| Teriol said: the only real mith is the one that tells the ps4 xbone are powerfull, because if you compared both of them with PC's you can't denied reality. |
Fact: you cannot get a scratch-built pc that outperforms or even matches what a ps4 can do for the same price, or size, or power requirement.
PS4 comes with a case, an OS, cords, and inputs. It is an all inclusive system.
| Teriol said: the only real mith is the one that tells the ps4 xbone are powerfull, because if you compared both of them with PC's you can't denied reality. |
Compared to your PC they certainly are!
My PC is about the same as the PS4 (I only have a 7850... it's overclocked... but Killzone gave me something to reflect on)
| Slimebeast said: Exactly. So it's not a mith. Personally I am very unhappy with the horsepower of PS4 and Xbone. I'm in the process of going back to PC gaming because next gen graphics on consoles are so underwhelming. Xbox 360 beated almost every high end PC when it was released. I member buying a Radeon X1900XT GPU for $650 back in Spring of 2006 and still the Xbox 360 was just as powerful. Oblivion looked almost better on Xbox 360 than it did on my PC. In comparison, today, my Radeon R9 290 ($400) PC is miles ahead the PS4 in grafix quality. |
Top of the line GPUs always outperformed the 360, the problem is that on high settings you got graphical candies not available on the 360... and obviously people tried to run it in higher resolution on their PCs back then too...unfortunateky there was no serous comparison sites back then 
what the 360 GPU had was a more advanced architecture than other GPUs of the time (more flexibility with shaders, which was a big deal back then) but since it runs at only 800mhz it did not have the raw power to outclass high end GPUs...
The only similar situation I see with current consoles it the PS4 with the unified pool of gddr5 + huma, it's a feature not yet available on high end PCs that can make it punch above its percieved weight! (all good consoles have something like that)
- NES scrooling and sprite movement is hardware accelerayed (smooth)
- SNES: mode 7 chip, great audio chip (1990/991)
- PS1: basic 3D acceleration (1994)
- N64: better 3d accel than on consumer PCs at time of release
- PS2: emotion engine was actually pretty fast back in 2000
- og xbox: 64MB of unified ram (was great for a console + relatvely strong gpu as well...)
| Soundwave said: Steambox will eat both the PS4/X1's lunch in terms of performance over time. |
I have a thread which nobody saw, addressing this exact thing... Check it out
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=176643&page=1
It's a bit of strecth to say that steambox will eat the PS4 for lunch over time, considering that even the fastest PC cannot exceed the 1080p and 60 fps on a TV right now, and most games will not be optimized for it, BUT I maintain that it will be possible to have a very compact, Gamecube like Steambox with the performance of PS4 for less than $399 in a few years. From that point on, you'll have the convenience of a Console and the power of the PC in an inexpensive tiny box. This is what the steambox needs to go after.
Graphics Quality is highly overrated by the PC enthusiasts here. Yes, it matters, sometimes a lot, but it is not the only thing that matters. People also care about "convenience", "price", "simplicity". So a tiny, quite, inexpensive steambox with the performance of PS4, a large catalogue of forward and backward compatibility would be fantastic. Again the performance does not have to be perfect, 8th gen console level performance should be enough for starters as long as the price and convenience is there!
Playstation 5 vs XBox Series Market Share Estimates
Regional Analysis (only MS and Sony Consoles)
Europe => XB1 : 23-24 % vs PS4 : 76-77%
N. America => XB1 : 49-52% vs PS4 : 48-51%
Global => XB1 : 32-34% vs PS4 : 66-68%
alabtrosMyster said:
Top of the line GPUs always outperformed the 360, the problem is that on high settings you got graphical candies not available on the 360... and obviously people tried to run it in higher resolution on their PCs back then too...unfortunateky there was no serous comparison sites back then what the 360 GPU had was a more advanced architecture than other GPUs of the time (more flexibility with shaders, which was a big deal back then) but since it runs at only 800mhz it did not have the raw power to outclass high end GPUs... The only similar situation I see with current consoles it the PS4 with the unified pool of gddr5 + huma, it's a feature not yet available on high end PCs that can make it punch above its percieved weight! (all good consoles have something like that) - NES scrooling and sprite movement is hardware accelerayed (smooth) - SNES: mode 7 chip, great audio chip (1990/991) - PS1: basic 3D acceleration (1994) - N64: better 3d accel than on consumer PCs at time of release - PS2: emotion engine was actually pretty fast back in 2000 - og xbox: 64MB of unified ram (was great for a console + relatvely strong gpu as well...) |
Ummm you would never want GDDR5 for your main RAM in a PC as it doesn't work as well for things other than Graphics. Thats why GPU's have their own GDDR5 memory directly on the GPU itself to utilize and why people don't just buy 16GB of GDDR5 for their main RAM pool in the PC.
freedquaker said:
The Cell on PS3 was cutting edge => This proved to be largely a legend. This cutting edge design was one of the worst mistakes by Sony. The CPU performance was lower than a casual CPU (Core 2 Duo) for general purposes and the graphical capabilities were so underwhelming that it had to be coupled with an NVIDIA chip late into the design. What you guys seem to miss is that all those technical comparisons don't mean anything when you see the first generation console games were clearly inferior to their PC counterparts, both with X360 and PS3. This is NOT THE CASE today, at least with PS4. As long as you stick with 1080p, the difference between PS4 and the PC is minimal. On the other hand, the difference between PS3 and PC has always been huge in multi-platform games. |
Power is not the only factor in producing a good-looking game, ESPECIALLY for ports and first gen games. To compare them in order to determine solely a difference in power is disingenuous.
| kowenicki said: I have said it before and I will say it again. I think a lot of PC gamers lie about their "rigs". The steam survey certainly suggest they do.... mediocrity abounds. |
Not on VGC 
Remember?
a pc that can beat the pc4 costs 650€. 4 intel cores are better than 8 amd...
freedquaker said:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=176643&page=1
It's a bit of strecth to say that steambox will eat the PS4 for lunch over time, considering that even the fastest PC cannot exceed the 1080p and 60 fps on a TV right now, and most games will not be optimized for it, BUT I maintain that it will be possible to have a very compact, Gamecube like Steambox with the performance of PS4 for less than $399 in a few years. From that point on, you'll have the convenience of a Console and the power of the PC in an inexpensive tiny box. This is what the steambox needs to go after. Graphics Quality is highly overrated by the PC enthusiasts here. Yes, it matters, sometimes a lot, but it is not the only thing that matters. People also care about "convenience", "price", "simplicity". So a tiny, quite, inexpensive steambox with the performance of PS4, a large catalogue of forward and backward compatibility would be fantastic. Again the performance does not have to be perfect, 8th gen console level performance should be enough for starters as long as the price and convenience is there! |
Let's be honest here though, do you really think they'd keep at 60FPS in a year or 2 with the top tier games? It's a cycle man, devs will try to hit 30FPS to bring out more impressive visuals, and if they are not doing that, it will be because of the X1 most likely with multiplats, PC games these days will only be as good as a little better than the best console version due to asset restrictions being consoles only(unless modded,) the fact is, these new consoles will be holding back the best possible graphics we can achieve with current tech because they are running on 3+year old hardware in the category of raw performance comparisons. You don't even understand my dissapointment to learn the PS4 was rated at the level it's current at when they revealed it. Alas, it won't matter to me if TLoU2 turns out to be a good game, I'd buy a PS4 just for that.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
