| DraconianAC said: They just need one that when optimized can do full 1080p with direct X with a hint of anti aliasing (maybe some Tessellation) at 45-60fps. Why pay for more? Please remember that they only need to meet 1080p screens; 2k & 4K screens are years aways before they become affordable alternative. They would be shooting themselves in the face if they try to place anything higher on their console because of the HDTV screen bottle neck. |
Well. If they only wanted to do 1080P then the Xbox 1 GPU could do it, with included Anti-Aliasing. - Just don't expect amazing lighting, high quality textures, high polygon models and other effects, but it could still do it just as the PC equivalent could do it, that is... If you're only worried about resolution. (There is allot more to graphics rendering than just the resolution.)
The problem is... As developers start pushing a relatively low-end chip that's in the realm of integrated graphics performance-wise then they need to make sacrifices, one of those sacrifices this generation was in the form of resolution and framerate.
If they go with low-end chips then they will do the same thing, just much sooner because they will utilise the extra processing to make the game look nicer.
If they have allot of graphics processing head room, then you probably could enjoy gaming at 1080P@60fps for a couple of years.
Now if they dropped in a high-end card? Not only do they not suffer from massive performance hits when loaded with super fast memory when running higher resolutions, but they could handle allot of effects at once that will make your eyeballs have an orgasm.
www.youtube.com/@Pemalite
