je_saist

Something else that could be an issue on the backup files is the user-name rights. If you are using a Windows NT5( 2000 / Xp), Windows NT6 (Vista / Win7), or Linux Install through Cedega you need to make sure that the files belong to the same username and group that you are trying the new install on.

E.G. : If your username is DaveMatthew and you save the files to a backup-partition, and then you try to copy those files over and use them on the username MatthewDave you could run into a permissions error.

*suggests to Fedor that NekoAli would look really good with a set of pink fuzzy paw-cuffs*

Ack!

*uses the ancient art of Tail-Fu to try and hold Fedor away and keep the hydro-cannon pointed on Tiger*

no.

The 50k limit is a hard-cap on trial accounts. You'll be able to earn additional influence / infamy upon subscribing to the game.

if you are on a trial account, 50k is your cap.

You can view your influence by clicking on MENU then clicking on I.D..

*manages to arm the Hydro-Cannon as fuzzy paw cuffs make such movement hard, and then FIRES on LongClawTiger*

One bath at 2 Tsumani's a minute!

For starters. City of Heroes has a file size of 2.9gb. That's almost 3gigs.

Second, just because you pay for a fast internet connection.. does not mean that your internet services connection to NCSoft's servers is fast..

You can actually find out how many servers are between you and your destination. Here, for example, is a picture of Xtraceroute tracking down the ip address for ncsoft.com... well. Up until it hit a firewall and got no responses.



Once you get outside of your own Internet Service Providers service area and start talking to the backbone you are at the mercy of the backbone providers and whoever connects you from there.

OpenCL is actually in Intel's, AMD's, and Nvidia's drivers right now.

How it's exposed is a bit odd though. Nvidia is currntly exposing OpenCL support through CUDA, while both Intel's and AMD's drivers expose OpenCL directly.

Nvidia's upcoming drivers are expected to expose OpenCL directly as well.

***

edit: correction, I'm getting ahead of myself ATi's driver is currently exposed through StreamSDK : http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item&px=NzYwOA : and the driver hasn't actually been merged to Cataylst.

***

double edit. While I'm pretty sure support for OpenCL on Intel is included in Apple's Snow Leopard, I'm not able to find a Windows / Linux code release or mention... so I might be mis-reporting comments going through #intel-gfx

***

triple edit: ah, here's the Intel code reference I was thinking of : http://software.intel.com/en-us/foru...s/topic/68140/

so yes, I am getting ahead of myself.

(note, this rambles as I try to fit everything together)

These two parts are actually related. Nvidia doesn't just want to be seen as something other than a gaming company... they have to be seen as something other than a gaming company.

The reality is, the stink over the Intel chipset licensing was a bit of a red herring. The short version is that Nvidia claimed that their pre-existing licensing for the system bus used on the Core platform also gave them license to the use the Front Side Bus developed for the Nehalem architecture. Intel said no, it didn't. Intel didn't actually explicitly tell Nvidia that they could not ever have a license for the Bus Logic system used in the Nehalem architecture. Intel just told Nvidia they couldn't use their pre-existing contracts.

What this meant is that in order to have chipsets for Core I7 processors Nvidia would have to come to a new contractual agreement with Intel... and Intel had set that price higher than Nvidia was willing pay.

The other problem with Nvidia's lines about why they were leaving the chipset market is that they abandoned the AMD platform. Not even 2 years ago the best AMD motherboards were shipping with Nvidia chipsets. Then, when Socket AM3 hit, Nvidia announced several chipset solutions... then never delivered.

If Nvidia had been serious about Intel's licensing being the reason why they left the chipset market, they would have been pushing their chipsets for both AMD and Intel platforms at the same time. They weren't. They had already axed development of one branch, and evidently, were looking to axe the other in a convenient manner. Now, I can't fault Nvidia for leaving the chipset market. The other third parties like Via and SiS had been winding down chipset support for other processors for years, and Nvidia took Uli out of the market. I can, and do, fault Nvidia for not being straight-forward with their investors about why Nvidia left the chipset market.

***

Now the reason(s) behind these product moves are partially found in both Intel Larrabee and AMD Fusion. Part of the goal of the Larrabee project wasn't just to develop a competitive performance graphics solution based on the x86 architecturer, it was also to merge an x86 based GPU onto an x86 based CPU. Both AMD and Intel will be launching Central Processors that include integrated graphics... on the same physical chip.

These new CPU/GPU hybrids will virtually eliminate many of the design issues OEM's have with current integrated graphics motherboards. The GPU will be able to take advantage of the processor's cooling, and the display hardware and memory access components will be greatly simplified. The design changes will free up wiring going to and from the Central Processor and System chipset.

In the Integrated graphics world as pictured by Intel and AMD, a third party graphics solution doesn't actually exist. There's no design space where a third party like Nvidia, SiS, or Via could plop in their own graphics solution. This means that the only place for a 3rd party graphics vendor, within just a couple of years, is going to be as an add-in card vendor.

From Nvidia's point of view this wouldn't quite be a bad thing since AMD / ATi is their only real competitor. Via's S3 Chrome series never gained any traction. PowerVR is only playing in the mobile segment if memory serves correctly, Matrox is only interested in TripleHead2Go, and 3DLabs hasn't been heard from since 2006.

However, with Intel entering the add-in card market, things don't look so rosy for Nvidia. One of the (many) reasons Intel's current graphics processors resemble an electrolux is that an integrated GPU can only run at limited clockspeeds, and in Intel's case, they don't actually make a GPU, they only make graphics accelerators that still leverage the CPU for some operations. In an external card though, Intel can crank the clockspeeds and cores... and Intel's gotten really good at software rendering through x86. As a mid-range part, Larrabee based cards are a nightmare for Nvidia.

The fact is, the largest selling graphics segment.. is mid-range and low-end cards. Nvidia and AMD make very little money off of their high-end cards. Most of their operating cash comes from the midrange sets, like the GeforceFX 5200, Radeon 9600, Geforce 6600, RadeonHD 3650, and so on.

With a potentially legitimate, and humongous, competitor coming up in what has traditionally been the bread-and-butter for most graphics vendors, the market Nvidia thought they could sell into was lessened. Nvidia also had other issues, such as bad reputation with ODM's like Clevo and FoxConn, and OEM's such as Asus, Acer, HP, and Apple, over the issues with various NV4x, G7x, and G8x GPU's having (drastically) different thermal envelopes than Nvidia originally said those parts had. Just look up Exploding Nvidia Laptop.

***

As a company, Nvidia's market strategy needed to change. They need to become something other than a graphics card vendor. They couldn't depend on Intel's GPU entry being a complete mongrel. Learning that Epic Software, the guys behind one of the engines that built Nvidia as a gaming company (Unreal Engine), was involved in helping Intel optimize Larrabee for gaming had to land like a blow to the solar plexus. While I'm not saying that Epic's involvement is magically going to make an x86 software rendering solution good... I think Intel is serious about getting Larrabee right as a graphics product... and when Intel gets serious about a product, they generally deliver. E.G. Banias into Core 2, and then the Core 2 architecture into I7.

As a company, I can't really figure out what Nvidia's ultimate strategy is going to be. A couple months ago I would have throught they were trying to get into the x86 processor market, and produce a competitor to both the Intel CPU's and AMD CPU's, essentially becoming yet another platform vendor. I think, emphasis on think, these plans have been scrubbed.

It's been more profitable for Nvidia to focus on offering multimedia platforms, such as the Tegra. If rumors are to be believed, Nvidia may have even landed the contract for the next Nintendo handheld platform... a potential slap in the face to rival AMD whose employees have been behind the N64 (SGI), GameCube (ArtX), and Wii (ATi) consoles, and who were at one point contracted to build a system platform for the successor to the GameBoy... a project that fell through when the DS started flying off shelfs like it was powered by redbull wings.

It's the opinion of some analysts, and myself, that maybe not even Nvidia themselves know what direction they are going to take in the coming months. While it would be disappointing to see Nvidia leave the gaming card market, it is perhaps one of the options on their table.


I know what you mean. I've commented before about the Intel D975XBx motherboard I have, that despite being a Socket 755 motherboard, and if I'm not mistaken, the first Crossfire enabled motherboard Intel ever did, only supported Conroe, Allendale, Kentsfield Core 2 processors, and will not support any Yorkfield or Wolfdale processors... that were just die-shrinks of the processors it did support.

On the other hand, I've got an Asus M2R32-MVP, which uses the Radeon Xpress 3200 chipset, which was a Socket AM2 motherboard from 2006... that's happily chugging away with a Phenom 9600.

yes / no

Yes, you are right, they would count, and the original post was about better managing what resources were available in a fight.

No, I sort of skip over them because they aren't really instanced missions or task forces, and my mind was thinking in terms of content requiring 2 or 3 teams working together.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BnOUOkcr9c

The demo was ran on Crossfired RadeonHD 4870x2's. According to Ghost Falcon the game would run in Ultra-Mode on a RadeonHD 4850. However, resolution scaling wasn't mentioned, so we don't know if that was Ultra-Mode at 1440*900, 1680*1050, 1920*1200, or 640*480, and nor do we know what the baseline processor was.

Question: do you seriously believe that Back Alley Brawler's animation work has anything to do with coding work and bug fixing for the rest of the game? Do you really think that the power and costume animation guys have access to the source code and power management?

Honestly, if your power supply doesn't have two different plugs for either PCIE-6pin or PCIE-8pin... I wouldn't try it.

Anyways, the HD 5x00 series generally has the same thermal and power envelopes as the previous 4x00 cards for each branding, so you theoretically should be able to manage the 5850 in the same power envelope.

Okay. Lets work on definitions first.

***

• Graphics Card

A graphics card contains your physical GPU and all of the external controls and circuitry required for the GPU to work and make a picture

***

• GPU

GPU stands for Graphics Processing Unit. This is the physical chip that does all of the graphics calculations.

Multi-GPU stands for Multiple Graphics Processor Units. It means you have more than one chip that calculates the graphics in your computer.

***

• SLI

SLI stands for one of two things. It can either stand for Scan Line Interface or Scalable Link Interface. Scan Line Interleave was developed by 3DFX and basically interlaced the picture from two different GPU's for one picture.

A few years back Nvidia bought up 3DFX and began working on Multi-GPU technology again. They branded their new technology SLI, for Scalable Link Interface.

SLI is used as a branding term for any Multi-GPU technology produced by Nvidia. If you have more than one physical processor that calculates graphics, the technology required to manage each physical processor and make the processors work together is called SLI.

***

• Crossfire

Crossfire is AMD's / ATi's brand name for managing multiple GPU's. If you have more than one physical processor that calculates graphics, the technology required to manage each physical processor and make those processors work together is called Crossfire

***

You'll also find terms like:

• Triple SLI - This means you have 3 Nvidia GPU's
• Quad SLI - This means you have 4 Nvidia GPU's
• Triple Crossfire - As you'd expect, this means you have 3 ATI gpu's
• Quad Crossfire - and finally, 4 ATi gpus

***

Now, each current vendor, ATi and Nvidia, sell single graphics cards with 2 GPU's on each card. So it is possible to have a Quad-SLI or Quad-Crossfire setup with only two physical add-in graphics cards.

***
Right now the City of Heroes engine does not benefit from having multiple GPU's. You'll notice performance gains in other games, but until Ultra-Mode arrives later this year or sometime next year, multiple-GPU's is a bit of a waste if this is the only game you play.

I think you mean Core I7... Intel's Pentium branding is now used for lower end processors.

And yes, I can say that it does. I've got a Core I7... something, well, let me turn that computer on and take a screen shot. Be a minute.

And... here it is.



***

That the drivers have been messed up really hasn't been true for ATi's DirectX support since well... around 2003 /2004 when ARTx took over the driver program.

That ATi cards were messed up, however, has been true with OpenGL till a couple years ago. Back when ATi retired the Radeon 8500 series cards, which was Nov. 15, 2006, and they did so because an OpenGL rewrite was in the cards. That re-write hit in 2007 : http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item=914&num=1

And... the results were spectacular. The OpenGL performance skyrocketed on many ATi cards, with some averaging over 100% performance increases. From a performance standpoint, ATi had indeed caught up with Nvidia on OpenGL support.

If you go back and look at the archived drivers here: http://support.amd.com/us/gpudownloa...eonaiw_xp.aspx :: and then compare them to Nvidia's drivers here: http://www.nvidia.com/Download/Find.aspx?lang=en-us :: You'll actually find that AMD / ATi has been far more regular with driver updates than Nvidia. AMD / ATi hasn't actually missed a monthly driver update for... Windows since... well. Going all the way back beyond the Catalyst 6 series from 2006. I want to say that ATi's regular driver updates started in 2004 / 2005.

You'll also find that Nvidia's been the one with broken drivers, such as this article demonstrates when putting Nvidia's 64bit drivers versus ATi's 64bit drivers: http://www.mepisguides.com/Mepis-7/h...ati-64bit.html

****

Now, I've had lots of Nvidia cards and lots of ATi cards. Of the ones I've personally owned for myself, and used in my own systems:

Nvidia:
Riva TNT2
Geforce 2 MX (pick a varient, I've had them all)
Geforce 4200 TI Factory Overclocked (then overclocked to 4600 GPU speed, 4400 memory)
Geforce 6600 GT (2 of them, but AGP factory overclocked)
Geforce 7900 GT KO (factory overclocked)
Geforce 6800 Mobile
Geforce GTS 250 (Triple SLI)

ATI:
IBM Oasis (don't. ask. just don't.)
Rage 128 AIW
Radeon 7500
Radeon 8500 AIW
Radeon 9600 XT
Radeon 9600 Pro
Radeon 9800 Pro
Radeon 9800 AIW
Radeon 9800 XT
Radeon x1800 XT
Radeon x1900 AIW
RadeonHD 2600 Mobile
RadeonHD 3870 (Crossfire)
RadeonHD 4850 (Crossfire)

Now, you might notice that I've had a lot more ATi cards than Nvidia cards. That's because, in my own personal experience, the Nvidia cards and their drivers have invariably sucked like a Hoover vacuum cleaner.

The 6600 GT's, for example, howled like Banshee's. I actually wound up sacrificing 4 slots for each card in order to use a water-cooling solution. One of the big problems with the 6600 GT AGP edition cards is that they used a unique fan mounting design in order to make room for the PCIE to AGP bridge chip... and the only cooler I ever found that would work was a self-contained Thermaltake Tide-water cooler.

The 7900 GT KO, great card. Only, it wasn't really that much faster than the x1800 or x1900 cards I had, and required a heftier power-supply.

The GTS 250's... again. Great cards. They perform wonderfully on the system I've got them hooked up at... yet... when I was buying them... they were all dual-slot solutions. I couldn't find any vendors that sold a single slot GTS 250... Yet I had no problems finding vendors that sold single slot RadeonHD 3870's or Single Slot RadeonHD 4850's... which were in the same price range. This might not sound like a big deal, but the 3 GTS 250's I've got literally take up so much space, I've got no room to plug in the cables for my front USB ports or my front speaker ports, and there's no physical space to place a real sound card for the computer... and I'm using a full ATX board in a FoxConn chassis.

On the other hand, the ATi cards have been... well. I can't honestly say I've ever had any driver problems with them except in games where Nvidia had a hand in the development... say like Planetside... but that was also buggy on Nvidia cards too, but a different kind of buggy.

***

Soo, looking ahead to the future... I seriously question Nvidia's commitment to the hard-core gamer. I really do question just how good, or bad, Fermi is going to be for gaming purposes. Honestly, I'd feel a lot more comfortable if Nvidia was able to demonstrate Fermi's architecture working in IKOS.

For those who don't know, IKOS is a brand name for a silicon pre-production system. Basically it's a hardware setup that allows developers to mimic the hardware structure of a silicon that's to be fabbed before the silicon is actually fabbed. Most vendors use an IKOS box, or a similar system, to verify that an architecture works as expected before sending it off to be fabbed. Nvidia has, as far as I'm aware, yet to demonstrate that Fermi works even in the silicon emulation level.

***

By the same token, I'm somewhat... leery... of what AMD's going to be doing with their drivers. I've gotten some doublespeak recently from them with Catalyst Maker (Terry) saying that yes, OpenGL support was still a priority for the dev team, and others who said that OpenGL support was really only going to be targeted for the WorkStation market... coupled with Matthew Tippett leaving for Palm, and I wonder if AMD will continue to push OpenGL performance... which is important to CoH, and as I feel, important to the gamesindustry as an overall technology.

I'm not exactly comfortable with the idea of Intel being the main graphics vendor pushing OpenGL...

***

Okay, does that answer your questions about the subjects?