1st generation of new hardware will often be to slow, when the programs that take advantage of the features are released. But since they also run older games faster there's still a reason to invest.
Originally posted by: g3pro
I think it's safe to say that the 5-series people not caring about SM2.0 performance were right because there were no games which utilized that ability at the time. I think it's safe to say that the 6-series people caring about SM3.0 were right because we're seeing the games starting to pile up and the cards can actually utilize it pretty well. SM4.0? It's so ridiculously far off in terms of use in games and by hardware that it's impact will be marginal. Not so with the next generations though.
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: n7
Ahahahahahaa!
This just makes me laugh even harder at all teh idiots who felt they were safe getting SM 3.0...
Ditto, we can all sit back and smile now.
Originally posted by: ExarKun333
Originally posted by: Nextman916
Originally posted by: n7
Ahahahahahaa!
This just makes me laugh even harder at all teh idiots who felt they were safe getting SM 3.0...
hey at least its better than SM 2.0 sucker :] have a nice day
ur wrong, sm2.0 is marginally AT BEST better than 3.0 (and i have a 3.0 card)....ur an idiot if thats the only reason why u by a card...
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: ExarKun333
Originally posted by: Nextman916
Originally posted by: n7
Ahahahahahaa!
This just makes me laugh even harder at all teh idiots who felt they were safe getting SM 3.0...
hey at least its better than SM 2.0 sucker :] have a nice day
ur wrong, sm2.0 is marginally AT BEST better than 3.0 (and i have a 3.0 card)....ur an idiot if thats the only reason why u by a card...
Im sure he meant it the other way around. sm 3.0 is at best, marginally better than sm 2.0
What is better about SM2?
Originally posted by: munky
The 5-series people must have not cared about performance, period, because even in the dx8 games available at the time the fx cards lagged behind. And there was a dx9 game - TR:AOD in which the fx cards performed abysmally. And in late 2004/early 2005 when dx9 games became more abundant, those with a 9800p could run them at decent settings and fps, unlike your fx cards.
And now - how many sm3 games are there? Not much, and from the few that exist like Chaos Theory and Farcry, sm3 capability is still not enough to give the 6-series a performance lead. And 10x7 no AA is hardly a setting that can utilize features like HDR "well". I never expect the first generation card to utilize it's latest features well, because software usually lags behind the hardware, and by the time the software catches up there's already newer hardware.
Originally posted by: Pr0d1gy
Originally posted by: n7
Ahahahahahaa!
This just makes me laugh even harder at all teh idiots who felt they were safe getting SM 3.0...
Exactly. As long as morons keep shelling out dough for the bigger, better technology; the more they're going to keep trying to make the current stuff obsolete.
Originally posted by: Genx87
Keep smiling as SM4 wont be out until Vista hits. It sounds like that may be late 06 early 07 then tack on the usual 24 months until games come out supporting DXNext.
One thing that will stimy DXNext support is it sounds like Microsoft is cutting off XP users at DX9. Thus the only people who will be able to even use SM4 will be required to have Vista as their OS. I bet this next incarnation of DX will take years to finally become popular just due to the amount of legacy systems out there.
If Microsoft decided to wait for the Longhorn for those new shaders, this would have meant that the next generation Nvidia and ATI chips would have had to wait for a few quarters before they would be able to get the full Shader Model 4.0 functionality.
The move from Windows XP to Longhorn will take years and Microsoft knows it, and I can bet that big games publishers would be veru upset if Shader Model 4.0 was a Longhorn baby only. µ
Originally posted by: nitromullet
Originally posted by: Genx87
Keep smiling as SM4 wont be out until Vista hits. It sounds like that may be late 06 early 07 then tack on the usual 24 months until games come out supporting DXNext.
One thing that will stimy DXNext support is it sounds like Microsoft is cutting off XP users at DX9. Thus the only people who will be able to even use SM4 will be required to have Vista as their OS. I bet this next incarnation of DX will take years to finally become popular just due to the amount of legacy systems out there.
Did you actually read the article?
If Microsoft decided to wait for the Longhorn for those new shaders, this would have meant that the next generation Nvidia and ATI chips would have had to wait for a few quarters before they would be able to get the full Shader Model 4.0 functionality.
The move from Windows XP to Longhorn will take years and Microsoft knows it, and I can bet that big games publishers would be veru upset if Shader Model 4.0 was a Longhorn baby only. µ
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Doesnt this mean games/engines based on SM4 would only START being developed now?
You wont have to worry about this until 2007.
Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
I also heard that the WGF (Windows Graphics Foundation) has bit the dust.
If it has it is an issue of nomenclature- the fundamentals of what they are doing haven't changed.
Of course, i do feel pretty stupid for supporting Sm3 so heavily now that SM4 is coming up
SM3 will be a sticking point. All of the consoles support it this generation. It will be the target dev platform for most titles for years to come. It will be the same as SM1.0 was.
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: n7
Ahahahahahaa!
This just makes me laugh even harder at all teh idiots who felt they were safe getting SM 3.0...
Ditto, we can all sit back and smile now.
Keep smiling as SM4 wont be out until Vista hits. It sounds like that may be late 06 early 07 then tack on the usual 24 months until games come out supporting DXNext.
One thing that will stimy DXNext support is it sounds like Microsoft is cutting off XP users at DX9. Thus the only people who will be able to even use SM4 will be required to have Vista as their OS. I bet this next incarnation of DX will take years to finally become popular just due to the amount of legacy systems out there.
Originally posted by: n7
Ahahahahahaa!
This just makes me laugh even harder at all teh idiots who felt they were safe getting SM 3.0...
Originally posted by: n7
Ahahahahahaa!
This just makes me laugh even harder at all teh idiots who felt they were safe getting SM 3.0...
Originally posted by: R3MF
Originally posted by: compgeek89
So... what advantages will SM 4.0 have? More speed gains? Or more capabilities?
it will introduce unified pixel and vertex shaders, which heralds the advent of the GPU becoming a general processing unit, and thus useful for many processing tasks other than pure gaming.
it might even benefit games by providing a more flexible graphics programming environment too.
Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Example; the Radeon 8500 can play BF2, but the faster GeForce Ti 4600 cannot. Yet would you even want to play BF2 on an 8500? I wouldn?t...you can run it, but you can?t ?play? it, because I play to have fun, and blurry slide shows aren?t that fun. I expect those for classes and presentations where I?m learning, not playing.
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Originally posted by: videoclone
Sorry i dont have SM3 or SM2.0b but i do have a Hot girlfriend
Me = i win.
That girl you talk to on the internet who you call your girlfriend is actually a 48 year old fat man who hasn't bathed in months. You loose.
Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
Note to self: Never buy a video card for the future.
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Originally posted by: videoclone
Sorry i dont have SM3 or SM2.0b but i do have a Hot girlfriend
Me = i win.
That girl you talk to on the internet who you call your girlfriend is actually a 48 year old fat man who hasn't bathed in months. You loose.