3 ms·
It comes down to the fact that in comparing GPUs from a general consumer perspective, unlike traditional benchmarking the goal isn't to look at the technical de
by dotnet00 4y ago
It comes down to the fact that in comparing GPUs from a general consumer perspective, unlike traditional benchmarking the goal isn't to look at the technical details of "how much time do these take to execute this exact same algorithm" but "how much time do these take to produce these visually indistinguishable images", since the end user doesn't really care if the algorithm being used is the same, they just want the same output to be produced faster.
- mastax 4y agoI remember in 2008 or thereabouts there was some controversy because one vendor rendered some things at a higher quality than the other. It was a relatively small thing like the edges of alpha textures or texture filtering or something. There was a period of time where some video card reviews would include a visual quality comparison because there could be noticable differences between the two.
- dotnet00 4y agoThere were still various 'hard' fixed function components in GPUs which would cause that kind of visual difference back in the day. Technically this does sort of still happen these days (eg the period of time when NVIDIA cards had ray tracing support but AMD cards did not, the quality of the video encoder, or nowadays with the various super-resolution methods used by each vendor), in which case those do tend to get treated separately in third-party benchmarks since not everyone really cares for the quality of those.