Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action
Subject: Re: AMD weighs in on HD versus 4K
Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 10:15:03 -0500
Organization: E. Nygma & Sons, LLC
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <bdug3k5foel8m5j2u5h8qi7kqfjlothekn@4ax.com>
References: <19nb3k5q4pho824jtoqf3kbrsned4n7db6@4ax.com> <1016a71$33pu1$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: zaghadka@hotmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 17:15:04 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="65003d013034114b01d2483d9277c58a";
	logging-data="4129545"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/6Tu6slmKcPbFwG7gSPryXJZv6AxAmH6k="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:eUV3iT0UhYQVhp3GPhkoAuXNWJk=
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
Bytes: 4002

On Wed, 28 May 2025 06:24:34 -0000 (UTC), in
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, vallor wrote: 

>On Tue, 27 May 2025 12:02:32 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>> Recently, Frank Azor -one of the bigwigs at AMD- pointed out that the
>> vast bulk of PC gamers (and even more with consoles) still play in HD
>> resolutions rather than $K or higher. Close to 60% of gamers on Steam
>> still have 1080p monitors. Many of the most-played games don't even
>> use the added RAM necessary for HD. As such, Azor says, AMD's primary
>> focus won't be on catering to the UHD/4K gamer, but to the larger
>> market where 4-8GB VRAM are sufficient.
>> 
>> Now, to some degree, this sounds a bit like sour grapes. While you
>> might argue that AMD's high-end cards are as good (or better) than
>> Nvidia, unarguably it is Nvidia that controls that market. Azor's
>> proclamation sounds less like a chosen strategy than a "well, we
>> weren't REALLY competing there anyway, so there!" acknowledgement of
>> that fact. AMD isn't repositioning by choice; they're where they are
>> because Nvidia thrashed them in that market (even if Nvidia arguably
>> has the worse product. You don't hear about AMD cards melting their
>> power cables every other month).
>> 
>> Still, I think Azor has a point. Gamers largely have spoken (through
>> their wallets) on the issue, and what they've said is that, "HD is
>> more than good enough". We've come to the point where video games
>> visuals are more than satisfactory already, and the added cost of
>> upgrading to higher-end hardware --be it video-cards, monitors or
>> whatever-- just isn't worth the price. In fact, with the popularity of
>> handhelds like the Nintendo Switch and Valve's SteamDeck,
>> HD-resolutions got a second lease on life; the small screen size of
>> those devices make the pixel density of 1080p more than sufficient.
>> 
>> So AMD is probably right to bet on lower-powered, less-expensive cards
>> that only sport 4-8GB RAM. Nvidia might be all the rage in the news
>> with their 12/16/24/32GB monstrosities (complete with 600W power
>> requirements... I think my toaster uses less!) but outside of
>> gamer-super-enthusiasts (and crypto/AI-bros) there's not really much
>> call for that sort of performance.
>> 
>> I'm sure the developers will be pissed though. For too long they've
>> been riding on the wave of ever-more powerful machines looming on the
>> horizon to excuse their sloppy code. Maybe now we'll get some
>> optimization in.
>
>I'll admit it -- I love 120Hz 4K in my space game.  But the 24G
>of video memory also helps with running Fooocus, a text-to-image
>AI app that uses pyTorch.
>
I'm running Flux on Comfy through pyTorch on my 4060 Ti. I'm glad I got
the 16GB model instead of the standard 8GB.

-- 
Zag

What's the point of growing up 
if you can't be childish sometimes? ...Terrance Dicks, BBC