PC graphics question

J

Jet Set Willy

Guest
And what does that have to do with resolution?

Also, filtering takes up NO texture memory. Because it's filtering. You don't really seem to have a clue about what you're on about.
 

suckthismeat

New member
ok lets see here, if the Video card is using HARDWARE filtering, the Video card is going to be needing the memory, if the Video card is using HARDWARE FSAA then the video card is going to need the memory or how about Texture and lighting again HARDWARE PROCESSED - is this adding up yet, or need I go on....

If none of this is done by the video card (essentiall saying a software T&L) then how is it that those options are not supported on older cards ex Voodoo series did NOT support Hardware T&L (up to the Voodoo4 I believe, the Voodoo 5 did finnaly include that as I recall though - but that may not be entirely accurate) or the GF2 I believe was the last Nvidia series with a software T&L - and I learned that all from LINUX as UT 2k3 Requires a GF3 class or better so that I can have hardware T&L.

THAT takes memory does it not? and the more complex anything gets, the more it requires does it not?
 
J

Jet Set Willy

Guest
What are you talking about? What do you think memory is? You clearly don't know anything about hardware, so shush!

One example: HARDWARE filtering. It takes the plain texture FROM memory, and as it draws it across the polygon face it uses special calculations to improve the quality as it's interpolated between vertices. The hardware part comes from the built-in optimisation to make this a fast operation. Filtering is in fact designed to make lower resolution textures viable over a larger area - a memory SAVING technique.

If you insist on talking out of your arse, don't do it in the presence of people who are wise enough to prove you wrong.
 

Spekkio

Banned
Originally posted by Lemon@Mar 10 2004, 07:28 AM
What are you talking about? What do you think memory is? You clearly don't know anything about hardware, so shush!

One example: HARDWARE filtering. It takes the plain texture FROM memory, and as it draws it across the polygon face it uses special calculations to improve the quality as it's interpolated between vertices. The hardware part comes from the built-in optimisation to make this a fast operation. Filtering is in fact designed to make lower resolution textures viable over a larger area - a memory SAVING technique.

If you insist on talking out of your arse, don't do it in the presence of people who are wise enough to prove you wrong.
Fuck you.
You almost made me use a smiley to express my joy when I read this..

It was hilarious, and thanks for enlightening me on the exact process of what happens.
*bookmark*
 

suckthismeat

New member
you just said it yourself though, it takes memmory to do that. meaning the fastest access to the texture to filter it it, IS ON THE BOARD, otherwise if has to use the system bus to access the main memory in order to fetch the texture.... A SLOW PROCESS, hence the need to increse AGP bus speeds, either way, using the system to get the information is a slower means that storing the texture in the Video Bards RAM, and those textures can be quite large....easlily chewing up 128 Meg of video memory if they wanted to.(3d mark does that as part of the benchmark, you think that 128M texture sits on your systems RAM?)

your a moron
 
J

Jet Set Willy

Guest
Right, he's suspended for spreading misinformation as usual and being arrogant about it as usual. I'll campaign for a full ban. He has no use.
 

Spekkio

Banned
Originally posted by suckthismeat@Mar 11 2004, 01:55 AM
you just said it yourself though, it takes memmory to do that. meaning the fastest access to the texture to filter it it, IS ON THE BOARD, otherwise if has to use the system bus to access the main memory in order to fetch the texture.... A SLOW PROCESS, hence the need to increse AGP bus speeds, either way, using the system to get the information is a slower means that storing the texture in the Video Bards RAM, and those textures can be quite large....easlily chewing up 128 Meg of video memory if they wanted to.(3d mark does that as part of the benchmark, you think that 128M texture sits on your systems RAM?)

your a moron
And if you've got a GPU that can execute all the fancy calculations as opposed to a lot of texture memory, you'll outperform it.

If you fill your entire texture memory but the GPU takes 10 minutes to actually process all of it, you'll still have crappy FPS.
 
J

Jet Set Willy

Guest
Just ignore him, he has no idea. Seems to think that on top of the original texture, exta operations eat up video memory too.
 

Spekkio

Banned
Originally posted by Lemon@Mar 11 2004, 09:53 AM
Just ignore him, he has no idea. Seems to think that on top of the original texture, exta operations eat up video memory too.
That would be the day.
Delete his posts or something, before the topicstarter actually believes him and buys a card based only on texture memory.
 
J

Jet Set Willy

Guest
I'm just going to close this at the next off-topic post.
 

suckthismeat

New member
Originally posted by Spekkio+Mar 11 2004, 09:46 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Spekkio @ Mar 11 2004, 09:46 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-suckthismeat@Mar 11 2004, 01:55 AM
you just said it yourself though, it takes memmory to do that. meaning the fastest access to the texture to filter it it, IS ON THE BOARD, otherwise if has to use the system bus to access the main memory in order to fetch the texture.... A SLOW PROCESS, hence the need to increse AGP bus speeds, either way, using the system to get the information is a slower means that storing the texture in the Video Bards RAM, and those textures can be quite large....easlily chewing up 128 Meg of video memory if they wanted to.(3d mark does that as part of the benchmark, you think that 128M texture sits on your systems RAM?)

your a moron
And if you've got a GPU that can execute all the fancy calculations as opposed to a lot of texture memory, you'll outperform it.

If you fill your entire texture memory but the GPU takes 10 minutes to actually process all of it, you'll still have crappy FPS. [/b][/quote]
I never said the memory would take the place of the GPU, all I said was it is just as important as games grow and evolve, try to run any game on 5 meg video memory as Waz seems to think is possible (need I quote that post) and see how far you get.

and waz you are just pissed cause I am right, and dont bother suspending me, I shal do the same thing you have done, use a multiple screen names.... (this is the 3rd now that _I_ know of)

Oh yeah and waz, this does apear to go right with the topic so shutup.
 

Nick

New member
Quit your pointless babble, OK?

You'll use multiple screen names and each one will be banned.
 
J

Jet Set Willy

Guest
No, I said that the screen buffer would only take up a small amount of the graphic card's total memory, you moron. You're just being harmfully stupid again. You don't know shit about computers, you can't even grasp the basics.

DAMN that guy is pathetic. Actually makes me depressed that somebody so damned stupid could exist. The sad thing is that he's a Linux zealot, so he clearly tries to learn about computers and still ends up being horribly tech-illiterate.
 
J

Jet Set Willy

Guest
All that does is explain the size of screen buffers and texture memory. We've already covered that. Not entirely helpful.
 

beefcakes

New member
the point of that article of course being "The ammount of memory textures take up varies massivley, depending on how many textures are needed at once, and what resolution they are and what color depth they are"

also note that they mentioned the greatest use of video memory are in the textures, bump maps, and light maps
 
J

Jet Set Willy

Guest
Yes, games use texture memory differently. We know. Naturally a game could conceivably use 128MB for one texture, but none do, so it's best to get a fast card with a modest amount of RAM.
 

beefcakes

New member
true, though if you have the money, you might as well get 256, the games will probably be using it soon enough anyway. Think about how quickly 64M became the standard, with 128 slowing replaecing it.
 
Top