I know exactly why the hack works. The vendor ID check is nullified/moot, so the rendering path no longer jumps over a stage, and the proper output is realized.
Aha... what rendering path is that exactly?
I know exactly why the hack works. The vendor ID check is nullified/moot, so the rendering path no longer jumps over a stage, and the proper output is realized.
Aha... what rendering path is that exactly?
I found an interesting blog, by you.
Have you made it your mission to call all AMD employees scumbags, idiots, and liars?
Honestly, responding to anything you post is pointless. You are not interested in any meaningful discussion, you only want to slam and berate anything AMD says or does. :thumbsdown::thumbsdown:
No I was trying to find the images that I posted in a forum that included Batman AA etc. on an ATI card. I don't have the images locally anymore.I see you had to google to find the answer?
Or well, seems you haven't quite found it yet, have you?
No I was trying to find the images that I posted in a forum that included Batman AA etc. on an ATI card. I don't have the images locally anymore.
So why don't you respond to the question, what is with your AMD hate?
No I was trying to find the images that I posted in a forum that included Batman AA etc. on an ATI card. I don't have the images locally anymore.
So why don't you respond to the question, what is with your AMD hate?
People are going to intepret this differently, but it deserves to be looked at again.
AMD responding to nVidias request that reviewers use the H.A.W.X 2 prerelease demo in the reviews of AMD's new part:
It has come to our attention that you may have received an early build of a benchmark based on the upcoming Ubisoft title H.A.W.X. 2. I'm sure you are fully aware that the timing of this benchmark is not coincidental and is an attempt by our competitor to negatively influence your reviews of the AMD Radeon HD 6800 series products. We suggest you do not use this benchmark at present as it has known issues with its implementation of DirectX® 11 tessellation and does not serve as a useful indicator of performance for the AMD Radeon HD 6800 series. A quick comparison of the performance data in H.A.W.X. 2, with tessellation on, and that of other games/benchmarks will demonstrate how unrepresentative H.A.W.X. 2 performance is of real world performance.
AMD has demonstrated to Ubisoft tessellation performance improvements that benefit all GPUs, but the developer has chosen not to implement them in the preview benchmark. For that reason, we are working on a driver-based solution in time for the final release of the game that improves performance without sacrificing image quality. In the meantime we recommend you hold off using the benchmark as it will not provide a useful measure of performance relative to other DirectX® 11 games using tessellation.
This was a response by one of the members at HardOCP who puts it well in a few words
"The only thing I can see here for sure is this: if there is a solution that works well on both vendors and they pick one for a particular vendor, then its the customers that are loosing."
We have seen this before when nVidia gets involved in how games are presented to gamers. Hurting the game experience as long as it shows nVidia in a better light appears to be in the mission statement at nVidia headquarters.
The verdict isn't out on what's going on with HAWX 2, but we did see ubisoft release a patch that REMOVED support for DX 10.1 in assasains creed when it showed AMD hardware running the game better than nVidia hardware. Gamers lost, nVidia sponsered Assasains Creed. Batman AA is also clearly relevant in guaging what nVidia esteems in it's conduct of it's relationship with developers and game "refinements".
Well I guess this explains a lot then.So much for an unbiased discussion from you.I don't think you understand. I didn't argue about the images. I'm talking about the rendering path. This is crucial for the understanding.
Hate? That's a very strong word, isn't it?
And AMD? No, not AMD itself, but Huddy, and some other PR guys.
Huddy's biggest mistake was that he stabbed a developer friend of mine in the back, in one of his big press releases, published on a large variety of sites.
As a result, the company's reputation was damaged severely, and business was rather problematic in the years that followed.
You see, you can't just do what Huddy/AMD are doing here. In this case it's Ubisoft, a big player, and they already don't exactly have a good reputation. It's not the first time they're involved in shady business... I don't really care about that.
But AMD always takes it out on the developers and the companies when AMD's hardware is 'treated unfairly' according to AMD (read: their hardware is not doing as well as they want in benchmarks... sometimes even when they're actually ahead, the greedy b'stards). This damages the reputation of these companies and the developers involved... which is especially nasty when these developers aren't actually doing what AMD accuses them of (which happened to be the case with my friend).
Basically, Huddy is the scum of the earth for what he does to developers. Don't you understand?
I can't recall nVidia going after the companies/developers directly in such situations. They generally just try to 'fix' it in the drivers, without specifically pointing the finger at the developers. It's just a bit more classy that way, and only nVidia gets hurt if they get caught.
This is what I understand, and know. I know that there was no technical reason for ATI hardware to be vendor ID locked out. I tested this myself. You seem to want to talk about the technical aspects of how AA was achieved under DX9. This has been discussed endlessly, and is immaterial.I don't think you understand. I didn't argue about the images. I'm talking about the rendering path. This is crucial for the understanding.
You use very strong words.Hate? That's a very strong word, isn't it?
sourcenVidia still has an ace up its sleeve though. They have PhysX. Unlike DirectX 11, PhysX is already being used in current games. It delivers lots of eyecandy, so it’s not that hard to make some impressive demos. It is going to be harder to show off things like tessellation and HDR compression to the general public. HDR compression mainly improves performance… Tessellation can improve detail with less performance impact, but it’s not going to be that obvious, since we already have pretty detailed graphics with per-pixel parallax mapping and self-shadow etc, which already delivers an incredible amount of detail. In fact, people had trouble seeing the difference between Crysis in DirectX 9 and DirectX 10, while Crysis used higher detail meshes in DirectX 10, and more advanced shading.
It sounds like you have some anger issues to work out, and are taking it out on anyone that likes or defends AMD products. But thanks for that, your approach makes much more sense now. Sorry to hear what happened to your friend.And AMD? No, not AMD itself, but Huddy, and some other PR guys.
Huddy's biggest mistake was that he stabbed a developer friend of mine in the back, in one of his big press releases, published on a large variety of sites.
As a result, the company's reputation was damaged severely, and business was rather problematic in the years that followed.
This is what I understand, and know. I know that there was no technical reason for ATI hardware to be vendor ID locked out. I tested this myself. You seem to want to talk about the technical aspects of how AA was achieved under DX9. This has been discussed endlessly, and is immaterial.
You use very strong words.
John Fruehe: AMDs latest and greatest liar
Intel Compiler soap, another episode of AMD fanboy idiocy
Are all AMD fans idiots?
Your vitriol for anything AMD is really obvious, so yes hate would be an appropriate term.
BTW, back when you seemed to think that tessellation was not important at all:
source
You also said this:
So basically everything I said was right and everything that everyone else said was wrong.
And you went on to basically say you're the only one with any kind of knowledge, and everyone else is an idiot including Dave Baumann.
It sounds like you have some anger issues to work out, and are taking it out on anyone that likes or defends AMD products. But thanks for that, your approach makes much more sense now. Sorry to hear what happened to your friend.
Well I guess this explains a lot then.So much for an unbiased discussion from you.
I was only able to find a few screenshots I did that show AA on and off. Ah well, I guess you are implying that because I can't find all the pics, what I'm saying is false.I am still waiting for your evidence regarding Batman - AA? :hmm:
Aha... what rendering path is that exactly?
This is what I understand, and know. I know that there was no technical reason for ATI hardware to be vendor ID locked out.
Your vitriol for anything AMD is really obvious, so yes hate would be an appropriate term.
BTW, back when you seemed to think that tessellation was not important at all
So basically everything I said was right and everything that everyone else said was wrong.
And you went on to basically say you're the only one with any kind of knowledge, and everyone else is an idiot including Dave Baumann.
It sounds like you have some anger issues to work out
Instead of being all snarky about it, why don't you just explain it to us?
Oh how i do agree Scali, PR is like a disease
I want to give you that moment where you go "Aha, so THAT's it!" all by yourself.
Besides, everyone here is so arrogant that they claim they've tested it all and know how it works, right? Prove it.
Oh no, I'm smart and mature enough to remain perfectly neutral (you should try it sometime).
I only need facts and past statements from Huddy to show what FUD he is spreading. As I said, he's not very good at what he does.
So nice try, but you're left with nothing but an unbased personal attack.
One thing worth noting is that between 60 and 80(!)% of these primitives get culled, which doesn't strike us as terribly efficient: you've just hammered the GPU with some heavy tessellation, generated a sea of triangles out of which a huge portion won't be used since they're back facing, or 0 area for example.
But it would be easier if you just explained it instead of acting so condescending and pompous.
It's always someone else with you. They are condescending, idiots, stupid, pompous, liars, wrong etc. etc.Why bother? I've explained it plenty of times already. Apparantely nobody listened then, and nobody will listen now. They just listen to what they want to hear.
Condescending and pompous, that's words I'd use to describe the attitude of the people who brought up the Batman:AA issue in this thread in the first place, on how they tested it, and all that.
When you ask a few questions, you quickly punch holes in that overly confident story of theirs, apparently.
Nice try but it's you who are being personal....Huddy shafted your friend you say....so how are you not biased against AMD and Huddy??Oh no, I'm smart and mature enough to remain perfectly neutral (you should try it sometime).
I only need facts and past statements from Huddy to show what FUD he is spreading. As I said, he's not very good at what he does.
So nice try, but you're left with nothing but an unbased personal attack.
