Prev: ATI MMC 9.08 or earlier won't install...
Next: FireGL V8650 Vs. NVIDIA QuadroFX 5600 Review
From: Tony DiMarzio on 24 Jan 2008 15:57
"John Lewis" <john.dsl(a)verizon.net> wrote in message
news:4798ce44.890444(a)news.verizon.net...
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 11:02:07 -0500, "Tony DiMarzio"
> <tony.dimarzio(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Oops. I meant the _RV670_ lineup should have been the product lineup
>>available from the ATI side at 8800 series launch. It would have been a
>>much
>>more competitive offering from the red team. Then, the R680 should have
>>followed as the high end part.
>>
>>Yes, it's a completely unrealistic timeline, given delay-plagued history
>>and
>>bugged silicon of the HD2900XT (R600). I'm just saying ... it would have
>>been nice :)
>>
>>Either way, I'm not upgrading next (to a card from either player) until
>>Crysis is playable at 1600x1200 with full/max detail as well as full AA/AF
>>with a single card solution. When that kind of power is available from a
>>single card, it will be decision time for me.
>>
>
> Not too long now for the single-card/single-CHIP solution to this woe.
> Won't be inexpensive, but hey buy 2 cards using the same chip and use
> the second oine for physics acceleration when not using it to impress
> your friends with the fastest desktop graphics (in SLI) on the planet.
>
> John Lewis

Are you referring to either of the upcoming 9800GTX and 9800GX2? If so, I
don't think either of those cards will provide the necessary power for the
Crysis holy grail.

Tony


>>--
>>Tony DiMarzio
>>tony.dimarzio(a)gmail.com
>>"First of One" <root(a)127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>>news:qKKdnXgOGaGWRQvanZ2dnUVZ_uOmnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>> Having the R680 (HD3870 X2) at the time of the 8800 series launch would
>>> have been an absolutely impossible leap. Remember, despite being late,
>>> ATi/AMD still rushed the HD2900XT out the door, with certain parts of
>>> the
>>> silicon not working correctly (hardware AA resolve, UVD...).
>>>
>>> To the benefit of the consumer though, the 3870 was mainstream-priced
>>> and
>>> available in reasonable quantities. Remember the X850XT Platinum-rare
>>> Edition cards going for $500? Did those things really contribute to
>>> healthy competition?
>>>
>>> --
>>> "War is the continuation of politics by other means.
>>> It can therefore be said that politics is war without
>>> bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."
>>>
>>> "Tony DiMarzio" <tony.dimarzio(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:zYmdnWbRqPPQTAvanZ2dnUVZ_v6rnZ2d(a)comcast.com...
>>>> Those COJ scores are pretty impressive. It would have been nice if
>>>> ATI/AMD had the R680 lineup available at the time of the 8800 series
>>>> launch. Better late than never I guess.
>>>>
>>>> Tony
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


From: First of One on 24 Jan 2008 18:29
Intel acquired Havoc. Physics acceleration on video cards is dead in the
absence of another API.

--
"War is the continuation of politics by other means.
It can therefore be said that politics is war without
bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."


"John Lewis" <john.dsl(a)verizon.net> wrote in message
news:4798ce44.890444(a)news.verizon.net...
> Not too long now for the single-card/single-CHIP solution to this woe.
> Won't be inexpensive, but hey buy 2 cards using the same chip and use
> the second oine for physics acceleration when not using it to impress
> your friends with the fastest desktop graphics (in SLI) on the planet.
>
> John Lewis
>


From: DRS on 24 Jan 2008 20:32
"First of One" <root(a)127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:kL2dnaevAMbsggTanZ2dnUVZ_vyinZ2d(a)giganews.com
> Intel acquired Havoc. Physics acceleration on video cards is dead in
> the absence of another API.

It was dead the moment Microsoft decided DirectX Physics would be CPU-based.


From: First of One on 28 Jan 2008 20:46
Didn't read this too closely four days ago, but isn't CPU-based
DirectX-anything an absolute oxymoron? Should we have DirectX AI while we
are at it? :-)

Or do the industry players foresee CPUs with different feature sets? ("This
game requires DirectX 10.2b-compliant CPU... with Intel Application
Accelerator v3.2.56789 Hotfix or later")

--
"War is the continuation of politics by other means.
It can therefore be said that politics is war without
bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed."

"DRS" <drs(a)removethis.ihug.com.au> wrote in message
news:47993c1f$0$17198$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> "First of One" <root(a)127.0.0.1> wrote in message
> news:kL2dnaevAMbsggTanZ2dnUVZ_vyinZ2d(a)giganews.com
>> Intel acquired Havoc. Physics acceleration on video cards is dead in
>> the absence of another API.
>
> It was dead the moment Microsoft decided DirectX Physics would be
> CPU-based.


From: DRS on 31 Jan 2008 19:12
"First of One" <root(a)127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:RdKdneRTGfz0GAPanZ2dnUVZ_uidnZ2d(a)giganews.com
> "DRS" <drs(a)removethis.ihug.com.au> wrote in message
> news:47993c1f$0$17198$5a62ac22(a)per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>> "First of One" <root(a)127.0.0.1> wrote in message
>> news:kL2dnaevAMbsggTanZ2dnUVZ_vyinZ2d(a)giganews.com
>>> Intel acquired Havoc. Physics acceleration on video cards is dead in
>>> the absence of another API.
>>
>> It was dead the moment Microsoft decided DirectX Physics would be
>> CPU-based.

> Didn't read this too closely four days ago, but isn't CPU-based
> DirectX-anything an absolute oxymoron?

My bad (brain fart). The Direct Physics engine is/will be GPU-based (at
least in the short to medium term; longer term CPU/GPU mergers remain
speculative). My point is that once Microsoft, with its extensive influence
on gaming via DirectX, decided its physics engine would not be PPU-based,
the likes of Ageia were dead in the water.

> Should we have DirectX AI
> while we are at it? :-)

I wouldn't put anything past Redmond.


First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: ATI MMC 9.08 or earlier won't install...
Next: FireGL V8650 Vs. NVIDIA QuadroFX 5600 Review