Ok, here is the link to the Banshee review at AGN
agn3d.com
Go to Hardware (left frame), then look for the Banshee article; I think it is at the top.
They have a nice interview along with the review. The only thing that confuses me is that the numbers look great, but the reviewer says that he thinks TNT and Savage may do a little better. Savage? When DIMD said that Savage would be low end, that made me feel that Banshee was clearly superior; I figure DIMD has had their hands on both pieces of silicon for a while...
In the interview the TDFX guy says that TNT will do 2 pixels per pass but, not in multitexturing games, and so that that will slow it down. Is he trying to confuse us? I thought that it was clear that the dual pipeline architecture ran 2 pixels per cycle for apps that do not support SPM, and will do 2 texels per on games that do. IF they get this to work, this is clearly superior to the V2 design. So why is he knocking it? Is there something I missed or is he trying to belittle the competition? (no, I am not big on TNT as I have SERIOUS doubts that they will get much over 100mHz without spontaneously combusting...) |
