Interesting article. The problem is, do you always want to play at mediocre levels? And besides, if you're never buying the best card, you'll be buying more. I personally think it's better to buy one GeForce 3 for $300 than an MX for $80, a Pro for $125, an Ultra for $150, and then finally buy a GF3 for $200 (as prices go down, remember). Did you really save any money? Hmm...let's see...
Yeah, I think it's interesting too. I wonder if the software world will ever catch up to the hardware side of the house. There is also the issue of sales. If the software developpers kept up with the advances of the video card manufacturers their games would only run on the newest and best video cards. That wouldn't produce alot of sales...Money talks...
To a point I don't really give a crap what it costs. I play wolf at 1280x1024 with anisotropic filtering turned on. It look as sweet as can be and it's been worth the money. Sure I could drop to say 1024x768 and play on a high end gf2 but I have the money...[-peep-] it.
The author wrote this article because he's bitter about the fact he can't afford a GF3 or an 8500. He can suck it up and wait till the price drops.
Let's look at it this way. 1 year from now you will own a GF3. It will cost you 150 bucks and you'll be happy. Now think about this...I paid 300 for mine but I get to use it for a whole year before you. That's worth $150 bucks alone. When you own one you'll be like, "Damn...I wish I had had this a long time ago" How bad will you wish? About $150 worth.
Keep in mind that new video card will give you a better return on your other investments: Games at $50 a pop. $50 bucks is in my opinion a LOT of money (relatively)...I want every penny of it.
There's a limit to all this of course. I don't go out buying a $3000 Wildcat video card just to run serious sam so fast that my neighbors dog gets motion sickness.
I don't think the GF3 has it's bubble busted...I think someone has GPU envy.
What I think the author was trying to convey was that the average PC user will not get his money's worth by buying the "latest and greatest". There's alot of hype about vid cards and most people don't understand the terminology so they are steered into buying something that they really don't need. Hey man if I had the money I'd have a GF3 TI 500. Most people don't need it and it must really suck to be the parent of a teenager who is convinced he needs it to play any video game.
The thing that makes great games isn't a great video card being available...it's an established base of millions of great video cards that people already own.
If someone is going to buy a GF3 and not get in there and kick the filtering up to trilinear (and other such things)so be it. He WONT get his money's worth...but he will still manage to encourage game developers to produce for him and me
Well, not really the average user. I simply can't afford to pay $300 USD on a graphics card every 6 months (yes, 6 months). I'm the type of person to buy new computer hardware every 2 months and make a formal minor upgrade (replace 2 or 3 hardware components) every 6 months, and make a complete overhaul every 1 year. I just can't afford a new $300 USD (or $450CDN) everytime I make a minor upgrade, because I don't like just upgrading one component. My theory is, if it doesn't improve overall performance by at least 10% it's not worth it. Generally, a graphics card won't improve my overall performance by 10% in 2D.
AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
Long story about the Quadro DCC- let's just say it's attributed to compensation for an error that occured. Anyway, I can easily affor a few thousand $ upgrades every 3 months, just that there isn;t a point. I upgrade every 2 or 3 years.
yeah, I am 14. I just ask my parents, and since I get good grades, teh usually oblige. Used to get a 100$ for every 100 I got on my tests, but after my parents realized I got 100 on every test, they stopped that