it has one trump card... windows XP (and to a lesser extent linux). DX10 requires vista... infact if it wasn't for this fact open GL3.0 would probably not exist, its only really due to developers looking to support the newer hardware features on older OS to broaden their market appeal thats really kept any life in it at all.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Nvidia says it's first to offer full OpenGL 3.0 support
- Thread starter helmutcheese
- Start date
it has one trump card... windows XP (and to a lesser extent linux). DX10 requires vista... infact if it wasn't for this fact open GL3.0 would probably not exist, its only really due to developers looking to support the newer hardware features on older OS to broaden their market appeal thats really kept any life in it at all.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
im talking about your view on their buisness practices and their hardware. i really dont think 'the shadow is a bit smoother there' really amounts to much, does it lol.
Id be very interested to hear why you think ati are holding the market back, maybe you could start a new thread on it?
NVIDIA hyped purevideo pretty well didnt they? even though it was completely broken when it was released...... they hyped quad sli MASSIVELY even though it never wored properly and still is a major headach even now....no nvidia dont overhype at all lol.
Id be very interested to hear why you think ati are holding the market back, maybe you could start a new thread on it?
NVIDIA hyped purevideo pretty well didnt they? even though it was completely broken when it was released...... they hyped quad sli MASSIVELY even though it never wored properly and still is a major headach even now....no nvidia dont overhype at all lol.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
They're holding the market back as they're not embracing a dodo technology and a physics engine which is a long way from maturity, despite the fact they brought prices down, stopped Nvidia's countless refreshes and almost kidding at the expense of consumers and actually tried to build a proper 2 GPU card.
They're so backward, why do they bother
Seriously though, some people are so embroiled and whitewashed they get tied up by marketing and theory they kind of forget to take a step back and think of the bigger picture...we work with a lot of people like that...
They're holding the market back as they're not embracing a dodo technology and a physics engine which is a long way from maturity, despite the fact they brought prices down, stopped Nvidia's countless refreshes and almost kidding at the expense of consumers and actually tried to build a proper 2 GPU card.
They're so backward, why do they bother
Seriously though, some people are so embroiled and whitewashed they get tied up by marketing and theory they kind of forget to take a step back and think of the bigger picture...we work with a lot of people like that...
I'm talking mainly about features for game development which is one of the main drivers for graphics cards - forget whats good or not for the consumer at this level or you stiffle the entire process. This is half the problem ATI push flashy features that catch the eye of the consumer but aren't so helpful to the people who actually make 3D products... nVidia is probably just as guilty of pushing the features interesting to consumers but atleast they are somewhat more intune with game developers.
The fact is...
ATI were pushing 3dc when game developers were more insterested in SM3 - extra VRAM was a cheap enough and better alternative to better compression of normal maps while still preserving accuracy. We would have had games like bioshock upto 2 years earlier had ATI embraced SM3.
ATI spent a lot of time pushing DX10 features when game developers were more interested in a solid DX9 platform - at the expense of several basic texture formats and several other beneficial features in DX9 - games like ETQW were delayed and are now lacking several cool features because ATI were too busy implementing DX10 features that no one was using or interested in. As it turned out despite claiming to support these DX10 features - when developers came to test them on the 2900 i.e. with lost planet they found the ATI cards weren't even rendering some DX10 effects or rendering them incorrectly.
I could go on and list another half dozen cases like this.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
explain this, ATi cards have always pretty much matched nvidia cards in terms of memory capacity when they've needed to whilst also supporting 3dc. how did that hold back bioshock by 2 years?
how many games made use of dx10 when the 8800gtx was released? and dont forget it too was lacklust with the first dx10 titles (well, most of them tbh, but thats down to the software not the drivers or hardware)
Problem is people take me waaaay too literally and I end up defending my position and getting myself far too embedded... I dislike ATI and never made any pretense of that but I'm not half the ATI hater people make me out to be.
End of the day tho nVidia wasn't concentrating on purevideo, quad SLI, etc at the expense of features or trying to pass them off as viable alternatives to features that are useful for the forward progression of 3D rendering/gaming technology.
LITERALLY LITERALLY they DIDN'T literally hold back bioshock by 2 years - I never said that... they held back games that make use of SM3 type features bioshock included - HINT THE x800 DID NOT SUPPORT SM3 instead ATI said no ones interested in SM3 but 3dc will be a great feature, SM3 provides features that are attractive to game developers...
I'm not sure what your point is here it has no relevance to the topic at hand...
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
you are veyr wrong there, if anything nvidia held the market up because they sat and sat on the 8 series cards when they coul dhave been pushing the industry forward. now yes, that was due in part to ATi dropping the ball somewhat with the release of the 2900's but that shouldnt have stopped nvidia pushing for more efficiant and faster cards, instead they took every oppertunity to relable their 8 series cards as much as they possibly could.
Ati this time around have really put the boot in which will only result in both companies pushing harder, but really nvidia are no better than you make ATi out to be.
neither were ati?
Ati this time around have really put the boot in which will only result in both companies pushing harder, but really nvidia are no better than you make ATi out to be.
neither were ati?
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
Absolutely hillarious, thanks for the entertainment Rroff 
your welcome... I'm finding it quite amusing myself - some people are so clearly out of their depth.
Unfortunatly I've lost perspective on the original point so I'm leaving it here...
Yes ATI have done some great things for consumers pushing some very good cards and keeping nVidia on the ball... and yes nVidia have dropped the ball several times...
But from a development point of view they (ATI) have done a lot to hold things back, barking up the wrong tree several times. nVidia are far more intune with what game developers want but unless you work or have some involvement in this field I guess you can't really see this for yourself.
I'm making a big assumption here but I'd put money on the current position being id software pushing for open gl 3.0 support so they can target a broader range of PCs and support games like rage under linux with the feature set they want... if ATI doesn't produce a comparable opengl 3.0 driver then the game will either have a reduced feature set so that it can be run on open gl 2.x or become a windows vista exclusive to maintain the feature set.
Unfortunatly I've lost perspective on the original point so I'm leaving it here...
Yes ATI have done some great things for consumers pushing some very good cards and keeping nVidia on the ball... and yes nVidia have dropped the ball several times...
But from a development point of view they (ATI) have done a lot to hold things back, barking up the wrong tree several times. nVidia are far more intune with what game developers want but unless you work or have some involvement in this field I guess you can't really see this for yourself.
I'm making a big assumption here but I'd put money on the current position being id software pushing for open gl 3.0 support so they can target a broader range of PCs and support games like rage under linux with the feature set they want... if ATI doesn't produce a comparable opengl 3.0 driver then the game will either have a reduced feature set so that it can be run on open gl 2.x or become a windows vista exclusive to maintain the feature set.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
at the time it wasn't. when nvidia released the nv40 (in 2004!) sm3.0 was not needed or justified. much like dx10 wasnt when the g80 was released. if your going to make a statement like that youre going to have to do better to prove it that that!
it has every relevance. nvidia pushed dx10 when it wasnt needed. yes we need progression but at the time not in that direction. support for dx10 was poor and dx10 titles took almost a full year AFTER the card was released to surface. the same thing happened with SM3.0 and you really think ATi held the market back by not supporting it?
LOL. yes they are....
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 May 2005
- Posts
- 5,622
- Location
- West London
I can see it now, I didn't think about it, DirectX is going to be dumped for OpenGL. I'm throwing my X2 away now. I really, really want to play Mirror's Edge and UT3 with these effects and watch tech demos all day. I'm so upset that ATi ruined game of the year ETQW. Damn ATi, they brought the prices down, they stopped Nvidia's long lifecycles, they have a good roadmap, can't believe how much they have stifled innovation.
Thanks for showing me the way
Thanks for showing me the way
They didn't push DX10 at the expense of DX9 support or as an alternative to another useful feature or just sit on their ass doing nothing - which is what I'm saying ATI have done.
I can see it now, I didn't think about it, DirectX is going to be dumped for OpenGL. I'm throwing my X2 away now. I really, really want to play Mirror's Edge and UT3 with these effects and watch tech demos all day. I'm so upset that ATi ruined game of the year ETQW. Damn ATi, they brought the prices down, they stopped Nvidia's long lifecycles, they have a good roadmap, can't believe how much they have stifled innovation.
Thanks for showing me the way
now thats just being silly...
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
you still havent shown me how 3dc hampered developement?
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 10,717
- Location
- InURmama
Hmm sitting on the 8000 series caused what ?
There is nothing else really needed to play today's game and Bad Code Jobs and Bad Console Ports will sometimes run crap on any hardware.
The initial launched 8000 series was very good and has had a long life.
There is nothing else really needed to play today's game and Bad Code Jobs and Bad Console Ports will sometimes run crap on any hardware.
The initial launched 8000 series was very good and has had a long life.
3dc didn't as such - it was ATI not implementing SM3 on their cards and spending the time they should have spent on that implementing 3dc - which pretty much no one wanted or used... SM3 gives access to several very useful features like for example being able to do complicated lighting effects in one pass - giving you a significant speedup on realistic lighting and similiar features that were of interest to developers... but theres no good developing a game for SM3 when only half your consumers can run it - resulting in a reduction in the quality of the end result. And so games like bioshock just weren't really feasible until much later...
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
sitting on hardware stalls developement. its not always about features and in this instance im talking specifically about the hardware itself. as good as my gtx was it was an absolutely juice guzzler and they could have done so much more to get that power consumption down but because of the lack of competition there was nothing to drive them to do it. You'll always see the biggest advances when either side is under pressure.
ATi, for instance, have 40nm cores tapped out - Thats not bad for a company that apparenty isnt pushing the industry forward.. nvidia could possibly have already gotten there if they hadnt of sat on their backsides. but again like I said earlier, that is due in part to ATi's blunders at the time but that isnt really an excuse.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 10,717
- Location
- InURmama
Sitting on DX9B with launch of X800/850 in mid/late 2004 when 6800U was DX9C was this also bad in your opinion ? 
I seem to remember peeps claiming we did not need DX9C or P.S 3.0/S.M 3.0.
I seem to remember peeps claiming we did not need DX9C or P.S 3.0/S.M 3.0.
Last edited: