Future-proofing your GPU.

[TNA]

The PCMR snobbery alive and well with this post.

Nah. I have had loads of consoles. They just don't do anything for me anymore when you can have all your games on steam and play them when you like and can build a catalogue of games you can play whenever or wherever (steam deck) you want.

I just don't see the point of talking about consoles. We are talking about graphics cards. But that is my opinion, does not mean I am right or everyone has to agree with it.

 

[JollyJamma]

Nah. I have had loads of consoles. They just don't do anything for me anymore when you can have all your games on steam and play them when you like and can build a catalogue of games you can play whenever or wherever (steam deck) you want.

I just don't see the point of talking about consoles. We are talking about graphics cards. But that is my opinion, does not mean I am right or everyone has to agree with it.

Yeah like the discussion is about what graphics card rather than the pros and cons of a console.

Nobody would dispute the value of a console but that’s not the point of this thread.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The reality is the consoles are late 2020 tech with dGPUs around RX6600XT~RX6700XT level performance. Yet here in 2023,three years later,no sub £400 dGPU is convincing thrashing a console in pure processing power,and we are another 12~18 months until they are being replaced. Next year there will be a PS5 PRO. Within two years of the XBox 360 we had the 8800GT. The most represented dGPUs on Steam are cards such as the RTX3060,GTX1650,etc.An RTX3060 is worse than an RX6600XT.

Compare that to CPUs,and you can get £150~£200 CPUs,etc which are significantly faster than a console CPU. If anything the consoles are more CPU limited IMHO.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Nobody would be talking about consoles,if the RTX4060TI was an RTX4060,the RTX4070 was an RTX4060TI,the RTX4060 was an RTX4050,the RX7800XT was an RX7700XT and the RX7700XT was an RX7700 and they all cost £400 and below. This is why consoles are considered relevant because Nvidia/AMD because the Pandemic/Mining/AI, and people paying well beyond RRP for gaming cards,have made them greedy.

 

[Joxeon]

Nobody would be talking about consoles,if the RTX4060TI was an RTX4060,the RTX4070 was an RTX4060TI,the RTX4060 was an RTX4050,the RX7800XT was an RX7700XT and the RX7700XT was an RX7700 and they all cost £400 and below. This is why consoles are considered relevant because Nvidia/AMD because the Pandemic/Mining/AI, and people paying well beyond RRP for gaming cards,have made them greedy.

Yeah GPUs are falling behind consoles unless you're prepared to pay significantly more.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Yeah GPUs are falling behind consoles unless you're prepared to pay significantly more.

What's even worse is the consoles are clearly CPU limited in some aspects(performance in closer to the Zen+ level in the realworld due to low clockspeeds,low levels of L3 cache and GDDR6 latency issues). If the future consoles actually work on solving some of these issues,then it's going to show up the "Steam average PC" even more.

In the end sadly,I think the only time we will get "good" PC releases is when new consoles are launched. Ampere/RX6000 series were released when the latest generation of consoles were released. I don't think that was a conincidence.

 

[Troezar]

Nobody would be talking about consoles,if the RTX4060TI was an RTX4060,the RTX4070 was an RTX4060TI,the RTX4060 was an RTX4050,the RX7800XT was an RX7700XT and the RX7700XT was an RX7700 and they all cost £400 and below. This is why consoles are considered relevant because Nvidia/AMD because the Pandemic/Mining/AI, and people paying well beyond RRP for gaming cards,have made them greedy.

Yes the PC work is in a strange place. CPU power seems to be progressing well but GPUs are being constrained by cost. Games also seem to be a bit stagnant.

It always resolves itself in the end though, as when the money stops flowing they have to up their game to get it back again. It may end though with PCs just becoming a commodity item as we reach the point where we have all power we need.

 

[Apex]

Hmmm, I had £500-£600 to spend and decided on a 32" 4K monitor rather than a GPU, far bigger upgrade in my mind from 6700XT - 7800XT - while the 6700XT is not ideal for 4K, with a few settings tweaks it's still a fantastic experience, I was surprised how much better the fidelity was coming from 1440p, and at how well the 6700XT held up.

A 7800XT even on BF deals is just not worth it IMO, and that goes all the way down both stacks, money is now better spent on fidelity, screen size and a component that will last you much longer and is much more impactful than raw raster, especially with the rise of upscaling techs, I don't like that as an alternative to real performance but that's the way it is, so i'd suggest to anyone thinking about a GPU upgrade in the current climate to consider whether your money is better spent on a nice new monitor.

 

[TNA]

The reality is the consoles are late 2020 tech with dGPUs around RX6600XT~RX6700XT level performance. Yet here in 2023,three years later,no sub £400 dGPU is convincing thrashing a console in pure processing power,and we are another 12~18 months until they are being replaced. Next year there will be a PS5 PRO. Within two years of the XBox 360 we had the 8800GT. The most represented dGPUs on Steam are cards such as the RTX3060,GTX1650,etc.An RTX3060 is worse than an RX6600XT.

Compare that to CPUs,and you can get £150~£200 CPUs,etc which are significantly faster than a console CPU. If anything the consoles are more CPU limited IMHO.

You would think good guys AMD would have released something to in this price range. But they are too busy to following what Nvidia does than try and lead the way.

They don't even have the excuse of they don't have the money no more. The new excuse is "but people won't buy it". Price it right or have a superior product than the competition and they bloody will.

Let see what they do next gen. Last I heard they won't or can't compete at the top and and they are going to target the mid range. Maybe they will release something that actually dramatically improve price for performance in the mid range and below, as it is about time it happens.

Like my 4070 Ti performance with at least 16GB next gen should be £299. £399 tops! But let's get real they are not the good guys people paint the to be. They won't do that.

 

[G J]

Agree with upgrading the monitor as I was on a near 10 year old Dell 24inch 1080p 60hz IPS panel and spent £150 on a Acer 27inch 1440p 170hz IPS panel and for the price I'm very happy with it and will stick with this now untill OLED's become more cheeper/better etc.

The only downside I have is the rx 6600 I have is lacking a little if I want to max 1440p/upscale to 4K as I mainly play older games but I would get some good gains from a 7600/6700XT(only 500w psu ) /3060ti so keeping an eye out.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

You would think good guys AMD would have released something to in this price range. But they are too busy to following what Nvidia does than try and lead the way.

They don't even have the excuse of they don't have the money no more. The new excuse is "but people won't buy it". Price it right or have a superior product than the competition and they bloody will.

Let see what they do next gen. Last I heard they won't or can't compete at the top and and they are going to target the mid range. Maybe they will release something that actually dramatically improve price for performance in the mid range and below, as it is about time it happens.

Like my 4070 Ti performance with at least 16GB next gen should be £299. £399 tops! But let's get real they are not the good guys people paint the to be. They won't do that.

They are not a budget brand anymore,haven't you heard?

Yet launch later,don't have the top spot and have less developed "value added features". Just look on the CPU side,when they did an Intel and made B650/B650E or jacked up Zen3 pricing to worse than Intel had.

Plus in the UK market they CBA to supply stock to even large companies such as Amazon,etc. Honestly getting a bit fedup with them.

 

[Gray2233]

Nah. I have had loads of consoles. They just don't do anything for me anymore when you can have all your games on steam and play them when you like and can build a catalogue of games you can play whenever or wherever (steam deck) you want.

I just don't see the point of talking about consoles. We are talking about graphics cards. But that is my opinion, does not mean I am right or everyone has to agree with it.

The only console I might buy at this point would be a PS5 for FF7 Rebirth, it would be sold or returned promptly after.

I don't have anything against consoles in particular, but my PC is a multi-usage machine and my preferred gaming platform. Consoles offer me (personally speaking) very little value for money, and while I hate having to fork out £500 + for a half decent GPU it's still more worthwhile on my end.

 

[Joxeon]

The only console I might buy at this point would be a PS5 for FF7 Rebirth, it would be sold or returned promptly after.

I don't have anything against consoles in particular, but my PC is a multi-usage machine and my preferred gaming platform. Consoles offer me (personally speaking) very little value for money, and while I hate having to fork out £500 + for a half decent GPU it's still more worthwhile on my end.

A pc only really offers a superior gaming experience when spending at least £500+ just on the GPU and thats not even forgoing the costs of the rest of the machine, ideally for the complete experience you want both console + PC, preferably PS5 as Xbox can more easily be replaced by a PC.

If I was on a lower budget, just wanted to game and couldn't afford GPU's over £500 then I'd go console every time.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

A pc only really offers a superior gaming experience when spending at least £500+ just on the GPU and thats not even forgoing the costs of the rest of the machine, ideally for the complete experience you want both console + PC, preferably PS5 as Xbox can more easily be replaced by a PC.

If I was on a lower budget, just wanted to game and couldn't afford GPU's over £500 then I'd go console every time.

The sad thing merely three years ago a £300 card was fine!

 

[mrk]

Step 1: Acquire RTX 4090
Step 2: Laugh in the face of everything for years

End of steps.

The sad thing merely three years ago a £300 card was fine!

What card? 3 years ago I had a 2070 Super (2020 to 2022) and that was well over £300 and was just passable for RT in upcoming games like Cyberpunk etc, so a 3080 Ti was necessary. That's of course assuming someone wants to maintain a certain bar in GFX settings being as close to max as possible at 3440x1440 and get over 60fps.

 

[GhostDog1981]

A pc only really offers a superior gaming experience when spending at least £500+ just on the GPU and thats not even forgoing the costs of the rest of the machine, ideally for the complete experience you want both console + PC, preferably PS5 as Xbox can more easily be replaced by a PC.

If I was on a lower budget, just wanted to game and couldn't afford GPU's over £500 then I'd go console every time.

I’ve often wondered why I bothered with pc and didn’t go ps5.

Next console gen I’ll buy a console and not upgrade my pc beyond what it is… more so the fact I don’t want to spend £1500 on a gpu to compete.

 

[K1LaW8tt5]

Step 1: Acquire RTX 4090
Step 2: Laugh in the face of everything for years

End of steps.

Even with the price adjusting by nvidia/amd you could probably buy a £700 GPU now and another 1 again in 3 years time and get a better all round experience over the next 6+ years than a 4090 would offer.
You are in no way future proofed with a 4090. You are also at the mercy of artificial performance that nvidia can just decide your GPU can't use in future games when the 5000 series is out.

Lets not advise regular people to blow a hole in their wallet for the sake of a handful of games. If you've money to burn and want the best GPU then yes just go buy a 4090.

 

[mrk]

There currently isn't a £700 GPU that provides high framerates at 1440P in the latest (admittedly small number of) titles. AMD cards don't count as they just aren't up there when you factor in upscaling and RT. A 4070 Ti may satisfy a portion of gamers, but it's starting price is £750, and it only has 12GB VRAM, which unticks its use at 1440P for a handful of modern titles that reach 15GB VRAM use (Alan Wake being the latest example). Ultimately this all boils down to the games you play though yeah.

The way I see it, there isn't any roadmap pointing to a 4090 not being still top end even a year after a 5090 release. Yeah it will be cheaper then obviously, but it will still provide high end performance whilst nvidia still charge eye watering sums for lower model cards. There is a chance that NV will release DLSS4 and only support the 50 series with it, it's a chance, even if small. The technology we see now shows strong growth for DLSS3 technologies, and that's the current evolution path with lots of headroom to improve in big ways, all NV need to do, and are doing, is just train the AI model sets just like they have done between Alan Wake 2 and Cyberunk resulting in higher quality denoising and better detail from ray reconstruction, and that's just within the space of a few months.

As for DirectX 13, there's not even any rumours of DX13 on the horizon, not even for Windows 12 coming next year. If they did release DX13 with Win12 as a selling point, then no games would support DX13 for many years unless a dev decides they want to run two APIs to cater to consoles (DX12) and PC (DX13) - How may devs are left that would put that kind of effort in any more?

Plus, remember that these cards are also not just for gaming any more. All major applications now have GPU acceleration with many now coming with AI acceleration (Davinci, Photoshop, Lightroom etc etc) - So for productivity they come into their own too. But yeah whilst the number of games utilising the full scope of gaming engine features can be counted on one hand of these cards, the number is growing, and Unreal Engine 5.x has only just started to gain some traction which will only grow bigger like UE4 did, just hopefully without all the stutter struggles of old.

The new cards all need to be 16GB cards at the minimum. Many games now hit VRAM up to 15-16GB at 1440P if higher settings are used. It's not an option any more so thankfully these new cards are seemingly going to be over 16GB too. The same applies to productivity, Lightroom exports can use up to 22GB of VRAM for example I've found.

I guess the gist of it is if you keep wondering what might be around the corner, you'll never fully enjoy the "now". Price to performance the 4090 is the only card that delivers performance for its RRP. I would never dream of buying one at today's prices though!

 

[Apex]

8GB FTW!

 

[tommybhoy]

The new cards all need to be 16GB cards at the minimum. Many games now hit VRAM up to 15-16GB at 1440P if higher settings are used. It's not an option any more so thankfully these new cards are seemingly going to be over 16GB too.

That's future proofing and why the main player wants £1000+ to achieve it.

Loads don't want 16Gb though, but let's not kid ourselves here, it's because Nv won't give you it.