Well I am shocked, SHOCKED I say! Well, not that shocked.

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 1 point 1 year ago

There’s so many games out there I’d like to play, but I’m an adult with responsibilities. I don’t need the newest game or gaming hardware because no matter how hard I try to catch up I never will, so I don’t bother to try and I always have something to play on my hardware.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    It's like how banks figured there was more money in catering to the super rich and just shit all over the rest of us peasants, GPU manufacturers that got big because of gamers have now turned their backs to us to cater to the insane "AI" agenda.
    Also, friendly advice, unless you need CUDA cores and you have to upgrade, try avoiding Nvidia.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    First: Nobody gives a shit about the ray tracing craze, like not really. It applies to a thin margin of games, and is an option easily turned off or avoided. Seeing as AAA games are most of the ones developing for it anyway, and seeing as most of those are utter shit, yeah I'm not buying into the craze and spending obnoxious amounts of money on it.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Food, not ROBLOX.

  • source
  • [+] 94 points 1 year ago (17 children)
  • [–] 51 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    It doesn't help that the gains have been smaller, and the prices higher.

    I've got a RX 6800 I bought in 2020, and nothing but the 5090 is a significant upgrade, and I'm sure as fuck not paying that kind of money for a video card.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    I'm in the same boat.

    In general, there's just no way I could ever justify buying a Nvidia card in terms of cost per buck, it's absolutely ridiculous.

    I'll fork over 4 digits for a gfx when salaries go up by a digit as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    I just picked up a used RX 6800 XT after doing some research and comparing prices.

    The fact that a gpu this old can outperform or match most newer cards at a fraction of the price is insane, but I'm very happy with my purchase. Solid upgrade from my 1070 Ti

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Well that depends on your definition of significant. Don't get me wrong, the state of the GPU market is not consumer friendly, but even an RX 9070 provides over a 50% performance uplift over the RX 6800.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    "When did it just become expected that everybody would upgrade GPU’s every year and that’s suppose to be normal?" - that's a really good question because I don't think normal PC gamers have ever, and still aren't, like that. It's basically part of the culture to stretch your GPU to the limit of time so idk who you're complaining about. Yeah, GPU prices are bullshit rn but let's not make up stuff

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

    Nah, there was a time when you'd get a new card every two years and it'd be twice as fast for the same price.

    Nowadays the new cards are 10% faster for 15% more money.

    I bought a new card last year after running a Vega 64 for ages and I honestly think it might last me ten years because things are only getting worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    I don't think they're actually expecting anyone to upgrade annually. But there's always someone due for an upgrade, however long it's been for them. You can compare what percentage of users upgraded this year to previous years.

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

    I just finally upgraded from a 1080 Ti to a 5070 Ti. At high refresh-rate 1440p the 1080 Ti was definitely showing its age and certain games would crash (even with no GPU overclock). Fortunately I was able to get a PNY 5070 Ti for only ~$60 over MSRP at the local Microcenter.

    5000 series is a pretty shitty value across the board, but I got a new job (and pay increase) and so it was the right time for me to upgrade after 8 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It's never been normal to upgrade every year, and it still isn't. Every three years is probably still more frequent than normal. The issue is there haven't been reasonable prices for cards for like 8 years, and it's worse more recently. People who are "due" for an upgrade aren't because it's unaffordable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago*

    If consoles can last 6-8 years per gen so can my PC.

    Your PC can run 796 of the top 1000 most popular games listed on PCGameBenchmark - at a recommended system level.

    That's more than good enough for me.

    I don't remember exactly when I built this PC but I want to say right before covid, and I haven't felt any need for an upgrade yet.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    When did it just become expected that everybody would upgrade GPU’s every year and that’s suppose to be normal?

    Somewhere around 1996 when the 3dfx Voodoo came out. Once a year was a relatively conservative upgrade schedule in the late 90s.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 143 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    The good games don't need a high end GPU.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago

    Absolutely. True creative games are made by smaller dev teams that aren't forcing ray tracing and lifelike graphics. The new Indianna Jones game isn't a GPU-selling card, and is the only game that I've personally had poor performance on with my 3070ti at 1440p.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 54 points 1 year ago* (19 children)
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    unless they're rich or actually need it for something important

    Fucking youtubers and crypto miners.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 21 points 1 year ago (13 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    What's wrong with 4k gaming? Just curious

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] 9 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    Have you tried 4k? The difference is definitely noticeable unless you play on like a 20" screen

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Somehow 4k resolution got a bad rep in the computing world, with people opposing it for both play and productivity.

    "You can't see the difference at 50cm away!" or something like that. Must be bad eyesight I guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It's just kind of unnecessary. Gaming in 1440p on something the size of your average computer monitor, hell even just good ol' 1080 HD, is more than sufficient. I mean 1080 to 4k sure there's a difference, but 1440p it's a lot harder to tell. Nobody cares about your mud puddle reflections cranking along in a game at 120 fps. At least not the normies.

    Putting on my dinosaur hat for a second, I spent the first decade of my life gaming in 8/16 bit and 4 color CGA, and I've probably spent the last thirty years and god only knows how much money trying to replicate those experiences.

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

    I mean I play at 1440p and I think it's fine... Well it's 3440x1440, problem is I can still see the pixels, and my desk is quite deep. Do I NEED 4k? No. Would I prefer if I had it? Hell yes, but not enough to spend huge amount of money that are damaging to an already unrealistic market.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    4K is an outrageously high resolution.

    If I was conspiratorial I would say that 4K was normalized as the next step above 1440p in order to create a demand for many generations of new graphics cards. Because it was introduced long before there was hardware able to use it without serious compromises. (I don't actually think it's a conspiracy though.)

    For comparison, 1440p has 78% more pixels than 1080p. That's quite a jump in pixel density and required performance.

    4K has 125% more pixels than 1440p (300% more than 1080p). The step up is massive, and the additional performance required is as well.

    Now there is a resolution that we are missing in between them. 3200x1800 is the natural next step above 1440p*. At 56% more pixels it would be a nice improvement, without an outrageous jump in performance. But it doesn't exist outside of a few laptops for some reason.

    *All these resolutions are multiples of 640x360. 720p is 2x, 1080p is 3x, 1440p is 4x, and 4K is 6x. 1800p is the missing 5x.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I bought a secondhand 3090 when the 40 series came out for £750. I really don't need to upgrade. I can even run the bigger AI models locally as I have a huge amount of VRAM.

    Games run great and look great. Why would I upgrade?

    I'm waiting to see if Intel or AMD come out with something awesome over the next few years. I'm in no rush.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 49 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Paying Bills Takes Priority Over Chasing NVIDIA’s RTX 5090

    Yeah no shit, what a weird fucking take

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 42 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (11 children)

    In the US, a new RTX 5090 currently costs $2899 at NewEgg, and has a max power draw of 575 watts.

    (Lowest price I can find)

    ... That is a GPU, with roughly the cost and power usage of an entire, quite high end, gaming PC from 5 years ago... or even just a reasonably high end PC from right now.

    ...

    The entire move to the realtime raytracing paradigm, which has enabled AAA game devs to get very sloppy with development by not really bothering to optimize any lighting, nor textures... which has necessitated the invention of intelligent temporal frame upscaling, and frame generation... the whole, originally advertised point of this all was to make hi fidelity 4k gaming an affordable reality.

    This reality is a farce.

    ...

    Meanwhile, if you jump down to 1440p, well, I've got a future build plan sitting in a NewEgg wishlist right now.

    RX 9070 (220 W) + Minisforum BD795i SE (mobo + non removeable, high end AMD laptop CPU with performance comparable to a 9900X, but about half the wattage draw) ... so far my pretax total for the whole build is under $1500, and, while I need to double and triple check this, I think the math on the power draw works out to a 650 Watt power supply being all you'd need... potentially with enough room to also add in some extra internal HDD storage drives, ie, you've got leftover wattage headroom.

    If you want to go a bit over the $1500 mark, you could fit this all in a console sized ITX case.

    That is almost half the cost as the RTX 5090 alone, and will get you over 90fps in almost all modern games, with ultra settings at 1440p, though you will have to futz around with intelligent upscaling and frame gen if you want realtime raytracing as well with similar framerates, and realistically, probably wait another quarter or two for AMD driver support and FSR 4 to become a bit more mature and properly implemented in said games.

    Or you could swap out for a maybe a 5070 (non TI, the TI is $1000 more) Nvidia card, but seeing as I'm making a linux gaming pc, you know, for the performance boost from not running Windows, AMD mesa drivers are where you wanna be.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Saved up for a couple of years and built the best (consumer grade) non nvidia PC I could, 9070XT, 9950X3D, 64gig of RAM. Pretty much top end everything that isn't Nvidia or just spamming redundant RAM for no reason. The whole thing still costs less than a single RTX 5090 and on average draws less power too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Yep, thats gonna be significantly more powerful than my planned build... and likely somewhere between 500 to 1000 more expensive... but yep, that is how absurd this is, that all of that is still less expensive than a 5090 RTX.

    I'm guessing you could get all of that to work with a 750 W PSU, 850 W if you also want to have a bunch of storage drives or a lot of cooling, but yeah, you'd only need that full wattage for running raytracing in 4k.

    Does that sound about right?

    Eitherway... yeah... imagine an alternate timeline where marketing and industry direction isn't bullshit, where people actually admit things like:

    Consoles cannot really do what they claim to do at 4K... at actual 4K.

    They use checkerboard upscaling, so basically they're actually running at 2K and scaling up, and its actually less than 2K in demanding raytraced games, because they're actually using FSR or DLSS as well, oh and the base graphics settings are a mix of what PC gamers would call medium and high, but they don't show console gamers real graphics settings menus, so they don't know that.

    Maybe, maybe we could have tried to focus on just perfecting frame per watt and frame per $ efficiency at 2K instead of baffling us with marketing bs and claiming we can just leapfrog to 4K, and more recently, telling people 8K displays make any goddamned sense at all, when in 95% of home setup situations, of any kind, they have no physically possible perceptible gains.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    And then to stick it to the man further you're running Linux of course, right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    I tried Mint and Ubuntu but Linux dies a horrific death trying to run newly released hardware so I ended up on ghost spectre.
    (I also assume your being sarcastic but I'm still salty about wasting a week trying various pieces of advice to make linux goddamn work)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    The entire move to the realtime raytracing paradigm, which has enabled AAA game devs to get very sloppy with development by not really bothering to optimize any lighting, nor textures

    You clearly don't know what you're talking about here. Ray tracing has nothing to do with textures and very few games force you to use RT. What is "allowing" devs to skimp on optimization (which is also questionable, older games weren't perfect either) is DLSS and other dynamic resolution + upscaling tech

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Doom the Dark Ages is possibly what they're referring to. ID skipped lighting in favour of Ray tracing doing it.

    Bethesda Studios also has a tendency to use hd textures on features like grass and terrain which can safely be low res.

    There is a fair bit of inefficient code floating around because optimisation is considered more expensive than throwing more hardware at a problem, and not just in games. (Bonus points if you outsource the optimisation to some else's hardware or the modding community)

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

    That is a prominent example of forced RT... basically, as I described with the TAA example in my other reply...

    idTech 8 seems to be the first engine that just literally requires RT for its entire render pipeline to work.

    They could theoretically build another version of it off of vulkan-base, to enable you to be able to turn RT off... but that would likely be a massive amount of work.

    On the bright side... at least the idTech engines are actually well coded, and they put a lot of time into making the engine actually very good.

    I didn't follow the marketing ecosystem for Doom Dark Ages, but it would have been really shitty if they did not include 'you need a GPU with RT cores'.

    ...

    On the other end of the engine spectrum:

    Bethesda... yeah, they have entirely lost control of their engine, it is mangled mess of nonsense, the latest Oblivion remaster just uses UE to render things slapped on top of Gamebryo, because no one at Bethesda can actually code worth a damn.

    Compare that to oh I dunno, the Source engine.

    Go play TitanFall 2. 10 year old game now, built on a modified version of the Portal 2 Source engine.

    Still looks great, runs very efficiently, can scale down to older hardware.

    Ok, now go play HL Alyx. If you don't have VR, there are mods that do a decent job of converting it into M+K.

    Looks great, runs efficiently.

    None of them use RT.

    Because you don't need to, if you take the time to actually optimize both your engine and game design.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    I meant they also just don't bother to optimize texture sizes, didn't mean to imply they are directly related to ray tracing issues.

    Also... more and more games are clearly being designed, and marketed, with ray tracing in mind.

    Sure, its not absolutely forced on in too many games... but TAA often is forced on, because no one can run raytracing without temporal intelligent upscsling and frame gen...

    ...and a lot of games just feed the pixel motion vectors from their older TAA implementations into the DLSS / FSR implementations, and don't bother to recode the TAA into just giving the motion vectors as an optional API that doesn't actually do AA...

    ... and they often don't do that because they designed their entire render pipeline to only work with TAA on, and half the games post procrssing effects would have to be recoded to work without TAA.

    So if you summarize all that: the 'design for raytracing support' standard is why many games do not let you turn off TAA.

    ...

    That being said: Ray tracing absolutely does only really make a significant visual difference in many (not all, but many) situations... if you have very high res textures.

    If you don't, older light rendering methods work almost as well, and run much, much faster.

    Ray tracing involves... you know, light rays, bouncing off of models, with textures on them.

    Like... if you have a car with a glossy finish, that is reflecting in its paint the entire scene around it... well, if that reflect map that is being added to the base car texture... if that reflect map is very low res, if it is generating it from a world of low res textures... you might as well just use the old cube map method, or other methods, and not bother turning every reflective surface into a ray traced mirror.

    Or, if you're doing accumulated lighting in a scene with different colors of lights... that effect is going to be more dramatic, more detailed, more noticable in a scene with higher res textures on everything being lit.

    ...

    I could write a 60 page report on this topic, but no one is paying me to, so I'm not going to bother.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 29 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I stopped maintaining a AAA-capable rig in 2016. I've been playing indies since and haven't felt left out whatsoever.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    The majority sure, but there are some gems though.

    Baldurs Gate 3, Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, Doom Eternal, Elden Ring, God Of War, ... for example

    You can always wait for a couple of years before playing them, but saying they didn't miss anything is a gross understatement.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    It's funny, because often they aren't prettier. Well optimized and well made games from 5 or even 10 years ago often look on par better than the majority of AAA slop pushed out now (obviously with exceptions of some really good looking games like space marine and some others) and the disk size is still 10x what it was. They are just unrefined and unoptimized and try to use computationally expensive filters, lighting, sharpening, and antialiasing to make up for the mediocre quality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    My new gpu was a steam deck.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    It's just because I'm not impressed, like the raster performance bump for 1440p was just not worth the price jump at all. On top of that they have manufacturing issues and issues with their stupid 12 pin connector? And all the shit on the business side not providing drivers to reviewers etc. Fuuucccckk all that man. I'm waiting until AMD gets a little better with ray tracing and switching to team red.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 24 points 1 year ago

    I've been waiting for a product that makes sense.

    I'm still waiting. I can keep waiting

  • source
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Unfortunately gamers aren't the real target audience for new GPUs, it's AI bros. Even if nobody buys a 4090/5090 for gaming, they're always out of stock as LLM enthusiasts and small companies use them for AI.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Ex-fucking-actly!

    Ajajaja, gamers are skipping. Yeah, they do. And yet 5090 is still somehow out of stock. No matter the price or state of gaming. We all know major tech went AI direction disregarding average Joe about either they want or not to go AI. The prices are not for gamers. The prices are for whales, AI companies and enthusiasts.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago*

    5090 is kinda terrible for AI actually. Its too expensive. It only just got support in pytorch, and if you look at 'normie' AI bros trying to use them online, shit doesn't work.

    4090 is... mediocre because it's expensive for 24GB. The 3090 is basically the best AI card Nvidia ever made, and tinkerers just opt for banks of them.

    Businesses tend to buy RTX Pro cards, rent cloud A100s/H100s or just use APIs.

    The server cards DO eat up TSMC capacity, but insane 4090/5090 prices is mostly Nvidia's (and AMD's) fault for literally being anticompetitive.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I have a 3080 and am surviving lol. never had an issue

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Pretty wise, that's the generation before the 12HVPWR connectors started burning up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Colour me surprised

    Resumes gaming with a 1000-series card

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Rimworld doesn't need a new gpu

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago

    I am tired of be treated like a fool. No more money for them.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Uhhh, I went from a Radeon 1090 (or whatever they're called, it's an older numbering scheme from ~2010) to a Nvidia 780 to an Nvidia 3070 TI. Skipping upgrades is normal. Console games effectively do that as well. It's normal to not buy a GPU every year.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    As long as you make an upgrade that's equivalent or better than the current console generation, you're then basically good-to-go until the next generation of consoles comes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Still on a 1060 over here.

    Sure, I may have to limit FFXIV to 30fps in summer to stop it crashing, but it still runs.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago*

    I'm running Linux for everything and my GTX 1070 is still chugging along trying to power my 1440p 144hz monitor ^^'

    Well, I mostly just play strategy games and CS2 (which I do have to run on almost the lowest possible settings without FSR. I basically turn everything to lowest except for lowest still AA setting and dynamic shadows to not have a disadvantage and get 110 - 180 fps depending on the situation)

    But I'm planning on buying a used Radeon 9070 XT and just inserting it into my current build (i7 6800k based lololol) and on eventually buying a new build around it

    (A 750W 80 Plus Platinum PSU should be able to handle a new 970 XT)

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›