News GeForce RTX 4060 May Consume More Power Than a RTX 3070

[spongiemaster]

To be fair, they arguably couldn't sell the hardware at lower prices without resellers buying up all the stock and reselling the cards at inflated prices anyway. If someone's going to make a profit off the largely mining-induced inflated street pricing, it's arguably better for them to get a cut than all of it going toward a middle-man leaching off the market. At least this way, some of the profits can be put toward things like future research and development. The current pricing is still bad, but will likely continue to get better in the months to come.

AMD doesn't just sell GPU's. There's nothing really to argue here since AMD's CEO flat out said they were prioritizing the high end.

AMD focusing on higher-end CPU production during silicon shortage

“There is some compute that we’re leaving underserviced,” Su said. “I would say, particularly, if you look at some of the segments in the PC market, sort of the lower end of the PC market, we have prioritized some of the higher-end commercial SKUs and gaming SKUs and those kinds of things.”

You think they weren't doing the same thing with GPU's? All you need to do is look at the product stack to see they were. Given the choice, these companies aren't going to waste their time with lower end products. That's not where the money is made.

 

[spongiemaster]

If it's strictly for gaming show me PC equivalent for $400.

That's not necessary to make the point. The 6600XT is the performance equivalent to a PS5. That card alone is selling for $400. Even if you had a decent PC to use, you still wouldn't be saving any money just upgrading your GPU to a console equivalent level. It's impossible to build a gaming PC for less, because the GPU alone is equal in cost to a console.

 

[blargh4]

Those old parts you're upgrading from cost money at one time. So you can't not add them to the total cost. BTW: That 1070 isnt going to compete with a PS5 in graphical processing power. So again, for strictly gaming value the console wins.

I'm not doubting the usefulness of a PC, I never did.

And FYI, that PC you linked wouldn't hold a candle to a PS5 in graphics processing power.

While buying a PS5 is undeniably cheaper than an equivalent PC, I'm not sure that the exclusives-driven console ecosystem as a whole wins out in terms of value (though obviously that's a subjective call based on what games you play/how you like to play them). In the time since I last did a major computer upgrade I bought an xbox one x, a switch, a PS5, various games forever locked to those particular machines... fairly comparable amount of money, all told.

 

[KyaraM]

Those old parts you're upgrading from cost money at one time. So you can't not add them to the total cost. BTW: That 1070 isnt going to compete with a PS5 in graphical processing power. So again, for strictly gaming value the console wins.

I'm not doubting the usefulness of a PC, I never did.

And FYI, that PC you linked wouldn't hold a candle to a PS5 in graphics processing power.

First of all, that's a hypothetical upgrade that will likely never happen, as indicated by that "if". Because for what I play, the old system is sufficient as a secondary system as it is, and I could likely roll with it for a while longer regardless. I got a new system just this year because I also do other things with my computer and started to feel the age. It would just be a couple more years with an upgrade than without. But it will still run for a long time without the upgrade.

Second, I can't remember comparing my old 1070 to the PS5 in graphical output. It would honestly be embarrassing if a new console was worse than that old system, that was never even the point. The point was that it's still a good enough card to play pretty much any game on, and will stay for a while longer, even years into the PS5 era. I really don't know what more you even want from it. Plus, you probably need other consoles, too, depending on what you play, meaning it won't stay by just one console for many people. And for the price of two consoles, you start to get quite decent computers already which are able to play almost all the games your two seperate consoles would. Then there is the controller vs mouse and keyboard thematic.

I'm aware that the PC I linked isn't the same as a PS5. I linked a system capable of gaming in that price range, that's it. It's also still far more available than a PS5 and got a bigger gaming library as well.

There are so many factors (like streaming, or voice chat for games that don't have that integrated) why one would choose a computer over a console besides what I stated above, yet the guy I originally replied to somehow thinks PC gaming is dying even with Steam and similar platforms growing year after year, and consoles having to be kept afloat by exclusives and timed exclusives. Sorry if I find that statement stupid and argue against it.

 

[drivinfast247]

That's not necessary to make the point. The 6600XT is the performance equivalent to a PS5. That card alone is selling for $400. Even if you had a decent PC to use, you still wouldn't be saving any money just upgrading your GPU to a console equivalent level. It's impossible to build a gaming PC for less, because the GPU alone is equal in cost to a console.

Correct.

 

[drivinfast247]

First of all, that's a hypothetical upgrade that will likely never happen, as indicated by that "if". Because for what I play, the old system is sufficient as a secondary system as it is, and I could likely roll with it for a while longer regardless. I got a new system just this year because I also do other things with my computer and started to feel the age. It would just be a couple more years with an upgrade than without. But it will still run for a long time without the upgrade.

Second, I can't remember comparing my old 1070 to the PS5 in graphical output. It would honestly be embarrassing if a new console was worse than that old system, that was never even the point. The point was that it's still a good enough card to play pretty much any game on, and will stay for a while longer, even years into the PS5 era. I really don't know what more you even want from it. Plus, you probably need other consoles, too, depending on what you play, meaning it won't stay by just one console for many people. And for the price of two consoles, you start to get quite decent computers already which are able to play almost all the games your two seperate consoles would. Then there is the controller vs mouse and keyboard thematic.

I'm aware that the PC I linked isn't the same as a PS5. I linked a system capable of gaming in that price range, that's it. It's also still far more available than a PS5 and got a bigger gaming library as well.

There are so many factors (like streaming, or voice chat for games that don't have that integrated) why one would choose a computer over a console besides what I stated above, yet the guy I originally replied to somehow thinks PC gaming is dying even with Steam and similar platforms growing year after year, and consoles having to be kept afloat by exclusives and timed exclusives. Sorry if I find that statement stupid and argue against it.

You have your opinion as I have mine.

I can't argue about the lack of availability of the PS5 worldwide

 

[InvalidError]

While buying a PS5 is undeniably cheaper than an equivalent PC, I'm not sure that the exclusives-driven console ecosystem as a whole wins out in terms of value

The biggest factor IMO is that genuinely fun games are still fun even if you have to bump details down a notch or three to get decent performance. And if you really liked a game, you can always replay it later when you get your hands on something that can max it out.

 

[KyaraM]

You have your opinion as I have mine.

I can't argue about the lack of availability of the PS5 worldwide

So you are in the "PC gaming is dead"-camp?

 

[drivinfast247]

So you are in the "PC gaming is dead"-camp?

Never said that.