-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NVIDIA: PS4 GPU 3x less powerful than Titan, but more powerful than Xbox 720
- Thread starter gembel
- Start date
Phire Phox
Banned
Couldn't agree more.
I see, the post is rather ambiguous so I don't know if those games of yours include Quake or not because if they do you should know that you literally can't do the things in for example q3 that pro players do using just a pad due do its limitations.
And I say that as a person who plays the majority of his first person games on pc using a 360 pad.
alexandros
Banned
What do you classify as hostility though? Is stating a simple fact (like "current PC GPUs are much more powerful than next-gen console GPUs") considered hostile?
There's a bit of a problem though. Much of the same people who claim to not care about the 'extra layer of MSSXFXAA', as you put it, can be seen in other threads arguing fiercely about the benefits of 8GB DDR5 and the magical Durango secret sauce. I'm not sure how you would call that, but I call it hypocrisy.
They care but not enough to put up with the hassles of PC gaming. Most gamers want the optimum point of graphics with convenience.
chaosblade
Unconfirmed Member
To be fair, having to touch a mouse or keyboard for maybe 15 seconds isn't nearly the horrible inconvenience you've made it out to be.
alexandros
Banned
Or, as an alternative explanation, they only care that their side wins and will move the goal posts accordingly depending on who they're up against.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
Pretty much doing anything but treating the PS4 as a magical device and the second-coming of video gaming, means:
1. You're a PC gamer.
and
2. You're "defensive" and "hostile" towards it.
Forget about trying to use data and facts. And if someone finally comes to terms with the PS4 not being as powerful as a high-end PC, then it becomes "the visuals won't even be that different..." which is hilarious. I look forward to later this year!
This thread has a guy using goddamn google search results to show a game isn't popular(because it's not as popular as BF or CoD, which isn't a good metric). And it has a guy who said the difference between maxed out 1080p BF3 PC and the console versions is barely there, spitting in the face of logic and the eyes of every gamer who has objectively played both. Now there's the poster saying couch PC gaming doesn't matter because you have to use a m/kb sometimes for 10 seconds before playing.
Like one big, nonsensical, middle
school fight.
That's much more accurate given who you're replying to and the context of this and other threads.
Oh this shit. I game primarily on my PC, but even I will attest to be annoyed to shit with my PC. There are hurdles in PC gaming that only a Steam Box or a new OS could only fix.
chaosblade
Unconfirmed Member
You missed the context here. I really don't think having to double click an icon or Steam library listing to launch a game is a deal breaker for all that many people. Or use the keyboard to input a name while creating a character in an otherwise controller-compatible game (Skyrim doesn't have an on-screen keyboard while using a controller?)
Of course they can. Simply not at the best quality only at 360 quality.
And then you change your PC or upgrade it. For a better and cheaper experience than buying a console. Consoles are PC that are tweeked to play games only. They are not magical devices. You could build a Xbox 360 right now with parts, and have a PC Xbox 360. It would be shitty, but you could. So yeah, PC is better than consoles, you simply pay more once in a while, but you pay less for the games for a better experience.
lol why carmack?
fromw aht ive read carmack said the ps4 could reach 66 percent of a titan with optimization
but thats from a post in this thread
im not sure he actually said that
Mango Positive
Member
I'm a PC gamer and my system will probably keep up with / surpass (680) the PS4 on most multi-platform games, but I have no intention of not owning a PS4 on day 1. It seems the arguing is a bit absurd at this point. Of course PC gaming is better in almost every way. It better be for what it costs.
John Carmack made a tweet that you can get up to 2x effective performance out of fixed hardware in a console setting compared to PC. It's bound to come up at least once in these threads.
I'm in the same boat actually, I just get dragged back into these threads because people continue to make up insane downsides to PC gaming, or technological advantages of consoles, seemingly out of thin air.
This is the primary reason why I'm so frustrated with the state of platform discussion on GAF since the new console generation started mattering. You can see the talking points switching (for the same posters) depending on whether they are arguing about Wii U vs Durango, or Durango vs PS4, or PS4 vs PC. In some cases hardware or graphics matter a whole lot, in some cases very little. It really seems as though hardware power matters only exactly up to the point where your preferred platform sits. (Of course, one could argue whether there's a correlation or a causation there)
Yup. It's hilarious to see the same people who apparently couldn't care less about graphics shitting on the Wii's visuals or tearing each other's throats out over a difference of 2 frames in 360/PS3 multiplatform games.
It's going to be even better this upcoming gen with the Durango supposedly being a good deal weaker than the PS4.
Impeccable
Member
I suspect there will be a sharp decrease in people putting weight into Digital Foundry's stuff next generation.
darkazcura
Member
I don't even know why it matters. Who cares if the PS4/720 are a bit weaker or a bit stronger at launch..PCs will be outperforming them within a year no matter what like history indicates. It's all so silly. I'm a console guy, but I don't give a crap about the 6-10 month lead consoles typically have on PCs in a 5-7 year cycle. In the grand scheme of things, it means absolutely nothing.
If the PS4 was more capable than the Titan, it would only take a few more months for the PC to have something even stronger. So meh.
If the PS4 was more capable than the Titan, it would only take a few more months for the PC to have something even stronger. So meh.
There is no lead this time around. You're starting with a deficit from the offset.
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
I just want all future console games to run on 1080p.... PLZ Sony, do it!!!
Legit question, are these irrelevant factors? Or are they incorrect?
That's probably what they are aiming for. Though some devs might run at a lower Rez to squeeze better visuals elsewhere somehow.
SniperHunter
Banned
These threads are getting tiring at this point. Sony lost a lot of money on PS3, they weren't going for that route again with PS4. At the end of the day it's all about profitability, and as we have seen in the console space the best graphics don't even matter...I mean look at Dreamcast vs PSX, DC's graphics were so much better than PSX, yet it didn't sell....it bombed and died.
Graphics don't matter in this industry...sure if you like super sample AA, downsampling, 60 FPS at ultra, just buy two titans and call it a day. The console trolling is getting out of control IMO
Graphics don't matter in this industry...sure if you like super sample AA, downsampling, 60 FPS at ultra, just buy two titans and call it a day. The console trolling is getting out of control IMO
Hehe, technically the dreamcast was competing with ps2.
mugurumakensei
Member
$3000 PC is irrelevant cause a $1000 PC will still have a GPU 2x as powerful as the next-gen consoles with a much more powerful CPU to boot.
To the metal is laughable since few developers (We'll see great things from First parties and a few select third parties that have their own internal engines) will do that since they will be using middleware and a lot of the game logic will reside within scripts that run through UE's VM.
Console optimization often amounts things like dynamic resolutions and such.
Overhead: See to the metal.
Carmack: He's right but 2x performance of equivalent PC is the exception not the norm.
SniperHunter
Banned
I remember when DC came out Sony was still supporting PSX, I remember playing the Final Fantasy 8 demo around the time DC launched. The PS2 was far far away at that point
They're not incorrect at all (well, the $3000 is). And they are relevant in some discussions. They are, however, massively overstated and overplayed by people who don't really understand the subject matter, and they are irrelevant to what NV has been doing lately (comparing hardware performance).
To be quite honest, it's getting damn tiring seeing the same pro-PC people come in and try to exert some sort of superiority because they game on high-end computers. I have a PC that can play games at the highest level without breaking a sweat and I love gaming on my PC. However, I recognize that there are games that I can't get or don't want to play on a PC and would like to get a PS4/Durango/Whatever for. Some people honestly couldn't care less that your PC games has an 8xMSAA option, etc and people need to deal with it.
Did you even read the fucking OP? I'm saying the 1.8TFlop GPU is the best choice Sony could have made.
Ignorance is on both sides (PC/Console), yet somehow you only see one side of it. I own a 680 too, however I bat on both sides.
Ciastek3214
Junior Member
Not until they see the difference.
Or more like they are salty that there main avenue, the desktop market, is growing thinner and thinner by the week, and are salty that they didn't get even a dear john letter for consoles. Has to be it.
mugurumakensei
Member
Eh, they also get a ton of money from the mobile market. Asus and Nvidia are good bed fellows for the tablet market.
As far as I know Nvidia is getting fewer contract by each day. I don't see any main manufacturer uses Tegra. They really need to get their shit together with their tegra line.
old manatee
Banned
How many MSAA's are there in a GDDR5?
mugurumakensei
Member
Eh, Asus uses Tegra in almost all of their tablets including the Nexus 7. Tegra still isn't big in phones but phones need to be power efficient. Tegra is a power at the cost of battery life product. Tegra 4 beats out the the Snapdragon 800 quite handily. I can see that being the chip of choice for Asus next transformer tablet.
If the majority of PS4/Durango games are 720p at any framerate then next-gen is pointless as far as I'm concerned.
Har Har. The reason people are excited about the 8GB of RAM is because we saw how the amount and bandwith speed was the major bottlenecks encountered this gen. Having not only 8GB but also the highest quality you can find today, and you can see how people are looking up towards games on consoles in the future. Now, that's not to say that people aren't getting their information wrong about the actual uses for it, but to try and come in and try to downplay it is ridiculous considering the opportunities it presents in game development.
SirButterstick
Banned
Isn't next-gen already theoretically last gen when comparing Consoles to PC? Isn't 'next-gen' already outdated 'last gen' the moment the PS4's hardware was announced?
Isn't the thread the 'Bioshock: Infinite' of stupidity at this point?
Isn't the thread the 'Bioshock: Infinite' of stupidity at this point?
sono
Member
Interesting AMD push back comments!
Read my first post. It doesn't work that way. Take a look at MGS5. That is a current gen game on 7 year old hardware. Then take a look at NFS or Tomb raider for PC. Same game as the current old hardware console but pcs still barely push them at higher resolutions with cards that came out 2 years ago.
Considering what 1080p can still do to pc realm when you start forcing nvidia inspector to use more bells and whistles it's not unreasonable for machines with less power to be stuck at 720p.
You can't increase every aspect of graphics and hope these console can still 1080p with ease.
1080p is a much smaller jump in resolution than the jump from last gen to the current one. It'll be pretty common next gen.
Repeat the same fact again & again isn't it at least tiring? In any case, yeah, it's quite hostile obsess the people with the same concept.
TheExecutive
Member
It's in the top 3 no doubt about it.
Er, isn't 720p>1080p a much larger jump in pixel count than 480p>720p?
Edit: A difference of 614,400 between 480p and 720p and a difference of 1,152,000 for 720p to 1080p by my count.
TheExecutive
Member
To me this post sounds like you are arguing against your own facts. To the metal is NOT laughable and you explain why in your own post.
Yes in terms of numbers but every console gen has pretty much doubled base resolution and 720p to 1080p is a 2.25x jump, in line with most other jumps. Last gen to this gen was over 3x.