Originally Posted by sccr64472
And just what do you think the process is to have Microsoft test and sign off to give WHQL support? A fee and you implied perhaps that was why they failed the test. I'm still looking for the test review I read that showed the failing, but I have 1 last quick question while I search....You mention the Slideshow as having zero credibility,but then, you provide proof that is was submitted BY ATI because it says so in the slideshow
Do you not see the inconsistency there?
Btw, here's some reading showing that Shader 3.0 doesn't have to have hardware support,it can be done with software...
And this also mentions Nvidia's architecture failing the shader 3.0,which was why they raised their eyebrow when Sony announced it was the basis for their console design...
Again, here's you reading what you choose to read, not what I posted. I did not imply any money in the Microsoft certification. Even if that's true, what bearing would it have? Last I checked nVidia is a larger company than ATi and would more likely be able to pay the fee than ATi...
I never discredited ATi's results, I simply stated that the drivers they were using in their slideshow were a year old. It even says in the screen that the drivers were something from the 6x.xx generation, very old.
Originally Posted by J3r3my
Pretty noticible difference???? Jori what the hell are you talking about? I put both screens next to eachother and the only difference I noticed was that in SM 3.0 the water was a little less blue. Nothing else was any different except that. Stop exagerating stuff just to favor your brand.
You must be pretty blind then cause it looked pretty significant to me... On the ATi card all of the water had some strange blue tint to it for some reason and the ripples looked sharper on the nVidia card.