• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

ATI rumors say it will support DX: NEXT

A

Acanthus

Lifer
title says it all, how could R500 support the next direct X when the spec isnt even finalized... they could wind up in the same boat NV did with 32 bit precision shaders last year...

If MS decides to change specs at the last minute before finalizing it it could knock the card out of "official spec" after the card is released.
 
Seeing how ATI and Microsoft are totally on the same page at the moment (what with the ATI/Microsoft alliance for Xbox 2 and whatnot), while Nvidia was trying to steer the industry towards their proprietary Cg and away from 32-bit shaders with their NV3x design years ago, plus the whole Nvidia/Microsoft fiasco on the Xbox (Microsoft taking Nvidia to court for overcharging them), I would say ATI has a stronger chance to have full support of the next DirectX than Nvidia did at having "true" DirectX 9 support with NV3x.

I don't think MS will deliberately try to shaft ATI at the last minute. On the contrary, since Nvidia is now firmly in the enemy's camp (Sony, for the PS3), I would predict Microsoft will do everything in their power to make ATI's next GPU (which just so happens to be going into the Xbox 2) all that is required for full DirectX next compatiblity.
 
Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
Seeing how ATI and Microsoft are totally on the same page at the moment (what with the ATI/Microsoft alliance for Xbox 2 and whatnot), while Nvidia was trying to steer the industry towards their proprietary Cg and away from 32-bit shaders with their NV3x design years ago, plus the whole Nvidia/Microsoft fiasco on the Xbox (Microsoft taking Nvidia to court for overcharging them), I would say ATI has a stronger chance to have full support of the next DirectX than Nvidia did at having "true" DirectX 9 support with NV3x.

I don't think MS will deliberately try to shaft ATI at the last minute. On the contrary, since Nvidia is now firmly in the enemy's camp (Sony, for the PS3), I would predict Microsoft will do everything in their power to make ATI's next GPU (which just so happens to be going into the Xbox 2) all that is required for full DirectX next compatiblity.
Click to expand...

I had the same thought.
 
Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
Seeing how ATI and Microsoft are totally on the same page at the moment (what with the ATI/Microsoft alliance for Xbox 2 and whatnot), while Nvidia was trying to steer the industry towards their proprietary Cg and away from 32-bit shaders with their NV3x design years ago, plus the whole Nvidia/Microsoft fiasco on the Xbox (Microsoft taking Nvidia to court for overcharging them), I would say ATI has a stronger chance to have full support of the next DirectX than Nvidia did at having "true" DirectX 9 support with NV3x.

I don't think MS will deliberately try to shaft ATI at the last minute. On the contrary, since Nvidia is now firmly in the enemy's camp (Sony, for the PS3), I would predict Microsoft will do everything in their power to make ATI's next GPU (which just so happens to be going into the Xbox 2) all that is required for full DirectX next compatiblity.
Click to expand...

Just a small correction, the NV3X supported FP32 and FP16 and not FP24 which was standard, and it was part of the performance issue with NV3X under DX9.

And the lawsuit against nvidia for the xbox was MS trying to get a lower price on the xbox chip AFTER production was well under way and the xbox was shipping. They basically told NV that "we are paying this price now, not the price in the contract". Thats where the lawsuit came from.
 
I thought that DX was kaput after 9.x. It was my understanding that there wouldn't be another DirectX with the advent of WGF2.0 (Windows Graphics Foundation 2.0) in Windows Longhorn. That WGF2.0 would replace DX, and it would be a "cumulative foundation" that both Windows and games would use. If not, well, maybe I just didn't understand it correctly, but even Maximum PC said that DX was going the way of the Dodo. If, in fact R520 will be a WGF2.0 part, then great, but I have a gut feeling that something similar to what happened with NVIDIA's NV30 and DX9 could take place. MS has changed specs at the last moment before, and I wouldn't be surprised to see them do it again. I understand that ATI is trying to "push the evelope" so to speak, but IMHO, they would be jumping the gun a bit.
 
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: jiffylube1024
Seeing how ATI and Microsoft are totally on the same page at the moment (what with the ATI/Microsoft alliance for Xbox 2 and whatnot), while Nvidia was trying to steer the industry towards their proprietary Cg and away from 32-bit shaders with their NV3x design years ago, plus the whole Nvidia/Microsoft fiasco on the Xbox (Microsoft taking Nvidia to court for overcharging them), I would say ATI has a stronger chance to have full support of the next DirectX than Nvidia did at having "true" DirectX 9 support with NV3x.

I don't think MS will deliberately try to shaft ATI at the last minute. On the contrary, since Nvidia is now firmly in the enemy's camp (Sony, for the PS3), I would predict Microsoft will do everything in their power to make ATI's next GPU (which just so happens to be going into the Xbox 2) all that is required for full DirectX next compatiblity.
Click to expand...

Just a small correction, the NV3X supported FP32 and FP16 and not FP24 which was standard, and it was part of the performance issue with NV3X under DX9.

And the lawsuit against nvidia for the xbox was MS trying to get a lower price on the xbox chip AFTER production was well under way and the xbox was shipping. They basically told NV that "we are paying this price now, not the price in the contract". Thats where the lawsuit came from.
Click to expand...


I was about to add that.

MS SUCKS to work with.

Nvidia came out MUCH better in the console deals this time. For many reasons that I wont go into now. But that being the biggest..
MS trying to force NV to take less than what was originally in the contract!

It is really Nvidia that is mad at MS, not MS mad at NV. But I'm sure the feelings for each other are not exceptional.
 
What happened was that initially, the chips cost a lot to make, and MS was paying a lot per chip and taking a big loss on hardware just like Sony. As you know, chips get cheaper as time goes on. A couple of years later, Sony was able to renegotiate prices with Toshiba/Rambus etc to lower the prices of chips, so it can take less of a loss as time went on, and eventually having a net profit for each console sold too. Nvidia would not renegotiate, and is still selling chips to MS at the original launch price, and raking in much higher profits, and still making the xbox console a big loss to MS.
 
Avalon aka DX10 suppose to be released with longhorn but will be avail for xp, no big deal, you can download a new beta build nearly every month and toy with it.
 
The thing which is much better for ATi is that they are taking royalties, so a percentage of the revenues of each console sold, so when it goes down in price (the console) so do their royalties.

I think this is whats happening with ATi and MS?
 
Well, it prolly will support it. 6xxx cards fully support Sm3.0, and that wasn't even out when the cards were released...and they do fine with it...or at least, do what they are supposed to do (far cry patch)

I would'nt be surprised if either ATI supports more than they say, or if they support much less...
 
oh and i just noticed this in a r520 article from The Inq.

"We are not sure which kind of Shader support you need to be WGF 1.0 compliant, but we are quite sure that we are talking about Shader Model 3.0, as it's time for ATI to go down that road."

does that mean the 6xxx series will support WGF 1.0?
 
Originally posted by: Acanthus
And the lawsuit against nvidia for the xbox was MS trying to get a lower price on the xbox chip AFTER production was well under way and the xbox was shipping. They basically told NV that "we are paying this price now, not the price in the contract". Thats where the lawsuit came from.
Click to expand...

Isn't that always the deal with ms, either give it at their price or they will steal it?
 
Originally posted by: hans030390
Well, it prolly will support it. 6xxx cards fully support Sm3.0, and that wasn't even out when the cards were released...and they do fine with it...or at least, do what they are supposed to do (far cry patch)

I would'nt be surprised if either ATI supports more than they say, or if they support much less...
Click to expand...


They always seem to suprise us, when they announce that pratically all their cards for the past 2 or 3 years support something that has only recently come into the games...
 
1. ATi was faster with FP24 than nV was with FP16 in the first few DX9/SM2 generations (9700, 9800, 9800XT and 5800, 5900, 5950). This was in part due to ATi just having more pipes/shaders, and nV not having enough temp registers.

2. AFAIK, the DX name and some of its baggage is going the way of the dodo, but WGF 1.0 is essentially SM2. WGF 2.0, the real meat of Avalon (or DirectX Next or whatever it's called) is more like SM4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top