DoctaThompson
Banned
32k with ps5 SSD. 64K if you link them in SLI.Bah, whatever, Jesper Kyd is back to AC Valhalla, the moment his music plays, our ears will activate our secret sauce making us see the game at 16K
32k with ps5 SSD. 64K if you link them in SLI.Bah, whatever, Jesper Kyd is back to AC Valhalla, the moment his music plays, our ears will activate our secret sauce making us see the game at 16K
If pc can play at 60fps @4k, does it mean it was optimized?
That clears it up I've always considered standard to mean something else don't know if that's a British thing or just me personally.
I think that is the problem though. People are thinking the series x it's the equivalent of a 2080 and a 3700x cpu. They are not the same. Especially when you take into account of having dedicated system memory. Take a look at the Minecraft demo and you'll see where things start to fall apart.If it does spec for spec then yes, the devs are intentionally capping the framerate on the consoles.
I think that is the problem though. People are thinking the series x it's the equivalent of a 2080 and a 3700x cpu. They are not the same. Especially when you take into account of having dedicated system memory. Take a look at the Minecraft demo and you'll see where things start to fall apart.
It's crazy to think Ubisoft would call the framerate of next gen consoles. Only getting 61fps on a 2080 TI in Odyssey didn't bat an eye when it released, but look how things are backfiring now for Ubisoft. Next gen consoles are the biggest thing to happen for casual gamers in the past 7 years. Ubisoft would be crazy not to upsell consoles, in the best light possible. The same people who would buy into the AC franchise, would buy Valhalla either way. Now to see a "next gen" version of the game, could easily make AC one of the biggest launch games, ever. It's not about Ubi gimping consoles, as that would never help the company, as a pc gamer or a console gamers perspective.
The real problem is buying into the hype from Microsoft and Sony PR. Take that and all the hypeman warriors on both sides, and you get people thinking next gen consoles will give you 8k120fps because of the SSD.
I can't even be in PCMR, my SSD ain't fast enough apparently.Spec for spec, what does this mean I wonder?
I don't need your PCMR story.
How about 1080p 60fps instead? 4K seems a bit overrated, and I have a 4k tv. I haven't really noticed much of a difference in the same way I would going from 30 fps to 60 fps.
I can't even be in PCMR, my SSD ain't fast enough apparently.
I think imma pull the trigger and go with AMD this year. But probably won't get a super fast SSD for a year or so. My Samsung's are doing just fine for now.SSD envy. I get it.
Ryzen 4/RDNA3 should assist with that, allegedly.
I think imma pull the trigger and go with AMD this year. But probably won't get a super fast SSD for a year or so. My Samsung's are doing just fine for now.
Hopefully this virus shit dies down soon, and won't disrupt too much in the technology world...I am as well once we see what's on the plate for Ryzen 4 this fall. New build, fosho!
why not 1440p or 1080p at 60fps like a performance mode?
why not 1440p or 1080p at 60fps like a performance mode?
The problem with lower resolution is it being too low to see the entire rendering approximation. Upscaling takes away from the true image. Running at lower res also takes away when you are running on a native 4k screen because the internal TV will have to upscale it to 4k which causes blurring of pixels.
The only real way to enjoy good clarity graphics is to run at 4k native. Or run at the native resolution of the medium to get a perfect 1:1 pixel to pixel ratio from framebuffer to TV.
For those smarter than me, how hard would it be to incorporate VRS on a cross-gen game like this?
The problem with lower resolution is it being too low to see the entire rendering approximation. Upscaling takes away from the true image. Running at lower res also takes away when you are running on a native 4k screen because the internal TV will have to upscale it to 4k which causes blurring of pixels.
The only real way to enjoy good clarity graphics is to run at 4k native. Or run at the native resolution of the medium to get a perfect 1:1 pixel to pixel ratio from framebuffer to TV.
”30 was our goal, it feels more cinematic. 60 is really good for a shooter, action adventure not so much. It actually feels better for people when it's at that 30fps. It also lets us push the limits of everything to the maximum.
It's like when people start asking about resolution. Is it the number of the quality of [sic] the pixels that you want? If the game looks gorgeous, who cares about the number?”
For those smarter than me, how hard would it be to incorporate VRS on a cross-gen game like this?
Native 4K is just waste of resources IMO. It is a cross-gen game so I think it should not have a problem. But otherwise I am sure things like gfx detail, fps will be given importance than native resolution.
At this point in time even a 533MB/s SATA SSD will give you 95% is the benefits a 3.2GB/s NVmE drive will.I think imma pull the trigger and go with AMD this year. But probably won't get a super fast SSD for a year or so. My Samsung's are doing just fine for now.
It matters, but I think that very few people will make their final decision on buying a game or not on a game's resolution or performance.i remember playing Ps2 games at any fps they where that time and then playing ps3 games at like 28fps most times and thinking wow what a game , and now people wont buy game because of some fake news about fps, i mean this went long way , and you shouldnt be called gamer for this at all. i dont care, i played witcher 3 in time at 20-15fps in worse cases and i enjoyed game on 840m gpu laptop. never i thought : wish i could play it at more fps. it just doesnt matter .
And based off what has been said about the Unreal Engine demo, many people won't even need to upgrade. Of going above and beyond that, couldn't hurt, and could possibly have added benefit! This will be a great year for everyone!At this point in time even a 533MB/s SATA SSD will give you 95% is the benefits a 3.2GB/s NVmE drive will.
Hopefully we will eventually have some credible use case for all that extra speed.