Support NeoGAF

[ghst]

In "mid range" there is a word and it's "range".

So what's "range"? It's a variation in amounts.
So what's "mid range"? It's the middle point in the variation.

What's the middle point in PC Hardware right now? By your "rang", 99% of the PCs out there are in the "less than low" range. If you buy a laptop (and everyone has a laptop these days), you are "lesser than less than low" if you don't go over 800€ here in France...

So upper mid range is a i5 4670k with a r9 280x? YOU HAVE TO BE JOKING RIGHT?

okay, you win. thanks to XP still holding strong in offices around the world, the average PC is something like a pentium 4 with no dedicated GPU. the PS4 absolutely stomps a pentium 4 with no dedicated GPU and PC dweebs need to shut up with their false equivalences.

i feel like PS4 dudes have been drinking from the "superior power and performance" cup for the last few months and are having a hard time remembering that debates like this are only going to hurt their feelings.

 

[mekes]

I have the same build as the OP. Such a capable PC, been over the moon with it for a few years now. I was hoping the PS4 might match what I have, so far it seems it can possibly with a little extra to spare? So I am very much looking forward to getting my PS4.

 

[Manmademan]

Surprised to here the PS3 cell is actually more powerful than the CPU in PS4.

At least theoretically.

I think it depends on the kinds of tasks.

Don't forget that the ps4 doesn't have a CPU per se, it uses GPGPU when appropriate so the GPU ends up doing the heavy calculation work.

You can't compare that directly to the cell or an Intel i5 or i7 in an open system.

 

[Terbinator]

Lol, nothing out atm is better than the PS4. Even the astronomically priced Titan only has 6GB of GDDR5.

 

[RayMaker]

multi platform games I think will run and look better on PS4.

For me the PS4 seems like a mid range PC.


but in the first 3 years console exclusives will look better then PC games apart from IQ.

(this is not a fact, and is purely my opinion)

 

[Fredrik]

and that's exactly how much PS4 costs with $400 console and 8 years of paying online

Ouch. It's way too easy to forget this. Add a redesign for half the price after 3-4 years at $200 too. Or make that two if you go PS4+XB1 like many of us do.
So...
PS4+PSplus+PS4slim (400+400+200) ~1000
XB1+XBLG+XB1slim (500+400+250)~1150
= $2150

And then we have WiiU too...
No I think I'll stop here. This is depressing. Maybe I should become a fanboy. It's cheaper.

 

[chickdigger802]

Lol, nothing out atm is better than the PS4. Even the astronomically priced Titan only has 6GB of GDDR5.

lol wow.

 

[patapuf]

No one. In fact, it's probably what i wanted to say. No one cares, it's probably what make some guys so defensive about it.

We all know that any one can buy a PC that's better than everything on the market. And we all know we will be all satisfied with what consoles offer for seven years to come.

Because we know that PC multiplatform games are (and always will be) limited by consoles. You'll find ten games at most by decade that has been made to take advantage of high end

Spoiler

(and i said high end, because most PC exclusives are not what i would call high end)

PC tech (Crysis at his time for example), the rest is a jump in resolution/framerate for the most part.

But the OP obviously wants to play games on his PC and asks for advice on how comparable it is powerwise to a PS4.

Which is why we are comparing the two in the first place.

Also, whether or not you are satisfied with console performance is very much a matter of taste. You don't need the exlcusives to take advantage of PC tech either. Battlefield was miles ahead on PC, games like the elder scroll series too.

 

[cajunator]

Lol, nothing out atm is better than the PS4. Even the astronomically priced Titan only has 6GB of GDDR5.

BEAN BURRITOS IN SPAAAAAAACCCEEEEEEEE

 

[Psycho_Mantis]

Lol, nothing out atm is better than the PS4. Even the astronomically priced Titan only has 6GB of GDDR5.

Dat 8GB of GDDR5.

 

[Emitan]

Lol, nothing out atm is better than the PS4. Even the astronomically priced Titan only has 6GB of GDDR5.

If one does not understand computer hardware one should not comment on computer hardware.

 

[John Rabbit]

Lol, nothing out atm is better than the PS4. Even the astronomically priced Titan only has 6GB of GDDR5.

everytime i almost forget about this joke, someone brings it back.


also, there's more reasons that just "can it run Crysis?" to game on PC. there's also the part where having a $1500 gaming rig also gives the ability to run other non-gaming software more efficiently/quickly too. but lets just keep counting pixels.

 

[MThanded]

and that's exactly how much PS4 costs with $400 console and paying online for 8 years

In 8 years the PS4 will still handle all the software made for it. Can't say the same for the PC.

Face value comparison is a challenge. However, the thing you can guarantee with a console is that you can play the games that are made for it and they will be optimized to hell and back by the end of the life cylcle.

 

[Alej]

Lol, nothing out atm is better than the PS4. Even the astronomically priced Titan only has 6GB of GDDR5.

And then, you think those 8GB GDDR5 are on the same die with CPU/GPU.
It's a fucking APU!

Any APU like that on PC? With hUMA and everything? I'm asking because i don't know.
And so, if not, what bottlenecks are we looking at when benchmarking discrete parts if those bottlenecks ARE NOT THE SAME ONE in the consoles?

Okay, i forgot that low end laptop cpu is so shitty we should close the party even before it starts. Seriously guys.

But the OP obviously wants to play games on his PC and asks for advice on how comparable it is powerwise to a PS4.

Which is why we are comparing the two in the first place.

No, he wants to know for what platform he should buy his multiplatform games in the future, isn't he? Sorry if i misunderstood.

 

[mapla]

The incoming generation uses low range components so this time is easy to get a PC which stands the comparison with the consoles during the entire generation at least with the same level of detail and performance.

For example, Nvidia 8800 GT was twice 360/PS3 and It beats them in any multiplatform you could think about.

Now for achieve the same difference you "only" need R9 280X. Also, the differences between the architectures of consoles and PC are almost nil and we are waiting to the hypothetical improvement that Steam OS and Mantle could give us.

In fact with BF4 you don't need more than a 7950 Boost (very cheap) to get 1080p, Ultra setting and 60 fps while PS4 runs the game at 900p and One at 720p...

Anyone remember what were the requirements in PC to get the same quality in Oblivion than in 360? The were insane for the fucking MSAA lol.

Is the first generation this happens because the hardware of these consoles is shit. Specially One's.

 

[Terbinator]

Pentakill? PENTAKILL!

 

[IAmRandom31]

From what I have seen of the GPU numbers and specs and such, it is around the power of a 7850 or 7870. It has a few things higher then the 7850, a few things lower then the 7870.

I just call the GPU a 7860. As others will no doubt say, it is a closed system and developers will be able to pull more performance out of it compared to a standard PC GPU of similar numbers.

So, if you add that capability, I am thinking you could get the pure performance of a say 7870 out of it. The latency is likely lower on this type of APU setup for the system memory then a separated CPU/GPU setup on the PC, so the TFLOP numbers in real time situations could likely be pretty close between the two even though the 7870 has higher overall TFLOP numbers.

The thing you will see on the consoles though, and already seeing with games like Deep Down / Killzone, effects will be really, really good on the PS4.

In the PC world they seem to be all about high resolution textures, high resolution environment, high resolution this and that. Then something explodes or a spark is thrown and it looks like you could carbon date it back to the Commodore 64 era. Very odd to me. I have yet to play a PC game, even in todays graphical world, where the effects wowed me.

But the moment I saw the Fire Tornado thing in Deep Down. I wowed. Or the 200,000 Voxel explosion in Res0gun. Or the first grenade explosion in Killzone.

 

[Emitan]

Pentakill? PENTAKILL!

fuuuuuuuck

 

[ghst]

also, there's more reasons that just "can it run Crysis?" to game on PC. there's also the part where having a $1500 gaming rig also gives the ability to run other non-gaming software more efficiently/quickly too. but lets just keep counting pixels.

my favourite is the idea that while PC is great for waving your tech dick around, consoles are where the games are. despite literally hundreds of titles being added to steam every couple of months and a 20 year backlog, while it seems every console discussion devolves into gif recirculations and arguments over resolution.

 

[SuoGrey]

Lol, nothing out atm is better than the PS4. Even the astronomically priced Titan only has 6GB of GDDR5.

 

[L3G3ND6]

I've currently got I7 3960X, GTX 690 (4.2G of GDDR5), 16GB ram (DDR3) I'm also getting a PS4, while a few PC specs can beat PS4's the optimization of games and of the hardware will be done very well on PS4 than PC since PS4's components aren't going to be changed.

So, OP your PC won't match up to a PS4, but you will still be able to play games you would like, I would say get the games for PS4 and use PC for PC exclusives.

I'll be getting most games on PS4 and using PC to play PC exclusives.

 

[Nethaniah]

In the PC world they seem to be all about high resolution textures, high resolution environment, high resolution this and that. Then something explodes or a spark is thrown and it looks like you could carbon date it back to the Commodore 64 era. Very odd to me. I have yet to play a PC game, even in todays graphical world, where the effects wowed me.

What is this.

 

[Fracas]

I don't specialize in this stuff, but I would say that you couldn't get KZ: Shadow Fall or Drive Club graphics at 1080p/60fps for any less than $600, maybe $700.

It's a pretty solid machine, especially for the price.

 

[Dranakin]

I'm running:

Intel i7-4800MQ
GTX 765M
16GB DDR3 1600MHz

And yet, all the videos I've seen of PS4 gameplay looks better than anything my laptop can produce.

 

[ghst]

So, OP your PC won't match up to a PS4, but you will still be able to play games you would like, I would say get the games for PS4 and use PC for PC exclusives.

why? he can already run games at close to PS4 spec. if he buys games on PS4, he'll have to run them at PS4 spec forever. if he buys them on PC, he'll be able to run them at 2xPS4 spec within a year for half the cost of a PS4, or 4x not long after that.

 

[Fredrik]

In 8 years the PS4 will still handle all the software made for it. Can't say the same for the PC.

You can usually scale most PC games back until they run fine with lower details/resolution etc, you won't get the advantage of all the finer details other PC gamers get but the same can be said about console gamers since 8 years will take PC gaming on Ultra setting far far ahead of next gen consoles.

 

[Prophet Steve]

I'm running:

Intel i7-4800MQ
GTX 765M <--------------------------------
16GB DDR3 1600MHz

And yet, all the videos I've seen of PS4 gameplay looks better than anything my laptop can produce.

There is your problem. Do not expect to keep up with nextgen on a laptop graphics card. Laptops are shit for gaming if you want good performance for the price.

 

[Nethaniah]

I'm running:

Intel i7-4800MQ
GTX 765M
16GB DDR3 1600MHz

And yet, all the videos I've seen of PS4 gameplay looks better than anything my laptop can produce.

That gpu is worse than what the OP has in his system i'd reckon.

 

[entremet]

I don't specialize in this stuff, but I would say that you couldn't get KZ: Shadow Fall or Drive Club graphics at 1080p/60fps for any less than $600, maybe $700.

It's a pretty solid machine, especially for the price.

Consoles are subsidized. PC components are not: moreover, consoles components are bought in much higher quantities by the manufacturer, driving down cost significantly . Not really a fair comparison.

 

[jonscrambler]

In 8 years the PS4 will still handle all the software made for it. Can't say the same for the PC.

Face value comparison is a challenge. However, the thing you can guarantee with a console is that you can play the games that are made for it and they will be optimized to hell and back by the end of the life cylcle.

but in 8 years PS4 games will look like PC games in low-mid settings just like the end of this gen cycle

 

[Dranakin]

There is your problem. Do not expect to keep up with nextgen on a laptop graphics card. Laptops are shit for gaming if you want good performance for the price.

That gpu is worse than what the OP has in his system i'd reckon.

...but, but it's a Class 1!
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-765M.92907.0.html


I did want to go with a laptop though. Been out of the PC specs game for so long that I don't even know what desktops are running.

 

[TGO]

Not getting this part.

Also the pitchforks would be at you for lumping everyone together rather than what you're trying to say.

The consoles are only built for HDTV output and design probably takes that into consideration
Ie, even if they could they won't
PC doesn't have this problem.
And sorry I'm not lumping all PC gamers together, even PC gamers get attacked for stating something the elitist don't like.

 

[Nethaniah]

...but, but it's a Class 1!
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-765M.92907.0.html


I did want to go with a laptop though. Been out of the PC specs game for so long that I don't even know what desktops are running.

Laptops are garbage for gaming wouldn't be suprised if that's where the so called high pc prices come from that are sometimes thrown in these threads, from people buying overpriced laptops and thinking they are high end pc's.

 

[TheKayle]

Lol, nothing out atm is better than the PS4. Even the astronomically priced Titan only has 6GB of GDDR5.

i feel sorry for u wake up

 

[-GOUKI-]

i feel sorry for u wake up

He's joking

 

[TGO]

i feel sorry for u wake up

ya he is wrong but ain't you that "720p is ok" guy?

 

[Alej]

i feel sorry for u wake up

Joke post probably.

But i really wanted to know myself if there is an APU out there with that RAM and that level of CPU/GPU for PC... No one answering that, maybe it's a stupid question.

Because bottlenecks affects benchmarks as much as horsepower... And in an APU like this, those bottlenecks shouldn't be the same, making comparing parts any more muddy.

 

[Durante]

You'll find ten games at most by decade that has been made to take advantage of high end

Spoiler

(and i said high end, because most PC exclusives are not what i would call high end)

PC tech (Crysis at his time for example), the rest is a jump in resolution/framerate for the most part.

Reading GAF for the past few weeks you'd get the impression that jumps in resolution and framerate are incredibly important.

And then, you think those 8GB GDDR5 are on the same die with CPU/GPU.

You don't know what a die is.

my favourite is the idea that while PC is great for waving your tech dick around, consoles are where the games are. despite literally hundreds of titles being added to steam every couple of months and a 20 year backlog, while it seems every console discussion devolves into gif recirculations and arguments over resolution.

Astute.

 

[WolvenOne]

Pure spec wise? It's about on par with a middle end gaming PC, with one or two components from a very high end gaming PC. (See, the RAM.)

Functionally, the PS4 should perform fairly close to a high end gaming PC for awhile. By mere virtue of the closed system allowing developers to pry more horsepower out of the hardware. This is why consoles historically punch a little above their weight class so to speak, there's more room to optimize on consoles, then on PC's.

That said, the highest end PC's will produce better visuals now, and in a few years even mid-end gaming PC's will start putting out slightly better visuals. As with the PS360 however, this probably won't become too noticeable, until the fourth or fifth year of these consoles lifespans.

 

[TheKayle]

ya he is wrong but ain't you that "720p is ok" guy?

are we talking about specs/benchmarks etc etc? or games?

specs talking ps4 and xb1 are outdated before they will hit the market also the omgitcantbetrue 8gddr5 seem old with nvidia calling for a 780ti with 12gddr5

well is just stupid to talk about those console compared to pc...

games will be on console as always coz console gamers spend money for original games....if wasnt like this.....developers would work on the main platform ...pc

 

[capitalCORN]

PS4 was designed by Cerny, a certified genius. Who makes PC parts? I'll tell you who, Assholes. I'll let you decide.

 

[ghst]

That said, the highest end PC's will produce better visuals now, and in a few years even mid-end gaming PC's will start putting out slightly better visuals. As with the PS360 however, this probably won't become too noticeable, until the fourth or fifth year of these consoles lifespans.

there were people getting 7950s for $170 a month or so ago. that's far from the "highest end". that's $30 below the mid-range sweet spot.

 

[TheKayle]

Joke post probably.

But i really wanted to know myself if there is an APU out there with that RAM and that level of CPU/GPU for PC... No one answering that, maybe it's a stupid question.

Because bottlenecks affects benchmarks as much as horsepower... And in an APU like this, those bottlenecks shouldn't be the same, making comparing parts any more muddy.

an apu powerful as the ps4? no there isnt i think

but i think we was talking about desktops

 

[hodgy100]

I think the comparison is completely illogic. Mid-range pc will no handle ps4 games in some years. I'm looking to watch dogs, for example.

and how can you use watchdogs as an example? the game isnt out yet, we have no idea how well it will run on pc's it says it "reccomends" an oct core cpu but Id be very surprised if any mid range i5 struggled also the gpu cant compare with some of the higher end cards that are now coming down in price (HD 7979 / R9-280x comes to mind) keep in mind Watchdogs runs at 30fps on ps4 and xbox one.

 

[GhostTrick]

A fair comparison would be to benchmark Battlefield 4 at 900p and same settings as PS4.
Unfortunately, GPU reviews are always maxing out GPUs with crazy high resolutions and high quality AA. I think it'd be interesting to see how could those midrange GPUs performs at 900p or 1080p without AA.

 

[hodgy100]

A fair comparison would be to benchmark Battlefield 4 at 900p and same settings as PS4.
Unfortunately, GPU reviews are always maxing out GPUs with crazy high resolutions and high quality AA. I think it'd be interesting to see how could those midrange GPUs performs at 900p or 1080p without AA.

What settings are comparable to the ps4 version? I have both a laptop and pc that i could run some benchmarks on if you want?

Desktop:
i5 3570k 3.4Ghz
8GB DDR3
GTX 560ti 1GB GDDR5

Laptop
i7 4700MQ 2.4GHZ
8GB DDR3
GTX 765M 2GB GDDR5

the ps4 should outperform both of these really as they are both lacking in the gpu area, but it would be interesting see a comparason when running at similar settings

 

[Alej]

You don't know what a die is.

Could be a translation issue. On chip is more accurate? edit: no it isn't. Complete bullshit, i feel sorry for this. I wanted to ask (see my other posts), what an APU change when comparing those parts. Nothing?

Reading GAF for the past few weeks you'd get the impression that jumps in resolution and framerate are incredibly important.

For choosing for what platform you should buy you multiplatform game, yes. Or comparing two platforms performance, yes. It's indeed important.

 

[shandy706]

Because we know that PC multiplatform games are (and always will be) limited by consoles. You'll find ten games at most by decade that has been made to take advantage of high end PC tech (Crysis at his time for example), the rest is a jump in resolution/framerate for the most part.

This is so far off base it's funny. The extra little details and visual flair of say a game like Batman: AO with DirectX 11+ enhancements on and High PhysX on a $200-$250 graphics card looks quite different than their console counterparts. There are multiple games just this year (let alone a "decade") that absolutely manhandle my 360 and PS3 versions of the same game.

Resolution is one of the least important (eye candy wise) parts of current and next-gen gaming.

 

[Odrion]

We're already seeing cross-generation titles that are not huge leaps in graphical fidelity recommending much more computing resources than before. I can imagine things are going to get even more intensive from here on out.

We're quickly being reminded how inefficient developers are at PC optimization. I sure can't wait until we start getting ports that run like shit on anything less than 8 cores for no good reason whatsoever.

 

[Qassim]

And then, you think those 8GB GDDR5 are on the same die with CPU/GPU.

It's a shame we don't have signatures on NeoGAF cause that would be going in it.