From: Matthias H. <mh...@su...> - 2005-07-28 15:14:25
|
On Jul 28, 05 11:52:10 +0200, Wladimir van der Laan wrote: > > This is the sound of me hating ATI for making such useless pixel shaders. R200 did not really have pixel shaders. They had a configurable pixel pipeline, that's different. Comparable to GeForce2, a little bit better. > Hey hey calm down a little there, up until the R300 ATI has been on > the forefront for implementing new features on their chips like: > > - 3d textures. NVidia only came up with those in the FX5 series, ati > had them already in the Radeon7500. The GeForce3 had 3D textures (except for an early sample we had at Unversity :-/ ), and IIRC this was before the Radeon7500. > - Multi render target support. ATI r300 can do it, NVidia FX5 series cannot. Right, the lack of multiple render targets sucked. > - Floating point textures. ATI r300 can do it perfectly, NVidia FX5 > series is limited to TEXTURE_RECTANGLE. Well - sort of. R300 still does not do IEEE computations in its pixel shader (I think R400 doesn't either), which gives you crappy results for GPGPU applications. > ATI their Linux drivers are a crippled bunch, that's for a fact, and > that's a big reason why open source r300 drivers get so much > attention. But don't offend their chip designers :) Yep. They used to do good hardware. Have fallen behind a bit compared to GeForce6, but not much. > Wladimir > Ogre3D Team (http://www.ogre3d.org) Nice engine, BTW! Matthias -- Matthias Hopf <mh...@su...> __ __ __ Maxfeldstr. 5 / 90409 Nuernberg (_ | | (_ |__ ma...@ms... Phone +49-911-74053-715 __) |_| __) |__ labs www.mshopf.de |