Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

[JEMC]

Chazore said:

JEMC said:

PC benchmarks is something that fewer and fewer sites do, but it's easy to understand why. You need a lot of hardware, both CPUs and GPUs and it's very time consuming.

 

The thing is, we still see sites like DSOG that do performance benchmarks. We see people across all of youtube, mere users that run benchmarks. Duderandom makes his own benchmarks almost daily. So when a site like PCG, that can somehow scrap together an e3 event 3 years in a row, can somehow not manage to run a few benchmarks a week compared to one guy that can do them almost daily, then I start to see a bullshit issue.

The question here is what are we calling benchmarks? Because to me, it's trying to run a game across a range of available cards and hopefully processors in order to determine if your actual rig can run it and how well. And if you can't run it at the settings you want,which is the lowest combination available to meet your needs. And the key part is a range of hardware.

Since I don't know any youtober that does "benchmarks", I'll talk about DSOG that does benchmarks, yes, but with only 1 (oldish) CPU and two or three GPUs that do not represent new hardware. Check their Far Cry 5 Performance Analysis:

Their system use an i7 4930K overclocked to 4.2Ghz with 8GB RAM, and have a RX 580, GTX 980Ti and GTX 690, that use to get the 680 results. Besides the RX 580, all the other parts are old and their results don't tell use the whole story.

Now check the benchmarks that sites like Guru3D or TechSpot did for the same game:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/far-cry-5-pc-graphics-performance-benchmark-review,1.html

With other benches for other resolutions and also CPU scalling with even Ryzen numbers.

https://www.techspot.com/article/1600-far-cry-5-benchmarks/

Heck, even HardOCP, that have a different approach to benchmarks, gives us VRAM usage numbers that let us see if our card's performance can be affected by that.

But, as I said in my previous post, that need a large selection of hardware and a lot of time, two things (specially the second one) that some sites, even PCGamer, can't afford.

Chazore said:

JEMC said:

I wouldn't mind a bit of showcase, either a new engine tech demo or that ray-tracing demos that we've seen. But I'm affraid that it will depend on who is the sponsor of the show.

It would be the perfect place for MSoft to show the first gameplay of Age of Empires IV, and even Ubisoft could show Anno 1800.

 

If AMD or Intel are the sponsors, then I don't really see any Nvidia tech being shown off, unless it's the new Metro. But even then, we've already seen that tech in action from their specific RT trailer, so I don't really see a need to drone on about what we'd already seen in a tech trailer, for say 20-30 mins.

 

Pretty sure that new Anno is going to consoles, but we'll see.

It's obvious that with AMD, Nvidia wouldn't be able to show its Ray-Tracing tech, but AMD has it's own tech that could be showcased. But, last year Intel was the sponsor, so unless they put a ban on it, there's nothing stopping GPU tech, at least for now...

 

As for Anno, if the games goes back to 1404 levels of gameplay, I won't give a sh!t if it launches on consoles too. Remember, simple controls don't mean simple gameplay, which was the biggest problem of the last Anno games. I didn't even bother with the last one, despite looking great.