I remember when I was playing the early access version of Baldur’s Gate 3 at potato fidelity. I bought a new (to me) GPU since then, but I’m pretty sure FSR and its Linux implementation massively improved since then, too.
TBH I never bother with “high” settings in the first place unless the game is like 15 years old, I’d rather have an even quieter PC and/or a more stable framerate than that little bit more of visual fidelity.
I’m being facetious. I just don’t grasp leaving visual fidelity on the table for overkill performance.
There are two ways to approach PC gaming’s fiddly, inconsistent performance in my book: either you have hardware powerful enough to crank it up and forget about it or… you do the actual work of setting up a target for performance and tuning the game to perform within that spec while looking as good as possible.
I mean, it’s not overkill performance. Having a consistent framerate is worth a lot, and I like enjoying the sound of a game without headphones, too. I should probably look into getting an aftermarket cooling solution again, but chances are that I’ll need to a bigger PC case for that, which is kind of a pain.
Consistent performance and good thermals are important, but that’s the poing of having a performance target. You decide what fps you want to get and tune settings until you get it with the best possible visuals. It’s definitely not potato fidelity across the board.
Of course it depends on your hardware, but there are plenty of games that run on more than potato mode even on integrated graphics these days.
The potato fidelity I mentioned was because my system literally couldn’t do any better with that game, but I really wanted to play it. Usually I don’t bother with games that my system won’t be able to run well.
I remember when I was playing the early access version of Baldur’s Gate 3 at potato fidelity. I bought a new (to me) GPU since then, but I’m pretty sure FSR and its Linux implementation massively improved since then, too.
TBH I never bother with “high” settings in the first place unless the game is like 15 years old, I’d rather have an even quieter PC and/or a more stable framerate than that little bit more of visual fidelity.
I recognize the words you are using, but they don’t seem to make any sense to me when put in that order.
What do you mean specifically? I understood that comment very well
I’m being facetious. I just don’t grasp leaving visual fidelity on the table for overkill performance.
There are two ways to approach PC gaming’s fiddly, inconsistent performance in my book: either you have hardware powerful enough to crank it up and forget about it or… you do the actual work of setting up a target for performance and tuning the game to perform within that spec while looking as good as possible.
I mean, it’s not overkill performance. Having a consistent framerate is worth a lot, and I like enjoying the sound of a game without headphones, too. I should probably look into getting an aftermarket cooling solution again, but chances are that I’ll need to a bigger PC case for that, which is kind of a pain.
Consistent performance and good thermals are important, but that’s the poing of having a performance target. You decide what fps you want to get and tune settings until you get it with the best possible visuals. It’s definitely not potato fidelity across the board.
Of course it depends on your hardware, but there are plenty of games that run on more than potato mode even on integrated graphics these days.
The potato fidelity I mentioned was because my system literally couldn’t do any better with that game, but I really wanted to play it. Usually I don’t bother with games that my system won’t be able to run well.