Was Nintendo right to opt out of the graphics arms race?

[Chrkeller]

Norion said:

Soundwave said:

Architecture does matter massively when you are talking about a 7+ year difference in architecture, I didn't think I had to spell that out specifically because I would think people would do their homework and know that GCN 2.0 (the PS4) is 7 years older than Ampere, but apparently I had to point that out as I guess that wasn't common knowledge or common sense? 

Of course there will be a large difference between Ampere and GCN 2.0 (PS4) ... like does that seriously need to be explained and dumbed down? Just like Ampere will be dwarfed by a GPU architecture from 2027 (7 years afterwards). That shouldn't even be a controversial statement at all, jeeezus. 

If you want to side track the discussion, y'know it's not terribly hard to find GCN 2.0 GPUs (PS4 class) ... go see if the configs of those AMD cards that are roughly in line with the PS4 (so like not cherry picking the highest config GCN 2.0 card) can run Star Wars Outlaws, Assassin's Creed Shadows and the like. Frankly I don't care, I don't even know why someone wanted to fall on their sword to defend the PS4's honor in a thread that isn't even about the PS4, lol. Like who cares. This topic isn't about the PS4. 

Why are you consistently conflating his claim that raw horsepower matters more than architecture with something else? Raw horsepower mattering more than architecture doesn't mean that architecture doesn't matter a ton over that length of time. Those are two completely different statements since raw horsepower mattering more and architecture being very important do not contradict each other at all since raw horsepower could be even more important thus both of those things could be simultaneously true.

His response was specifically focused on your claim that architecture matters more than raw horsepower so as I said if you think he's wrong about raw horsepower mattering more you should focus on backing up your initial claim instead of arguing against something he didn't say there.

Because he is wrong and can't own it.  The 2080 runs with the 5050.  2018 and 2025 release dates, respectively, which is 7 years...

This is how RTX 2080 and RTX 5050 compete in popular games:

• RTX 2080 is 11% faster in 1080p
• RTX 2080 is 12% faster in 1440p
• RTX 2080 is 12% faster in 4K

Edit

I should add i know raw power matters because I made a stupid mistake.  When I first tried PC I jumped on a 3050 sale because I assumed a 3000 series meant better performance than a 2000 series...  not so much.  Many 2000 series out perform a 3050.  Live and learn.  With nvidia the last two numbers, within reason, matter way more than the first two.  

50 and 60 are budget.  70 and 70ti are mid tier.  80 and 90 is premium.  I wouldn't trade my 4090 for a 5080, much less a 5070.

Architecture obviously matters and plays a role, but not to the point people think.  Raw power is insanely crucial.  I will be stunned if my 4090 doesn't at least match the 6060 and likely it will easily best a 6050.  Heck, solid chance it will be parity to a 6070, or at least not far behind.

Last edited by Chrkeller - on 13 January 2026