cobragt4001
Banned
Shit you're right, the 8GB's will surely dominate my system, even with the fact there aren't x64 games
I just hope nvidia has cards next year that can match the ps4's high end specs, I don't think Maxwell will be able to keep up.
-
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.
Full Unreal Engine 4 Elemental demo video running on PS4
- Thread starter SniperHunter
- Start date
Shit you're right, the 8GB's will surely dominate my system, even with the fact there aren't x64 games
I just hope nvidia has cards next year that can match the ps4's high end specs, I don't think Maxwell will be able to keep up.On top you have a build that costs almost or over one thousand dollars to make.
On the bottom you have a build that will sell for 400 dollars total. Deal with it? Epic cannot afford to make engines and games tailored to the PC market like this.
You shouldn't write off the PS4 just yet though. This looks like one of those scenarios where prototype hardware is old, janked, dated, and unoptimized.
Well, at the end of the day, if the final result looks similar to the best current gen has to offer, technical trickery notwithstanding, then it really isn't worth the time or the money to upgrade to next gen.
Fortunately, Drive Club, KZSF and inF SS have had more time to bake in the moving performance target that is the PS4 which makes them look better.
After the particle demonstration I saw in KZSF (the most impressive portion for me) I'm flabbergasted at the comparative sparseness of particles in the PS4 version of UE4 tech demo.
If the trend holds true, which logically it should, then given the nature of development on fixed hardware, games will surpass this visually underwhelming tech demo (regardless of how optimised/unoptimised it was when it was ported over).
I thought you were of the belief that MS's comparatively stable performance target (as would be reflected in their dev kits) should provide for a better first showing.
This comparison pic is just shocking
almost all the effects have been removed..no DOF, no particle effcts, worse lighting, worse shadowing....unbelievable
You are using old picture. GDC version of PS4 demo looks [little] better.
Expectations were high that the PS4 would out-do PC hardware, people even pointing to previous generations. Now it seems the argument has shifted to "Well, it's cheaper.".
SniperHunter
Banned
I am not writing it off, I will buy a PS4 sooner or later, I have owned all Sony consoles since the PSX. I am a big Playstation fan, but that image is just pathetic. They should write a disclaimer on the bottom or something, you know, "work in progress, running on alpha kits"
I mean even the PS3 can do depth of field and....I really HOPE Epic does something about this.
I thought graphically it looked alright, particle effects were noticeably toned down and the textures were surprisingly weak, but holy hell that frame rate was gnarly, and not in a good way.
If they can't even get the tech demo to run well then I don't have a whole lot of confidence in games using that engine on the PS4.
If they can't even get the tech demo to run well then I don't have a whole lot of confidence in games using that engine on the PS4.
As for the MS part, Beta kits havent arrived at developer studios, but Durango kits have had 8 GB of RAM + in them since launch, so you will see what the fruits of those labours provide. Current Durango kits are rumored to be very loud and hot.
ill make you sure to add you on my list of future crow eaters ;P
I look at this as more or less a benchmark. You can't extrapolate potential from this simple engine demonstration. I honestly think the final product lies somewhere in between the terribad PS4 youtube video and the GTX 680 video. With optimizations I think you'll get pretty close, but not quite there to the 680.
SolsticeZero
Banned
No, the argument is that this was put on an older dev kit with basically no time for optimization. Remember the first UE3 games on the PS3? They sucked. They got a shit ton better over time when they were able to optimize the engine for the console.
Most people who say things like that usually don't own PC's. However, the 8 GB GDDR5 when properly utilized will pose problems for current PC owners, this is fact. The PS4, IMO, will keep a good footing at producing similar IQ to the PC for the first two years of it's life, and after that it will be a totally new ball game.
It really isn't fact. We've already seen PS4 games being run on a PC with hardware that isn't from the future.
SolsticeZero
Banned
We've seen entry level PS4 dev demos. Take a look at Uncharted 2 or God of War: Ascension. The more time these devs have with the console, the more they can optimize.
But PC tech isn't going to sit still for 3 years while that happens.
SolsticeZero
Banned
Nobody said it was, but console games have the advantage of:
- Not being built with multiple hardwares in mind
- Having a lot less overhead than PCs
- Having access to lower level APIs than DX in general
- Having unique architecture that allows for more tricks and optimizations
Multiplat games? 90% of the time WILL be better on PC. But that's not why a lot of people have consoles. It's about those first party games.
It helps but not enough, the games you mentioned weren't the most impressive games graphically when they came out.
Probably unoptimized.
cobragt4001
Banned
Yea true but what if GG or ND developed for the current gaming PC? KZ SF on the pc would not only run better but would look better with proper AA and a higher refresh rate. What hurts PC gaming isn't hardware but software development. It has already been discussed that the PC has so much raw power that isn't utilized.
SolsticeZero
Banned
But the fact is they don't. We can sit around and speculate all day at what might happen if X does Y. And while PCs do have untapped power, they are also a lot more pricey when you want to access all of that power ($400-$500 PS4 vs $479 GTX 680)
alexandros
Banned
Inevitable.Many people have been saying that these new consoles are nothing special in terms of specs. The fact that the PS4 GPU can't compete with a GTX 680 should have been obvious to anyone with realistic expectations.
RibbedHero
Member
Windows overhead is very small nowadays, somewhere in the region of 2-5%. The APIs and one spec targetting are what results in the consoles resulting in greater pound for pound results.
I am not understanding what you are trying to point out. Are you saying PC's will be ahead of PS4? That is quite obvious. Even when the PS4 launches, PC's will have parts available that will dwarf it, no one will argue that. If it makes you feel better to point out that a build that is more than double the cost of PS4 will perform better, than hey man you win.
The PS4 is an amazing piece of kit, and in time, will rival and outdo the GTX 680. However, when Maxwell and it's brothers arrive, it will be dwarfed significantly. PC's are moving targets with unlimited budgets and sizes. The PS4 is a peice of kit and hardware that developers will target and exploit. I expect amazing things for it.
SolsticeZero
Banned
It's not just Windows overhead though. Many people have a ton of shit that runs in the background, and while it may not be a lot, it can add up.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
cobragt4001
Banned
Yea but people, not directing this to you, think that because the ps4 has this amount of ram it puts it on equal footing with the current gaming PC's and that's not the case. Next gen as far as visuals is already here if you look at Crysis 3 and Metro Last Light. Metro Last Light imo has no competition in regards to graphics. KZ SF looks great no doubt but the fact it's not running 60fps is disappointing if you're a PC gamer. I guess that's fine for console players.
AstroNut325
Member
Is there an updated comparison pic? With the GDC reel.
While this is true, what we saw of UE4 really doesn't look like the best it can be. KZSF had better particle system that this and that was playable. If people honestly think this is what the system is capable of, or rather this is what the developers can do with it to the end of its days then time will teach them a lesson they deliberately plea ignorance of every single generation... every one of them.
When I observed the particles took hit to the levels of PS3/XB360, it became clear that it's the old demo running on non finalized spec'd console. But as aforementioned, inevitably, people will be negative since it generates more conversation and consequent bans.
SolsticeZero
Banned
It's really kind of weird when people compare PC and console generations, though. PCs update so much more often because they're interchangeable. Consoles have to rebuild from the ground up to move into the future. So, if anything, we should simply be asking "is the a great step from the consoles we have now". Compare the PS3 to the graphics card you had in 2006. How does it rate with it?
The bolded part is most evident. I understand PC fans get angry whenever any one mentions the PS4 in their ball park. Reality is, there are folks on GAF who have spent upwards of 2k on their machines, and scoff at the idea of a console version of a game running even in the same ball park.
Deep Down + Infiltrator Demo, is what I expect to see after the first two years of the console launch. We are here arguing about Elemental demo and what ShadowFall is capable of, but this shit is only the beginning.
BTW running out of VRAM is a son of a bitch. When console games start utilizing all that RAM, PC gamer's will feel the sting.
1st Course
Member
8800 GTX was already out in 2006.
alexandros
Banned
By the time the PS4 launches, a 680-level card will probably cost quite a bit less than the PS4.
SolsticeZero
Banned
I know, I had one (Actually, I think mine was the GTS), but do you think it would be able to run Uncharted 2?
Quite a bit? I doubt it. But you still have to add on the price for the CPU, power supply, case, etc. That's why it's really weird comparing consoles to PCs.
It doesn't add up really. You can see at all times how much resources programs are using. Listening to music, reading GAF on Waterfox, and talking on Skype, doesn't use my CPU or GPU even 1%. RAM usage is 2.5GB, leaving enough RAM for any game.
If anything, NVidia will become the biggest whore you have ever seen in the industry in the coming years. Node shrinks are becoming harder, yields are rougher, and GPU's are getting larger by the day. Without AMD doing anything worth while, NVidia will gouge your eyes out.
angular graphics
Banned
Are you kidding me?
SniperHunter
Banned
I have been an AMD supporter ever since the days of 9800 Pro XD
jacksepticeye
Member
In a perfect world that's what would happen. But people are gonna boast PCs over consoles all the time.
eddfromtheriver
Banned
Why even release this?, they're trying to sell their engine right?...
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Plot does indeed thicken
Whoever released that original shot screwed something up. I just went back and watched the video from the PlayStation meeting and you can see that there are textures actually present.
They're certainly there in the newest version that was just released as well. The texture in the PS4 version on the gate is different, but there are actual textures there. Same thing with the main character.
Here's a shot from the new version as well:
alexandros
Banned
Nope.
RibbedHero
Member
I mean if you include everything, as in all your background applications and browser and iTunes, etc, it results in 2-5% of CPU overhead and less than 1% of GPU overhead. Check your resource monitor right now to see.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Sony's first party games will. Nobody makes PC exclusive blockbuster graphical showpieces anymore. The last one we got was the original Crysis.
Unless you want to count playing on 1400p or something, but assuming 1080p vs 1080p (vast majority of PC gamers will be on this res), I've no doubt both of these consoles will have exclusive 1st party titles that'll hold the "best looking game out" crown multiple times throughout next-gen.
Portugeezer
Member
No texture version is DDR3 Durango version.
PLASTICA-MAN
Member
Why nobody has read my comment on the first page ? PLease see the link. EVEN the PC version looks worse and lacks details from " THE TARGET VIDEO" that everyone is tqking as reference.
cobragt4001
Banned
But lets look at the possible amount of ram for the ps4's system. 8GB's isn't solely for the gpu so how much will the gpu actually have access to? I remember hearing a rumor that the ps4 would be able to run on multi-monitors and if that's true then I see the reason for that much ram. PC games aren't even x64 so I'm not worried about ram at all, nvidia's Maxwell gpus might come with a higher amount of ram next year so again, I don't think PC gamers have much to worry about.
cobragt4001
Banned
Yes it would be able to run Uncharted, maybe at 60fps and actual 1080p if ND developed on that gpu but we'd never know.