• 0 Posts
  • 6 Comments
Joined 20 days ago
Cake day: June 16th, 2025
  • RazgrizOne@piefed.ziptoTechnology@lemmy.world•NVIDIA is full of shitEnglish
    1·
    2 minutes ago

    I assume people mean 3440x1440 when they say 1440 as it’s way more common than 2560x1440.

    Most people do not use WS as evidenced by the mixed bag support it gets. 1440 monitors are by default understood to be 2560x1440p as it’s 16:9 which is still considered the “default” by the vast majority of businesses and people alike. You may operate as if most people using 1440+ are on WS but that’s a very atypical assumption.

    Raytracing sure but otherwise the 4090 is actually better than the 5070 in many respects.

    I’m not sure what you’re comparing at the end unless you meant a 9070XT which I don’t use/have and wasn’t comparing.

  • RazgrizOne@piefed.ziptoTechnology@lemmy.world•NVIDIA is full of shitEnglish
    1·
    12 hours ago

    Not all of us can afford to spend $3000 for a noticeable but still not massive performance bump over a $700 option. I don’t really understand how this is so difficult to understand lol. You also have to increase the rest of your machine cost for things like your PSU, because the draw on the 5xxx series is cracked out. Motherboard, CPU, all of that has to be cranked up unless you want bottlenecks. Don’t forget your high end 165hz monitor unless you want to waste frames/colors. And are we really going to pretend after 100fps the difference is that big of a deal?

    Going Nvidia also means unless you want to be fighting your machine all the time, you need to keep a Windows partition on your computer. Have fun with that.

    At the end of the day buy what you want dude, but I’m pulling down what I said above on a machine that cost about $1700. Do with that what you will

  • RazgrizOne@piefed.ziptoTechnology@lemmy.world•NVIDIA is full of shitEnglish
    3·
    12 hours ago

    Not 1440 like you’re thinking. 3440x1440 is 20% more pixel to render than standard 2560x1440’s. It’s a WS. And yes at max settings 80-90fps is pretty damn good. It regularly goes over 100 in less busy environments.

    And yeah it’s not matching a 5090, a graphics card that costs more than 3x mine and sure as hell isn’t giving 3x the performance.

    You’re moving the goalposts. My point is for 1/4th the cost you’re getting 60-80% of the performance of overpriced, massive, power hungry Nvidia cards (depending on what model you want to compare to). Bang for buck, AMD smokes Nvidia. It’s not even close.

    Unless cost isn’t a barrier to you or you have very specific needs they make no sense to buy. If you’ve got disposable income for days then fuck it buy away.