I know Intel is dipping its toe into the GPU market, but let's be real, AMD and nVidia are the only options and have been for the last 20+ years. The manufacturers/assemblers of the complete graphics cards are varied and widespread, but the core tech comes from two companies only.

Why is this the case? Or am I mistaken and am just brainwashed by marketing, and there are in fact other viable options for GPUs?

Cheers!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is nonsense and, frankly, sounds like guerrilla marketing for nvidia.

All things considered, I can play any game I want on the steam deck, which has an old SoC by today's standards. A newer AMD gpu can run anything at max settings on a linux machine.

So again, either you are grossly misinformed or working for nvidia to sew gentle doubt. Either way, stop it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Do you not play many games? Good luck playing CP2077 with PT or heck even MSFS2020 at good (read: max) settings on 1440p.

    The deck is great but I can't even run NMS on high settings on it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Why would I want to play at max settings? That adds very little to the gameplay for me.

    I can play any game tweaking settings, and I can render at 720p + upscale if a game is demanding. This makes nearly any game enjoyable.

    High settings are irrelevant, but if you want high settings, any AMD card from the past 2 years will more than deliver max performance for anything you throw at it.

    For a handheld, portable device that costs under $500, I am okay reducing graphics quality for portability and gameplay.

  • source
  • parent