Can't see a future for dedicated graphics cards

There has been less and less emphasis on graphics and more emphasis on gameplay.Hydra1234

They focus on graphics a lot, it's just that they're limited by consoles so they all look like crap. Gameplay, on the otherhand, is being dumbed down more and more. Compare modern and past PC games and you'll see that there's a massive difference in terms of complexity, depth, and open-endedness.

Anyway, while I'm sure there will be a day when discrete cards are no longer needed (ie when photorealistic graphics are a reality and hardware is so powerful that even a CPU can run them at any resolution without breaking a sweat), that day is very far off. That said, APUs have at least obviated the need for a discrete GPU as a requirement for gaming. Now you can at least run modern games at low settings at a decent resolution without a discrete GPU as long as you have an A8 or i5 CPU. However, if you want good graphics at good resolutions with good framerates you're still going to need to get a good discrete GPU. And depending on how high your resolution is you may need to go crazy with GPUs (as is the case with my rig where at 6000x1080 I still find myself needing a lot more GPU power in some of my games).

BF3 is the onlyl game worth a fancy graphics card.

It has amazing dx11 graphics. The only game truly and honestly built for dx10/11 technology. The lighthing and textures are abslutely amazing compared to any game with high res and settings with dx11.

It truly is the ONLY game worth 1000 dollar rig. And truly the only company actually developing for new pc hardware. Everyone else who says they are is lying....and most people can tell just by playing the game.....no other game is built fully for dx11.

@the OP. A company like EA DICE still gives me hope.

2/10, just because you spent a lot of time typing

These guys just crawl out of the woodwork with these philosophical threads.

Hear me out before jumping the gun. Lets face it, PC games haven't taken that much of a leap in terms of graphics over the past 5 years. There has been less and less emphasis on graphics and more emphasis on gameplay. While I love a fun game, we need to get on with the times and not make the game look like it was made in 2002. Which begs the question, will there be a need for a discrete card? I mean, most games that PC gamers have been getting are ports that look slightly better(better AA/AF/resolution). Sure the performance is better, but the technology the graphics card runs games on is years behind. It's not bleeding edge. There has also been a surge in casual/indie games which don't look modern because of the limited budget and other constraints the developer has to meet. The casual market in PC crowd is booming,so there hasn't been a need to upgrade the graphics card. While the hardcore PC number is falling. So do you see a future for dedicated graphics cards? I personally don't but then again we do have two tards in the industry who can't program drivers for **** and purposely make their cards run **** on the latest games forcing us to upgrade. Discuss.Hydra1234

What there is to discuss?!...you have no arguments to ur points...and ur talking BS...you dont even have an ideea about what ur babling about...

Try playing all the latest games, without a GPU, and tell us how you go...C_Rule

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]Try playing all the latest games, without a GPU, and tell us how you go...Hydra1234

There's also the problem that a 460 can run pretty much anything nowadays maxed out, without insane amounts of AA or ambient occlusion on the more demanding games at 1080p, what you just said is bs or you only play modern games done by developers that either didn't know what they were doing or their game was too complex for what "they" were capable of doing.

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]Try playing all the latest games, without a GPU, and tell us how you go...Hydra1234

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]Try playing all the latest games, without a GPU, and tell us how you go...Hydra1234

someone hasn't done their research...

.

i'm welcome for it if they don't suck... hd 4000 series(intel) is very impressive. I would not hesiteete geting a laptop with it and a 120hz monitor and a good form factor like 14in.JigglyWiggly_

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]Try playing all the latest games, without a GPU, and tell us how you go...Hydra1234

I hope it dies. It would reduce the amount of variables and besides the advancement in graphics has tapered quite a bit to the point where upgrading seems not as appealing especially for the marginal gains that would not be noticeable.

.......

It would be cool if motherboards start putting really good integrated cards, but yeah I don't ever buy a top of the line 400.00 video card or multiple cards. I don't see the point. I spend like 150 - 200 most on my cards.

Dedicated graphics cards are dinosaurs and on the way out.

The future is single-chip solutions.

Dedicated graphics cards are dinosaurs and on the way out.

The future is single-chip solutions.

ZombieKiller7

[QUOTE="Hydra1234"][QUOTE="C_Rule"]Try playing all the latest games, without a GPU, and tell us how you go...achilles614

It does'nt spank any game at 1080p.... SLI 460s don't spank every game at 1080p.....

[QUOTE="achilles614"][QUOTE="Hydra1234"] Most so called "modern" PC games struggle at 1080p on a gtx460. Good luck in about an year from now games will run like crap because of **** optimization. They purposely make the games run **** on older hardware to force you to upgrade.MlauTheDaft

It does'nt spank any game at 1080p.... SLI 460s don't spank every game at 1080p.....

[QUOTE="achilles614"][QUOTE="Hydra1234"] Most so called "modern" PC games struggle at 1080p on a gtx460. Good luck in about an year from now games will run like crap because of **** optimization. They purposely make the games run **** on older hardware to force you to upgrade.MlauTheDaft

It does'nt spank any game at 1080p.... SLI 460s don't spank every game at 1080p.....

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Dedicated graphics cards are dinosaurs and on the way out.

The future is single-chip solutions.

DanielDust

Agreed, Multi-lateral or (3D) integration already is ahead of single chip solution.

Single chip solution is still only connecting on one side, (multi-lateral, or 3D integration) has it connecting on multiple "sides."

The robots building robots has removed many of the limitations in hardware making, much like single sided integration.

And before any of you say it cannot be done, you may want to check out TED.com, lots of wonderful things are on the way.

This thread is really, really stupid.

I'm just saiyan.

I don't see PC games becoming better-looking, requiring new visual features, or continuing to use higher resolutions. In two years, power supplies will be obsolete too, as all monitors will double as solar power panels.Gammit10

I hope you are sarcastic...coz otherwise il be intended to think ur just dumb...

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]i'm welcome for it if they don't suck... hd 4000 series(intel) is very impressive. I would not hesiteete geting a laptop with it and a 120hz monitor and a good form factor like 14in.ronvalencia

These guys just crawl out of the woodwork with these philosophical threads.

Silicel1

The OP is right on.... all games look 10 years old, minus the cinematics, except for bf3. Skyrim is the perfect example of this.

and its not a cooncidence that bf3 is trully the only game designed around dx11. when ALL other games look and feel like console ports designed around dx9,

You don't have to read the engine specs to know this...just play the game.....if your not biased and your a consicous old school gamer...its pretty obvious how much better bf3 looks...

guys from back in the day will remember when the first unreal game was released by epic. and the awe inspiring graphics.....well bf3 is the closest thing to that nowadays. its pushing the innovation...the ONLY game doing that.

not only technically on paper...but visually as well.. while most games, minus the cinematics, don't look much better then games from 2004-05 (around the same time alot of companies abandoned pcs to develop strictly on consoles). anyone who disagress is suspect.

The OP is right on.... all games look 10 years old, minus the cinematics, except for bf3. Skyrim is the perfect example of this.

and its not a cooncidence that bf3 is trully the only game designed around dx11. when ALL other games look and feel like console ports designed around dx9,

You don't have to read the engine specs to know this...just play the game.....if your not biased and your a consicous old school gamer...its pretty obvious how much better bf3 looks...

guys from back in the day will remember when the first unreal game was released by epic. and the awe inspiring graphics.....well bf3 is the closest thing to that nowadays. its pushing the innovation...the ONLY game doing that.

not only technically on paper...but visually as well.. while most games, minus the cinematics, don't look much better then games from 2004-05 (around the same time alot of companies abandoned pcs to develop strictly on consoles). anyone who disagress is suspect.

cooloutac

And you would be right if it wasnt for the facts...that sayz otherwise

The Witcher 2...is looking like a 2005 title?

Metro 2033 also?

Shift 2 Dirt 3...sayz hallo...

FarCry 2...

Stalker COP...and Just Cause 2 also look like games from 2005?

What about Two Worlds 2?

Batman AA and Arkham City looks like 2005 games?

Alan Wake looks anything remotely like a 2005 game?

What about ARMA II?

What about Portal 2???

How about Shogun 2?

Red Faction Guerilla and Armagedon are even comparable in terms of graphics with Red Faction 2?

Can u compare Mafia II and the original Mafia in terms of graphics???

Are u sure you are OK?I mean really...everything is ok in u little head?

The OP is right on.... all games look 10 years old, minus the cinematics, except for bf3. Skyrim is the perfect example of this.

and its not a cooncidence that bf3 is trully the only game designed around dx11. when ALL other games look and feel like console ports designed around dx9,

You don't have to read the engine specs to know this...just play the game.....if your not biased and your a consicous old school gamer...its pretty obvious how much better bf3 looks...

guys from back in the day will remember when the first unreal game was released by epic. and the awe inspiring graphics.....well bf3 is the closest thing to that nowadays. its pushing the innovation...the ONLY game doing that.

not only technically on paper...but visually as well.. while most games, minus the cinematics, don't look much better then games from 2004-05 (around the same time alot of companies abandoned pcs to develop strictly on consoles). anyone who disagress is suspect.

cooloutac

Morrowind:

Skyrim:

The market is limited graphically by console limitations since most mainstream games tend to be multiplatform. Speciallized features like DX11 tessellation are more or less bolted on, and while such features really need a real graphics card to be enjoyed, the implementation hasn't been all that ground breaking in comparison to without it. This extended console generation has given Intel and AMD plenty of time for their integrated graphics to catch up to where the consoles are.

I don't think dedicated graphics will be outright replaced for a while. An Intel 4000 playing mainstream games at 1080p is still a laughable proposition at the moment. High end games like BF3 at higher specs need quite a bit of graphics pushing horsepower that can only be practically delivered with a dedicated graphics processor with it's own memory. The resolution, AA, and FPS benefits that come with dedicated graphics of course are a great plus, even with console ports.

I do wonder what Intel has instore for their next IGP iteration, which probably won't appear for two years or so. By that point, PC dedicated graphics will have progressed once again, and we might have another console generation started to push the mainstream forward quite a bit. Yes, the low end dedicated graphics is pretty much moot now, and AMD is effectively killing their own low end GPUs off in order to stay a step ahead of Intel. However, Trinity in reallife situations will probably still trail Redwood and Turks quite a bit due to memory bandwidth limitations. In order to really extract the APU's full performance, we would need four DDR3 memory channels.