3 ms·
specifically, it sounds to me like ATI/AMD's rather-notoriously-poor OpenGL performance in action... another way to rephrase OP to take the emphasis off hardwar
by paulmd 5y ago
specifically, it sounds to me like ATI/AMD's rather-notoriously-poor OpenGL performance in action... another way to rephrase OP to take the emphasis off hardware generation (which makes no sense) would be "when I switched from NVIDIA to ATI I lost 40% of my performance"... which is still an experience many people have today with OpenGL on the AMD cards.
- exfascist 5y agoI could be wrong (I never really got into gaming as GMA950+Linux was an exceptionally bad combo for it) but I thought source was exclusively DirectX back then.
- paulmd 5y agoHL2 had both OpenGL and DirectX on paper, but the DirectX implementation was notoriously poor such that everyone used and recommended the OpenGL renderer. https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=1007962 https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=1007962 https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=931690 https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=931690 https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=987307 https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=987307 Ironically now with Valve's push for Linux gaming, I'd expect that Linux is probably a great platform for HL2, probably even better than Windows. Intel GMA drivers might still be bad though, not sure if that is too far back for the open-source driver that showed up in the Core era.
- danbee 5y agoI believe Source had both OpenGL and DirectX renderers, alongside a software renderer. Edit: I'm thinking of the GoldSrc engine used in Half-Life