- Joined
- Apr 1, 2017
- Messages
- 420 (0.15/day)
System Name | The Cum Blaster |
---|---|
Processor | R9 5900x |
Motherboard | Gigabyte X470 Aorus Gaming 7 Wifi |
Cooling | Alphacool Eisbaer LT360 |
Memory | 4x8GB Crucial Ballistix @ 3800C16 |
Video Card(s) | 7900 XTX Nitro+ |
Storage | Lots |
Display(s) | 4k60hz, 4k144hz |
Case | Obsidian 750D Airflow Edition |
Power Supply | EVGA SuperNOVA G3 750W |
nah, in any AMD-related thread he always shits on anything they do, and when he gets proven wrong by time, he always ends up moving the goalpostI'd call it looking at the big picture, personally.
usually it goes like this:
Zen 3 going to be faster than intel in games? nope, no way, don't kid yourself. -> Zen 3 actually ends up being faster than intel in games? heh, it's not an upgrade to intel users anyway!
RDNA 2 going to be faster than 2080 ti in games? nope, no way, don't kid yourself. -> RDNA 2 actually ends up being faster than a 2080 ti AND rivals nvidia's top cards? well, it might be faster than the 2080 ti by a nice margin, but the RT performance isn't up to far, so who cares if their raster performance is on point!
I've seen these two exact scenarios happen in threads he commented on, at this point I wouldn't be surprised if he gets paid to post such tripe... either that or it's a massive cope/buyers remorse, don't know which
first/second gen tessellation was slow as fuck too, who cares. RTRT effects won't become REALLY mainstream until at least 5 years, and won't be mandatory in any game for at least 10 more years/end of the new console generation... and by the time they do become mainstream, current RTX and RX cards will be outdated by then, and you'll be getting much better performance for less in said time, so really it's a flawed argument anywayTheir RT performance, this moment, is no better than first gen RT from NV.
Last edited: