rokkerkory
Regular
Would an extra 8% do much for gfx? 30 to 35fps maybe?
skype does not run snapped.
Would an extra 8% do much for gfx? 30 to 35fps maybe?
But it does in the background when i play? So that i can skype and play, and receive calls, or do i have to leave the game paused in the background when i skype?
30 to 35 is 18%, your much more likely to get something more near 32.4fps but that assumes that the framerate increases linearly with the size of the time slice that the game gets.
ya you'll get notifications and stuff, you just can't put it on the side screen.
But i can have a skype (voice of course) session while i play?
I actually haven't tried skype voice while playing a game, but I assume it would work.
<edit> just tried it, it works.
Some of my friends speak on Skype while they play, so yes, it is possible as Alphawolf pointed out already.But i can have a skype (voice of course) session while i play?
The Skydrive rename was done because Microsoft was sued and lost for using a web product with the "Sky"+whatever naming scheme .
Since the rename was necessary, it seems hopping onto an existing branding initiative was how they chose to make the best of it.
I'm not following the 2% reserve for voice controls either, isn't that what the SHAPE audio block is for?
but the ps2 had the most powerful CPU IIRC about 4x the power of the xbox, graphics arent solely dependant on the GPU the CPU plays a large role as well esp with the ps2/ps3.It's really weird to me that most peoples opinions are that winning this generation falls to whichever systems has the most powerful gpu. In fact it has never really mattered this much before. The best selling console of all time (Ps2) had the weakest gpu of it's console generation.
but the ps2 had the most powerful CPU IIRC about 4x the power of the xbox, graphics arent solely dependant on the GPU the CPU plays a large role as well esp with the ps2/ps3.
This time round though I think both CPU's are very similar within ~10%, the major difference is GPU
But isn' the 8% GPU time mainly doing Kinect skeletal tracking (which is what's expensive, not rendering the Snap window).
And since Kinect is always tracking players (to determine who's issuing voice commands, who's first player, second player etc) can they actually get rid of the GPU reservation?
I wouldn't get my hopes up.
But isn' the 8% GPU time mainly doing Kinect skeletal tracking (which is what's expensive, not rendering the Snap window).
And since Kinect is always tracking players (to determine who's issuing voice commands, who's first player, second player etc) can they actually get rid of the GPU reservation?
I wouldn't get my hopes up.
Displaying the video from the hdmi-in (eg TV) may take gpu resources. Any simultaneous html5 gpu accelerated programs running on the browser might as well, apps that use some gpu resources now wouldn't be able to.
Currently can you watch a 1080p youtube video or gamersyde video and play a game at the same time??
wow, that's a fair number of extra characters for my handle...I created my account just to bump this question.
I am shocked at the notion that kinect would use ANY gpu for audio. Especially with all we have heard here from insiders about SHAPE. Can someone (bikillian?) explain why kinect might need to use 2% GPU time slice for audio processing?