6 ms·

I am sorry but the "rule of thumb" website, https://www.logicalincrements.com/ https://www.logicalincrements.com/ disagrees with you, heavily so. You can still

by chx 4y ago

I am sorry but the "rule of thumb" website, https://www.logicalincrements.com/ https://www.logicalincrements.com/ disagrees with you, heavily so. You can still buy an awful lot of computer for $2k, it's right there how. The prices are real, they link -- yes, with affiliate links -- to real sales on Amazon/Newegg/etc. To quote what you can expect from their "outstanding" tier at 1628 USD: > This expensive tier has the highest possible cards that still maintain a reasonable performance/price. Sure it is pricey, but it is luxurious! > Expect high performance at 1440p, and solid performance at 4K even in the most demanding games. For 1865 USD: > Max most titles at 1440p@144Hz, and solid framerates in 4K, even with max settings. And if you want to note the 6900XT card for $720 they used here is out of stock then let me note a $700 6950XT: https://www.newegg.com/asrock-radeon-rx-6950-xt-rx6950xt-ocf-16g/p/N82E16814930073 https://www.newegg.com/asrock-radeon-rx-6950-xt-rx6950xt-ocf... which makes it an even better bang for your buck.

bialpio 4y ago
> For 1865 USD: You can also save up on the case (cheaper options should be available), and grab a Ryzen 7900 which should have similar perf & comparable price point to Intels they used, and comes with stock cooler, shaving off additional ~$100. I'd also probably skip the HDD and grab 32GB RAM.
- lastLinkedList 4y ago
  That's what I'm thinking of doing when I build PCs for my partner and I later this year. I've been looking at benchmarks and I'm not as worried about the top end of performance as much as I am Intel being about ready to release a new socket design next refresh.
waboremo 4y ago
This is misleading. For nearly $2000, you better be getting 4K with ray tracing (max settings), AKA, a top of the line device. 1440p/144 is midrange now. Which that $1865 one does not provide. Even before ray tracing, most games struggle to hit the 144 rate you're aiming for, so with ray tracing that drops down to like ~40 (Cyberpunk 2077 for example in that 6900XT card). You have to enable workarounds like DLSS/FSR to make those games playable. The only way you're getting good framerate at 4k is without ray tracing, but you're paying $2000 to have to worry about still disabling settings? Ridiculous! So yes, they are overpriced. For $2000 you should not be worried about having to enable FSR. The usual excuse when this is brought up is "well just don't play those games, they seem unoptimized" to which again, the question is, why are you spending two thousand dollars to avoid playing certain games? How absurd.
- mosquitobiten 4y ago
  Well the website is called logical increments, it's really hard to call ray tracing a logical increment. You are sacrificing too much to gain so little, at least for now.
  - breckenedge 4y ago
    This is how I see it now too. The manufacturers are capitalizing on people needing to have the best by making even more expensive top tier components. You don’t need 4K or ray tracing to enjoy a triple-A game. Last year, I got a 3070-equipped system, force feedback driving wheel, and a 4k TV as a monitor for under $2k. The games are still quite gorgeous, and I have no idea what I’m missing by not having something more expensive.
    - arvinsim 4y ago
      The best way to save money is not to target 4k
  - waboremo 4y ago
    Ray tracing IS the logical increment the industry has decided on though. So again, you're spending $2000 to miss out on what the industry has decided on is the next logical step, only to have to spend another ~$500 for whatever upgrade to actually play those games.
    - hotstickyballs 4y ago
      Afaik the industry is only the supply side of the equation. If the market doesn’t think ray tracing isn’t worth it then it won’t happen.
    - otikik 4y ago
      Not worth it
    - mosquitobiten 4y ago
      >Ray tracing IS the logical increment the industry has decided on though. I disagree. Nvidia decided it didn't had enough exclusivity, if the industry decided it was a logical increment then it would've had to come as a request from video games and video games engine developers towards hardware companies. It would've been a more natural progression, we wouldn't have it now and also it wouldn't feel like it's in a perpetual beta phase.
ryanisnan 4y ago
Beware of any site that makes bold claims like “Max most titles” - this type of comment ages like milk.
- chx 4y ago
  Last updated 08 February 2023
  - ryanisnan 4y ago
    I mean that as the landscape of titles available changes, and what the author takes into consideration, the quality of the statement decreases.
    - chx 4y ago
      The site is quick to adapt, it's what I am saying. The site has been around for a very long time.
      - ryanisnan 4y ago
        Interesting. I'll take a closer look, thank you for sharing!
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

by chx 4y ago

bialpio 4y ago

> For 1865 USD: You can also save up on the case (cheaper options should be available), and grab a Ryzen 7900 which should have similar perf & comparable price point to Intels they used, and comes with stock cooler, shaving off additional ~$100. I'd also probably skip the HDD and grab 32GB RAM.

lastLinkedList 4y ago
That's what I'm thinking of doing when I build PCs for my partner and I later this year. I've been looking at benchmarks and I'm not as worried about the top end of performance as much as I am Intel being about ready to release a new socket design next refresh.

waboremo 4y ago

This is misleading. For nearly $2000, you better be getting 4K with ray tracing (max settings), AKA, a top of the line device. 1440p/144 is midrange now. Which that $1865 one does not provide. Even before ray tracing, most games struggle to hit the 144 rate you're aiming for, so with ray tracing that drops down to like ~40 (Cyberpunk 2077 for example in that 6900XT card). You have to enable workarounds like DLSS/FSR to make those games playable. The only way you're getting good framerate at 4k is without ray tracing, but you're paying $2000 to have to worry about still disabling settings? Ridiculous! So yes, they are overpriced. For $2000 you should not be worried about having to enable FSR. The usual excuse when this is brought up is "well just don't play those games, they seem unoptimized" to which again, the question is, why are you spending two thousand dollars to avoid playing certain games? How absurd.

mosquitobiten 4y ago
Well the website is called logical increments, it's really hard to call ray tracing a logical increment. You are sacrificing too much to gain so little, at least for now.
- breckenedge 4y ago
  This is how I see it now too. The manufacturers are capitalizing on people needing to have the best by making even more expensive top tier components. You don’t need 4K or ray tracing to enjoy a triple-A game. Last year, I got a 3070-equipped system, force feedback driving wheel, and a 4k TV as a monitor for under $2k. The games are still quite gorgeous, and I have no idea what I’m missing by not having something more expensive.
  - arvinsim 4y ago
    The best way to save money is not to target 4k
- waboremo 4y ago
  Ray tracing IS the logical increment the industry has decided on though. So again, you're spending $2000 to miss out on what the industry has decided on is the next logical step, only to have to spend another ~$500 for whatever upgrade to actually play those games.
  - hotstickyballs 4y ago
    Afaik the industry is only the supply side of the equation. If the market doesn’t think ray tracing isn’t worth it then it won’t happen.
  - otikik 4y ago
    Not worth it
  - mosquitobiten 4y ago
    >Ray tracing IS the logical increment the industry has decided on though. I disagree. Nvidia decided it didn't had enough exclusivity, if the industry decided it was a logical increment then it would've had to come as a request from video games and video games engine developers towards hardware companies. It would've been a more natural progression, we wouldn't have it now and also it wouldn't feel like it's in a perpetual beta phase.

ryanisnan 4y ago

Beware of any site that makes bold claims like “Max most titles” - this type of comment ages like milk.

chx 4y ago
Last updated 08 February 2023
- ryanisnan 4y ago
  I mean that as the landscape of titles available changes, and what the author takes into consideration, the quality of the statement decreases.
  - chx 4y ago
    The site is quick to adapt, it's what I am saying. The site has been around for a very long time.
    - ryanisnan 4y ago
      Interesting. I'll take a closer look, thank you for sharing!

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]