VFXVeteran
Banned
You'll find someone brave enough to go there once the exclusives get shown.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Specs for nVidia Ampere Supposedly Leaked
- Thread starter VAVA Mk2
- Start date
You'll find someone brave enough to go there once the exclusives get shown.
VFXVeteran
Banned
Cyberpunk is not designed for next-gen consoles. In fact, it was an after-the-fact because they didn't even have plans to release the game for them this year. People need to stop stating that games are developed on console tech first. That's just a very broad and unproveable statement. Not every game is created JUST for console tech.
Orta
Banned
Oh they will, don't worry about that. You only need look at the Horizon Zero Dawn thread to see that a ps4 is a better system than a high end pc with a 2080ti gpu.
lastmessiah
Member
To be fair, this time the consoles will actually have "next-gen" tech, albeit AMD's supposedly inferior RDNA2 (or RDNA "1.5" or whatever).
kiphalfton
Member
As I mentioned in my previous post, I sell stuff I won't use anymore... But how difficult is it to sell something like that (i.e. something in, around, or in excess of $1k)?
I generally only sell stuff that is <$400. I imagine it's a more niche crowd?
BluRayHiDef
Banned
I never said that it was designed for the next generation of consoles; I implied the opposite by referring to it as a cross-generational game, meaning that because it's been designed for both this generation of consoles and the next generation of consoles, it doesn't represent the standard of games that will be developed primarily for the next generation of consoles and therefore shouldn't be used as a basis for determining what graphics cards will be necessary for the future.
As for PC, most triple-A games are made primarily with consoles in mind; therefore, the PC versions of these games are just suped-up versions of their console counterparts (e.g. higher resolution textures, sharper shadows, more NPCs and post processing effects per frame, etc). Hence, when deciding what graphics card to buy, PC gamers should use consoles as the minimum standard for their selection. Hence, since the PS5 and the XSX will be released soon, PC gamers should base their selection on games that are designed with the PS5 and XSX primarily in mind and that don't take any variation of the PS4 and XBO into consideration.
Madflavor
Member
After that I continue to play games on my sweet new 3070 or 3080 graphics card. I mean duuuuh, don't you know anything about PC gaming?
I swear some people.
GamingArena
Member
You be surprised sometimes its easier to sell high end GPU and faster...
BluRayHiDef
Banned
I have a gaming PC that I built back in 2016 with a 980Ti and upgraded with a 1080Ti in 2017, though I don't game on it much nowadays (I game mostly on my PS4 Pro).
Anyhow, I don't know whether or not you're joking, but you said that you were getting a 3070 and implied that even a 3060 would be enough for you. This is why I asked what you were going to do after beating CyberPunk 2077; I don't think that a 3070 or a 3060 would be enough for next-gen games.
llien
Banned
NVidia "guiding its partners to increase prices of its current-gen high-end graphics cards"
Chinese publication ITHome reports that several premium RTX 20-series SKUs, which include the RTX 2070, RTX 2070 Super, RTX 2080 Super, and the RTX 2080 Ti, are on the chopping block, meaning that NVIDIA partners are placing the last orders with upstream suppliers for parts that make up their...
Among other negative things, it makes people spending $1k+ on GPUs feel uncomfortable.
Last edited:
Sybrix
Member
NVidia "guiding its partners to increase prices of its current-gen high-end graphics cards"
Chinese publication ITHome reports that several premium RTX 20-series SKUs, which include the RTX 2070, RTX 2070 Super, RTX 2080 Super, and the RTX 2080 Ti, are on the chopping block, meaning that NVIDIA partners are placing the last orders with upstream suppliers for parts that make up their...www.neogaf.com
Among other negative things, it makes people spending $1k+ on GPUs feel uncomfortable.
Oh lol
Well my 1080 still has legs for next couple of years
Also recently upgraded my Intel CPU to a Ryzen 3900, maybe ill go AMD for upgrade GPU
Last edited:
BluRayHiDef
Banned
Relevant.
Ellery
Member
Yup, but it is always the case with ultra high end. The diminishing returns are insane. It is the same with graphics settings. Most people don't want to believe it but visually the difference between High, Very High, Ultra and Extreme are tiny whilst the performance impact is gigantic.
No developer really cares about the 1% of the 1%. Otherwise console games wouldn't look as good or even better than High End PC games. ( I am an owner of a High End PC as well). They start at the bottom and everybody eats the same cake, but some have sprinkles on it.
(Obviously I am exaggerating a bit, but the actual power of Ultra High End Enthusiast GPUs is often wasted on unoptimized PC ports)
VFXVeteran
Banned
Even that's a false statement. The research involved with the latest and greatest graphics tech features are always done on a PC anyway. The papers you see in GDC and Siggraph are the result of such research. The GPU companies (AMD/Nvidia) make hardware that can implement such new features (i.e. shader units for example) and the graphics APIs are programmed to expose those to programmers to write in their engines all in an agnostic way. There isn't going to be something new researched on a console. For example PBR. That was already done through software first and then refined for GPUs (in general) and then implemented in the various graphics engines. So a next-gen game isn't going to have some new 3D feature that hasn't been done before. There are features in games today that will just be carried over to the next-generation of consoles - not reinvented.
And again, I'm telling you that's not the case. And too broad a claim. Yes, a game will be compiled down to the closed platform, but the earlier stages happen on a PC. iD Software uses a full path tracer as a roadmap to implementing features in their graphics engine. Naughty Dog uses several 3rd party software with their Nvidia equipped PCs when developing assets for the console. There are features in the graphics pipeline that are implemented on PC but turned OFF for consoles. For example, SSAO is the most basic ambient occlusion algorithm for all hardware. It's simple, light weight, and yields fairly good results. Horizon-based ambient occlusion is a more complex method that was invented on the PC in a lab or classroom. This can NOT run on a current gen console. But that doesn't mean ND or Dice won't put the implementation into their renderer anyway. You just won't see it.
You guys act like the implementation is done on a console and then the PC after the game releases thereby limiting the full potential of the PC. This is simply wrong.
Last edited:
BluRayHiDef
Banned
Okay, I understand.
kruis
Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
You're the one who's completely misguided here.
For the past seven years PC games have been hobbled by the limits of what the Xbox One and PS4 were capable of. If he vision of a game designer wasn't possible on that lowest common denominator. there wasn't a publisher who would then say: "Well, in that case we'll have to make your game a PC exclusive!" or "I guess we'll cut some functionality from the PS4 version, so the game will at least run."
Yes, the games are designed on PCs, preliminary testing will be done on PCs, etc. But the goal is to make the final version of the game run as good as possible on the lead platform which for an AAA development studio is a console, not a PC. That's why the PC port is often (usually?) handled by a second team. Take for example Crystal Dynamix, the studio responsible for the last three Tomb Raider games. They only did the Xbox version, the PS4 and PC ports were done by Nixxes in the Netherlands. Ubisoft Montreal is where the Assassin's Creed games are created, the PC ports are all done by Ubisoft Kiev.
Now these PC ports can be very good. Nixxes for example are very good at their job and they worked with Nvidia in the past to add additional features to the PC version. But they never designed the game, they ported it and then enhanced it. Crystal Dymanics however created those games and their design was limited by what the Xbox One was capable of, not a state of the art PC.
Last edited:
VFXVeteran
Banned
This is simply false with regards to most 3rd party games. And that's the bulk of gaming today.
I never said otherwise. That doesn't mean that the PC is crippled. It takes time to implement some of these features - a LOT of time. If you want to say this is true for 1st party Sony (because all Xbox games are pretty much PC), then yea making it run as good as possible on the PS is #1 priority.
This is in SOME cases. This is not the majority of cases. This guy was talking about CB2077 which is clearly a game designed with a high end PC in mind. FS2020 is another example of a PC-centric designed game. Ports happen both ways.
In this specific case, you are talking about implementing features within a graphics engine that wants special features like hair rendering (not a part of any API) or Nvidia's special FX rendering. This is NOT the majority of 3rd party games. That's why I said your statement is too "sweeping" in it's claim. Not ALL studios follow your claim. In fact, MOST studios don't follow your claim because most studios are 3rd party ones.
The bottomline is this. If it's a 3rd party game that we are talking about chances are that the graphics engine has features that will not run on a next-gen console but will run on a PC. Evidence that PC was the #1 platform along with good R&D pipeline to optimize on closed platforms. If it's a 1st party game, then the #1 priority is getting it to work on a closed system, BUT that doesn't mean that a port for the PC won't be more enhanced or better than the closed platform (which is nearly always the case). The PC is never at a disadvantage here.
Last edited:
Razvedka
Banned
Games are designed with consoles in mind, not PCs. They are engineered, as stated by the other people here, to target the lowest common denominator (which will make them the most money). That is absolutely consoles and not PCs.
A PC port might get some nice stuff, like increased texture resolution, and additional bells and whistles (which are typically configurable). There are games which target PC as the primary platform, sure, but they're not what I would consider to be the mainstream games and certainly not the AAA stuff. The best case scenario I prepare for is that the PC port is taken seriously, I never look at any game that's coming to consoles (and PC) and go 'ah yes, this will hopefully be a PC first title with a version ported down to consoles'. Consoles provide the baseline performance that pretty much all games target.
According to Steam Survey:
Even with amazing APIs and tools there's no way a base PS4 or Xbox One is going to compete with that. Nor the stuff the year before that, or even the year before that more than likely. When the consoles came out their CPUs were completely garbage and that's ignoring the chunk that each system reserved for OS use. Their GPUs were 'ok' iirc, not terrible.
A PC port might get some nice stuff, like increased texture resolution, and additional bells and whistles (which are typically configurable). There are games which target PC as the primary platform, sure, but they're not what I would consider to be the mainstream games and certainly not the AAA stuff. The best case scenario I prepare for is that the PC port is taken seriously, I never look at any game that's coming to consoles (and PC) and go 'ah yes, this will hopefully be a PC first title with a version ported down to consoles'. Consoles provide the baseline performance that pretty much all games target.
According to Steam Survey:
Even with amazing APIs and tools there's no way a base PS4 or Xbox One is going to compete with that. Nor the stuff the year before that, or even the year before that more than likely. When the consoles came out their CPUs were completely garbage and that's ignoring the chunk that each system reserved for OS use. Their GPUs were 'ok' iirc, not terrible.
Last edited:
VFXVeteran
Banned
OK. I've stated my case. Until you can get said developers to come on here and say otherwise, I'll believe my insiders and my experience.
Razvedka
Banned
I'm going to hazard to guess you're not actually a programmer or developer of any stripe. Having a PC version 'in mind' or involved as a platform during the development of the game is a very different thing then saying 'what are some reasonable PC specifications of today, and how about the ones of tomorrow? What sort of game can we make if we really push the envelope with these two data sets in mind and then just 'see what we can do' regarding consoles down the pipe?'.
Over and over again you hear developers talk about the limiting factor for gaming this generation being CPU power. That wasn't a constraint on the PC platform, because nobody here was using netbook CPUs to run their rigs. Do you honestly think that CPUs on PCs were taken very seriously when the consoles were so hamstrung by theirs?
Follow the money. Lie to me. Tell me that console games don't represent the majority of revenue for most gaming companies.
Last edited:
kruis
Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
AAA games by all the major third party publishers (EA, Activision, Warner, Ubisoft, Capcom, Take-Two, etc) are all designed to run on consoles first. That's a FACT. When you imply that the majority of games were really designed for PCs, I assume you're thinking of indie developers who start out on PC and often aren't even capable of releasing PC and console versions at the same time. They usually make small games that can run on potatoes. I (and I assume most people here) are thinking of BIG titles that cost tens of millions of dollars to create, that take hundreds of man years to create.
About CP 2077, that game will certainly make use of the features of a high end PC, but at the same time, the game we're getting was designed with the limitations of the lowly Xbox One in mind. If game design ideas were impossible to implement on the Xbox One, then those idea were cut from the game. That's how it works. Those changes are invisible to us, because we only see the final product. When we're eating a delicious meal in an uptown restaurant, we have no idea the cook diverted from the correct recipe because not all of the ingredients were available and the "fresh salmon" had been sitting in the freezer for almost a year.
Last edited:
Razvedka
Banned
Right. His argument makes sense if you're looking at Indie stuff, maybe.
I'd want to see figures.
Last edited:
VFXVeteran
Banned
OK. Instead of defending statements are broad and not clear as to what people are saying, let's start over...
Are either of you guys a game developer? At all? I ask because if you are going to talk about what is and what isn't, we should at least know all of us are developers in this space and can define what people like to say all the time but are uninformed by the very statement and what they are trying to convey to the audience.
What exactly does a console gamer prove when he says "well games are designed for consoles anyway.." as if having the PC version is somehow at a disadvantage?
Are either of you guys a game developer? At all? I ask because if you are going to talk about what is and what isn't, we should at least know all of us are developers in this space and can define what people like to say all the time but are uninformed by the very statement and what they are trying to convey to the audience.
What exactly does a console gamer prove when he says "well games are designed for consoles anyway.." as if having the PC version is somehow at a disadvantage?
Razvedka
Banned
Web App Developer/Cloud Developer is the quickest summation of my 'job hat' on top of a myriad of other things you could stuff in there, in particular within the 'web app' part.
The PC version is 'at a disadvantage' in the sense that the scale of game or the world in question will be limited to what a console is capable of doing. The scope of the game.
I don't even understand what you mean by this statement. It's irrelevant that the PCs were used in development of these games, what does that even matter? How many Naughty Dog games are hitting PC? We just saw how Horizon Zero Dawn got ported over. And while Doom is outstanding and ID are masters of their craft, they were absolutely making sure that their game was going to play pretty good on XBO and PS4. They always had to keep those limitations in mind.
Something one must do when creating a client facing application is take into account who is going to use your app and what they're going to view it on. You must account for the different browser types (Firefox, Edge/Chrome (V8 family), etc) and the devices that they are on + internet connection speeds. The art of making sure that your experience is basically usable for the vast majority of people and 'scales down' is literally called graceful degradation. I cannot, if I am a sane man, create a website or web app that takes full advantage of the average PC and ignore how this might effect low end PCs and mobile users. I mean, I could do that, but alot of people won't be using my site and that's a huge loss of revenue.
What does it matter if I developed all of the assets and code for this website on a high end monster PC? At the end of the day, that isn't the machine which will be (statistically) running it and making me the most money. Completely irrelevant.
Maybe none of what I am saying is applicable to the game development scene and everything I recall reading and hearing about that particular industry was incorrect. But I kinda doubt it man.
Last edited:
VFXVeteran
Banned
Ok. Graphics programmer here for 20yrs in the film industry. Currently working on realtime graphics systems at Lockheed Martin. Been a gamer for like forever and know very well the graphics pipeline. I've got several friends in the gaming industry and I've interviewed with numerous ones for years under NDAs.
Then we have no further things to say. You are 100% correct.
That's NOT what people on here are meaning when they say that. They are talking about the limitations of the graphics technology. They are wrong. Graphics tech is several generations ahead of consoles. You don't make textures at 2k and then later remake them at 4k. Too time consuming and any company that does that needs to close down. Assets are created, algorithms are made for various subsystems and all are created with agnostic software/hardware (i.e. the unaffordable type). These features are absolutely scaled down for consoles/mobile phones, etc.. You will never see a console game run better than it's PC equivalent. Ever. You will never see a graphics feature that can be run on a console and not a PC. Ever. It's the other way around..
These guys are imagining that. Not the scope of the game which you are completely correct about.
Last edited:
Razvedka
Banned
Hope LockMart is fun.
Well ok then. Confusion defused on my part.
Think I had a bit of a temper in this interaction. Been a shit day. Sorry about that bud.
Last edited:
You can't really tell people not to buy something because you personally think it's too expensive. Basic market forces dictate the price of every single item in the marketplace - literally billions of products.
I personally think it's insane that certain young athletes, who contribute very little to society, get paid so much for doing so little - but if people want to pay huge sums of money to watch young men chasing balls around a field, then so be it.
As far as a $2000 GPU is concerned, for me that's money well spent. Gaming is the only thing that's ever truly excited me. I'm not really into sports. I don't like cars I don't enjoy dining out. I don't even like travel very much, because I always feel the money could have been spent on something more tangible.
A GPU, however, is something I'll use almost every single day that I own it. The joy that I get out of gaming eclipses almost everything. If that's not you, then great - I'll get the GPU. That's how it works.
I personally think it's insane that certain young athletes, who contribute very little to society, get paid so much for doing so little - but if people want to pay huge sums of money to watch young men chasing balls around a field, then so be it.
As far as a $2000 GPU is concerned, for me that's money well spent. Gaming is the only thing that's ever truly excited me. I'm not really into sports. I don't like cars I don't enjoy dining out. I don't even like travel very much, because I always feel the money could have been spent on something more tangible.
A GPU, however, is something I'll use almost every single day that I own it. The joy that I get out of gaming eclipses almost everything. If that's not you, then great - I'll get the GPU. That's how it works.
Thugnificient
Banned
I suppose you have a source for that?
He needs a source for what's painfully obvious to everyone?
Developers don't make PC games anymore. They're just console ports.
Thugnificient
Banned
Not an argument so unless you got a source to back up what he's saying, "everyone knows" isn't a valid point.
https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/134829/carmack_on_rage.php?page=3
So here we have id Software in 2011 admitting that Rage was targeted at consoles and then realizing that he screwed up because it could have done way more efficiently if he had targeted PC and just chopped everything down for consoles. That was id Software. A company that basically made PC games. It's ALL gone console now. It's why Dark Souls 2 got destroyed, why Witcher 3 was downgraded to shit, why nothing has really looked that impressive for a long time, why Cyberpunk won't have destructable environments, the list goes on and on.
Anyone with a brain knows that no one really makes PC games anymore. Even fucking Diablo 4 is being developed with gamepads in mind because NO ONE MAKES PC GAMES ANYMORE. It's all just console garbage that gets ported.
https://news.blizzard.com/en-us/diablo4/23308274/diablo-iv-quarterly-update-february-2020
Thugnificient
Banned
Not even what he's saying. He's basically saying since consoles were so similar to PC, their specs were used as a target so it could work on both of them. A far cry from "are designed to run on consoles first."
Consoles HAVE to be considered and they happen to be the lowest common denominator so of course you'd use their specs as a baseline. Next-gen consoles are sporting upper mid-range to high-end GPU's and you can bet your ass these won't be the minimum specs for next-gen AAA games simply because the myriad of potato PC's out there will fill that role. It won't be anymore targeted for PC then than it is now.
It's a simple matter of "our games must work on consoles AND PC's and consoles are the weakest of the bunch".
Targeting them is designing for them smart guy.
Just fess up. You can't admit that you're wrong. Games literally do not have features they would otherwise have because they are DESIGNED TO RUN on underpowered consoles.
Thugnificient
Banned
Bullshit it is. They're targeting a wide range of hardware and consoles happen to be the weakest of the lot so duh you're gonna use them as a baseline.
Then the whole "targeting PC's" doesn't even make sense. What PC? PC isn't a single spec. Low-rent PC's, mid-range, high-end?
Because I can guarantee you, the requirements won't suddenly jump to a 2070S-class GPU and a 3700X next-gen. They'll remain lower because there's a bunch of garbage PC's devs will have to worry about. Just like there were garbage consoles devs had to worry about at the time and now.
Edit: Hell, look at Flight Simulator 2020 which has minimum requirements far outstripping the X1 which it will apparently run on. Doesn't stop people from calling it the first "next-gen" game.
Last edited:
Interestingly, that's not true. Even though a high end PC is orders of magnitude more powerful than a PS4 or Xbox One, the average PC is probably less powerful than them. Look at Steam hardware statistics. Very few people actually own high end PCs.
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam
The average GPU is a dog shit 1060 that couldn't even run Horizon better than a PS4.
This is yet more evidence that games aren't designed for PCs but consoles. Amusingly, games would be even more gimped if they were designed for the average PC (the TRUE weakest link), because most PCs are garbage with terrible GPUs.
Until the Xbox in 2001, there used to be "real" PC games. And by real PC games, I mean games that were basically designed for and only ran well on high end PCs. People seem to forget that you basically needed a brand new PC to run Wolf3D, Doom, and Quake at playable framerates when they first came out. Quake 1 required a Pentium with a FPU. It just said "don't have a high end PC? Fuck you."
It would be the equivalent of releasing a game this year that needed a 2080ti to run at 30fps. It's completely unheard of today. This type of game simply doesn't exist anymore.
Games are made for consoles meaning that they run like shit on the vast majority of PCs (because they're not designed for them), and because they're not optimized for ANY PC, basically require overpowered computers to run PS4/Xbox One games acceptably.
Thugnificient
Banned
The average PC is a lot stronger than the base consoles by now. They're almost 7 years old. In the very Steam survey you linked, the top 13 GPU's represent 50% of all GPU's and ALL are stronger than the base PS4 with the weakest of them being the 1050 Ti.
Something, something. Bad port.
This is evidence HZD was designed for PS4 but we didn't need a Steam hardware survey to tell us that.
Not to mention this is false. Hardware Unboxed did a test and would you look at that;
Minimum 1% of 28fps and average of 38 fps at 1440p which is 88% of the 1920x2160 of the PS4 Pro. Bump up the res by a small amount and it'd still produce similar results to the PS4 Pro which it isn't even far stronger than anyway. Not to mention yes, this is a PS4 game. It destroys the base PS4.
Yes and even pieces of crap dual-core like the G3258 paired with a 750 Ti offered performance similar to a PS4.
Those didn't merely target PC's those were targeting powerful rigs which is completely different from what we are discussing. Hence why I asked you "low-rent, mid-range or high-end." No there are no more games targeting high-end PC's that exist because everyone knows it's a fool's errand. There are just games targeting the widest possible range of hardware available. Be it PC's or consoles.
Once again, this isn't just targeting PC's, this is targeting top-tier rigs. Not to mention I never heard of a game like that. Crysis, the holy grail of PC melters ran pretty damn well on modest PC's, so long as you stayed away from the highest settings.
Now go back to 2013 and laugh at the minimum requirements for games which were lower than the consoles specs. Why is that if they were "designed for consoles" first?
I rest my case.
Last edited:
Actually, it's not false. Horizon is a stuttery piece of crap on the PC regardless of the hardware you have. It objectively runs better on a PS4 than a PC with a 1060. So good job on spreading more FUD.
No, it's actually not different than what we're discussing. That's what people mean when they say "designed for the PC." High end is implied, and just like anyone with a brain realizes that games aren't designed for PCs, anyone who isn't an obtuse turd realizes that "designed for the PC" implies high end PC. If you weren't a disingenuous weirdo who can't admit he's wrong, you'd acknowledge that, but we have to keep bending space and time to avoid admitting we're full of crap, don't we?
Thugnificient
Banned
Somebody doesn't know what FUD means.
I have Horizon Zero Dawn on PC and have clocked in 38hrs. Not a single crash and no stutter AT ALL. There's a lot of people whom the game runs great for but there's also a lot of people whom it runs like dogshit and others for whom the game still doesn't launch despite today's patch.
Bollocks it is. High-end makes like 5% of the total market so we mean games that wouldn't run on 95% of PC's lol? Not to mention your bullshit about games "needing" a top-tier GPU to just run at 30fps literally never happened. As I mentioned, Crysis which is the holy grail of PC melters ran good on modest hardware. It destroyed your PC's if you cranked shit to the top.
If you're looking for games doing that, RDR2 brings a 2080 Ti to its knees at 4K and looks marvellous and we can almost assert this game was designed on consoles first. Doesn't stop it from dunking on games like The Witcher 3 all the while slapping around top-tier rigs.
You're gonna have to do a much better job at this. So far your arguments have been piss-weak and easily disproved.
And that person is apparently you.
You're like one of those psychopaths who says Diablo 3 doesn't stutter for them. Thanks for revealing that there's absolutely no point in communicating with you anymore.
You denying facts and just spreading bullshit isn't "disproving" anything. You're just hot air. Welcome to the ignore list.
Thugnificient
Banned
I destroyed your arguments and picked them apart piece by piece. I showed and linked benchmarks, I got the damn game and what have you got?
"bu bu but but John Carmack said something I misinterpreted".
Put me on ignore all you want, I dismantled your weak argument.
Just to be clear, it's confirmed that Horizon stutters on every PC setup regardless of hardware configuration. It objectively runs worse on the PC than the PS4.
ANY game developer you talk to will admit that they target consoles at their primary platform and will make compromises that they wouldn't make otherwise to hit those targets.
Games are made for consoles. They're not made for PCs. This is universally accepted by every rational person.
You lose.
ANY game developer you talk to will admit that they target consoles at their primary platform and will make compromises that they wouldn't make otherwise to hit those targets.
Games are made for consoles. They're not made for PCs. This is universally accepted by every rational person.
You lose.
Thugnificient
Banned
No, it fucking isn't. Unless you think they tested every single PC out there? I platinum'd the damn game on PS4 and it runs FAR better on my PC.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1151640/discussions/0/3821820927591022562/
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1151640/discussions/0/3821820927588989900/
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1151640/discussions/0/3821820927588632536/
But I guess all these people are lying. I have the game so what the heck are you telling?
"Any game developer you talk to"
Dude, learn to formulate an argument. That's not a counter-argument at all and you're getting crushed like a bug. Give me something to work with. I gave you benchmarks, I used your Steam surveys against you, I linked people having no issues with HZD what the fuck did you give me? A 2011 interview by John Carmack who validated my point, not even yours. Then you have the nerve to say I spread FUD. Do you know what the fuck FUD is? It's Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, a misinformation tactic meant to DISCREDIT a product yet here I am stating the game runs great for me so how in the world is that FUD? You're literally the one doing something that could be constructed as FUD by blatantly lying.
To top it all off, your games needing a high-end GPU just to run at 30fps NEVER existed. That's a fabrication on your part and would be complete suicide because that would eliminate 95% of the market. Were there games that crushed high-end GPU's at max/high settings? Yes, there were and there still are.
Appeal to popularity and authority are not arguments and you're not even doing them well. Jesus Christ.
Last edited:
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
No. Games are made to sell regardless of platform. PC has a huge amount of games only available on them. Many times games come to PC first. PUBG for example. World of Warcraft is still only available on PC. Countless indie games.
You are so incredibly stupid. Just stop.
I literally said that high end PCs games don't exist anymore, and your argument is that they don't exist. Really compelling argument. You're a master debater. Really impressive.
You're literally saying that Carmack saying that Rage was designed for consoles is proof that games are designed for the PC.
You are so fucking stupid it's mind boggling.
I literally said that high end PCs games don't exist anymore, and your argument is that they don't exist. Really compelling argument. You're a master debater. Really impressive.
You're literally saying that Carmack saying that Rage was designed for consoles is proof that games are designed for the PC.
You are so fucking stupid it's mind boggling.
Rikkori
Member
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 30 'Ampere' Graphics Cards Rumors: RTX 3090 24 GB, RTX 3080 20 GB, RTX 3070 16 GB , Double The Ray-Tracing & DLSS Performance Over Turing
Specifications and performance of NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 3090, RTX 3080 & RTX 3070 Gaming Ampere graphics cards have leaked out.
wccftech.com
"Now coming to the memory side, Micron has confirmed that GDDR6X is indeed happening for the next-generation NVIDIA lineup. The main SKUs include:
NVIDIA Titan - 48 GB GDDR6X
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 - 24 GB GDDR6X
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 - 20 GB GDDR6X
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 - 16 GB GDDR6X
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 - 12 GB GDDR6X
3DMark Time Spy Extreme 'Rumored' Performance Numbers:
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Founders Edition - 10,000 Graphics Score
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Founders Edition - 9,000
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Founders Edition - 7,300
MSI Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti Lightning Z (OC) - 7665
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super - 5549
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 - 5024
As for the power consumption, the GeForce RTX 3080 is mentioned to feature a total power draw of around 300W while GeForce RTX 3090 should exceed 350 Watts. This is a higher jump in power figures than any generation we have seen so far but at the same time, the performance will ideally match the power input and hence lead to similar or even better efficiency figures than Turing. The GeForce RTX 3070 which will feature the GA104 GPU is suggested to feature power consumption of around 200 Watts which will actually be lower than the RTX 2080 (non-SUPER at 215W). If that's the case, then Ampere definitely improves upon efficiency as the RTX 3070 will offer performance that is higher than an overclocked RTX 2080 Ti (275W) while consuming much less power.
As per the rumor, all GeForce RTX 30 series graphics cards will be 20% more expensive than their Turing based predecessors. This suggests that the GeForce RTX 3090 will be close to $1400 US and the GeForce RTX 3080 will be close to $800 US. The GeForce RTX 3070 could still retail for around $500 US which is offering performance better than an RTX 2080 Ti for $700-$800 US less and with higher memory capacity.
Surprisingly, the poster alleges that the GeForce RTX 3060 based on the GA106 GPU will be highly competitive against the Sony PS5 which will make use of the RDNA 2 architecture with around 9.0 TFLOPs of horsepower while being more cost-effective as a graphics solution. There's also talk that the competition, AMD's Big Navi (RDNA 2 / Navi 21) GPU, may only be able to compete against the GeForce RTX 3070 and that too in terms of pricing, not performance. That's definitely speculation territory but the leaker who posted the PCB picture also stated similar details in regards to GPU competition between NVIDIA Ampere and AMD's RDNA 2.
Graphics Card Name GPU Name SMs / CUDA Cores Memory Capacity Memory Bus Launch Timeframe
NVIDIA GeForce RTX RTX 3090 Ampere GA102-300? 5248 (82)? 24 GB GDDR6X? 384-bit? September 2020
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ampere GA102-200? 4352 (68)? 20 GB GDDR6X? 320-bit? September 2020
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti? Ampere GA104-400? 2944 (46)? 16 GB GDDR6X? 256-bit? October 2020
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ampere GA106-300? TBD 12 GB GDDR6X? 192-bit? November 2020"
Similar threads
- Locked