By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
the-pi-guy said:
Soundwave said:

If that can run at 40 fps on a laptop using a older Turing based GPU and a garden variety SSD, it's not a great look for Sony or AMD.

Are you new to console gaming?  The things you're saying are mostly true, but it's like you're completely new to console gaming as a concept.  
Sony isn't in trouble because Nvidia has some GPU's that are better.  It's rare for a console to even get close to a high end PC. 

The PS4's GPU was beaten by a 1.5 year old Nvidia GPU itself, quite handily.  

And the gap with the Xbox One's GPU was substantially larger.    

PS3's GPU was based off a Nvidia GPU that released a 1.5 year old earlier.  

So you're acting like this is some bad look on Sony, when it's been the norm for quite a while.  So... welcome to 2006?

Not to mention, it's hard to say if it's bad news for AMD.  I can almost guarantee even the Xbox Series X GPU will be beaten by something else in AMD's line up.  

And yes, AMD's tended to be behind for a while.  So it's nothing new there.

Still their revenue and profit is improving quite a bit, so not sure how much trouble he thinks AMD is, also PS4 have done well on HW but even more in SW royalties besides PS+ (40M+ subs at 60USD per year or 2.4B of revenue with a small cost associated). They are all doomed right?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."