| Words Of Wisdom said: It might surprise you to know that large-scale video editting is often even more demanding on system resources than most of the PC games out there. In fact, a good friend of mine upgraded her video card to help her in this area and she hardly plays any games on her computer at all. I know. By 'games', I meant 'user applications'. My intention was to say that the one/two GPU distimction is irrelevant to computer users - they see one card at one price. I invite you to look at 3dprofessor.org, a non-game GPU review site, which says in every review that ATI offers much better value than Nvidia. I wouldn't presume to speak for a majority of people out there as that would be incredibly arrogant of me however I can say that neither I nor even my avid PC gaming friends have ever really stopped to seriously care about "performance per watt." Power usage is important as far as knowing if a PSU can run it but that's about it really. "Performance per watt" sounds more like a fun buzz phrase used by a salesman pushing a product. OK, ignore the performance per watt. ATI's cards are still the fastest in the majority of applications at most price points. This is agreed upon by most respected hardware review sites. I would say that counts as 'on top'. As for "fun buzz phrases", where do you think "single fastest GPU" came from? Nvidia PR. It spins ATI's victory into an apparent Nvidia one.
Now why do you go from talking about what the consumer is thinking to something that seemingly no consumer would care about? Do you care about the profit margin of the company when you buy a new kettle or vacuum cleaner? You were the one who brought up one GPU vs two when it makes no difference to the consumer. I'm saying it was a technology decision - ATI could have created a single fast GPU better than the GTX280 but didn't, not because they were inferior but because it was a better business decision. |
