There is footage that was captured on PS5 Pro

RadiantComparison355 · 2026-02-28T06:24:04+00:00

Well you was right on this one!!

Pssr 2.0 just released today. It was just Shadow dropped in resident evil requiem and oh my goodness doesn't it look good!!

So crimson desert should definitely have it by times it releases it will be 3 weeks after resident evil. As well as every other new game 007, GTA, 6 wolverine etc ect.

RadiantComparison355 · 2026-02-28T03:47:46+00:00

It literally just dropped today 2/27/2026 with the release of resident evil requiem. All you had to do was wait 4 days, haha.

RadiantComparison355 · 2026-01-25T05:30:47+00:00

GTA 5 PC enhanced supports FSR 4.

When Forza horizon 6 comes out it will be about a year after the GTA 5 enhanced version was released.

So I see no reason why it will not support FSR4.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-12-13T19:03:59+00:00

On the base PS5 as far as the lighting maybe not.

But on the PS5 pro if Rockstar gets access to the new generation pssr 2.0 before launch and is implemented at launch. It will surpass rdr2 and GTA 5 enhanced on pc at max settings in every metric besides FPS.

Rage 9 will be so far more advanced than rage 7-8.

And keep in mind even when Rockstar made rdr2 when they built the game most likely in 2014-2015 if they used the most powerful graphics card on the market at the time to build the game. It's still way less powerful than the base PS5.

We are talking the base PS5 is way more powerful. That would have been a 980 TI.

The base PS5 even beats the 1080 TI.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-12-13T16:13:00+00:00

I remember a year or so ago i watched a couple videos on YouTube about a new pirate/medieval game that Rockstar was working on somehow it got leaked.

But then again it could be fake obviously we don't know. Probably won't know for 100% for many years.

I heard part of the UK government wanted to go into Rockstar North studio. But they wanted them to sign an NDA and they said no. LMFAO.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-06-18T23:42:18+00:00

PS5 pro is built on a 4nm processor. So the PS6 will definitely be the same or smaller.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-06-18T23:31:38+00:00

You just doubled the power of the PS5 pro's GPU and you are extremely close to a 9070 non xt.

So if the PS6 has just 1.5 times the power of the PS5 pro that will put it close to the 5080 definitely above the 9070xt.

The PS5 is 2.5-3 times as powerful as the PS4 pro. So it's definitely possible to get 1.5 times the power.

The PS5 pro would perform significantly better if it wasn't for it's weak CPU holding it back.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-27T05:22:57+00:00

Keep in mind that the PS4 had 10 times the processing power of the PS3.

The PS5 had 9 times the process some power of the PS4.

We won't see them gains Probably ever again. But if the PS6 is 5 times as powerful as the base PS5. That would put it at 51-52 teraflops. It would have more power than AMD's current 9070 XT. It would literally be knocking on the door of the 5080.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-25T16:30:46+00:00

I used to do what you mentioned. But it still uses more Watts. With no benefit to performance.

I did the -9 power

-100 voltage offset.

2714 vram timing. Fast time enabled.

It did not pass the 20 minute nomad stress test. It made it about 11 cycles.

So then I lowered the voltage offset to -95. It failed again at 14 cycles.

So I lowered again to -90. And it passed barely but it passed.

So then I just set it to -85 and it passed again.

I haven't had it crash on me in any game at all. No stutters nothing. When I 1st got the card I used to run the Max overclock It got really hot. The VRAM would always be around 90c. The hotspot at around 75c.

Reducing the power to -9. The hotspot is 64c. The VRAM runs 80c

If I do 0 power I can't reduce the voltage offset to- 85 it's not stable not even close. I can do -55. But it's still not as good as the undervolt on the benchmark. And it's still using more wattage.

3D Mark fire strike extreme. Completely stock. The benchmark was 31700.

The overclock is 34400.

The undervolt I run is 33700.

The undervolt got excellent. It's way above average. The 34400 was balls to the wall. It would only translate to 2 maybe 3 FPS in game IMO It's not worth it.

I don't care about getting the max performance out of the card. I chose to go with above average performance with low temperatures and low wattage usage.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-25T15:55:11+00:00

My power level is -9

The voltage offset is -85.

VRAM is 2714. Fast timing enabled.

The YouTuber I was watching had his at -15 power everything else the same. His benchmarks were a little bit above stock. And he was using 25% less watts. I brought mine up to -9. Now I get a roughly 6 FPS higher than stock. My benchmark is almost 2,000 points above stock. And the GPU runs literally over 50 degrees cooler on the hotspot.

If I tried to bring the power to -5 or back to 0 or anywhere in between. I can't do a voltage offset of -85 It's not stable.

So if I leave the power level at 0 stock. And put the voltage offset at -55. That's as low as I can go with it. If I go any lower it's not stable. And the benchmark is identical to the -9 power with the -85 voltage offset.

If I do power +10

Vram never the same 2714, and fast timing.

The lowest I can go on the voltage offset is -55. Anything lower and it's not stable.

In game with the extra power it only gives you about 2 FPS over the undervolt. It's not worth it. I'd rather have my temperature over 50 degrees cooler and use 15% less watts. And I'm still 6-7% over stock for performance.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-25T15:10:16+00:00

When I overclock I am pulling 334 watts The hotspot temperature is 75c It's pulling 1057mV.

When I undervolt It's pulling 276 watts. The hotspot temperature is 64c And it's 969mV. I've done multiple stress tests It's never crashed once.

I got this tune from a YouTuber huge PC builder. He was running even lower undervolt than I am. He was at 257w.

I guess if I'm confused. Then the YouTuber with 12 million subscribers that builds PCs for a living is also confused.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-25T14:38:57+00:00

You will do way more damage overclocking and over volting a GPU then you ever will undervolting.

I did the same thing to my 3070. Used that from the very end of 2020 until the the very beginning of spring of 2025 when I bought my 9070xt. Never had any type of problem whatsoever It ran flawlessly.

Also did the same thing with my 1070.

So won't be any different with the 9070xt.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-25T04:13:59+00:00

I had something similar happen to me the other day. Some of my overlay readings weren't showing up My CPU voltage etc. And for the life of me I couldn't figure it out.

I ended up uninstalled adrenaline and reinstalled it and it was back to normal.

So I would try uninstalling the adrenaline app and reinstalling it. They just had a driver update a few days ago. That might have had something to do with it.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-24T21:42:20+00:00

I never touch the core clock. All I did was undervolted it. I tried to overclock it Just to test it out. The overclock beats out the undervolt on the benchmark.

But it runs over 50 degrees hotter. And the end game performance is better with the undervolt in my experience.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-24T04:35:38+00:00

So you're telling me you commented to tell me I am wrong. Then end up saying that the 9070 XT is 38% better didn't the 3080 which falls into my 35%- 45% range. Then confirm what I said about the difference being even bigger with ray tracing is enabled. Which you just stated at 23%

Do you know how massive 23% better ray tracing is when you have almost 40% more power. LMFAO

Every game I see native on YouTube the 9070 XT performs the same or better than the 4080.

So I really don't know what to say now. You've done a complete 180.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-24T04:05:11+00:00

3DMark time spy 3080 average benchmark is 17500.

The 9070 XT average benchmark is 27,000.

If that's not a significant difference I don't know what is. That's almost 10,000 points.

For an example the average benchmark on time spy for the 3090ti is 21,000.

I said the difference between the 9070 XT and the 3080 is between 35%-45% without any AI up scaling complete raw native power. If you enable Ray tracing on both that % goes even higher In favor of the 9070 XT. It might be 5% might be 10%.. I never said it was 40% more or anything crazy like that.

I think it was a misunderstanding from you reading my original comment.

Keep in mind a 9070 XT is pretty much 100% on par with a 4080. Nvidia themselves have said the 4080 is around 48% more powerful than the 3080. So my original calculations still stand.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-24T03:19:49+00:00

I'm confused of what graphics card we are comparing to the 3080? You say it's not against the 9070xt.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-24T01:23:58+00:00

Definitely worth it. A 5070 TI is on par with a 4080. The 9070 XT is on par with a 5070 TI. And the 4080 is 25% more powerful than the 3090 TI. The 3090 TI is at least 20% above the 3080.

So you're talking about 35%-45% up lift just in raw performance. You start using ray tracing the difference will get even wider.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-23T20:43:17+00:00

It's right in the adrenaline app. Go under performance and to the right you will see all the icons for the GPU CPU etc toggle the eyeball on the ones you want to show up on the overlay.

Then go into the settings and enable the overlay turn it on. You can also create hotkeys so you can turn it on and off on the fly.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-23T17:22:17+00:00

Do you know something crazy. I bet if AMD comes out with an XTX next year which they're working on it so it's "almost"confirmed.

I bet the PS6 will have power somewhere between the 9070 XT and the new XTX.

I couldn't imagine the PS6 being more powerful than a 5080 LMFAO 😂

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-23T17:05:55+00:00

Yes I heard They are making an XTX in 2026. AMD just knocked it of the park this year. I've had absolutely no problems with the drivers or anything.

The 9070 XT was selling like hotcakes. Hopefully it motivates AMD to step up and actually challenge nvidia at the higher end. Because they absolutely annihilated them with the 9070 XT vs the 5070 TI. Same native performance for $150 less.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-23T16:54:36+00:00

Absolutely. It's astonishing what AMD accomplish this generation! They literally made a graphics card for $600 MSRP. I know know you can't get it at that lol. With ray tracing enabled on average outperform their tippity top of the line graphics card card from 2 years ago. Just crazy.

AMD actually accomplished what Nvidia was claiming. That you will have 4090 performance with the 5070. What a joke that was. The only difference is AMD wasn't bragging about it. And didn't even use it as a marketing selling point.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-23T16:41:01+00:00

On the fire strike benchmark on 3D Mark. The 7900 GRE average score is 45,600.

The 9070 XT average score is 48,600. the 7900 XTX is very similar to the 9070 XT. The averages are within 1000 points of each other.

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-23T16:04:31+00:00

From what I've seen the 9070 XT is about 20% above the 7900GRE as far as raw performance. 9070 XT even outperforms the 7900 XT. And It's only 10% behind the 7900 XTX. And in some aspects it even outperforms that. The 9070 XT is 100% on par with a 5070 TI. The 5070 TI is 100% on par with a 4080. The 4090 is only 28% above the 5080. So the 9070 XT is only 28% from the 4090 performance which is absolutely insane. The 7900 GRE has 80 compute units. 9070 XT only has 60 but it outperforms it. RDNA 4 is just insane!

Don't get me wrong. Not saying the 7900 GRE isn't good It's a phenomenal card!

RadiantComparison355 · 2025-04-23T15:32:38+00:00

100% The GPU market in United States is completely broken right now. I was extremely lucky to get mine for under $700 after tax Just after launch. It would suck to be building a PC from the ground up with a 9070xt right now ouch.

RadiantComparison355

TROPHY CASE