| Soleron said:
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.
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. |
For what purpose? I know you want to talk about that, but it hasn't been the subject of any of my posts so far.
I don't know why but you seem to want to start an argument with me.
| Soleron said: 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. |
And what just what is the consumer of highend graphics cards typically like? I would guess that they're the types that would pay the most attention to a single card or crossfire solution. Of course, I'm sure you have expert studies and strong sources telling you that it makes no difference so feel free to provide them in links please.
I also find it interesting that you say "ATI could have created a single fast GPU better than the GTX280 but didn't." Would you care to quote sources for this statement too?
