Duplicated.
Mazty said: No it can't. The HD7990, the most powerful card out there is only able to handle those resolutions. FYI run a game = 60 FPS min and max settings = BF3 |
Oh God... It can.
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2012/6/18/the-4k-graphics-card-shootout.aspx
ethomaz said: OP. - The Wii U itself is cheapers because the dated hardware... the Gamepad puts the things a little high... that's the reason. |
what evolution ???? tell me whats going to improve to a point where it is actually visible???
There is no need for MOAR power you know
hivycox said: what evolution ???? tell me whats going to improve to a point where it is actually visible??? There is no need for MOAR power you know |
lol the games in consoles have outdated graphcs... bad textures, low resolutions, bad shadows, bad physics, bad performance... everything needs to envolve.
ethomaz said:
lol the games in consoles have outdated graphcs... bad textures, low resolutions, bad shadows, bad physics, bad performance... everything needs to envolve. |
No they don't. Furthermore, the PS3 did not boast the same graphics as they do now compared to when it launched. Developpers need time to be accustomed to hardware.
@Mazty
More games running in 4k with GTX 680.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-4k-gaming
Battlefield 3 = Similar performance than console version
Crysis = stunning, smooth 4K experience
Need for Speed: Most Wanted = 4k with 30 fps
Batman: Arkham City = look stunning
Conclusion: GTX 680 can handle 4k games.
ethomaz said:
lol the games in consoles have outdated graphcs... bad textures, low resolutions, bad shadows, bad physics, bad performance... everything needs to envolve. |
yeah but in order to improve all this things the next gen consoles won't be able to manage 4k res... if devs make better looking games in the future the power of the console will be used to render better texture and so on....so I guess they production costs will increase since their must develop harder to make textures...
But thats not the point, a gamer doesn't see the difference... only tech poeple which aren't the targeted group for gaming devs
btw.: Ace combat looks brilliant and I don't see THAT much difference with that vid your posted a moment ago
Vinniegambini said: No they don't. Furthermore, the PS3 did not boast the same graphics as they do now compared to when it launched. Developpers need time to be accustomed to hardware. |
I love PS3 but the power and graphics are 2006 standards... needs a heavy power up.
Did you guys are just jokiing with me?
ethomaz said: @Mazty More games running in 4k with GTX 680. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-4k-gaming Battlefield 3 = Similar performance than console version Crysis = stunning, smooth 4K experience Need for Speed: Most Wanted = 4k with 30 fps Batman: Arkham City = look stunning Conclusion: GTX 680 can handle 4k games. |
here you are mistaken:
the GTX 680 can do 4k on these games...BUT these games are developed this gen....for current gen consoles...so its obvious that PC's can handle them way betttr with a 680....
but as I said in my previous post = future game won't allow a 680 to handle 4k....thats for sure...
here is a example = my old PC from 2006 can play San Andreas on 4k...can it play games from 2006 or 2007 in 4k....I don't think so
ethomaz said:
I love PS3 but the power and graphics are 2006 standards... needs a heavy power up. Did you guys are just jokiing with me? |
no ..just pointing out facts you know ;)