Provided lets say some of us went back and showed off our modern games. I wont even show Red Dead Redemption II as its too heavy, but Call of Duty 4 from 2007 was only about 8 gigabytes and didnt need crazy hardware.
back in 1990 they didnt even have GPUs and companies that made them made their own custom chips and didnt have enough experience how to make them or how they worked.
Im guessing any game that runs ONLY on CPU means the game is software rendered correct?
So lets say we change the code of Modern Warfare 1 from 2007 to accept multiple CPUs and make it so it doesnt really have any compatibility issues or doesnt need Windows XP, all it needs is the horsepower and ram to run. Basically we would be building an ASIC specifically to run ONE game which is CoD4
How many 2Mb ram chips which I think thats what they had in 1990 and 486 25mhz CPUs would you need in a rack so you could run CoD 4 at 60 fps 1080p? 200 CPUs would give it an effective 5GHZ Single Core CPU speed of today so a core i9 9900k except that doesnt even include the latency. And a CPU doesnt process graphics well. Usually it does it at about 1fps software rendered?
So would we need about and Im generalizing here, about 12,000 486 CPUs?
back in 1990 they didnt even have GPUs and companies that made them made their own custom chips and didnt have enough experience how to make them or how they worked.
Im guessing any game that runs ONLY on CPU means the game is software rendered correct?
So lets say we change the code of Modern Warfare 1 from 2007 to accept multiple CPUs and make it so it doesnt really have any compatibility issues or doesnt need Windows XP, all it needs is the horsepower and ram to run. Basically we would be building an ASIC specifically to run ONE game which is CoD4
How many 2Mb ram chips which I think thats what they had in 1990 and 486 25mhz CPUs would you need in a rack so you could run CoD 4 at 60 fps 1080p? 200 CPUs would give it an effective 5GHZ Single Core CPU speed of today so a core i9 9900k except that doesnt even include the latency. And a CPU doesnt process graphics well. Usually it does it at about 1fps software rendered?
So would we need about and Im generalizing here, about 12,000 486 CPUs?