Locknuts said:
BlueFalcon said:
Blaming AMD? Hilarious when they still have the world's fastest single card crown with the 295X2.
https://www.techpowerup.com/mobile/reviews/MSI/GTX_960_Gaming/29.html
From a technological point of view, it was possible to have an FX8350 @ 4.5Ghz and dual HD7970 Ghz cards to make up the console. However, form factor, profitability and price would all suffer. It's just common sense that when single high end flagships use 250-280W of power (780Ti/7970Ghz/290X), you were never going to have any console with a flagship PC gaming card. Since it wasn't possible to manufacture a 980M Maxwell around June 2013, which is when they would have needed to start manufacturing for launch, Sony/MS went with consoles that cost nearly $400 to make because neither company's shareholders were OK anymore will selling an $800+ console for $500 and losing billions of dollars as was the case for PS3.
Look if you just want the best graphics, 4K gaming, no one stops a PS4/XB1 gamer to build a 5960X with Triple Titan Xs. Bitching and moaning how a $350 XB1 and a $400 PS4 can't run the latest games at 1080p @ 60 FPS is getting old. Besides BF games were always best played on the PC.
|
Except my 4 year old PC with midrange graphics cards plays these games at 1080p & 60fps. These consoles are unacceptably weak. The only thing they have going for them is their exclusives, and they've been pretty weak so far.
|
They need to have them at a particular price point, You obviously have to remember these consoles come with $60 controllers, the hardware alone costs $340 and that is the way they will always be if there are future consoles, the best you can get for the price. They also record all of the gameplay as well which anyone who has done so on their PC does affect performance. They’re fine.
