| goopy20 said: Totally agree. BF3 was basically a different game on pc compared to the ps3/360 versions when those consoles just came out. Historically speaking, consoles have always been outdated the moment they launched compared to a main stream pc of that time. However, even you have to agree that's not looking to be the case next gen. This is the first time ever that consoles launch that are on par, and in case with the SSD, even exceed high end gaming pc's. |
Battlefield 3 came out in 2011 towards the end of the 7th gen console cycle.
nVidia will release it's next-gen GPU's before the next-gen consoles launch.. Something we need to keep in mind.
nVidia at the moment is beating AMD despite AMD being on 7nm and nVidia only 12nm. (Which is just a refined TSMC 16nm process which in turn is based on 20nm but with Finfet and a change to the BEOL/FEOL.)
There is a reported 4x increase in Ray Tracing performance, 20 teraflops of compute and 40GB of Ram @1.6TB/s for the Ampere/A100 chip from nVidia with a whopping 54~ billion transistors. - That could end up being paired up with GDDR6 with adjusted clocks for the next Titan, definitely being used for compute/servers/professional scenarios.
Either way, the PC will be a step up over the Playstation 5 and Xbox Series X when next-gen consoles eventually release as the PC will have new GPU's released.
The consoles only have a mid-range 8-core Ryzen CPU (Granted is still damn impressive.) with only 6-7 for actual gaming.
12 and 16 cores are readily available and are the high-end offerings these days on the PC with 24-32-48-64 etc' core CPU's being workstation/enthusiast grade.
The SSD in the Playstation 5 will certainly beat your run of the mill SSD in any PC, but an Enthusiast PC will always be in another league from consoles.
But the PC's SSD's are also larger, 32-256GB SSD's are budget rubbish usually using a couple of NAND chips at most.
512GB SSD's are pretty entry level, 960-1TB SSD's are about your mid-range, 2TB SSD's are fairly high-end with 4TB drives as enthusiast.
Ram wise... 4GB is netbook trash.
8GB is low-end, 16GB is mid-range, 32GB is high-end, 64GB-256GB is Enthusiast and so on.
But for the price of a console, I think all the manufacturers have struck a good balance, Nintendo prioritized portability, Microsoft prioritized compute, Sony prioritized storage.
The question remains... Which games will be a reflection of those strengths and weaknesses?
| eva01beserk said: How dare thouse peasants be exited about trash we discarded 10 years ago that cost us 50k at the time. Let's put them in their place. There's a rumor that a cure for cancer is available in secret for the rich for millions. If it ever comes to the masses at an affordable price should we also laugh at them? |
Yes. Yes we should.
| goopy20 said: You seem like a knowledgeable guy, but I also never understood why you always have to go out of your way to downplay consoles and bring up pc superiority. Yes, if you slap 4 2080 Ti's and 20 SSD's in a pc it's going to be more powerful than a PS7, but what's the point if no developer is going to support it? The problem with pc has never been about a lack of powerful hardware, it's about what people are actually buying so it will get support from developers. Unfortunately, the Crysis days are behind us and I can't think of any AAA developer that's making games specifically for high-end pc hardware anymore. In fact, I can't think of any pc game that doesn't run at high settings on a 6-year-old GTX970 and a normal hdd. |
Because the PC does have the technical superiority? Let's not sugar coat it, downplay it or lie about it.
A high-end PC will beat the Playstation 5, Xbox Series X, Nintendo Switch in every single aspect, in every single scenario. Those are the undeniable facts.
A Playstation 5/Xbox Series X will beat a low-end PC and are probably competitive with a mid-range rig that gets sold later this year, those are also the facts.
| goopy20 said: Right now, something like a 2080 Ti is great for playing in native 4k and 120fps, but most people don't care for that. Maybe it stings a little but tell me honestly that you weren't impressed with that Ureal 5 demo, even though its running on a console? Nobody is saying it can't run on pc, but the demo was so impressive because it's the first time that we finally got to see what a RTX2080 can do when you have a "game" that's specifically designed for it, instead of just running current gen games in 4k and a high fps. As both a pc and console gamer, I think this is great and can't wait to see that kind of tech finally getting supported on pc. |
I have already stated my impressions about the demo.. And yes I was impressed as overall it's a damn impressive presentation and I am excited.
I have said all along that the Xbox Series X and Playstation 5 offer solid and compelling hardware.
Don't twist my words or intentions to be something they aren't.
Also the demo in question isn't leveraging the RT cores or DLSS there is still untapped potential left on the table to bolster image quality... And that truly makes me moist.
| HollyGamer said: Well that's why me and him always keep arguing about consoles VS PC. Not because i am defending consoles but how most of people downplaying the tech behind consoles. He still don't understand what the meaning of consoles for gaming industry and the impact for gaming industry overall. I am fair guy i put credit where the credit goes weather it's PC , Mobile phones , handled , PC , VR or Server streaming like Stadia when it comes to technology. |
False.
I also give credit where credit is due, you just choose to ignore it seems. I have consistently praised the Xbox Series X and Playstation 5's hardware since their specifications got revealed. Did you not take note of that?
| HollyGamer said: Yup, Xbox series X design has more PC DNA and old way of thinking. It's priority are closer to desktop GPU on the way it handling the graphic PS5 in the other way try to revolutionize how the games are made and using different approach, that's why many developer praise it. Cerny is game developer on it's heart and prioritizing on how game development rather then just power and power. |
They are both based on PC technology.
They are both semi-custom PC's.
They both have strengths and weaknesses.
They are both solid pieces of hardware that is worthy of a purchase.
Cerny has a conflict of interest, he has an interest to drive console sales, So does Phil Spencer, hence why I take whatever their statements are with a grain of salt and prefer more impartial sources like Anandtech or Digital Foundry, that removes any fundamental bias.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
