[RandomTiger]

ATI obviously are the best at the moment but its hardly set in stone that its going to stay that way. If NVIDIA doesnt bounce back another company could come along and take the prize.

In general it would be a bad idea to get into card specific features and optimisations although truform is probably the exception to that.

On Bobs truform is easy comment, does that mean you have resolved the crack issue? Also have you considered the problem that very large ships that curve a lot could throw the rendering polygons so far out of sync with the collision model that clipping issues result on close flybys / hull collisions.

Quick note to anyone interest, Im still committed to a software truform solution for other cards but it wont be as efficient.

Back to cards, I think glide is the example of what is the worst thing that can happen if everyone supports one card maker too much. They try to take over the market and multiple engines have to be constructed. Then look what happens when it goes wrong, the graphics subset becomes useless.

I have to say that NVIDIAs choice to try and follow the same route with a card specific language was a great disappointment and Im glad ATI seem to be going in the other direction with making cards that handle general solutions rather than demanding certain optimisations geared to a small number of cards for a relitively short time period.

My next card will probably be an ATI but Im not going to bow down and worship them and flame everything else, because they are bound to slip up sooner or later.

[HellToupee]

Originally posted by Bobboau
"you pretty much know a game is going to have minimum problems with NV"

untill your card catches fire...

hmm never encounterd that before.

[Zuljin]

a ****ty GeforceFX 5200 256mb ram -_-
I'm an ATI whore so I want a Radeon 9800XT, but I can't afford one for the very life of me...yet atleast

[IncendiaryLemon]

Originally posted by HellToupee


hmm never encounterd that before.

 The early fx models had an idle and active setting for their fans that didn't properly detect usage, screensavers were very dangerous.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Bobboau
how can any card sort an AGP slot...

someone not knowing WTF they're doing when they install it


QD you're so incorrect it's pathetic - the NV boards are _slower_ than ATI boards, the NV boards require vast cooling systems that sound like vacuum cleaners, NV boards have a pathetically high failure rate (NV will never admit to it though - so you have to believe those of us that work on computers in the real world)  

Here is a quick breakdown

Speed: ATI > NV
Stability: ATI > NV [mostly due to thermal considerations]
Features: ATI > NV
Image Quality: ATI > NV
Frame Rate: ATI ~ NV (yes, they both often get about the same framerates - that's cause NV cuts image quality intentionally in favor of frame rate)
Heat: NV runs Hotter than ATI (very bad thing)
Life Expectancy: ATI > NV
Probability Failure: NV > ATI
Driver "Safety": ATI > NV (NV has a higher Probability of drivers DAMAGING the card, due to making their cards overclock via the drivers)

Value: ATI > NV

[HellToupee]

that list just seems a tad biasd

[QuantumDelta]

Try reading some unbiased sites. ¬.¬
People spout less crap then.

http://www.tweaktown.com/document.php?dType=article&dId=613

unbiased and ATIs Radeon card wins out by the smallest of margins.

Reading the whole of the conclusion made me wonder if that's why the Nvidia FX cards don't like FS2 so much.

[SadisticSid]

I tend to look at it this way. ATI has had the 9700/9800 hardware series out for years, and these cards still beat the **** out of their NVidia equivalents that were developed a great deal of time later. And as Kaz says NVidia have only caught up by putting enormous vacuum cleaner fans on their cards.

But I'm not an ATI whore, indeed, I hope NVidia recovers and gives them a run for their money technology-wise. It's this that keeps competition healthy and prices down. However, there's still no denying that ATI produces superior products atm.

[Inquisitor]

Again, religious wars over hardware an not needed here. Let's keep it civil.

[Flipside]

Can admin take a vote off of DX8 and add one to DX9? I've just upgraded to a DX9 card, not telling you which though :Þ

[IncendiaryLemon]

same issue, if you would.

[Cyker]

IMHO.... no point in going to DX9 - will just alienate half of us for no good reason.

Hell I still play stock FS2 on my Voodoo2 just for kicks sometimes

TBH, I'm of the opinion that it's best to used the lowest version of DirectX that does all the stuff you want.

If you *have* to use DirectX.

I'd go with OpenGL personally

[RandomTiger]

Originally posted by Cyker
IMHO.... no point in going to DX9 - will just alienate half of us for no good reason.

Everyone will be able to run a DX9 fs2_open (excluding voodoo owners), they just wont have access to all *new* features, mainly DX9 shaders.

TBH, I'm of the opinion that it's best to used the lowest version of DirectX that does all the stuff you want.

We want access to shaders, DX9 shaders are a lot more useful than DX8.

If you *have* to use DirectX.
I'd go with OpenGL personally

DirectX has many flaws and the fact it isnt portable is a real shame but it has an a few advantages which are very significant to this project. It comes with a lot of high level powerful libs that let us get complex stuff done fast.

[Flipside]

That;s the whole thing though RT, you may as well upgraqde to DX9 at your own leisure anyway, it will have absolutely no impact on those with DX8 cards, and means that if and when they choose to upgrade, the DX9 specific features are there waiting for them.

If the technology is there and useable, I say go for it