By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - How many of you who mainly game on a Pc can run all games on Ultra @ 1080P/60fps?

HollyGamer on 02 January 2015
sc94597 said:
HollyGamer said:
sc94597 said:
 

Yet an r9 270 still slightly outperforms a PS4, anyway. So your point doesn't hold in this particular case. Usually you cant compare gflops when the other parts of the gpu hardware are quite different. The r9 270 and PS4 gpu are both based on the same chip though. And in all other areas the r9 270 is slightly better. The difference is that of running games at medium at 1600 *900 and running them at medium-high 1080p with some AA. If you overclock the r9 270, which literally only takes a button click, then you see even greater performance gains for the same price you paid.

It's different from one game to another tho, i have the problem with ACU, watch Dog with My Nvidia 880M GTX, i understand it can be slightly benefit on greater specs, but it seems most games run almost the same graphic because most developer (multyplatform games) build on the same engine that can be use for multyple configuration and specs.

Not for the r9 270 though. Your 880M GTX is much more of a different card with different advantages and disadvantages than an r9 270 is from a PS4. All are within the same ballpark performance, but the R9 270 is repackaged Radeon HD7870 with a higher clock speed, while the PS4's GPU is an underclocked HD 7870. 

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-R9-270-vs-Radeon-HD-7870

They are essentially the same gpu in everything but clock speed. The only benefit the PS4 has is that its memory is unified GDDR5, and that means it won't be constrained by VRAM in future games, but r9 270 should be fine with 2gb of Vram for the rest of the generation. 

Well, i said many times, PC need to run Direct X, and many coding layer for compability, and the design is very general, PS4 benefit not just unified RAm but GPGPU technology, ACE unit 8x then the 7870 , low level code on metal level, and optimization which is imposible on PC.

Read my comparison on Ferrari VS GT Club, you cannot compare the spec directly interms of GLOF (TFLop) or GPU clock etc.



Around the Network
Captain_Tom on 03 January 2015
Lawlight said:
So, do people who game on PCs and have desktops also buy a laptop?


I do. For those who want the best of all worlds (Price/performance, power, Portability) I would recommend getting a cheaper (But still nice) netbook with a long batter life, and then a gaming desktop.  That way you get both for the same price as a UBER laptop while still beating it in performance and portability.

 

Of course I myself splurged on a portable gaming laptop as well as a nice desktop.  But I would never get one of those 17" "Desktop Replacements."  They are completily pointless...



TheDarkShape on 03 January 2015

I have two 970s, so yeah, I can max everything in 1080p @ 60fps. I can max a huge number of games at 4K/60fps.

My rig is worth something like $2200, but it's not just designed for gaming.



Intel i7-8086k @ 5.1 GHz | Asus Maximus X Hero | 32GB Ballistix Sport LT 2400Mhz RAM | Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti

vivster on 03 January 2015

A laptop is always useful, no matter what other devices you have. I have a gaming rig and I've been looking for a nice ultrabook for some time now. I think it's a lot better to actually have a dedicated gaming desktop and then a complementary very light notebook to stay mobile. Why would I want to lug around a heavy laptop all the time? Are people actually gaming on the go?

If it's for LAN parties, there are great ways to build a tiny portable gaming rig on mini-ITX basis. It will be easily portable, cheaper and stronger than a gaming laptop. Actually I don't know anyone who would recommend getting a gaming laptop unless there are special circumstances.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

arcaneguyver on 03 January 2015

Good topic; have been looking into piecing a rig together this year, and I figure if you're getting a gaming PC, don't half ass it. Looks like 1.5-2k is roughly what you need.



Around the Network
goopy20 on 03 January 2015

Why do people always talk about building a pc from scratch? Of course that is expensive. But the thing is, most people already own a pc and by just upgrading the gpu you can play most games at 1080p/ 60fps. For example: I got a i5 cpu with only 4 gigs of memory and I can play everything at ultra after replacing my ancient 460gtx with a 970gtx, which cost me $399.

I do agree that pc gamers exaggerate the importance of 60fps a bit. Even with the best hardware it's gonna be hard to get a locked 60fps with any demanding game at ultra settings. I found Ryse, for example, to be much more enjoyable at a locked 30fps than a framerate that jumps from 80 to 40fps all the time.



Lawlight on 03 January 2015
Captain_Tom said:
Lawlight said:
So, do people who game on PCs and have desktops also buy a laptop?


I do. For those who want the best of all worlds (Price/performance, power, Portability) I would recommend getting a cheaper (But still nice) netbook with a long batter life, and then a gaming desktop.  That way you get both for the same price as a UBER laptop while still beating it in performance and portability.

 

Of course I myself splurged on a portable gaming laptop as well as a nice desktop.  But I would never get one of those 17" "Desktop Replacements."  They are completily pointless...

Why are they pointless?



dane007 on 03 January 2015

in three weeks time i an lol. that would cost 2.4k nz dollars



vivster on 03 January 2015
arcaneguyver said:
Good topic; have been looking into piecing a rig together this year, and I figure if you're getting a gaming PC, don't half ass it. Looks like 1.5-2k is roughly what you need.

If it's about money you can get a really good rig for 1k. Everything above includes premium hardware like high quality mainboards, cases and PSUs. Diminishing returns start very early when building a PC. For example people going with $400+ CPUs when it's only 5% more powerful than the $200 one.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

sc94597 on 03 January 2015
HollyGamer said:
sc94597 said:
HollyGamer said:
sc94597 said:
 

Yet an r9 270 still slightly outperforms a PS4, anyway. So your point doesn't hold in this particular case. Usually you cant compare gflops when the other parts of the gpu hardware are quite different. The r9 270 and PS4 gpu are both based on the same chip though. And in all other areas the r9 270 is slightly better. The difference is that of running games at medium at 1600 *900 and running them at medium-high 1080p with some AA. If you overclock the r9 270, which literally only takes a button click, then you see even greater performance gains for the same price you paid.

It's different from one game to another tho, i have the problem with ACU, watch Dog with My Nvidia 880M GTX, i understand it can be slightly benefit on greater specs, but it seems most games run almost the same graphic because most developer (multyplatform games) build on the same engine that can be use for multyple configuration and specs.

Not for the r9 270 though. Your 880M GTX is much more of a different card with different advantages and disadvantages than an r9 270 is from a PS4. All are within the same ballpark performance, but the R9 270 is repackaged Radeon HD7870 with a higher clock speed, while the PS4's GPU is an underclocked HD 7870. 

http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-R9-270-vs-Radeon-HD-7870

They are essentially the same gpu in everything but clock speed. The only benefit the PS4 has is that its memory is unified GDDR5, and that means it won't be constrained by VRAM in future games, but r9 270 should be fine with 2gb of Vram for the rest of the generation. 

Well, i said many times, PC need to run Direct X, and many coding layer for compability, and the design is very general, PS4 benefit not just unified RAm but GPGPU technology, ACE unit 8x then the 7870 , low level code on metal level, and optimization which is imposible on PC.

Read my comparison on Ferrari VS GT Club, you cannot compare the spec directly interms of GLOF (TFLop) or GPU clock etc.

I was saying in this case we have real-world performance advantages, however. Empirical data to draw from. So while, yes, you can't just compare Floating Point Calculations, there is an advantage nevertheless, which we can assume comes from the extra power (clock speed) considering the archicture of both chips is nearly identical. Optimization is not impossible on PC, it is just - as you said - more general. If it were impossible, Nvidia (or AMD) wouldn't release drivers with descriptions of  "100% faster speeds in video game x" as they do. Or developers wouldn't release patches that improve game performance. As for GPGPU, most games don't even use it, and the ones that do seemingly provide no graphical advantage for performance. I highly doubt many developers will off-load resources and time in multiplatform games which have already been coded to add GPGPU features. In exclusive games you have a point, but not multiplats.