System Light Dark

xentr_theme_editor

xentr_page_setup xentr_appearance xentr_sidebar

  • xentr_page_width

    xentr_toggle_page_width

    xentr_page_width_description

    xentr_color_pickers

    xentr_toggle_color_picker

    xentr_toggle_color_picker_description

    xentr_typography

    xentr_select_the_font_you_want_to_use

    xentr_node_layout

    xentr_grid_layout

    xentr_grid_layout_description

  • Style variation

    xentr_select_the_style_variation_you_want_to_use
    System Light Dark

  • xentr_sidebar

    xentr_toggles_sidebar

    xentr_sidebar_description

    xentr_sticky_sidebar

    xentr_sticky_sidebar_description
    xentr_sidebar_position
    Left
    Right
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

The Last of Us Part I

seen a article that said this was the most multi threaded game to date, it sure can use a 5950x but only during that initial building shaders part after that i barely see any cpu usage. hope and prey they get sued like ubisoft does for battlefield releases so this doesn't become the standard for pc gamers going forward.
 
Hardware Unboxed did some good video explanations of this. It's a shame they took so much flack for presenting the data the way they did, expecting viewers to decipher the information on their own to make decisions on hardware and software settings. Good discussion for vram requirements nonetheless.
 
On2wheels said:
Hardware Unboxed did some good video explanations of this. It's a shame they took so much flack for presenting the data the way they did, expecting viewers to decipher the information on their own to make decisions on hardware and software settings. Good discussion for vram requirements nonetheless.
Click to expand...

When the thumbnail says "RIP 8 GB" and then the content shows you that 8 GB can't do ultra settings, on this game, but can do other settings just fine, that's disingenuous. I've followed their channel for a long time, and I will continue to as they produce great stuff, but the clickbaity titles just piss me off.

Also saying that NVidia is executing "planned obsolescence" is close to slanderous really. Unless you can find something in writing or on a video that shows that NVidia deliberately set their VRAM at 8 GB to force people to upgrade because the card is obsolete, well, that's pandering to the AMD fanboi in my book. AMD deciding to put more VRAM on their product is a good thing, and it will probably help them sell more video cards. But there is no need to slander NVidia just to earn a few brownie points from one community or another. That doesn't look fair and balanced to me, and it's important to stay impartial when you are reviewing all sorts of technology products.

With all that said, the decisions that consumers make when purchasing a video card should take into account the VRAM on the card, and how game design might affect the long term usefulness of maximum settings on the cards. Years back 2GB was fine, then 4, then 6 then 8 etc. Buying a card today with 12 GB may not be enough in 2 years, or 4 years. 16 GB may not be enough in 2 years, we just don't know. But people who think they want to "future proof" their purchase may thing that 16 GB is the minimum they should buy, and that will leave some cards DOA if they don't up the VRAM amounts.
 
Dwayne said:
When the thumbnail says "RIP 8 GB" and then the content shows you that 8 GB can't do ultra settings, on this game, but can do other settings just fine, that's disingenuous. I've followed their channel for a long time, and I will continue to as they produce great stuff, but the clickbaity titles just piss me off.

Also saying that NVidia is executing "planned obsolescence" is close to slanderous really. Unless you can find something in writing or on a video that shows that NVidia deliberately set their VRAM at 8 GB to force people to upgrade because the card is obsolete, well, that's pandering to the AMD fanboi in my book. AMD deciding to put more VRAM on their product is a good thing, and it will probably help them sell more video cards. But there is no need to slander NVidia just to earn a few brownie points from one community or another. That doesn't look fair and balanced to me, and it's important to stay impartial when you are reviewing all sorts of technology products.

With all that said, the decisions that consumers make when purchasing a video card should take into account the VRAM on the card, and how game design might affect the long term usefulness of maximum settings on the cards. Years back 2GB was fine, then 4, then 6 then 8 etc. Buying a card today with 12 GB may not be enough in 2 years, or 4 years. 16 GB may not be enough in 2 years, we just don't know. But people who think they want to "future proof" their purchase may thing that 16 GB is the minimum they should buy, and that will leave some cards DOA if they don't up the VRAM amounts.
Click to expand...
I certainly agree the title of that video was clickbaity, and I mentioned that when I linked their other video, and I did think that was out of character for them so I'll perhaps give them the benefit of the doubt that maybe it wasn't intentional? Not sure.

I agree with most of what you said. But the 8 GB cards in the 3000 gen always struck me as odd. My 1080 Ti had 11 GB. When a lot of the 3000 series launched I was put off by the VRAM, feeling like it wasn't a step up for a lot of money. Texture compression and handling is improving but clearly not enough yet, or devs aren't doing it well, to sell me on going to less VRAM for the same or more money. Certainly a factor in me going to the 6800 XT used for the price.

And I will say this about Hardware Unboxed: in my opinion they crap equally on both the major GPU players when they feel it's necessary :) They certainly didn't pull any punches in their assessment of the AMD 7000 series GPUs, so I wouldn't say they pander to either fan base imo. Part of why I keep watching their stuff.
 
Updated with the patch yesterday, crash to desktop on next cut scene. I swore that I wouldn't play until the next patch, lasted 5 minutes. Tried the safe mode option given because it detected a GPU crash and I played for 45 minutes or so with no issue.

If you don't own it yet but want to I'd still be waiting. There's a bigger patch coming "end of the week". I'll report back after that one. It's frustrating as hell because it's a good story and I just want to play through without issues other than being bit by fungus zombies. 😛
 
SugarJ said:
Updated with the patch yesterday, crash to desktop on next cut scene. I swore that I wouldn't play until the next patch, lasted 5 minutes. Tried the safe mode option given because it detected a GPU crash and I played for 45 minutes or so with no issue.

If you don't own it yet but want to I'd still be waiting. There's a bigger patch coming "end of the week". I'll report back after that one. It's frustrating as hell because it's a good story and I just want to play through without issues other than being bit by fungus zombies. 😛
Click to expand...
Thank you for your service, Sir.
 
Not sure how many hours I have in the game, But I've not had a single issue. On max setting, 70-90FPS
10900k
32gb
2 tb NVM e
3090 GTX.
 
Chromey said:
Not sure how many hours I have in the game, But I've not had a single issue. On max setting, 70-90FPS
10900k
32gb
2 tb NVM e
3090 GTX.
Click to expand...
Resolution? I'm guessing 1080 or 1200?

Reason I ask is reports I'm reading at 3440x1440 (my reso) are showing ~60fps with a 3090 at max.
 
Finished it yesterday. One of the best games ever. Not one crash. Running triple 48" OLED's in surround. 90-100 fps mix of medium and high settings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

xentr_legal_notice_title

xentr_legal_notice_description

Back
Top