On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 09:57:12PM +0100, Rodolphe Ortalo wrote: > There is clearly a marketing race too between graphics chipset > vendors, pretty much like the clock race between (x86) microprocessors > vendors... > Sometimes it really just is a number race without much real technical > foundations (probably mainly marketing ones). > Of course, raising clocks or bandwidth or framerate does help, and can seed > exploration of new features which in turn require more power again; > but well, sometimes not really... > Technically, you do not need a high end modern card to have fun with a > computer game (even if you are allergic to nethack).
Yes, but a fast card can certainly make life easier for developers of other applications who would like to be able to through stuff at the card in a straight forward manner and have it be able to have it keep up. I refer in part to having to use textures to accomplish video with overlays when multiple passes of glDrawPixels would be much more straight forward. > Whatever the clock speed, if it is decent (>100MHz is decent IMHO) and > if the hardware gets used to its full capabilities under Linux/X11 > (and FreeBSD/X11) And hopefully NetBSD/X11 on non x86 platforms. > I think you can trigger a technical breakthrough for things like DRI, MesaGL > and alike. > If it occurs, you will probably get enough momentum to enter an ASIC clock > race too afterwards (if you want). There is always someone that wants a > higher clock speed than his neighbors. And plenty of people who need more performance. -- Joshua D. Boyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.jdboyd.net/ http://www.joshuaboyd.org/ _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
