News:

The configurator website states that "At least half of the PCs shipped today have an underpowered GPU...You need the right CPU / GPU mix for the best experience.  Whether you're using the latest operating systems, editing photos, watching videos, or playing a game..."  It's difficult to verify that percentage, but the thought behind the statement is obviously true.

 

Much more than half, I'd say.  This is actually something that boggles my mind; that people spend a lot of money on computers but just have crappy built in graphics.  Most people don't play a lot of intensive games, so that family or work computer is fine with built in graphics... but it's also fine with a Pentium IV 3.0Ghz!

It's a tough argument on what's better for 3D things, CPU or GPU.  But I'm a firm believer in GPU.  I'd rather have a $80 CPU and $210 GPU combo (which I paid for both in Dec), then vica versa.  Who among here honestly doesn't agree?  And for those you know who only use their computer for Office, Internet, Flash, Videos, MP3s, etc... tell me you don't think they can do all of these very quickly with a Pentium 4 3.0Ghz or Athlon XP 2800?  Now you cannot play todays games with those CPUs at high settings.  But a cheap $99 Athlon 64 will be able to play any game, and at that point put your money toward GPUs.

I'm not sure what I'm trying to say exactly.  But most people need neither a modern CPU or GPU.  But if you do need 3D applications, spend less on CPU and put extra money toward GPU.  So Nvidia has a point.

I totally agree. We (and by we I mean HH and the enthusiast comminuty in general) have to do a better job explaining to Joe Sixpack the benefits and reasons behind choosing certain components. With the way application developments is headed, having the right GPU is only going to get more important moving forward. Heck, Operating Systems are now using the GPU to accellerate their interfaces.

 Yea, not even that the GPU is important for games, but like BigWop says, they are integrating it into everything nowaday. I believe Vista uses it for their Aero as well. But I always believed in having both a fast CPU and fast GPU to somewhat eliminate the bottlenecks.

 Like what has been discussed in the last couple of posts, it is a case of matching budget and balance, you wouldn't want some Qxxxx paired with a 8400gt now would you. but meeting in the middle to elminate the bottlenecks would see the most benefitial and in theory should improve performance compared to previous cpu orientated pcs

Not sure about this, but I could have sworn that I saw a similar slide before when Nvidia was defending it's stuff against Intel and their current integrated graphics and/or Larrabee.