RazorDragon said:
Captain_Tom said:
RazorDragon said:
soulfly666 said:
His build has ddr3 ram when the pS4 has GDDR5 and ram is used in HSA 2.0 for both CPU and GPU. It has no gamepad, no operating system, no blu ray drive (or any drive) and is way larger. And to say the celeron 1610 processor is comparable to the PS4 processing power is totally false. It may be true right now, but in 2 years minimum when new games are using considerably more power (i.e. more than 2 simultaneous threads) the 2 core Celeron won't even remotely compete with the 8 core Jaguar. Also, I am 90% sure that video card won't even fit into the case he chose? I also don't think 400w is enough power for his choices, and it can't play Sony exclusives. His PC build being on par with a PS4 is completely theoretical.
|
RAM type is irrelevant when the GPU has dedicated GDDR5 memory. Agreed about the rest, even though the PC actually is just as powerful as a PS4 theoretically as you said(those two Celeron cores have enough single-threaded performance to outdo the 6 usable Jaguar cores on PS4/XOne), it won't run the same games thanks to these low-power CPUs being so weak that no PC game is going to be playable on those in a few months, even if the games are on PS4 thanks to optimization.
|
Pretty much everything your saying is wrong. I don't have time to correct everything but I will say that the PS4's cpu is easily as strong as an i3, and modern games already use 8 cores or more. Dual-threaded cpu's became obsolete in anything but mega low end gaming about 4 years ago, and whithin another 2 years the same will be true about quad-threaded cpu's (Besides the k-series i5's running above 4GHz.
|
What I said is true. The amount of cores is hardly relevant when talking about different architectures, base clock speeds and TDP requirements. It's also not about using more or less cores in applications that support them, even though this is helpful when talking about heavily multithreaded workloads. PS4 and XOne have 6 cores available to be used in games. While there are a lot of cores compared to this particular dual threaded Intel CPU, since Jaguar's IPC isn't even comparable with a 2007 Wolfdale(Pentium/Celeron/Core 2 Duo 45nm 2007 cores), actually, it's roughly 20% worse, it's hardly competitive with a current gen Haswell processor, even with that many cores(while, admittedly, drawing a lot less power than a Haswell processor, thanks to different architectures focused at different kinds of workloads). You just need to compare Passmark scores to see what i'm talking about: the Celeron G1610 does about 1400 points in the single threaded score, while an Athlon 5150(4 Jaguar cores at 1.6GHz, same CPU as PS3 with 2 less cores) does 635. The different architecture and higher clock speed alone are enough to make 1 Celeron core perform a lot better than 2 Jaguar cores, multithreading your software won't change anything if a CPU is slow as that.
|
Passmark is not gaming. Here a 6-core FX-6300 beats a quad-core i5-2500K at nearly the same clocks:
http://www.bf4blog.com/battlefield-4-retail-gpu-cpu-benchmarks/
Then keep in mind that the PS4 has way faster RAM to feed the CPU (This does matter since console devs will actually use it), and if the PS4 utilized even 5% of its GPU's proccessing power it would destroy anything out there....
Wait a second why am I wasting my time talking about the CPU?! Either way it isn't going to bottleneck the GPU so that is all that matters at this point and it is as strong as an R9 270. A PC that houses that is not $400, it's $600.
