Eh, what does it LOOK like. FPS is so 1998.

Night Train to Wakanda: cretinbob: Eh, what does it LOOK like. FPS is so 1998.

Unless you're turning DLSS and FSR off it's going to look bad. It's only function is when you are running low end hardware like the new phoenix point APUs which are supposedly getting VERY close to a 3050 mobile G

what? DLSS and FSR have to be on to for these things to look good? I've only seen that as an option.
Full disclosure, I run a Quadro 4000 RTX because I do video editing. The Quadro was the first to have RTX. Unlike gaming cards, it draws EVERY SINGLE PIXEL. Gaming cards drop pixels and sacrifice quality for extra frames. They are crippled basically.
FPS isn't the benchmark it once was has basically been a layperson's benchmark for years. It began as a brag. "I got 28 FPS in Quake" meant you got your overclock to work or you were able to afford a faster CPU or early GPU. Once the average system broke 30 FPS, it began to lose meaning , and over 60 has very little effect and again, FPS is just a brag.
Passmark is an actual benchmark, Tom probably still uses it. It goes through all of the functions and instruction sets available and generates a score. Passmark has been compiling these and ranking them since shortly after time began. They then take that score, do some more math and come up with a value score.
Well, what does that even mean?
It means if I am poor, on a budget, what card give me the best performance PER DOLLAR SPENT as opposed to the best card. Don't conflate those two.

And the video card of all video cards that is the best value based on math and science and not opinion is the Radeon RX 5700 XT . You'll have to sort the list manually and don't get too excited, the #2 card is the R9 380. I'd love to continue discussing display history, the S3 was Savage, especially because today's have so many other functions besides drawing pixels because CPUs hare hitting brick walls.

At the end of the day, it's about target audience and not everyone needs the top shelf GPU or understand that they need. FPS is marketing. I'd love a Quadro 8000 RTX, and now I see a new GV 10 exists as of last week which has a slightly higher score, but I can't pay $5000 for a single video card yet.

Oh yeah, my Quadro which everyone thinks is terrible because it's not a gaming card, games in 4k above 60 fps. That's well above persistence and the limiting factor in gaming these days is internet latency and lag.
But people should keep believing the ads instead of researching and understanding. Take my word for it, right?



//an essay a day does something something
///it's a machine. We are interacting with machines, not people

and I have need for the Quadro and wouldn't recommend it for gaming, but the prices was equivalent at the time. It used to be the Quadro would be the $1000 card and the top end gaming card would be $500. I'm glad I went with it because there is a huge difference in the quality of my finished product compared to a card that doesn't draw every single pixel. 20 years ago, no way. Then FPS would have been an issue.

I should put down the pipe.
Pipe is life.