>> Doesn't make any sense to me either. Maybe the reviewer got their 
>> facts wrong?
> 
> It seems from reading the MS site that it can be used to render when no 
> GPU card is present, and then send the results over the network for 
> remote viewing.  This is probably what the reviewer meant.

Yeah, seems plausible. They didn't explain that part...

(Even so, if you're just worried about your PC booting up, it's already 
usable over the network. Hmm.)

>>> The reference rasteriser already supports all DirectX 10.1 features, 
>>> that's the idea of it.
>>
>> So I'm guessing it's coded for correctness rather than speed. If 
>> that's true, there's probably a few easy ways to speed it up.
> 
> Yeh, the MS site also says that WARP is based on the reference 
> rasteriser. Apparently it is designed to make full use of SSE4.1 and 
> multiple cores.

The review suggests it plain won't work without SSE. But yeah...

>>> Amusingly I just tried it on one of the samples, 20fps on the GPU, 
>>> 0.2fps on the CPU :-) I guess they made it a bit faster :-)
>>
>> Which GPU? Which CPU? ;-)
> 
> Quadro FX1700 and E8500.

Ah.

Isn't the Quadro designed for fast 2D work?

Post a reply to this message