@Okplay low resolution and compressed to a crap bit rate as a bonus. Online video will be poor representation of high end PC and next gen console games. Even 1080p res videos on Youtube and other sites look worse than the actual thing. Looking on online streams from PS4 announcement I was very unimpressed. Found RAW files online and the games look quite a bit better.
Anyway, not like this matter. No matter how much marketing inanities they spout, campaign will still be crap since DICE never made a good single player experience (maybe Mirror's Edge), but I don't care.
@chaos power You are wrong because the CPU clocks are provided by NVIDIA and come with a warranty. The card is designed to work within these frequencies at an exact power consumption and heat output treshold. This is nowhere close to traditional overclocking. Normally you hope you get a good GPU core allowing more Mhz on the same voltage and a mild performance increase for free. Sometimes it will work, sometimes it won't. Or you overvolt the card, dramatically increasing power consumption, heat and noise and often introduce the need to water cool the card. Difference is that Nvidia guarantees every single card you buy will hit the quoted clockspeed, including Boost. For the same reason Intel's Turbo Boost tech is included in every CPU benchmark that takes advantage of it. You, sir, have no clue what you are talking about.
Second: errors in your general logic. Historically each new high end GPU cranked up power consumption, heat and often noise to go with the performance. And then we got the monstrosity that was the GTX 480. It was a step too far and reviewers and consumers lashed out and Nvidia took note. The GTX 580 was an early attempt to reverse the trend by redesigning much of the PCB and modifications of the GPU core itself, but since it was still derived from the old process there was only so far they could push the efficiency gains. The reason why engineers would focus on creating less power hungry GPUs can easily be turned into the opposite argument you are making right now. What will a less power hungry GPU mean? Less worry about having the right PSU and enough PSU connectors. Less heat generated so your PC won't have to be a radiator any more. The cooler on the card will be able to run at lower fan speeds and since it will dump less hot air inside your case, the case fans will be able to run quietly as well. The case itself can also be smaller and more sleek since you won't need as much air flow as in, say the Silverstone FT02. So suddenly instead of "efficient GPU kills PC gaming" you have "efficient GPU makes PC gaming an even more appealing proposition". Hmm...
oi Walton, Walton. I like you and you are fun on the podcast, but occasionally you come out with these articles... First: errors of fact. 1 The M3 as far as I can tell has a really crappy 1368x768 display. Not a 1080p one. It just about barely runs BF3 at max settings at 768p. At 1080p it would go down to 15 fps or so. Furthermore the card inside that notebook DOES NOT WORK when unplugged from the wall socket. It will not run on battery. So much for portable gaming. 2 "Their laptop parts aren't weak versions of their desktop counterparts; they're every bit as powerful, and just as capable of running the latest games." That is just plain wrong. The laptop parts are still severely cut down compared to desktop parts. From Anandtech's article on the 600M series of GPU's "The only Kepler chip in NVIDIA's current mobile lineup is the GK107, and it sports 384 of NVIDIA's CUDA cores; architecturally it's basically a quarter of the GK104 that powers the GTX 680. That's one quarter the cores and one half the memory bus."
markiewicz's comments