I feel like we might be going a bit off topic hereHaha. Yeah I guess
Just imagined someone buying a cucumber and then saying it was a good investment.
Time: Didn't take long to have the desired effect.
Money: It was buy one get one free (used the free one).
Emotion: Was fulfilling multiple ways
-
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
Lol. Fair, fair. Gave myself a chuckle, so was a good investment of time. For me anyways
Consoles don't look as good as a high-end PC, that is just a fact. Consoles have far less graphical fidelity in pretty much every area, equivalent to Medium settings on most games. Are they good enough for 95% of people? Yes of course, but if you have games with a high-end PC for years then the difference is night and day.
Lol. Nah. Just the financial kind for me. Hence why I brought it up when you mentioned it when buying a graphics card
To be fair unless your really pixel checking a PS5 or Series X can play most games more than well enough and you would struggle to spot the difference,
Frame rates, ok fair enough, but lots of console versions of games can hit 4k60 and look pretty good with it and IMO 60hz is ok if your sat on a couch using a controller, higher framerates only really come into their own sat up close, i also notice them much more with a mouse than a controller.
With the latest generation there has been a lot more games running high and even in some cases ultra settings but this is more common at the start of a console generation- over time the settings will revert to medium and eventually low as PC graphics cards get multitudes of higher performance
Even in in graphically complex games on new consoles there are always big compromises to get the framerate to acceptable levels. However if you have any particular examples please feel free to list them so we can check?
sli was basically dead with the 3000 series with only the 3090 supporting it, and no sign of that changing this gen.
SLI died ages ago and it was well publicised. https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/...gives-up-the-ghost-as-nvidia-ends-sli-support
One easy example I can think of is gears of war 5, where the digital foundry review identifies the game was the running on Ultra settings on the Xbox series x
One game that is 3 years old? Umm yeah, ok grim, not sure you understand the concept of typical vs outliers.
The real test is open world games, the rest can more easily be fudged (corridor-like progression of Gears et al in particular) and when we do look at OWGs we can see a big gulf between PC & Consoles, because everything gets stressed GPU, CPU, memory, storage, the software itself, everything is stressed. And that's without even adding in RT, which will absolutely keep the hardware on its knees and barely let it breath. Certainly if you want 60 fps you can't stay on consoles because even nuking the settings it's going to be tough to maintain that particularly as their production starts making RT necessary (Avatar: FoP, Jedi Survivor, etc.), which means you'll have a medium/high raster settings + a half-nuked RT implementation compared to PC, and hopefully a stable 30 fps, usually upscaling from 1080p-ish.
On the other hand, we look at something like the 4070, it's rumoured to be ~40 TFlops (fp32) which is 4x the PS5 (which is already >2x the actual baseline - Series S), and even though that doesn't mean it's 4x faster based on that, if we look at how much faster the RT is done on Nvidia, plus DLSS (which has a huge advantage in performance vs standard TAAU/FSR 2.0), it's easily going to run 3x faster at a minimum. Sure, assuming the msrp stays the same $499, it's not going to be cheaper than consoles but considering how much faster it is, and the cost savings on PC.... it's tough to really stay committed to consoles if you're not computer-illiterate, and that's only 2 years in! Given that we can see how much longer the console generations are now, it's certainly better to invest in PC than a console (hell, you'll be able to re-use everything in the PC for a "next-gen PS6" build besides CPU/Mobo/GPU).
On the other hand, we look at something like the 4070, it's rumoured to be ~40 TFlops (fp32) which is 4x the PS5 (which is already >2x the actual baseline - Series S), and even though that doesn't mean it's 4x faster based on that, if we look at how much faster the RT is done on Nvidia, plus DLSS (which has a huge advantage in performance vs standard TAAU/FSR 2.0), it's easily going to run 3x faster at a minimum. Sure, assuming the msrp stays the same $499, it's not going to be cheaper than consoles but considering how much faster it is, and the cost savings on PC.... it's tough to really stay committed to consoles if you're not computer-illiterate, and that's only 2 years in! Given that we can see how much longer the console generations are now, it's certainly better to invest in PC than a console (hell, you'll be able to re-use everything in the PC for a "next-gen PS6" build besides CPU/Mobo/GPU).
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,703
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Let's not get too latched onto tflops. I was however hoping they would stop making pc build videos baiting 'console killer'...
my current pc is a console killer.
drop a fully loaded tower case on a console and dead console, dead pc as well but the console will be killed
Rtx4000 may still be quite a while away.
According to Igorslabs, Nvidia has only just finished the theoretical PCB design for the RTX4090 and they have not yet manufactured any engineering samples.
Igor says engineering samples will be done towards the end of July, so from August we may start to see performance and benchmark leaks and mass production will start towards the end of September.
Actual GPUs available in stores would be late October or sometime in November
According to Igorslabs, Nvidia has only just finished the theoretical PCB design for the RTX4090 and they have not yet manufactured any engineering samples.
Igor says engineering samples will be done towards the end of July, so from August we may start to see performance and benchmark leaks and mass production will start towards the end of September.
Actual GPUs available in stores would be late October or sometime in November
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,703
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Last rumour I seen was they thought the 4090 was releasing first, then 4080, 4070.
Seems laughable as only a week or so back they were sharing Ada launching earlier than September!
Seems laughable as only a week or so back they were sharing Ada launching earlier than September!