Tencent has shares in pretty much every game developer that is publicly traded. There is no escaping China, it seems.

after some checking, i discovered i actually have 2 UE5 titles. well actually 1 atm since i banned steam and Fort Solis i have on that account.

From memory Fort Solis felt a bit powerhungry but nothing out of the ordinary. Immortals of Aveum is a whole other story after installing the title, i immediately remembered why i didn't continue my play through. 1080p low settings and i still need to enable ultra prestation for DLSS to end around a power draw that is somewhat encouraging, around 150W, of course the game looks like shit by that time.

I'm so postponing my expected purchases on Avowed and Claire Obscure until at least we have advanced a thousand years !

suddenly remembers a little of sleight of horror from last night

or.... with the 5060Ti probably outperforming my 3090Ti ..........

Of course this title came to us at the beginnings of UE5 .. so yea

Not sure Steam was noticing your "disappearance" but if you want to make them disappear your Alpha power will need to exceed the one from Musk.. which at least may fly to Mars at some point, with a entire kindergarden, í heard.

I wonder how you play Immortals of Aveum now. Perhaps using a EGS account.

We surely can agree... this game got no good "tech count for the performance it takes"... probably a nightmare in optimization and most cards demise. Of course 4090 works good but who got 2500+ coins left? At this time... no good idea.. rather wait for next gen.

Nah... efficiency is probably 2-3 times higher but the performance on a 60-series is struggling to outperform any flagship not older than currently 6 years (up to 10 years in the rather near future i do predict). Anyway, it will not become available any time soon and constantly being sold out many months after release... so, nothing anyone could "count on" in the near future.
Sure, the 4060TI was actually now beating the 1080TI, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSvCsqj_tFQ but this flagship is now already over 7 years of age. On top of that, the advancement of performance was bigger in the past. Nowadays... in order to get a 50+% increase over the last generation... up to 600 W is required... (!) and a price several times as high (!!!).

The 3090 TI is still a good card for several more years to come. It is not lean on the power demand but, if the PC can handle it, this PC is basically "bulletproof" even for cards like 5090 and up. Anyway, for me it is clear, with the current demand of many "top notch games", this card is now a full settings 1080P card but not a true 4k card anymore. Although, even the 4090 is soon not a true 4k card anymore (means, it can not always handle 60 FPS on full settings°°) but at least 1440P is surely possible for many more years to come. °°Full settings = epic, native +DLAA.

Nvidia does not feel pushed toward making better "entry level offers" because who is gonna offer something way better than them, and on top of that... even at a worse performance level compared to a equally priced competitor... their card still is 10x more likely to become "picked". It is just as i said.. they lack competition and in order to be able to compete it takes way more than sheer performance... it takes even "a big image".

Same here. Since i mostly play old games released before 2014 and Unreal Engine 5 games look very blurry. I'll just be a patient gamer and wait 15 years to play these games at glorious 16K resolution :)

And that Immortals of Aveum game you just played is running at 436p resolution on Xbox Series S, lower than PS2 resolution lol. I wonder if UE5 developers will bring us back to 240p resolution just to get "ultra realistic graphics"

Either you are still a very young chick with a fat bank account or you got big trust into your health... and your capability to make investments. You may need it because this 16k card might cost you 10 000 considering inflation, Nvidias greed and what else.

Not believing me? The picture tells it all. Ah no... the currency is not Indian rupee... it is hard Swiss franc.

If it goes like this... 5090 could end at 4000+, 6090 at 5000+... and so on.

No i am not joking, yet i do admit it sounds like a fairy tale.

Actually... the datacenter-versions of those cards are being driven by armored cars to those datacenters... i am not joking as those cards are just that expensive. It might not be long... perhaps for the 5090 already... only super premium customers can even get any of those cards handed over by mail and without paying it in advance. For the 3090 TI it was still possible for me, 4090 maybe too but 5090+ could become tricky. Not even sure the insurance may cover such a high price, in term it gets stolen.

freaking handhelds!

Tís an EA original
usually every new generation matches the one tier higher up from the previous one. and with the 4070Ti just winning from the 3090Ti it is a safe bet to conclude on the 5060 prior to release. All in all from that standpoint the 3090Ti.... even when you bought it at a price point of 1500 euro's annd considering it's life expectancy a better decision was available.
on a personal level i dig my 3090Ti, there seems to be an extra level of comfort present when compared to lower tiered nvid cards

Free Tibet!

Neither. The problem has been and always will be the publisher and of course money, when it comes to AAA gaming.

Actually, it doesn't even matter what engine they are using. I think the problem is the public reception, since for some reason people thought changing the engine to UE5 would solve the most common problems, when obviously it won't.

By the way the most common problems during game development besides "devs messing up": employee fluctuation, lack of funds, they need more time (but publisher says nope), publisher demands certain things to be in the game over others and thus they need to redo certain parts.

This thread has slowly been morphing into a hardware talk and I do not want to push it even further. But guess what, I will :)

I agree that modern integrated graphics are as good and even killed the entry level market. But is still hard to find a laptop with relative powerfull iGPU at good prices, it seems that either has dual graphics with a Geforce logo or it's a "special purpose" laptop, like tablets/convertibles/hybrid.
I'm refering to laptops because I firmly believe that if one wants the better efficiency possible, a laptop is the way to go, even using it as a desktop. Very low Idle power comsumption that even most mini PC's can't match. Unless of course, one need the features of a mini PC, like dual LAN or several PCIe storage slots.

Integrated graphics on desktops don't make much sense to me unless it's way cheaper to build, since the efficiency would be roughly the same as a build with a modern dedicated GPU. The only thing the iGPU limits is the maximum power used wich is very easily configurable with a dedicated GPU setup, idle current should be on the same ballpark since the use of a dGPU is offset by using very fast dual-channel memory on the iGPU.

My old AMD Rx480 (RIP) was a 150W TDP card and I had no trouble playing most games at around 100W at the wall, with a not so efficient power supply and a 45W minimum idle machine. It took a bit of work and testing, wich involved decreasing the card memory clock, undervolting and underclocking (same on CPU) but the time to play high refresh twitch games is long gone so the end result was pretty decent.

Whats a decent entry level graphic card? A 4060 or 4060 TI and a 7600 or 7600 XT which goes for around 250-350 coins? I mean, anything lower than this i do not consider "decent" anymore and a Laptop with a good IGP/APU is not free.

Its hard to compare because almost no one is running a benchmark dedicated vs. integrated. By looking at the raw specs which is about the same architecture... the 7600 or other dedicated GPUs got about 2 times the amount of shading units. For example Radeon 890 M vs. RX 7600, around 1000 vs. 2000 shading units, so yes, dedicated in this case should be able to stay clearly ahead. I would say the entry level dedicated cards got roughly double the performance.

Of course, i would not get those entry level cards anymore because currently Intels Battlemage B580 is even better and as well slightly faster in most scenarios.

I'd never go for a laptop, can't tinker in it, add parts you already have, readily upgrade or replace pretty much any component, very limited in what you can put in it, like number of drives, no PCI-E slots, limited ports too, may be iffy to hook up your proper monitor to it, and keyboard and mouse and a bunch of other things that may need USB ports at the same time...
And come on, quite a difference in power draw between integrated graphics and a dedicated card.
You're going waaaaay too high again. I'd say entry level stops at 3050. What you say is firmly current-gen midrange.

You mean the weakest dedicated cards available? I had in mind those are made for someone without a integrated GPU... not for gaming. This is not even entry level... just a "APU/IGPU" replacement.

The 3050 is even a "failure"... because the weakest card starts with 4060 now (the 4050 is now a laptop GPU, so the 50-series is not a dedicated GPU anymore).

Imo, entry-level would be going for an RX 580 tier of card for £100 or less. If the purpose is to test the waters, a 4060/7600 is an awkward investment at £250-£300...For £200 more all of the sudden you're in in 7800 XT / 7900 GRE range at £450-£500. Hell, if you're in the UK, brand new RX 6800 models are still in stock at £350-£400.

Intel has the right idea to introduce more power at the £250 range, otherwise an APU genuinely make more sense. 8700G is £250, matches the 1650, and still leaves room to upgrade.

Edit: corrected information.