Voodoo Extreme heeft een extra reaktie toegevoegd aan hun Fillrate vs T&L artikel. Deze postings is afkomstig van Jack Mathews, ex-3dfx (dat maakt het interessant) en nu werkend voor Ritual:
The question is very subjective, and I'm afraid I'll have to answer both and, well, neither. That's very vague, let me explain. For the "both" argument, it depends on what you really care about. If you care about looking a pretty as you can, you'll want the AA, which requires very high fill rate to maintain. If you want Quake 3 to run very, very quickly you'll want a T&L card. That's basically it. Now, as for neither, if these cards are going to be even close to as expensive as I hear, they will not have a mainstream market penetration. As such, very few games will not be written with these cards in mind in the very near future. Everyone needs to remember to support Voodoo2 and even TNT1.
You can have games that scale their performance up to these levels, but I think you'll find with the grand majority of games that the developers simply won't have time to put in extra goodies for certain cards barring money from the hardware company, very very high market penetration, or extra time. In the mean time, the long term will start to happen where T&L cards start to concentrate more on fill rate because the fill rate guys are starting to concentrate on T&L. And developers will have a fairly common set of hardware to write for again. This probably won't be for a year though.
So to answer your question, in the next two months, the people with money to burn will pick one or the other depending on their style of play, but neither will really be more or less important. In the long run, the two (fill rate vs. T&L) will likely converge anyway just as a result of competition. Which would I prefer to have as a developer right now to work with? T&L of course