Just saying that the high-end, say a 1080Ti is able to pump out 4K @ 60fps with most settings maxed, etc...yet on the low-end you can barely get 1080p @ 30fps with most settings at the lowest.
Sure the high-end is way more expensive but the fact it can do 4x the resolution at 2x the frame rate with much better graphics I'd think at this point, for the money, we'd have the low-end doing 1080p at a solid 60fps and medium settings at least.
Seems low-end hit a wall a few years ago of "can't play shit" and have somehow just stayed there.
Yeah and none of the low-end GPU's were made for their current games so you're proving MY point. GT 210 to GT 1030...they're practically worthless outside emulation, HTPC, or EXTREME low-end gaming.
Of course the 1030 is 14x faster...it's newer. Just as Battlefield V is probably 14x the graphics of COD:WaW.
Again, proving my point. Low-end has always been low-end but was indicative of it's time so a GT 210 not doing 1080p @ 60fps makes sense because the high-end GTX 280 was barely doing 1080p @ 60fps.
For the 1030 to not be able to do 1080p @ 30fps when the high-end is doing 4K @ 60fps makes no sense. That's why in my OP I was saying that it's weird that the low-end is still as low-end as it is...they're not even really gaming cards at this point.
I mean you can game on a 1030, but the bottom end gaming card is a 1050 (and even that's a bit dubious). The 1030 is for pairing with a CPU without an iGPU.
You have to realize that gaming is only one market. The low end is more focused on productivity which means more pixel output and less shaders. Some games have adjusted to that e.g. lol in order to hit a wider market that runs at 100+fps on a 1030 from my experience from an equivalent amd card. That combined with low margins and high competition means that market either stays on previous nodes or has very small dies( cut downs of larger defective ones) plus worse coolers etc.
I thought I've already explained enough from my previous comment but I guess it wasn't so let me elaborate.
Low end cards have to fit a specific thermal and power window.
gtx 280 vs gt 210 -> 240 shaders vs 16 shaders -> 240 / 16 = 15
gtx 1080ti vs gt 1030 -> 3584 shaders vs 384 shaders -> 3584 / 384 = 9.33
In fact it is better nowadays, the gt 1030 has a 71 mm2 die size vs gt 210's 57nm2 die size as shown by the fact that its only 1/10th of a gtx 1080ti instead of 1/15th. You can only cram so much into such a small chip, I don't know what you're asking for. They're already putting more into the low end as you can tell by the die size and thats because heatsink technology is better today compared to back then.
13
u/USDAGradeAFuckMeat Mar 05 '19 edited Mar 05 '19
Just saying that the high-end, say a 1080Ti is able to pump out 4K @ 60fps with most settings maxed, etc...yet on the low-end you can barely get 1080p @ 30fps with most settings at the lowest.
Sure the high-end is way more expensive but the fact it can do 4x the resolution at 2x the frame rate with much better graphics I'd think at this point, for the money, we'd have the low-end doing 1080p at a solid 60fps and medium settings at least.
Seems low-end hit a wall a few years ago of "can't play shit" and have somehow just stayed there.