I don't really see how you can class a 4060 as midrange when it's the lowest performing card in the range. Even when they release the 4050 it's still only a single rung up with a 4060ti, 4070, 4070ti, 4080, 4090, all above it.
Last edited:
-
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
- Thread starter MrClippy
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2020
- Posts
- 1,472
Will you be keeping the 4090 equally as long?
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 1,085
I got rid of the previous pc a year later as I wasn't really enjoying pc gaming the way I do now. It was more social gaming that kept me on console back then.
Whereas now I'm mostly playing games by myself without the group of friends I had back then. So I'm after graphical performance and higher framerates and of course I make more money now than I did back then.
I still think when you go above the 1k price range you should be delivering amazing performance to the consumer and the 4090 does that. I'll probably keep this GPU for 2-3 years but I'd be lying if I didn't consider a 5090 (if select titles require it) I don't see that for now.
I think the 690 had good performance for a few years? I remembering playing games at 60hz 1440p back in 2012 on it... so it must have been amazing for its time.
Last edited:
Soldato
Been giving portal RTX a go. It's shiny and looks/feels surprisingly good with DLSS performance and frame gen on. Definitely do get a bit of an IQ hit at those settings but it still looks pretty good, is very playable and you get that wobbly glass effect which I think is the most important thing.
I get that on a good Friday night and i don't need to spend £1.5k for it.
Last edited:
Soldato
Performance of the 690 fell off a cliff eventually as it was just a 2GB card. That and really depended on how well SLI was supported in a game.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 1,085
Yeah I remember sli stutter, at the time I tried numerous games and didn't have an issue with any of them in that sense. I believe metro was the one game I couldn't run at a smooth 60fps at the time @1440p from my personal catalogue. Will be interesting to see how the 4080 and 4090 hold up once numerous truly next gen titles are available. Without any of the software aids.
I'm not sure that I agree there. The"high end" has the same number of cards as entry+mid range. The 3060 is a whole tier to itself AND half another.
3050/60 - entry
3070 - mid
3080 - high
3090 - enthusiast
How it's clocked, how it's crippled or how much memory it has doesn't define it's tier. The underlying silicon does.
Soldato
I get that on a good Friday night and i don't need to spend £1.5k for it.
To be fair I'd never part with that for a GPU but those Friday nights add up.
Exactly
Any card regardless of the name cannot call itself mid tier when its performance target is 1080p gaming in 2023. 1080p GPUs are entry level, mid tier is 1440p gaming and high end/enthusiast is 4k GPUs
Now let's look at Nvidia slides. They benchmark the 4060 series at 1080p, so these are entry level cards. They benchmark 4070 series at 1440p so these are mid range cards. And they benchmark both the 4080 series and 4090 series at 4k, so these are high end and enthusiast cards
Last edited:
Soldato
I think the "ranges" get a bit weird because the 4090 can be considered a prosumer card sort of like the Titans. But I defer to the infallible tiers sticky.
Edit: Also I'm not sure we should just accept Nvidia's marketing when they're blatantly trying to drive margins up.
Edit: Also I'm not sure we should just accept Nvidia's marketing when they're blatantly trying to drive margins up.
Last edited:
Really we're quoting console gaming PR now? The Series X is no match to the 4060ti let alone the Series S.
MS also announced Series X price increase yesterday
Last edited:
In what games is it better at that justifies it's price over a series x?Really we're quoting console gaming PR now? The Series X is no match to the 4060ti let alone the Series S.
MS also announced Series X price increase yesterday
The 4060ti is cheaper and faster than the Series x.
What games is it better at?
Soldato
Without the rest of the PC the 4060 ti has the performance of a literal potato. Plus even GPU to GPU the 4060 ti is only barely faster than the Series X's.
Outside of game pass, you can get the same games cheaper on a series x as well
Soldato
You're wasting your time. He's deluded. It's been covered loads of times that you can't really build a console destroying game for under £650
Just look at almost every digital foundry game analysis lately and you will see PC games are plagued with issues and stutter that cancels out a lot of their advantage anyway.
Associate
But it's the Nvidia slides doing the performance targets not the end user, right? Like any good marketing, slides can be made to tell the story you want to tell.
We're free to use whatever hardware we want at any resolution we want. It might be less than ideal to use a 3070 at 4k but with DLSS and lower settings you'll probably get away with 60FPS in some games.
I really don't think resolution is comparable to card tier - because refresh rate is such an important factor to consider. I also really don't think resolutions should be tiered... Is 4k60 a higher tier than 1440p240hz?
A lot of cards can serve both purposes, I have friends who have the 3060 12GB that play 1440p60hz for single player games and 1080p240hz for FPS games. I don't believe that 1080p240hz is entry level in the slightest - and the 4060 can do that.
Ultimately I think the real issue is all down to Nvidia and their pricing and product stack vs. what we consider to be entry/mid/high-end. 70 series was never mid tier, it was always high tier - and it absolutely shouldn't be considered mid-tier at 589 quid...