Quantcast
Tomb Raider PS4 Pro vs PC highest Settings

Forums - Sony Discussion - Tomb Raider PS4 Pro vs PC highest Settings

torok said:
irstupid said:

So in your example you need to buy a monitor for 4k, but the PS4Pro doesn't need a 4k TV.

Fair comparisons assume you either need to buy both, or you own both, or you use both on same display.

A 4k TV with certified HDR is going to set you back probably $800 min. 

While were at it, why don't we say you need to buy a computer desk and chair and the PS4 Pro needs to buy a comfy couch. 

While I don't think we should count the monitor, his reasoning is probably that a PC monitor only has use in the computer, while the TV is something that you already have to buy anyway, even if you have a PC. Even without the monitor, the pricing difference is still pretty big. Getting 4K or close to it by 400 bucks is a killer value. I dumped close to it on a 970 1 year ago and it isn't touching this kind of resolutions since it struggles with 1440p.

1500$ is somewhat exagerated. But more than 1K without a monitor is a given if you are going with a 1070, so the 399 price of the Pro is pretty good. I can't see why someone would even grab a Slim with the Pro being so cheap.

You don't need a 4k tv. Most peoples current tv's are completely fine. So I would consider buying a NEW tv to be an added expense.

And if we are talking about TV's being something someone already has to buy anyway, then what about the fact that many people also buy a PC anyway for business or photo's or something. Sure they can get away with a cheap $400 desktip or something, but then shouldn't a PC person be able to subtract that from their $1500 price tag and say "I needed a computer anyway, there was no way around it. All I did was spend and extra $1,100 on this one"

A PS4 is not a NEED. A pc in a house may be. 



Around the Network
The_BlackHeart__ said:
The light looks as intended by the developer on the PS4 Pro.

Look at the PC version, that is not how light propagates, specially when there are other external light sources. The brighter artificial source should have a stronger effect than the natural light on both the character and the environment.

She is holding that neon type of light right next to her face and you can barely see the range of light on PC.

Apparently the PS4 Oro is coming with some extra tools that will help developers handle light in a more realistic way.

I think they probably just tweaked some lights that they didn't like a lot in the previous version.



irstupid said:

You don't need a 4k tv. Most peoples current tv's are completely fine. So I would consider buying a NEW tv to be an added expense.

And if we are talking about TV's being something someone already has to buy anyway, then what about the fact that many people also buy a PC anyway for business or photo's or something. Sure they can get away with a cheap $400 desktip or something, but then shouldn't a PC person be able to subtract that from their $1500 price tag and say "I needed a computer anyway, there was no way around it. All I did was spend and extra $1,100 on this one"

A PS4 is not a NEED. A pc in a house may be. 

Basically nobody that is not a PC gamer will buy a desktop. People have laptops. They don't take a lot of space, can be easily moved, can be taken to any place, it's basically a full win unless you plan to game on it. I have a gamign desktop but still had to buy a damn expensive laptop because I have to take a PC with me to the university or work sometimes and my desktop won't do it. So a desktop isn't a real need. nobody has it anymore unless they want to game on it or do specific works (rendering, heavy video/image editing). Even ergonomics are not relevant, just plug a M/KB and a monitor and you now have a laptop with desktop-like comfort plus two screens. Most of non-techy people actually think that desktops are things from the past. I don't see a non-gamer saying "hey, help me chose a desktop" since almost a decade, while there's always someone wanting a laptop or smartphone.

When people do have cheap desktops, they are smaller PCs with a cheap PS and MB. You can't upgrade it to be 4K capable, you just have to buy a new PC. Even my gaming desktop could be an issue for 4K gaming since it's not full tower, my PS won't feed a beefier GPU, my CPU would bottleneck a monster GPU. Add to this my DDR3 memories, outdated CPU socket and I would probably just have to get a new PC if I want a 4K machine. And I have a good gaming PC. It's never that easy.

I know people may have to buy the TV, but everyone has TVs. Upgrading to a 4K one will also allow you too see 4K movies and enjoy Netflix on HDR. If you buy a PC monitor and then you decide to sell your PC, the monitor is now useless, while the TV isn't.



Ruler said:
they look identical

Nope. Look very closely.



                                                                                                                                            

@torok "I think they probably just tweaked some lights that they didn't like a lot in the previous version."

That could be true. The PC version may be updated eventually. One can tell that the resolution of the textures is better on the PC version. Specially on the rocks.

But the practical effects optimization seems to be on the PS4's side for now.



Around the Network

This comparison makes NO sense. On the PC the ability to pirate games can save users thousands of dollars PER YEAR. So yes, the box itself is more expensive, but users can make up the difference within a single year and thereafter its all savings. A high end PC is much more economically sound than a PS4.



I already play it in 4k.

 



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti 11GB VRAM | Asus PG27UQ gaming on 3840 x 2160 @120 Hz GSYNC HDR| HTC Vive Pro :3

Reached PC Masterrace level.

contestgamer said:

This comparison makes NO sense. On the PC the ability to pirate games can save users thousands of dollars PER YEAR. So yes, the box itself is more expensive, but users can make up the difference within a single year and thereafter its all savings. A high end PC is much more economically sound than a PS4.

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with a graphical comparison. At all.



                                                                                                                                            

JRPGfan said:
Zkuq said:

If you're paying $1500 for a PC, you're either doing it wrong or doing it with pleasure. You can get a perfectly fine gaming PC for much less than that, which means that either you're stupid to pay that much, or you're an enthusiast to whom it's worth the price.

Also, as you already seem to know the answer to your question, this seems like another provocation using the (incomplete) price argument. Your argument is incomplete because it only takes into account the initial cost, whereas the whole thing is actually much more complicated than that. My point? Your price comparison is, in my opinion, pretty much useless because it's so naive, so it doesn't make much sense to even make the comparison.

I ll bite this bait...

You dont want your PC hooked up to your liveing room TV, like you could with a console.

So you d need a 4k monitor.

 

4k monitor about 300-500$.

Nvidia 1070 to run high-very high settings in tomb raider @4k = 450$

Intel i7-6700k about 350$

LGA 1151 motherboard 100$

...

..

ram,mouse,keyboard,case,psu,cpu cooler,hdd,blu-ray drive,speakers,..... and windows 10.

= probably over 1500$ right?

 

But hey atleast it can do native 4k then.

 

"You can get a perfectly fine gaming PC for much less than that, which means that either you're stupid to pay that much, or you're an enthusiast to whom it's worth the price."

Perfectly fine isnt the point, the point was doing it better than the PS4 pro.

By doing it better I assumed you ment "real" 4k natively.

To do that you ll need a expensive PC.

 

My point was the PS4 pro for 399$ does ALOT for its price.

Funny to hear this called a bait by a person that set up a bait first.

Actually I might want my PC hooked up to my TV, if I could use it for other stuff too. And personally I couldn't care much less about 4k but let's assume I do anyway. In that case, that 4k TV is probably going to cost a ton, definitely a lot more than a smaller 4k monitor. An i7 is probably also more than you really need. I also find it curious that you don't have an existing computer you could take the mouse, keyboard, and speakers from.

I agree with your point, but please try to keep the comparisons fair. If you have a point, it should withstand a fair argument without exaggeration. Exaggeration can make even a good point look bad.

JRPGfan said:
irstupid said:

So in your example you need to buy a monitor for 4k, but the PS4Pro doesn't need a 4k TV.

Fair comparisons assume you either need to buy both, or you own both, or you use both on same display.

A 4k TV with certified HDR is going to set you back probably $800 min. 

While were at it, why don't we say you need to buy a computer desk and chair and the PS4 Pro needs to buy a comfy couch. 

Im assumeing people have a 4k TV or want one anyways. So yeah ignoreing that part of the cost equation.

Thats probably not fair though, but even if you ignore that cost, it ll probably still end up over 1500$.

Yeah, that's definitely not fair. I think we're still a long way from getting that much advantage from 4k, and I'd rather have graphical advances in other areas. I'm assuming I'm not alone. And if it's 4k I'm interested in, I'll be getting a 4k monitor anyway, right? So I can just deduct its price from the PC cost too, right? See, it goes both ways.

I'm also assuming you get something besides gaming out of the new computer, so it's not fair to count it all towards gaming costs either. The chances are, you have a computer and you're going to upgrade it sooner or later. There, now you can deduce the upgade cost from the cost of a new computer in gaming comparisons, because you'd have got a new one anyway. That's probably a deduction of at leats $300-400, possibly even more depending on what you want.

----------

At this point you can probably see that comparing the costs of console and PC gaming is not a simple issue, and we're not even very far into the issue yet. Add in the price of games (during their whole lifetime), the cost of online gaming, exclusives games, and probably some other things too, and it gets even more complicated. Basically if you play of ton of games, want to get most games near release, and play online a lot, consoles will end up costing more in the long run. In general, the less you play, the more economic consoles are, so even the cost issue alone is pretty subjective. Of course cost isn't everything, and there's a lot of other subjective things that matter. Often, those subjective things make console gaming more suitable for people.



Boobs look same size in both pics. Gaming PC is a waste of money confirmed.