GF100 (Fermi) explained

I don't know about you Atech, but I don't fold so NV's performance there means nothing to me and not an important factor in my buying decisions. We won't know anything until the card is released so this is all hearsay. I think they make great products, but i'm not a great fan of their business policies. However at the end of the day I buy what suits my needs and my wallet regardless of who's tag is on it, because both companies are really only fighting for your money not your love! Some people on these internet forms don't seem to understand that aka Fanboys.
 
Makaveli@BETA said:
I don't know about you Atech, but I don't fold so NV's performance there means nothing to me and not an important factor in my buying decisions. We won't know anything until the card is released so this is all hearsay. I think they make great products, but i'm not a great fan of their business policies. However at the end of the day I buy what suits my needs and my wallet regardless of who's tag is on it, because both companies are really only fighting for your money not your love! Some people on these internet forms don't seem to understand that aka Fanboys.
Click to expand...

That was not the point here, but nice red herring.
Like I said before:
I don't care about more than 60 FPS
Making a GPU, which sole purpose is run run games at +200FPS makes no sense to me...that is a LOT of wasted transistors, running to render something you can't even conceive makes no sense to me.
After FPS we have stuff like AA and AF.
Today there are really diminising returns above 4xAA/16xAF

So instead of +200FPs at 4xAA/16XAF I would rather have 60FPS at 4xAA/16xAF...and more immersion.
Away with the dead scripted worlds and HELLO interactive world.

Guess which company caters to me?

NVIDIA has made, that on paper, looks like a an architecture where they will have the best perfomning GPU (in games)..but at the same time will be generations ahead of AMD on GPGPU front.
Just like today.
 
Trying to guess performance on a unreleased product based on paper specs is a fruitless effort!

I agree 200fps is pointless when most people are locked to 60fps because of their LCD's.

I do believe it will take more than NV's future gpu until we truly see a "Fully interactive world", which i'm assuming you mean will be far more advanced than anything in the current pipeline to be released soon. And by the time we do see these games there will be much faster GPU's than Fermi!

I'm not saying ATI has anything better coming out soon that will serve the market better, but it seems more like wishful thinking.

The reason I bought up the folding performance was because of your previous statement to the other guy where you keep talking about folding, I can fairly say this and not be too far off, that most gamers don't care about Folding performance, they care about the gaming experience. Which would not only incorporate your FPS level Avg and more importantly minimums, and the full immersion you speak of, plus performance / dollar and etc.
 
Last edited:
BlueStorm said:
That's incorrect. Trinibwoy is correct.

With multi-GPU, the data is different in each GPUs memory for SLI or Crossfire. Its as if you had the frames back to back on the same single GPU (different memory contents) but instead you have 2 GPUs and they are actually processed simultaneously.

Basically what you're saying is like saying dedicated caches for each arbitrary type of processor core are always kept identical to one another, which would defeat the purpose of having a dedicated cache for each core in the first place...
Click to expand...

But don't they load the same textures ? after all they are rendering the same screen only different parts of it, and its not like they can load half of this texture and stuff

It doesn't make much sense to me that they add, since each GPU is limited to 896mb and 119.6GB/s each ... so if one chokes the other cannot go faster right ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top