14th March 2005, 3:32 PM
Honestly lazy I never said that having two GPUs was a bad idea. I only said that having two physical screens does nothing for gameplay and was only done due to cost and the need to fold the system up.
I have a Virtual Boy... It can do the same thing but doesn't use two GPUs. It renders the two different images using the single 32-bit RISK it has. This CAN be done without two different processors, but yes, two does make it easier and is the better solution in many cases. The thing is, when doing that all it need do is render the world twice, from two different viewpoints.
Oh and, one last thing. The two processors, well one's weaker than the other. I don't think they could use that to render two different viewpoints of a 3D scene like you suggest... I mean, they could do that but the more powerful one would have to render both at once...
Oh and, the second you strap a helmet on your head covering your eyes, in public, you will be KILLED.
I have a Virtual Boy... It can do the same thing but doesn't use two GPUs. It renders the two different images using the single 32-bit RISK it has. This CAN be done without two different processors, but yes, two does make it easier and is the better solution in many cases. The thing is, when doing that all it need do is render the world twice, from two different viewpoints.
Oh and, one last thing. The two processors, well one's weaker than the other. I don't think they could use that to render two different viewpoints of a 3D scene like you suggest... I mean, they could do that but the more powerful one would have to render both at once...
Oh and, the second you strap a helmet on your head covering your eyes, in public, you will be KILLED.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)