ABstract from conclusion i disagree with
Right so, anyone(intel powervr) with any ideas of bringing us ray traced graphics should stick it up their rear because we wont have any games or use for it and 4k resolutions that are being banded about as future (proof) tech should not be brought in, after all whos got a 4K screen ,yeh stick your inovations up your arse dev co's, we dont want them not unless they make quake quicker NOW Ridiculouse on TPU fututre tech/proof counts for nought, really
You're missing the point, or I didn't make myself clear enough on my opinion.
I hope Americans won't bust my ass for copyright infringement but here goes...
Lets say I supply the US army with F-16 fighter jets for a year now, and they've proven themselves to to be cheap, easy to maintain and most importantly an all round performer.
Now, after a year you show up with a F-22 Raptor, and you're all like "I got stealth, a future proof technology", and the US Airforce goes like "Wooooow".
But when they put our two fighter jets to the test, head to head, yours F-22 Rapptor is outmaneuvered, outgunned and outperformed as a platform in every way. Would you say that your future proof technology justifies your product failure?
If you delivered your plane to be used, it needs to make use of that future proof technology integrated in a whole balanced and complete package - product for end user. AMD has a new architecture, that holds a certain potential for long term growth and performance improvements. But that means little to us end users in the short term because they delivered a product on a level that Intel had a year ago, and by the time AMD reaches Bulldozer full potential, Intel will have Sandy Bridge - X which will be X times faster. It's hard to see "future proof tech" there
Edit:
The F16 vs F22 comparison was used just to make a point. Please don't troll about it
![Smile :) :)](https://tpucdn.com/forums/data/assets/smilies/smile-v1.gif)