greenmedic88 said:
Nvidia likes to play it loose with their marketing in the whole "4k ready" bullet point for their cards. If I'm not mistaken, the GTX 970 was even marketed as such back when it was released and it's really a WQHD/WQXGA card for games.
This is where manufacturers can be a bit disingenuous. Technically, you can run 4k displays and even run lower overhead software at acceptable framerates, but realistically, the vast majority of people who are buying these video cards are using them for high end gaming.
All new, current gen GTX 1080 represents more of a value increase than a sheer performance increase proposition for potential buyers. The same amount of money is buying quite a bit more performance, but like you said, it's just not realistic to expect 4k at 60fps on high settings for everything or even most high end game engines.
For 4k/60fps without running the sliders down, that's still in the $1000 video card range and even then there are examples where the framerates are well below 60fps.
So really the challenge is getting that level of performance down to the $300-400 range which is:
A) not something I would expect to see by the next generation of video cards
B) still way too high for a $400 console
C) refers to Nvidia, not AMD who are not at the forefront of GPU performance even if for no reason that Nvidia has more money for R&D
|
