By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
chakkra said:
Pemalite said:

Not once have I talked about performance, I have talked about hardware features.

They are the same thing.
I have already elaborated on how the approaches differ prior.

It's just like Tessellation, AMD and nVidia approached the issue very differently (Truform vs Polymorph vs Evergreen Graphics Engine), they all offered the same feature in the end and yes they both had different levels of performance, but I am not talking about performance.

But these features are all about performance, each and every one of them was designed with one thing and one thing only in mind; performance. If you were expecting something else, you're going to be disappointed.

It's not just about performance, that is a fallacious line of thinking.

Often a feature gets introduced not because of performance reasons, but because it may also reduce development burden on game developers.
Remember what runs on top of graphics hardware... Games.
nVidia and AMD both work closely with developers and various API's to extract as much ease-of-development as possible with various development tools and optimizations.

I.E. Case in point TressFX. - It allows for advanced simulation of hair, grass and fur by leveraging various middle-ware libraries that just happened to be GPU accelerated. - It greatly expedited development time, but enabling it? There was certainly an impact to performance and efficiency, but that was worth the trade-off for the visual gains.

So no. It's not just about performance, it's often just about reducing development time and increasing visuals.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--