-
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
You think that we are going to have GPU's with 18.4TFLOPS in a year or 2? really?
Which is basically 2 680's in SLI.
Doesnt seem like THAT big of a difference if you think about it like that.
childplease
Banned
Anything is possible but one thing is certain consoles will show their age must faster this gen.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
The graphics the PS4 is delivering in the demos shown so far indicate that people are more than satisfied with what they're going to get. Although everybody should always contextualize all of the information. The chart shown indicates that last generation the kind of gap between the consoles and top of the range PCs didn't reach the 2-3x level until 2-3 years after the 360 launched, while it's already there on D-Day -150 for this generation. PC gamers have been complaining about consoles holding them back for several years now, and if this chart is any indication, that situation will be worse this time around.
NemesisPrime
Banned
They read it on NeoGAF.
True, though I secretly hope that the disparity between consoles and pcs will reach somekind of critical mass and explode into a plethora of "crysis1-esque" pc exclusives that are made from the ground up for very high end hardware.
devonraynor
Member
again the 1.8 vs 1.2 Tflops, guess speculating on old info
He was being sarcastic or facetious. Just a heads up junior.
At least I hope, for his sake.
childplease
Banned
I would settle with the majority of next gen games using the pc as the lead platform so the games are made to their max potential instead of being gimped by console hardware then ported to pcs.
With the new architecture inside of consoles there is no reason not to have the pc version lead first then port that game into something the consoles can handle.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-07-25-amd-console-exec-leaves-for-nvidia
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/24973...ech_in_all_three_next_gen_consoles/index.html
The senior exec responsible for getting AMD into the PS4 and next Xbox left AMD for Nvidia last year.
It's not. The chart assumes that Xenos was faster than desktop GPUs of that time and it was clearly not the case, the gaps are similar.
Phonomezer
Banned
This just makes me want a Titan.
Well, that was the point.
Phonomezer
Banned
Because according to that graph the xbox was twice as fast as the geforce 2 and the 360 was roughly equivalent to the the 7800 so console graphics speed is regressing relative to discrete gpu's.
I just bought one and they are not $1500 AUD. Actually, I'd love to know who sells them for that much? None of the usual on-line retailers have them for more than ~$1200-$1300
GPU FLOPS he most important thing hardware according to PC fans
E-Cat
Member
Premium pricing, baby! That's how it goes.
Always-honest
Banned
Correct. Nvidia has an agenda
IHaveCandy
Banned
Does that mean the PS4 will be $333.34?
michaelius
Banned
Always-honest
Banned
Almost
blitzcloud
Banned
What's your basis for that statement? As a PC gamer who owned an ATI card that year I think you're completely wrong, as Xenos was actually more powerful than the X1800 XT in a number of important ways.
Xenos was using unified shaders at a time when ATI's desktop cards were still on individualized pixel and vertex shaders, and had more raw shading power than the high-end cards of 2005. It also had superior framebuffer bandwidth vs those cards. At extremely high resolutions the fillrates of the desktop cards would catch up, but Xenos was an extremely powerful console card for its time.
The PS4's card doesn't have any bleeding edge tech that its desktop peers lack, and appears to be very similar to a mid-range 2012 AMD desktop card. And the next-gen Xbox's card is weaker yet.
NVidia is correct in asserting that this generation is starting with a larger performance deficit than the 360/PS3 did vs desktops of their day. Both companies (especially Microsoft) have aimed much lower than they did at the start of last gen as they're less willing to take a large hardware loss upfront early in the generation.
It is far more important than the amount of VRAM in most cases!
Lord Panda
The Sea is Always Right
IHaveCandy
Banned
Weren't there 7800s around in 2005?
E-Cat
Member
It is, as the ultimate yardstick of performance. As for RAM, you're mainly concerned with having enough of it so as to not cripple your performance.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Instead of rubbing their balls all over console owner's faces they should price their shit reasonably, 500 dollar midrange card and 1000 dollar high end card is a joke for us pc owners.
I blame amd partly, 7xxx series is a turd performance wise and they priced it way too high before nvidia released theirs.
If amd had something proper to bring to the table 1.5 years ago for a reasonable price we'd have had the real gtx 680 for under 400 by now.
I blame amd partly, 7xxx series is a turd performance wise and they priced it way too high before nvidia released theirs.
If amd had something proper to bring to the table 1.5 years ago for a reasonable price we'd have had the real gtx 680 for under 400 by now.
Like with any product that falls on the extreme high-end if its category, it's not at all economical. It's like saying a Ferrari is only twice as fast as a Mustang (although not even), but costs over 6x as much.
The chip in Titan, GK110 is essentially full "Kepler" and is likely the basis for their next generation of desktop graphics. By the end of next year the power of the Titan will almost certainly be exceeded by $300 cards -- possibly the $200 cards as well.
The past generation of consoles launched just ahead of a rather revolutionary PC card -- the 8800 GTX (November 2006). It was followed with a $600+ version called the 8800 Ultra that in many ways played the same role that Titan currently holds. But by October 2007, a process shrink let NVidia release a card almost as powerful as those two for $199-249: the 8800GT.
Yes. They also were of the pixel/vertex shader type. Unified shader graphics didnt come to PC desktop cards until November 2006 with the 8800 GTX, a full year following the 360's release.
I don't remember whether the 7800 or 1800 held the performance crown in '05. I remember it was quite close in '06 in the battle between their refreshes, the 7900 and 1900.
Canis lupus
Member
Also 3x cheaper.
nelsonroyale
Member
This seems to me to be good news for PC gaming. Play ports of great looking console games and you won't even need these GPUs which draw ridiculous amounts of power...Call me when they they get the draw back in reasonable figures with these high end gpus.
when I see the poor framerate on ZOE HD on much powerful GPU ( 6GLOPS vs 250gflops) I say "Edram bandwidth FTW"
childplease
Banned
Nobody knows the ps4s price yet. It's also unlikely judging by Sonys love of overpricing its hardware.
No this is horrible news for pc gaming. It means pc games will be gimped by the weak consoles sooner this gen. This is disappointing as it holds gaming in general back.
- Why are the console jumps not perfectly vertical? I didn't know consoles slowly increased in power?
- Why does the PS4 have the same releasedate as Titan? PS4 is not even out yet.
- Why no horizontal lines for the PC-GPU's? It's not like there are GPU's being released every day...
No matter what I think a PC with a Titan inside will cost more than 3x the PS4 cost.
Well with consoles stuck at 1080p I guess you could argue that no matter what.
if you take into account the whole pc with the titan it probably is even more
Canis lupus
Member
We are comparing an entire system against a gpu here. If we were to compare gpu vs gpu the ratio is much higher.
DarkoMaledictus
Tier Whore
Premium to buy failed Tesla chips??? I'll pass...