• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Is it just me but after all the tech jargon and raw power numbers these new expensive graphics cards don't really push the envelope that much?

RoboFu

One of the green rats
What is the envelope you want to be pushing?

There is only one path to go right now and that's just improving RT and after RT is maxed out then what?

Maybe Nintendo will make vr super popular one if these days. Or someone figures out how to do " dream state VR " that would be cool. Everyone buy your ps12 matrix chair.
 

Haint

Member
Maybe its me but for what these cards cost they don't offer that much improvement. If anything it makes me appreciate what Sony and Microsoft were able to do with the home consoles. I am not saying that the gpus are garbage but there are not some super big improvement over the best console graphics especially considering the cpu aspect as well.

This is quite the ill timed thread considering a super majority of the core gaming community is currently playing a game that struggles to run at 720p unstable 60FPS on PS5/Series X and genuinely looks like a Switch port. Even the $800 "Pro" console struggles to run it at 1080p with drops.
 
Last edited:

BbMajor7th

Member
It's diminishing returns and a busted industry. Like film, gaming became increasingly occupied with chasing spectacle at the expense of everything else. We've sadly reached a point where every incremental gain now takes a huge amount of resource. It's unsustainable and exhausting.

Me? I don't want more realistic games. I want more interesting games. I've already got reality all around me.
 

bitbydeath

Member
You realize that games started at 60 fps, and that "chasing the dragon" is why we got the 30 fps garbage to begin with, right?
There’s no denying that 30FPS games pushed gaming to greater heights.

Without it you wouldn’t have seen a lot of the mega IP’s we have today.

GTA, Uncharted, GoW, Gears of War etc all benefited.
 

Guilty_AI

Member
There isn't much envelope to be pushed in terms of hardware. The race now is who can make the most efficient development pipelines without impacting game quality.
 

ArtHands

Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
OP discover for the first time that maybe it is fine not upgrading PC parts every year.

Welcome to PC gaming
 

rofif

Can’t Git Gud
Graphical improvements are logarithmic. The closer we get to realistic, lifelike visuals, the harder it becomes to make improvements.

We’re gonna be sitting in the uncanny valley for YEARS, if not another decade or so. (Unless we drastically alter the way we render graphics, like moving towards a realtime generative AI model or something.)
We will not improve rendering much. It is done. We’ve established that 4080-5090 is what we get and that’s it.
Real time graphics will never every reach movie rendering quality like cgi.

Possibly ai will overtake it and old rendering ways will be abandoned.
 

Dacvak

No one shall be brought before our LORD David Bowie without the true and secret knowledge of the Photoshop. For in that time, so shall He appear.
We will not improve rendering much. It is done. We’ve established that 4080-5090 is what we get and that’s it.
Real time graphics will never every reach movie rendering quality like cgi.

Possibly ai will overtake it and old rendering ways will be abandoned.
Nah, there’s still more room. Not only in terms of raw compute (which still has a bit to go), but more so on the software and render tech side of things. Even if we don’t shift to a full-on generative AI approach, there’s still a lot of ways AI will help with raster and ray tracing.

Though I do agree that we might legitimately never get to photorealism/movie CGI, especially exploring the same rendering tech we have today.

My guess is that the next big step forward will be a combination of standard rendering + a generative layer on top. Almost like an instagram filter, but to try to get realtime rendering over the finish line to photorealism. I bet we’ll see that tech emerge in the next few years too.

Who knows if it’ll be any good, though.
 

Azelover

Titanic was called the Ship of Dreams, and it was. It really was.
As said, it's diminishing returns. But also Moore's law is in its last days aswell.

We need to start thinking about things outside of the graphics race.
 

Diddy X

Member
Overpriced underperforming hardware, paired with unoptimized software, and consumers who'll buy anything that’s marketed enough—it's a recipe for a struggling industry.
 
Last edited:

SHA

Member
Bobby kotick did say these consoles from amd are no longer taking advantage of it's hardware as well as PCs. When most games stopped looking different is where the real issue has started. The consumers are still willing to spend more on games but only if they're great. I don't see software sales recovering unless this issue been solved immediately.
 

Fess

Member
I blame the focus on frame rates and ray tracing.
If we could go 30FPS without ray tracing the graphics will be massively improved, and I mean no option above 30FPS and no option for ray tracing at all.
30fps makes everything feel sluggish and either stutters or lack motion clarity depending on how much motion blur there is. I can’t go back. One of the best things that has happened in the industry lately is 60fps getting normalized again. Today I only accept 30fps when there is no way to get more, like in Zelda BOTW and TOTK, I hate the constant stutter but I still play the games. Otherwise I think 60fps or more is essential for anything fast or action oriented. Especially first person feels awful in 30fps, I never understood how people could hype up Halo back in the days, literally made me motion sick.
 

Knightime_X

Member
Using path-tracing and 4k resolutions won't net you much improvements as those require ridiculous amounts of computing power.
You're going to need like 5 of these cards combined and MAYBE might push a little bit further.
 
Last edited:

Dorfdad

Gold Member
I think the bigger issue is that the tool and services to take advantage of these cards are just not releasing or being implemented fast enough. Imagine if gpus were like console and they only released a new version ever couple of years. We would be able to have much more in terms of quality with new people optimizing tools etc. right now it’s all buzzwords and brute force for the most part and it takes 2-4 years for games to support them .
 

nikos

Member
It's not just about "graphics." It's about running games at a high frame rate, high resolution, low latency, etc. All of those things contribute to the experience and overall image quality.

Even then, the "graphics" are still way better on high end cards.
 

nemiroff

Gold Member
That's not the feeling i have when I boot up CP in with PT in 4K with near-perfect image quality. It's pretty damn amazing to me this stuff is even possible. Been day-dreaming of these timea for decades. The 4090 is the best buy I've done in a long time.
 

RCX

Member
I'm here with a 2080 super and still can't see a good reason to upgrade.

Graphics were more than good enough at the end of last gen. Once everything is in motion it's hard to pick out why RT etc etc is a something that's truly game changing.

Higher framerates are certainly welcome but that tops out as well. It's fresh ideas in terms of gameplay and mechanics that we really need.
 

Three

Member
It's because it's no longer tech holding us back but budgets. The 30fps games of the past got you double the processing power essentially. Devs spent a lot of time packing in details into their games. Then new hardware got you 60fps of that good looking game on PC. Now new hardware gets you 120fps and maybe higher native res and most people are like "so what"? Because to them the games don't look any better with insanely high fps and res bumps even though the power required still doubles or more.
 
Last edited:

Astray

Member
It's because it's no longer tech holding us back but budgets. The 30fps games of the past got you double the processing power essentially. Devs spent a lot of time packing in details into their games. Then new hardware got you 60fps of that good looking game on PC. Now new hardware gets you 120fps and maybe higher native res and most people are like "so what"? Because to them the games don't look any better with insanely high fps and res bumps even though the power required still doubles or more.
The biggest tragedy of modern gaming is how consumers don't understand that what they ask for impacts what they get (and eventually complain about).
 

Ebrietas

Member
Diminishing returns is a real thing. Base ps5 is more than good enough to make a fun, content rich, good looking game at 60fps. I’m playing destiny 2 right now and can’t imagine how anyone in their right mind can call this game ugly.

AAA developers just suck by and large now. They spend 5 years and exorbitant amounts of money just to make the most boring crap that somehow has less content than what we had on ps2 or ps3 and yet barely looks any better than games with supposedly bad graphics. The excuse that hardware is holding back their “vision” no longer holds water.
 
Last edited:

Idleyes

Gold Member
That's why many prefer a €700 PS5 Pro over something like a $6000 5090.

Look, I get that the focus is on developers poorly optimizing PC games & currently overpriced components, but let’s be real, not all PC games suffer from bad optimization and components are not always overpriced. A properly built $4,000–$6,000 PC isn’t just a minor upgrade; it typically outperforms two generations of PlayStation consoles.

For example, if you were to buy a $4,000 system from a boutique builder like Digital Storm today, it would likely perform equvilant to the PS8 when that console eventually releases, assuming we’re talking about well-optimized games, not sloppy ports.
 

poppabk

Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
You can have the most powerful and expensive GPU or console in the world, but it won't mean anything if devs either can't or just refuse to optimise their games. Consoles always have busted games, just like PC, but PC GPUs can somewhat brutefotce performance all while letting the devs off the hook. We are paying a premium, in part, to cover the talent or skill (or lack of) of the devs / port team etc

We have started seeing games eg MH Wilds, seemingly NEED a graphical extra meant for the end user as a necessity for the game to run at a basic frame rate. All the while still breaking if you move the damn camera. Plus it looks ugly and old, so that adds extra insult to things.

Prices / performance is also tied to nVidia being so far ahead and so rich, they are getting too comfortable promising the world, selling higher, but generally providing less. It's billionaires being the scum the are.
My 6900XT can run Monster Hunter Wilds at >100 FPS at 1080p with no ray tracing. No framegen or upscaling required.
 

Killjoy-NL

Member
Look, I get that the focus is on developers poorly optimizing PC games & currently overpriced components, but let’s be real, not all PC games suffer from bad optimization and components are not always overpriced. A properly built $4,000–$6,000 PC isn’t just a minor upgrade; it typically outperforms two generations of PlayStation consoles.

For example, if you were to buy a $4,000 system from a boutique builder like Digital Storm today, it would likely perform equvilant to the PS8 when that console eventually releases, assuming we’re talking about well-optimized games, not sloppy ports.
Fair enough, but that's why some PC-centric people opt for a console, not most.

And the point of the argument in this thread is that diminishing returns are real and while on a technical level high-end PCs might be superior, on a visual level the difference is more often than not negligble.
Unless you have some outliers like Cyberpunk, where PC has RT and consoles do not.
Edit: Correction, consoles have limited RT, only for shadows.
 
Last edited:

Idleyes

Gold Member
Fair enough, but that's why some PC-centric people opt for a console, not most.

And the point of the argument in this thread is that diminishing returns are real and while on a technical level high-end PCs might be superior, on a visual level the difference is more often than not negligble.
Unless you have some outliers like Cyberpunk, where PC has RT and consoles do not.

Well there is this also, Sony has a closed ecosystem where they control digital game pricing, sales, and discounts. There’s no competition within the PlayStation Store itself, so prices stay higher for longer. On the other hand on PC (Steam, Epic, GOG, etc.), developers and publishers compete against each other to attract buyers using frequent sales & discounts.

My point is It’s easy to focus on the upfront cost of entry, but ignoring long-term expenses doesn’t tell the whole story.

For fuck’s sake, there are more games available on PC right now than on all consoles ever released combined. Most of them free too! Gaming isn’t just about AAA titles like Cyberpunk, and it’s certainly not just about flashy features like ray tracing.
 

Killjoy-NL

Member
Well there is this also, Sony has a closed ecosystem where they control digital game pricing, sales, and discounts. There’s no competition within the PlayStation Store itself, so prices stay higher for longer. On the other hand on PC (Steam, Epic, GOG, etc.), developers and publishers compete against each other to attract buyers using frequent sales & discounts.

My point is It’s easy to focus on the upfront cost of entry, but ignoring long-term expenses doesn’t tell the whole story.

For fuck’s sake, there are more games available on PC right now than on all consoles ever released combined. Most of them free too! Gaming isn’t just about AAA titles like Cyberpunk, and it’s certainly not just about flashy features like ray tracing.
True. Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing against PC gaming.

I just think on the surface, the gap between PC and console has become smaller.
 
Last edited:

Idleyes

Gold Member
Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing against PC gaming.

Sorry, I didn’t mean to sound like I was arguing against anything you said. My point is that fanboy warriors, whether they’re for PC, Xbox, or PlayStation, have always been wrong. They rarely consider the bigger picture and tend to focus only on what supports their argument. The truth is, every platform has something great to offer, otherwise, they wouldn’t have made it this far. And those who fail to consistently deliver great experiences (looking at you, Xbox) inevitably fall behind, or disappear altogether.
 

Idleyes

Gold Member
As said, it's diminishing returns. But also Moore's law is in its last days aswell.

We need to start thinking about things outside of the graphics race.

No worries. Moore's law will be obsolete one day. Why? Because it's based on transistors and Computers wont always need those.
 

Thebonehead

Gold Member
No worries. Moore's law will be obsolete one day. Why? Because it's based on transistors and Computers wont always need those.
True

All the chip fabs have been researching Carbon nanotubes, Graphene which will lead to performance gains and shrinkage
 

Thebonehead

Gold Member
Maybe its me but for what these cards cost they don't offer that much improvement. If anything it makes me appreciate what Sony and Microsoft were able to do with the home consoles. I am not saying that the gpus are garbage but there are not some super big improvement over the best console graphics especially considering the cpu aspect as well.
The 50 series actually has a lot of new tech inside it which is very interesting and cutting edge

  • Neural Shaders
  • Neural Radiance Cache
  • Megatextures

The trouble is, we'll probably only start to see software shipping that takes advantage when the 60 series is almost here, just as ray tracing was slow adoption with the 20 series.
 
It's still good business to sell shiny new stuff to those who want to brag online about how much they spent, and talk specs instead of, you know, playing the games.
 
Kinda yeah. But then iq in console games keep going down especially in 60 fps mode while a good gaming rig maintains the same pristine iq that we once had during the xbox one x /ps4 pro gen, raw graphics be damned.
 
Last edited:

Ogbert

Member
Once you get beyond a certain point (for example, the 9070 XT) it's very much diminishing returns.

The 50 series is disappointing. You always have the brute powerhouse card leading the way, but it's a rich toy rather than a reasonable consumer product. Nothing wrong with that at all; it's for niche enthusiasts.

Games are also optimised poorly, especially on PC. Most games are actually 'ready' about 12 months after their release.
 
Top Bottom