|Originally posted by Thor1182
I argued till blue in the face with divine already with this issue and he didn't budge. Funny how in a spec sheet that they made how a software change made a difference because it changed how registers were used and also enabling some calculations to take one cyce instead of two, nope no change in software can make a difference... not like making a two cycle operation to one is a performance gain
the DX9 standard was made around the chip ATI made and NVIDIA didn't have a say till the end where it was already too late to make a difference. DX9.1 is more NV3x friendly thus making calls that chip can run better, no no performance gain can be made form that
Why should i budge? My stance on this is not simple defiance. I have reviewed what i can find on the hardware, how it handles the registers, etc.
I would be very supprised if you can make the FX do a one pass on a normal two pass register. if i am wrong, i will be happy, ad admit it (i have an FX5900U).
And no, the DX9 standard was not made around the ATI chip. The ATI chip was made around the DX9 standard, and the FX was made to handle Cg shaders. That is a big part of the reason it is so crappy.