Video cards & next generation EPROM

[ECH]

Why haven't we seen some of the drivers features on the video card itself (Using EPROM as a delivery system)? Wouldn't it be more efficient to move some of those features from the HD to the video card itself? For example:
-AA/AF settings
-Movie/video settings
-Color Tweaking Options
-Display Settings (Resolution settings for PC/HDTV, etc)
-Overclocking Options
-Video encoding, decoding, etc
-Game Profiles

In hindsight, it would make more sense to use features that wouldn't need consistent monthly, weekly, quarterly updates (IE: profiles). However, it should reduce the overall footprint of the driver one would need to install on their PC. The side of this coin is to find a way to get it working with Windows 7 and other OS's.

 

[ShaidarHaran]

I believe it best to store user settings on the hard drive. As someone that swaps hardware on a fairly regular basis, I find it rather convenient that all of my game profiles are still valid even after changing a card. For example, I play Borderlands and force 16xQ CSAA as well as VSync with a profile. I recently replaced the graphics card in two of my systems, an 8800 GT and an 8800 GTS 512, each with a BFG GTX 275 OC. The upgrade was painless and required absolutely no adjustment on my part.

 

[Alexko]

Nevermind, brain fart.

 

[ECH]

I believe it best to store user settings on the hard drive. As someone that swaps hardware on a fairly regular basis, I find it rather convenient that all of my game profiles are still valid even after changing a card. For example, I play Borderlands and force 16xQ CSAA as well as VSync with a profile. I recently replaced the graphics card in two of my systems, an 8800 GT and an 8800 GTS 512, each with a BFG GTX 275 OC. The upgrade was painless and required absolutely no adjustment on my part.

I understand that. However, that would be the exception rather then the rule. Here's a thought, a backup file would be needed so that one can restore all user settings. Other peripherals have such features.

 

[aaronspink]

Why haven't we seen some of the drivers features on the video card itself (Using EPROM as a delivery system)? Wouldn't it be more efficient to move some of those features from the HD to the video card itself? For example:
-AA/AF settings
-Movie/video settings
-Color Tweaking Options
-Display Settings (Resolution settings for PC/HDTV, etc)
-Overclocking Options
-Video encoding, decoding, etc
-Game Profiles

In hindsight, it would make more sense to use features that wouldn't need consistent monthly, weekly, quarterly updates (IE: profiles). However, it should reduce the overall footprint of the driver one would need to install on their PC. The side of this coin is to find a way to get it working with Windows 7 and other OS's.

Flash ram costs money, bits in the ether do not. hence, its a null point. no vendor is going to double - 100x their flash costs for this.

 

[Grall]

What would be the advantage? I see virtually none. Only diff is if you reinstall your OS you won't have to make a few quick changes to the default settings but that's it. Oh, and if you take your GFX card over to your friend's house you can bring along your settings...super schweet for all of the 8 or so people worldwide who regulary do something like that.

 

[ECH]

What would be the advantage? I see virtually none. Only diff is if you reinstall your OS you won't have to make a few quick changes to the default settings but that's it. Oh, and if you take your GFX card over to your friend's house you can bring along your settings...super schweet for all of the 8 or so people worldwide who regulary do something like that.

LOL, the idea behind it has nothing to do with portability. Although I had to think on why such an idea was purposed as a reason why it's not an advantage . The idea is to reduce the overall footprint of the driver. Also, adds a check mark to how the product (video card) can be marketed in comparison with it's competitor .

 

[compres]

I hate to say it but I see no benefit what so ever.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

LOL, the idea behind it has nothing to do with portability. Although I had to think on why such an idea was purposed as a reason why it's not an advantage . The idea is to reduce the overall footprint of the driver. Also, adds a check mark to how the product (video card) can be marketed in comparison with it's competitor .

If you are hurting over a few KB of HD space on a multi-GB drive, I think there's other more pressing concerns.

Regards,
SB

 

[ECH]

If you are hurting over a few KB of HD space on a multi-GB drive, I think there's other more pressing concerns.

Regards,
SB

I serious doubt that HD space is of any concern. Adding functionality to the card itself can have it's own advantages .

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Other than driving up the cost of the card for no tangible benefit, I don't see it as an advantage to move user configurable settings into EPROM.

Regards,
SB

 

[Grall]

The idea is to reduce the overall footprint of the driver.

HDD space is practically free these days. You pay less than a tenth today for the largest possible HDD in the market right now (2TB) than you paid for the largest possible HDD in the late 1980s for the largest possible HDD then (~200MB). That doesn't even account for inflation, so in reality it's much cheaper than 10x difference...

And regardless, you still have to store this stuff somewhere, and EEPROM is like...thousands of times more expensive bit-for-bit than HDD storage. If not even more.

Also, adds a check mark to how the product (video card) can be marketed in comparison with it's competitor .

I'm sure manufacturers can come up with a lot of other checkmarks too, but question is if any of them make sense - particulary from a value-for-money standpoint. You have to pay for the added functionality, and if all it does is copy functionality already present elsewhere in your PC at a much higher cost you're just adding a checkmark of inefficiency, redundancy and poor value.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

HDD space is practically free these days. You pay less than a tenth today for the largest possible HDD in the market right now (2TB) than you paid for the largest possible HDD in the late 1980s for the largest possible HDD then (~200MB). That doesn't even account for inflation, so in reality it's much cheaper than 10x difference...

Heh, late 80's you'd be lucky if you could afford a 10 MB HD... I can't even think of anything in the 100's until the 90's.

Regards,
SB

 

[FrameBuffer]

Heh, late 80's you'd be lucky if you could afford a 10 MB HD... I can't even think of anything in the 100's until the 90's.

Regards,
SB

I think it was the late 90s iirc,.. I know I had a bunch of Seagate 9.2GB SCSI drives in Raid with a 20-30GB IDE in/around 98ish.. in 99/00 I got a set of IBM DeathStars.. I think they were 75GB ones. I mihgt still have one sitting around here.. (so when I go back east I can use it for target practice.. maybe 12G with slugs).

 

[Blazkowicz]

And regardless, you still have to store this stuff somewhere, and EEPROM is like...thousands of times more expensive bit-for-bit than HDD storage. If not even more.

that's not a concern, as even 256K of flash would be ample storage for game profiles, checkboxes and such.

the problem is that's tied to a specific driver set and OS. on a current card it would be windows only, perhaps vista/7/2008 only ; or upgrading from XP to vista, you might have to flash the firmware and lose all your changes, thus making it moot.

another one is, I need the 3rd party stuff sorted out (ffdshow for video decoding/enhancing, refresh rate tool, rivatuner shortcuts etc.) and again settings residing in flash are moot.

what would be useful is settings stored in a file that you can easily carry around between installs.
well I've checked nHancer and it does a good job at exporting game profiles as XML. lol I will keep the file around. but the future isn't built in nvidia drivers.

The issue that bothers me is lack of game profiles on linux. Even though there are not many games in linux and you'd have to watch what Wine runs or something like that, I definitely shouldn't have to go into some UI and manually change anti-aliasing settings between different games.
That's a major loss of functionality (and thus IQ or performance or both) and a reason that makes me stays under windows.

If nvidia made linux game profiles I'd consider switching, no I would switch to ubuntu 10.04 as my personal desktop OS (and live with the lack of Wine compatibility with games)

 

[ECH]

Be it flash, eprom, eeprom or something else the costs is not relevant . Some of you talk as if you need 100s megs of it just to store a few settings when in fact you don't. So, IMO cost in that regard is really not relevant.

Keeping settings on the card itself would allow for more flexibility as you wouldn't need to install it on the HD among other examples mentioned. I'm surprised really, here we are in the age of SSD and soon to be launch PCIe SSD variants and here some of you are still talking about standard HDs like they just came out (IE: lower cost, etc). Gee, I wonder what platters they use, oh wait...

 

[Blazkowicz]

for about the same price you can either buy a 320GB or 500GB hdd that does well over 100MB/s, or a slow 16GB memory card that writes at a few MB/s.

color me very unimpressed

 

[ECH]

I can get one for about $2? That's awesome gimme the link!

 

[ShaidarHaran]

The ultimate question though: why do it? What's the actual benefit? If it doesn't enhance portability (which isn't a great need to begin with), what does it actually do for the end-user?

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Be it flash, eprom, eeprom or something else the costs is not relevant . Some of you talk as if you need 100s megs of it just to store a few settings when in fact you don't. So, IMO cost in that regard is really not relevant.

Keeping settings on the card itself would allow for more flexibility as you wouldn't need to install it on the HD among other examples mentioned. I'm surprised really, here we are in the age of SSD and soon to be launch PCIe SSD variants and here some of you are still talking about standard HDs like they just came out (IE: lower cost, etc). Gee, I wonder what platters they use, oh wait...

Again, why do it? There is zero benefit. All it does is raise cost, however small, for absolutely zero benefit.

Is a few KB going to save you more than a micro-second of loading at OS bootup? You still haven't even answered the most basic question of why this would be a benefit when it will increase those cost to manufacture a card.

And as you so well pointed out, with SSD's on the horizon there is even less reason to resort to storing a few KB of user definable settings on the video card itself.

20 years ago when HD's were in the size of MBs and speed was much slower than it is today you might have made an argument that the increased cost "might" be worth it. But even then I don't think you'd have gotten very far with the idea.

Regards,
SB