307
2023 was the year that GPUs stood still
(arstechnica.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2023
307 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
58091 readers
2928 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Hands up if you/someone you know purchased a Steam Deck or other computer handheld, instead of upgrading their GPU 🙋♂️
To be honest I stopped following PC hardware altogether because things were so stagnant outside of Intel's alder lake and the new x86 P/E cores. GPUs that would give me a noticeable performance uplift from my 1060 aren't really at appealing prices outside the US either IMO
It's diminishing returns.
We need a giant leap forward to show a noticeable effect now.
Like, if a cars top speed was 10mph, a 5 mph increase is fucking huge.
But getting a supercar to top off at 255 instead of 250, just isn't a huge deal. And you wouldn't notice unless you were testing it.
So even if they keep increasing power at a steady rate, the end user is going to notice it less and less everytime.
We had hardware getting massive leaps for years. Problem is, devs got used to hardware having enough grunt to overcome lack of optimizations. Now we got shit coming out barely holding 60+ on 4080s and requiring usage of FSR or DLSS as a bandaid to make the game get back to playable framerates.
If you’ve got 30 series or 7000 series from AMD you don’t need to look for a more performant card, you need devs to put in time for polish and optimization before launch and not 6 months down the line IF the game is a commercial success.
Hell, Cyberpunk 2077 dropped 10-20fps with the last patch on my 4090, and the devs don’t care enough to fix it.
Cities Skylines 2 aims for only 30fps, and it can’t even hit that on my pretty good gaming PC.
A fix that worked for me on Cyberpunk dropping in performance after that patch - turn everything to low, restart the game, then change settings back to what they were.
Yeah, with that trick it went from 50fps to 90fps on everything turned to max. Thank you so much!
Cities Skylines 2 is really bad because you’d expect given how poorly it runs on your 4090 that a meager 1060 wouldn’t run it at all, but on the contrary I’ll probably get the same performance as you. It’s like the game just… isn’t capable of taking advantage of your better card.
One thing that's very apparent is that with more traffic the simulation slows down while the framerate isn't (so all cars go in slow motion, even though I'm at 3x speed). This means that it's severely CPU-limited.
I don't know how multithreaded their simulation is, I have a 5950X with 32 hardware threads. Maybe an upgrade to the new generation of Ryzen CPUs that are going to come out around February could help.
Generally speaking, the simulations running behind the scenes in simulation games are always single-threaded. You’re always better off with a higher clock speed, those extra threads just won’t be utilized.
Well, that will get harder and harder to achieve, since CPUs are getting more cores, they aren't getting much faster these days.