Originally Posted by Nonehxc
Yes, very dissapointing, especially that bit about a low-level hardware acces graphics API...
Are you nuts? All of you want current numbers on current benches on current layers, yet AMD is touting a "closer to the metal" renderer and all you can do is talk about your preferred brand Fanboy drivel. You're not gamers nor hardware enthusiast.
You're GPU racist.
I, for one, don't care if it is red or black or green or blue. This is surely something that will go, in time, with SteamOS, and surely Nvidia and Intel are doing their own low-level acces APIs for their GPU/CPU. A step forward is a step forward, no matter the color of the shoe. If people like some of you were around at the time the first 3D chips came out, I refuse to think what would have happened if 3dfx was in war with Nvidia
Not too long ago there was some presentation that talked about the "want" of having closer to-the-metal API's available, and while everyone talks about it, the consequences of doing this are most often overlooked. Do you think game developers really want to go back to coding a game and having a completely difference graphics path/pipeline for AMD 9 series, 10 series, one for nvidia 7xx, nvidia 7xx, a couple of extra branches for intell mobile, amd apu's etc etc. Close to metal coding is CRAZY time consuming, and as soon as new hardware comes along everything breaks and needs to be patched.
this is EXACTLY the reason why directx and opengl were created, to dramatically cut down developer time to go into the incredibly low lvl details of 1 specific card/driver, and then do that a dozen times over for other cards. Close-to-metal sounds cool, but the reality is that its time consuming, expensive and requires expertise that comes with a hefty price tag in itself.
edit: correction it was a blog: