Should you really be surprised? The 970 at stock has 2.1x the pixel fill rate of the PS4. That's simply not enough to raise the resolution 77% and expect solid 60 fps.
Should you really be surprised? The 970 at stock has 2.1x the pixel fill rate of the PS4. That's simply not enough to raise the resolution 77% and expect solid 60 fps.
Should you really be surprised? The 970 at stock has 2.1x the pixel fill rate of the PS4. That's simply not enough to raise the resolution 77% and expect solid 60 fps.
Just curious - if you insist/imply its the sole criteria of GPU performance at higher res - what do you think the pixel fill rate of a 290x or 390 is? Hint: a bit less than a 970.
Just curious - if you insist/imply its the sole criteria of GPU performance at higher res - what do you think the pixel fill rate of a 290x or 390 is? Hint: a bit less than a 970.
Pixel fillrate is not a relevant comparison to make across architectures (PS4 GCN vs 970 Maxwell) since they differ so greatly. That a Fury X actually compares more favourably to the 980 Ti the more pixels it is pushing, and it only has around 2/3 of the pixel fillrate of a 980 Ti, should tell you that.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.