firewolfsm
Golden Member
- Oct 16, 2005
- 1,848
- 29
- 91
Then we can tune down the physics effects just a little and run it on CPUs. I'd rather have a high resolution.
Originally posted by: Continuity28
Originally posted by: Extelleron
How do you plan on diverting shading resources needed for graphics processing to physics processing without reducing performance?
And I'm sure code optimized for an Octal-core processor would fare well against a modern video card.
The point is, running such physics calculations on the underloaded CPU would result in less FPS than running it on the GPU, even when the GPU is already fully loaded with tasks. It's because the CPU is very slow at this type of task. When the GPU does it, you may drop in FPS from 65 to 62, or hell even for argument, 45. When the CPU does it, you may drop from 65 to 10 because the CPU can't do that level of physics any faster than that.
You can't really optimize the code for the CPU, the issue starts at the hardware level, the hardware isn't built for it. There are things that the modern GPU can do better than a CPU, and things a modern CPU can do better than a GPU, and that's why they have their respective uses and roles in a system. We don't run our operating systems and programs on a GPU, we don't render modern games on our CPU and expect speed. They are drastically different pieces of hardware.
It's like comparing an elephant and horse as modes of transportation. The elephant can carry more for sure, but it's not as fast regardless of it's capacity. If you think the horse will always be faster, try loading it as much as the elephant and see how fast it runs. They aren't built the same way, and won't be used in the same ways.
I don't care if anyone hates my analogy.
Originally posted by: Continuity28
You can't really optimize the code for the CPU, the issue starts at the hardware level, the hardware isn't built for it. There are things that the modern GPU can do better than a CPU, and things a modern CPU can do better than a GPU, and that's why they have their respective uses and roles in a system. We don't run our operating systems and programs on a GPU, we don't render modern games on our CPU and expect speed. They are drastically different pieces of hardware.
Originally posted by: biostud
The thing is most people prefer good loking graphics compared to intense physics calculation.
We learn from pcinlife forum that ATI next generation flagship R700 lost battle to GTX 280 in closed doors tests.
Taiwan graphics cards manufacture obviously got both 4870x2 and GTX 280 graphics card samples for these comparisons. But as we told you before, we still don't know the specification of the test hardware and software configurations.
We hope ATI Catalyst Develop Team could do miracle to save Radeon HD 4870x2 in next gorgeous chips battle between AMD and NVIDIA.
Originally posted by: Janooo
R700 lost battle to GTX 280?
We learn from pcinlife forum that ATI next generation flagship R700 lost battle to GTX 280 in closed doors tests.
Taiwan graphics cards manufacture obviously got both 4870x2 and GTX 280 graphics card samples for these comparisons. But as we told you before, we still don't know the specification of the test hardware and software configurations.
We hope ATI Catalyst Develop Team could do miracle to save Radeon HD 4870x2 in next gorgeous chips battle between AMD and NVIDIA.
Originally posted by: Quiksilver
Originally posted by: Janooo
R700 lost battle to GTX 280?
We learn from pcinlife forum that ATI next generation flagship R700 lost battle to GTX 280 in closed doors tests.
Taiwan graphics cards manufacture obviously got both 4870x2 and GTX 280 graphics card samples for these comparisons. But as we told you before, we still don't know the specification of the test hardware and software configurations.
We hope ATI Catalyst Develop Team could do miracle to save Radeon HD 4870x2 in next gorgeous chips battle between AMD and NVIDIA.
That was a terrible article, no numbers, no anything factual. Just rumors, what a bore.
Originally posted by: Janooo
Originally posted by: Quiksilver
Originally posted by: Janooo
R700 lost battle to GTX 280?
We learn from pcinlife forum that ATI next generation flagship R700 lost battle to GTX 280 in closed doors tests.
Taiwan graphics cards manufacture obviously got both 4870x2 and GTX 280 graphics card samples for these comparisons. But as we told you before, we still don't know the specification of the test hardware and software configurations.
We hope ATI Catalyst Develop Team could do miracle to save Radeon HD 4870x2 in next gorgeous chips battle between AMD and NVIDIA.
That was a terrible article, no numbers, no anything factual. Just rumors, what a bore.
Here you go. Some numbers
Originally posted by: MarcVenice
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7755.html
Some new info, for a nice price this will prove to be pretty interesting if you ask me.
Originally posted by: ghost recon88
Originally posted by: MarcVenice
http://www.nordichardware.com/news,7755.html
Some new info, for a nice price this will prove to be pretty interesting if you ask me.
Hmm most interesting. At only $250 a pop for a HD4870, it will be hard to beat.
Originally posted by: ghost recon88
Hmm most interesting. At only $250 a pop for a HD4870, it will be hard to beat.
Originally posted by: AshPhoenix
RV770PRO engineering sample works at 625MHz
Product part to be faster
The RV770PRO is a GDDR3 version of the RV770 chip and we?ve found out that the samples out in the wild are working at 625MHz. The samples are based on revision a12, which is usually ATI?s production revision.
The sample board was equipped with GDDR3 memory clocked at 2,000MHz and we?ve heard that GDDR5 samples are expected any day now.
Both RV770XT and RV770PRO are scheduled for a June 16th launch, just two days before the Geforce GTX 280 / 260 launch.
Originally posted by: Quiksilver
Originally posted by: Janooo
Originally posted by: Quiksilver
Originally posted by: Janooo
R700 lost battle to GTX 280?
We learn from pcinlife forum that ATI next generation flagship R700 lost battle to GTX 280 in closed doors tests.
Taiwan graphics cards manufacture obviously got both 4870x2 and GTX 280 graphics card samples for these comparisons. But as we told you before, we still don't know the specification of the test hardware and software configurations.
We hope ATI Catalyst Develop Team could do miracle to save Radeon HD 4870x2 in next gorgeous chips battle between AMD and NVIDIA.
That was a terrible article, no numbers, no anything factual. Just rumors, what a bore.
Here you go. Some numbers
I know those numbers. The GT200 performing better than 4870X2 had none, didn't say by how much, no hardware, etc. It was all fud. Even Fudzilla puts some guesswork numbers.
Originally posted by: taltamir
bryan makes a good point. You would have to wait a few months for the 4870x2 CF drivers to mature before it starts competing with (or even defeating) the G200... And you will have to wait again for every new release.