Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — EMCA4 outperforms the more expensive Memory on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck!
Advantages of EMCA4 Computer PC
- Performs up to 46% better in No Man's Sky than Memory - 130 vs 89 FPS
- Up to 7% cheaper than Memory - €879.0 vs €949.0
- Up to 37% better value when playing No Man's Sky than Memory - €6.76 vs €10.66 per FPS
No Man's Sky
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €949 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 8952 minutes ago
10th Variation
FPS
130
100%
Value, €/FPS
€6.76/FPS
100%
Price, €
€879
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €879 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 345 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
41st Variation
10th Variation
GPU Comparison
Compared by selected game FPS and theoretical performance
41st Variation
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
6 GB GDDR6 | 192-bit
Pixel Fillrate
84.96 GPixel/s
69%
Texel Fillrate
169.9 GTexel/s
49%
10th Variation
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB
8 GB GDDR6 | 128-bit
Pixel Fillrate
121.7 GPixel/s
100%
Texel Fillrate
344.8 GTexel/s
100%
GPU Winner
CPU Comparison
Compared by selected game FPS and Geekbench 5 benchmark scores
41st Variation
Ryzen 7 5800X
3.8 GHz | 8-core
Single-Core
2178
100%
Multi-Core
10263
100%
CPU Winner
Memory PC | vs | EMCA4 Computer PC |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | Release Date | Unknown |
| Ryzen 7 5800X | CPU | Ryzen 5 5500 |
| GeForce GTX 1660 Ti | GPU | GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB |
32 GB | RAM | 16 GB |
| 480 GB SSD + 1.953125 TB HDD | Storage | N/A Storage |
