> Please. The new GPUs are about more than just framerate.

Perhaps, but where OP is wrong is where he thinks all modern GPUs can run a full 60 fps at 1080p. He is wrong. He also ignores 1200p, 1440p, 1600p, 1080px3, and all the other use-cases that require a high-end GPU. He also forgets that game developers are *always* pushing the limits.

In short, this article is stupid, and an embarrassment to /.

Either your sarcasm detector needs calibration, or mine does...

But can it run Crysis?

Well, the OP is wrong anyway. I don't need to point out how - there's hundreds of posts here that are on the mark. It's the idiot moderators that though this kind of post was worthy of being on /. that severely disappoints me. No wonder I've been frequenting this site less and less.

Given the responses, I think you're right. Wait, unification to decay in 3.... 2..... 1.....

Wow, how can something so stupid get chosen as a post? Seriously. Even at 1080p, even the high end GPUs fall below 60fps on the most demanding games out there. People to buy high-end GPUs often do so to pair them up with 3 1080p monitors, or a 1440p monitor, or even a 1600p monitor. In fact, these people need to buy 2 to 4 of these top-end GPUs to drive that many pixels and triangles.

Actually it's more like $300 to $1300, depending on which hardware you bought to run it on.

Incidentally, lithium in the tesla batteries is scraped up from salt in the salt flats. Most of it comes from Bolivia, and the worker make good money, and work in pretty good conditions. The rest of the car is made out of metal and fiberglass, much like any other car. Perhaps you're mistaking it for a prius.

Is Elon any worse than any of the other Car CEOs out there? You know, the ones who push out the same overcomplicated machines with slight year-over-year refreshes, and put in place schemes to keep people wanting more, and which use a black, tar-like substance which is mainly gained from drilling under the ocean, or in war-torn countries, or by strip-mining the countryside? Every time I see any care I see a big-ass pile of heavily polluting blood minerals, and gasses, and damage, and that damage continues as long as those cars operate.

The infrastructure for charging stations is there: The electrical grid has more than enough capacity. As for all electricity coming from fossil fuels, that's just a red herring: Electrons don't care where they come from. Just because there is a lot of fossil fuel generation right now (in my area, btw, it's all hydro-electric - so my electric car wouldn't be charged by fossil fuels), it doesn't mean that it will always be that way. It's actually a strength of the electric car: It won't care if you ditch fossil fuel generation for something else - you don't have to change your car because the generation technology has changed.

Charing rate is now down to 30 minutes for a 50% recharge (granted, this is at tesla stations, but it's just as real), and will only get faster. Range on a p85 tesla is over 400 km. Where I live, the presence of charging stations is within a few hours drive in every direction. I can get to the major centers around me with 0 or 1 stops at a charging station on the way. In 5 years, batteries will probably grow sufficiently in capacity to negate the need to charge before I get to any major center. At the end of the day, we will run out of fuel one day, I don't really see the point of making it happen as fast as possible.

First it has to get out of just being in one laboratory before it's worth a look. After science actually vets it, we'll see. But, again, at the end of the day you'll still have to have fuel cells actually come to market. They are massive, hot, and complicated. They are used on busses because of all the extra machinery they need to maintain their temperature - oh, and they are high-temperature.