• 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.

NVIDIA 4000 Series

Bill Turnip said:
I'd go along with this, it's just surprising that it's having such an impact quite so soon.
Click to expand...

Not to me :p I said this as soon as dlss 1 came out what would happen.

2 things that any developer hates dealing with is security remediation and optimisation of their work, these are usually the last things to get looked at, which makes it even harder as they have been so focussed on delivering their features/product and it is a very hard task to backtrack and improve these 2 areas once you have got everything in place and working especially if the code is of very poor quality i.e. it's impossible to change something without breaking various other things in the process.

TBH, now that I think of it, the game development industry needs a similar system/central authority in place to certify that said game meets certain conditions before it is allowed to be released to the public, obviously will never happen though.
 
LiE said:
speechless-nathan-fillion.gif
Click to expand...
Fusion '98 Quake UK Finals at Leeds Grand Hotel (around 200 players I think). I turned up with a 3k PC from 1996 and the PC's I was competing against from 1998 were 2x-3x faster.

Pentium 133 versus Pentium 266 and then Kage with his brand new HP Pentium 333mhz mega-rig from his nan :)

My dad had to buy me a new rig after that.....many of us were council estate lads from some hard areas.
 
Last edited:
Nexus18 said:
TBH, now that I think of it, the game development industry needs a similar system/central authority in place to certify that said game meets certain conditions before it is allowed to be released to the public, obviously will never happen though.
Click to expand...


Well wouldn't that be a thing!

Or do what they used to do and have people sign up for alpha & then beta access , automatic if pre-ordering, so that people could get a 1st hand experience of the game and the devs could collect perf info from lots of different systems.

Seems people pay MSRP to do this now - enough people keep paying MSRP for games on release - devs'll keep taking that and fix over time.

Using release/beta performance as a measure of GPU performance is futile. Some folk seem to forget the whole internet and all review sites work on clicks - and nothing better to do that with than something apparently controversial - which a poorly optimized game on release apparently, is as enough people click on it rewarding the site/channel then regurgitate in forums as the way forward, thinking the site is giving you what you need. They aren't, they just want more clicks for more revenue and are competing against the many, many others.

Painful to see so many falling for it. Like the guy in the 4090 thread now wanting to return his 4090 and abuse distance selling regs as the memory doesn't clock as well as others. Completly missing the point that as a gamer, it'll make no perceivable difference, entitled to the top card of that model.

The world is getting more stupid - the internet was good before social media came along. It is very clever for feeding you stuff, monitoring and adapting as to what'll keep you on the platform by exploiting general human psychology, same way as religions work.
 
Just looking at jansn benchmarks for 1080P RT, obviously not "like for like" but gives rough idea:

3080 vs 7900xtx:

jPxIUlu.png

3080 vs 6800xt:

gyKkGca.png

3080 vs 4070ti:

HorGPiA.png

So seems TPU and Jansn results are similar so far, HUB being the odd one out.

Still find it hilarious that even a 4090 is being brought to its knees :D

Grim5 said:
Click to expand...

Personally I got no problem paying for something if it actually offers something new to the table (that I want/need) or further improves upon already good tech. e.g.

ampere - dlss 2 and RT perf = better gaming experience in terms of visuals and higher fps thus more enjoyable
ada - even better rt perf and frame generation = better gaming experience in terms of visuals and higher fps thus more enjoyable

Problem is when these things such as dlss, frame generation are now becoming "necessary" even on £1500+ gpus in order to get a good "pc gaming experience", that's the problem.

Woodsta888 said:
Well wouldn't that be a thing!

Or do what they used to do and have people sign up for alpha & then beta access , automatic if pre-ordering, so that people could get a 1st hand experience of the game and the devs could collect perf info from lots of different systems.

Seems people pay MSRP to do this now - enough people keep paying MSRP for games on release - devs'll keep taking that and fix over time.

Using release/beta performance as a measure of GPU performance is futile. Some folk seem to forget the whole internet and all review sites work on clicks - and nothing better to do that with than something apparently controversial - which a poorly optimized game on release apparently, is as enough people click on it rewarding the site/channel then regurgitate in forums as the way forward, thinking the site is giving you what you need. They aren't, they just want more clicks for more revenue and are competing against the many, many others.

Painful to see so many falling for it. Like the guy in the 4090 thread now wanting to return his 4090 and abuse distance selling regs as the memory doesn't clock as well as others. Completly missing the point that as a gamer, it'll make no perceivable difference, entitled to the top card of that model.

The world is getting more stupid - the internet was good before social media came along. It is very clever for feeding you stuff, monitoring and adapting as to what'll keep you on the platform by exploiting general human psychology, same way as religions work.
Click to expand...

That's just happened with sons of forest, was due for release end of this month but now they are releasing it in early access form instead as didn't want to delay the game again, this is where things like this work well especially when you throw in steams refund policy when it comes to early access titles.

Either that or game development companies need to start embracing devops practices and try to apply "shift left" practice to game development workflow where they have various setups for testing early in the development phase rather than relying on the "customers" to be their guinea pigs ;)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TNA
Nexus18 said:
Problem is when these things such as dlss, frame generation are now becoming "necessary" even on £1500+ gpus in order to get a good "pc gaming experience", that's the problem.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. The strange thing though, is that it's happening. People are complaining about the prices, correctly in my view, but there are very few people defending them.

Normally there are views both ways on a given point, but the VAST majority are saying "too rich for me".

Yet they're selling.
 
Last edited:
Nexus18 said:
Just looking at jansn benchmarks for 1080P RT, obviously not "like for like" but gives rough idea:

3080 vs 7900xtx:

jPxIUlu.png

3080 vs 6800xt:

gyKkGca.png

3080 vs 4070ti:

HorGPiA.png

So seems TPU and Jansn results are similar so far, HUB being the odd one out.

Still find it hilarious that even a 4090 is being brought to its knees :D



Personally I got no problem paying for something if it actually offers something new to the table (that I want/need) or further improves upon already good tech. e.g.

ampere - dlss 2 and RT perf = better gaming experience in terms of visuals and higher fps thus more enjoyable
ada - even better rt perf and frame generation = better gaming experience in terms of visuals and higher fps thus more enjoyable

Problem is when these things such as dlss, frame generation are now becoming "necessary" even on £1500+ gpus in order to get a good "pc gaming experience", that's the problem.



That's just happened with sons of forest, was due for release end of this month but now they are releasing it in early access form instead as didn't want to delay the game again, this is where things like this work well especially when you throw in steams refund policy when it comes to early access titles.

Either that or game development companies need to start embracing devops practices and try to apply "shift left" practice to game development workflow where they have various setups for testing early in the development phase rather than relying on the "customers" to be their guinea pigs ;)
Click to expand...


Indeed, no one minded beta testing. Though I remember BF4 beta - people going out and buying i7's as it played better on those in a beta - game released and played fine on i5's. People again chasing beta performance and then paying £100's for new hardware instead of waiting for optimization post beta. Same now - just the privilege of paying MSRP to be beta tester. <MADNESS
 
Just noticed too, a 2 year old flagship gpu beating the latest and greatest £1300+ gpu..... :eek:

Maybe Tyrion could spare some fine wine.

VT3XNux.gif
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: TNA
Purgatory said:
Why is this game even on Unreal Engine 4 not 5 ? From my googling it states Unreal Engine 4 why couldn't they have just used the latest engine on it before release ? Unreal Engine 4 has been broken since release on pc with stutter issues from what I remember, have they actually even fixed that yet on UE4?
Click to expand...
Think about the development cycle for a game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom