Sony has formed the ‘PlayStation PC’ label for its PC games push.

zamardii12

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
3,278
According to a Corporation Wiki listing, Sony Interactive Entertainment registered the PlayStation PC name in April this year via its California-based headquarters.

Although the name appears to be a formality, it represents another strong signal that Sony intends to increase its gaming output on the PC platform.

Speaking to GQ, SIE boss Jim Ryan said that the opportunity to bring PlayStation’s IPs to a wider audience, as well as an easier port process, meant that making more games for PC was now “a fairly straightforward decision” for the company.

Asked why SIE is now embracing PC, whereas before it was hesitant to bring its games to the platform, Ryan said: “I think a few things changed.

“We find ourselves now in early 2021 with our development studios and the games that they make in better shape than they’ve ever been before. Particularly from the latter half of the PS4 cycle our studios made some wonderful, great games.

“There’s an opportunity to expose those great games to a wider audience and recognise the economics of game development, which are not always straightforward. The cost of making games goes up with each cycle, as the calibre of the IP has improved.

https://www.videogameschronicle.com...e-playstation-pc-label-for-its-pc-games-push/
 

sleepeeg3

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
5,213
They should make it first for the PC and then port it to their inferior console. Still backwards.
8d1.png
 

Aurelius

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
3,749
Remember when there used to be year after year of 'PC gaming is dying/dead' talk?
Short of a precipitous plunge (which I'm not expecting any time soon) I don't think it's in danger of dying. I just don't think it's going to take the lead like some PC diehards are convinced it will. Consoles and mobile will likely continue to dictate most gaming for a long, long time, and Sony will only port titles once they've had a good "theatrical run" (that is, they've had plenty of time to sell on consoles first).
 

noko

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 14, 2010
Messages
6,715
Maybe Sony should start making PCs and laptops again. Use their IP to advance a unique PC line with some benefits. Sony not engaging, as far as I can tell in AI, Robotics, Computing on a higher level or significant level is making them less off any kind of technology leader. The trend of much higher prices from China and other areas of the World could give them an opening locally to start producing more straight from Japan. Having a unique PC line like what Apple does with their Macbooks, Microsoft with their Surface line which can be supported by all the other items they make could be very lucrative. Movies, games, production software, cameras, imbedded TVs etc. with unique computing hardware to go along with it besides a game limiting PS5. For automations, AR/VR and robotics, medical AR/VR and robotics. In a nutshell, Sony engaging the PC market again or more is a good thing.
 

defaultluser

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
14,399
They should make it first for the PC and then port it to their inferior console. Still backwards.
View attachment 407297

Agreed, when you design some of the most convoluted zoom menu system in games like Horizon Zero Dawn, (just to make it all clunky-just-barely-playable on a controller), you then get saddled with the most lazy-of-control sets when it eventually gets ported to PC mouse + keyboard

Maybe if they had started it on the PC first , they would have look at other PC-developed third-person shooters like Warframe (now available on every console, and as lot more interesting to play than Destiny)
 

zamardii12

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
3,278
Agreed, when you design some of the most convoluted zoom menu system in games like Horizon Zero Dawn, (just to make it all clunky-just-barely-playable on a controller), you then get saddled with the most lazy-of-control sets when it eventually gets ported to PC mouse + keyboard

Maybe if they had started it on the PC first , they would have look at other PC-developed third-person shooters like Warframe (now available on every console, and as lot more interesting to play than Destiny)
Highly disagree. Starting development on PC first or last would have no effect on control unless you change the gameplay mechanics entirely, and in the case of Horizon Zero Dawn had that been the case I am glad they didn't develop first on PC.

I find the argument a little annoying... like PC gamers aren't happy enough that previously exclusive console games are getting ported to PC but now "DEVELOP ON PC FIRST!!!"
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,313
This is good news. I suppose that means we may see the more recent and upcoming games, like the Horizon Zero Dawn sequel come to PC reasonably soon. I expect a year of exclusivity on the PS but that is better than waiting 2-3 years. They still have a big backlog of games which I assume they'll get to first. God of War, then Uncharted 4/DLC, and then maybe Spiderman or Last of Us 1/2. After they burn through those I assume they'll start doing other newer games at a faster pace.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
31,289
The LLC was created in April. I guess it's only in the news now since they're listed on Steam.
 

RPGWiZaRD

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
1,217
Good. Hopefully Sony would bring out sometimes a PC but not a handheld device and just focusing on offering a decent PC packaged hardware to a great price (obviously would tightly tied to the services they offer but that's okay). The expensier the PC parts gets, the more these Steam Deck-like PC packages grows in market share potential. It's a win-win for developers and customers unless you're the overclocking enthusiast perhaps but it will help driving costs down and help optimization for devs when there's less configs to develop for.
 
Last edited:

zamardii12

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
3,278
Good. Hopefully Sony would bring out sometimes a PC but not a handheld device and just focusing on offering a decent PC packaged hardware to a great price (obviously would tightly tied to the services they offer but that's okay). The expensier the PC parts gets, the more these Steam Deck-like PC packages grows in market share potential. It's a win-win for developers and customers unless you're the overclocking enthusiast perhaps but it will help driving costs down and help optimization for devs when there's less configs to develop for.
I REALLY don't see Sony going the route of doing PC hardware again. If the Steam Deck takes off and it's poised to do so Sony releasing more of their games on PC and thus Steam is going to be a huge win for them. I mean playing some of those Sony first-party games on a handheld console would be incredible, and I've only experienced that using a PlayStation Vita in the past. I would LOVE for Sony to create another handheld personally, but I know it won't happen.
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2017
Messages
686
I REALLY don't see Sony going the route of doing PC hardware again. If the Steam Deck takes off and it's poised to do so Sony releasing more of their games on PC and thus Steam is going to be a huge win for them. I mean playing some of those Sony first-party games on a handheld console would be incredible, and I've only experienced that using a PlayStation Vita in the past. I would LOVE for Sony to create another handheld personally, but I know it won't happen.

I ordered the maxed out Deck but I'm still sort of wait and see on it. Many companies have tried this and "mobile gaming" is pretty much littered with the corpses of anybody not named Nintendo and smart phones have made that worse. My attitude about the Steam Deck is hope for the best and if it doesn't work it's a bad as emulation station anyways.
 

staknhalo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
1,923
I ordered the maxed out Deck but I'm still sort of wait and see on it. Many companies have tried this and "mobile gaming" is pretty much littered with the corpses of anybody not named Nintendo and smart phones have made that worse. My attitude about the Steam Deck is hope for the best and if it doesn't work it's a bad as emulation station anyways.

Plus Valve HW doesn't exactly have a stellar track record of success
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2017
Messages
686
Plus Valve HW doesn't exactly have a stellar track record of success

Yep. The way I see it is Valve's hardware has always been pretty good but bombed. The Steam machines while they didn't build them ASUS and Alienware do know what they are doing and those bombed as well. Plus looking at mobiles mobile gaming PCs have always been an utter train wreck even with companies like Razer trying. Combine that with the fact that Sega, Sony, NeoGeo/SNK, Bandai, TG-16/Konami, Atari all of whom are/were formidable companies in their own right bombed in mobile gaming and the Steam Deck has "we are all going to look back on this, feel stupid, and have a good laugh" written all over it.

I don't want it to happen because I want something like this, I also want Linux gaming to be a thing so I'm rooting for it. I just expect this to follow both Valve, mobile PC gaming, and non Nintendo mobile gaming's history straight into comedic failure. But I'll still have and keep mine at work and play games at the office with it and on the subway/plane/train!

What I'm really waiting for though is something like the analogue pocket but runs Linux with the Steam Library and emulation, made of aluminum and based off ARM but that's a LONG way off.

 

sleepeeg3

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
5,213
I find the argument a little annoying... like PC gamers aren't happy enough that previously exclusive console games are getting ported to PC but now "DEVELOP ON PC FIRST!!!"
I find it annoying that dirty console peasants don't understand why PC gamers would want development on PC first. :D

Games developed for PC first can have much higher resolution textures, higher polys and overall far better graphics. If they get developed on console first, the graphics are always hampered by the crappy console components. The original Halo, for example. I'm pretty sure Borderlands changed the artwork to cell shading to make it easier to run on consoles, too.

Graphics are just one of the reasons, but there are many other features you will never have if developed on console first. You can always downgrade the graphics to console. Reverse is not true.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 10, 2017
Messages
686
I find it annoying that dirty console peasants don't understand why PC gamers would want development on PC first. :D

Games developed for PC first can have much higher resolution textures, higher polys and overall far better graphics. If they get developed on console first, the graphics are always hampered by the crappy console components. The original Halo, for example. I'm pretty sure Borderlands changed the artwork to cell shading to make it easier to run on consoles, too.

Graphics are just one of the reasons, but there are many other features you will never have if developed on console first. Reverse is not true.

It's about numbers. PC is a minority. High end PCs that can really make a PC better than a console are even a more fringe minority. You're making the "why don't they design downtown NYC streets for super cars. Everyone knows the super car is the superior car" argument here.
 

travm

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
1,703
Remember when there used to be year after year of 'PC gaming is dying/dead' talk?
Then the Corps realized "those idiots will spend $2 on a graphics card, and upgrade every year! We need to cash in on that."
 

Silentbob343

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
1,927
I find it annoying that dirty console peasants don't understand why PC gamers would want development on PC first. :D

Games developed for PC first can have much higher resolution textures, higher polys and overall far better graphics. If they get developed on console first, the graphics are always hampered by the crappy console components. The original Halo, for example. I'm pretty sure Borderlands changed the artwork to cell shading to make it easier to run on consoles, too.

Graphics are just one of the reasons, but there are many other features you will never have if developed on console first. You can always downgrade the graphics to console. Reverse is not true.
I thought they changed he design because it looked like several other shooters at the time and didn't stand out from the crowd. Also, it isn't cel shaded.
However, by October 2008, Gearbox knew it had a problem. Internal reviews by the "Gearbox Truth Team"--a group of testers with psychology backgrounds--concluded that people found that the game's art style was too similar to that of the then freshly minted hit Fallout 3. The game was also drawing comparisons to another postapocalyptic game from id Software. "We didn't want to be considered a poor man's Rage," said Martel.
Another problem was the growing incongruity between the gritty, realistic visuals, which the trio called the game's "Brown Period," and the increasingly over-the-top gameplay. "The jump height was the real trigger," said Neumann, referring to how the game's vehicles--called runners--could catch massive air off of ramps, Dukes of Hazzard-style. Other exaggerated elements included exploding enemies, extreme bosses, and "crazy vagina monsters"--a reference to one hulking creature with a massive sideways maw. There were also issues with the game's skill tree, which had grown overstuffed with workmanlike powers and abilities that didn't capture the "fantastical" aspect needed for a solid RPG.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/behind-borderlands-11th-hour-style-change/1100-6253257/

https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/borderlands-3-art-style-story-details-gearbox-boss/
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
31,289
It's about numbers. PC is a minority. High end PCs that can really make a PC better than a console are even a more fringe minority. You're making the "why don't they design downtown NYC streets for super cars. Everyone knows the super car is the superior car" argument here.
PC isn't a minority in gaming. It is the largest sector in the gaming market. Just because we're not the kind of gamers to go out rushing to buy and play the latest copy pasta "AAAA" titles doesn't mean our numbers are lower. We have a magnitude more options when it comes to games on PC, and for that it's considered an afterthought when the latest COD only sells 20% the volume of the console version.
 

LukeTbk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
2,032
Well if compo ent prices don't come down then maybe in a few years it will
If they continue like that, would not be the sign of a giant demand and complete opposite ?

It's about numbers. PC is a minority. High end PCs that can really make a PC better than a console are even a more fringe minority. You're making the "why don't they design downtown NYC streets for super cars. Everyone knows the super car is the superior car" argument here.
Depend how you define this, is you include smartphone yes (but console are even more a minority), it is around 23% of all sales which is probably similar if not bigger to Playstation and Xbox combined, the super car analogy does not really hold up has a niche comparison.

Newzoo_Games_Market_Revenues_2020-1024x576.png
2012-2021-global-games-market-800x495.png


For maybe a bad example because of a rare case where the quality of the product a specially large gap, but still:

EzlqoaZWYAUq1_g?format=jpg&name=small.jpg


Looking at steam growth in the last 8 year's (at that concurrent steam users, sleeping accumulatin unused old account should not create a misleading view):
number-stream-users.png
 

LukeTbk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
2,032
PC isn't a minority in gaming. It is the largest sector in the gaming market.
Is it still above say mobile gaming ? (If we talk about actual dollar made by the game themselves and not hardware sales) ? Seem to have been around 19-23% for a while, below the giant almost 50% that became mobile and a tiny miny bit below consoles when you put all the consoles together (which is not that useful in some ways considering how different some are from each other).
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,871
Graphics cards are already on their way out. SOC is the future and that's how it's going to be.

Lol. Typical armchair analyst nonsense. As long as there is a market for demanding games, there will be dedicated GPUs. An SOC is never going to be able to match what a powerful dedicated card can do. ARM and other SOCs have potential on the lower end, but they will never be viable at the high end.
 

Aurelius

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
3,749
Lol. Typical armchair analyst nonsense. As long as there is a market for demanding games, there will be dedicated GPUs. An SOC is never going to be able to match what a powerful dedicated card can do. ARM and other SOCs have potential on the lower end, but they will never be viable at the high end.
Apple's M1 Max is roughly comparable to higher-end RTX 30 series chips, at least when you get Apple Silicon-native apps. Now, I'm sure NVIDIA is ahead in terms of features, but Apple extracted a lot of raw performance from an SoC.

As far as PC gaming... I'm not expecting SoCs to take over there, at least not any time soon. The biggest obstacle is simply an economic one: it doesn't make much sense to build an M1 Max-like SoC in the Windows world, as vendors will balk at the thought of a very expensive chip with RAM they can't customize. And that's assuming they can get the power consumption in check, which they might not (a PS5 Digital Edition consumes about 340W, and it's considerably less powerful than an M1 Max in at least some respects). Dedicated GPUs lower upfront costs and expand choice in the desktop PC world, and may be the most power-efficient option for Windows laptops so long as they're still chained to x86.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,871
Apple's M1 Max is roughly comparable to higher-end RTX 30 series chips, at least when you get Apple Silicon-native apps. Now, I'm sure NVIDIA is ahead in terms of features, but Apple extracted a lot of raw performance from an SoC.

As far as PC gaming... I'm not expecting SoCs to take over there, at least not any time soon. The biggest obstacle is simply an economic one: it doesn't make much sense to build an M1 Max-like SoC in the Windows world, as vendors will balk at the thought of a very expensive chip with RAM they can't customize. And that's assuming they can get the power consumption in check, which they might not (a PS5 Digital Edition consumes about 340W, and it's considerably less powerful than an M1 Max in at least some respects). Dedicated GPUs lower upfront costs and expand choice in the desktop PC world, and may be the most power-efficient option for Windows laptops so long as they're still chained to x86.

Purely in the context of gaming, the Max is nowhere near even high-end mobile 30-series chips. It would be interesting to see how some modern AAA titles would perform if they were optimized for Metal, but as that’s not the case the Max is going to end up lagging behind for gaming.

That’s not to slag on the Max though, it’s one hell of a chip and I really wish I had the money to drop on a MBP in order to play around with it.
 

Aurelius

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
3,749
Purely in the context of gaming, the Max is nowhere near even high-end mobile 30-series chips. It would be interesting to see how some modern AAA titles would perform if they were optimized for Metal, but as that’s not the case the Max is going to end up lagging behind for gaming.

That’s not to slag on the Max though, it’s one hell of a chip and I really wish I had the money to drop on a MBP in order to play around with it.
That's the thing — it seems to be held back simply because there aren't many Apple Silicon-optimized games yet. I'm not expecting a flood of ports, but I can imagine that changing in the next few years. For now, it's 'just' a good GPU for creative tasks.
 

westrock2000

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
9,346
Even though I bought Death Stranding and FF VII Remake nearly 2 years ago, I have only been able to play Death Stranding because it was later released on PC. Perhaps now I will finally be able to play FF VII Remake.

If you can't supply your own hardware, just use someone elses.......
 

DukenukemX

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
6,040
Apple's M1 Max is roughly comparable to higher-end RTX 30 series chips, at least when you get Apple Silicon-native apps.
You got benchmarks to back that up or you getting those numbers from the grave of Steve Jobs?
Now, I'm sure NVIDIA is ahead in terms of features, but Apple extracted a lot of raw performance from an SoC.
We're a long way before a SoC can do what a dedicated GPU can do. That might be an unreachable goal honestly.
As far as PC gaming... I'm not expecting SoCs to take over there, at least not any time soon. The biggest obstacle is simply an economic one: it doesn't make much sense to build an M1 Max-like SoC in the Windows world, as vendors will balk at the thought of a very expensive chip with RAM they can't customize.
AMD's V-Cache is going to take care of that.
And that's assuming they can get the power consumption in check, which they might not (a PS5 Digital Edition consumes about 340W, and it's considerably less powerful than an M1 Max in at least some respects).
Again, citation needed. A quick Google shows that at best the M1 Maxx is about the same as a RTX 3060. I say at best because the most I've seen tested is like three games and Borderlands 3 isn't even playable on the M1 Maxx with 24fps. Which the RTX 3060 is a joke as it performs the same as a RTX 2060 and I'm pretty sure the M1 Maxx can't even do Ray Tracing.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/17024/apple-m1-max-performance-review/6
Dedicated GPUs lower upfront costs and expand choice in the desktop PC world, and may be the most power-efficient option for Windows laptops so long as they're still chained to x86.
The only reason the world goes SoC is because the price of GPU's are out of control. If the Apple M1 Maxx was any good as a GPU then people would buy them up just to mine on them. Quick Google shows that the M1 Maxx has a horrible hashrate, which is honestly to the benefit to Apple users. The fact that Sony has finally joined the PC Master Race shows that x86 isn't going anywhere. The PC gaming market is nearly 1/4 of the gaming market, which is too big for Sony to ignore. PC users aren't always buying Playstations when they have powerful PC's, so it makes sense that Sony started to release their games on PC. Apple is not part of the Master Race.
 

Aurelius

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
3,749
You got benchmarks to back that up or you getting those numbers from the grave of Steve Jobs?
Yes, I do. It's very competitive with higher-end RTX 30 GPUs in ideal conditions. The problem with AT's gaming tests, which you overlooked, is that they're using Rosetta 2 code translation — that delivers a huge performance penalty. Now, you can rightly point out that there still aren't many Apple Silicon-native games and that real-world speed won't be so hot in those cases, but we're talking about the GPU's capabilities in this case.

AMD's V-Cache is going to take care of that.
Let's see how it works in practice. From what I've seen, an actual SoC with gobs of DRAM on top (let alone an advanced GPU) is more of a long-term prospect; the short term is considerably more modest. You're not going to see a Ryzen 9 with 64GB of on-chip memory and Radeon RX 6800M-class graphics any time soon.

The only reason the world goes SoC is because the price of GPU's are out of control. If the Apple M1 Maxx was any good as a GPU then people would buy them up just to mine on them. Quick Google shows that the M1 Maxx has a horrible hashrate, which is honestly to the benefit to Apple users. The fact that Sony has finally joined the PC Master Race shows that x86 isn't going anywhere. The PC gaming market is nearly 1/4 of the gaming market, which is too big for Sony to ignore. PC users aren't always buying Playstations when they have powerful PC's, so it makes sense that Sony started to release their games on PC. Apple is not part of the Master Race.
You're really overstating the case here. Sony is releasing those games on PC well after their initial PlayStation run, and even then only a handful of titles. It's not a mea culpa where it admits it must cater to PC gamers in a big way; it's selling you the leftovers to boost profits. And I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure Apple is happy to distance itself from pro-Nazi computing analogies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T4rd
like this

RanceJustice

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
6,258
Seriously, good. I've long lobbied against the idea of hardware, platform, or storefront exclusivity by contract for ages. I hope this is Sony finally realizing that by NOT releasing on PC they're missing out on people who will buy their games at launch and a long tail of sales over months and years future (ie Days Gone was probably picked up quite a bit for the Halloween Steam sale). However, it is imperative they do this right. First, NO FUCKING EPIC STORE (or anything else) EXCLUSIVITY. Release the games at very least on Steam, and then elsewhere if you wish, but I don't want to hear "X is coming to PC" only for it to be "Sorry, for a year its EGS" - I will not buy or support that store in any way given their behavior and their push for exclusives is similarly vile. Next, Sony/PlaystationPC should make a commitment to launch new titles either at parity on PC and PS5, or if absolutely necessary - to give additional features and whatnot for PC technical elements - shortly after, within a month or two. While admittedly better than never, its not going to feel like a great "Oh they're supporting PC" moment if they launch first on PS5 and then take 6+ months in order to bring it to PC and then expect full price when it arrives. Lastly, this is also a great time for them to realize something Microsoft did ages ago - support and use open standards for your peripherals, and people will buy them for use on PC. Xbox controllers have been the de facto "just works" element on PC thanks to included drivers and XInput. Sony should go a step forward and actually open source everything, including their Dual Sense feature SDK, so that every PC - Linux or Windows etc - can basically use their Playstation controllers for any game and in some cases, if supported thinks like dual sense or gyro will encourage people to seek out their hardware specifically!

So yeah, this could be a good step forward and it may end up a menial also-ran if they mess it up. Don't treat PC gamers like second class late-comers and expect them to shower you with money and attention! Also, even MS found out that "70-85% of a popular game released on Steam to a ton of buyers is TONS more money than 100% on your own platform your control but ffew want to use/support it" so Sony should do the same - every game on Steam, and then elsewhere as they wish, rather than giving PS5 timed exclusivity beyond literally a day or two at most if absolutely necessary. They can start with their goodwill by hurrying the fuck up with the Director's Cut of Death Stranding on PC. Death Stranding came out on PC via Steam after a year of console exclusivity, and has sold very well. Yet here comes Director's Cut contents and upgrades and there's no word if it will come to PC at all, or if / when it will happen! That's just not acceptable, especially if lots of bonehead execs pull this kind of "nobody is buying clearly inferior version on PC in the wake of hearing about upgraded version - clearly PC gamers don't care so we won't bring the upgraded to PC" moron decision making. Anyway, good potential - but lets see them do something with it!

P.S - Helldivers 2 if well made AND SUPPORTED WITH NEW CONTENT will absolutely PRINT MONEY.
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,313
If you think Sony will put PC versions on par or over priority with their console you're going to be disappointed. That will only happen when they decide to get out of the hardware business.
 

LukeTbk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
2,032
Yes, I do. It's very competitive with higher-end RTX 30 GPUs in ideal conditions. The problem with AT's gaming tests, which you overlooked, is that they're using Rosetta 2 code translation — that delivers a huge performance penalty. Now, you can rightly point out that there still aren't many Apple Silicon-native games and that real-world speed won't be so hot in those cases, but we're talking about the GPU's capabilities in this case.

I am wrong or you are talking about mobile gpu here ? If so that was quite misleading (even if fair to compare mobile to mobile), no one has mobile in mind when they hear high end RTX 30 series chips without a L at the end and even when talking mobile:

126685.png


There is not a single game benchmark that show the M1 Max performing above a 3060 mobile chips on the link you sent it seem.
 
Last edited:
Top