1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Ultra high-end graphics are "a terrible mistake"

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Tim S, 11 Mar 2008.

  1. steveo_mcg

    steveo_mcg New Member

    Joined:
    26 May 2005
    Posts:
    5,841
    Likes Received:
    80
    I don't see how that's any different from a current chip set that is dx9 capable, they still couldn't play games.
     
  2. completemadness

    completemadness New Member

    Joined:
    11 May 2007
    Posts:
    887
    Likes Received:
    0
    Personally, i think the "massive gap" is due to integrated graphics and the super low end stuff
    People go out and get a £700 PC with integrated gfx and then wonder why it wont play some game

    I personally think that PC's are far greater then a console for gaming, mainly in controls but also flexibility and graphics
    But yes, a PC is more expensive, i wont disagree with that, but I've had far better Value For Money out of my PC then any console I've _ever_ owned
     
  3. Bluephoenix

    Bluephoenix Spoon? What spoon?

    Joined:
    3 Dec 2006
    Posts:
    968
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'd like to point out that its still decent for an IG chipset. the AMD 690 IG CHipset couldn't even passably play 1080p content, so the technology is improving, just not nearly as fast as its discrete counterparts.
     
  4. Tim S

    Tim S Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    18,879
    Likes Received:
    76
    Video playback is a completely different kettle of fish compared to gaming performance. It's like comparing a PC to an Xbox 360 for word processing capabilities (the PC wins that argument, btw)... In other words, you wouldn't make the comparison because it's completely wrong.
     
  5. wuyanxu

    wuyanxu still wants Homeworld 3

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    10,559
    Likes Received:
    224
    also, don't forget those relatively cheap "gaming laptops" which can't even render a single Crysis frame. :wallbash:
     
  6. MaximumShow

    MaximumShow Member

    Joined:
    20 Jan 2003
    Posts:
    765
    Likes Received:
    16
    For me, console gaming has gone in the totally wrong direction. The last console I was really into was the SNES, and since then I have had no desire at all to get into anything new (except for the wii, which has gone back to the original roots). These days consoles try too hard to be PCs.

    Consoles should have completely different games than PCs, like they did years ago. Sidescrollers, puzzle games, adventure etc... Those type of games work perfectly in the console/gamepad format. I absolutely cannot understand someone's desire to play an FPS, such as Halo, on a gamepad. In my opinion the experience completely sucks. I have seen many cases where the clumsy controls force the devs to slightly dumb down the AI. Give me games like Zelda: a Link to the past! The graphics are cartoony and non realistic, but the gameplay is phenomenal, and 100% suited to the console realm.

    Developing games that are ported to both consoles and PCs is what's holding both back from their true potential. I will never go back to console gaming until they become consoles again, and not PC imitators.
     
  7. Bluephoenix

    Bluephoenix Spoon? What spoon?

    Joined:
    3 Dec 2006
    Posts:
    968
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm not saying that it can currently do gaming at all, merely using that to illustrate the point that it is improving and might someday actually be useful for gaming of some sort. (2020 maybe?)
     
  8. completemadness

    completemadness New Member

    Joined:
    11 May 2007
    Posts:
    887
    Likes Received:
    0
    The thing is, sure the IGP's may be getting better, but games get more demanding

    I think we may be marginally further ahead with IGP's then we were 10 years ago (in terms of how good they are at games) but even by 2020, i doubt the IGP (if it exists) will be as good as a DGP
     
  9. Tim S

    Tim S Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    18,879
    Likes Received:
    76
    Intel has been improving on the video front for a while, but when the company is boasting about their IGP being able to run a couple of games (like it did last year), that gives you an idea of just how much work there is. Driver development just isn't there in the same way that it is for ATI and Nvidia. Look at 780G - it's a fantastic integrated chipset that can play games in this day and age. Why can't Intel's IGPs do the same? It's because they're a long way behind.

    Intel tried to enter the discrete graphics card market a while back and failed... they've proposed a 10x performance increase in 3 years on the IGP. But the problem is when you're starting with (essentially) nothing, and multiply that by 10, you've still got (almost) nothing. Call me a sceptic, but that's my job - I'll believe the claims when I see them based on past delivery. This was something that Sweeney mentioned in this part of the interview - Intel has always said "it'll be better next generation" but there hasn't been a significant change on the gaming front for a long time...
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page