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!
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.