View Single Post
Old 01-29-05, 12:59 AM   #186
Registered User
ChrisRay's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 5,101

Alright, So lets clarify your position on this. Just so I understand it properly. I would like you to forgive me and us for being "Mis informed".

#1. You dont believe that there is any performance to be gained from transfering some geometry load to the GPU. Personally I dont agree with you here. I understand why Sony chose not too. But the GPU has alot of geometry processing power being wasted. Assuming the polygons were skinned on the GPU, It would free up more power to the CPU. It's not really unreasonable to assume this.

#2. You dont believe that implementing SM 2.0 was a magical performance fix for the slow performance in EQ 2. I agree. But that doesnt neccasarily mean there arent certain areas in the game that could benefit from a more unified lighting model. If you have any reason to believe otherwise. I'd like for you to share it. Obviously the entire game wouldnt need to be filled with SM 2.0 type shaders. There are many shaders in HL2, Far Cry ect which dont need high precision longer instructons.

But surely there are situations and circumstances where some lighting shaders can be processed in a single pass. The real question is. What shaders would benefit from this? Obviously not all of them.

#3. I dont see a reason for your hostility here. I personally have never suggested switching to SM 2.0 for every shader was the solution. Actually its obsurd. I do believe geometry processing could be better balanced between GPU and CPU currently. I also b believe there are circumstances where single passing some shaders might be ideal to current rendering method. I understand that such recoding will take a great deal of time and I also understand that it would require extensive testing and restesting of every changed area.

#4. As a matter of fact, I dont suffer from the stutter. But that does not mean it doesnt exist for several users. Because we dont have a stuttering issue does mean that others dont. Secondly its obvious that this discussion has gone off topic since there are well over 180 posts/replies. As such I thought it was within merit to discuss the EQ 2 engine. The only thing I have experienced with EQ 2 is poor performance. ((But within reasonable expectation as well))


SLI Forum Administrator


Last edited by ChrisRay; 01-29-05 at 01:18 AM.
ChrisRay is offline   Reply With Quote