Wow, that is the first time I've ever seen Vega match a 1080Ti in gaming. Even games that favour Vega specifically like Far Cry 5 and Wolfenstein II don't show Vega being on par with the 1080Ti; it was always still slightly behind, at least from what I've seen and remember. Very impressive.
Also, OC3D's video game analysis articles are one of the only places I know of that shows performance scaling with different in-game settings. There's nothing worse than seeing a graph for a game where a GTX 1080 or Vega 64 can't hit 60 FPS at 1440p in a new game at max settings but easily hits 80 FPS with just a couple of superfluous settings turned down or off. So thanks very much for the extra work.
On a similar note, what I think could be the best way to test a game is to have target FPS points. So for instance you'd have a GTX 1050/RX 460, GTX 1060/RX 580 and GTX 1080/Vega 64 comparison, and you'd show what the graphics settings would need to be in order to hit 60, 90 or 120 FPS, maybe with screenshot comparisons as you guys already do. So if I had a GTX 1060, I'd know that in AC Odyssey I'd have to use FXAA and High shadows in order to hit 60 FPS at 1080p, or I'd have to turn off a couple of other things to hit 90 FPS. The same thing for the other cards. It would take a lot of work and may not be possible for most, but it would be the best way to do things in my opinion. I always appreciated Nvidia's breakdown of AAA games and their graphics settings. It basically meant that if I had for example a GTX 970 and still wanted to hit 60 FPS at 1080p, I'd know that either I'd need to upgrade my graphics card, or how far I'd have to reduce the in-game settings to hit that point, or whether that was something I was willing to do.
Again, excellent work, Mark and all those involved.
