Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim Barad who wrote (76569)	3/17/1999 11:33:00 AM
From: Scumbria	Respond to of 186894

Haim, Depth complexities of 100 are very rare I have been told that depth complexities of 1000 are used in the CAD business. Also if a SW geometry engine is not in front of the HW, then all the content (even backfacing and completely clipped primitives) will be sent over the bus to the HW. This exacerbation of bus traffic over a SW geometry engine isn't a clear win for HW engines. It's going to be content driven. An AGP 4x system with a sophisticated geometry engine and onboard texture memory will produce extremely fast rendering, with minimal bus utilization. Scumbria

To: Haim Barad who wrote (76569)	3/17/1999 2:25:00 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Haim, Certainly, it's not a clear case that HW geometry engines will completely replace SW engines. Many SW vendors will not use a "standard" lighting algorithm and prefer to light their own vertices. The OpenGL spec is fairly specific about their lighting algorithms. If you had a choice between high speed OpenGL compliant lighting, or considerably slower proprietary lighting, which would you choose? It does not seem a wise choice to deliberately choose a slower algorithm, for most applications. (Unless you are doing something unusual like ray-tracing.) Scumbria