Sparkle Arc A770 ROC

[sLowEnd]

And that's what you missed. Go back and re-read the review. What I'm getting at is that you are making your statement based on the general averages, whereas what I was saying earlier is based on individual benchmarks, in which many favor the A770 over certain other GPU's. Put another way, it's very dependent on the game.

There's always exceptions, but that doesn't make the product competitive in a general context. You didn't mention any specific games in your statement:

Lets be fair, this A770 is competing with the 3060ti and 4060 both of which are either $280 or more. So it's it's not an unfair price, but yes, the other cards are a much better value at their $230 price. They are THE value cards right now.

One wouldn't say a 7600X generally competes with the 14900K just because it matches it in CS2

 

[lexluthermiester]

There's always exceptions

Those are a lot of exceptions.

You didn't mention any specific games in your statement

And I'm not going to when you, and others, can more easily go READ for yourself.

One wouldn't say a 7600X generally competes with the 14900K just because it matches it in CS2

Are deliberately taking my statements out of context?

 

[sLowEnd]

Those are a lot of exceptions.

And I'm not going to when you, and others, can more easily go READ for yourself.

Are deliberately taking my statements out of context?

To me, this is a generalized statement:

Lets be fair, this A770 is competing with the 3060ti and 4060 both of which are either $280 or more. So it's it's not an unfair price, but yes, the other cards are a much better value at their $230 price. They are THE value cards right now.

A more contextualized statement would be something like this:

Lets be fair, this A770 is competing 4060 and can even hang with the 3060 Ti in some of the games tested. Both cards are either $280 or more. So it's it's not an unfair price, but yes, the other cards are a much better value at their $230 price. They are THE value cards right now.

I'm not interested in getting into an extended argument about semantics with you here, but I hope you can understand what kicked off this conversation in the first place.

 

[lexluthermiester]

To me, this is a generalized statement:

A more contextualized statement would be something like this:

I'm not interested in getting into an extended argument about semantics with you here, but I hope you can understand what kicked off this conversation in the first place.

The reason we're having this debate is because what I said was taken out of context. So let's both of us move along.

 

[john_]

@W1zzard

No support for DLSS (yes I know it's an NV exclusive, still doesn't change the fact that you can have it on one option and not on others)

If we are going to push Nvidia's proprietary techs as a plus and also use them as negative points for the competition, playing in other words the Nvidia marketing game(sorry but that's what it is), then why isn't for example AMD's AFMF 2 in that list? It offers the option to have upscaling and Frame Generation in every game out there, no matter if that game supports upscaling or Frame Generation. And that should be a negative in every Nvidia review because "the gamer would need to wait for the game to implement upscaling and frame generation" or "older games that could be played at 4K with good frame rates on mid range cards, will never support DLSS and Frame Generation, so the gamer will have to do with what their card can achieve without upscaling and Frame Generation". Upscaling and Frame Generation is used multiple times in the conclusion to convince everybody that the RTX 4060 is the best option, so having upscaling and Frame Generation IN EVERY GAME OUT THERE, it should also be considered a plus. Still, AFMF 2 is ignored.

I can understand putting DLSS, Frame Generation and even CUDA as positives in every Nvidia review, but using the Nvidia proprietary techs as negatives in other product reviews, I am against it. Even AFMF 2 shouldn't be used, I am just using it as an example to explain my point of view. Let's not forget that a good percentage of gamers are against upscaling and frame generation, feeling that those techs are affecting visual quality in a negative way, no matter what others may say.

Of course I am just a member here expression an objection. The reviewer chooses what he feels is the correct thing to do and I am pretty sure many will disagree with my opinion.

 

[W1zzard]

then why isn't for example AMD's AFMF 2 in that list? It offers the option to have upscaling and Frame Generation in every game out there, no matter if that game supports upscaling or Frame Generation

Have you used it? How does it look like? Latency? What about in-game UI, text overlays etc?

 

[john_]

Have you used it? How does it look like? Latency? What about in-game UI, text overlays etc?

Yes I have use it. I played Rise Of The Tomb Raider a few months ago that only offers DLSS upscaling. With upscaling from something like 3200X1800 (don't remember exactly, but I think is was this resolution) and Frame Generation enabled I had over 60 fps in almost all the game with the exception of the city of Kitezh, where probably not just the RX 6600, but also the R5 5500 had a problem to achieve playable framerates. So, 4K resolution on my TV, upscaling, Frame Generation, an R5 5500, 16GB of VRAM (I upgraded latter), RX 6600, 4K, all settings to maximum and while the benchmark was reporting something between 20-50 fps, the AMD Adrenaline overlay was reporting between 40 and 100 fps, or something like that. I didn't kept detailed notes expecting to have a dialog with you about the game months latter. The experience was possitive with smooth graphics. Considering it was a solo game whatever latency there might be there, wasn't felt at all. UI and overlays where just fine and I liked that I could trick myself that I was playing at 4K, all settings maximum and good framerates.

And that's a honest description of my experience. It's your choice to accept it or not. But it works. Maybe you should try it, but not as a reviewer who will be hunting for every pixel that FSR will "misplace" compared to DLSS, or for every ms of latency that AFMF 2 wouldn't be able to reduce (it does promisses lower latency) compared to Nvidia's solution. But as a gamer who enjoys the game, not as someone who freezes the image to investigate pixels.