Buy AMD Next Time.

[CheeseBall]

You get 24GB's of VRAM with the 7900XTX Instead of 12GB's for a 4080 and you pay less.
Then you won't have to worry about poor PC ports from lazy devs.
Nvoodia Is stealing your money.

[*Gen*HeroCrusher]

Publicado originalmente por -=🗲Offence🗲=-:

Publicado originalmente por *Gen*HeroCrusher:

Read slowly now offence... when playing at my max refresh rate of 144 the 4090 uses around 100 watts less then my 3080ti did...

Sure if you load up furmark or another benchmark it can use over 400 watts at full load.

For everyday gaming @ 140 FPS 3440 x 1440 the card is using around 200 - 250 watts like it is right now in Dark Tide.

You really need to stop talking about things that you have no experience with it just makes you look jealous.

Oh wow you only play it at 2k res my bad , 4090 is a 4k card , it all makes sense then with the low power draw , i guess you gotta start saving money for a new monitor now , waste of a gpu at 2k :)

Yeah it's such a waste being able to run RT and ultra settings while maxing out FPS what a waste...

I think I'll sell this 4090 and get the same card you have.

You been watching to many youtube videos.

[nas360]

Publicado originalmente por Jootn:

Publicado originalmente por nas360:

Wow. I thought Nvidia nutjobs only infested r/Nvidia on Reddit but you seem to have escaped. Fanboyism is a disease.

I could tell the same about AMD fanboys, they are the worst and most salty bunch of kids. Keep bashing on the RTX 4090 like "power hungry" "dlss3 is fake frames" "firehouse" "too big card doesn't fit in case". Without any actual valid argument

So tell me a valid argument that Cyberpunk in RT isn't better on a nvidia card compared to a AMD? Which of the statement isn't true?

FYI I own a 3080FE.
CP2077 is of course better in RT mode on an RTX card but that does not mean AMD is much worse. If you look at benchmarks, the 7900XTX is 40fps with FSR 2 and the 4080 is 60fps with DLSS in RT Ultra mode, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj4xu3pahp0
Even in raster the game favours Nvidia so most of the different is due to game code rather than just RT. Most other RT games do not show AMD as being weak.

AMD is basically on par with a 3090Ti which is still a very good card. For most people the lower price of the 7900XTX makes it a good deal if RT is not a priority for them since it is usually faster in raster games. They can always lower RT setting a bit if they really want to achieve 60fps.

[Jootn]

Publicado originalmente por *Gen*HeroCrusher:

Publicado originalmente por -=🗲Offence🗲=-:

Oh wow you only play it at 2k res my bad , 4090 is a 4k card , it all makes sense then with the low power draw , i guess you gotta start saving money for a new monitor now , waste of a gpu at 2k :)

Yeah it's such a waste being able to run RT and ultra settings while maxing out FPS what a waste...

I think I'll sell this 4090 and get the same card you have.

You been watching to many youtube videos.

Yea he's having 4500 hours world of warcraft, you def want to sell your 4090 and buy his card without any doubt ;)

[FeilDOW]

Publicado originalmente por nas360:

Publicado originalmente por Jootn:

I could tell the same about AMD fanboys, they are the worst and most salty bunch of kids. Keep bashing on the RTX 4090 like "power hungry" "dlss3 is fake frames" "firehouse" "too big card doesn't fit in case". Without any actual valid argument

So tell me a valid argument that Cyberpunk in RT isn't better on a nvidia card compared to a AMD? Which of the statement isn't true?

FYI I own a 3080FE.
CP2077 is of course better in RT mode on an RTX card but that does not mean AMD is much worse. If you look at benchmarks, the 7900XTX is 40fps with FSR 2 and the 4080 is 60fps with DLSS in RT Ultra mode, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj4xu3pahp0

AMD is basically on par with a 3090Ti which is still a very good card. For most people the lower price of the 7900XTX makes it a good deal if RT is not a priority for them since it is usually faster in raster games. They can always lower RT setting a bit if they really want to achieve 60fps.

Thats a 40% performance difference, a generational leap. I only paid about 20% more for a 4090 then I would have for a 7900xtx.

[MancSoulja]

Publicado originalmente por Jootn:

Publicado originalmente por -=🗲Offence🗲=-:

Oh wow you only play it at 2k res my bad , 4090 is a 4k card , it all makes sense then with the low power draw , i guess you gotta start saving money for a new monitor now , waste of a gpu at 2k :)

3440x1440 "2k" you must be trolling right? It's considered a 4k widescreen standard for 5 years now. Have a brain check at your local hospital asap

3440x1440 is nowhere near 4K, it's slightly higher res than 1440p at 2560x1440

[Pacino]

Brute forcing performance by using OP hardware doesn't mean the game is optimised. PC is a scalable format, that's the main point of PC gaming. As long as you meet the minimum requirements you should be able achieve a perfectly functional experience. It's concerning that developers have become so lazy when it comes to optimisation. But looking at some of the mental gymnastics in this hub, I can understand why they don't care.

[*Gen*HeroCrusher]

Publicado originalmente por Jootn:

Publicado originalmente por *Gen*HeroCrusher:

Yeah it's such a waste being able to run RT and ultra settings while maxing out FPS what a waste...

I think I'll sell this 4090 and get the same card you have.

You been watching to many youtube videos.

Yea he's having 450 hours world of warcraft, you def want to sell your 4090 and buy his card without any doubt ;)

Right? It's just to funny and entertaining watching the mouth breathers try to bash on the 4090...

Being a PC enthusiast I collect all kinds of hardware... I got an AMD 6700XT and 3060 builds in the other room ready to sell.

There are PC enthusiasts and then there are these pleb types that try to tell you your 4090 is a waste for UW and then on the other hand he says it will be outdated in a year like which one is it?

We all know whats going on... If you cant have it you gotta bash it to make yourself feel better.

[Jrm]

Publicado originalmente por MancSoulja:

Publicado originalmente por Jootn:

3440x1440 "2k" you must be trolling right? It's considered a 4k widescreen standard for 5 years now. Have a brain check at your local hospital asap

3440x1440 is nowhere near 4K, it's slightly higher res than 1440p at 2560x1440

I'll have to agree with you. If everyone is going to be having debates then might as well correct them when wrong.

If they would google the resolution, 3840X2160 is 4K UHD and has over 3 milllion pixels more than 3440X1440p. I know 3440x1440 is a weird ultrawide resolution, but it is in fact not 4k. It is actually considered 2k still.

[FeilDOW]

Publicado originalmente por MancSoulja:

Publicado originalmente por Jootn:

3440x1440 "2k" you must be trolling right? It's considered a 4k widescreen standard for 5 years now. Have a brain check at your local hospital asap

3440x1440 is nowhere near 4K, it's slightly higher res than 1440p at 2560x1440

Ya, it's QHD ultrawide, 2560x1080 is HD ultrawide, and 5120x1440 is dual QHD ultrawide (not 5k). We do have a dual 4k ultrawide on the way, can't wait to see the price of that.

[SeeNoWeevil]

Publicado originalmente por Jootn:

Publicado originalmente por -=🗲Offence🗲=-:

Oh wow you only play it at 2k res my bad , 4090 is a 4k card , it all makes sense then with the low power draw , i guess you gotta start saving money for a new monitor now , waste of a gpu at 2k :)

3440x1440 "2k" you must be trolling right? It's considered a 4k widescreen standard for 5 years now. Have a brain check at your local hospital asap

3440x1440 is not considered 4K. 4K refers to a horizontal resolution of approx 4,000 pixels. 4K is 8 million pixels, 3440x1440 is only 5 million. Also, '2K' is 1080p, not 1440p.

[Jootn]

Publicado originalmente por MancSoulja:

Publicado originalmente por Jootn:

3440x1440 "2k" you must be trolling right? It's considered a 4k widescreen standard for 5 years now. Have a brain check at your local hospital asap

3440x1440 is nowhere near 4K, it's slightly higher res than 1440p at 2560x1440

Official 4k resolution is 3840 x 2160
So you're saying that the number 3440x1440 is closer to 2560x1440 than it is to 3840x2160? It's simple math if you don't get this I don't know how to explain this any better loll to it's very close to official 4K

[FeilDOW]

Publicado originalmente por Jootn:

Publicado originalmente por MancSoulja:

3440x1440 is nowhere near 4K, it's slightly higher res than 1440p at 2560x1440

Official 4k resolution is 3840 x 2160
So you're saying that the number 3440x1440 is closer to 2560x1440 than it is to 3840x2160? It's simple math if you don't get this I don't know how to explain this any better loll to it's very close to official 4K

Check pixels counts, they matter. 4k is confusing becasue its so much more demanding to run then a QHD ultrawide monitor.

[Jrm]

Este comentario está esperando un análisis de nuestro sistema de verificación automática de contenido. Estará oculto temporalmente hasta que comprobemos que no incluye contenido dañino (por ejemplo, enlaces a sitios web que intenten robar información).

[SeeNoWeevil]

Publicado originalmente por Jootn:

So you're saying that the number 3440x1440 is closer to 2560x1440 than it is to 3840x2160? It's simple math if you don't get this I don't know how to explain this any better loll to it's very close to official 4K

2560x1440 is 3.7 million pixels
3440x1440 is 4.9 million pixels
3840x2160 is 8.3 million pixels

[Michael]

Publicado originalmente por Player One:

Honestly, I am so sick of the BS from nVidia lately I think i will.

Just watch the video "I Tried Going All AMD For A Month…" by BPS Customs as it shows the kind of crap AMD puts you through
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqKgeP9Gkgs

Do you like BSODs.. at least Nvidia stuff can play well with most configs. I was really hoping Intel would give Nvidia a run for their money...