Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
Stop.
Lol seriously, this is getting embarrassing. Comparing an out-of-the-box console with a PC is hilarious.
Stop.
Seriously? Because you were trying to claim that rather than buying a PS4, you should make your own HDTV connected gaming PC for $550 that would run rings around it. So, you know, you'd need all the bits that would make this possible.
If you're cherry picking what components to ignore, why not just assume that everyone has a spare i5 CPU laying around. I mean, I have one sat on my desk at work. Doesn't eveyrone
I dunno why they ditched the curves, but yeah, it does look good.God, the new experia tablet is sexy as fuck. Along with Experia Z, Sony seem to have turned a corner in terms of design.
Lol seriously, this is getting embarrassing. Comparing an out-of-the-box console with a PC is hilarious.
Lol seriously, this is getting embarrassing. Comparing an out-of-the-box console with a PC is hilarious.
Also, do you have a desktop PC already? Because if not, you're going to want to get a monitor.
I'm not saying PC gaming doesn't have its place, it has a huge one and for a lot of people it's the place to be. It's just getting annoying seeing people act like consoles are nothing but overpriced gaming PCs.
That setup is pretty low end and not very future proof. For one, that case looks like a flimsy piece of shit. It also doesn't have any of the modern features you'd expect from a modern case, like USB 3.0 or eSATA. For two, that power supply is awfully weak and you'd be hard pressed to upgrade with it futher in the generation and with such a setup I guarantee you'd need upgrades later on. The motherboard is also lacking in features like USB 3.0 and PCIe 3.0 meaning you'll be gimping yourself in a few years. And if you're going Sandy Bridge and not getting at least 3570k you're doing it wrong.Radeon 7950 $279
Intel i5 3470 processor $150
Gigabyte 1155 motherboard $39
Samsung DDR3 4GB RAM $22
Antec Basiq 450w power supply $39
MSI Case $20
320gb WD Caviar BlueHarddrive $45
Total: $595
And that is not shopping around and going with what I could find in 10 of browsing and with all very good, reliable parts. There is room for skimping.
Do composite cables carry HD signal?
Is PS4 designed with HD gaming in mind?
Why can't they just pack both?
You need an Hd display of some sort with either a pc or a console and they would work the same with either. PCs hook up to HDMI ports on current TVs.
All I am doing is looking at these current rumored specs. I have no way of knowing whether or not these specs are true. But I am telling you that if they are, that $600 PC build I listed would be considerably more powerful.
That is my only point. If these specs are true they are about what a low to mid tier current PC build would do. They aren't some crazy alien tech that is mind blowing and changes the game. They are a cheap PC current build, that comes pre-bult that fits under your tv for maybe around $400-$500. That is no small feat, but it also isnt anything too amazing.
Right, the PS4 will not be as powerful as a high-end PC. I think everyone has known that since 2009. The point that others are trying to make is that a PS4 is not a PC, and it won't work the same way either. For instance the machine you posted, while very probably more technically powerful than the PS4 will be, probably won't be able to reasonably keep up with PC ports of PS4 games by 2015.You need an Hd display of some sort with either a pc or a console and they would work the same with either. PCs hook up to HDMI ports on current TVs.
All I am doing is looking at these current rumored specs. I have no way of knowing whether or not these specs are true. But I am telling you that if they are, that $600 PC build I listed would be considerably more powerful.
That is my only point. If these specs are true they are about what a low to mid tier current PC build would do. They aren't some crazy alien tech that is mind blowing and changes the game. They are a cheap PC current build, that comes pre-bult that fits under your tv for maybe around $400-$500. That is no small feat, but it also isnt anything too amazing.
That setup is pretty low end and not very future proof. For one, that case looks like a flimsy piece of shit. It also doesn't have any of the modern features you'd expect from a modern case, like USB 3.0 or eSATA. For two, that power supply is awfully weak and you'd be hard pressed to upgrade with it futher in the generation and with such a setup I guarantee you'd need upgrades later on. The motherboard is also lacking in features like USB 3.0 and PCIe 3.0 meaning you'll be gimping yourself in a few years. And if you're going Sandy Bridge and not getting at least 3570k you're doing it wrong.
Honestly that setup would just be a headache a few years into next generation, you'd have to throw the whole thing out and build from the ground up for good performance.
Actually his choices are pretty good for something build and forget to play games for a couple of years. The power supply is enough for what he needs and the extra features you listed don't improve performance.
I just feel now is a bad time to build a PC to play next gen games.
Who builds a PC just to play games for a couple years? When you build a PC it's for the long haul.
You need an Hd display of some sort with either a pc or a console and they would work the same with either. PCs hook up to HDMI ports on current TVs.
All I am doing is looking at these current rumored specs. I have no way of knowing whether or not these specs are true. But I am telling you that if they are, that $600 PC build I listed would be considerably more powerful.
That is my only point. If these specs are true they are about what a low to mid tier current PC build would do. They aren't some crazy alien tech that is mind blowing and changes the game. They are a cheap PC current build, that comes pre-bult that fits under your tv for maybe around $400-$500. That is no small feat, but it also isnt anything too amazing.
Honestly that setup would just be a headache a few years into next generation, you'd have to throw the whole thing out and build from the ground up for good performance.
But PCs are poorly optimized and utilized compared to consoles so it would take maybe twice as more powerful hardware to achieve the results that are possible with consoles.
Even if PS4 has something only comparable to 7850 in GPU, but in a PC environment, it may take more than 680 to achieve same results with identical IQ.
Could you give me some research to back up this "twice as powerful" statistic? I'm not being facetious, either.
I'm also not really exagerating the difference. The current top of the line AMD processor often gets substantially lower performance than that i5 I posted in that build. And, as has been stated, these AMD chips are not even that powerful. They are more improved mobile varities, apparently. Here is a comparison chart showing variouis game and application performances of the best AMD processors versus current Intel i5s:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=288
If you think "console optimization" makes up that difference, I guess that is maybe possible, but that's a hell of a lot of optimization fairy dust that is required.
I have wondered to myself what an FX version of a Jaguar core would look like. Would it be as big a difference between Trinity APU and FX with Piledriver cores?
Not if these specs are true and we living with them for a good while. Like I said, that system woudl be more powerful than what those Orbis specs are by a considerable margin.
the optimizations will make up that and more. 300+% improvements are possible. And if you didn't realize.
this is what you get when you try to run 360 games with comparable hardware. Thats running the game at lower than 360 settings and not even hitting 30fps.
Graphics-wise, the PC version of the 4A engine is far removed from the console versions. All too often we've seen PC games that are identical to the 360 equivalents, simply offering you the ability to run at higher resolutions with higher frame-rates.
Metro 2033 features superior volumetric fog, double the precision in the PhysX, 2048x2048 textures (up against 1024x1024 on console), better shadow-map definition and filtering, object blur in DX10, sub-surface scattering for superior skin shaders, parallax mapping on all surfaces and better geometric detail with less aggressive LODs.
There's also going to be support for tessellation in DirectX 11.
I have wondered to myself what an FX version of a Jaguar core would look like. Would it be as big a difference between Trinity APU and FX with Piledriver cores?
Durango will be easy to replicate on PC, piss easy.
Or is is a different fish. Expect it'll be a good investment, but who knows how long the next gen will last :/
I think it will probably be about the same as this gen, or maybe even longer.
If you think "console optimization" makes up that difference, I guess that is maybe possible, but that's a hell of a lot of optimization fairy dust that is required.
I'm curious too. I'm just trying to going by a fairly optimistic view of what we currently know about AMD's tech. There are a lot of people in this thread throwing out suspicious claims about "optimization" with numbers pulled seemingly out of thin air. "Twice" the optimization, "300%!"etc.
"console optimization" makes a hell of a difference; how else do you think PS3, a console that has 512MB combined memory with an nVidia 7900-architecture GPU, is able to churn out games like Uncharted 3/GoW3/Killzone 2?
"console optimization" makes a hell of a difference; how else do you think PS3, a console that has 512MB combined memory with an nVidia 7900-architecture GPU, is able to churn out games like Uncharted 3/GoW3/Killzone 2?
"console optimization" makes a hell of a difference; how else do you think PS3, a console that has 512MB combined memory with an nVidia 7900-architecture GPU, is able to churn out games like Uncharted 3/GoW3/Killzone 2?
less than half the framerate and less than half the resolution aswell as less effects like AA is not really a compareable situation.
My only point is that consoles can do much more with much less.
I'm not saying PC gaming doesn't have its place, it has a huge one and for a lot of people it's the place to be. It's just getting annoying seeing people act like consoles are nothing but overpriced gaming PCs.
Your comparison doesn't make that point very well, they are doing alot less with alot less in that situation.
Hmm, not sure if the idea has been floated, but wouldn't third parties essentially just target the lowest common denominator for both Orbis and Durango i.e.
- 8 Jaguar cores @ 1.6 Ghz
- 1.2 TFLOPS
- 3.5 GB RAM
In what way in that situation is the PS3 doing a lot less? Now you're just being blatantly incorrect.
Sorry I misread as amd 7900, still I was running games like Assasins Creed at 720p on my geforce 7900 series PC quite easily.
Gemüsepizza;46694505 said:The thing is devs can use the rumored power of the PS4 to easily improve things like image quality and framerate, and if the PS4 really has a GPU with 50% more processing power and RAM with 3x times the speed, than this could be quite a significant improvement. A lot more than the differences between Xbox 360 and PS3.
In what way in that situation is the PS3 doing a lot less? Now you're just being blatantly incorrect.
Edit: When I say "a lot more" I mean in context with its specs, not compared to PC's offerings.
@stoneman_laura its an huge press tour where the major Sonys developers show their new games to the press for the first time.
Yeah, I'm thinking what it will amount to is basically PS4 games running at 60 fps and Durango games running at 30 fps.
Again, if rumored specs are true...the gap is far wider than it was this gen.
Sorry I misread as amd 7900, still I was running games like Assasins Creed at 720p on my geforce 7900 series PC quite easily.
That game is poorly optimized on consoles so that should help his point about optimization.
Or more like the same with the same. Crysis ran at around 32fps on a 7900 at slightly higher than 720p at medium settings. Keep in mind that is an open world game that is pretty damn impressive even today.
http://www.techspot.com/article/73-crysis-performance/page3.html
Here is Skyrim running on a 7900:
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=IBhk_bPan6U&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DIBhk_bPan6U