![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Jeez I just posted this but, PS5 is definitely not that low of performance. It is between a 6600XT and a 6700XT
Sales numbers came out a few months ago, which basically underlined that; indeed, a meaningful amount of GPUs went to Crypto.
Who cares? What does that matter? kirbyrj speaks the truth.
Since requiem plague tale was brought up, I started looking at benchmarks and yea the PS5 isn't much faster than a GTX 1060. According to Digital Foundry which I don't think their benchmarking is good, thinks this game performs the same on the PS5 as a RTX 2070 Super, which gets an average frame rate of 32fps.
Paper specs don't matter, only benchmarks.
If it does, and when it does it's barely a difference.
I'm not a fan of buying into the future because I've done it many times with AMD. My FX 8350 and Vega 56 did age well but not in any meaningful way. I replaced my FX 8350 and my Vega 56 is doing nicely but that's mostly because I use Linux. You won't get a GTX 1060 owner to go out and buy a ARC A770 for what little it offers.
I miss mining so much. curse you PoS ethereum. Now i am forced to look for video games to play, but none of them are as fun for me. I think miners certainly impacted the market -- buying video cards on 0% interest knowing they were going to pay themselves off every 3-6 months (in the good times) made it easy to just max out your credit cards and then start selling the coin to make your electric and credit card payments. I never mined and held, so obviously i never got rich from mining -- but ive sold over 300 bitcoins in the last ten years and paid off a lot of video cards. for every 1 miner I think there is probably 50+ PC gamers. However the average miner might of owned 7-15 video cards wild guess, most of the miners i know i had only 1 or 2 rigs -- but of course there was full data centers of video cards too so who knows how that skews the results. I know one guy on this forum claimed to have over 100 video cards in his house. I quit growing when i started tripping 15 amp breakers
According to techpowerup a 2070 super has twice the performance than a 1060, which make that bit of a strange statement.
because everything costs more and inflation is still high. Food or GPU upgrade?
That's some logic flow there. The PS5 gets 32 fps on Plague Tale: Requiem while a GTX 1060 will average 30fps. Also the PS5 version of Requiem does indeed use temporal upscaling for 4k, which means it already has some form of FSR or DLSS. Digital Foundry thinks the game on PS5 performs like a RTX 2070 Super but you can achieve much higher frame rates on a 2070. The problem here is that Digital Foundry guesstimated it by comparing the graphics output of the game on PS5 vs PC, because it's not like game developers tell you what settings they use. We're assuming Digital Foundry's is correct, which is probably not a good assumption. If the 2070 is twice as fast as the 1060 and therefore so is the PS5, then the PS5 should be able to achieve higher frame rates like the 2070, but it doesn't.
Just because the 6600 XT is similar to the PS5 in specs doesn't mean the PS5 will perform like a 6600 XT. The PS5 shares 16GB of memory with the CPU and GPU which hurts performance because both can't access memory at the same time, plus the CPU has access to GDDR6 memory which isn't ideal for a CPU due to high latency. There's a reason why PC's use DDR5 for CPU and GDDR6 for the GPU, because that's optimal. That's also the reason we run benchmarks and not talk about paper specs because there are things we don't see that can effect performance. When Gamers Nexus said the PS5 performs like a medium to high end PC from 5 years ago he's spot on if Requiem is anything to go by. A 1080 Ti is still very good at playing Plague Tale: Requiem, which is not only better than a PS5 but also from 5 years ago. It's beating a 6600 XT, which again explains why not many people are buying new GPU's.
slightly off topic, hoping I dont get shot for this, but the only reason to have a real christmas tree is to burn that bitch in July. They are spectacular. Far better than having a wet ass tree in your house in december. Burn that dry fucker in july. You wont be dissapointed.
That make little sense to me, why have the 7900xt already with below msrp rebate ? Issue with yield would explain all of this.
Crypto is the main driving force behind all the problems with GPU sales. What people are going to start learning soon is that COVID didn't cause a lot of the problems, but was a catalyst to already existing problem. We've had problems with GPU prices twice in the past due to crypto and even before COVID. The 2016 crypto boom started this mess and while crypto did crash in 2017, Nvidia was already resisting to reduce prices and justified the price increase with Ray-Tracing which was pushed with Toms Hardware telling everyone to "Just Buy it". Then the pandemic hit along with a massive surge of BitCoin which before 2020 was worth around $9,000 but even after the Binance and FTX fiasco, it's still worth $16,000. BitCoin is suppose to be a failed monopoly money and yet somehow it still retains a massive value of $16,000.
How much was he wrong ? Was availability and/or price been significantly (and better than usual time passing affair) better since ?
It’s not a conspiracy theory when Nvidia puts the plan in writing and publicly states it to their board and investors only for all the news sites to put out articles about Nvidia “manipulating the market”.
Since 2005?
iGPU becoming good enough and the popularity of the corei5 type of cpu that come with them is probably the biggest force in the downtrend, followed by laptop popularity and augmented lifespan of computer hardware
It's absolutely not a 6700 xt in terms of performance, it's very close to the 6600 xt / 5700 xt.
Mhmm. See the part where I remembered the 6700 non-XT----and indeed the specs are VERY similar. Its between a 6600 XT and 6700 XT.
![performance-2560-1440[1].png](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/attachment-files/2023/01/788746_performance-2560-14401.png "performance-2560-1440[1].png")
The specs are similar, but the PS 5 is not RDNA 2, it doesn't have all of the architectural advantages and increased IPC, that's why I compared it to a 5700 XT. It has some minor ray tracing features, but it would likely tie a 6600 XT. PC gaming needs to get cheaper, end of story. if people could buy a 6700 XT for 250 it'd be a better value proposition overall. 6650 XT and 6600 XT are getting there but it's still not the same value IMO. Long term, if you play a lot of games, it's probably cheaper to a own a PC because games are generally cheaper but still.
I only sold the 2070super for ~$420 too I was playing what I could on my backup GT 1030 before my friend lent me the 1080 FTW too PS5 is a custom chip, which has aspects of RDNA 1 and 2, as well as some custom bits (the geometry engine is one of those custom bits. Which seems to be a custom approach to Mesh Shading or something dynamic like that).
I would be curious about this, looking at steam most played:
