Meh. Which card, EVER, was able to give that? On all modern games? We're talking about a med/high resolution with 4xaa and 16AF. And a MINIMUM of 60 fps?
Then I guess you have been limiting yourself to playing Doom 3 or so for eternity. I mean, current games are all console ports so they are light for the PC and all, but a minimum of 60 fps for high IQ is too much to demand.
It's just people seeing that there has been absolutely NO increase in graphics quality (except for Crysis) in like 3 years, while PC graphics capability has increased five fold; seeing the regular FPS numbers on the roof and then trying to find & justify the meaning for buying an expensive graphics card.
I am on 1920x1200 and I find that even a 5870 can be overkill most of the cases. Just think, I haven't overclocked the card even 1 mhz, and I didn't even install the 10.1 drivers (current is 10.3) because the system doesn't break a sweat on 4xAA and 16xAF in all games, except Crysis.
I am fine with not having min 60 fps in games. It's impossible to generalize it anyway. On Crysis 30-40fps average is perfectly fine whereas on some games the FPS changes from 50 to 200 in a matter of seconds, so you do want 60 fps. It's more like a matter of having constant FPS rather than a high one. If your avg Crysis FPS is 35, chances are it hardly ever goes below 30 and above 40. You get used to it and play the game perfectly.






Bookmarks