I know Intel is dipping its toe into the GPU market, but let’s be real, AMD and nVidia are the only options and have been for the last 20+ years. The manufacturers/assemblers of the complete graphics cards are varied and widespread, but the core tech comes from two companies only.
Why is this the case? Or am I mistaken and am just brainwashed by marketing, and there are in fact other viable options for GPUs?
Cheers!
lol “not being able to run games” have you heard of a little thing called the steam deck?
Or indeed the PS5 which runs AMD chips.
And runs the few games it does have pretty poorly, all things considered.
This is nonsense and, frankly, sounds like guerrilla marketing for nvidia.
All things considered, I can play any game I want on the steam deck, which has an old SoC by today’s standards. A newer AMD gpu can run anything at max settings on a linux machine.
So again, either you are grossly misinformed or working for nvidia to sew gentle doubt. Either way, stop it.
Do you not play many games? Good luck playing CP2077 with PT or heck even MSFS2020 at good (read: max) settings on 1440p.
The deck is great but I can’t even run NMS on high settings on it.
Why would I want to play at max settings? That adds very little to the gameplay for me.
I can play any game tweaking settings, and I can render at 720p + upscale if a game is demanding. This makes nearly any game enjoyable.
High settings are irrelevant, but if you want high settings, any AMD card from the past 2 years will more than deliver max performance for anything you throw at it.
For a handheld, portable device that costs under $500, I am okay reducing graphics quality for portability and gameplay.
Runs it better than any PC costing a similar amount.
You can barely get an entry level GPU for that.
I have a steam deck. It’s a portable, it’s really cool for what it is but as a main gaming system it can’t exactly compete visually nor performance wise with being able to run Path Tracing in CP2077 for instance, which I’d say is borderline required to enjoy the game’s visuals.
It’s like comparing the PS3 and the PSP or the N64 and the Gameboy Color. Both are cool, one doesn’t replace the other nor does it have to.
the point was about “not being able to game on amd”
yeah duh mobile chips are less performant, but still forza horizon 4–5 runs better on my steam deck than on my desktop pc with a 2080rtx in linux
Why would I game on shit settings when I can game on good settings for the same/less money?
i’m not sure if you meant like deck vs desktop, but if so, because the deck is a handheld, you can play anywhere
At the same resolution?
i think you probably meant it the other way, can the deck run it in 1080p, but i just tried it in 720p on my desktop and it’s still choppy, although it does make the average fps higher.
also it’s not unplayable, it’s just annoying, and the knowledge that on windows it can do stable 60 fps with “maximum” settings (that’s below “ultra” and “extreme”) in 1080p
also also, this is a “special” thing, most games run just as smoothly as on windows, forzas, and the “new” mafia games are the few exceptions out of my 1000+ games library
No, exactly what I said - does your steam deck run the games better at the same resolution as your pc with a 2080 does?
It running them “better” but at a lower resolution is an unfair comparison.
maybe i wasn’t clear, but i tried 720p on both the desktop and deck, and the nvidia desktop was still choppy
Must have a very weak cpu or some other bottleneck then, as a RTX 2080 is in a whole different league to the GPU in the Steam deck’s APU - like in the 5x better range.
Linux also doesn’t help from all I’ve seen, with terrible drivers for Nvidia gpus.
it is probably the linux nvidia driver, because, as i mentioned before, it runs smoothly on windows on the same machine on higher settings