安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
but not draw 4k and hold 60 fps in later games
do you want proof, why do console games have a quality (res) or performance (fps) option in them?
even when at 1080p60
The limiting factor is the raw power of the hardware itself and both with those consoles. You are looking at about RTX 2070 Super or so like performance which isn't bad at all but its not 4K@120 hardware.
The idea of a console is to provide you with a decent gaming device at very accessible price. if you want more then PC is the way to go. Remember that the PS5 and Series X cost about 500$
any rt is done on cpu side or on gpu side with more work
and the console does on the fly res scaling, something pc dont do
you cant compare them directly
Radeon RX 6700, for PS5. And the Xbox Series X's GPU is even better.
Granted, it doesn't have boost clocks, but my understanding is that boost largely works because some system resources are underutilized, which shouldn't be as much the case on console since one of the points of having a console is that they all meet the same specifications, allowing developers to better optimize the system resources if necessary. We can see that based on the M.S.R.P. of $400 for the Playstation 5 Digital Edition Sony used to charge at launch, that this is a fairly commendable value
Going by M.S.R.P. or the 3700x and 6600xt its a $710 value for just those two parts alone, and we still do not have a fully functional system at this point. Now granted, by the time the system launched in 2020 the RX 3700x had been released the prior year and likely depreciated a little, but I feel that is counterbalanced by the fact that the 6600 xt was not released until the next year. To get something that small with built in wi-fi, you would likely be buying a mini itx motherboard for $120 and stuff everything in a Fractal Node case for another $90, and I'm not sure if that includes the needed sfx P.S.U. or not. You would still need $80 to buy 16 gigabytes of R.A.M. if I recall correctly and I do not recall how much a 1 T.B M.2 P.C.I.E. card cost back in 2020.
Even just recently I can't really get a price figure lower than $600 for the core components to build a comparable system with the advantage of technological advantages and hardware cost depreciation. In terms of hardware, you're getting more than the money you directly put into it (Sony hopes to recoup the cost from licensing deals), so it can hardly be called nerfed in that respect.
However, despite however good of a deal the Playstation 5 posed, the RX 6600 xt isnt known as a 4k powerhouse card. Even A.M.D's. own marketing infographic suggest it is targeted at 1440p performance.[www.techspot.com] The card only seems to be capable of hitting 120 F.P.S. in 1080p at high settings (in some titles). So with respect to what the hardware is capable of doing, so its failure to reach 120 F.P.S. at 4k does not seem like Sony is doing anything holding back any either. The included hardware is not capable of being pushed that far, at least for recent.
Fact of the matter is that 4k 120 F.P.S. is likely a reference to what H.D.M.I. 2.1 bandwidth can carry if an undemanding enough game is made for the Playstation 5, and if people misunderstand and get fooled into thinking that represents the performance capabilities of the hardware, well, that just behooves the interests of Sony's marketing division, does it not?
I have to agree with this. Console generations are getting shorter making PC gaming that much more appealing. Your PC hardware will last longer than a console (per generation). That, and the fact MS has bought everything meaning just about every game is available on Steam. The exclusive, aside from Nintendo, isn't what it used to be. Every Xbox title also being on PC has made a Xbox meaningless to buy. PS has lost almost all of its major exclusives. I love consoles, but I'm content using my older PS3, 360, and Xbone.
Already wrong. Look up the Radeon RX 6700. It matches the PS5's GPU almost exactly. 6600XT has nowhere near the same amount of memory bandwidth as PS5.
There's no evidence to suggest that it's getting shorter.
PS3: 2006
PS4: 2013
PS5: 2020
PS4 Pro - 2016 (3 years after)
PS5 Pro - 2024 (4 years after)
If anything, it's taking longer than usual. Not shorter.
I am basing my assessment on teraflops because that's how many calculations the processor can perform in a given span of time, and the RX 6700 is an 11.29 teraflop card.[www.amd.com]. It is over 1 teraflop more powerful than the Playstation 5, which reads as a significant difference.
Also, memory consumption on a P.C. and memory consumption on a console are two different things. The 16 gigabytes of R.A.M. on the Playstation 5 are shared between the G.P.U. and the processor, aren't they? In a P.C. with an RX 6600 XT, I'd think you'd have at least 16 gigabytes of system ram, plus the 8 gigabytes of V-Ram attached to the card, totaling everything up to 24 gigabytes of R.A.M., rather than just 16.
No amount of FLOPs mean anything if the GPU is bandwidth starved. 6600XT has about half the bandwidth of the PS5 system.
Does anyone use or need to use 8K vision ? No and No. This was already tested by Computer Professionals in many sizes and approaches. Nobody can visually tell the difference between 4K & 8K. Because while the PC can ascertain it is 8K, your eye can only perceive 4K.