Chip maker AMD has invested heavily into hyperbole research, proudly proclaiming that its new graphics chip, the RV770, is "more powerful than every generation of video game console ever brought to market combined." The RV770, demoed Monday, is capable of processing one trillion floating operations per second on a single chip, a feat that AMD says "punches a sizeable hole in the sensory barrier."

In short, that means things will look prettier and more realistic, giving game creators nearly limitless depths of brown to explore with space marine armor achieving nearly unimaginable levels of detail.

AMD has a brief tech demo that show off the RV770 at its official site, featuring a DOG from Half-Life 2 clone chasing graphics card mascot Ruby. You'll probably find it as rewarding as the corporate promise of "Cinema 2.0." That's definitely gonna catch on.

Cinema 2.0: The Next Chapter in the Ultimate Visual Experience Story

too bad noone has the money to buy it

How much will it be?

It's really not far fetched. If it's, say, 4x as powerful a GPU as the RSX, then it's easily more powerful than all consoles combined. That's the way the industry works.

Price is assumed to be ~600-700, due this fall. It's basically an 4870x2.

Amd products are quite cheap at the moment, since they've been losing tons of money the last few years.

Let me know when it gets down below $100.

C'mon early adopters! Soak those research costs so that us console owners can enjoy our quality games with this chipset next generation!

That's one way to look at it. The other truth is that they've deliberately stepped down from the tech arms race with NVidia because they were being slowly beaten into the ground.

The RV770, which is in the 4870, 4870X2, and 4850, are all intended to be cheaper, smaller, and more efficient than the new NVidia line, which by all accounts they are. NVidia's new high end beats the 4870 and 4850 (not the 4870X2, but that again isn't out til this fall) in raw performance by modest amounts, but costs twice as much, runs much hotter, and has a lower process/watt ratio.

Basically, if you absolutely must have the top-of-the-line for consumer components in terms of raw performance, GTX 200 will be your best bet. If you're willing to come in second, you can buy a card from AMD that costs half as much, fits in one PCI-E slot, consumes less power, and still kicks the PS3/360's ass.

I think gaming is like the car industry. PC gamers with gaming rigs have the $500,000 cars, and console gamers have the $20,000-30,000 cars. Except that with gaming, those $500,000 cars go bad in about 4 years, and suddenly the $20,000 car is just as good as the $500,000 car was 4 years ago. But look! A NEW $500,000 car! Better buy again!
(after writing this I realized that all I did was rephrase what above poster famousringo already said)

If that is true, I might wait until this comes out to upgrade.

It's actually usually the other way around; margins for these products upon release are usually extremely slim. They use the marketshare traction gained from the early adopters to drive the sales up the adoption curve.

It's technically the mid-to-late adopters who are paying the most in terms of raw technical value. Of course, one could argue utility and function (since we're basically viewing these cards not as technology, but as a product that allows us to play games), but that's a different argument altogether.