Lister
Banned
Closer to what, a high end pc? No.
Closer to a mid tier one? Maybe, but it wont be a 400 dollar console then.
I hope so, console gamers, i hope so. Having the xb1 being the lowest common denominator hurt multiplatform titles for sure.
-
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.
Want to upgrade my gaming PC but...
- Thread starter MacReady13
- Start date
Closer to what, a high end pc? No.
Closer to a mid tier one? Maybe, but it wont be a 400 dollar console then.
I hope so, console gamers, i hope so. Having the xb1 being the lowest common denominator hurt multiplatform titles for sure.
LazyParrot
Member
Consoles have been faster than PCs in the past, so that's not really true. When Super Mario Bros. came out for the NES PCs couldn't even handle side scrolling games, and when the Xbox 360 launched in 2005 it actually came with a GPU that was faster than anything you could get for your PC at the time.
Lister
Banned
The xbox 360 wasnt really faster but it did support a new feature set. So basically a high end pc was still beating its performance on launch and for a while after, but as developers started using the new feature set the gap widened in favor of the console. However, by then there were two gens of gpus much more powerful than the consoles available on pc.
Fixed console hardware cant keep up with the moving target that is pc hardware. By the middle of that gen, pc gaming was a wide gulf of performance and visual improvements o er console which was running most AAA games at 720p or below! Literally a lot of the early remasters for the ps4 didnt look as good as the original games on the pc did!
Last edited:
LazyParrot
Member
IIRC the 360 GPU was about the equivalent of a Radeon X1900, which didn't release until 2 or 3 months after the launch of the console. I remember buying a new PC when Oblivion came out in early 2006 and was pretty pissed when it actually ran better on my friend's Xbox, which was about 1/4 of the price.
And of course console hardware can't keep up with PC throughout an entire generation, but that's not what was claimed in the post I responded to. The claim was that PC would always be superior, and that the gap between consoles and PC would be the "closest it's ever been", which is definitely not true, considering that the consoles releasing next year appear to be using hardware that's worse than what you can buy today, and that consoles have literally been ahead in the past.
llien
Member
Eh, 5700 (non-XT) a cut down version of a 250mm chip comfortably beats 1080.
PS5 chip is expected to use superior process node and have GPU that is at least as big.
Lux R7
Member
Eh, 5700 (non-XT) a cut down version of a 250mm chip comfortably beats 1080.
PS5 chip is expected to use superior process node and have GPU that is at least as big.
Yeah i was thinking about maybe a 1080ti when i wrote that
llien
Member
Even 2080Ti, a 750mm2 monstrocity, is 1.7 times faster than 5700 (non XT). PS5 might get GPU that is faster than that (UPDATE: I mean faster than 5700, of course, and that is quite obvious from the context)
Whereas 7870 in PS4 was about 2 times slower than 780Ti.
The gap is clearly closing, on top of Moore's law being dead, perf/$ bumps are mediocre at beast with NVidia's 1650 series is being beaten by AMD's 3 year old card from the same price segment.
Last edited:
Mr.Allan
Neo Member
you realise ps4 has 8 physical cores right now and they worse than the cheapest i3? I know what you mean but consoles are for masses and will never be as powerful as single cpu unit costing more than entire system. Also there are over 10k games on steam alone so you can always upgrade your pc and play games you like/d back then but with mods/higher resolution. ps5 will suck hard compared to normal desktop i5 and no shilling will help it. hint,; it happened before and ps4 with its shitty cpu is the best example people here try to ignore.
Last edited:
metareferential
Member
I think you're doing it wrong, but still, that's the beauty of pc: you can go after whatever you want. In your case resolution and - I imagine - eyecandy.
I like more of a well rounded approach, as I prefer image stability and high framerates. But I still play on a 4k display from time to time for some games.
There's something off with your build though, 30 seconds to boot is just too much.
But in no way is pc gaming more troublesome than it was; hell, it's even less of an hassle than consoles these days: faster downloads, faster updates, faster loading times and all the other endless options and improvements.
Everytime I game I want is console-only I die a little on the inside, knowing I'll be playing it without all those things I now take for granted.
And good luck to those believing the new consoles will outperform a high end 6/8 core machine with a high end recent gpu. Like, come on.
Last edited:
Lux R7
Member
i'll place my bet on a gpu that is almost as fast as a normal 2080. We'll see.
Lister
Banned
I think 2070 performance is what well get, improving a bit as the generation goes on.
lukilladog
Member
lukilladog
Member
I doubt it will be pricey, on PC we have been paying too much because they have been trying to rise the perception of value. For example, some estimations put the 2080ti die at only $150-$160. This one is gonna be much cheaper.
Whatever GPU consoles are gonna get it's going to be whatever.
It's the CPU which seems to be unusually good this time around (8c/16t zen2 even if heavily underclocked is not bad at all).
PC gaming is cheap. You can never go wrong by targeting 1080p and getting value parts.
Get Ryzen 3600 5 for 200usd + mobo for 55usd + 65usd for 16gb DDR4 for a total of 320.
Even if this ends up being underpowered in two years once consoles come around,
it's only 13-14usd month cost of ownership for the duration of those two years.
It's very likely going to be fine for 3 or even 4 years for the cost of ownership of 7usd month in that case.
Stop buying overpriced high-end parts. Stop buying 150usd+ motherboards. It's a waste.
1080p ultra at rock solid 60fps minimum (more like 100fps+) is around 20-30usd/month cost of ownership.
Reuse parts, swap out what needs an upgrade. Ez pz masterace gaming experience.
It's the CPU which seems to be unusually good this time around (8c/16t zen2 even if heavily underclocked is not bad at all).
PC gaming is cheap. You can never go wrong by targeting 1080p and getting value parts.
Get Ryzen 3600 5 for 200usd + mobo for 55usd + 65usd for 16gb DDR4 for a total of 320.
Even if this ends up being underpowered in two years once consoles come around,
it's only 13-14usd month cost of ownership for the duration of those two years.
It's very likely going to be fine for 3 or even 4 years for the cost of ownership of 7usd month in that case.
Stop buying overpriced high-end parts. Stop buying 150usd+ motherboards. It's a waste.
1080p ultra at rock solid 60fps minimum (more like 100fps+) is around 20-30usd/month cost of ownership.
Reuse parts, swap out what needs an upgrade. Ez pz masterace gaming experience.
Rolling_Start
Banned
Fuck's sake this ended up long.
No CPU you can buy right now will be likely to "blow away" next generation consoles. And don't even consider buying an Intel or AMD HEDT platform for gaming - low boost clocks, high power consumption, and by the time the thread counts will matter there will be better alternatives.
Chapter 1: Now
Console games currently have access to seven threads and seven cores, and only six of each of those fully. While some PC games may benefit from more than that, any gains will be very small. Some games even benefit from having hyperthreading / SMT disabled (moving to one thread per core).
Right now, a 9900K or 3800X will be somewhere in the region of five or six times as fast as the PS4 or X1 CPU. Even a 4790k is going to be something like 2.5 ~ 3 times as fast in practice. Right now, you have no real need to upgrade unless high framerate gaming is a priority. If 60hz is your cap then you have no need to do anything at the moment. Or even this year. Or possibly even next year: multi-gen, multi-platform games will rule the roost and if those are going to run at 30 fps on a PS4 / X1 then your 4790 should handle them fine.
Don't rush. Don't do anything right now if you're not going beyond 60 fps. Certainly don't blow $1500+ on a gaming PC if that's a lot of money to you. Because when software starts targeting next gen consoles on the CPU side, that's where things will change.
Chapter 2: In 2 or 3 years
With a hypothetical 8 core, Zen 2 CPU at ~3.2 gHz, that 9900k will be about 50% faster, the 3800x a little less. Probably fine to get you through the entire generation at console settings and console frame rates with added stability to boot. But if, for example, you want to take a CPU heavy console game from 30 to 60 fps, with world detail and draw distances cranked up, then that 9900k or 3800x won't cut it.
Odds are, with 8 cores and 16 HW threads available, next gen only console games (when they arrive) are going to work towards maximising the use of at least 14 HW threads (though this will take time). Hopefully, that will scale towards 16 cores in the PC space.
Socket 1151 is pretty much a dead end - a ten core chip next year, supposedly, which won't have the core count of AMD and won't have PCI-E 4 for faster SSDs to close the gap on console streaming.
AMD on the other hand has AM4, which supports up to 16 cores, PCI-E 4, and will see a next gen architecture with at the very least improved cache hierarchy for highly threaded apps (higher IPC on average). But unless games really take advantage of high thread counts (might take a long time), and start rewarding high transfer rates from PC SSDs over PCI-E 4 ... even that might not "blow consoles away".
TL
RRide your 4790K for a while yet if you're not currently a HFR gamer - a 9900K can't blow next gen consoles away and even a Zen 2/3 at 16 cores can only do it when games are ready, and that might take a while.
Meanwhile, buy a good GPU if you want it and ride it hard, regardless of upgrading your CPU, mobo and main ram. The GTX 2080 is a beast, and even when its ray tracing falls behind due to it's inflexibility it'll still be a fast card that will last you a good few years.
I'm on a 4790K too. It's been great. Not a chance in hell I'm budging from this thing until more of the future has revealed itself. There is no rush.
TheContact
Member
the 4970k won't be your bottleneck even with a 2070/2080. Depending on how much you want to spend, you're better off investing in faster RAM alongside the new GPU. Keep in mind, the 4970 uses slot 1150 and the 9th gen intels use 1151 so you'll need a whole new mobo if you decide to upgrade the CPU.
MacReady13
Member
I'm thinking it might be best to wait until we have some concrete details on the next gen consoles. I want to give up console gaming as i'm not too keen on this streaming bullshit that console companies are heading down, plus I want to play without as many compromises as consoles give you.
I'm happy to hold on to what I have for a little longer, but playing games like Rage 2 at 1080p with compromises on my PC is starting to get a little tiresome, especially when gaming on a 4k tv. I'm quite content to wait and see what Nvidia's next GPU will be and save my pennies for a Ti model. Once I do that i'll probably go a complete overhaul on the PC with 32 gigs of ram, new CPU (obviously), new mobo and a minimum 2tb ssd. Should set me up well for the next few years at least!
Thanks all for the advice.
I'm happy to hold on to what I have for a little longer, but playing games like Rage 2 at 1080p with compromises on my PC is starting to get a little tiresome, especially when gaming on a 4k tv. I'm quite content to wait and see what Nvidia's next GPU will be and save my pennies for a Ti model. Once I do that i'll probably go a complete overhaul on the PC with 32 gigs of ram, new CPU (obviously), new mobo and a minimum 2tb ssd. Should set me up well for the next few years at least!
Thanks all for the advice.
Manus
Member
Is this a troll post?
Tell me how many AAA games run at 60+ FPS on console. I'll be here waiting.
manfestival
Member
I went from 970 to 1070 and now currently a 2080. Personally anything less than a 2070 super from a 1070 would not have been worth the time or effort. I overpaid for sure but I did get the improvement I was seeking so that is the silver lining.
Justin9mm
Member
I'm talking about the new consoles coming.. I was stating a point that if the X can do some now, then the new gen consoles will be able to achieve this more easily. Comprehend what you are reading my friend.
My whole argument was that the new console will be good value for money and a lot less compared to upgrading a PC to output the same performance.
When we get the new console and a new AAA multiplat game.. Let's say it runs close to Native 4K at 60fps. If you build a PC to handle that same performance of outputting near Native 4K Resolution at 60fps. It is going to cost a lot more than that console
But I had to have someone trash me coming in all like PC Masterace, consoles are shit.. blah blah blah.. We all know a PC is superior but the ego in this thread is ridiculous. I've never argued console is better, simply stating that performance wise, the new consoles will be on the same level if not probably a little better than a mid tier PC which is what a lot of PC Gamers run around the world. Not everyone is sitting on 1080 and 2080 GPU's etc.
No need for me to get attacked about something I'm not even debating! Everyone needs to get off their high horse!
Last edited:
888
Member
If you buy smart PC isn't even remotely expensive really. But anyway this was mine progress.
( the right one should have been a single 290, but for some reason comparison messed up, so yea there's that )
Went from 580 gtx > 290 because v-ram. then 2x 290's then 970 and eventually a 1080 ti, probably will keep this thing for a couple of years.
Bought the i7 870 for 320 euro's in 2009 i think lasted me a decade at 60+ fps gaming. Covered 2 console gens really and multiple console releases and would still be used today if it wasn't for my need for high fps gaming.
Also i find your 2070 super performing a bit lowish on the score solution. Maybe u use a different version as me, but u should get about the same as my ti i think.
Ok so it was bothering me so I spent a few hours overclocking and testing. Was able to get the boost clock to 2100mhz and the mem clock up to 1900+. If I go 10mhz over 2100mhz I get artifacts.
I also see another thing I did. I added the 8700k run but not the 9700k to the mix. I’m up to 22700+ now with the 9700k and further overclocked 2070 Super.
Your 9900k is awesome and the numbers look great. I would have gone with that but having to worry about keeping three rigs up and fairly current I couldn’t spend that much. Next time tho.
cant upload a pic for some reason directly to the site.
Kenpachii
Member
Ah nice, i was wondering but rechecked 3dmark and it seems like 2070 super just isn't scoring as high as a 1080ti, even while in newer games they are pretty much on par. Probably not optimized for the 2000 series cards.
prag16
Banned
Hahahah, you agree with him, except you're doing this to yourself again. Expecting your console to punch unrealistically high above its weight. Which is exactly what the post you're responding to said. If anything we're going in the other direction. Gone are the days of "coding to the metal" to squeeze impressive power out of pedestrian innards. Consoles are now basically just PCs when you come down to it.
Kenpachii
Member
They will have to if they wanna sell that box.
That's the real issue with people talking about PC is expensive, they have zero clue how PC works. And always start this dialogue around "make the a entire PC for console budget".
While in reality upgrading is cheap as hell like you mention, and those parts are actually high performing parts already.
Last edited:
Bryank75
Banned
My body is ready for 500 or more, I will buy. If it hits 450 or less in the year or year and a half following... it will be all good.
prag16
Banned
I'm expecting $499 based on what we've heard so far, though I think $399 would be smarter of them. There have been people on here expecting and/or hoping for $599 because they want teh powah. There's ZERO chance (if they're at all sane) of Sony doing this. $499 may even be too high to tap into the mass market success the PS4 saw at $399.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
Didnt read all the replies you may have answered this.
Depends on what you play but 144 fps and above beats ray tracing any day of the week imo.
If you play games like CoD, Fortnite, Overwatch ect get those frames up upgrade now.
High frame rate is king.
Depends on what you play but 144 fps and above beats ray tracing any day of the week imo.
If you play games like CoD, Fortnite, Overwatch ect get those frames up upgrade now.
High frame rate is king.
Kenpachii
Member
First intel HD graphics sit at 1% on the playerbase.
However if you talk like you talk, u could also mention that only a fraction of the console gaming market sit actually on a PS4. Lots of people have older or different consoles.
About PS5 parts
Yes they are budget the moment that console comes out.
GPU wise a 2060 is already a 1080. which is the lowest RTX tier GPU currenntly on the market and phased out already for a 2060 super ( 2070 super will be the budget model the moment the PS5 comes out. ).
CPU wise its probably a 2700 comparable on PC level as it runs lower clocks but has architectural differences which is a budget CPU at this point in time already.
Next year when the consoles come out new generation PC hardware will also come out.
Then the focus on 4k which will choke that GPU to death, will most likely mean they won't need a whole lot of CPU performance to start with to boot that GPU which makes it all the more likely that the CPU is probably not going to run at high clocks to start with. SSD wise we know nothing about. Even a shit tier SSD could already provide the performance gain with optimisation in a game specifically designed for it as we saw in there spiderman presentation in a game holded back by decade+ old hardware and therefore reduces load massive on SSD through complexity anyway. It probably won't cost them more then 30 bucks like they spend for the HDD for the PS4 and will feature probably a budget solution as result which makes sense to presses prices.
That's why i said PS5 hardware is what it is, but far from impressive vs PC version. The same as with last generation. If you bought a i7 870 4 years early for average price u could sit out the entire gen without issue's. which i did. GPU wise a 750 ti would steamrol all the games without problems for years on better settings and performance then PS4 would give you.
Nothing changed, just a whole load of people hyping PR nonsense up that says nothing. Much like what they did with the PS4.
Look we are all a bit older here probably and even spending 1k on a console isn't much of a issue for us at the end of the day. Hell i spend 10k on my bike hobby a year and i bitch about a 60 bucks video game that its to expensive. The video game market for people that are a bit older price wise isn't much of a issue specially if it lasts you for a long time. However i don't think the demograph that on average buys these boxes are going to spend 500 bucks on a pure video game console. I could see this becoming to expensive as i see it personally as a entry level gaming system. Price is important. Also a reason why i think the 360 won over the PS3 and the Xbox one completely lost from the PS4 ( obviously other reasons also ) but price is something important to watch out from.
This also means that the parts need to be realistic in that box and are going to be budget tier as result.
Last edited:
Kenpachii
Member
As 90% of the software runs on both platforms with the samish type of hardware, comparisons are easily made.
ViolentP
Member
I could compare an orange and a tomato because they are both fruit but that'd be fucking stupid when discussing sherbet.
Last edited:
michaelius
Banned
There's no point upgrading that cpu yet till games made for next gen 16 threaded consoles start being released - i'd just slap something like 2070 Super into it
888
Member
I was able to get a good amount more out of it. Going to see about CPU OC next. Wouldn’t mind 5ghz+ on the 9700k. Should bring up the score a bit more too.
Shai-Tan
Banned
Multiple games from this year won't run in 4k60 even without RTX on a 2080ti unless you wanna turn details down. Anyone who wants that with more recent games should wait for 3000 series. That said I've enjoyed playing quite a bit of older and less demanding games in locked 4k60
I can’t stop watching this.
Justin9mm
Member
Yep the current gen and new gen are basically PC's. But this is the first time the new console will have modular architecture being a separate CPU and GPU. On paper the new console is nothing more than probably a low-mid tier PC.. But when you say unrealistically high above it's weight what do you mean exactly?
Because the new console is not going to be worse than say the Xbox One X right? Granted it's an exclusive title but I'm playing Gears 5 on the X at almost Native 4K at 60fps. And this is older tech hardware. So with the new console, do you think it's reasonable to expect the same performance for all games if the developer so desires? Most people can't get that out of their PC's and certainly not at the price of a console. And the reason why? Because we all know games are optimised for console, to get that performance.
I'm merely saying that the new console would be good value in getting an almost same or similar experience than a PC worth 2-3 times more at that 60fps. Obviously PC is still superior and the way to go for everyone wanting more than that.
But I've never heard any console gamer say Console is better or say anything unrealistic in any expectations. You show me a statement where someone has said a console is going to blow away a PC? I've never seen that comment so it's unfair to keep trashing on console performance. You can't say that a console is not value for money compared to building a gaming rig for the casual gamer wanting best performance at a value price.
The gaming industry would not be where it is today without consoles so I really don't get all the hate on here. This is coming from someone that has a mid tier PC by the way.. I have an AMD Rig.. Ryzen 5 2600 with Vega 64 and I still prefer gaming in my lounge on my X or Pro on my OLED TV. I just hate fucking around with settings and shit.. PC Games are a head fuck to me but that's just my preference.
Last edited:
memoryman3
Neo Member
I would really suggest focusing on a good CPU, RAM and disk drive setup. Especially as that is what the next gen consoles will be shooting for. GPU you can be more leient on iif you don't mind turning down resolutions.
Last edited:
ResilientBanana
Member
What's a disc drive for?
sunnysideup
Banned
Its obviously smartest to wait until you know what the baseline is going to be.
You want your pc to be many many times more powerful than the console standard. To ensure you can get a stable framerate.
You want your pc to be many many times more powerful than the console standard. To ensure you can get a stable framerate.
sendit
Member
Hoping for a new Nvidia GPU by next year. The RTX 2080 TI will be almost 2 years old by the time Cyberpunk 2077 comes out.
sendit
Member
Average console framerate per game this generation targets 30 FPS with a mixture of medium-high graphical settings if you're comparing this to PC. You won't need a PC many times more powerful to match what next gen consoles will be outputting.
Last edited:
ViolentP
Member
That's the card I'm currently using. I expect it to handle the game without issue and buy me a few years after. I tried to build during that right pricing sweet spot. Not launch, but not end of life.
Matt_Fox
Member
A rising tide lifts all ships.
I'm a console gamer AND a PC gamer, and am balanced enough to say the next gen of consoles will dramatically raise the bar for new titles available to PC gamers too. It's not like PC gamers have been living the 'next gen' life for the past two years, and PS5 owners are about to join in. Anyone presenting that is disingenuous. Yes, multi-platform titles can have superior FPS on a high end PC but to see a significant difference between the graphical bells and whistles from a One X or a Pro you really have to reach.
OP in about 13 month we will see a major change in the ambition level of games for both console and PC gaming, I'd personally wait till then before spending a large sum.
I'm a console gamer AND a PC gamer, and am balanced enough to say the next gen of consoles will dramatically raise the bar for new titles available to PC gamers too. It's not like PC gamers have been living the 'next gen' life for the past two years, and PS5 owners are about to join in. Anyone presenting that is disingenuous. Yes, multi-platform titles can have superior FPS on a high end PC but to see a significant difference between the graphical bells and whistles from a One X or a Pro you really have to reach.
OP in about 13 month we will see a major change in the ambition level of games for both console and PC gaming, I'd personally wait till then before spending a large sum.
adamosmaki
Member
Consoles? 60FPS ? 4k? when did that happen in anything other than a few indie games ?
Also what magic optimisation and BS . Do you still believe this crap about optimization making consoles on par with much better GPUs ? I get a very similar performance to the Xbox 1x in most games and i only have an rx 570
sendit
Member
Funny. Not to mention a 4K 75" OLED cost $4K+. So really his high end gaming experience is more in the range of $4500+. Versus a highend PC setup in the 2-3K range.
Last edited:
Rolling_Start
Banned
The biggest advantage for consoles is probably on the CPU side. Very carefully protected CPU resources, along with lower overhead APIs, making it possible to have stable frame rates with much less single threaded CPU performance.
On the GPU side it varies with how much work has been put into optimising for a single configuration. The console GPU efficiency advantage seems to have diminished as GPUs have in general become more powerful, and needed to be able to scale for a huge range of GPU performance and display resolutions.
Nvidia are particularly good at optimising drivers to minimise the fixed platform advantage. They have large, very well funded teams that optimise drivers on a per-game basis. AMD are showing signs of being resurgent too.
adamosmaki
Member
Indeed the advantage of optimization is on the CPU side but then again consoles need alot of optimization considering they have a low end CPU. On pc any semi-decent CPU from the last 4-5years is enough for at least 60fps gaming
Justin9mm
Member
Well considering you mention Xbox one X.. Gears 5, Halo 5, Forza Horizon 4.. So yes it did happen, 4K at 60fps.. And yes on AAA titles. You know nothing mate, optimisation meaning developed for console first. You talk so much BS, trying to tell me a 570 is going to run 4K 60fps on any decent modern game! I'm also a PC gamer so you can't fool me.
Also 4K 60FPS on the new gen consoles will be a thing and is happening so keep trash talking. I'm not saying Console is superior to PC but for the money it is better value comparing performance vs price. Thinking your 570 is similar to the One X in performance is laughable!
Last edited: