ok so now that i have your attention: i must say i am quite impressed by some of you and the ideas you presented. and quite enjoyed the conversation. since the previous thread was getting quite long i decided to make a "part 2". it gets quite difficult to keep track of what each reader/writer is presenting when threads get so long. i believe greatgrapeape suggested it as well. (to his/her credit)
let me begin by saying the entire premise for my initial post was to gather the ideas and philosophy of you readers. no i did not intend for it to become word wars about who makes the best graphics card, rather to gain insight of currant feelings and facts about the graphics industry. it does perplex me to still see (from the previous post i've read) how many readers do not seem to get the revelant points of this topic. i still believe that it is wrong to create a graphis card that will be replaced by another card in 3 to 6mos because of game(s) particular requirement(s). why? might you ask. because it is the games we play that drive the 3d graphics card industry, not as one reader stated the need for the best and/or the fastest video card. i personally still use my trusty gf2 ultra and i must say it plays most, not all, games rather well. my statements were directed more to questioning the ethics of game makers and video card producers (their relationship) rather than who is better, ati or nvidia. truth be known both companies (now a days) make good products, although i feel, far to costly. so let me present my idea(s) in another way. it is my understanding that games drive the video card market and there by the technology that is required to run said games.(for the most part). using this perspective, as my premise for the initial instance of the artical and the basis of this next thread.
1. games are very expensive (initially)
2. video cards of mid to good quality are very expensive.
3. game designers and their relationship with graphic card manufactuer'. (ethics vs the consumer and cost)
4. longivity- (i must repeat this for lack of a better way to express it)
5. what are possible solutions?
in my defence when i stated the issue of "nvidia getting a bad rap" my reason for a defensive posture was not so much in defense of nvidia, rather an artical that THG reported about nvidias accuation of tweeked drivers used by ati.(directx9) and 3d mark 2003. finally, not to single anyone out, but to my knowledge nvidia was the fist graphs card company to introduce the gpu and ddr for consumer use in graphics cards, if i am wrong then i will capitulate. well, on to your ideas. thanx for letting me rant.
(old person by trait)
let me begin by saying the entire premise for my initial post was to gather the ideas and philosophy of you readers. no i did not intend for it to become word wars about who makes the best graphics card, rather to gain insight of currant feelings and facts about the graphics industry. it does perplex me to still see (from the previous post i've read) how many readers do not seem to get the revelant points of this topic. i still believe that it is wrong to create a graphis card that will be replaced by another card in 3 to 6mos because of game(s) particular requirement(s). why? might you ask. because it is the games we play that drive the 3d graphics card industry, not as one reader stated the need for the best and/or the fastest video card. i personally still use my trusty gf2 ultra and i must say it plays most, not all, games rather well. my statements were directed more to questioning the ethics of game makers and video card producers (their relationship) rather than who is better, ati or nvidia. truth be known both companies (now a days) make good products, although i feel, far to costly. so let me present my idea(s) in another way. it is my understanding that games drive the video card market and there by the technology that is required to run said games.(for the most part). using this perspective, as my premise for the initial instance of the artical and the basis of this next thread.
1. games are very expensive (initially)
2. video cards of mid to good quality are very expensive.
3. game designers and their relationship with graphic card manufactuer'. (ethics vs the consumer and cost)
4. longivity- (i must repeat this for lack of a better way to express it)
5. what are possible solutions?
in my defence when i stated the issue of "nvidia getting a bad rap" my reason for a defensive posture was not so much in defense of nvidia, rather an artical that THG reported about nvidias accuation of tweeked drivers used by ati.(directx9) and 3d mark 2003. finally, not to single anyone out, but to my knowledge nvidia was the fist graphs card company to introduce the gpu and ddr for consumer use in graphics cards, if i am wrong then i will capitulate. well, on to your ideas. thanx for letting me rant.
(old person by trait)
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram