By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Nvidia bitterness continues, compares PS4 specs to a 'low-end CPU'

A $1000 PC in 2005 was far behind an XBox 360 though I think. So that has definitely changed, consoles are no longer far ahead of lower priced PCs.



Around the Network
TheJimbo1234 said:
The guy is right....but of course dodges the real issue - price.
A "gaming PC" is normally £800+. No shit that such a PC will blow away a ~$450 console. Need he state the Earth is round whilst he is at it?

Though it makes me wonder what involvement, if any, they have had with the 720 and if the hardware they have put in it is piss poor in comparison.

the NeXtBox is using very similar setup as PS4. See my sig.



This topic seems likely to get ugly. Nvidia is right and wrong. The PS4 is a low-mid range PC, but being a closed platform is good and makes it able to do more than the same specs on a PC. Unfortunately Nvidia's statement is going to cause a wildfire of arguments and spin off disagreements.



superchunk said:
TheJimbo1234 said:
The guy is right....but of course dodges the real issue - price.
A "gaming PC" is normally £800+. No shit that such a PC will blow away a ~$450 console. Need he state the Earth is round whilst he is at it?

Though it makes me wonder what involvement, if any, they have had with the 720 and if the hardware they have put in it is piss poor in comparison.

the NeXtBox is using very similar setup as PS4. See my sig.


But that is all rumours. One week it is using some Intel beast, the next it is AMD. There have been no legit reports on it yet.



Funny he compares GTX 680 GPU to PS4.

~$500 GPU vs. $400-$500 CONSOLE



Around the Network

What nvidia says is true, with a grain of salt. While the processor in the 720/PS4 is nothing special in PC terms, nor is 8 gig of ram (the I7 laptop I am writing this on outspecs either on the processor side of things). Th GPU in either is good enough, but nowhere near the top end of the nvidia line. Between the two (720/PS4) the PS4 is likely to perform better since it is unencumbered by the windows 8/kinect clock cycle killers. But the real question is why do people think that a console should be PC powerful? A console realistically needs to do 1080p at 30 to 60 fps, and that is the limit of what it needs to do. In PC terms that is not that hard. Your console also only needs to run a limited set of software in comparison, also not that hard.

A console does not need to be a PC, I don't do large scale environmental modelling on a console, that is why I have PCs and processing clusters (I am one of the scientific users that the Kepler/Titan are aimed at, and some of our models can use a rack mount full of them... if we get the budget for it this year).

A game console does not need that kind of power, it has a fairly moderate performance range. Hell even the WiiU can do a good job of 1080p gaming (though the power pc architecture is very decent and gives a lot of bang for your buck) I have been running some of the ports CODBO2 and Ninja Gaiden are after the latest patches running pretty flawlessly on my 1080p tv (no frame rate drops). So while I agree with the power statements, I think that the console market does not need to be as powerful as a lot of people think it does to provide a great experience.



disolitude said:
drkohler said:
superchunk said:
VetteDude said:

Mobile products aren't necessarily low/mid end. The PS4 has a desktop GPU in its APU anyway.

No it isn't. Its the mobile variant with other modifications.

There is NOTHING "mobile" in the PS4.

A quad core jaguar has a TDP of 25W at 1.6GHz. The PS4 has a (rumoured) 2GHz eight core custom CPU so you are looking at 50W TDP for the CPU part. The GPU part is an improved 7850-like GPU. This is one hell of a chip likely in the 100W TDP range.


Superchunk is right about gpu most likely being mobile. its a lot closer to 7970m than 7850 according to specs released so far. its probably based on 8970m or some next gen monile gpu.

Wait...what you saying and what superchunk is saying is not the same though?

Superchunk said this:

"So yes, the APU in the PS4 is the graphical technology equivalent of a HD77XX or HD77XX, but it would have the "M" moniker at the end of the label to denote that it is the mobile series variant."

This is completely incorrect. The comparisons you have made Disolitude are much more correct. Unless Superchunk made a type here hes way off.



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

TheJimbo1234 said:
superchunk said:
TheJimbo1234 said:
The guy is right....but of course dodges the real issue - price.
A "gaming PC" is normally £800+. No shit that such a PC will blow away a ~$450 console. Need he state the Earth is round whilst he is at it?

Though it makes me wonder what involvement, if any, they have had with the 720 and if the hardware they have put in it is piss poor in comparison.

the NeXtBox is using very similar setup as PS4. See my sig.


But that is all rumours. One week it is using some Intel beast, the next it is AMD. There have been no legit reports on it yet.

These rumors are very reliable and they come from the same source that leaked the PS4 specs which were 99% accurate.



ethomaz said:

JoeTheBro said:

Oh don't bring that stupid saying from Neogaf to vgchartz!

What? That was used in vgchartz since 2006 but of course... vgchartz born in gaf so... I'm confuse now.


It's not common here. Don't make it spread!



Soundwave said:

I remember when "high end PC" meant like a $2500-$3000 rig, lol.

A $1000 PC was like what your bought your grandparents so they could surf the net. 


If you go with a high-end CPU, Aka. None of that socket 1155 or AM3 stuff... And 3-4x graphics cards and multiple monitors... You can exceed that price tag easily, heck just my screens was almost $2000 and I got them discounted!

superchunk said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobcat_(processor)#Jaguar_core

Jaguar is AMDs successor to Bobcat. These are AMDs low-power low-cost market... the "mobile" products. Stuff they intend for laptops, netbooks, and so forth.

Just because Sony is fusing two of these quad-core mobile processors together, doesn't mean its not a mobile based CPU.

The entire APU (CPU plus GPU) will have a TDP below 100W. That's kinda the point of going with an APU to begin with.


And to put it in perspective, Jaguar has far superior single threading performance to that of Intels Atom and the ARM processors (Think: 50%). Throw 2x quaddies onto a single die for some better multi-threading... And it wouldn't be a bad chip if developers make their games heavily threaded (Which I would benefit greatly from, having 12 logical threads on my CPU).
Heck, I would peg the 8 Core Jaguar's CPU performance to be about 8-10x faster than a Dual-Core Intel Atom. - Or about equivalent to a Phenom 2 x2/Core 2 Duo @ 3.4 - 3.8ghz.
Of course it begs to question if they will use the improved Kabini die or stick with Jaguar, if it's Kabini, IPC should have increased.
Whether the CPU performance is something that's going to remain relevant for a decade remains to be seen, as it's still low-end netbook/tablet processor stuff, just with doubled the cores.

It's certainly not CPU performance that could come near a Core i7 or AMD FX 8350 thats for sure.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--