quote:Original post by Triencoquote:Original post by AxoDosS
I have also experienced this lose of performance. Very frustrating.
at least so far it was always extreme enough to let you know something is awfully wrong. though i prefered the bug where allocating LESS than a few mb would kill performance. wonder if nvidia will someday care to fix their vbo support or if they are just %%§& because the arb prefered atis version (just like with certain dx9 features resulting at first in lousy performance of nvidias cards)
In an attempt to head off an ATi vs Nvidia war;
* Any bugs in NVs VBO impliementation has nuffin todo with them prefering one interface over another, if they picked one over the other it would be for conceptul (sp?) reasons, remember, this extension will allow for things where texture data could be dealt with in the same way, a VAR system wouldnt make sense for that to work.
* The whole DX thing was NVs fault more than anything, they tried to push the 32/16bit standard, however MS decided that 24bit was enuff, which is what ATI designed for. (i seem to recall something about NV not really taking part in the DX9 discussions as well), so in effect they brought it apon theirselves by not taking part
(before i get accused of ''fan-boy''isms, i should point out that until the 9700pro i got last year I''ve only had Nvidia cards from the TNT onwards, so i''m not blind to one side or the other)