Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
This is because the rtx 3050 runs in 8 express lanes, so pcie 3.0 system will run the rtx 3050 at 3.0 speed with only 8 lanes in operation. A 4.0 system will run 4.0 speeds with 8 lane operation.
Kind of like if you put the gt 1030 in a much older pcie 2.0 system. The gt 1030 only runs in 4 lanes and supports pcie 3.0 standard, so it makes sense to use it in a system that at least supports pcie 3.0. It would work in a pcie 2.0, but it's still 4 lanes, so that would be slower.
So, me personally, I would only use the rtx 3050 if I had a pc that supported the pcie 4.0 standard. That way I could get the most out of it. I fI had a 3.0 or a 2.0 pcie system, then I would get the rtx 2060, so I could at least operate in 16 lanes.
But you're asking a very open ended, broad question. If it fits what you want, get it. If not, what are you asking? If you were more specific, maybe there would be a better way to answer.
Otherwise you want a 3060 minimum if leaning towards modern day gpu from nvidia
The 6500-XT is somehow a better value despite being a gimped refresh of a refresh of a refresh in terms of performance because it only has 4 lanes so if you run with a 3.0 slot, you lose up to 30% of the card's performance vs PCI-e 4.0.
Also AMD OpenGL performance on Windows is terrible which is necessary for certain emulators, but as of Adrenalin 22.7.1 saw improvements, but I still haven't tested since I jumped to Nvidia.
The last sort of Radeon Profile Inspector was for AMD Catalyst and that was 2015.
Same price range, 29% more performance on average at 1080p.
If you compare two current, nearly equal cards from each company Radeon is a much better experience.
AMD has Tessellation/LOD in the adrenalin software btw.
That profile inspector I'm talking about isn't for performance use though. I'm talking about making older games look decent and not dated. AMD only way for this is through Reshade, but that messes up the ingame UI because effects gets applied on to it.
It like the Radeon Adrenalin UI looks more modern than Nvidia with Overclocking, Benchmarking, Statistics tools built right into it, no need for Afterburner or Rivatuner.
Tessellation and LOD are different afaik. You can't set Texture filtering Negative LOD Bias.
Anyway, play a legally emulated game and it will be smoother on the Radeon. I have current generation GeForce and Radeon cards.
Tessellation setting in adrenalin flags the same thing as LOD tweaks on modern 3DMark making it invalid.
my2ct