4 ms·

Note that the source of TressFX is fully available in the DX samples. This cannot be said about whatever Nvidia does which cannot be disclosed to IHVs.

zamalek 11y ago
> Note that the source of TressFX is fully available in the DX samples What does that have to do with my core point of AMD sitting back and complaining? > This cannot be said about whatever Nvidia does which cannot be disclosed to IHVs. NVIDIA provides restricted source to everything but TXAA, PhysX and beta libraries.[1] I'll re-iterate my point: AMD would have access to the code if they walked in the door. [1]: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Editorial/NVIDIA-and-AMD-Fight-over-NVIDIA-GameWorks-Program-Devil-Details/NVIDIAs-Response http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Editorial/NVIDIA-and-AMD-Fight-...
- the_mitsuhiko 11y ago
  > What does that have to do with my core point of AMD sitting back and complaining? AMD: here is the code, optimize it. NVidia: there is the binary blob (you can't look at the code), feel free to make your card exhibit the same performance characteristics as our geforce reference cards without infringing on our patents. No, you can't change the code. You could hot patch game executables though. AMD is not allowed to look at the source.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- Narishma 11y ago
  I think the issue is that the licensing of GameWorks, which HairWorks is part of, prevents the game developer from sharing it's source code with anyone other than other licensees. That means AMD has to reverse engineer it if they want to optimize their drivers for it. That isn't the case for TressFX, which is freely available to anyone and allowed Nvidia to quickly add support for it after Tomb Raider released.
  - zamalek 11y ago
    Right, that makes sense. It may not be an issue depending on which conflicting piece of information you go with.[1] [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9582304 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9582304

zamalek 11y ago

> Note that the source of TressFX is fully available in the DX samples What does that have to do with my core point of AMD sitting back and complaining? > This cannot be said about whatever Nvidia does which cannot be disclosed to IHVs. NVIDIA provides restricted source to everything but TXAA, PhysX and beta libraries.[1] I'll re-iterate my point: AMD would have access to the code if they walked in the door. [1]: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Editorial/NVIDIA-and-AMD-Fight-over-NVIDIA-GameWorks-Program-Devil-Details/NVIDIAs-Response http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Editorial/NVIDIA-and-AMD-Fight-...

the_mitsuhiko 11y ago
> What does that have to do with my core point of AMD sitting back and complaining? AMD: here is the code, optimize it. NVidia: there is the binary blob (you can't look at the code), feel free to make your card exhibit the same performance characteristics as our geforce reference cards without infringing on our patents. No, you can't change the code. You could hot patch game executables though. AMD is not allowed to look at the source.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
Narishma 11y ago
I think the issue is that the licensing of GameWorks, which HairWorks is part of, prevents the game developer from sharing it's source code with anyone other than other licensees. That means AMD has to reverse engineer it if they want to optimize their drivers for it. That isn't the case for TressFX, which is freely available to anyone and allowed Nvidia to quickly add support for it after Tomb Raider released.
- zamalek 11y ago
  Right, that makes sense. It may not be an issue depending on which conflicting piece of information you go with.[1] [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9582304 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9582304