ATI's Radeon 9600 Pro GPU.... NO F BUFFER @#$%^&*

[London Midland & Scotland]

This has turned me off in getting this card.





" No F-buffer - Unlike ATI's high-end R350 chip, the RV350 doesn't have an
F-buffer. Without an F-buffer, the Radeon 9600 Pro will be unable to handle
shader programs more complex than what's called for by Microsoft's DirectX 9
spec, but it's still unclear how much of a limitation that will be in the real
world. It will probably be some time before games exploit all of DirectX 9's
shader capabilities, much less move beyond them. You can read more about what
exactly an F-buffer is and what it does in our Radeon 9800 Pro review. "


http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2003q2/radeon-9600pro/index.x?pg=1

 

[Anders Albrechtsen]

This has turned me off in getting this card.





" No F-buffer - Unlike ATI's high-end R350 chip, the RV350 doesn't have an
F-buffer. Without an F-buffer, the Radeon 9600 Pro will be unable to handle
shader programs more complex than what's called for by Microsoft's DirectX 9
spec, but it's still unclear how much of a limitation that will be in the real
world. It will probably be some time before games exploit all of DirectX 9's
shader capabilities, much less move beyond them. You can read more about what
exactly an F-buffer is and what it does in our Radeon 9800 Pro review. "


http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2003q2/radeon-9600pro/index.x?pg=1

It doesn't seem to make any great difference. Halflife 2 which is fully DX9
compliant do not seem to be affected. Besides what are the alternatives in
that price range?

 

[JN]

This has turned me off in getting this card.

F-buffer is beyond dx9 spec and they probably implemented it just to look
better than nvidia on paper

 

[Ben Pope]

F-buffer is beyond dx9 spec and they probably implemented it just to look
better than nvidia on paper

Why the requirement to look better than nVidia on paper?

Opinions from some developers:
http://www.beyond3d.com/reviews/ati/r350/index.php?p=fb

Basically it's a good idea, but not necessarily useful. However, removing
basic limitations is always good, especially when it means you can stop
thinking about hardware and architectural differences and get on with coding
the game.

Ben

 

[nathantw]

That means that fewer software packages will support that feature if at all.