Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New 3D Graphics Card Features in 2006

Posted by Zonk on from the love-the-shiny dept.

Ant writes "This Tom's Hardware article says that in the latest generation of graphics cards, PixelShader has become mainstream. Version 3 features 3D effects like HDR rendering for bright light sources, and parallax mapping for even more vivid features in walls and stones. The brand-new ATI Radeon X1000 series and the NVIDIA GeForce 6 and 7 master these improved graphics features. It looks at today's newest computer games (e.g., F.E.A.R.) and compare the 3D effects."

7 of 297 comments (clear)

  1. Here is a feature I'd like to see.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...cheaper graphic cards...

  2. Re:Meh by mabinogi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    no. actually it doesn't.

    There's no formula that says "gameplay = 1 - graphics"
    It is entirely possible to have a game that looks good and plays well.
    It's also very possible to have a game that looks bad and plays bad. And plenty of old games were bad. The classics are classics because they were good, not just because they're old and don't have the same graphical quality as modern games.

    Quite a lot of classics actually did have excellent graphics for their time, and it was one of the things that contributed to their classic status in the first place.

    --
    Advanced users are users too!
  3. Re:price by kfg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The real question is: why not spend a couple hundred dollars every 1-4 years on a new card instead of spend a metric assload every time?

    Shhhhhhhhhhh! I frickin' love early adopters.

    KFG

  4. The feature I want by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    is a decent card for under $100. I shouldn't need a $150-$200 card to play 8 month old games.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  5. nothing to see here, move along. by Truekaiser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    this is not a preview for any new technology that will be apearing in graphics cards that are coming out this year. it's just a long winded reveiw of what apeared last year.

  6. Games? What about the basic OS? by Skippy_kangaroo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not only games that demand these new uber-graphics-cards. Consider what is happening with operating systems. In a couple of years I'm sure the OS will require today's uber-cards.

    Core Image in OS X offloads a lot of the GUI stuff to the graphics processor. To get all the eye candy (sorry, usability improvements) you can't have a particularly old card. Vista is doing the same thing.

    Now we are really putting the G into GUI.

  7. Cost for production is cost for production by bradleyland · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When you look at the hardware that's on a graphics card, the cost makes more sense. You've got a GPU with 304M transistors (G70 [7800] core), then you've got up to 512 MB of very, very fast memory (bus speeds in excess of 1000 MHz). That's heavy duty. By contrast, a San Diego core Athlon64 has 114 million transistors, but costs $245 or so. Throw in 512 MB of RAM that will run at a 1200 MHz clock speed, and you will approach the cost of a graphics card, but the GPU's aren't manufactured on the same 90nm process as the A64, so the production costs must be much higher.

    Of course, this doesn't factor in R&D costs, but there's a lot more growth going on in graphics processing than there is in x86.

    I'm not in any kind of position to make judgments (because I'm not an expert on either industry), but it seems to a laymen that the $400 price tag might just be justifiable for a 7800GTX.