State of the Graphics Industry Rant

[RussSchultz]

Wow. I've offended you by saying we disagree over something, so we should just quit beating a dead horse.

If it was the wording that offended you, let me restate:

I find that the definition of anisotropic is such to preclude the 8500 as being a completely correct solution.

You don't.

Now, if I still offend you, you're just going to have to be offended. Do try, however, to accept that I'm not intending to offend.

 

[demalion]

Wow. I've offended you by saying we disagree over something, so we should just quit beating a dead horse.

This is in reply to:

We obviously believe there is enough documentation and mathematical reasoning behind the concept of anisotropic filtering that you can do it correctly, or incorrectly(yes, objectively).

You obviously don't.

This is so obviously incorrect, intentionally obtuse, and blatantly deceptive that you've pretty thoroughly offended me.

This doesn't seem quite the same thing as saying I am offended because "we disagree over something". In fact, it rather clearly states something else entirely in no uncertain terms...I'd even use the term "obviously".

For the sake of preventing another circular argument, I'll just conclude that I accept your rewording.

 

[Guest]

Most reviews suck period that is not open to debate but a given fact!!!!!!!

Now read this carefully
what does flawed actually mean

Flawed:

1. Defective which can mean:lacked, deficient, lacking
2.Imperfect which can mean: not perfect, flawed, defective, incomplete
3.cracked this certainly doésn't apply........


Flawed as most understand it means it not working right / it's broken or because it is flawed it had to be broken.............. but surely that doesn't apply on ATI aniso now if you say it was lacking in some area you would be correct......


ATI's 8500 certainly is lacking..........
So is the GF4..........
They both lack in some erea's and so will every new generation so lacking, deficient, incomplete, not perfect Certainly apply on both cards and features/implementations they have..........etc.

I believe that that is what every1 should have read......

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Well, I have not much further to add to this thread as is stands. (demalion has pretty much covered the responses). Though I do think the following is amusing:

Russ Schultz Said:

Posted: 31 Aug 2002 13:27
...And that is the last thing I have to say on the subject.

Posted: 31 Aug 2002 15:55
...I'll definately not reply on this topic again.

Posted: 01 Sep 2002 16:06
If it irritates you so much, just stop responding. You'll live longer.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

demalion said:

This doesn't seem quite the same thing as saying I am offended because "we disagree over something".

Don't sweat it, demalion. This is the second time (in this thread, no less), that Russ has "accused" someone of having some sort of problem with others when there is a mere difference of opinion between them.

Makes you wonder if someone else might actually have a problem...

 

[Althornin]

Makes you wonder if someone else might actually have a problem...

Joe - dont go there, its not worth it.

 

[Nagorak]

Why can't you guys just accept the Radeon 8500 anisotropic for what it is? It's not flawed or broken or anything else...you're trying to simplify it down into a single word definition and accomplishing nothing but a lot of bickering in the process.

All cards have their limits and pros and cons. Specfically with Anisotropic this is what we have:

R8500:
Fairly fast
Does not work on some 45 degree angles
Does not work with Trilinear

GF4 Ti (GF3?):
Major performance hit (although 4600 still approx as fast as 8500 since the card is faster overall)
Works on all angles
Works with Trilinear

R9700:
Fairly fast
Works on all angles
Works with Trilinear

R8500 obviously has a more "limited" anisotropic implementation than GF4 Ti, but it's also got a lower performance penalty. That doesn't mean R8500 anisotropic is "flawed" or anything, it's just how it works. So if the limitations of the R8500 bother you, don't use the card, problem solved.

R9700 has the best of both worlds, which is probably a step in the right direction.

 

[alexsok]

Well, with the latest detonator drivers, the aniso perfomance hit is much smaller (there is 40-50fps increase in Q3A with aniso 8 for instance!!)

Together with the new settings in RT, the perfomance hit is lower than on R8500, so I think that GF4TI has better & faster aniso implementation than R8500.

Obviously, both of them are still far from R9700pro.