It wasn't directed at you. And sorries.
Tis ok..
Just be careful, we don't want wars in the forums
I did say MANY things.
Also you are going into the realm of taking information and changing it to make a point about something else.
Btw you are wrong about hardware tesselation not on anything under DX11, The old Radeon 8500 was the first GPU to feature hardware tesselation - so you can jog that to memory for some quiz you may come across on the history of GPUs or whatever
As for game engines being the direct cause, no it's not, it comes down to hardware, you could have a brilliant 3d engine great memory resourcing etc, but yet on 3% of specific hardware its rubbish. Is it the fault of the engine? or the hardware?
I agree a poorly optimized or built/compiled engine can have problems also. But it is not the be all and end all of problems.
You also have to remember users come here to get some ideas on what may be right or wrong, thats why I don't get too technical as users may have a brain explosion trying to make sense of it all.
So I pinpointed what the usual suspects are for poor gaming performance from the information provided, if the 9600 was working fine for someone then it has to come down to either drivers or the motherboard (not having a good FSB etc to cope with the 460). Hence why I stated those possibles
Well, there's tessellation and there's tessellation.
The Radeon 8500 had a special (very limited, which is why I didn't mention it - and I remember, I had a Radeon 9000 myself, and a 8500 in a later PC) tessellation feature, dubbed TruForm 1.0. Problem is (as with Glide, for example - man, 3DFX had potential all those years back) that this was a proprietary standard, i.e. a lot of users would not be able to utilize it, since ATi didn't own the market. Thus, it was not widely adopted back then - and didn't really come back (integrated into a standard, and a lot more advanced) until now, in DX11. But yes, theoretically you're correct.
Well, you say potato, I say potato. (Damn, that doesn't really come out well writing it.)
It's all about the Software<->Hardware commands. (In other words; drivers.) It's about how the software handles the hardware, and the error is... That's where it gets blurry. Some hardware designers cut corners, for example. (GeForce FX series and DirectX9 is a lovely example of this. Performance was really, really subpar, even if the cards, in theory, supported the DX9 standards. (Without any real support for 24-bit shader code, causing them to be mediocre in DX9 performance.))
It's a bit better these days, and even if the hardware does it's job of being pretty much standardized, even between competitors - the drivers... sure as hell aren't. That causes problems, and the problem thus lies between the SW and the HW, i.e. in the SW control of the HW.
I do apologize for being too technical in my post - as an RMA worker I guess it's a habit of work, and temperatures and PSU performance are sounding alarms in my mind when I hear a similar problem. Today's computers, with modern components and operating system, have a tendency to keep themselves up to date software-wise, without bothering the end-user much. And if something is not up to date, and is required, it'll often tell you so. (When it comes to Windows updates, DirectX, C++ runtimes, etc. etc.)
I'm still seeing heat and power as potential problems though, the 460 produces more heat than a 9600, consumes more power, and thus... they are not unlikely.
No offense, of course, I just wanted to broaden the view (most posts were regarding software issues, whereas mine took up potential hardware issues as well). I do apologize for being a geek though, or if I came out sounding harsh or in any way bad mannered towards anyone.
Oh, and aren't all posts in the realm of changing and twisting information to some degree? Otherwise it'd be just identical posts.
[Edited by PeTTs0n, 7/7/2011 9:28:00 PM]
Important Board Topics
Trending Topics