wh3resmycar :
if you happened to have a more updated review then post it.
those are the only ones that i found that compared them @ stock. all the review sites that came up with the newer version of ccc happens to test it on a 4850 factory oc'd vs a 9800gtx+ @ stock and vice versa (toms review had a slightly OC'd 4850).
Which is fine when it's a GTX+ vs HD4850 instead of GTX vs HD4850, or do you think only other people should play fair?
Seriously, it was a simple request without sarcasm until you addes it: Got something that's more recent than the summer that pits virgin HD4K drivers against an EOL product with optimized drivers?
wh3resmycar :
so which is more accurate, comparing 2 cards @ stock, or posting a review with one OC'd the other isnt?
For the task, probably the one that applies to the cards being tested, for what people would do when buying, probably the one that pits equally priced cards (well even the factory OC'ed HD4850s are usually cheaper) against each other in a current situation, which would be the HD4850 OC'ed versus the GTX+ both with the latest drivers and games.
That seems pretty fair, and pretty straight forward, and there's a bunch of those. Sound fair
wh3resmycar :
since when? 2007? its not like intel rebuild the whole havok engine from the ground up when they acquired it did they? and why should i care if intel owns havok when it runs on an amd machine? whats the point?
The point is rather simple, which is why you miss it and try to make it into another discussion, like your other ones. You say I'm against PhysX because I'm an ATi fanboi pumping Havok, but it (Havok) is owned by intel, and was previously the darling of nV and ATi, with nV actually being the launch partner for HavokFX with their SLi physics. That's the point, it's not abou being an AMD/ATi fanboi, just because you're an nVidia fanboi, it's about not wanting shiny physics before, during, after the PhysX era, regardless of who brings it to me, and if I were promoting Havok for the sake of Havok, that would make me an intel fanboi, not and AMD/ATi one despite your charges to that effect. That's the point. Pershing following that up with people only using Havok because they were forced to with ATi cards was similar to that reaction by you, it's about people using one or the other because they have to, it should be a moot point because everyone would want to. Sofar, we're nowhere near there. And that Medge's implementation lets you run it via CPU mean it' all available to everyone, unlike what you you said.
Game physics, not shiny physics, that's the other simple straight forward point, and like I pointed out, I'm far from being the only one who feels that way, and I've also never changed that position regardless of the implementation or whomever owned it. I've always been about the bullet-drop, not the bits of crap flying through the air or more ragdolls.
wh3resmycar :
like what ive said, typical ATI fanboys will just see it shiny dust. if those effects are really doable sans hardware acceleration, we shouldve seen something like it with FO3. and i wonder why you're not cursing @ that game for having mediocre havok effects. now if the havok on Fo3 happens to gave you a WOW EFFECT and MEdge didnt. well, thats typical amd fan boy stuff.
Why would I curse a game that doesn't sell itself as being the be all and end all of physics implementations? I definitely having been pimping the physics in FallOut3 or in Oblivion on which it was based on. I had high hopes for it based on their pre-release PR, just like Crysis, but their reality was dissapointing, and just before launch both made it clear, they fell short of their expectations and didn't include the level of physics they had hoped for. I don't think you've seen me praise or woudl see me praise the physics in FO3, I know like Oblivion, they aren't impressive, and they're only a step up from a game like Morrowind, but not necessarily from a game like HL2, so you're essentially saying I should be more appreciative of the debris in MEdge because it's better kind of dissapointing? The only game that impressed me sofar was HL2, and that's because next to no one was at that level, and I didn't care if it was Havok or Novodex behind it; the only thing that that knowledge did was to unrealistically boost my hopes for Oblivion because it was Havok too and Bethesda said they were improving their physics over Morrowind. Which just goes to show you, both can dissapoint.
wh3resmycar :
if you happened to have seen anything comparable or like the PhysX effects with MEdge before, name that game. trust me, you cant.
Why would I want something comparable? I don't that's the point, I don't want the 'bad HDR' / 'shiny phsysics'. You seem to think that it's about that, you go out of your way to drive to physics, but take exception with the fact that we are focus on PhysX being the poor implementation, not being able to split the two.
It's like saying shadows = good , self-shadows = good, Oblivion self-shadowing = bad ; therefore you draw the conclusion, everyone else is saying shadows are bad and they must be Fable or WOW fans. Nah, I've always been in the physics is good, gameplay physics is good, and the future will be nice camp, but I've also remained in the shiny physics is bad camp, and the ownership change of PhysX hasn't changed where I stand on that, nor has it changed the implementation, other than you no longer need to buy a PPU which has no other task, that takes away one fault, but doesn't address the others, while adding CPU overhead as a drawback. It still doesn't speak to 4745454b's statement that a larger number still use Havok, so saying that nV is the future is just an empty statment, especially as we go to the next point...
wh3resmycar :
and why would would i be bothered if PhysX/Havok dies once Game Physics becomes standardized with Dx11/OpenCL? did i said PhysX will be the standard of it all? ive mentioned this before, PhysX will be another Glide scenario if this continues.
Because that reinforces the idea that it doesn't matter, and it's NOT the future unlike what Pershing said. You do realize that that was the impetus, not that someone does or doesn't like mirror's edge as a game, or is against physics in general. It's specific to physX, so OCL and DX11 pretty much run counter to that statement, especially since nV isn't abandoning CUDA for them, nor directly changing it for them. You'd have to run a wrapper or change code again to make it work, thus removing the benefits of OCL and compute shaders. Since it's a standard C/C++ library, then the best way would be to go straight through without a seoncd layer, meaning it would be available ot all at that time. That's why it matters that the future is more agnostic than the hardware specific CUDA+PhysX implementation, and also why it runs counter to that original postby Pershing.
wh3resmycar :
so you're assuming im a PhysX Fanboy just because i liked the PhysX (hardware assisted) effects on MEdge?..
..nope, thats what Boneheaded ATI fanboys consider as blasphemous idolatry. like what ive said, i never singled out nor ignore anything (which you keep on putting on my mouth that i did lol) when i mentioned Physics as a whole will mature.
Same reason you call other people fanbois and think that since we don't like the shiny physics implementation currently and previous used in PhysX, we're against all physics. If your position were forward looking about all physics like you pretend then instead of trying to talk about maturing PhysX alone you would talk about maturing Havok and how they both would be replaced, but that's not what you did was it? If it was about physics as a whole then the commments about Shiny physics shouldn't have illicited the fanboi comments on your part, because then it would be about physics or no physics, not AMD/ATi/Havok/intel/etc vs nV, or is that me putting words in your mouth?
Seriously, perhaps if you focused less on the Fanboi and name-calling crap and more on the physics, you wouldn't have missed that part. [:thegreatgrapeape:6]
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram