Before I was saying that CRT was better bc I was using one and when I saw LCD screens I was puking. But when you get a LCD screen u never go back to CRT be sure of that.

Intel coming with Larabee we'll see if it will become a 3-way Combat and / or become a 2-way combat NVIDIA/INTEL ? bc to be serious these times are dark for AMD. Waiting for REVOLUTION GUYS!

Maybe I'm a dinosaur since I still use a CRT, but it looks better. It has a better picture than x000$ LCD/Plasma screens I've seen. I use what is better, not what our capitalist overlords tell me to buy. That makes me a free thinking individual.

True, most people think they can think for themselves. But they are the ones who simply regurgitate what they see on TV. They say, "The TV said so. That means everybody thinks that. That must be my opinion too." The TV says, "Buy this huge LCD HD Quad Core BluRay Plasma TV." They invariably respond, "Yes, O' mighty capitalist lord I shall do thy bidding."

Sure, it has some virtualization technology thown in and assorted extensions for flavor but a C2D/Q is still an 8086 regardless of 64bit. 64bit doesn't change much. You can calculate algorithms at a far quick rate than with 32bit, but it's the same stale algorithms.

14 watts of power doesn't change much of anything either. Why should Joe Shmoe who only writes email even use a computer? He should use a typewriter that consumes 0 watts. Then instead of consuming even more watts by sending it over the internet, he can just send it via snailmail.

No, Joe Shmoe will buy what TV tells him to buy. It doesn't matter if it's as dumb as American Idol. Joe Shmoe will stare happily and drool and think he's smart because he's done exactly what our capitalist overlords told him to do. If our overlords tell Joe that he needs 500 gigawatts of power and 10THz CUDA GPU to write an email message, he will do just that.

The benefit for us, who actually use some our computers potential, is an evolution is computing technology. We haven't seen anything really new since the 80s, arguably the 70s. Sure, 3D graphics matured in the 90s, but the tech scene has been pretty stale since then. It's time to abandon 30 year old technology already.

If you want to make a change...the first thing you do is realize that a C2D or C2Q is a 64 bit processor and there are 64-bit OSes out there. 

Why are so many people running 32-bit Windows on a native 64-bit processor? 

If you want change, people have to stop sticking to "yesterday" and accept today. These are the same people who complain about technology not going anywhere but at the same time do nothing to research how far it has gone.

Im sure even Nvidia is running a lot of 32-bit Windows PCs on XP (and a few on Vista). They curse the CPU is dead...

GPUs themselves, get extremely hot, in fact hotter than CPUs. I like the future of CPUs...

Intel has realized that 95% of people don't use their PCs for gaming, so has AMD, so they are making LOW POWER, CPUs, just like VIA did. 

With rising electrical bills, people care more about saving money on power and most wont pay $500. 

To make my point:

More people care about a Computer that can operate on 10w of power or less using Intel Atom processors (or the via processor), SSD (when they become affordable)....integrated sound and integrated video than one GPU that takes 125w of power.

PROOF: The fact many people traded away 32-bits of color and PERFECT COLOR CORRECTION for LCDs which by SPECIFICATION alone have a white backlight, preventing any BLACK or WHITE from displaying perfectly, but HEY, it used 25% - 40% of the power a CRT uses and saves space.

AMD already in the trend of higher performing integrated GPU chipsets at low power consumption. If Nvidia really wants to shine, then combining a GOOD Integrated GPU optimized for the Intel ATOM processor, with power saving features would be good.

Why should JoeSmoe who only writes papers and browses email have to use 200 - 300w total system power? This is why people buy low end laptops...My low end laptop, according to Kill-A-Watt, when I ran an SSD in there used 14w of power every hour vs my desktop that at full load uses 300w of power each hour.

I think it's time we said goodbye the ol' 8086 microprocessor of yestermillenium. I mean, you might as well break out an old 6510 or z80 and revel in your 2k of ram wonder machine. Yes, I'm sentimental for the old days too. But don't you think microarchitecture should evolve beyond the 1970s already?

--Paid for by Nvidia--

Corporate flame-war aside, the merger between CPU and GPU has always been a natural evolution. The research has been ongoing for at at least 10-12 years. Anyone remember Cyrix Media GX? The whole point is to capture a large market. Merging CPU and GPU isn't going to produce a high-end GPU or CPU, it will be slower than dedicated ASIC logic but it will be cheaper and more convenient to market than a discrete card. Summarizing: Integrating CPU and GPU will increase the profit margin over the current IGP platforming for whichever company implements it which probably will be Intel, AMD and Nvidia. I doubt their implementations will be that different from each other, at least from the AMD / Nvidia perspective. Besides, even ignoring the heat/power/transistor count issues will keep the performance for IGP's down for a while yet.

For someone who is working on raytracing engines and MPI based implementations of raytracing, let me lay it out right now, intel's larrabee is a pile of crap, In the end it is still a rasterizing chip like all GPUs out there. If Intel thinks they will have ray tracing style graphics using X86 style ISA base as foundation, their claims are just as good as the one they made years ago, about their 15Ghz CPUs before 2007 or so. Intel will launch in another crap and then gets kicked not only by Nvidia but by AMD/ATI as well.

You people are wasting your time and intel and Nvidia fans boys are fighting and arguing over peanuts.

And for the technically impaired, the problem set solved and computed by GPUs and CPUs are totally different to say the least, today rasterizing graphics which is also known as "fake raytracing", because it is a crude form to calculate lighting, shadows, depth etc., needs a dedicate ASIC, which is what we call the GPU.

So intel is trying to make something new? Rubbish those who buy this nonsense are people who have no clue as to what the basic difference between a GPU and CPU is.

Raytracing, can be simple to extremely complex based on the scene, and for the scenes like say in Crysis or Unreal 3 engines today's hardware is a far cry to be even worthy of doing any raytracing at all. In MPI we employ 64 CPUs to get a complex scene done in about few minutes... now try selling the public nonsense about ray tracing potential.

And Intel's cheap solution of having multi cores is nothing but a physical dissection of the stream processor concept. There will be no viable raytracing for games, it will still be a rasterizing chip.

Their first solution may well prove to be an embarrassment, intel may even tuck tail and change their lines about the product's outlook and intended market.

Further more, Intel tried the same deal with IA-64 Itanium to displace the X86 altogether and it flopped. Larrabee is another pile trash but one which intel can afford but one which a company like AMD cant.

...Nvidia is the Tinkerbell on the left, and Intel is the Bondage Fairy on the right?

Hmm...I do reckon that might make for some entertaining anime...

Larrabee will likely be a game-changer, pun intended. There is no law against success, despite the cries and wails from Nvidia and AMD, and "Some Guy". If Intel can produce a cheaper, stunning GPU and the market beats a path to their door, so be it. It's called Business 101. Please, please, stop the whining and let me buy one.

That's all the hostility. Intel already has the lion's share of IGP - crappy though they maybe - and now they want discrete graphics. FTC, where are you?

How blatant can you get?

At the moment Nvidia + Intel surely is a lovely pair in your computer. ;) As for the companies' relationships, that's another thing.

I didn't know T'Pol had a sister. I'll take the one on the right.