I know Intel is dipping its toe into the GPU market, but let’s be real, AMD and nVidia are the only options and have been for the last 20+ years. The manufacturers/assemblers of the complete graphics cards are varied and widespread, but the core tech comes from two companies only.

Why is this the case? Or am I mistaken and am just brainwashed by marketing, and there are in fact other viable options for GPUs?

Cheers!

  • survirtual@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    This is nonsense and, frankly, sounds like guerrilla marketing for nvidia.

    All things considered, I can play any game I want on the steam deck, which has an old SoC by today’s standards. A newer AMD gpu can run anything at max settings on a linux machine.

    So again, either you are grossly misinformed or working for nvidia to sew gentle doubt. Either way, stop it.

    • LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Do you not play many games? Good luck playing CP2077 with PT or heck even MSFS2020 at good (read: max) settings on 1440p.

      The deck is great but I can’t even run NMS on high settings on it.

      • survirtual@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Why would I want to play at max settings? That adds very little to the gameplay for me.

        I can play any game tweaking settings, and I can render at 720p + upscale if a game is demanding. This makes nearly any game enjoyable.

        High settings are irrelevant, but if you want high settings, any AMD card from the past 2 years will more than deliver max performance for anything you throw at it.

        For a handheld, portable device that costs under $500, I am okay reducing graphics quality for portability and gameplay.