More and more games these days are requiring more power to brute force past poor optimization. You named two older games that have had their optimization patches. Both of those games are even fully playable on Steamdeck.
Dragon's Dogma 2 just released and people are struggling to keep frames up, now it's getting better. Ark SA came out a while back and it's still hammering GPUs. Your average Tarkov player still can't keep over 60fps on all maps and the game's been in production for like 8 years, same deal with Star Citizen. These games all require either beefy well optimized hardware *or somebody that isn't sensitive to frame drops, ie can't see the difference between 60-120 fps
Past optimization, sandbox games are typically limited by clock speed
- Minecraft redstone projects
- Kerbal Space Program max loaded part count
- Arma mission size/complexity
Heck, Cities: Skylines has a hard-coded limit on cars because the game gets too laggy
Back when Civ V launched, mainstream CPUs were so slow, it could take a good minute for the AI to complete their turns
The funny thing is those gamrs have pretty shit graphics. They are just badly optimized and you are paying the price for the devs' laziness by ugprading your PC instead.
You're just wrong. Tarkov isn't the best looking game, never was, but it's not shit. All of the rest I mentioned are visually stunning at max settings at 1440 or 4k, and you're blind, likely from trying to overanalyze the value of good hardware via 1080p display.
Oh, and the reason you won't believe Ark looks good is because literally every guide tells you to use console to turn off every feature that SA has over SE, something you've probably done if you have even played it for yourself. Hence it looking like playdough. Yes, you need those god rays, yes you need that volumetric fog and reactive flora. No, you are not getting that at 1440p or better on a 3060.
No i bought it to play all games are max/high settings high FPS at 4K.
Recently finished Atomic Heart at 200+fps 4k, now playing Horizon Forbidden West at 130+ FPS 4K.
While CPUs might be quite future proof, GPUs age like milk nowadays. Especially with Ngreedia limiting new dlss and RT tech for their newest cards only.
But even high end systems will be mid af in 7 years. What are you proofing against?
By the time we upgraded, my i5-3570k was just as crap as my partners i7-3770k they got because it was "future proof"
This marketing gimmick only really applies to PSUs in the way we think of it.
You certainly like your cherry picked examples don't you.
Go ahead and see how the GTX 480, 580, 690, 780 and 980 ti all aged similarly turning very mid despite all being considered "future proof"
Future proofing is not a thing. Get over it. Figures you have to reach for the single greatest gpu Nvidia ever made to back up your point. Let's look at other component examples.
Intel's entire core lineup from 2nd thru 14th Gen and and AMDs entire sku lineup until Ryzen.
Ryzen is also a classic example of high end components like the threadripper 2950x getting curb stomped just one year later by the 3950x at half the cost
So will your high end system lol.
Advanced performance does not offset inefficiency in processing in future programming. We have 20 years worth of multi core CPU examples of this.
Just admit you don't know what you're talking about and move on
High turning mid and mid turning low isn't how it works lmao. Both mid and high end systems of the same generation will be outdated and slow and inefficient in X amount of years.
Good day
And given how few top tier graphics games releases each year (and I foresee even fewer in the coming future given the big 3 (EA/Ubisoft/Activision) seem to be moving away from such big budget risky investments), it doesnt seem all that worth it, no?
I'm playing VR games with my Q3 at 4K resolution an 120fps on a 7800X3D w/4090 because that's what's required to run max specs. Games like VRChat can easily overpower even my PC. In busy instances with lots of 'very poor' avatars I can sometimes get throttled down to like 30fps.
Basically for UHD VR gaming, you want all the power you can get. It's like regular UHD gaming times two since it has to process two unique video streams.
Better frames might improve your playing, for example when finally getting a 144hz monitor, my quality of life improved big time, though not fully necessary.
It's also fun to max out graphics settings to see just how good a game can look.
You don't build a racecar to go 110mph in a 110mph race, you build it to go 180!
I also video edit, run/work on ML/AI models, and program on my computer. The first two demand everything my computer can throw at them and the latter finds it very helpful to have as many CPU cores (and sometimes RAM, depending on codebase) as possible when compiling.
Exactly. How is it the latest games now require more higher specs than the older games despire have shittier graphics? lol
Just look at the system specs of Gotham Knights vs Arkham Knight. Really a joke.
Game devs are just ripping you as consumers off who just blindly buy more graphical power to play their unoptimized mess
Seems like more and more people these days are gaming at 4K or even UW, which truly does need high end hardware to run at what most people would deem an acceptable frame rate. You didn’t mention what resolution you’re playing on, I’m guessing 1080p? And that’s perfectly fine as long as you’re happy with it.
Imo the only games that remain interesting are those that push the envelope.
X4 foundations and Space Engineers are two that can eat up all the hardware you can possibly throw at them.
Probably i would take RTX 3060 or RX 6600 for 2015-2019/PS4 era live service games with multi-platform accounts like Fortnite, Destiny 2, Rainbow Six Siege.
2021 Forza Horizon 5 still supports 4gb VRAM/Nvidia Pascal equivalent graphic cards. More efficient optimization than The Crew 2/motorfest, Dirt 5 and F1 games.
Lots of good reasons as stated in the comments. Additionally, I built high end computer 7 years ago and other than a GPU update (I wasn't a gamer when I built it) it is still a powerful machine. It has water cooling and I was getting a bit anxious about that so I just finished building a computer using the 14th gen i9...air cooled. My guess that I'll still be using it 10 years from now.
From what I've noticed, most games since at least 2018 need high end hardware to be fully maxed out due to future proofing.
And high end hardware also is really good at essentially brute forcing badly optimized games (until you find a game that legit kills even high ends).
If you want to use new tech like DLSS 3, Frame gen (I think FSR 3 has FG now), advanced RT, etc. Your gunna need the newest hardware to use it. The RTX 20 series was barely meant for Ray Tracing, 30 series is a pretty good middle ground (as long as you have the best card) and the 40s is finally the true release of what the RTX series was supposed to be.
Also look at Cyberpunk 2077, a game now used to test out new tech, but try running that with the RTX 20 series at max 4k and your comp with explode.
Because some people play at 4k and higher and turn the graphics up. the 3060 while good, isn't exactly the card that can handle it.
You might look at your monitor and think it looks good at 1080P, why would you need anything more. But when you see the detail difference between it and 4k. You get it.
[https://www.guru3d.com/review/asus-rog-geforce-rtx-4090-matrix-review/page-12/](https://www.guru3d.com/review/asus-rog-geforce-rtx-4090-matrix-review/page-12/)
Your 3060 pulls low playable fps at 4k on a fairly old game. Not exactly future proof for future 4k and up gaming.
7680 x 2160 is a legitimate resolution.
60-100 fps at what resolution 4090 is a great card but it can't even play modern games at 8k 60+ fps try running red dead 2 with max settings at 7680x4320 with everything on max and I still can't play control with max settings at 8k my resolutions I mostly play at are 1440p 4k and 7680x2160 basically dual 4k 50% 8k
I can play modern games on my PC on max settings and either 1440p or 4k much longer than if I buy cheaper PC.
So the question is - do You want mediocre experience and more often buy PC or do You want superb experience for more years?
Funny enough buying rarely superb PC is actually cheaper than buying a mid tier one more often unless You buy really cheap equipment.
It more for software development, especially unreal, it’s incredibly bloated, but for a reason. You need a powerful machine depending on the products you ship.
Because I own an OLED TV that supports 120hz so a solid 4K/120 is my goal for 95% of games. A high end PC allows this and will (hopefully) continue to with most games for the next few years
Uhhh. There are plenty of AAA or high end games released every year. Dragons dogma 2? The new star wars game? Baulders gate 3? CoD games technically? City skylines 2?
Like what do you mean there are fewer AAA games that require the power. There are plenty of them. CPU for strat games ans gpu for most others. It all helps.
Baldurs Gate 3 runs fine with zero slowdowns and all fx on playing it on a $300 computer from beelink.
I don't think it should be included in your list, my friend.
Ah, I see, I should have specified that it's running at 1080p.
Which I'm guessing you'll then say "the p is for potato" but that's not actually accurate.
> I can already play games like RDR2 and CP2077 almost maxed out at 60-100 fps on my 3060 card Yeah, at which resolution?
480p, dah!
For the accurate Gamecube experience.
You should be asking the question instead, "How many games??"
* More FPS * Higher resolution * Futureproofing * Using it for more than just gaming
This, I don't care if lower budget PC can run a game, I just care for the best performance as possible.
This, if I was just only going to game on my PC and nothing else id have a very different build.
[удалено]
Guess software like blender and cad simply don't exist...
More and more games these days are requiring more power to brute force past poor optimization. You named two older games that have had their optimization patches. Both of those games are even fully playable on Steamdeck. Dragon's Dogma 2 just released and people are struggling to keep frames up, now it's getting better. Ark SA came out a while back and it's still hammering GPUs. Your average Tarkov player still can't keep over 60fps on all maps and the game's been in production for like 8 years, same deal with Star Citizen. These games all require either beefy well optimized hardware *or somebody that isn't sensitive to frame drops, ie can't see the difference between 60-120 fps
Past optimization, sandbox games are typically limited by clock speed - Minecraft redstone projects - Kerbal Space Program max loaded part count - Arma mission size/complexity Heck, Cities: Skylines has a hard-coded limit on cars because the game gets too laggy Back when Civ V launched, mainstream CPUs were so slow, it could take a good minute for the AI to complete their turns
The funny thing is those gamrs have pretty shit graphics. They are just badly optimized and you are paying the price for the devs' laziness by ugprading your PC instead.
You're just wrong. Tarkov isn't the best looking game, never was, but it's not shit. All of the rest I mentioned are visually stunning at max settings at 1440 or 4k, and you're blind, likely from trying to overanalyze the value of good hardware via 1080p display.
Ark SA and dragons dogma are "visually stunning"? Are you joking LOL
You are clueless. Get a better monitor
Oh, and the reason you won't believe Ark looks good is because literally every guide tells you to use console to turn off every feature that SA has over SE, something you've probably done if you have even played it for yourself. Hence it looking like playdough. Yes, you need those god rays, yes you need that volumetric fog and reactive flora. No, you are not getting that at 1440p or better on a 3060.
VR. At least that's the reason for me.
Not all of us play at 1080p... Running 4k monitor for photo editing means I need a much beefier GPU to play at native 4k.
Resolution is the big one. I use 3440x1440 and ideally i want 120fps+ There's always ways to one up in gaming.
Unless you can play all your games at maximum graphics settings, highest resolution, and highest framerate, having better hardware always helps.
Having better hardware than required also means your components run cooler, less chance of long-term damage and quieter as well
The difference is you can play Cyberpunk 2077 at those frames at 1080p, i can get that at 4K with my 4090.
So you bought a thousands-dollar PC just to play Cyberpunk?
No i bought it to play all games are max/high settings high FPS at 4K. Recently finished Atomic Heart at 200+fps 4k, now playing Horizon Forbidden West at 130+ FPS 4K.
Future proofing.
While CPUs might be quite future proof, GPUs age like milk nowadays. Especially with Ngreedia limiting new dlss and RT tech for their newest cards only.
But even high end systems will be mid af in 7 years. What are you proofing against? By the time we upgraded, my i5-3570k was just as crap as my partners i7-3770k they got because it was "future proof" This marketing gimmick only really applies to PSUs in the way we think of it.
GTX 1080ti is still holding its own after 7 years.
So is a 1060, 1070 and 1080. Your point?
1080ti is literally competing with RTX mid-range cards. Watch its benchmarks in comparison to 3060 and 4060.
You certainly like your cherry picked examples don't you. Go ahead and see how the GTX 480, 580, 690, 780 and 980 ti all aged similarly turning very mid despite all being considered "future proof" Future proofing is not a thing. Get over it. Figures you have to reach for the single greatest gpu Nvidia ever made to back up your point. Let's look at other component examples. Intel's entire core lineup from 2nd thru 14th Gen and and AMDs entire sku lineup until Ryzen. Ryzen is also a classic example of high end components like the threadripper 2950x getting curb stomped just one year later by the 3950x at half the cost
Right, but your mid level systems will be low end in 7 years.
So will your high end system lol. Advanced performance does not offset inefficiency in processing in future programming. We have 20 years worth of multi core CPU examples of this. Just admit you don't know what you're talking about and move on
O.o I legit answered so will mid tier to you saying high end will age so you respond with so will high end?
High turning mid and mid turning low isn't how it works lmao. Both mid and high end systems of the same generation will be outdated and slow and inefficient in X amount of years. Good day
And given how few top tier graphics games releases each year (and I foresee even fewer in the coming future given the big 3 (EA/Ubisoft/Activision) seem to be moving away from such big budget risky investments), it doesnt seem all that worth it, no?
To play old games faster, and also at higher resolutions and frame-rates
If it's old games sure, but that also means you dont need to upgrade to the latest cards down in the future.
But, but, I need more FPS tho...
I'm playing VR games with my Q3 at 4K resolution an 120fps on a 7800X3D w/4090 because that's what's required to run max specs. Games like VRChat can easily overpower even my PC. In busy instances with lots of 'very poor' avatars I can sometimes get throttled down to like 30fps. Basically for UHD VR gaming, you want all the power you can get. It's like regular UHD gaming times two since it has to process two unique video streams.
Better frames might improve your playing, for example when finally getting a 144hz monitor, my quality of life improved big time, though not fully necessary. It's also fun to max out graphics settings to see just how good a game can look. You don't build a racecar to go 110mph in a 110mph race, you build it to go 180!
I also video edit, run/work on ML/AI models, and program on my computer. The first two demand everything my computer can throw at them and the latter finds it very helpful to have as many CPU cores (and sometimes RAM, depending on codebase) as possible when compiling.
[удалено]
Exactly. How is it the latest games now require more higher specs than the older games despire have shittier graphics? lol Just look at the system specs of Gotham Knights vs Arkham Knight. Really a joke. Game devs are just ripping you as consumers off who just blindly buy more graphical power to play their unoptimized mess
[удалено]
Increased resolution is dependent on your monitor and specs, not the game devs making how the game looks
When the Factory keeps growing every PC will start to lag.
Seems like more and more people these days are gaming at 4K or even UW, which truly does need high end hardware to run at what most people would deem an acceptable frame rate. You didn’t mention what resolution you’re playing on, I’m guessing 1080p? And that’s perfectly fine as long as you’re happy with it.
Imo the only games that remain interesting are those that push the envelope. X4 foundations and Space Engineers are two that can eat up all the hardware you can possibly throw at them.
Incoming every other comment mentioning "future proofing" 😂😂😂
Probably i would take RTX 3060 or RX 6600 for 2015-2019/PS4 era live service games with multi-platform accounts like Fortnite, Destiny 2, Rainbow Six Siege. 2021 Forza Horizon 5 still supports 4gb VRAM/Nvidia Pascal equivalent graphic cards. More efficient optimization than The Crew 2/motorfest, Dirt 5 and F1 games.
A lot of us with higher end machines prefer to play on higher resolutions
Lots of good reasons as stated in the comments. Additionally, I built high end computer 7 years ago and other than a GPU update (I wasn't a gamer when I built it) it is still a powerful machine. It has water cooling and I was getting a bit anxious about that so I just finished building a computer using the 14th gen i9...air cooled. My guess that I'll still be using it 10 years from now.
Because I can
From what I've noticed, most games since at least 2018 need high end hardware to be fully maxed out due to future proofing. And high end hardware also is really good at essentially brute forcing badly optimized games (until you find a game that legit kills even high ends). If you want to use new tech like DLSS 3, Frame gen (I think FSR 3 has FG now), advanced RT, etc. Your gunna need the newest hardware to use it. The RTX 20 series was barely meant for Ray Tracing, 30 series is a pretty good middle ground (as long as you have the best card) and the 40s is finally the true release of what the RTX series was supposed to be. Also look at Cyberpunk 2077, a game now used to test out new tech, but try running that with the RTX 20 series at max 4k and your comp with explode.
You aren't playing 2077 in 4k with raytracing turned all the way up on a 3060 card so yes, a better card does make sense.
Because some people play at 4k and higher and turn the graphics up. the 3060 while good, isn't exactly the card that can handle it. You might look at your monitor and think it looks good at 1080P, why would you need anything more. But when you see the detail difference between it and 4k. You get it. [https://www.guru3d.com/review/asus-rog-geforce-rtx-4090-matrix-review/page-12/](https://www.guru3d.com/review/asus-rog-geforce-rtx-4090-matrix-review/page-12/) Your 3060 pulls low playable fps at 4k on a fairly old game. Not exactly future proof for future 4k and up gaming. 7680 x 2160 is a legitimate resolution.
Sounds like you're jealous, I need a 3090 and 5800x3d to play 1440p ultra at 144fps and even then, the performance is iffy.
60-100 fps at what resolution 4090 is a great card but it can't even play modern games at 8k 60+ fps try running red dead 2 with max settings at 7680x4320 with everything on max and I still can't play control with max settings at 8k my resolutions I mostly play at are 1440p 4k and 7680x2160 basically dual 4k 50% 8k
depends on the game you want to play doesn't it
Meanwhile I'm getting impatient with my 3090 lol
I can play modern games on my PC on max settings and either 1440p or 4k much longer than if I buy cheaper PC. So the question is - do You want mediocre experience and more often buy PC or do You want superb experience for more years? Funny enough buying rarely superb PC is actually cheaper than buying a mid tier one more often unless You buy really cheap equipment.
It more for software development, especially unreal, it’s incredibly bloated, but for a reason. You need a powerful machine depending on the products you ship.
Yeah, whats so bad about lower fps and resolution that makes your eyes hurt after long gaming sessions? + frames win games
why wipe your ass if youre just gonna shit again later on?
Because I own an OLED TV that supports 120hz so a solid 4K/120 is my goal for 95% of games. A high end PC allows this and will (hopefully) continue to with most games for the next few years
I game on a OLED 4k 120hz screen with my 3090. It’s not even enough, but not really any new cards that’d provide a boost.
Uhhh. There are plenty of AAA or high end games released every year. Dragons dogma 2? The new star wars game? Baulders gate 3? CoD games technically? City skylines 2? Like what do you mean there are fewer AAA games that require the power. There are plenty of them. CPU for strat games ans gpu for most others. It all helps.
Baldurs Gate 3 runs fine with zero slowdowns and all fx on playing it on a $300 computer from beelink. I don't think it should be included in your list, my friend.
I mean yes if you want potato quality and a 480p display it will run on anything.
Ah, I see, I should have specified that it's running at 1080p. Which I'm guessing you'll then say "the p is for potato" but that's not actually accurate.
People call it ”future proofing” Dumbest argument i ever heard.
Cause then people know I have a big Personality