could see this borne out when a somewhat out-of-the-mainstream game was benchmarked, the nVidia card would invariably do much better.

And it was during the lifetime of these cards that the "Quack" issue came into light, where it became obvious that ATI was detecting and optimizing for that specific game.

I'm just saying that it is really silly for people to claim that nVidia is an "evil" company for what has been happening, not when other companies have done very similar things, if not exactly the same in some circumstances.

How is Quack a cheat when they fixed it and the performence was the same? Edit: IIRC, wasn't Quack originally a bug fix of some kind for the R100? Edit2: Forgot a word. Fixed.

 

[Doomtrooper]

There were lots of GF3s on the market by fall of '01 and yet you raised unholy hell about PS 1.4 when the 8500 shipped and how nVidia was holding technology back. Hmmm. . . .

I'm really not trying to pick a fight, but it is interesting watching an apparent flipping of opinion to whatever best defends a preferred company's current part.

I think you are, find another target you will not suck me into your game again this time.