By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
fatslob-:O on 29 March 2014
Edit Thread
Eddie_Raja said:
This is one of the biggest fail threads I have ever seen. In most games you can turn down (or off) the tessellation and not tell the difference without looking really hard. AMD cards are classically better at larger textures and AA, which is far more noticeable. 

On top of that AMD was the ONLY option in terms of pricing. 
1) Nvidia's CPU's are awful.
2) Intel's graphics are awful
3) AMD has good CPU's and great graphics.

P.S. The 280X loses to the 270X in your "benchmark." That makes absolutily no sense so good job finding the most non-nonsensical benchmark I have ever seen.

 

Eddie_Raja said:
Pemalite said:
GProgrammer said:
With my Graphics Programmer cap on

Tessellation is way down the list of useful GFX tech


I disagree.
Geometry is going to play a massive role this coming generation.
is much more scalable.


Disagree all you want.  Tessalation is way over done in Nvidia games to make AMD cards look bad.  Play BF4.  Highest poligon counts you will see, and guess what?  AMD card perform way better...

 

AMD cards are just fine at high polygon counts as long as you aren't deliberatily trying to sabotage the competition. (It's not like Nvidia is known to do that /s)

Why are you damage controlling for AMD so much on the tessellation front ? I already knew that AMD was the ONLY option for console manufacturers but I was expressing one of my concerns. As to why the 280X gets beaten by the 270X is because AMD's tessellation engines scales better with clock which is quite sad ... 

Tessellation is over done ? Wow your on a roll to point out the culprit so quickly when it's clearly AMD's fault for not producing a truly parallel solution. If anything AMD are framing themselves by putting in that AMD optimizied tessellation setting in the driver ...