Witch Game Has?

A Better Story -

Neither, Both Have Great Stories,TimeShift Has A Realistic Fantasy Type Story,where you
Use your TimeShifting Abilities to Take Advantage over your enemies,
Where as Crysis you Use Your Nano Suit to be Invisible Stronger Run faster or even have some Armor To Take your Enemies Down or try to Sneak around them, In TimeShift you are trying to Stop a Man Named Chrone who has a Time Shifting Suit to,witch is the Beta Suit,He Has Built a Massive Machine and is Trying to Destroy Everything,you need to Stop him,
Having the Ability to Slow Stop and Revers Time it Would Seem it would be Easy to Beat the Game,But it’s not as Easy as you think! You Cannot Stop
Slow or Revers Time As much as you want,the Suit only Has so much power that it regenerates,
Crysis is the Same Way Your Armor will Deplete as you get shot, And you Clocking Abilities are limited, when you are still your Clock will last for
About 3 min.,But as you move around your Energy will Deplete A Lot Faster, In Crysis you are a Member of the US Special Forces,You and your Team Are
Trying to Find Someone who sent a Distress Signal from an Island, After a wile You Find out that its Anything But ordinary,that's all I'm telling about the Stories.


Better Graphics -

Most of you probably wont Agree with me on this But - Neither, Why? Well Crippling Most PC’s Crysis Has Some Awesome Graphics That's For Sure , The Guy’s That Have the Nano Suit’s “Your Team” Have Some Great Graphics That are Better than Timeshifts, As Far As the Rest? The Koreans Have Some Odd Stuff Going on with there Faces “YEA” They are Vary good But that's not what we are Comparing, Some of Time Shifts Guy’s Have some add Stuff to, like that Chinese Guy, As For World Detail? They are Both Vary Good! , Goodies! Well Crysis Has Lots Of Destructible Stuff and Nice Grenades, you can Shoot or Blast Down almost every tree Building Vehicle in your way! , The Thing i Noticed Most Was Crysis Has A lack of Blood,
With nearly no Blood in the Game its Good for those who don't like it, but if you want Realism its not there as far as Blood and Gore Go, TimeShift is a Bit more Gory, Blood splatters and when you Stick a Grenade on someone He’s Coming Apart! And With More Realistic Physics on the Gibbs it looks a lot more Realistic than most Games, and with Timeshifts 3D Decals Where when you Shoot a Wall or the Ground a 3D Decal will appear with actual Holes in the Ground and Vary Nice Effects , all i Can Say is They are no Better than Each other ?


More Action -

Same thing here? They are Both Action Packed Games With Crysis Fighting Koreans and Blowing things up and Grabbing Guy’s Buy the throat and tossing them Aside Like nothing ,To Timeshift Sticking Explosive Darts in Guy’s Heads And Sticking Grenades to them Blowing them
To Bits of Dog Food To Getting Grenades off of you by Reversing time to Running threw Lasers And Getting threw Sticky situations where Time Shifting is Needed Or Fighting TimeSlowing guy’s who are Vary Fast!. So Both Have Awesome Action!


Better Weapons -

TimeShift Has A Better Variety of weapons that are a lot more High Tech,as where Crysis Has more Normal Weapons like AK-47’s Basic
Handguns And Normal Rifles,there is only one High Tech Weapon That One of your Team Made From Something I'm not telling,
But As for Cooler More High Tech Weapons i Say Timeshift wins in all areas, But it Depends on what you like? As Far as looks Go They Both look Vary Good,
The Weapons in Both Games Look Almost Real.


Both Games Have Abilities Beyond the Normal Person,

TimeShift - Slow - Stop - Revers Time !

Crysis - Cloak - strength - Speed - Armor!

This is my Opinion of Course and should Not be Taken Seriusly.
Thanks for Taking the Time to Read my Opinion on Crysis Vs TimeShift!

Did you Guys Here About the Upgradeable Graphics Cards?


Taipei (Taiwan) - The vision of upgradeable graphic cards goes back to the late 1990s, when Micron Technology was experimenting with removable sockets. In 2006, both MSI and Gigabyte showcased upgradeable graphic cards, but their concepts, which were based on GeForce Go MXM boards, never took off. Earlier this year, Asus introduced a single board with three MXM slots for ATI Mobility Radeon 3850 or 3870 cards (upgradeable with future parts), and has now unveiled its single-MXM product.

Called Splendid HD 3850M, this card doesn’t look like anything special, until you remove the dual-slot cooler. What you can see then is a MXM card with a RV670 chip and 512 MB of memory attached to the PCB that contains the Splendid HD video processor: The video processor features 12-bit gamma correction, 7-region color enhancement and dynamic contrast engine.

The Graphics chip is clocked at 668 MHz while the 512 MB GDDR3 memory operates at 828 MHz DDR (1.65 GT/s). According to Asus, this MXM card will score around 600 3DMarks (3DMark06) more than ATI’s own reference design. But what makes the different, is the fact that this product is significantly shorter than the Radeon 3850 or 3870 ATI reference design.


The Asus Trinity card has three MXM slots. The company is currently selling the card with three modules based on the Radeon HD 3850.

Thanks to a modular design, you will be able to upgrade to upcoming MXM modules, including ATI’s RV770 and RV870 chips (Radeon HD 4800, 5800 series). Interestingly, there should be no issue to put a Nvidia-GPU based MXM module onto this card, since there is no limiting logic.

Using this design, you can imagine a future where users will upgrade their graphics experience simply by buying a small module. If you would have to buy just the GPU and memory, this approach would actually lead to less money being spent, since you don’t need to buy the complete card over and over again.

This new line of products appears to be much more than an engineering exercise. We hope to see future designs incorporating HDMI-in on graphics cards too, just like on the much anticipated professional sound card, Xonar AV1 .

Asus is now on track of doing something new, something that can put them clearly ahead of the competition.

Sunnyvale (CA) - AMD has updated its server processor roadmap with single-die 6-core and dual-die 12-core Opteron processors. The new processors will be manufactured in a 45 nm process that will be introduced with the Shanghai quad-core later this year.

When Intel rolls out its Nehalem processors later this year, AMD appears to be better prepared than in late 2006 when Core began its triumph and until today pretty much wiped out all of the gains AMD Opteron has made in previous years. On the server side, AMD will counter Intel with the Shanghai quad-core CPU, which will be based on the current Barcelona technology, but will be manufactured in 45 nm and bring performance and power consumption benefits.

According to vice president Randy Allen, Shanghai will deliver about 20% more speed than Barcelona. While the chip will remain compatible with the current Socket F (1207) platform, the L3 cache will triple to 6 MB, 3-lane HT3 support will be integrated and DDR memory support will be extended to 800 MHz devices. AMD claims that the idle power consumption of the new CPUs will be 20% below their 65 nm counterparts.

Production of the 45 nm chip, which has been sampled to server vendors, is scheduled to begin late this year, while first products should be surfacing in Q1 2009. In the second half of that year, AMD plans to release a single-die 6-core Socket F processor code-named Istanbul. Offered for two- and four-socket systems, the chip will be clocked at lower clock speeds than the quad-cores.

A completely new platform (read: a departure from Socket F) is planned to be introduced in 2010. Called the "Maranello" platform, AMD will then transition to DDR3 memory and four HT3 lanes. The multi-socket processors will include the monolithic 6-core "Sao Paulo" with 6 MB of L3 cache, new hardware throttling and power management features, as well as the dual-die 12-core "Magny Cours" processor with 12 MB L3 cache. Both processors will be built in 45 nm. At least at this time AMD does not anticipate any Nvidia chipsets to support this platform and says that it will couple the CPU with its own RD890S and RD870S northbridges as well as the SB700S southbridge.

Eagle-eyed readers may wonder about those production dates. A late 2008 45 nm volume production of these processors matches the information we received from industry sources and would mean that AMD will put 45 nm into production just about one year behind Intel. Intel plans on introducing 32 nm processors in late 2009 and AMD now indicates that its Sao Paulo and Magny Cours processors will be manufactured in 45 nm in the first half of 2010, leading us to believe that 32 nm won’t arrive until the second half of the year in a best case scenario. This could mean that AMD keeps up with Intel, but won’t gain any ground on Intel in this discipline anytime soon.

Randy Allen responded to our inquiry by saying that this assessment would not be accurate as server processors do not reflect the entire product range of AMD. However, at least for 45 nm, we have credible sources indicating that 45 nm AMD CPUs won’t arrive before Q4 of this year. The 2010 processors are too far out to speculate whether Intel will deliver them at the end of 2009 and whether AMD will have any 32 nm chips available in Q1 2010. But clearly, at least for now, the 2006 promises AMD made to analysts aren’t likely to be kept.

Until Shanghai arrives, AMD will have to survive with its Barcelona quad-core and it is not surprising that the company touts the power-efficiency drum to compare itself favorably to competing Intel products. Allen claimed that AMDs 75 watt part Opteron 2356 saves about 20% of power when idle, 14% in high-load scenarios and 10% under full-load when compared to Intel’s (45 nm) 80 watt Xeon 5440. The executive also noted that the Opteron delivers on average 13% more performance than its Intel counterpart.

Those claims are based on five SPEC benchmarks as well as two fluid dynamics tests. It often depends on a very specific need that exploits a very specific capability of a processor as the results in each of those benchmarks can change dramatically. While AMD claims a 19% lead in SPECompMBase2001, a 13 and 19% in SPECfprate_base2006 and SPECfprate_2006, we were not able to verify the latter two results. In fact, official SPEC results indicate that at least one Intel Xeon 5440 systems is 29% and 26% ahead of the best performing Opteron 2356 system listed.

Chip giant Intel finally released a driver update that will enable DirectX10 on its chipsets that feature integrated graphics. Intel has been claiming DirectX 10 compatibility since the introduction of the G965 chipset in 2006, but has only recently released driver support for it. The update available at Intel’s website, is naturally a Windows Vista driver only and is compatible with Intel’s G31, G33, G35, Q33, Q35, G965, Q963, and GM965 Express chipsets.

However, NVIDIA has been reportedly been sending tech journalist tidbits on the performance of Intel’s DX10 update – mainly that there is no performance gain.

NVIDIA ran the usual benchmark of games under DX10 settings and to no surprise found Intel’s integrated graphics to be “downright incapable” of being used with DX10 applications.

NVIDIA goes on to say, “Saying GMA 3500 is DirectX 10 capable is kind of like saying Styrofoam is "nutrition capable". I guess Intel’s definition of capable is a lot different than our definition... a lot.” NVIDIA may be patting itself on the back for drawing that conclusion, but PC enthusiast have widely linked Intel’s IGP to poor performance for quite some time now. While NVIDIA should not be worried too much about Intel upping the performance on its IGP, they should be worried about Intel’s upcoming Larrabee project.

Larrabee, due in 2010, is a multicore discrete graphics initiative from Intel based off of the x86 architecture and supports OpenGL and DirectX instructions. Larrabee, has drawn much interest from the technology community and is one of the most anticipated product launches in the industry.

Jen-sun Huang, NVIDIA CEO, and the rest of NVIDIA have been on the initiative of opening “a can of whoop ass”, before Larrabee takes off. This latest act from NVIDIA appears to be just another example of the company’s aggressive PR plan — pushing the consumer to link poor graphics performance with Intel. Conversely, Intel previously stated in a press call that it thinks computer graphics is hitting a severe bottleneck and that is vector based solutions coming down the line will be the way of the future for 3D.

The Intel-NVIDIA war heeds warning from CRT Captial Group, saying NVIDIA maybe providing motivation to the chip giant. CRT Captial Group analyst Ashok Kumar issued a warning stating the recent tirade by NVIDIA CEO, Jen-sun Huang may have adverse effects – angering a “huge, rich, motivated design powerhouse.”

Kumar believes NVIDIA’s current products are better than Intel’s offerings, but mentions Huang is greatly overlooking Intel’s lack of interest in the high-end 3D-gaming market, and thus the reason why NVIDIA is so successful.

Many saw Huang’s outburst as NVIDIA’s attempt to gain higher ground before an upcoming epic battle between NVIDIA and Intel. The battle is due out in 2010 and is known as Larrabee, a multicore x86 chip as a discrete graphics card from Intel. Along with support for OpenGL and DirectX, Intel announced the chip design will include SSE-like extensions known as Advanced Vector Extensions.

Early reports on Larrabee showed chip designs incorporating 16-cores, with each core capable of operating over 2 GHz. Intel claims Larrabee is capable to scaling to several thousand cores.

Larrabee’s main attraction so far has been its potential as a ray-tracing chip. However, in a recent blog by Tom Forsyth, a developer on the Larrabee project, Intel’s primary design focus was on rasterization since it would be the only way to render the large library of DirectX and OpenGL games on the market. NVIDIA’s ongoing “war” with Intel started with Huang adlibbing during a financial analyst meeting, stating NVIDIA was about to “open a can of whoop ass” on Intel.

Huang further belittled Intel’s graphics solutions as a “joke” and being abysmal in the visual computing world. NVIDIA’s VP of content relations added to the fire with a declaration that the CPU is dead.