Maybe render but I think it couldn't output it due to HDMI bandwidth limitations.
Report the post if it's meaningless
I don't notice fps issues anymore unless under 45-50 fps. Although the only game that plays at that range for me today is Cyberpunk with full rtx and dlss on. I own a evga 2060 rtx and waiting for my queue step-up to 3060ti (come on evga send that email already, its been since december 3rd wtf...) Gaming at 1080p (as that is what my 27" monitor and tvs are, is not a big deal for me. Looks fine and can go up to 144hz. Sure the 144hz is a nice thing to see in afterburner, but I really don't notice the difference.
Wait, what?
Sorry about that. I always consider workload as a separate isolated thing and bandwidth as the workload done over time. I can see the confusion. It's like specifying a distance to travel. Workload would be adding more miles to the distance but without what time can you travel the distance, you don't really have a good picture of how a vehicle can perform.
RDR 2, FS2020, Marvel Avengers and Cyberpunk are all games that can not hold 4k/60FPS no matter what workload has been given. FS2020 is clearly an incredible piece of software so that I can completely understand. I sortof can understand Cyberpunk too.
I seriously doubt that. It's very rare for a game to require more than the latest technology such that running it at the lowest feasible resolution possible doesn't yield a locked 60FPS. A 3090 will be good for all games for another 7yrs easily. A new generation of consoles after this one still will lag behind the actual GPUs coming from Nvidia/AMD. We often forget that it takes years to develop a console after the initial decision to pick parts for that console. If PS6 comes out in 7yrs, Sony has at most 1 more year from now to decide on a piece of hardware. They don't decide based on the latest graphics cards 6yrs from now and then make the console in year 7.
Their designs were though.
I'm speaking more of Nvidia. How soon do you think Sony will move on a PS6 architecture? It's 2021 now and the console GPUs are nearly 2 generations behind a 3090. What type of games do you think will choke a 3090 by the time the PS6 comes out (which means that a PS5 wouldn't even be able to run it) and what company will make such a game?
Any of the 980Tis could run a PS5 game at 1080/60FPS if you lower the workload of the GPU (i.e. lower the texture resolution, lower the LOD, lower the shadow map quality, lower the texture filtering, etc..). Cyberpunks minimum spec calls for a 780. Can a PS5 run FS2020 right now even though a 3090 is too slow to render it at max settings? Sure. Can it run at 3090 settings? No.
Yea, but even still consoles are not in lock step with the PC GPUs. I think that's the mixup. A 3090 will outperform a PS6 is my claim. We'll see. Nvidia is still ahead by a generation over AMD. AMD completely wasn't prepared for full on RT cores with ML cores for DLSS. Their next iteration needs to address this if there will be any hope of PS6 being feasible to run games right now like Cyberpunk with all the rendering options that still bring 3090 to it's knees.
You are seriously underestimating the advancement of GPUs over a 7 year time frame. When the PS4 launched the top end GPU was the GeForce GTX 780 Ti and the Radeon R9 290X, both around 2.5x times as fast as the PS4 equivalent GPU, the Radeon 7850. The R9 290X especially was 5.6 TFLOP, roughly a 3x increase in raw numbers over the PS4 GPU. Both metrics are larger then the difference between the XSX GPU and the 3090/6900XT in normal rasterization performance. The XSX GPU is equal to a ~2080 and the 3090 is only 70% faster then that GPU. The 3060ti is also less then 10% more powerful then the GPU in the XSX. That won't even cut it for a mid-gen refresh. Games that are going to stress the consoles in 5 or so years time (aka 1440p/30FPS) will ensure the 3090 struggles with 1440p/60FPS on those titles, especially with the higher settings that PCs run at. I don't think the 3090 will ever need to drop down to 1080p for this generation however.
We'll see.
More like games not designed to utilize full potential or power of card.
If Nvidia is at 5-generation series of cards, then yea, you'll be correct. But I somehow doubt they will follow their normal 2yr generation releases this time. I also don't think the gap between generations will be as large as it was with 20-series and 30-series cards. Life doesn't always follow the exact circumstances from the past. If that were the case, then we'd all be millionaires.
Well, X1X was a pretty big design change in that it got rid of ddr3 and esram for lots of fast gddr5.
Why? You said your opinion, i told you my opinion. Relax
this happens when u have i3 cpu and 8gb ddr3
Almost i9 10900kf and 32gb ddr4 at 3400this happens when u have i3 cpu and 8gb ddr3
You can have made this exact same argument 7 years ago, just with using the original GTX Titan instead of the 3090. How could a console possibly have a GPU more then twice as powerful as my $999 GPU? Or have a CPU more powerful then anything on the market? Or a state of the art 1TB SSD?
I mean really think about that. PS5/XSX still run multiplatform games at much lower settings than Ampere. What would they change if the GPU stays the same (CPU is fine and not needed)? And more importantly, how to put it out costing just $100 more than PS5? I don't even think their will be a mid-gen refresh in 2yrs. PS5/XSX are very good starting level consoles from last gen unlike PS4 back then. There really is no need or practicality with adding higher clocked GPU. I don't see it happening especially with how shortages are ridiculous now and probably will be this entire year.
No because the Titan and the 3090 are radically different. This generation the Nvidia cards took 2 steps up from 20x series cards. It was a monumental jump. They aren't going to have another monumental jump next year in 2022. That's why I said that nothing stays the same. Everything changes.. even the rate, power and time of these releases.
You keep looking at numbers. I'm looking at game performance - which is what developers judge. The games out now (including exclusives) should tell you that consoles are struggling to maintain 4k FPS and advanced features that are pretty easy for Ampere cards to render. RT is completely a wash with the consoles without DLSS (and I mean hardware - you can't just add a software solution and think it's going to be free.)
I'm a bit lost man tbh. If Ps4 Pro came out 3 years later after ps4 launch why would a Ps5 pro come out 2 years later after ps5 launch? Perhaps I jumped into another convo and we're off track lol. I agree that Ps5 is much more future proof than ps4 was.
Nearly double the number of pixels is 'barely an upgrade'. Sure, OK.
Then how can you explain the current consoles? I mean PS5 has faster I/O than pretty much anything on PC to date, it's taken awhile to catch up to that kind of raw throughput. It's already been noted that the XSX GPU smashes flagship cards that came out just 4 years ago. Both have competent Ryzen CPUs and dedicated silicon to offload other tasking.
I found it has almost no effect on aa. You still need a ton. Visually it's not a big jump
The Turing-Ampere leap is nothing out of the ordinary, Maxwell-Pascal offered a greater performance uplift. So does RDNA-RDNA2 for that matter (not IPC, but the impressive performance per watt increase of 55%).
I'm playing Valhalla on PS5 and I disagree.
You totally missed the point tho, don't get me wrong, I love playing Spider Man on the PS5 and especially the PS5 version looks amazing. But you won't see any difference if the picture was 2K or 4K unless you walk up to the screen.
