Key Differences
In short — Captiva outperforms the cheaper GameMachines Neo - on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing GameMachines Neo - is a better bang for your buck.
Advantages of GameMachines Neo - Gaming PC
- Up to 69% cheaper than Captiva - €1249.0 vs €4089.0
- Up to 28% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Captiva - €13.01 vs €18.17 per FPS
Advantages of Captiva PC
- Performs up to 134% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than GameMachines Neo - - 225 vs 96 FPS
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
2nd Variation
FPS
96
42.66666666666667%
Value, €/FPS
€13.01/FPS
100%
Price, €
€1249
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €1,249 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3956 minutes ago
8th Variation
FPS
225
100%
Value, €/FPS
€18.17/FPS
71.60154100165107%
Price, €
€4089
30%
FPS Winner
Buy for €4,089 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 4735 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
2nd Variation
8th Variation
GPU Comparison
Compared by selected game FPS and theoretical performance
2nd Variation
GeForce RTX 4060
8 GB | System-Shared
Pixel Fillrate
118.1 GPixel/s
26.62908680947012%
Texel Fillrate
236.2 GTexel/s
18.310077519379846%
8th Variation
GeForce RTX 4090
24 GB | System-Shared
Pixel Fillrate
443.5 GPixel/s
100%
Texel Fillrate
1290 GTexel/s
100%
GPU Winner
CPU Comparison
Compared by selected game FPS and Geekbench 5 benchmark scores
2nd Variation
Core i7-12700F
null-core
Single-Core
2362
75.99742599742599%
Multi-Core
11527
54.780914361752686%
GameMachines Neo - Gaming PC | vs | Captiva PC |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | Release Date | Unknown |
| Core i7-12700F | CPU | Core i9-14900KF |
| GeForce RTX 4060 | GPU | GeForce RTX 4090 |
| 16 GB | RAM | 64 GB |
| N/A Storage | Storage | N/A Storage |
