Goooood for you? Anyway the Killzone demo is native 1080p and have better graphics than Crysis 3 due the art style (that is debatable)... there is no released game in PC that blow away Killzone Shadown Fall.

Maybe next year PC can do better graphics

On your last paragraph.. the reason the PS3 is being brought up is because alot of PS3 owners who reigned the CELL processor as superior pretty much encited the Xbox 360 was mainly just a plain jane PC.. it had a processor that was more old APPLE ( before apple went to X86 intels ) and had a Radeon ( r600 or close ).. while the Ps3 had a custom processor.. something more eloquent.  SO now Sony dumps the plan for an updated CELL in PS4 in favor for a cheaper, easier to program for PC style X86 system its sorta sickening.  It's not insecurity.  So now that the PS4 is basically going to be very similar to the new NextBox console it's now INSECURITY instead of looking back and saying - The same fans who criticized MS for going with an architecture similar to PC are now praising - almost worshipping the PS4..  Heck the first Xbox was 100% PC.. It had an intel processor and people hacked them and Installed WIndows XP on them...

Also.. i can't reason how any high end PC owner could be truely annoyed or jealous of the PS4.. afterall-  anyone who has "more money"  to spend 300 dollars on a HIGH END Radeon graphics card ( that kills the mid range Radeon in the PS4 ) ceraintly has the cash to buy any console they want.. The Next Xbox is rumored to use a very similar Radeon to the one in the Ps4 as well ..  I feel  PC owners have always stated the truth: that PC's have superior graphics - These people were saying this 10 years ago - and- only now that  the PS4 is actually using true PC architecture does it seem offend console users enough to reply back that High end PC USERS must be jealous or pissed - TRUST ME - If anyone can afford can afford a 300 dollar graphics card.. they can buy any console they want - there is no envy.. 

I have a brother that owns all three last gen consoles and a Wii U....I find the most envy or jealousy in people that own 'one' console - and sometimes it is a financial limit that makes some choose one console.. Other people buy one console because they really don't care.. I've never owned more then 2 consoles at one time.. I used to have a PS2.. and a Gamecube at the same time.. I own a 360 now, but Im not fan boy.. I can easily switch to whatever I feel works.. I plan on buying a new Xbox but im not trapped into it.. I can be persauded.. I do live in America and I feel its important to buy from American companies if possible..  Anyone who lives in Asia tends to buy Asian electronics first.. I have a friend that is South Korean.. he buys Samsung becuase its a south korean company.. nothing wrong with that..

I just feel now more then ever the PS4 will be most like the New Xbox.. ( but Xbox's have always been more PC then the PlayStations  - And for the 1st time - this wont be true )..  The trouble is now even though both system will be very similar everyone will try and analyse based on what they know.. On paper the PS4 looks like it it could be more powerful in the CPU area - yet very few websites ( and very few people ) know that some of those EXTRA cores are actually locked out.. so the advantage on paper is not reality.. You'll see two consoles by Sony AND MS that will offer similar quality - even more so then how close in quality the PS3 and XB360 are now.. Especially now that the Nextbox will have a 6x Bluray drive..  

Another example?  Microsoft's technique for accommodating 8GB of DDR3 modules - PS4 fans point out a SEEMINGLY obvious disadvantage for the durango.  Namely, bandwidth. . DDR3 can only process around one third the amount of data as the wider GDDR5, because the "pipe" is that much thinner. Microsoft's solution? They will equip the NextBox ( Durango ) with 32MB of fast memory (ESRAM) attached DIRECTLY to the graphics core ( on die ), but capable of being accessed from the CPU too. This little cache of memory can run in parallel with the DDR3, and combined bandwidth then rises back up to around 170GB/s - a number close to the throughput of the GDDR5 in the PS4.  The PS4 ( Orbis ) DDR5 will actually be slowed a bit by the system bus since the DDR5 will be limited by the PS4 bus - it'll end up being much more equal then most beleive.. People think guys on 'either side' of the camp are dumb.. thats why most of you aren't engineers..

This is why you won't see big differences in games on the PS4 and Nextbox.. 1) The real world hardware results will be close.. 2) Since the PC, PS4 and Nextbox will be similar in many ways - porting games will be just as common ..or more so.. then today -  Graphics quality will in games will be much like now - It'll be hard to tell many multi-platform titles apart.. and mostly Xbox exclusives will look best on Xbox.. and Sony exclusives will look best on PS4

Okay, so after lurking through these forums for awhile, I've finally decided to make an account here, and share my thoughts on the PC vs Console argument. While also addressing some of the stupidity I've seen in this thread.

First and foremost, the whole, "PS4 is nothing but a PC" argument is one of the worst constructed stances I've ever seen. Even among gamers. PC = Personal Computer. Let that sink in for a moment, while the PC is a computer, it's not the only kid of computer there is. The fact that someone's argument was that, "PS4 uses X86 architecture." means nothing. If the PS4 had an arm processor would you call it a tablet/smartphone? Consoles are a type of computer, just as smartphones, tablets, supercomputers, and PC's are all similar to one another in core needs, such as processors, RAM, graphical processing unit, etc. Also, every console has used a GPU created from one of the big PC GPU player's. Last generation was powered by Nvidia, and the PS3's cpu was made by IBM, two PC computer manufactures. But that didn't make the PS3 anything like a PC, the problem is you people fail to realize that consoles are infact computers, but they're console computers, not personal computers.

Now, when it comes to gaming I prefer consoles. I have a few friends who're PC Gamers, and one of my friends recently convinced me to build a gaming PC. He was pretty much begging me to join the "Master Race", and despite my worries in investing in a PC, I ended up spending $980 for one. It was an i5, 7870(wasn't willing to pay an extra $100 for the 7950 performance increase), 8GB Samsung RAM setup. I was able to run just about every game at 40FPS or higher, at ultra settings I may add in. After using my Gaming PC to play games such as Dragon's Nest, Skyrim, and BF3, I do agree that the games are overall prettier. Especially when you compare them to the visuals my PS3 is pumping out on my 1080P TV, the upscaling to 1080P makes most games lack of AA really stand out. But the graphics are from for unbearable.

Anyways, gaming on a PC just doesn't give me that intense feeling I get from gaming on my PS3. On my computer I often find myself getting bored very quickly, I mean it's nice to look at, but other than that I'd rather sit down and enjoy gaming on my dedicated gaming system, even tho it's outdated by today's standards. PC Gaming has no "feels" to it in my opinion, when my friends are over we play multiplayer games like there's no tomorrow, you simply cannot have those fun, bonding, and epic gaming moments with friends on a PC. It feels much better to trash talk someone in real life, than over the computer. I mean you can feel the intensity when playing a close game of madden, over PC....I just feel nothing. Not to mention the PC Community is very abrasive for some reason. On my PS3 people rarely talk on Online play, and when they do it's more friendly than any other community. I mean, let's face it, I hate playing CoD on Xbox 360 there's far too many kids and assholes there for me to enjoy the online experience. While I do talk over PSN in games, I find myself having actual conversations with the players, and not just shit talking them to death. I guess what I'm trying to say is, there's thing PC gaming can offer(better visuals, better frame rates) that consoles cannot, but at the same time consoles can offer more a PC cannot(more exclusives, better exclusives, better local and online multiplayer, cheaper, backed by all AAA devs).

Nowadays I don't even use my gaming PC, I do everything from my 2009 laptop, while my gaming PC is gathering dust. I hate when people always say, "PC's are cheaper in the long run!" when that's not the case for the vast majority. I've spent well over $1,200 on my gaming PC and its games, While I've spent around $800 for my PS3 and my massive amount of games, thanks to cheap used games, and free games on PSN. Also, when PC gamers say things like, "you don't have to update your comp every five years, only the GPU." is a blatant lie. Five years ago Core2Duo's were hot shit, and now a Core2Duo can't run any acceptable game at a decent frame rate. You need to update your CPU to a more expensive one, which'll cost around $180 for a decent one, and then update your GPU which'll cost $180 for a mid-high end discrete GPU. Also add RAM into the figure as well, and new power supplies, cooling, etc. PC Gamers have to worry about shitty drivers, bad optimization, and shitty ports such as Max Payne 3(they had so many glitches and no patches, almost as if the devs didn't care for the PC community). Let's face it, if PC gaming was as superior as to how most elitist made it out to be, it would be where the consumers are.

Also. The PS4 GPU is a current gen card, it's rumored to be a 7850/7870 or a 8850/8870, both are mid-high end GPUs. It's humorous to me how PC gamers are now calling the 7850 a low end card, when in fact it's one of the best GPU's on the market for the price per performance, and it was clearly mid-high before the PS4 was rumored to have it, now it's a low end card. Also, more flops doesn't necessarily mean better performance. Just as more GHZ doesn't mean better performance. Let's be honest here, you guys can flame Sony for their choice of components, but really think to yourselves for a moment. Do you really believe that you know more about computer engineering, than the guys who created the PS4? Also, remember that the 7850 grade card is "enhanced" which'll prolly put it up there with an overclocked 7850 which can run Battlefield 3 on ultra at 50FPS and above, benchmarks show this. Now imagine an OC 7850/7870 with optimization, and complimentary parts, and with a HUGE bandwidth. Sony President confirmed that the standards for games on the PS4 is 1080P 60FPS, and after seeing the Killzone; Shadow Fall trailer, I have no reason not to believe him.

Someone posted in here that it was upscaled 1080P, and it was pre-rendered. But they're wrong. Know how? Maybe because the very next day Jimmy Fallon played the exact same Demo on Late Night. Also, may I add in that Shadow Fall is visually stunning. If you believe that Shadow Fall isn't a step-up from last gen graphics, you're lying to yourselves. It's right up there with Crysis 3 in terms of visuals, and to be honest the art style in Killzone: Shadow Fall makes it overall prettier than Crysis 3 in my opinion. At the end of the day the PS4 is sporting a GPU capable of running the most taxing games for PC at 50FPS and above. So I don't really see how PC elitists can brag about their builds for the next few months, or years perhaps. I mean, the difference between even 30FPS and 60FPS is very hard to perceive in the first place. I clocked my emulator to 30FPS and 60FPS before on my gaming PC and I hardly noticed a difference.

Also, the PS3 isn't even capable of doing 200GLOPS, the PS4 can do 1.84TFLOPS with a GPU that's more than twenty times better in everything the PS3's gpu has to offer, if not more. Have you see God Of War 3? Have you seen Uncharted 3? Have you seen KZ 2? Even when Upscaled on my 1080P TV they look stunning, and they're running on 256MB VRAM. When Naughty Dog and Santa Montica present their PS4 games, I'm willing to bet that it'll look better than Crysis 3 in every aspect. Seeing as they have 20 times the raw power they had and created PS3 games that looked better than most PC games. Also, PS+ gives good discounts and free games, just as Steam does, y'know, excluding the free games part.

In my opinion Playstation is the best computer for gaming needs, especially when the PS4 launches.

@Daisuke72

I read your post above.. please read mine above yours.. 

Only thing I really want to say to your above post is.. while the Radeon being used in the PS4 is a un-named 7000 series Radeon - We know from number crunching it would be close to a 7850.  Part of this could be because consoles like the Xbox or Playstation ( Old or NEW Gen ) have faster shorter and a faster system bus..This means data travels a shorter distance and gets there faster.. plus it moves faster..

It's still not the 'High End' Radeon 7970 .. or even the 7870....YES - Numbers 'appear' to be close - but performance is NOT when you compare the actual cards -

 Theres a pretty big distinguishable difference  between a 7970 Radeon chip ( which 500 dollars ) , a 7870 ( 250 dollars )..

.... and the Radeon 7850 ( which cost  120 - 150 dollars ) - which is being used by the new Xbox and The PS4..

No, The 7850 isn't bad.. it's mid-high end.. but as I said.. there's a decent jump going up to the 7870 and  finally to the top end Radeon 7960 which cost 500 dollars - 500 would put the cost  at equal or above the  new PS4 / new Xbox

I am not upset, just think it's retarded to compare specs found in Console with those in a PC for obvious reasons

Also think it's retarded to endlessly tell everyone that the Hardware you paid twice the amount for is better. No shit. Did you know the GT-R is faster than the STI? GT-R does cost $60,000+ more lol. Also water is wet. The fire is hot.

derp

You still need to hook up 5+ 1080P Televisions and run the game across all of them at once just for it have as many pixels, there is graphics and there is Art.
It's impossible for the PS3 to match a PC in terms of graphical prowess, ever.

Of course there's a huge difference performance wise. But PC games aren't built around mid-high end cards, even Crysis 3 will run at a decent frame rate with everything on Ultra on a 7770 at 1080P. The thing is, most high end GPU's are used to play games above 1080P on monitors with higher resolution than mainstream HDTV's, hence they run over 100FPS at 1080P. While the base 7850 runs BF3 on Ultra at 50FPS and above at 1080P and when OC it runs above 60FPS. In fact, an overclocked 7850 is a beast, someone overclocked it and it bumped up the performance to a base 7950. Point is 1080P gaming is mainstream, any other resolution than that isn't noticeable on 1080P TV's and barely noticable even on higher res monitors. 

Ok.. I can agree with that statement..  High end PC parts cost more.. they should be better..

Only thought I have is whats the differene between a mid range PC, the PS4, and The Next Box ?  More or less - the sticker on the case !

This thread seems to be slowing down.. Im adding one thought.. MS may have a slight advantage.. they can still make minor changes to the New Xbox because its final specs haven't been announced.. there's a chance MS may even launch after the PS4 this time.. although I believe the launch dates will be VERY CLOSE, if not the same..

What do you mean by "in every PS4 thread"? The threads where this comes up are the ones specifying by title that they're making comparisons between the PC and the PS4, its not like people go into every PS4 thread (and there's a whole damn lot of them at this point) and suddenly start spouting nonsense about how inferior the PS4 will be to PC's.

I think the five or so PC gamers in here would have a hard time catching up to the sheer amount of PS4 related threads that have sprung up in the past week.