Are we sure Nx gamer didn’t Just mid peak on that part I’ve literally never seen a framerate test where rhe ps5 fell to 35fps in any mode tje absolute worst I’ve seen is right at 40. And I do expect a 2080 ti to beat it considering it’s more powerful hardware. The 3070 has limitations unlike the 2080 ti so I don’t know why you brought that gpu up
Another question if the fear is that there are vram limitations and that’s what’s holding back the gpus how do we know the same thing isn’t happening to the ps5 and that say if it had 32gb of vram it would mostly in the 50s or even 60s?3060 is not outperforming the 2070
ps5 is not outperforming the 2070
2070 is underperforming compared to all its equivalent-power hardware
even 3080 underperforms compared to 2080ti at 4K.
[/URL]
Practically, VRAM constrained cards cannot perform as they should. Clear as crystal.
The reason 3080 also buckles at 4k is because game only uses a total of %80 available vram.
As a result:
8 GB cards have 6.4 GB budget,
10 GB cards have 8 GB budget (and 4K+ray tracing breaches the budget, hence it underperforms)
11 GB cards have 8.8 GB budget (still not enough budget, but better than 8)
12 GB cards have 9.6 GB budget (only proper budget that can truly match PS5's allocated memory)
VRAM constraint buckles 3080 to a point where it performs almost like a 2080ti. Whereas 3070 is constrainted too much that it drops a nearly %30 perf.
2070/2070s also drops a %30 perf. drop, which is the reason why it drops below 30s, and often hangs around 25 in his obnoxious video.
These problems %100 exists. Steam discussions are full of people who keep saying they keep having performance issues after 15 mins of playtime. The entire reason all reviewers seem to ignore this is because it would create a PR nightmare for NVIDIA. Even the 10 gig 3080 falter, to a point where it perfoms like a 2080ti.
All the issues community experiences stems from the exact same VRAM conundrum.
In all fairness to Alex spiderman is coded to load in textures and geometry when you stop swinging but I'm not sure if it's that severely cut back when you are swinging. I don't think it was.I found some screenshots i had taken in 2020 comparing the Pedastrian density in Performance vs Fidelity mode. The insane amount of pedestrians in Fidelity mode was the first thing that jumped out at me. I was in a fight and throwing around a bunch of mailboxes and trash cans and they all reacted to them very convincingly. I dont think ive seen 100+ pedestrians in a city street at once since AC Unity. It was extremely impressive even in Performance modes.
What Alex is doing here is bizarre. This is not equivalent to PS5's performance mode. The NPCs and traffic density should both be hitting the CPU hard and even the GPU since they all cast shadows and in vehicle's case they all cast RT reflections. How the fuck are these optimized settings anyway when you are downgrading the image and entire experience so severely. The whole point of optimized settings is to have the image looking virtually the same while offering cutbacks you wouldnt even notice.
Fidelity:
Performance:
Alex:
Lol it's about having "enough" VRAM. If the game asks for 7gb of VRAM during a certain scene, as long as you have 7gb available, it will perform as expected. But the performance won't improve if you have even more VRAM available. Performance doesn't scale that way. However, if you have less than the requirement, performance will tank.
it wouldn't happen because PCIE transactions with PS5 equivalent settings stops at near 9.5-9.6 GB VRAM usage. I always theorized that PS5 is probably allocating nearly 10 GB worth of data. Game simply wants 10 GB VRAM at those settings. Those settings are literally tailored for PS5. PS5 is not going to be hold back by VRAM constraints. The game and those settings are specifically tailored towards 10 GB budget. That's it. If there was a theoritical 24 GB RTX 3060, it would perform the same as 12 GB RTX 3060, because the game saturates around 10 GB and stops going upwards of it.
I mean can we be sure that the ps5 at it’s settings arent requiring say 20gb of vram and that’s why it’s not in the 60s range mostly?
The game literally wouldn't run on PS5 if it needed 20GB of VRAM.
1080p
Only a complete beginner would look at the kind of PCIe load we saw in that video and think it was anything other than a VRAM capacity issue. It was blatantly obvious from the footage and I'm not willing to let that slide from someone masquerading as a 'tech expert'.
The construction of the ps5 and pc versions are not the same as we constantly see so listing vram requirements based on the pc versión does not tell us the story of how much vram it used on ps5. And it doesn’t mean it wouldn’t run i said how do we know performance isn’t tanking
i own one ;-;who buys these?
the game is vram bottlenecked almost all the time if you enable RT with a 8 gig card (primarly because game limits itself to only use 6.4 GB of memory). then the game consntalty beings to use normal RAM as a substitute for VRAM
the test is all wrong, and he clearly failed to understand what made his 2070 perform like crap
not once in his video that he managed to make a comment regarding full vram utilization. the performance difference between 2070 and PS5 completely stems from running out of VRAM
in this specific shot, performance is dropped because of running out of VRAM, not because of "PS5 having better performance"
I actually proved it, in the exact same intro scene;
[/URL]
even high textures cause a performance drop. with low textures, I manage to get 56 frames. so 8 GB buffer cannot even fit high textures + ray tracing together at 4K without experiencing a performance drop
only at native 1440p, 8 GB+ very high textures are usable, but only in short burts of playtime. (not 4k+upscaling, 4k + upscaling uses 4k lods, therefore stresses vram further)
this is not to say NVIDIA and RTX cards are not to blame here. They are. Lack of VRAM causes these abnormalities, and opportunists like NX Gamer took a nice slice out of this problem for himself.
The entire reason game constantly hammers PCIE is not because how the engine is built, but because game artificially limits itself to only use a maximum of 6.4 GB VRAM and use normal RAM as a subsitute. It is not doing anything fancy: No game on PC should ever rely on transferring texture data constantly on the fly from RAM to VRAM. PCIE 4 wont solve that either, RAM to VRAM will always be slow, will always stall GPUs to worse performance and will always create more problems.
In this specific case, this happens becuase the said GPU does not have enough VRAM that game demands at 4K/RT+Very high textures. This config requires a solidly uninterrupted 10 GB BUFFER, which RX 6800 has, therefore does not run into similar performance issues.
If he actually had the courage to test and compare RX 6800 to PS5 with RT enabled in similar scenes, he would also see that PS5 is not "out performing" the other GPUs, as it would be decimated by the RX 6800. Notice how he cleverly avoided making a direct comparison between RX 6800 and PS5, it would undermine all of what he talked about in the very same video.
PS5 only "seemingly" destroys the 2070 because the buffer is at its limits.
Just my points and observations. You can do whatever you want with this info. I don't like the dude, but sadly 8 gigs of VRAM simply cannot enable features that PS5 can enable with its uncompromised 10 GB budget, which creates anomalies like this. And it too will continue to happen, especially if developers like Nixxes decides to artificially limit VRAM utilization to 6.4 GB, supposedly to leave "available VRAM" for background operations, even if you don't have nothing on the background
The RTX 3060 existing alone destroys the entire point of this video. If he tested 3060,
- It would match and exceed PS5 performance (unlike the 8 GB 2070)
- It would not cause PCIE to be hammered, since it has enough VRAM budget (unlike the 8 GB 2070)
Here's how 3060 performs at NATIVE 4k (similar to ps5's fidelity mode) with similar RT settings;
it gets 35-40 frames, just like PS5 does. look at his 2070 video, constantly having irregular frametimes, whereas 3060 is having a smooth ride all around.
as i said, it is indeed the 2070 being the problematic part here.
i have no idea how 8 gig rtx gpus will age, considering these events, I'd simply say stay away from them for your own good. wait for 12 GB 4070.
Also the 3070 has to do more work than the ps5 in this game cause of the construction of this port which is why it’s weird they consider these gpus underutilized
It doesn't matter. An uncompressed 4k texture at 4 bytes per pixel will always be 64MB on both PS5 and PC. You're never gonna see a scenario where PS5 uses less memory than a PC when showing the same graphics content on screen.
www.eurogamer.net
i mean i love it, i don't care much about RT and every game i throw at it runs well over 60 @ 1440pmy condolences... but I mean as long as you don't expect good RT performance you're gonna be ok
yamaci17
's post has made me question if getting 8gb in 2022 was really a good purchase
i mean i love it, i don't care much about RT and every game i throw at it runs well over 60 @ 1440p
that being said, i probably should have waited until next gen for a card that had more Vram.
yamaci17
Only if you believe insomniac Devs are complete doofuses to develop a PS only game with VRAM requirements that exceed the closed system specs that they were targeting from the start.
im talking about specific ports we see pcs in this game specifically have to do more work cause basically the load of compressing and processing things on the fly cause of overhead may change the requirements and size of things in other areas since there isnt a specific construction of those things on pc like there is ps5 so no i dont buy it these are the same people who said the cpu doesnt matter and here we are (also funny the cpu doesnt matter yet we need the absolute top end cpu for our tests I guess it matters enough)
alex doesnt have credibility on benchmarks besides emotionally verbally attacking people on both resetera or twitter who question his findings or tests (even if those people are proven right later) he never updates info and does way to much guesswork i would trust gamer nexus benchmarks before i trust any "benchmark" from alex and thats saying a lot. alex should stick to what he is good at which is discussing the construction of games (especially on the pc side) and tech implementations as well as engine limitations or deficiencies. this benchmarking and especially analyzing things like resolution, graphical settings, and differences have always not only been faulty but way to much "I think" or "I believe" in his statements than anything close to objective and thats without even mentioning the awful testing methods he does which adds so many variables like not testing each setup with the same parts and only having the gpu be different or any other assortment of variables like him using different drivers, os etc. im not saying nx gamer is perfect or even objective and he definitely shouldn't be the only source, but my god at least he is consistent and doesn't dip his toes into crap he has 0 clue or proficiency on and also nor does he attack people who disagree with him at least he shows how he came to his conclusions or findings unlike alex's I think
i mean maybe the vram does things like limit the ability to hit 60 which is already not the intended target for this mode
No, it is because of current PC architecture. Blaming VRAM size is like saying a bandage is the solution for all wounds. And if you truly think Nixxes phoned it in in any way, shape, or form then shame on you lol.
This dovetails into what I was saying above. Your are talking about games from the prior generation when you need to be thinking about memory requirements for console ports over the next five years. Again, Spiderman is the first native PS5 port that requires an SSD to reach PS5 levels of performance. And still, it's a PS4 game at it's core; "True" next gen games will be far more memory intensive. That is why NXGamer says the efficiency gap will widen in favor of console architecture.
the game is vram bottlenecked almost all the time if you enable RT with a 8 gig card (primarly because game limits itself to only use 6.4 GB of memory). then the game consntalty beings to use normal RAM as a substitute for VRAM
the test is all wrong, and he clearly failed to understand what made his 2070 perform like crap
not once in his video that he managed to make a comment regarding full vram utilization. the performance difference between 2070 and PS5 completely stems from running out of VRAM
in this specific shot, performance is dropped because of running out of VRAM, not because of "PS5 having better performance"
I actually proved it, in the exact same intro scene;
[/URL]
even high textures cause a performance drop. with low textures, I manage to get 56 frames. so 8 GB buffer cannot even fit high textures + ray tracing together at 4K without experiencing a performance drop
only at native 1440p, 8 GB+ very high textures are usable, but only in short burts of playtime. (not 4k+upscaling, 4k + upscaling uses 4k lods, therefore stresses vram further)
this is not to say NVIDIA and RTX cards are not to blame here. They are. Lack of VRAM causes these abnormalities, and opportunists like NX Gamer took a nice slice out of this problem for himself.
The entire reason game constantly hammers PCIE is not because how the engine is built, but because game artificially limits itself to only use a maximum of 6.4 GB VRAM and use normal RAM as a subsitute. It is not doing anything fancy: No game on PC should ever rely on transferring texture data constantly on the fly from RAM to VRAM. PCIE 4 wont solve that either, RAM to VRAM will always be slow, will always stall GPUs to worse performance and will always create more problems.
In this specific case, this happens becuase the said GPU does not have enough VRAM that game demands at 4K/RT+Very high textures. This config requires a solidly uninterrupted 10 GB BUFFER, which RX 6800 has, therefore does not run into similar performance issues.
If he actually had the courage to test and compare RX 6800 to PS5 with RT enabled in similar scenes, he would also see that PS5 is not "out performing" the other GPUs, as it would be decimated by the RX 6800. Notice how he cleverly avoided making a direct comparison between RX 6800 and PS5, it would undermine all of what he talked about in the very same video.
PS5 only "seemingly" destroys the 2070 because the buffer is at its limits.
Just my points and observations. You can do whatever you want with this info. I don't like the dude, but sadly 8 gigs of VRAM simply cannot enable features that PS5 can enable with its uncompromised 10 GB budget, which creates anomalies like this. And it too will continue to happen, especially if developers like Nixxes decides to artificially limit VRAM utilization to 6.4 GB, supposedly to leave "available VRAM" for background operations, even if you don't have nothing on the background
The RTX 3060 existing alone destroys the entire point of this video. If he tested 3060,
- It would match and exceed PS5 performance (unlike the 8 GB 2070)
- It would not cause PCIE to be hammered, since it has enough VRAM budget (unlike the 8 GB 2070)
Here's how 3060 performs at NATIVE 4k (similar to ps5's fidelity mode) with similar RT settings;
it gets 35-40 frames, just like PS5 does. look at his 2070 video, constantly having irregular frametimes, whereas 3060 is having a smooth ride all around.
as i said, it is indeed the 2070 being the problematic part here.
i have no idea how 8 gig rtx gpus will age, considering these events, I'd simply say stay away from them for your own good. wait for 12 GB 4070.
the game is vram bottlenecked almost all the time if you enable RT with a 8 gig card (primarly because game limits itself to only use 6.4 GB of memory). then the game consntalty beings to use normal RAM as a substitute for VRAM
the test is all wrong, and he clearly failed to understand what made his 2070 perform like crap
not once in his video that he managed to make a comment regarding full vram utilization. the performance difference between 2070 and PS5 completely stems from running out of VRAM
in this specific shot, performance is dropped because of running out of VRAM, not because of "PS5 having better performance"
I actually proved it, in the exact same intro scene;
even high textures cause a performance drop. with low textures, I manage to get 56 frames. so 8 GB buffer cannot even fit high textures + ray tracing together at 4K without experiencing a performance drop
only at native 1440p, 8 GB+ very high textures are usable, but only in short burts of playtime. (not 4k+upscaling, 4k + upscaling uses 4k lods, therefore stresses vram further)
this is not to say NVIDIA and RTX cards are not to blame here. They are. Lack of VRAM causes these abnormalities, and opportunists like NX Gamer took a nice slice out of this problem for himself.
The entire reason game constantly hammers PCIE is not because how the engine is built, but because game artificially limits itself to only use a maximum of 6.4 GB VRAM and use normal RAM as a subsitute. It is not doing anything fancy: No game on PC should ever rely on transferring texture data constantly on the fly from RAM to VRAM. PCIE 4 wont solve that either, RAM to VRAM will always be slow, will always stall GPUs to worse performance and will always create more problems.
In this specific case, this happens becuase the said GPU does not have enough VRAM that game demands at 4K/RT+Very high textures. This config requires a solidly uninterrupted 10 GB BUFFER, which RX 6800 has, therefore does not run into similar performance issues.
If he actually had the courage to test and compare RX 6800 to PS5 with RT enabled in similar scenes, he would also see that PS5 is not "out performing" the other GPUs, as it would be decimated by the RX 6800. Notice how he cleverly avoided making a direct comparison between RX 6800 and PS5, it would undermine all of what he talked about in the very same video.
PS5 only "seemingly" destroys the 2070 because the buffer is at its limits.
Just my points and observations. You can do whatever you want with this info. I don't like the dude, but sadly 8 gigs of VRAM simply cannot enable features that PS5 can enable with its uncompromised 10 GB budget, which creates anomalies like this. And it too will continue to happen, especially if developers like Nixxes decides to artificially limit VRAM utilization to 6.4 GB, supposedly to leave "available VRAM" for background operations, even if you don't have nothing on the background
The RTX 3060 existing alone destroys the entire point of this video. If he tested 3060,
- It would match and exceed PS5 performance (unlike the 8 GB 2070)
- It would not cause PCIE to be hammered, since it has enough VRAM budget (unlike the 8 GB 2070)
Here's how 3060 performs at NATIVE 4k (similar to ps5's fidelity mode) with similar RT settings;
it gets 35-40 frames, just like PS5 does. look at his 2070 video, constantly having irregular frametimes, whereas 3060 is having a smooth ride all around.
as i said, it is indeed the 2070 being the problematic part here.
i have no idea how 8 gig rtx gpus will age, considering these events, I'd simply say stay away from them for your own good. wait for 12 GB 4070.
Because the game wqs coded purely for a playstation console. Insomniac know exactly what they are doing and what hardware they are working with. Nixxes is then having to port that code to PC.
I don't know why it feels like your misleading this thread. It rarely ever gets in the 7GB usage on the 2070. Normally the game see the GPU has more memory, so it stores more (just in case it's needed) files on the GDDR instead of RAM.3060 is not outperforming the 2070
ps5 is not outperforming the 2070
2070 is underperforming compared to all its equivalent-power hardware
even 3080 underperforms compared to 2080ti at 4K.
[/URL][/URL][/URL]
Practically, VRAM constrained cards cannot perform as they should. Clear as crystal.
The reason 3080 also buckles at 4k is because game only uses a total of %80 available vram.
As a result:
8 GB cards have 6.4 GB budget,
10 GB cards have 8 GB budget (and 4K+ray tracing breaches the budget, hence it underperforms)
11 GB cards have 8.8 GB budget (still not enough budget, but better than 8)
12 GB cards have 9.6 GB budget (only proper budget that can truly match PS5's allocated memory)
VRAM constraint buckles 3080 to a point where it performs almost like a 2080ti. Whereas 3070 is constrainted too much that it drops a nearly %30 perf.
2070/2070s also drops a %30 perf. drop, which is the reason why it drops below 30s, and often hangs around 25 in his obnoxious video.
These problems %100 exists. Steam discussions are full of people who keep saying they keep having performance issues after 15 mins of playtime. The entire reason all reviewers seem to ignore this is because it would create a PR nightmare for NVIDIA. Even the 10 gig 3080 falter, to a point where it perfoms like a 2080ti.
All the issues community experiences stems from the exact same VRAM conundrum.
I think the main reason (as seen on page one) is because his comparisons make the PS5 look way stronger than it actually is.
I’m sure they have to build some middleware that bridges Sonys api(GNM?) to either directx or Vulcan. That in itself will introduce some overhead.
I mean just read this comment, the GPU that is performing worse here has nothing to do with the PS5 performing better???!!!!????
the game is vram bottlenecked almost all the time if you enable RT with a 8 gig card (primarly because game limits itself to only use 6.4 GB of memory). then the game consntalty beings to use normal RAM as a substitute for VRAM
the test is all wrong, and he clearly failed to understand what made his 2070 perform like crap
not once in his video that he managed to make a comment regarding full vram utilization. the performance difference between 2070 and PS5 completely stems from running out of VRAM
in this specific shot, performance is dropped because of running out of VRAM, not because of "PS5 having better performance"
I actually proved it, in the exact same intro scene;
even high textures cause a performance drop. with low textures, I manage to get 56 frames. so 8 GB buffer cannot even fit high textures + ray tracing together at 4K without experiencing a performance drop
only at native 1440p, 8 GB+ very high textures are usable, but only in short burts of playtime. (not 4k+upscaling, 4k + upscaling uses 4k lods, therefore stresses vram further)
this is not to say NVIDIA and RTX cards are not to blame here. They are. Lack of VRAM causes these abnormalities, and opportunists like NX Gamer took a nice slice out of this problem for himself.
The entire reason game constantly hammers PCIE is not because how the engine is built, but because game artificially limits itself to only use a maximum of 6.4 GB VRAM and use normal RAM as a subsitute. It is not doing anything fancy: No game on PC should ever rely on transferring texture data constantly on the fly from RAM to VRAM. PCIE 4 wont solve that either, RAM to VRAM will always be slow, will always stall GPUs to worse performance and will always create more problems.
In this specific case, this happens becuase the said GPU does not have enough VRAM that game demands at 4K/RT+Very high textures. This config requires a solidly uninterrupted 10 GB BUFFER, which RX 6800 has, therefore does not run into similar performance issues.
If he actually had the courage to test and compare RX 6800 to PS5 with RT enabled in similar scenes, he would also see that PS5 is not "out performing" the other GPUs, as it would be decimated by the RX 6800. Notice how he cleverly avoided making a direct comparison between RX 6800 and PS5, it would undermine all of what he talked about in the very same video.
PS5 only "seemingly" destroys the 2070 because the buffer is at its limits.
Just my points and observations. You can do whatever you want with this info. I don't like the dude, but sadly 8 gigs of VRAM simply cannot enable features that PS5 can enable with its uncompromised 10 GB budget, which creates anomalies like this. And it too will continue to happen, especially if developers like Nixxes decides to artificially limit VRAM utilization to 6.4 GB, supposedly to leave "available VRAM" for background operations, even if you don't have nothing on the background
The RTX 3060 existing alone destroys the entire point of this video. If he tested 3060,
- It would match and exceed PS5 performance (unlike the 8 GB 2070)
- It would not cause PCIE to be hammered, since it has enough VRAM budget (unlike the 8 GB 2070)
Here's how 3060 performs at NATIVE 4k (similar to ps5's fidelity mode) with similar RT settings;
it gets 35-40 frames, just like PS5 does. look at his 2070 video, constantly having irregular frametimes, whereas 3060 is having a smooth ride all around.
as i said, it is indeed the 2070 being the problematic part here.
i have no idea how 8 gig rtx gpus will age, considering these events, I'd simply say stay away from them for your own good. wait for 12 GB 4070.
What is happening on PC, also why I like closed box consoles with fixed HW and concept of generations (
) as well as well documented and focused very low level access, is that it takes a lot longer for breakthroughs to happen in this kind of ecosystem where hardware variety, pace of iterations, and interoperability are key.
NXG does the exact same shit only more often, he royally screws up and does a twitter poll to say people can't see the difference so his mistakes don't matter............... yeh that's a better way to do things sure.
First of all, in your video you grossly misrepresented the number of PCs with GPUs more powerful than a 2070(super).. You used percentages based off of concurrent daily users instead of total monthly users.. of which Steam has more than 135M as of last year. Same goes for CPUs which have 8 cores or more, which is around 20%..
OK, the figures were based on the concurrent users, as I noted in the video. And then stated Approximate and showed the stats from the August Survey, but yes, for arguments sake, let's take all 135million users as all unique (they are not) as you state that is still ~20mil PC's around or above PS5/SX. So that is already 10 million smaller target base for PC market, at best. The point in the video was not the numbers per se, but the target baseline for Multi-Platform titles moving forward, again all in the video.
Can you explain how these dgpu shipments since 2021 equal only 20 million gpus stronger than a ps5 at best? even though turing ceased production before ampere even released sep 2020, im not sure when rdna stopped. Basing the whole pc userbase off steam seems a little broken no? CoD launches on blizzards thing, Whatever is popular on pc on epic launches over there right, gamepass same deal however many people game on that. Apex addicts would still just launch through EA, maybe some moved to steam but im guessing alot of those steam users were new. Not everyone with a gaming pc is launching steam every month and we don't even know the amount that when the dialog pops up just hit cancel (I do screw giving companies my data if they don't compensate me for it).
EasyCan you explain how these dgpu shipments since 2021 equal only 20 million gpus stronger than a ps5 at best? even though turing ceased production before ampere even released sep 2020, im not sure when rdna stopped. Basing the whole pc userbase off steam seems a little broken no? CoD launches on blizzards thing, Whatever is popular on pc on epic launches over there right, gamepass same deal however many people game on that. Apex addicts would still just launch through EA, maybe some moved to steam but im guessing alot of those steam users were new. Not everyone with a gaming pc is launching steam every month and we don't even know the amount that when the dialog pops up just hit cancel (I do screw giving companies my data if they don't compensate me for it).
[/URL]
50+ million rdna2/ampere cards in mining rigs ok sure. You must be able to find these cards on ebay at the moment for 10 bucks with miners dumping 50 million gpus seeing gpu mining is done.Easy
dude cmon. you're just outstreching things here. even at worst case scenario, when not constrainted by VRAM, 2080ti is only %4-7 faster than 3070. in spiderman's case, gap widens to %28. i have literal PROOF that 2080ti performs like a 3080 at 4k with ray tracing, and outperforms 3070 by %30, yet you, nx gamer, and the other dude refuses to acknowledge it
no, you still don't get it. if you use high textures with all other settings matched with PS5, 2070 will match PS5 performance.
they removing bottlenecks for PC while comparing to PS5
in which you can't remove bottlenecks and of course CPU which costs like a PS5 or more beats PS5 that's what DF wan't to see, so the most fair comparisson should be PS5 vs PC(closest spec to PS5) without any bottleneck free parts to see what PC is needed or not to match PS5, in other case remove consoles from comparisson or be proud as DF and act how 1000$ PC is beating 500$ console.
It really doesn't matter. 2070 is what it is. I don't want to lower the textures
