Amazing, your 400 dollar video card is basically placebo

Amazing, your 400 dollar video card is basically placebo

Other urls found in this thread:

hellblade.com/hellblade-patch-1-01-released-for-playstation-4-pc/
cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1600/3647vs3919
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>judging performance and potential based on a single screenshot

Nice bait consolefag.

I'm gonna add a sharpen filter to it so it doesn't look like shit anymore. Can't do that on console.

You see one screenshot and base your opinion on that?

I'm glad I'm not you.

The game runs at 58 fps on PS4Pro
That's bad code. If they release a patch it should run in stable 60fps

>prerendered screenshots
Wow! It's nothing!

Why is everything so fucking blurry, jesus christ. Is this the power of "4K" (not even 2160p)

Quite literally runs at 30 fps on ps4 while on my pc (150€ video card) the game runs at 1080p high settings 60 fps, I imagine a 400€ video card can run the game at 4k

Now compare framerate.

1080p Youtube videos have garbage compression

actually it's not
that's because resolution is a meme. If the game has bad code and bad assets it will look shit

>PS4
1080p30
>PS4 Pro
1440p30 or dynamic resolution (hovers around 900p)60
>PC
1080p60 or higher
Really makes me think.

Yeah I ran the game with Intel Graphics the other day and looked like a PS4

>AMD
lol

They just released a patch that fixed performance issues on AMD GPUs though since it was broken

AMD forces you to install meme10 and almost all games need specific patch to run at stable frame rate

>AMD forces you to install meme10
The fuck are you talking about?

AMD is forcing people to install Windows10
Their w7 and w8 drivers are broken and shit and their new processors are w10 only

I swear to god, these nvidia shills are in numbers.

Games are only doctored to nvidia now, and the people who make these videos always make them before the amd patch fixes things.

pc gaming was a mistake
I don't even have an AMD or Nvidia here. I'd buy the new Ryzen if AMD supported Windows 8/8.1 though

But none of that is true, their win7 and 8 drivers are fine and no CPU requires W10, they just won't be able to make use of every feature on W7/W8.

you mean, ps4 is an underpowered piece of trash and devs didn't bother improving anything for PC

>caring about marginal performance
>buying a new GPU every couple months for a smidget of improved performance instead of every other year where performance gains are actually noticable and you're not wasting hundreds or even thousands of fucking dollars on useless upgrades

Being a fucking idiot who blows thousands on hardware, and then complaining when you notice only slight improvements to your system's performance doesn't make you "master race." It makes you a fucking moron who doesn't know how to hold onto his money and further enables these companies to do what they do and get away with it.

Why is NVIDIA so superior lads?

ninja theory released the patch though because their game was broken

>no CPU requires W10
Their ryzen is W10 only, maybe windows 8.1 unofficial patch
It's pretty sad. I could run Linux but I already have a stable set up here for my comfy Xubuntu I wanted to run Windows 8 on the newer ryzen
why are you so angry? or is it fake dude I'm angry lmao?

Isn't it completely possible to use W7 with the Ryzen series?

Digital Foundry is to blame for not waiting. They wanted to release another clickbait video as quickly as possible

Win 10 is fine, just turn the telemetry off lmao

Because they sponsor studios and pay them to manipulate the GPU optimizations to their favor in terms of performance.

I'm not angry. I just think it's retarded to sit and compare such marginal differences in performance, and that people who buy upgrades every few months for merely a small fraction of improved performance are the reason the hardware industry pulls the bullshit they do.

they released a note in february saying they will support windows 7 but I'm not sure. I'll wait a few more months to see what happens

this game looks like shit who cares

>upgrades every few months for merely a small fraction of improved performance are the reason the hardware industry pulls the bullshit they do.
Yeah I agree. The graphics and 4K meme is destroying the industry since 2012.
>Because they sponsor studios and pay them to manipulate the GPU optimizations to their favor in terms of performance.
On the other hand AMD pays people to shill for them such as Linus Tech Fedora Tips

>AMD
Actual bait.

I'm running 7 on a 1500 and aside from a slight pain in the ass time finding and installing drivers and an odd avoidable BSOD it runs fine

The graphics and resolution meme has been a part of this industry since before anyone on Sup Forums was born.

It's not shit, but it is almost impossible to recommend because the gameplay itself actually is pretty shit. You've got to be the kind of person that values presentation to get a lot out of it. I don't regret playing it, I actually had a really good time with it, but I can see how most people would just dismiss it as pretentious shit.

that looks more in favour of AMD to me

390x was cheaper than 980. 390 was cheaper than 970.

380s competitor was 960 which is not on the chart because its probably at 10fps

every console on earth uses AMD gpus sweetie

and has done for years
and always will because they are dirt cheap with relaxed licensing regulations

Yes, and?
That's no reason to use AMD when you're building your own PC

just played it through maxed out 60fps on a 3570k and 970. not the best or latest hardware, mid range years old hardware actually.

ps4 is 1080p30fps. ps4pro is 900p (lmao) 60~fps

PS3 used Nvidia
Switch uses Nvidia
Every handheld uses either PowerVR or custom hardware.

you know thats already been patched? and it only dropped to 50s in cutscenes where it zooms on her face. its not even happening on gameplay

>PS3 uses nvidia
i'm sorry what

the og xbox did but not the fucking ps3

for CPUs its definitely better to buy AMD at the moment

did they intentionally make the game look like shit to balance with the shit optimization?

PS3 was nVidia user, a modified 9800 GTX chip, how fucking new are you?

The PS3 used nvidia's RSX reality synthesizer you mong.

patch 1.01.1 kills this thread...

lol what the 9800 GTX came out years after ps3

more like 7800 gt

The PS3 used a custom nvidia garbage and a CPU Sony made with IBM

regardless it's a 30 dollar 2 hour movie game

>all it did was make the ear bigger

That, 7800gtx, my mistake user

Except 7700K is definitely better for video games, and cheaper than the AMD alternative?

Same way Intel is. Better chips.

7700k is $300+, the 1600 is like $260.

The 1600 is not an alternative to 7700k, m8

>Turns itself on
>2 settings menu's
>Not even all telemetry can be turned off
>Worse off in every benchmark
>Literally a w7 and w8.1 copy pasta

hellblade.com/hellblade-patch-1-01-released-for-playstation-4-pc/

Well I mean its not like graphic cards add polygons and increase texture size and quality beyond the original

shit aint magic

Overall usage, sure. For games? Ever so slightly no. Intel CPUs are still better at per core performance.

settings menu's
Use ShutUpWin10.

Only if you're buying and i7 7700k.
The unlocked 7600k is outperformed by a comparably a priced 1600, the locked i5s get stomped by the 1500x/1400, and the i3s/pentiums get stomped by the 1300x/1200 for the most part.
And threadripper makes the i9 processor look like last gen tech.

7700k is £350 in britbong compared to 1600 at sub £200 + comes with decent cooler and cheaper mobo

It is? Same performance as 1700 etc in gaming, the only reason for a 7700k is if you want to consistently push 144hz with a 1080ti or higher

Nope. They have the same per core/ipc, the only advantage Intel has is clock speed.

Any i7/i5 is a bad buy anyway, they are replaced in a few weeks. i5s also hit 100% usage in some games, 4c/4t is outdated

Here (in Norway) the AMD mobos are more expensive and the Ryzen 1600 isn't comparable to 7700k, user.

The 7700k is like 20% better. It's ridiculous to compare these.

cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-1600/3647vs3919

...

>userbenchmark
Disregarded

buying an i7 or ryzen 5 1600 for gaming is a mistake
intwo years it won't play anything in 144p
the best way is to buy an i5 or a cheap quad core AMD and a simple 1060 or 1070ti

Yes, if you just close your eyes and go LALALALALALALAAAAA
then AMD will sound like a good alternative

I highly doubt a B350 motherboard is more expensive than a Z170/Z270 motherboard

i5s are stutter machines now if you want to play above 60fps. t. 2500k @ 4.8 user

Ryzen is fine for games but Threadripper is super not fine for games unless you really hate money.

I've watched a lot of comparison videos where people run games on similar setups with R1700 (pretty much identical gaming performance to R1600) and i7 7700k, and while i7 was ahead in most tests with better max and average FPS (but often worse lowest), it wasn't a 20% lead. Wasn't even a 10% lead, really.

>intwo years it won't play anything in 144p
You're retarded, CPU requirements have remained roughly the same for the past 5 or so years, and an i7 or Ryzen 5 1600 will last much longer than any i5.

That one and this one were taken during my playthrough of the game on my PC. There is no fucking way a PS4 is going to pull off the kind of visuals a 1080 can. I can RIGHT NOW go into the game, pause it at any point, and pull out a screenshot that looks a million times better than it would on a console.

Why not use actual game benchmarks like No one uses those sites expect tech illiterate people. Its as bad as gpuboss.

10% performance gain for almost double the price? lmao

I thought that game was a console exclusive.

I am legitimately fucking confused right now.

dumbass

This game looks awful, those environments are literally modded Skyrim tier.

>i5s are stutter machines now if you want to play above 60fps
but as I said in two years you won't play anything in more than 60fps
Why pay more now?
You are the retarded one thinking more cores mean better performance.
Ryzen 5 1400 or Ryzen 3 1200 are enough to play 60fps games.
Unless you love to waste money

>58 fps

>You are the retarded one thinking more cores mean better performance.
More threads does indeed mean better performance you fucktard, a hyperthreaded quadcore clocked at 3.6 GHz is always going to outperform a similar quadcore without hyperthreading clocked at 3.6 GHz, even in most modern games.
Compare the i7 4790 to the i5 4590 and get back to me.

In addition to AMD being worse for games and more expensive, they still have all kinds of driver problems.
Just have a look at the Steam forums. Even nuDoom (which uses Vulkan) causes AMD users a lot of pain, and still runs better on Intel/Nvidia.

Your $400 console is basically obsolete.

I have it running at 125 on my 1070. Consoles will catch up in 10 years.

>but as I said in two years you won't play anything in more than 60fps

There is a thing called upgrading GPUs. With my 2500k I started with a 6950 and went through to 7970 > 980ti
If I upgrade anymore its just gonna CPU bottleneck and i5s have hardly changed in the past 6 years. May change with the coffelake 6core i5 but no way would I recommend a 4c/4t cpu to anyone right now, its just not going to last long.

Why would someone do that, just go on the internet and lie?

No you fucking retard that's temporal anti-ailsing. Figure out what it is yourselves you mouth breathers.

i got in i5 6600 with a gtx 1070 and i can play most modern games with 60fps or higher constantly

>nuDoom (which uses Vulkan) causes AMD users a lot of pain, and still runs better on Intel/Nvidia.

delusion. you know the driver meme is like a decade out of date right?

I'm planning to buy an MSI B350M mortar mobo, ryzen 1500X and gainward 1060 6gb, already have ddr4 16gb RAM ready, that's a good build right?

>390 as good as a 980
>200 dollars+ cheaper

The way you are meant to be jewed.

And still a problem

my cpu and motherboard are from 2011
should I upgrade or just build a new computer at this point?

Sure 60fps is fine. Anything higher your CPU will be at near 100% usage, especially in shit like BF1.

Also what happens in a couple years when you need to put in a more powerful GPU? It'l be massively bottlenecked meanwhile ryzen/i7s will be fine.

Game benchmarks doesn't really matter. Which is why I said 'ever so slightly.' Most games aren't using 100% of the CPU since you can't really downgrade gameplay.

I haven't bothered with researching so much about AMD's new cores since I'm not interested in buying a new CPU, but I do remember reading that intel was still 'dominating' the performance per core scene. In reality it was like 5-10% which funny enough that chart accurately represents.

You cannot measure FPS in a single image, you retarded fuck

The environments jump around a bit in quality. The second picture, however, came from a unique environment in that the bodies in the back are all moving and writhing, grabbing for your character as you walk by.

go for the 1070 8gb
better card then the 1060

>30 vs 200 fps