By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - IF the rumors were true AND the Ps4 were to use HD 7670 and the Nextbox were to use HD 6670. Who will come out on top?

personally I hope they use a 7770 or higher - cards with that GPU begin at ~95€ at retail right now so that shouldn't be too costly for console manufacturers



Around the Network
Lafiel said:
personally I hope they use a 7770 or higher - cards with that GPU begin at ~95€ at retail right now so that shouldn't be too costly for console manufacturers


A 7770 would be a nice fit IMHO, not just in terms of performance but features and power consumption too.
Microsoft/Sony would be buying the chips themselves (Not packaged on a PCB with large exotic coolers.) and in bulk, so they would get it far cheaper than $95.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
Lafiel said:
personally I hope they use a 7770 or higher - cards with that GPU begin at ~95€ at retail right now so that shouldn't be too costly for console manufacturers


A 7770 would be a nice fit IMHO, not just in terms of performance but features and power consumption too.
Microsoft/Sony would be buying the chips themselves (Not packaged on a PCB with large exotic coolers.) and in bulk, so they would get it far cheaper than $95.

Yea, that's what I meant. I guess I didn't phrase that too well.



Rumours are just fake news to me. Every week people talk about new rumours...



zero129 said:
Gehirnkrampf said:
People just keep in mind that even IF these rumors are true, they could use GPUs based on these cards. So imagine they modified some specs (make it more power efficient) to be able to overclock them slightly. they could easily use another hardware revision.

so as of now, we can really not say these specs are too low.

This FTW!!

And since its now illegal to just type "This FTW" here i am writing this message do to say i agree with everything you say xD

master zero... this is chinese to me... could you please translate this in english? and how tdoes it compare to wiiu if true?



 

Around the Network
Turkish said:

Lol what? Outside their game devs, what do you mean?

And its obvious we can't compare a pc gpu with the one in a console. However that doesn't mean a pc low end gpu will turn into a monster card in consoles. PS3s RSX is comparable to the Geforce 7800 series. Those were high end cards when they came out. One would expect the next gen consoles to have derivatives of todays high end gpus like the 8870(rebranded 7870). The HD6670 is comparable to the 8800gt. Yes faster than the RSX, but don't expect the performance boost like we've seen PS1>PS2>PS3

You may laugh and I understand if you wish to defend Sony here, but the Operating systems & applications on all my Sony's gadgets is slow & bulky in respects to the type of hardware that they use. They never really take advantage of all their hardware. I'm talking about my Sony Erricsson interface, my Sony Blu-ray player interface (not PS3), my PS3 applications, my PSP games & applications, PSV applications. I feel that they don't provide the consumer with same amount of software quality that they try to give them with the hardware (I'm not talking about games here). I could go into detail with each one, but I'm not going to. If you own a Sony product, compare it to more popular ones and I'm sure you will notice why Sony lost their grip on the market.

Its like they try to sell you a car with a shinny beautiful exterior thats great, but when you get inside it, you realize that its missing many of the important perks that most popular commuters have. It's annoying.



Pemalite said:


Prove that nVidia games look better on nVidia cards compared to AMD. - (I.E. It simply isn't true.)
That has been debunked so many times it's not funny in the PC space.
Every now and then AMD might have better texture filtering and nVidia might get better Anti-Aliasing, but the difference is never "clear as day" and they catch up to each other eventually even without upgrading your hardware.

Sure, you get PhysX with nVidia cards, but you can also run that with AMD cards if you used hacked drivers and a secondary low-end nVidia GPU.
I am also yet to find a game I can't run on a single monitor with max graphics, triple monitor is a different story... But hell. It's allot of god damn pixels to render and nVidia would fold too.

Also, the reason why a super powerfull PC can't emulate a PS2 100% perfectly is simple. - It's not a PS2.
Emulation works on the basis that instead of modifying the game code to run optimised natively on x86 architectures, the PC uses software middle layers to "emulate" a PS2 environment where instructions are intercepted then the JIT compiler re-compiles the instructions to run in x86.
It's hardly an efficient process at any rate, the upside is compatability and potentially superior image quality, the disadvantage is of course performance.
Look at any exclusive PC game, it surely doesn't look like a PS2 game at any rate because it can take advantage of the hardware and doesn't need anything to translate the instructions.

Now, take a 5 year old PC, something along the lines of a Core 2 Quad Q6600 and drop in something like a Geforce 8800GT and a few gigabytes of ram. - You would be hard pressed not to run most games at console levels of image quality settings at 720P@30fps, provided it was a decent console port to begin with. (I.E. Not GTA IV.)
Heck, you could run Crysis on that with at-least 25-30fps. ;)

To put the Radeon 6670 in perspective for some though...
A Radeon 6670/7670 has about 3x more compute power than the Xbox or PS3's graphics chips, but does feature some image-quality enhancing features such as Tessellation and all the other pretties/optimisations that we got with the move to Direct X 10/10.1 and 11.

The other thing to remember is that Sony and Microsoft wouldn't be using the slow and bog standard for low-end cards, GDDR3 memory either and probably opt for memory with vastly more bandwidth, so it would still beat a cheap desktop Radeon 6670/7670 at any rate.

Also worthy to note is that Integrated graphics have reached a point of almost being at parity of a Radeon 6670/7670 both from Intel and AMD. A few more years and they will probably eclipse it.
But with that said, I highly doubt Sony or Microsoft would choose such chips, especially aging ones based on the VLIW5 architecture.


I'm talking about my exprience with AMD/ ATI cards. When one plays games like Never Winter Nights 2 and realizes that it was optimized for Nvidia cards in mind, it sorta sucks that I can't turn on the shadows above low in the game because the FPS drop to 10-15. I still have my AMD card, and I primarly buy AMD cards, I'm not trying to bash AMD. What I am trying to say is that when a company has a good deal of influence in the market, they sometimes make partnerships with developers where the code is optimized for their products. If you don't believe me just take a look at game ports, not all of them a great.

You said, "Also, the reason why a super powerfull PC can't emulate a PS2 100% perfectly is simple. - It's not a PS2."

Good! That was exactly my point. PS2 game software was optimized for the PS2 in mind. A PC can't do it as well. That was my point. And to add to that, I'm going to argue that Sony and Microsoft don't need to have a high level GPU. They just need one that when optimized can do full 1080p with direct X with a hint of anti aliasing (maybe some Tessellation) at 45-60fps. Why pay for more? Please remember that they only need to meet 1080p screens; 2k & 4K screens are years aways before they become affordable alternative. They would be shooting themselves in the face if they try to place anything higher on their console because of the HDTV screen bottle neck.



DraconianAC said:

They just need one that when optimized can do full 1080p with direct X with a hint of anti aliasing (maybe some Tessellation) at 45-60fps. Why pay for more? Please remember that they only need to meet 1080p screens; 2k & 4K screens are years aways before they become affordable alternative. They would be shooting themselves in the face if they try to place anything higher on their console because of the HDTV screen bottle neck.


Well. If they only wanted to do 1080P then the Xbox 1 GPU could do it, with included Anti-Aliasing. - Just don't expect amazing lighting, high quality textures, high polygon models and other effects, but it could still do it just as the PC equivalent could do it, that is... If you're only worried about resolution. (There is allot more to graphics rendering than just the resolution.)

The problem is... As developers start pushing a relatively low-end chip that's in the realm of integrated graphics performance-wise then they need to make sacrifices, one of those sacrifices this generation was in the form of resolution and framerate.
If they go with low-end chips then they will do the same thing, just much sooner because they will utilise the extra processing to make the game look nicer.
If they have allot of graphics processing head room, then you probably could enjoy gaming at 1080P@60fps for a couple of years.

Now if they dropped in a high-end card? Not only do they not suffer from massive performance hits when loaded with super fast memory when running higher resolutions, but they could handle allot of effects at once that will make your eyeballs have an orgasm.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Your forgetting something, the PS4 will be using an A10 apu and the 7670 gpu. The A10 contains a 4 core cpu PLUS a gpu on one chip, which will be able to work together with the 7670, in effect it will have 2 graphics cards.



Well I hope the 720/8 gets the 8800 and the 8GB Ram rumor.