Yes, but as a core gamer, why would you stop there? What's the point if you just barely match the consoles? I think most core gamer who decide to buy a gaming PC will invest more than $800 on their new rig. Look at the price of the 1070-to-1080ti and how popular those cards are on a core gamer board like this. Look at the price of a nice gsync or freesync screen.huh? 800 is plenty of money to spend on a well planned out pc.
That's great and all and you can write an essay on how much more practical or versatile or the 15,000 things that your PC can do better than an xbox but that's not what is being talked about here.
People are comparing the cost of a new xbonex and a new PC. Not the cost of upgrading your older PC and buying a new Xbox and then getting all defensive and saying how much better their PC is.
Yes, but as a core gamer, why would you stop there? What's the point if you just barely match the consoles? I think most core gamer who decide to buy a gaming PC will invest more than $800 on their new rig. Look at the price of the 1070-to-1080ti and how popular those cards are on a core gamer board like this. Look at the price of a nice gsync or freesync screen.
Personally I don't know any core gamer that only spend $500-$800 on their whole PC, I'd say that it's more common to spend that on a regular upgrade. You totally _can_ buy a cheap PC, but how many does that among core gamers?
In order to compensate for the lack of specific optimization, a PC GPU needs to be much stronger than just the hardware specs of the console.
Another example for this is Rise of the Tomb Raider. That game has no business looking this good on PS4 pro. No chance in hell of getting that quality on the PC equivalent of the PS4 pro GPU.
They said they weren't.
There is no way a PC capable of producing a similar visual experience as the XBX in actual games can be built in the coming year:
In order to compensate for the lack of specific optimization, a PC GPU needs to be much stronger than just the hardware specs of the console. Once Forza 7 comes out, this will become obvious. I predict one will need at least a 1070, probably a 1080, to match the graphical quality of the XBX.
Another example for this is Rise of the Tomb Raider. That game has no business looking this good on PS4 pro. No chance in hell of getting that quality on the PC equivalent of the PS4 pro GPU.
Less than $800 in total in a plug and play state, screen included? Isn't the 1060 4TF too? I'm sure the CPU is leagues above consoles but the GPU?This is the real world though where people can easily buy used, reuse, sales, borrow , and have to pay for online , software , etc . Noone cares about a hypothetical set of rules like " hey compare these exact things that will fit everyone" .. it's a starting point to a conversation nothing more. In the real world you can get good value out of both scenarios but only if you care. If you don't care about money just buy everything. My friend has a pro, 1400 pc and will probably buy a x1x .... Me not so much the consumer I'm looking for long term investment.
My i5 6500 + 1060 was 1040 Canadian and it's more than enough for me .... That's less than 800 last I checked exchange... It doesn't just barely match consoles lol.
Less than $800 in total in a plug and play state, screen included? Isn't the 1060 4TF too? I'm sure the CPU is leagues above consoles but the GPU?
Less than $800 in total in a plug and play state, screen included? Isn't the 1060 4TF too? I'm sure the CPU is leagues above consoles but the GPU?
.There is no way a PC capable of producing a similar visual experience as the XBX in actual games can be built in the coming year:
In order to compensate for the lack of specific optimization, a PC GPU needs to be much stronger than just the hardware specs of the console. Once Forza 7 comes out, this will become obvious. I predict one will need at least a 1070, probably a 1080, to match the graphical quality of the XBX.
Another example for this is Rise of the Tomb Raider. That game has no business looking this good on PS4 pro. No chance in hell of getting that quality on the PC equivalent of the PS4 pro GPU.
There is no such thing as coding to the metal. That's just marketing talk that you're more than happy to fall for.
Even if you find a build that can match it it's a weird one because the nature of consoles is different. Pc games are often brute forced to achieve performance rather than optimised for the hardware. Despite the high price it seems MS are putting together a package of pretty decent value for 2017 realistically speaking, it just still feels steep compared to the competition.
Hopefully they'll throw in a game to sweeten the deal. The XB1 and XB1S both launched with a free included game.
...But it is a stupid comparison. PC and console are different things.
And some of you even have size as an argument that a PC would be even more expensive when built the same size as X1X.
Well then I would like to argue that the Nintendo Switch is the most powerful machine ever made for 299. The most bang for any buck in the history of mankind.
How much would it cost you to build a PC that you can fit in your pocket and dock to your TV with the same specs as a Switch? That takes cartridges? Where you can fit the controller on each side of the console while poratable? With accelerometer, gyroscope, and brightness sensor?
And you are complaining about the Switch battery life, well how long would your pocket size portable PC last while playing in the park?
Thought so...Go out and buy a Switch now, coz comparison.
Just a small point, coding to the metal on consoles is very real, as is CPU overhead, driver overhead and OS overhead on PC. It's just that nowadays all these factors don't matter much when it comes to performance. Consoles have very weak CPUs so no amount of coding to the metal can help them at least match even bargain-priced PC CPUs. PCs are powerful enough to run games at the best possible performance with resources to spare for the driver and OS. DX11 and Nvidia's optimizations cut a lot of that driver overhead down and modern low-level APIs like DX12 and Vulkan bring PC development a lot closer to console-like coding to the metal. Both consoles use AMD GPUs so any specific console GPU optimizations can and do largely apply to AMD PC GPUs too. The end result is as you said, a PC GPU performing similarly to a console GPU. The myth of needing a GPU twi ce as powerful as the console one to achieve the same results is dead.
There is no way a PC capable of producing a similar visual experience as the XBX in actual games can be built in the coming year:
In order to compensate for the lack of specific optimization, a PC GPU needs to be much stronger than just the hardware specs of the console. Once Forza 7 comes out, this will become obvious. I predict one will need at least a 1070, probably a 1080, to match the graphical quality of the XBX.
Another example for this is Rise of the Tomb Raider. That game has no business looking this good on PS4 pro. No chance in hell of getting that quality on the PC equivalent of the PS4 pro GPU.
Yeah, we'll buy parts at consumer price and try to match a custom built system with business prices. Oh, we didn't manage to? What a shock.
Yeah, we'll buy parts at consumer price and try to match a custom built system with business prices. Oh, we didn't manage to? What a shock.
Everyone have a TV, even if they've never had a console. Everyone doesn't have a PC monitor though. I had nothing at all when I started with PC gaming 4 years ago so not including the monitor in the total price would be totally weird, especially since I wanted great stuff all around and went for gsync at least in the middle screen.No one in their right mind will include the TV as part of the price of a console. A monitor shouldn't be any different.
A little less than XBOX isn't what was said though, rather that it was much better.Nvidia TF =/= AMD terraflops. The 480 has 5.8 tf but performs on par with the 1060, both of which are better than the pro by a decent margin and a little less than the X1X.
And in fact, if that poster cheaped on the CPU to a G4560 that still blasts the console's cpus out of the water that computer could cost <$400 new.
What am I even reading. Before citing examples, you might want to actually look at the PC equivalent of the pro, the 470(Well, a downclocked 470), performance in the same game. Yes, the 470 performs better than the Pro in that game. The 470 plays it at absolute max settings and always remains above 30 fps.
Keep in mind the pro does not play the game at ultra settings, it plays the game at very high settings. Hell even the 380 a gpu much older than the pro performs on par with the pro in that game.
What, did you just play rise of the tomb raider, marveled at how pretty it is and thought, "Wow no way a PC could do that with equivalent hardware"?
There is no such thing as coding to the metal. That's just marketing talk that you're more than happy to fall for.
There is no way a PC capable of producing a similar visual experience as the XBX in actual games can be built in the coming year:
In order to compensate for the lack of specific optimization, a PC GPU needs to be much stronger than just the hardware specs of the console. Once Forza 7 comes out, this will become obvious. I predict one will need at least a 1070, probably a 1080, to match the graphical quality of the XBX.
Another example for this is Rise of the Tomb Raider. That game has no business looking this good on PS4 pro. No chance in hell of getting that quality on the PC equivalent of the PS4 pro GPU.
My thoughts exactly.
That'sYea idk how people thought this was gonna go vs custom built parts bought in bulk at direct sale pricing
I actually disagree that coding to the metal is marketing talk. You're telling me there is no difference in performance for games made to take advantage of nvidia hardware vs amd? There is most definitely an aspect of "coding to the metal". For Christ sake people cmon. Yea the phrase coding to the metal is silly, but you better bet your ass if you gave a developer a PC to SPECIFICALLY make a game for it's going to run smoothest on that PC vs others that take thousands of configuration in mind. Hell, denuvo makes games run slower and that's just fucking software to check for piracy.
I actually disagree that coding to the metal is marketing talk. You're telling me there is no difference in performance for games made to take advantage of nvidia hardware vs amd? There is most definitely an aspect of "coding to the metal". For Christ sake people cmon. Yea the phrase coding to the metal is silly, but you better bet your ass if you gave a developer a PC to SPECIFICALLY make a game for it's going to run smoothest on that PC vs others that take thousands of configuration in mind. Hell, denuvo makes games run slower and that's just fucking software to check for piracy.
I actually disagree that coding to the metal is marketing talk. You're telling me there is no difference in performance for games made to take advantage of nvidia hardware vs amd? There is most definitely an aspect of "coding to the metal".
Spencer said they aren't making a profit.Didn't they recently publicly say they're not selling at a loss or profit?
What am I even reading. Before citing examples, you might want to actually look at the PC equivalent of the pro, the 470(Well, a downclocked 470), performance in the same game. Yes, the 470 performs better than the Pro in that game. The 470 plays it at absolute max settings and always remains above 30 fps.
Keep in mind the pro does not play the game at ultra settings, it plays the game at very high settings. Hell even the 380 a gpu much older than the pro performs on par with the pro in that game.
What, did you just play rise of the tomb raider, marveled at how pretty it is and thought, "Wow no way a PC could do that with equivalent hardware"?
There is no such thing as coding to the metal. That's just marketing talk that you're more than happy to fall for.
The problem with many of you is you're so hell bent on your own bullshit opinion you're blinded to the points of the other side. Take the devil's advocate point of view for once in your lives and realize there are pros and cons to each side, not just your close minded opinion on what's "supposed" to be correct.
Also, get the hell over the fact that people are buying an Xbox one x for 500$. It's not your money and they are going to do it regardless of you liking it or not. What difference does it make to you? Why are you even trying or arguing? It's obviously not for you so keep your opinion about people wasting money or buying a PC or yadda yadda to yourselves... It's literally going to change nothing.
They're likely taking a loss on the hardware.
Nah... they're just not buying the parts at Newegg
Everyone have a TV, even if they've never had a console. Everyone doesn't have a PC monitor though. I had nothing at all when I started with PC gaming 4 years ago so not including the monitor in the total price would be totally weird, especially since I wanted great stuff all around and went for gsync at least in the middle screen.
A little less than XBOX isn't what was said though, rather that it was much better.
And like I said above, I didn't have a PC monitor when I started with PC gaming so not including that in the total price would be weird.
I already had a TV when I started with console gaming though. However, if I would buy an XBOX I would buy a 4K TV too, which would make the total price a lot higher than $499.
What am I even reading. Before citing examples, you might want to actually look at the PC equivalent of the pro, the 470(Well, a downclocked 470), performance in the same game. Yes, the 470 performs better than the Pro in that game. The 470 plays it at absolute max settings and always remains above 30 fps.
Keep in mind the pro does not play the game at ultra settings, it plays the game at very high settings. Hell even the 380 a gpu much older than the pro performs on par with the pro in that game.
What, did you just play rise of the tomb raider, marveled at how pretty it is and thought, "Wow no way a PC could do that with equivalent hardware"?
There is no such thing as coding to the metal. That's just marketing talk that you're more than happy to fall for.
There is no such thing as a $200 1070 much less a 6gb version.Ryzen 5 and board from microcenter $179
6gb 1070 $200
Psu $15
8gb ram $50
1tb hdd $30
Case $20
Linux
$494 total
Done
Uhd bluray isn't a realistic consideration as there isn't any pc software that plays it.
There is no such thing as a $200 1070 much less a 6gb version.
There is no such thing as a $200 1070 much less a 6gb version.
A $15 PSU for a $200 1070?????Ryzen 5 and board from microcenter $179
6gb 1070 $200
Psu $15
8gb ram $50
1tb hdd $30
Case $20
Linux
$494 total
Done
Uhd bluray isn't a realistic consideration as there isn't any pc software that plays it. A PC does x1000 things the Xbox can.
Factor in xbox live and youre really looking at a $700 build price too if you have the Xbox for a few years
I would gladly spend $500 on a PC. It's way too much for a console though.