sc94597 said:
We also need to remember that the APU's don't have infinity cache and a few other architectural differences that are present in the dGPU's. Much of the advantage AMD has in certain titles is largely because of this. An RX 6400 heavily outperforms (as much as +40%) an integrated 780m in many titles, as an example, despite the fact that on paper the RX 6400 should be slightly worse than the 780m. The Switch 2 is indeed running certain settings lower than low, but we can say the same for the Series S as well. And again, the setting the Switch 2 chooses to compromise on are either to save CPU resources (which the Steam Deck has no issue with) or to reduce RT like the Series S. If even the Series S needs to compromise on RT, I am not sure how one would think a system that is a third as performant (GPU-wise) on the same architecture wouldn't have to do so even more extensively. |
If we were talking about pretty much any other RT game, I would agree with you, since Ampere is easily beating RDNA2 in them. This one, no. Actually, AC:Shadows is good example of another game where, even with RT, Ampere is struggling against RDNA2, even more so than in Outlaws. Actually, in AC:Shadows all nVidia cards perform quite a bit worse than in Outlaws vs their AMD counterparts.
And AC:Shadows runs on Deck, even with "Global Illumination everywhere" option. Yeah, it kinda looks like dog shit with that turned on, due to lack of DLSS, but it runs on Deck and is sort of (though barely) custom build. No wonder, also Ubisoft game - for some reason, Ubi's games really love AMD GPUs.
So, as I said, I'm not convinced. Now, given that they've done it for AC:Shadows, maybe Ubi will do something for the Deck in Outlaws as well - at least to some degree, if not really going all the way, like with Switch 2 port. If not...well, we'll be left to speculate what the bottleneck was.







