Lonbjerg
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 4,419
- 0
- 0
No, you keep saying that, but gives no documentation.
Like I quoted before:
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
Lonbjerg
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 4,419
- 0
- 0
First of all, nobody mentioned APEX or PhysX so why you are is just a smokescreen.
Second, this is about Gameworks, which I and others have already shown the article in question with various references as to why it disallows AMD from optimising. You just fail to recognise it.
Really? Got proof of that?
Last edited:
Just like Nvidia has no fault in WB's decision to not work with AMD on Batman, or Crytek's tessellated ocean in Crysis 2, or any other faults people blame on Nvidia with no basis.
Nobody likes a hypocrite...
I wonder if you even know the difference between deliberate hobbling and just having a broken engine?
Read - DICE employee explains why Battlefield 4 is “buggy”
Now try to explain why this is even remotely anything like Nvidia's over-tessellated jersey barriers and hidden water in Crysis 2. Or missing AA from Batman (only on AMD), or massively over-tesselated mountains in HAWX 2, or etc etc etc.
Last edited:
You're asking for proof of something someone says?
Do they have a word for irony in English (UK)?
The fun part is:
At least these games actually run on AMD hardware.
Tomb Raider was straight broken and AMD compared their hardware with an broken nVidia DX path for performance numbers.
But whatever. I know AMD would never pay a developer like Eidos to sabotage a game for a huge group of gamers.
At least these games actually run on AMD hardware.
Tomb Raider was straight broken and AMD compared their hardware with an broken nVidia DX path for performance numbers.
But whatever. I know AMD would never pay a developer like Eidos to sabotage a game for a huge group of gamers.
SirPauly
Diamond Member
- Apr 28, 2009
- 5,187
- 1
- 0
I was one of the posters that agreed with Richard Huddy and Repi in 2011. I have nothing against proprietary based on innovation and improved gaming experience potential!
My post went over your head, not surprising.
What I am saying is, you have no proof that Nvidia was involved with the poor AMD showing in these games. You have absolutely no proof. Just like there is no proof AMD is the reason DICE's game is broken.
Is that clear enough for you? I am not sure if you are being deliberately thick-headed or what...
Lol yeah no proof that in games that Nvidia paid millions for just had huge amounts of over-tesselation even on hidden and completely flat objects, no AA implementation on AMD cards and AMD disallowed from doing optimisations in.
You could always try applying Occam's Razor. If after that you come to the conclusion that all that was just "sheer coincidence" then it's pretty clear who's being thick-headed.
You could always try applying Occam's Razor. If after that you come to the conclusion that all that was just "sheer coincidence" then it's pretty clear who's being thick-headed.
Lonbjerg
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 4,419
- 0
- 0
Indeed, Occam's Razor... AMD killed Battlefield.
BF3 no AMD, no problem.
BF4 AMD, series dies.
Occam's Razorizored.
Except AMD were the main BF3 partner. Apart from that tiny oversight you nearly had a case.
Is this thread about TWIMYBP/Gaming Evolved?
Nope! Sorry, using your own logic AMD killed BF4.
Occam's Razor.
Nope! Sorry, using your own logic AMD killed BF4.
Occam's Razor.
Let me help you with Occam's Razor balla.
Company A
Works very closely with development on BF3 and BF4
Both BF3 and BF4 show performance respective of each cards true placing.
BF4 is broken
DICE say the reason BF4 is broken is down to the new multi-threading engine with certain CPU's and OS's.
Occam's Razor says - "BF4 is broken because DICE *$^% it up."
Company B
Works very closely with development on various Ubisoft titles
Many of these titles have performance results that are not respective of the cards true placings, ie a 770 being almost as fast as a 290X.
Or say stuff like this -
Where the competing cards are twice as fast on Nvidia.
Then you have features being disallowed ie AA (funnily enough with the same company again? How can that be??), and AMD's attempts to optimise the game being refused.
Occam's Razor says "Company B and some of their partners are dirty rotten scoundrels".
You see balla, the simplest explanation based on the evidence.
Company A
Works very closely with development on BF3 and BF4
Both BF3 and BF4 show performance respective of each cards true placing.
BF4 is broken
DICE say the reason BF4 is broken is down to the new multi-threading engine with certain CPU's and OS's.
Occam's Razor says - "BF4 is broken because DICE *$^% it up."
Company B
Works very closely with development on various Ubisoft titles
Many of these titles have performance results that are not respective of the cards true placings, ie a 770 being almost as fast as a 290X.
Or say stuff like this -
Where the competing cards are twice as fast on Nvidia.
Then you have features being disallowed ie AA (funnily enough with the same company again? How can that be??), and AMD's attempts to optimise the game being refused.
Occam's Razor says "Company B and some of their partners are dirty rotten scoundrels".
You see balla, the simplest explanation based on the evidence.
Last edited:
lol what argument? Coke has no real competitor.
I think you meant Pepsi vs Sugar Water.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter