not to mention intel cpu's, i belief you can find 4th gen i7's under 200 bucks but nothing more

I'm not sure NVidia would be concerned about losing market share to consoles. Who do you think are making the GPU chips that are going into the consoles?

there are some that belief the release of nvidia's newest line, right before the xbox x and the ps5 enter the fray signal nvdia's strategy of trying to keep pc players with the pc instead of strolling of towards consoles. i belief both 3080 and certainly the 3090 destroy anything the console could provide for the serious games, at thrice the cost of a console of course

Ok, that's interesting. I hadn't thought of it that way. So, they make more by selling PC cards than console chips? I guess that's pretty obvious, given some of them by themselves cost more than a console.

But then, if they don't want gamers to move to console, why don't they just jack up the price of the chips they are selling to the console manufacturers?

Do we know what chips are going into the next gen consoles? I.e. what would I have to have for my PC to give equivalent performance.

Doesnt amd make the gpus for the consoles?

That's mainly if you want to run the games with every little doodad turned on and everything on ultra high.....for many, most games(including games about to come out) seem to run decently on cheaper cards at medium to high settings.

I'd disagree somewhat on this....to me, many games are fun despite having cruder graphics.

Also personally i'd rather have good storylines with decent length than better and flashier graphics. Sure, better graphics can be nice to a point, but i'll take good story and long SP campaigns over better graphics(better than say HD quality) near any day of the week.

as our favorite troll states it is indeed AMD who is the supplier of the console chips. i belief the consoles are rated at 14 teraflops of data output. i belief the 3090 sits at 24 teraflops of output.

also nvdia has most income out of their serverbranch chips and from pc gaming though i thought pc gaming was only 16% of their annual income

I believe that's what I said?

(Note the "imo")

Agreed 100%

One could play a game now at medium settings, wait to upgrade and play on high later on...whatever they feel like, really. I was just stating my feelings on such, is all. :)

This.....I never paid more than 150 or so for a vid card in my life, and played many games on high over the years when I built my own systems.

most games translate to me on 1080p 60 hz as programs that will consume about 30% load of my gp while looking pretty and beautifull. games such as the just released mortal shell, dragon age inquisition and the many many shooters and other first person arpg adventures and some grand strat games sit at that level. games such as total war warhammer II, control, mass effect andromeda i configure to run at about 50% powerdraw of the gpu and also look more then fine. Sometimes i do find it necesary to crank those figures up a bit so that the card will be used at 80 or 90% powerdraw while looking damn fine indeed.

i belief the added graphics either sharpness or better displayed effects are certainly worth the effort but really not worth spending all that money for but if and when those graphics can be displayed at a for me comfortable level i will set the graphics to the highest amount. Shortly said i find 4k atm to be nonsense but i will chip in once the industry found a way to provide that quality without expecting 4k builds of the moment .. that are literally 4k

I actually like somewhat decent graphics, but it's more that I(like you perhaps?) won't shell out insane amounts for such HW.

When I used to install my own HW in old systems I would buy older generation(like 1 generation or 2 off of cutting edge) HW for cheap and use that, and be able to play most games at decent settings. Then i'd wait like several years and then upgrade again to be able to play more games and/or at better settings.

But I wouldn't be like some(no offense meant to such who like such) and spend (imo) insane amounts like 1000 plus dollars (US prices) on say a vid card.

Your "imo" looks casually attached to a generalization. I've seen many people do that: "I'll just post any crap online, and as long as I attach an IM(H)O, I'm free from criticism".

But... I don't think that that's what you were doing - but still...

(at least I can expect a decent reply from you ;-) )

In my experience high-end cards hold their value long after it makes sense for them to. I've never looked at used stuff though, no.


I don't know how big a factor it is in their thinking, but a lot of people are excited to get the flashy new consoles that can beat their PC short-term, and nVidia just dropped a bomb on that thinking. If you have a decent processor already you can match or even beat the consoles with a $500 upgrade, which is probably a good market move for them.

What are you actually comparing? Do you play games from (let's say) 2001 on low graphics settings because story/gameplay is more important? I'm sure you don't, you play old games looking very flashy (that's what they said about it back then).

What's my point? Buy an old game for cheap and you'll expect it to look the best it can. Buy a new one at full price... and settle for low/medium? (something about that doesn't make sense to me)

Thanks

(Also yeah, I add imo in such cases most times to show that it is my opinion only, and not to avoid criticism.....if anyone wants to they're free to criticize anything I say or do :))

I'll buy and play anything if it is fun, tbh......I just don't worry about setting everything to ultra high or buying the best HW to do so like some.

Because I will enjoy it now on medium or so settings(and later on if I ever "upgraded" I could enjoy it on high as well). As I said, I buy games in good part for good story, and that sometimes includes newer games if I can run them.

insane insane, if my pc reaches with new bought pricing in mind around 2400 euro's screen and everything calculated i'm a happy man for about 4 years or so, 600 euro's a year ain't that bad

my most expensive gpu cost 650 i belief and for my next system i already decided to go a tad more premium with a better understanding of my uhm hobby pc needs ;)