The issue here is that you're playing on lower resolutions that generally require a lot less VRAM.
But for that very reason, you don't buy a ~350EUR card for a 1080p. You buy a 200EUR one, which is 960.
970 is meant for 1440p or higher, and there, and games like SoM start to ask for more VRAM on ultra. A lot more. And at 2160p you're looking at being capped, though for that you'd probably want a 980.
Good upscaler will not result in "blurry mess". In fact, to untrained eye, a good upscaler will typically look almost as good or just as good as source material.
Notably a lot of "native HD" content out there is in fact upscaled in production.
Now if you have a trained eye, you will see the very specific artefacts that result from upscaling. But when you are watching a good movie, you're not going to be actively looking for those - you will be too busy enjoying the movie.
So my advice stands. Get a modern DVD player with a good upscaler. From what you describe about your problem, yours clearly is not "fantastic" by a long shot.
I do. The main point of constitution that was actually popular was democratization of Europe. Specifically devolution of powers from European Council and European Commission to European Parliament. Effectively taking power from those elected by elites and giving it to those elected directly by the people. This change was desperately needed and even anti-EU forces generally agreed that one of the main problems of EU was lack of internal democratic access to decision making process. This was the main issue that Lisbon and Constitution projects looked to address.
The changes are the ones you outlined yourself. In other words, you do actually know that while Lisbon treaty was indeed equivalent of European constitution in the scope, it contained multiple changes negotiated to meet the problems pointed out by the people, all while the main idea behind the constitution, the democratization of decision making in EU was kept.
The main force that continued to criticize the Lisbon after changes were nationalist forces who wanted to have more power in EU than others and in fact didn't want to lose those powers to democratization which was a strong equalizer.
But it is a common usage. Ask 9/10 people what it means and they will provide the meaning you claim to be incorrect, as we have seen here. You're fighting the windmills.
Being "on the rise" does not mean "breakthrough" or "being widely successful". It means that marginal unsuccessful technology is getting slowly increasing adoption from "nonexistent" to "slightly less nonexistent" levels of adoption.
All while all the major marketing and R&D has already been taken out of said 3D because technology flopped. And the aforementioned "adoption" is overwhelmingly just a cheap feature that is being added and never used. Unlike for example 1080p resolution.
3D failed, as did quite a few other similar technologies. First attempt at wearables for example failed miserably in the 90s. Curved displays are dying on the vine.
Technological advancement is not a guaranteed thing. To gain acceptance technology must provide a significant enough perception of value to the user. Real value is important only as a factor in the "perceived value".
Let me see if I understood your argument correctly.
You are seriously suggesting that common use of the word for decades is in fact not a widely accepted definition of the word, but is an incorrect definition of the word because this wasn't a correct definition several decades ago?
Are you at all aware how languages work in general? Words gain meanings and languages gain new words from wide general acceptance. That is the main criteria that dictionaries use to add meanings to words.
It's very hard to take someone who effectively says that the entire concept of dictionary is wrong and then proceeds to argue about meanings of words seriously.
In other words, what you're doing here is called ignorance. People have come to incorrectly use the word trolling to mean redefining meanings of words to suit once agenda to idiotic degree, but that's not what it actually means.
Factually incorrect. Treaty was changed. The only ones I ever heard claiming otherwise are the rabid anti-EU parties well known to simply ignore facts when they don't suit their populist needs.
And may I remind you that in REPRESENTATIVE democracy, you elect representatives to represent you.
Latvia has received extensive and scathing criticism for these actions for a while from EU, from the time before Ukraine mess even started. No hypocrisy here.
It's not. There are games that are asking for 6 gigs of VRAM for highest texture quality already such as Shadow of Mordor (you need Titan for those). And this is just the start of new generation of consoles, that have shared 8GB of RAM for both system RAM and VRAM.
Actually windows XP could use 4GB just fine. Most people just went stupid and forgot that it's total of ALL RAM memory, which includes things like video RAM on graphics card.
So if you have a 512MB RAM on video card (which was typical for gaming rigs at the time) and 4 GB system RAM, you can only map 3.5GB system RAM. Because that's all that you can address with 32-bit OS. I had a system just like that, and I knew exactly what would happen because I researched the issue.
Slashdot Mirror
The issue here is that you're playing on lower resolutions that generally require a lot less VRAM.
But for that very reason, you don't buy a ~350EUR card for a 1080p. You buy a 200EUR one, which is 960.
970 is meant for 1440p or higher, and there, and games like SoM start to ask for more VRAM on ultra. A lot more. And at 2160p you're looking at being capped, though for that you'd probably want a 980.
Awesomely insane it is.
Good upscaler will not result in "blurry mess". In fact, to untrained eye, a good upscaler will typically look almost as good or just as good as source material.
Notably a lot of "native HD" content out there is in fact upscaled in production.
Now if you have a trained eye, you will see the very specific artefacts that result from upscaling. But when you are watching a good movie, you're not going to be actively looking for those - you will be too busy enjoying the movie.
So my advice stands. Get a modern DVD player with a good upscaler. From what you describe about your problem, yours clearly is not "fantastic" by a long shot.
I do. The main point of constitution that was actually popular was democratization of Europe. Specifically devolution of powers from European Council and European Commission to European Parliament. Effectively taking power from those elected by elites and giving it to those elected directly by the people. This change was desperately needed and even anti-EU forces generally agreed that one of the main problems of EU was lack of internal democratic access to decision making process. This was the main issue that Lisbon and Constitution projects looked to address.
The changes are the ones you outlined yourself. In other words, you do actually know that while Lisbon treaty was indeed equivalent of European constitution in the scope, it contained multiple changes negotiated to meet the problems pointed out by the people, all while the main idea behind the constitution, the democratization of decision making in EU was kept.
The main force that continued to criticize the Lisbon after changes were nationalist forces who wanted to have more power in EU than others and in fact didn't want to lose those powers to democratization which was a strong equalizer.
But it is a common usage. Ask 9/10 people what it means and they will provide the meaning you claim to be incorrect, as we have seen here. You're fighting the windmills.
All I can say is that I'm not sure if you're insane or awesome, or just awesomely insane.
Being "on the rise" does not mean "breakthrough" or "being widely successful". It means that marginal unsuccessful technology is getting slowly increasing adoption from "nonexistent" to "slightly less nonexistent" levels of adoption.
All while all the major marketing and R&D has already been taken out of said 3D because technology flopped. And the aforementioned "adoption" is overwhelmingly just a cheap feature that is being added and never used. Unlike for example 1080p resolution.
I think you need to look up what word "equivalent" means.
And when you're sick you often can get better just by going to a clinic, looking at the person in white coat and leaving.
Placebo effect does amazing things to people.
Get a decent DVD player. All modern ones perform solid upscaling.
3D failed, as did quite a few other similar technologies. First attempt at wearables for example failed miserably in the 90s. Curved displays are dying on the vine.
Technological advancement is not a guaranteed thing. To gain acceptance technology must provide a significant enough perception of value to the user. Real value is important only as a factor in the "perceived value".
Placebo effect is strong.
In blind test, situation is typically very different.
Let me see if I understood your argument correctly.
You are seriously suggesting that common use of the word for decades is in fact not a widely accepted definition of the word, but is an incorrect definition of the word because this wasn't a correct definition several decades ago?
Are you at all aware how languages work in general? Words gain meanings and languages gain new words from wide general acceptance. That is the main criteria that dictionaries use to add meanings to words.
It's very hard to take someone who effectively says that the entire concept of dictionary is wrong and then proceeds to argue about meanings of words seriously.
In other words, what you're doing here is called ignorance. People have come to incorrectly use the word trolling to mean redefining meanings of words to suit once agenda to idiotic degree, but that's not what it actually means.
Not a fan of being worshipped. Tends to end really badly for the subject when he's not imaginary.
Factually incorrect. Treaty was changed. The only ones I ever heard claiming otherwise are the rabid anti-EU parties well known to simply ignore facts when they don't suit their populist needs.
And may I remind you that in REPRESENTATIVE democracy, you elect representatives to represent you.
What do sanctions or publicity have to do with criticism? You seem to confuse several different things as one whole.
That was my entire point. Business will simply identify and manage risks.
Dead end argument. You are arguing that people have no right no change their minds or refuse initial treaty to negotiate a better one.
Latvia has received extensive and scathing criticism for these actions for a while from EU, from the time before Ukraine mess even started. No hypocrisy here.
I see. You don't have fans - you have worshippers!
It's not. There are games that are asking for 6 gigs of VRAM for highest texture quality already such as Shadow of Mordor (you need Titan for those). And this is just the start of new generation of consoles, that have shared 8GB of RAM for both system RAM and VRAM.
No. 32-bit windows can address and use 4GB just fine, but it reserves certain amount of RAM for itself. This is known as "system overhead".
OS overhead isn't "RAM that is incredibly slow in comparison to other RAM because of hardware limitations".
Actually windows XP could use 4GB just fine. Most people just went stupid and forgot that it's total of ALL RAM memory, which includes things like video RAM on graphics card.
So if you have a 512MB RAM on video card (which was typical for gaming rigs at the time) and 4 GB system RAM, you can only map 3.5GB system RAM. Because that's all that you can address with 32-bit OS. I had a system just like that, and I knew exactly what would happen because I researched the issue.
I recommend taking a look at said "studies" and studying what they actually base score on.
Then you'll understand that for end user, AV suite that scores lowest is the best one.