I don't see why it's so hard to implement both 65 nm solutions at the same time. Sure smaller processing costs more, but at this point, can MS really afford to mess up again?
Thread of the day. ROFLMAOCOPTOR. Hahahaha.kool-aids
QFMFT
Don't make fun of me for this, I'm dead serious, I, myself enjoy letting it rip and then put my face to the fabric and take a deep breath. It's a weird thing I do, but it makes me kinda proud, like looking down the toilet bowl after the morning routine.
It's kinda complicated as Nintendo doesn't make a VGA or DVI-D adapter. You could get a component-to-VGA/DVI-D adapter, but those little puppies cost alot of money, into the hundreds of dollars.
- 65nm process technology at TSMC. - Over one billion transistors. - Second Generation Unified Shader Architecture. - Double precsion support (FP64). - GPGPU native. - Over one TeraFLOPS of shader processing power. - MADD+ADD configuration for the shader untis (2+1 FLOPS=3 FLOPS per ALU) - Fully Scalar design. - 512-bit memory interface. - 1024MB GDDR4 graphics memory. - DirectX 10.1 support. - OpenGL 3.0 Support. - eDRAM die for "FREE 4xAA". - built in Audio Chip. - built in tesselation unit (in the graphics core" - Improved AA and AF quality levels
Thats Crazy! :shock:
LouieV13
Idk some of that stuff seems far fetched like the free 4x aa...
Well on the 360, the eDRAM die w/ it's 10 MB framebuffer does the finishing parts of rasterization like z-buffering, anti-aliasing and what not. Because it's a seperate component, they do in fact get "free 4x FSAA" with no hit to the actual GPU. The 360 is a pretty well equiped system for full HD, especially in comparison to the PS3.
I'm sure the thread/video creator's tail is inbetween his legs. Oh and I'm sure his own balls are trying to rip themselves off so they have nothing to do with such an idiot.
Log in to comment