Next-Gen GPUs: What Matters Most to You?

[AusWolf]

@AusWolf I love open standards too, even more so, but I'm also OK with the path to them potentially being paved with a innovative, trailblazing closed standard. From my chair, we're all benefitting in the long term from that happening in this space in particular in the recent past. Now if an open standard can topple DLSS (or even just cure the artefacts that ruin my immersion the most) I will absolutely cheer for it and welcome it with open arms, and I have used FSR on non RTX hardware to positive effect too even in it's current state, hell AMD's FG has completely mooted Nvidia FG as a selling point feature to me, yet we wouldn't have it without DLSSFG.

And with that perhaps it seems like we're right back to agree to disagree, yet we both open this can of worms relatively often don't we

That's the thing... If you only support the open standard if it surpasses the closed one in quality, then you're not really supporting it, are you?

Personally, I cannot in good conscience pay for (attempts at) monopolising the gaming industry through closed, brand-dependent feature sets. Even if the open standard is inferior in quality, I'd rather put up with it. But that's just me, I'm a man of principles.

 

[wolf]

That's the thing... If you only support the open standard if it surpasses the closed one in quality, then you're not really supporting it, are you?

Personally, I cannot in good conscience pay for (attempts at) monopolising the gaming industry through closed, brand-dependent feature sets. Even if the open standard is inferior in quality, I'd rather put up with it. But that's just me, I'm a man of principles.

I don't see it as so ... shall I say black and white, I can and do support both it just depends (only a sith deals in absolutes, and FSR FG is inferior yet I support it above DLSS FG due to several factors, for example), and I have principals too, both in this subject and perhaps much more strongly in others, yet you might call me more of a realist than an idealist.

 

[AusWolf]

I don't see it as so ... shall I say black and white, I can and do support both it just depends (only a sith deals in absolutes, and FSR FG is inferior yet I support it above DLSS FG due to several factors, for example), and I have principals too, both in this subject and perhaps much more strongly in others, yet you might call me more of a realist than an idealist.

I get what you mean. To be fair, I'm OK with having proprietary tech in my hands as long as it's something truly life-changing, and doesn't cost more than the alternative. For example, my car has a heated windscreen that only Ford has (or had for a while) due to some legal trademark bullshit reasons, and I absolutely love it. Besides, my car costs half of an equally equipped BMW, so I didn't pay any extra for it, either.

On the topic, though, as long as the Nvidia narrative is "pay 50-100 quid more for our card because it's got um... well, DLSS version 5328647 that only runs on the newest shiny thing", it'll be a hard pass for me.

 

[Vayra86]

No worries, I'm saying later that was an optimistic best case scenario given what we know, so we still got some open features sooner, but I'll leave it there for that topic. As for the rest I have varying levels of agreement and disagreement but I think I've hogged thread space enough making my point.

Very much looking forward to what the next 6-9 months bring, and there's no way I'm spending $1500+ USD / $2500+ AUD on a video card so I'm very interested in the RDNA4 vs midrange Blackwell battle. $700 USD tops, so here's hoping for that upgrade in all key areas, which I think will be realistic in that segment.

I'll be very honest, if Nvidia makes a killer product in the upper midrange/high end I might just jump ship again. Much like you I am also part realist And yeah, looking forward. I think that's the healthy approach...let's see what's coming I have no need... but even a solid sidegrade at a not too high expense would be neat.

 

[Daven]

I'll be very honest, if Nvidia makes a killer product in the upper midrange/high end I might just jump ship again. Much like you I am also part realist And yeah, looking forward. I think that's the healthy approach...let's see what's coming I have no need... but even a solid sidegrade at a not too high expense would be neat.

According to most rumors, the Geforce 5000 series will just be a boring iteration with astronomical power requirements. Not one rumor has mentioned any new features, better efficiency or better pricing.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

My vote is for energy efficiency but for me also equally is pricing.

 

[Legacy-ZA]

4080 Super for $200 less.
4070 Super 14% faster for same launch price.

How can that be next generation pricing if not priced higher than the predecessors?

I'm not saying they're cheap, and I'd love for the prices to go down.

The brainwashing already has set in folks, no wonder Leather-Jacket man keeps doing it & keeps getting away with it. No, these aren't xx80's, or xx70's. They have always been 4060 and 4070 masquerading as higher-tier cards. He has done this before.

I would have put two of the voting options as one thing. Price & Power; these two things are directly correlated and both are a major concern at this point.

 

[damric]

I voted pricing. That's always bottom line.

Performance (including VRAM) and energy consumption are extremely important but are easier to swallow if the price is right.

Today, pure raster performance is more important than RT. The upscaling cheats are nice especially when you can't afford the next tier up.

 

[Cavernoso]

NVidia will shit on gamers heads because there is no competition.
AMD will not be able to compete as usual and they will not try to compete with lower prices.
Intel will keep crying and shrinking (they can't work with anything that has more than 4 cores so they cant do GPU thing)

 

[lexluthermiester]

Voted Pricing but really I want improvements all of those areas. I do agree strongly with all those who voted the Energy point. We need cards that perform well and use LESS than 250w of power and use a connector that is actually safe...

 

[1d10t]

I was going pick Energy Efficiency but then I realized I hate upscaling so I went Raster Performance.
Despite the hype, buzzing going forward or whatever, I hate temporary or even blurrier fast approximates. It's mind-boggling to think that today's $900 card needs stretcher while a $300 card from 2008 has its legroom.
Play in QHD and always be, I want to play better than UHD, not below it under the illusion of "better".

 

[Craptacular]

I love how everyone complains about the prices of GPUs but then doesn't select it pricing in the poll.

 

[Daven]

Now with over 50k votes, RT has dropped into ‘no one cares’ percentages and FG/Upscaling is nonexistent.

This is a bit surprising because of how passionate many here advocate for those features. Very low percentage for pricing is unexplainable.

 

[Marcus L]

Now with over 50k votes, RT has dropped into ‘no one cares’ percentages and FG/Upscaling is nonexistent.

This is a bit surprising because of how passionate many here advocate for those features. Very low percentage for pricing is unexplainable.

I would have chosen pricing instead of my vote for raster only on my phone it was hidden as the last option and I only realised afterwards when I scrolled down and then it appeared, I wonder how many people the same thing happened to, cause prices are ridiculous at this moment in time

 

[AusWolf]

Now with over 50k votes, RT has dropped into ‘no one cares’ percentages and FG/Upscaling is nonexistent.

Because it is 100% possible to make a good game without them. Also, these things are features in modern graphics, and not parts of a graphics card to sell them by, imo.

Imagine if Nvidia had tried to sell Geforce 6000 series cards at a higher price 20 years ago because they supported DirectX 9.0c with Shader Model 3.0 unlike their ATi equivalents. No one would have bought them.

Very low percentage for pricing is unexplainable.

I would have voted price if I was planning to do generational upgrades like I have been in the last decade or so. But these upgrades are so small that they're really not worth the hype. So now, I'm planning to do an RDNA 4 upgrade (if it turns out to be any good), and leave it as it is for 2-4 generations. For such a long time, it'll be money well spent.

 

[64K]

Now with over 50k votes, RT has dropped into ‘no one cares’ percentages and FG/Upscaling is nonexistent.

I guess you missed post #94 by _roman_ where he said he voted multiple times for his choice.

Also, you don't realize this but if the poll is true then it makes AMD appear foolish indeed for saying that one of their goals for the next generation is much improved RT performance. I have yet to see even one AMD fan step up and explain why in the world would AMD be doing such a foolish thing when so few care about RT.

 

[Daven]

I guess you missed post #94 by _roman_ where he said he voted multiple times for his choice.

Also, you don't realize this but if the poll is true then it makes AMD appear foolish indeed for saying that one of their goals for the next generation is much improved RT performance. I have yet to see even one AMD fan step up and explain why in the world would AMD be doing such a foolish thing when so few care about RT.

Even if everyone voted multiple times and all choices were important, I expect even percentages. The law of averages means that the most important features get the most votes.

All the players are being foolish with ray tracing. Apple, Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Qualcomm, etc are being stupid for concentrating on ray tracing. Fluid, native, synced, 120 fps, 4k rasterization with all eye candle and anti-aliasing settings at max are good enough but even then still no substitute for good games that are just plain fun regardless of graphical beauty.

And the masses in this poll agree by picking efficiency and raster over gimmicks like DLSS and RT. I still expected price to do better though.

 

[AusWolf]

All the players are being foolish with ray tracing. Apple, Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Qualcomm, etc are being stupid for concentrating on ray tracing. Fluid, native, synced, 120 fps, 4k rasterization with all eye candle and anti-aliasing settings at max are good enough but even then still no substitute for good games that are just plain fun regardless of graphical beauty.

I agree, but the poll is asking what you want in a graphics card, and not what you want in games.

 

[64K]

Even if everyone voted multiple times and all choices were important, I expect even percentages. The law of averages means that the most important features get the most votes.

No. What it implies is that an AMD or Nvidia fan or anyone with a preference and a hard-on to get their way can skew the results of polls.

All the players are being foolish with ray tracing. Apple, Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Qualcomm, etc are being stupid for concentrating on ray tracing. Fluid, native, synced, 120 fps, 4k rasterization with all eye candle and anti-aliasing settings at max are good enough but even then still no substitute for good games that are just plain fun regardless of graphical beauty.

When an entire industry is moving in the same direction it doesn't mean that everyone besides a few fans here are foolish. It means something else.

I will agree with you though that good games that are fun to play is far more important than eye-candy but in that we are both in the minority imo.

 

[AusWolf]

When an entire industry is moving in the same direction it doesn't mean that everyone besides a few fans here are foolish. It means something else.

It just seems like the industry is moving in a different direction compared to what gamers want (if we can believe in the validity of the poll results).

 

[lexluthermiester]

Apple, Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Qualcomm, etc are being stupid for concentrating on ray tracing.

I fully disagree. Raytracing is an important feature. It needs further refinement and advancement.

 

[tommesfps]

Over 35000 (~67% of) votes for energy efficiency, guys, comon....

 

[QuietBob]

For myself, I wish for better energy efficiency and raster performance.

In some recently published titles you need one of the top cards for playable framerates in 1080p. This trend will only get worse, as we already have games that require upscaling and/or frame generation to achieve 60 fps in 1080p -- and that is without ray tracing.

GPUs like the 4090 or non-reference 7900XTX can easily consume 400+ W. Now imagine gaming on it for a few hours in the summer when your room temperature is already at 30 C. Contrary to popular belief, most people don't actually have AC at home. And with all the extra heat coming from your PC, your gaming experience in the latest AAA title is a glorious 1080p60 on an $800+ card.

For Nvidia, I wish for more sensible pricing in the mid and high segment. I don't really care how expensive the RTX5090 will end up being. People who buy halo products will pay the price anyway, however outrageous it may be.

For AMD, I wish for better RT performance, because this is what the market expects. Though realistically speaking, we are two or maybe three generations away from the time when mid-range GPUs will deliver satisfactory ray tracing performance at acceptable fps and cost.

And for Intel I wish them to offer real competition in the mid tier. Alchemist was a decent achievement, but we need to see more predictable performance from Battlemage without relying on constant driver updates.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Over 35000 (~67% of) votes for energy efficiency, guys, comon....

It's an important point.

 

[Daven]

I fully disagree. Raytracing is an important feature. It needs further refinement and advancement.

Certainly the industry agrees with you. This poll will have its flaws and inaccuracies but it seems with the recent rumors that the path to RT will eventually require kW GPUs and most here will reject such offerings.