GF3 STILL has compression bug! BAHAHAHAHA!

[DuRaNgO]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">..the brand spanking new GeForce3 has the same DXT1 bug as all previous nVidia cards </font>

Yes, take my $600 please

Read it here!

[This message has been edited by DuRaNgO (edited 05 March 2001).]

[Topha]

from how i understand that article, they just fixed it. thats not bad, considering it only took them, how long?? Two years??

[DuRaNgO]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">DXT3 is a less efficient compression algorithm than DXT1-- you're looking at 4:1 instead of 6:1</font>

They didn't fix it, they created a work-around (hack) that forces it to use dxt3 instead which is far from the effectiveness of dxt1

[Marshmallowman]

damn I was going to say that
99

[Topha]

dont know much about this, but it means that the problem is in the hardware?

[mdhome]

.....But look on the bright side.
Before you chaps criticise Nvidia ask yourselves a simple question. What has Matrox released in the past 2 years?


regards MD

[The PIT]

Name something that matrox has released in the last two years.
Thats easy. G450 G450etv the RT2000.

[Kosh Naranek]

Had a millenium, G200 and G400 Max....
Now i have an ASUS V7700 GF2 GTS......

Yawn, i'm bored.....

THIS is stupid.....if only matrox had a Graphics card with texture compression then this discussion would be worth something......

[Snake-Eyes]

Agreed, Kosh. Sorry DuRaNgO. I avoided replying earlier, but had the same thought. I still love the display from my G400 Max, but my GTS has a ton over it. Even though there IS a problem with the DXT1 textures on a GF, GF2, and now GF3, at least these cards can do something with compressed textures. And while a workaround using DXT3 mode isn't a real fix, it still allows full quality from the original textures with more of a performance increase than I get from my G400 (since it doesn't even support compressed textures).

Anyhow, guess I'll bite my tongue and bide my time some more, hoping Matrox really does annouce a new gaming solution later this month. It's just been so long now..

------------------
Ace

[Percuvius]

Too bad Matrox users have no idea what they are missing out on. Here's a link so you can get an idea anyways.

http://www.gamebasement.com/pages/ho...articles&id=34

[Rags]

Perv,

Just because we are Matrox users doesn't mean we don't have other hardware.

Do you have GF3? I didn't think so.

Rags

[Percuvius]

Ummmm Fags, why would I want a Gayforce3 with busted dxt1 for $500-$600 USD????? thats just laughable. Also the Gayforce3 isn't even shipping yet so Duh! I dont have one.
I have a card in my machine right now that has awesome 32 bit texture compression support so I dont need a gayforce3 either. Also ATi has announced that the Radeon2 will beat GF3 in all specifications. I'll bet for around 1/2-2/3 the price as well.

Percuvius...

------------------
P3-733EB@825mhz
256MB Infineon PC133@150
Gigabyte6vx7-4x VIA133A
Radeon AIW32DDR@188/188
Voodoo2/12
SB Live! X-gamer
Maxtor 7200rpm/30g
Plextor 12/10/32A
Pioneer 10x DVD
PanasonicP11021"monitor
ADSL 1.5MB

[This message has been edited by Percuvius (edited 11 March 2001).]

[Rags]

Perv,

Yeah, I remember when ATI announced the Radeon would beat the GF2 all around as well. Too bad reality set in The Radeon is nothing but a GF2 Mx with better 3D display quality.

Rags

[Percuvius]

Fags, you show your ignorance yet again. The Radeon is much faster than the geforce2MX and it supports way more dx8 features. When the Radeon came out it did beat the geforce2 in benchmarks, it was only with a later driver release that the geforce2 gts and ultra surpassed in framerate. Big deal the drivers have been developing for 3 years now compared to 7 months on the ATi. I'd like to see what kind of framerates the gayforce2 line would get on 3 texture/per pixel games or games that use environmental bump mapping, it would be laughable. Heres another look at what your missing.

http://www.gamebasement.com/pages/ho...articles&id=37

Percuvius...

------------------
P3-733EB@825mhz
256MB Infineon PC133@150
Gigabyte6vx7-4x VIA133A
Radeon AIW32DDR@188/188
Voodoo2/12
SB Live! X-gamer
Maxtor 7200rpm/30g
Plextor 12/10/32A
Pioneer 10x DVD
PanasonicP11021"monitor
ADSL 1.5MB

[Rags]

Perv,

You are the ignorant one, the Radeon can't even keep up with my G450 running win2k games, and the 2D performance is even lower than the MX. You had better get your facts straight. Like I said before, not everyone runs win9x, BTW I am missing nothing. I have a Radeon, and it blows goats running win2k, and knowing ATI's support, it always will.


Rags



[This message has been edited by Rags (edited 11 March 2001).]