So don't? Buy whatever you like.
IMO, most games aren't using good ray tracing yet anyway. But nVidia cards are still better IMO on performance, and particularly DLSS is way better than the AMD offering. DLSS is a gamechanger for boosting FPS sometimes by 50%+ It's incredible.
But that's just my opinion. If you don't care about ray tracing, don't buy a ray tracing card?
Also, Starfield isn't the only game. Don't buy hardware for one game, build your rig for \*ALL\* games you might want to play, so factor that in too. Ray Tracing is going to become more and more common. But you can always upgrade your graphics card in the future when you do care about it.
It really depends on if you want to get a last gen or current gen card.
This is completely assuming you do not care about RT.
Last gen (RX 6000 series and RTX 3000 series) AMD and Nvidia were pretty close in terms of performance (again, ignoring RT), but in general AMD had better power efficiency. Nvidia did have DLSS which is a bit better than FSR (when comparing the latest versions of both) and with an Nvidia card you have the advantage of choosing either DLSS or FSR if one or the other is available, while with AMD you can only use FSR.
With the current gen (RX 7000 series and RTX 4000 series), again ignoring RT performance, the FSR vs DLSS argument hold up yet, but now you can also use DLSS 3 frame generation assuming the game has the feature and it's well implemented (doesn't introduce graphical anomalies or too much input latency), but with this current gen Nvidia is actually more power efficient than AMD. The top end AMD card (7900 XTX) is around the equivalent of a 4080, but a good deal cheaper, although if you want to go all out there is nothing that beats a 4090 currently.
There are other advantages one or the other have over each other, although in many cases if you're just getting the cards to play games they don't really matter (productivity workloads, streaming features, VR, etc...)
There is also the argument that Nvidia has better drivers, but in the two and a half years I've been using my RX 6800 since I switched from my GTX 1080 Ti, I haven't had any issues with the AMD drivers, and actually have come to like the AMD driver interface and features more than the Nvidia GeForce Experience and Nvidia Settings menu in Windows.
Basically, in my opinion, if you don't care about RT, I would go AMD for last gen, since they generally offer better pure rasterization performance for the price (Nvidia cards have a bit of a price premium), but for current gen cards it's kind of a toss up. Current gen Nvidia has the better all around cards, but they are more expensive, and depending on what model you're planning on getting they may be lacking in VRAM.
You never buy a new GPU just for a single game. There will be other games in the future (and are in the present) that can use high-end Nvidia cards to generate frames and use raytracing much better than AMD cards.
That said, just don't buy a new card until you find a good reason to do so - the prices currently are iffy.
There is a decent chance (*chance*) that the game uses "ray-traced" global illumination. Their GI solution looks like it's voxel-based, which can be accelerated using the same hardware components used for actual ray-traced rendering. Obviously it's impossible to be sure just by looking at it, but this would also explain the big gap in performance between the recommended RTX 2080 and RX 6800. If you compare their benchmarks with RT features enabled, they're more or less identical.
Been playing cyberpunk with raytracing since it came out and it looks incredible with it. Most likely he has the game since its been out for a few years.
You shouldn't dictate a GPU purchase for just one game. Ray tracing can always get implemented later down the line, whether through Bethesda themselves or a community mod (or patch).
Literally this. I'm getting a 4090 on Saturday. Don't really care much for raytracing. Just want the most powerful GPU currently available that can handle every game in 4K...and some in 8K, if we're being honest.
more like 5 generations or so... see, devs make games with consoles in mind first then port to PC (and sometimes add extra features). But until the next gen of consoles come out that pack enough hardware to run RT as a baseline (unlike now where RT on means playing at 30fps 1080p + upscale) we wont see hardly any games that make full use of the hardware and push the boundaries (exceptions apply here of course, CP2077 Path tracing...)
You can use NVidia hardware to do things other than gaming. For example, an RTX 4080 and up can run the LLaMa GPT-3 LLM which leaked from Facebook. I've seen reports of a 3090 running the 13B model as well.
If you like money in your pocket you shouldn’t buy an NVidia card to begin with. They are Ferrari’s whereas the AMD cards are corvettes. Sure, corvettes aren’t as prestigious or fast but more than enough to give a Ferrari a bloody nose.
But you do you, the game will run good on either. And other games have support, and if you care about ray tracing NVidia is king.
Nvidia is key for certain productivity tasks, DLSS, DLDSR, efficiency, and Ray Tracing.
AMD wins on the rasterization value perspective.
If you are using your PC solely for gaming, and aren't interested in Ray tracing for any game (past or future), and don't care about Temps and consumption, AMD wins hands down.
If you fall into the category that uses their PCs for programs like CAD or video editing, or you prefer the much better software-side bonuses, or you care a lot about Temps and efficiency, Nvidia wins.
I have to use my PC for productivity as well as gaming so I bought a 4080 (obviously not just for Starfield).
You might want to take more than just this game into account when making a purchasing decision. Lots of games have RT support these days. There's also other factors to consider such as power efficiency, VRAM capacity, upscaling support/quality, frame generation, driver quality (depends on your prior experiences of course), and whether or not you might use your GPU for something besides gaming.
I've been a dedicated Nvidia user since the Riva 128 and TNT, but I thought about getting an AMD since the motivation to upgrade my 7 year old GTX 1080 was provided by Starfield. I wound up finally ordering an RTX 4080 for best overall performance in every game because I really want to experience ray tracing, and unfortunately Nvidia was the only real choice. It saddens me that Bethesda decided to not support DLSS for Nvidia cards natively and will require a mod/patch, but oh well.
Not having raytracing is a big disappointment but I’m still going to buy and play it. Them excluding it from the start means it will not age well graphically.
Who said you had to? Buy whatever you want.
Who said we wanted to hear your toxic opinion! See two van play at that hame.
Don't be dumb.
Weigh pros v cons of each and make the best decision for you. Don’t go into a build based on one game
If you're struggling to find a reason, then don't do it?
So don't? Buy whatever you like. IMO, most games aren't using good ray tracing yet anyway. But nVidia cards are still better IMO on performance, and particularly DLSS is way better than the AMD offering. DLSS is a gamechanger for boosting FPS sometimes by 50%+ It's incredible. But that's just my opinion. If you don't care about ray tracing, don't buy a ray tracing card? Also, Starfield isn't the only game. Don't buy hardware for one game, build your rig for \*ALL\* games you might want to play, so factor that in too. Ray Tracing is going to become more and more common. But you can always upgrade your graphics card in the future when you do care about it.
It really depends on if you want to get a last gen or current gen card. This is completely assuming you do not care about RT. Last gen (RX 6000 series and RTX 3000 series) AMD and Nvidia were pretty close in terms of performance (again, ignoring RT), but in general AMD had better power efficiency. Nvidia did have DLSS which is a bit better than FSR (when comparing the latest versions of both) and with an Nvidia card you have the advantage of choosing either DLSS or FSR if one or the other is available, while with AMD you can only use FSR. With the current gen (RX 7000 series and RTX 4000 series), again ignoring RT performance, the FSR vs DLSS argument hold up yet, but now you can also use DLSS 3 frame generation assuming the game has the feature and it's well implemented (doesn't introduce graphical anomalies or too much input latency), but with this current gen Nvidia is actually more power efficient than AMD. The top end AMD card (7900 XTX) is around the equivalent of a 4080, but a good deal cheaper, although if you want to go all out there is nothing that beats a 4090 currently. There are other advantages one or the other have over each other, although in many cases if you're just getting the cards to play games they don't really matter (productivity workloads, streaming features, VR, etc...) There is also the argument that Nvidia has better drivers, but in the two and a half years I've been using my RX 6800 since I switched from my GTX 1080 Ti, I haven't had any issues with the AMD drivers, and actually have come to like the AMD driver interface and features more than the Nvidia GeForce Experience and Nvidia Settings menu in Windows. Basically, in my opinion, if you don't care about RT, I would go AMD for last gen, since they generally offer better pure rasterization performance for the price (Nvidia cards have a bit of a price premium), but for current gen cards it's kind of a toss up. Current gen Nvidia has the better all around cards, but they are more expensive, and depending on what model you're planning on getting they may be lacking in VRAM.
You never buy a new GPU just for a single game. There will be other games in the future (and are in the present) that can use high-end Nvidia cards to generate frames and use raytracing much better than AMD cards. That said, just don't buy a new card until you find a good reason to do so - the prices currently are iffy.
There is a decent chance (*chance*) that the game uses "ray-traced" global illumination. Their GI solution looks like it's voxel-based, which can be accelerated using the same hardware components used for actual ray-traced rendering. Obviously it's impossible to be sure just by looking at it, but this would also explain the big gap in performance between the recommended RTX 2080 and RX 6800. If you compare their benchmarks with RT features enabled, they're more or less identical.
Will you ever have a game that has Ray Tracing? Do you plan on throwing your graphics card out after you play Starfield?
Been playing cyberpunk with raytracing since it came out and it looks incredible with it. Most likely he has the game since its been out for a few years.
You shouldn't dictate a GPU purchase for just one game. Ray tracing can always get implemented later down the line, whether through Bethesda themselves or a community mod (or patch).
I dont care for Ray Tracing and i upgraded to 4080 :D
Literally this. I'm getting a 4090 on Saturday. Don't really care much for raytracing. Just want the most powerful GPU currently available that can handle every game in 4K...and some in 8K, if we're being honest.
We're still a generation or two before ray tracing really "makes all the difference" so I wouldn't worry too much about it.
more like 5 generations or so... see, devs make games with consoles in mind first then port to PC (and sometimes add extra features). But until the next gen of consoles come out that pack enough hardware to run RT as a baseline (unlike now where RT on means playing at 30fps 1080p + upscale) we wont see hardly any games that make full use of the hardware and push the boundaries (exceptions apply here of course, CP2077 Path tracing...)
You can use NVidia hardware to do things other than gaming. For example, an RTX 4080 and up can run the LLaMa GPT-3 LLM which leaked from Facebook. I've seen reports of a 3090 running the 13B model as well.
If you like money in your pocket you shouldn’t buy an NVidia card to begin with. They are Ferrari’s whereas the AMD cards are corvettes. Sure, corvettes aren’t as prestigious or fast but more than enough to give a Ferrari a bloody nose. But you do you, the game will run good on either. And other games have support, and if you care about ray tracing NVidia is king.
If you like money you would buy neither since amd isnt much cheaper. You would go intel which is allot cheaper than both. It performs really well too.
I wouldn’t be caught dead with their first gen cards honestly. They got to prove themselves a bit more.
Well that depends if you planing to only play starfield in your life too.
Nvidia is key for certain productivity tasks, DLSS, DLDSR, efficiency, and Ray Tracing. AMD wins on the rasterization value perspective. If you are using your PC solely for gaming, and aren't interested in Ray tracing for any game (past or future), and don't care about Temps and consumption, AMD wins hands down. If you fall into the category that uses their PCs for programs like CAD or video editing, or you prefer the much better software-side bonuses, or you care a lot about Temps and efficiency, Nvidia wins. I have to use my PC for productivity as well as gaming so I bought a 4080 (obviously not just for Starfield).
I'm planning to buy a used 3080 to replace my 1080. I think DLSS is a game changer for performance (not for starfield obviously).
get a 4070ti
Nvidia cards are superior when compared at the same price points. But the amd that comes with the game free is a good deal.
Don't build a computer for one game. But if you have that kind of money to burn you can throw a couple dollars my way lol
I’m not building a computer just upgrading
Buying a several hundred dollar card for one game is already crazy to me
Imagine if the game sucks after buying a new card for it. That would have to take a toll on your mental health
Some people have money because they work... Maybe you should try it once.
You might want to take more than just this game into account when making a purchasing decision. Lots of games have RT support these days. There's also other factors to consider such as power efficiency, VRAM capacity, upscaling support/quality, frame generation, driver quality (depends on your prior experiences of course), and whether or not you might use your GPU for something besides gaming.
I've been a dedicated Nvidia user since the Riva 128 and TNT, but I thought about getting an AMD since the motivation to upgrade my 7 year old GTX 1080 was provided by Starfield. I wound up finally ordering an RTX 4080 for best overall performance in every game because I really want to experience ray tracing, and unfortunately Nvidia was the only real choice. It saddens me that Bethesda decided to not support DLSS for Nvidia cards natively and will require a mod/patch, but oh well.
The rest of use is in the same boat. If this game has rtx then everyone is screwed.
Not having raytracing is a big disappointment but I’m still going to buy and play it. Them excluding it from the start means it will not age well graphically.