All it means for gamers is an increase in the likelihood that amd gpus will continue to age better in the majority of high end multiplatform games
What cardboard box do you live in?And still, most people are expecting PS5 to launch at no less than $499 USD.
You are whining about the way people discuss technology in technology threads.
I'm optimistic about Navi, it's been in the pipeline for a while now. Finally, AMD is moving on from the GCN architecture. As for Zen 2 (3rd Gen Ryzen processors) are the least of my worries, I expect AMD to take the crown for single threaded performance this time around.
Navi is AMD's last iteration on GCN, not a new architecture.I'm optimistic about Navi, it's been in the pipeline for a while now. Finally, AMD is moving on from the GCN architecture. As for Zen 2 (3rd Gen Ryzen processors) are the least of my worries, I expect AMD to take the crown for single threaded performance this time around.
Even if something entirely unrealistic happened and it was somehow kicking every current PC's ass (that's not going to happen) it wouldn't really change anything for me.What it means is there will be real competition to nvidia pc market finally.
If ps5 turns out to be +11 tf then I really don't see a point on gaming pc anymore even tho I'm saying this while I have 2080 rtx pc myself.
What are you talking about ? 30fps ? Im preatty sure next ps5 can do 144+ frames with the new cpu they are talking about and with some TV allow 120Hz gaming this won't be a problem anymore. Also it doesn't have to be better than the most expensive pc out there getting close being able to do 120-144 fps is good enough at least in my opinion expensive pc gears makes no sense. That's why I think nvidia will do something about it and step it up.Even if something entirely unrealistic happened and it was somehow kicking every current PC's ass (that's not going to happen) it wouldn't really change anything for me.
Do you really want to go back to gaming at 30 FPS?
Have your gaming experience controlled by the whims of the developers and platform holder?
Get ready to be disappointed if you think developers aren't going to waste all that power on ≤30 FPS games again.What are you talking about ? 30fps ? Im preatty sure next ps5 can do 144+ frames with the new cpu they are talking about and with some TV allow 120Hz gaming this won't be a problem anymore. Also it doesn't have to be better than the most expensive pc out there getting close being able to do 120-144 fps is good enough at least in my opinion expensive pc gears makes no sense. That's why I think nvidia will do something about it and step it up.
Not gonna happen. This gen cpu is very outdated that's is why we can barely get 60fps in games.Get ready to be disappointed if you think developers aren't going to waste all that power on ≤30 FPS games again.
Every game could have been 60 FPS this generation if developers had targeted it. The CPU was not the issue.Not gonna happen. This gen cpu is very outdated that's is why we can barely get 60fps in games.
Now they seem to have focused more on cpu compared to this gen.
Yes the CPU was the biggest issue. CPU in gaming is mostly focused on Performance of a game while GPU is focused on graphics and such.Every game could have been 60 FPS this generation if developers had targeted it. The CPU was not the issue.
The CPU was more than enough to power 60 FPS games.Yes the CPU was the biggest issue. CPU in gaming is mostly focused on Performance of a game while GPU is focused on graphics and such.
Its really different situation than new gen. Alot of developers have mentioned that they struggle to achieve 60fps and it requires a loy of resources and time not everyone can achieve 60fps even on mid core graphics. Now that cpu is significantly better its possible to achieve 60 fps pretty much on any demanding game even open world games.The CPU was more than enough to power 60 FPS games.
The issue is that developers were targeting 30, not the hardware.
We did not go from the majority of games being 60 FPS to 30 FPS because hardware got slower.
Hardware got faster every generation. Developer priorities changed.
You have no idea what the support will be and he did not detail it whatsoever. Right now, different games have different solutions but we call it the same thing. We're in quite a grey zone and him using a buzz word is just that--a buzz word.
Cerny isn't really known for spouting buzzword BS though. He's a very clever, serious guy. He knows what he's talking about. And IMO it would be weird for him to be talking about raytracing support if he only means through software. The PS4 also "supports" software raytracing, it would just be very shit.
Yes the CPU was the biggest issue. CPU in gaming is mostly focused on Performance of a game while GPU is focused on graphics and such.
The GTX 480 was decent performer for it's price, but AMD at the time had a cheaper card I believe for around $380-420, but it was 15-20% slower VS $500 for the GTX480. Those cards ran extremely hot, I had 2 of them in SLI, and both ended up dying in around 3-4 years time. Both had lifetime warranty so evga ended up replacing them for something better in the end.With how often the hype train gets insanely out of control especially with new platforms, I really don't see an issue with his statements in each thread. It's not like there's one master thread for PS5 discussion and his posts are not off-topic for the threads he posts in.
You talking about the GTX 480? You could've probably chosen the FX series for NVIDIA as an example because it was probably the worst thing NVIDIA has ever done lol.
All I remember the 480 being awful about is the heat and power consumption, but I was less involved online those days so I don't remember what the general consensus was.
beat out? was it really even a competition? why would they choose intel and nvidia over amd which they already built a foundation on?
The GTX 480 was decent performer for it's price, but AMD at the time had a cheaper card I believe for around $380-420, but it was 15-20% slower VS $500 for the GTX480. Those cards ran extremely hot, I had 2 of them in SLI, and both ended up dying in around 3-4 years time. Both had lifetime warranty so evga ended up replacing them for something better in the end.
1. You're just painting everyone with anything tempered to say as a bitter PC gamer. Do you realize how immature that is? That was the birth of my statement about tech threads. Sorry people are killing the hype train by being realistic, but claiming it just has to be some PC MAZTER RACE meme shit is beyond silly.I am not. I simply said that when new console hardware is announced, a minority of PC gamers usually throw cold water on the specs from the off. This time we don't even have the full specs so the same is happening around SSD's and RT.
Maybe people should wait until we see some next gen games that use SSD's and RT (aswell as a CPU 500+% the performance of Jaguar) considering what first party console developers achieved with a "laptop GPU and notebook CPU"...
1. You're just painting everyone with anything tempered to say as a bitter PC gamer. Do you realize how immature that is? That was the birth of my statement about tech threads. Sorry people are killing the hype train by being realistic, but claiming it just has to be some PC MAZTER RACE meme shit is beyond silly.
2. The consoles do have a tablet CPU. Facts. Why does that bother you so?
3. Can I be really real? 1080p at shaky 30fps is such a low bar as far as targeting for graphics. These games SHOULD BE amazing looking with such an ancient specification as the standard. That is the real "secret sauce" of the current consoles.
For the record you popped up out of nowhere with this line of "why PC gamers gotta be so defensive" when it wasn't even going on in the thread. Let people voice their opinions without creating a narrative and painting them into a box.