• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

DOo you think GPU's are going be like CPU's now (performance increases)

Soldato
Joined
23 May 2006
Posts
6,843
VR is the future before ray tracing tbh. It will be a long time before we can have both.
In Death developers disagree with you. In a way vr may be a good fit for RTX. 1) current gen hmds are no where near 4k (even despite higher frame rate requirements and the relative increase is Res in vr) and 2) most vr games use simplified geometry etc compared to the likes of BF5 and tombraider .
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
33,188
RTX, as botched as it is right now, is a huge step forward.

In my opinion, the right step forward. We can push most games at 1440p/165Hz and 4k/60Hz. Yeah, more power is always good, but what for? 1080Ti and above can run anything already, so I'm happy we went in a new direction.

That same argument was made about a 280gtx, and a 7970, and a Titan, then a Titan X, then a 1080, then a 1080ti.

Game worlds are static, they don't use the same power or provide the same graphics year on year, they improve and use more power.

As for the random and rather arbitrary distinction of 1440p/165hz or 4k/60hz.... what if you want, 4k at 120hz? better resolution is better, higher speeds are better, more power is required to do both.

Even if you had 4 times the power and could run 4k at 120hz, the next year a more demanding game would come out and only run at 80fps, and the year after that a more demanding game would come out that only produced 40fps and thus you'd need more power again. That's the way it works, that's the way it's always worked.
 
Back
Top Bottom