The m1 gpu is broadly equivalent to a gtx 1650 in a host of benchmarks. This is getting less than half the fps a gtx 1650 does at these settings, and I am being charitable.
I don't know why you are looking at 1440p (2560 x 1440) as the m1 here is running at 1440x900. While I'm there, that 6700 XT posts 50fps, half of which is 25fps, which would indeed be alright. However this is putting out less than 15fps most of the time.
> I don't know why you are looking at 1440p (2560 x 1440) as the m1 here is running at 1440x900.
Ah, you are right, I messed up with the resolution.
> The m1 gpu is broadly equivalent to a gtx 1650 in a host of benchmarks.
Which ones?
> This is getting less than half the fps a gtx 1650 does at these settings, and I am being charitable.
... without having to emulate both CPU architecture and graphics layer.
I mean, this is not really a debate. DXVK is not comparable, Wine does not do the same either. We are talking about translating both CPU instructions and graphic API calls in real time, good enough that a triple A game runs without any modification on a laptop with 16GB of shared memory.
The m1 gpu is broadly equivalent to a gtx 1650 in a host of benchmarks. This is getting less than half the fps a gtx 1650 does at these settings, and I am being charitable.
I don't know why you are looking at 1440p (2560 x 1440) as the m1 here is running at 1440x900. While I'm there, that 6700 XT posts 50fps, half of which is 25fps, which would indeed be alright. However this is putting out less than 15fps most of the time.
Have a nice day.