| CGI-Quality said: One Titan X can run games in 4K/60fps, but not without dialing some stuff back. |
Ah not bad. Of course with the extra resolution you would want to increase the lod and draw distance instead of dialing back.
TItan X came out in 2015, seems a reasonable chance that 4K gaming becomes affordable in 2019.
| fatslob-:O said: I'd be interested in how well consoles can handle transparency too but I suspect that the PS4 would most likely come on top since it has 5.86 GB/s of bandwidth per frame @ 30FPS compared to 2.23 GB/s of bandwidth @ 30FPS on the Xbox One to play with so it should definitely come out on top when doing multi-layer/pass rendering like transparency ... Also the presentation is talking about the Fury X and the numbers in question are about the ratio ALU operations to rasterized triangles ... What specifically makes the Fury X much faster in this test has to do with the fact that it's using GPU compute culling to accelerate the graphics pipeline ... (Fury X is known for it's infamous rasterization or other geometry related bottlenecks among developers so that is why it profits most in this research when it has a skewed ALU op to fixed function capability ratio.) |
That explains why they picked that card. I wondered why not compare to a 2016 card if you're not going to compare to what was available end 2013.
