Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (151066)	12/5/2001 1:48:51 AM
From: ptanner	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Joe, re: "The problem is that you need some 32 or 64 MB of memory for today's high end cards. Placing this much memory plus all the logic of the GPU would make a HUGE chip. When this is done, it will first be done on the very high end graphics chips, and it will take a while until it gets down to low end solutions." Thanks for the explanation but I am thinking more on the low end (integrated mobo solns appropriate for most systems) than high end (screaming 3D power for gamers). Is 32 or 64MB of memory really needed for most applications? Even with very high screen resolutions what is it that needs memory? I know games use textures and other stuff - but I don't play games or read about performance graphics cards; and I thought some graphics cards had more memory simply for marketing reasons (e.g. 64MB sells much faster and for higher price than the marginal cost of adding the extra memory). It would seem that for 2D needs 8MB is more than sufficient and an integrated memory solution on the GPU would make for a highly efficient design. Of course, the graphics chip makers will surely work to provide the best solutions, particularly as they expand their product lines into chipsets (NVDA and ATi). -PT