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

[Jizz_Beard_thePirate]

vivster said:

Captain_Yuri said:

Well personally, I was expecting it to be more so in the middle of 2070 and 2070 Super. Not 2080 levels. Although considering how poorly Asscreed performs on Nvidia gpus with 6800XT even killing 3090 in Raster, on average, it may still be the case outside of one offs like this.

The thing I don't quite understand is why the Series X is performing so low. In fact, Ps5 and Series X has switched spots in that aspect as the Series X is more so in between the 2070/2070 Super and Ps5 is 2080 for this game. Although Series X is performing worse in every game against the ps5.

RDNA2 seems to benefit more from clocks than cores. Seems like Sony was smart enough to notice that early.

Yea if I do remember correctly, Cerny did mention something along the lines of 36 CUs being "easier" to code for than higher CU counts. I do wonder if it's a situation where devs are optimizing for 36 CUs so they can hit 2 birds with one stone instead of optimizing for both 36 and 52 CUs. Since if that's the case and with the disadvantage in clock speed that the Series X has, it would explain why it's performing worse than PS5 in many games.

In some ways, it's kind of like the ps3 vs 360 deal where initially, the ps3 had ports which ran worse on it even though in theory, it should have been the more powerful console. Eventually ps3 did have ports which showcased it's hardware but that took a while. Of course, the Xbox Series X is no where near as complicated as the Cell was but who knows. Something funky is going on with the Series X and MS most certainly goofed the launch. We will see if it gets better or if it stays the same.