8/3/2023 0 Comments Opengl es 2.0 ps3![]() ![]() An example would be D3 where both have 'capable' hardware that is OGL1.5+ compliant/capable, but the GF6 outperformed the X8 series partly because of the way D3, using OGL, handled early Z-culling compared to the 'typical' method in DX, and focusing on the architecture to play to one API more than another does then play a factor. While nV and ATi have different propietary extensions (now close to equal, but still favouring nV) the biggest differences are how they are implemented and how they can be exploited for a general path. Regardless of the API the hardware not only needs to be compliant but have the architecture to support the feature set called for or required to achieve a desired effect/result. ![]() There are important hardware limits and for the PS3/RSX they would fall within the current OGL2.0++ limits that the GF6/7 series has. The GPU has hardware limits and regardless of the 'firmeware', BIOS, or API it might never be able to perform a task regardless of the extensions you add and whatnot, they just can't be done (like FP16HDR+AA), but what the API et al might be able to do is to work with what they've got to make things similar if not equal, and that will once again be a hardware consideration more than anything because it's unlikely that the APIs or compliers will be limited. ![]() Yeah but you don't understand that the question is a hardware one and you guys are derailing him into only into the API/compiler direction that will confuse him more. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |