Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
It’s underpowered. That’s not debatable. It’s also a full generation (or 2 depending on release date) behind in GPU architecture with it being only RDNA3. That has big implications, one being it is stuck on FSR3, which is crazy considering it will heavily rely on on FSR due to being so weak.
Having a programmable light strip doesn’t make it “thoughtfully designed” lol. Well cooled means nothing when it’s so under-specced.
It’s a low spec SFF PC. That’s cool, but let’s not pretend it’s amazing hardware. The best thing about it is its size tbh.
No, I meant precisely what I wrote. The point being that if it were $4, “underpowered” would be an absurd way to describe it, because value is a function of cost versus benefit, where benefit is subjective.
Not really. This is made to play current games, and it’s underpowered for that no matter what the price is. It could still be great value while being underpowered.
Think about it like this - if you expect to play cyberpunk, would a $1 raspberry pi that can play it at 1fps be underpowered? It’s still great value at $1, but surely you can agree that for the job at hand it is underpowered?
Yes I agree, if we can move the goalposts where ever we want, you might have a point for your own narrow view. But there will be people that believe what it delivers to be suitable for playing the games they want to play, in which case it won’t be underpowered. Which means its status as underpowered… is debatable.
It can definitely be good enough for many people - that doesn’t make it not underpowered though. You don’t seem to understand the concept, or the difference between value and underpowered.
You don’t seem to understand that “underpowered” requires context. Nor do you that what we’re having here is a debate, thus making it debatable nevertheless.
Saying because we’re debating it means it’s not debatable doesn’t work like that. That’s like saying it’s debatable that the earth is round.
Underpowered already has context - it’s 2025 and it already won’t be able to play lots of steam games, let alone “next gen” games. It’s less powerful than the consoles it’s attempting to compete with………which came out 5 years ago.
It’s underpowered. That’s not debatable. It’s also a full generation (or 2 depending on release date) behind in GPU architecture with it being only RDNA3. That has big implications, one being it is stuck on FSR3, which is crazy considering it will heavily rely on on FSR due to being so weak.
Having a programmable light strip doesn’t make it “thoughtfully designed” lol. Well cooled means nothing when it’s so under-specced.
It’s a low spec SFF PC. That’s cool, but let’s not pretend it’s amazing hardware. The best thing about it is its size tbh.
And how would you feel if it were $4?
$4? Did you mean $400?
No, I meant precisely what I wrote. The point being that if it were $4, “underpowered” would be an absurd way to describe it, because value is a function of cost versus benefit, where benefit is subjective.
Not really. This is made to play current games, and it’s underpowered for that no matter what the price is. It could still be great value while being underpowered.
Think about it like this - if you expect to play cyberpunk, would a $1 raspberry pi that can play it at 1fps be underpowered? It’s still great value at $1, but surely you can agree that for the job at hand it is underpowered?
Yes I agree, if we can move the goalposts where ever we want, you might have a point for your own narrow view. But there will be people that believe what it delivers to be suitable for playing the games they want to play, in which case it won’t be underpowered. Which means its status as underpowered… is debatable.
It can definitely be good enough for many people - that doesn’t make it not underpowered though. You don’t seem to understand the concept, or the difference between value and underpowered.
You don’t seem to understand that “underpowered” requires context. Nor do you that what we’re having here is a debate, thus making it debatable nevertheless.
Saying because we’re debating it means it’s not debatable doesn’t work like that. That’s like saying it’s debatable that the earth is round.
Underpowered already has context - it’s 2025 and it already won’t be able to play lots of steam games, let alone “next gen” games. It’s less powerful than the consoles it’s attempting to compete with………which came out 5 years ago.
It’s underpowered.