Gabe Newell said that x800 is 40% faster then a 6800u in Half-Life2. Which boggles my mind because as many comparisons have stated the shader engine on the 6800u is far superior to that of the x800
I'd really like to know which of the "many comparisons" have said that.
offering not only shader 3.0 support but DX9c support AND virtually unlimited shader programing.
Shader 3.0 support in the 6800? Is that why, when Farcry detects that you have a 6800 in your system, it defaults to the setting where it ONLY uses 1.1 shaders, and NO 2.0 shaders? If Nvidia can't even get decent performance out of their 2.0 shaders, why would we give a shit about 3.0?
You simply CANNOT tell me with any truth that Valve isn't programing there game to work great on ATI hardware, and sup-par on nVidia hardware.
How long have you been in the PC gaming market, exactly? Ever heard of "Nvidia, The Way It's Meant To Be Played"? or ATI's promo (forgot the name)?
Ofcourse that's what Valve is doing, since they partnered with ATI. Other games do the same with Nvidia. In the end, it's all fucked up, so please stop your Nvidia Fanboy Righteous Indignation over the whole thing.
Not when John Carmack is so in favor of shader 3.0 and nvidias new card that he is already building his next engine USING IT!
Oh right, because Carmack is actually just plain stupid and really thinks that in, oh about five years, when his next engine is going to replace Doom 3, he'll still be using Shaders 3.0.
Carmacks always goes with the fastest card, it doesn't mean shit. It just means that whatever he's promoting at that point is the fastest card at that point. There's a pretty good chance that when he gets his hands on ATI's next baby, he'll switch stances again. He's been known to do that from time to time.
Stop viewing the world through your Nvidia box, it might help your perspective a little.
This comment was edited on May 10, 19:33.