Jump to content


Neko Lord
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About TouchFluffyTail

  • Rank
    You know you want to
  • Birthday November 15

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    A place where foxgirls are real
  • Server

Recent Profile Visitors

19,412 profile views
  1. It's worth noting that WoT was largely CPU bound for any but the worst GPUs.
  2. Was plenty fast when I was playing, and physics never hurt the Chi-Ri
  3. Wasn't slow back then, merely average and came with pretty good acceleration. The only thing wrong with it then was the fact it's a giant box. Easy to hit if you weren't smart about things
  4. https://www.pcgamer.com/dwarf-fortress-is-coming-to-steam-with-graphics-and-mod-support/
  5. That 50% wasn't from drivers, that was from DICE being even more aggressive with culling.
  6. The mere act of existing is sadly too much for large number of Wargaming's playerbase.
  7. It's a binary win/lose with no options for counterplay, that is heavily in favor of the carrier in almost all circumstances.
  8. Looks like they managed something that is an improvement, while making things much worse at the same time.
  9. Thing is, even doing this the technique has given two wildly different results. DICE's graphical wizards have gotten their ray traced reflection system over 60 fps (according to youtubers) on what might be a 2080ti (according to a youtuber). Meanwhile, the Tomb Raider demo ran between 30-50 fps?
  10. DICE managed to hit 1080p 60~ish fps on whatever hardware Nvidia supplied in their playable BFV demo. I'd really like to know what exactly that hardware is though.
  11. What little information we have on real time ray tracing performance doesn't give a good impression of Turing for that use.
  • Create New...