Re: feedback to NVidia [was: Nvidia Drivers]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Frank Tanner III wrote:
--- Sean Estabrooks <[email protected]> wrote:

On Wed, 26 May 2004 09:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
Frank Tanner III <[email protected]> wrote:

If they don't publish the specifications how are


all of these third party shareware tweak programs


the nVidia cards?  Easy answer.  Because there ARE
published specs.  You're just too busy ranting to
bother to look for them.  You'd rather be part of


problem rather than part of the solution.

Care to back this up with some evidence that isn't quite so speculative? Do you have a link for specifications of these cards? AFAIK there aren't any available to the public, otherwise there'd almost certainly be open source drivers.

Regards, Sean

As I stated in my e-mail to you directly, the
existance of the tweak utilities themselves are the proof.

No, the existance of tweak utilities is merely proof that the registers that allow tweaking are documented. For example GPU clock speed or memory bus speed.

And the fact that we have an open source 2D driver is pretty much evidence that the 'put a pixel on the screen' function is documented.

How these became documented I am not sure of - is it notes taken as a result of reverse-engineering, or did nVidia publish them at some point?

What is *NOT* documented is pretty much everything else, such as the method by which the driver should communicate with the GPU on the card to produce accelerated 3D graphics, or the registers that allow for multiple monitors. In other words, all the reasons you bought that card in the first place instead of just plugging in your 1997 S3 Trio64 and getting the exact same performance.


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux