It will definitely be interesting to see. Especially seeing how console devs go really deep into the hardware to get every last bit of performance out of it. We might see more optimization for AMD, I definitely agree.

But...that will only come after the 2nd generation of PS4 games. Which would be like...three years from now? Looking at past history, the PS3 was launched in 2006 with Uncharted as one of its first titles. Two years later in 2008 we see Uncharted 2, which makes a huge leap in visual clarity since the dev really got to optimizing for the PS3. 

By then, I hope that AMD's APU project succeeds to the point that I can get a computer the size of like a DVD case which can run Crysis at max.

I think it's a 24" monitor.

I think there might have been some difference, but I'd really have to look for it. AA might make the game like 5% better at most.

Nope.

Wait until there's some total DLC package, which will come out eventually.

I personally don't use AA, which helps a lot.

I mean, it's 1920x1080p. I tried like 4x AA and it looked exactly the same pretty much. AA only made sense when monitors were like 800x600.

I've been fascinated by them recently. Probably a total war?

Get something with portrait view.

Are you kidding?

I have a GTX560 ti 448 -- a worse GPU than you, and I think it's the best thing ever. I basically throw every single game at it with everything turned up at 1920x1080 and it runs perfectly. 

[QUOTE="taiwwa"]

Nvidia has PhysX support.

 

AMD does not.

 

PhysX is a neat little graphical treat. 

 

All other things being equal, it gives nvidia an advantage.

the_bi99man

There are very few games that actually use PhysX though, and even the ones that do, it can be done by the CPU now, so you don't have to have an nvidia card. 

Either way, I'd go with nvidia because, in my experience, I've never had problems with nvidia drivers, and I've had  nothing but problems  with AMD/ATI drivers. 

then again, between the two cards TC asked about, the AMD one is a considerably higher end card, so it's not really a fair comparison.

yeah, but it's nice to have.

Mirror's Edge is a good example

Nvidia has PhysX support.

AMD does not.

PhysX is a neat little graphical treat. 

All other things being equal, it gives nvidia an advantage.

ehhhh, but the 8350 will only be about as good as a Core i3 for many games, will be worse than the core i5 (which is the same price), and will eat up more power on top of it. 

Like, the benchmarks don't really do justice to how much SC2 needs a good CPU. You really notice in late game when everyone has like 180/200 units.