Well, is it? | |||
| Yes | 571 | 64.30% | |
| No | 317 | 35.70% | |
| Total: | 888 | ||
I'm fine with 720p, and played even with lower resolution and if you have 3Ds, you know it is a weaker resolution on a smaller screen.
On big screens, I'm fine with any resolution heck I play some emulation with older games like Contra and Mario. Not an issue.
Areaz32 said:
Dude you didn't provide links that i can use for anything. I told you i used data from reliable sources such as digital foundry and you just ignore it in favor of your own sources. Regardless of wether or not i have a high end PC doesn't say anything about wether i would know the details of this subject. Stop being so condescending and thinking you know what you are talking about. You said 32gb ddr4 ram. Dude ddr4 ram are not cheap. Besides you need ram nowadays because games are getting way way bigger than ever before. I know exactly what ram does i am actually educated in this. Your GPU's need ram space for each instruction commisioned by the game engine. On PC this is more important than ever. Not only that but you also need ram for all the files etc. Nowadays they are doing a lot of saving information from previous renders in the pipeline for later use. All of this is only possible because of the ram space, as it is not saved persistently. If you can't take the links i posted as proof then you are just delusional. All i can say is wether or not your proof is wrong or not is that we have conflicting proof. My proof is actual proof. Once is live performance stream and the other is digital foundry. Your proof was just pictures without a source. |
@ bolded
Did you click on his links? It shows the course used for the benchmark, goes into full details as to how they tested and says they repeated 3 times before taking an average. By comparison Digital Foundry isn't exactly knowledgable compared to the actual tech sites that regularly do benchmarks and their experience is limited at best. It's a niche segment with a small team on a much larger website and even then it's mostly console focussed. The livestream as well is only a single user and is hardly representative and I doubt he solely uses that rig for benchmarking.
The links permalite gave are from reputed tech sites for whom benchmarking of hardware is their focus.
Also, the comment about the RAM, I don't know of any major game that has shown any benefits to going above 8GB of system RAM.
Want games to run 60fps on a console? Then 720 isn't going anywhere for a long time. Apparently even that is "so hard to achieve" for most of the industry.
"You should be banned. Youre clearly flaming the president and even his brother who you know nothing about. Dont be such a partisan hack"
| IkePoR said: Want games to run 60fps on a console? Then 720 isn't going anywhere for a long time. Apparently even that is "so hard to achieve" for most of the industry. |
Not true. MGS V, GOW III, Uncharted 1, 2, 3, COD Ghosts, AW, BO2 and TLOU all run at 1080 60 on PS4 and most of them are graphically impressive on current gen.
| Scoobes said: Also, the comment about the RAM, I don't know of any major game that has shown any benefits to going above 8GB of system RAM. |
Yeah, 8 GB is enough for most games. For a new system, I would go with 16 GB to be on the safe side (and the price difference is neglible), but it ain't really necessary: http://www.techspot.com/article/1043-8gb-vs-16gb-ram/page3.html
Ballas said:
Not true. MGS V, GOW III, Uncharted 1, 2, 3, COD Ghosts, AW, BO2 and TLOU all run at 1080 60 on PS4 and most of them are graphically impressive on current gen. |
It's worth noting that those games are all either ports from or multplats with PS3/360. And by BO2, did you mean to say Black Ops 3? Cos that drops to 1360x1080 on PS4, which is close to 900p in terms of pixel count.
While I think it's unlikely we'll see more 720p games on PS4, I expect we'll see more on Xbox One and Wii U, as well as more sub-1080p games on PS4.
Scoobes said:
@ bolded Did you click on his links? It shows the course used for the benchmark, goes into full details as to how they tested and says they repeated 3 times before taking an average. By comparison Digital Foundry isn't exactly knowledgable compared to the actual tech sites that regularly do benchmarks and their experience is limited at best. It's a niche segment with a small team on a much larger website and even then it's mostly console focussed. The livestream as well is only a single user and is hardly representative and I doubt he solely uses that rig for benchmarking. The links permalite gave are from reputed tech sites for whom benchmarking of hardware is their focus. Also, the comment about the RAM, I don't know of any major game that has shown any benefits to going above 8GB of system RAM. |
I don't see how that explains away what i said. I said that he used his own sources and ignored mine. How is live gameplay shown in a video from a site that is rather impartial if not PC favored not usable in this context?
Regardless i did click his link and they didn't confirm anything different from what i was stating yet he was being condescending and telling me to educate myself.
He is trying to argue that the patch made a difference which is completely besides my point. The 960 ran unstable at 34-56fps in 1080p using his sources. I would hardly call that better than stable 30fps because the stutters are way way more noticable. Regardless that is still a pricey machine compared to consoles.
His sources prove my point ._.
I have a 46" TV. That was fine 10 years ago for that kind of resolution and it is still fine now. I think if you're someone who has upgraded to anything 65" or larger, then it might be a problem. If it comes down to the technical abilities of the hardware, then I would rather have a lower resolution if it means I get a better and more consistent framerate.
Check out my art blog: http://jon-erich-art.blogspot.com
curl-6 said:
It's worth noting that those games are all either ports from or multplats with PS3/360. And by BO2, did you mean to say Black Ops 3? Cos that drops to 1360x1080 on PS4, which is close to 900p in terms of pixel count. While I think it's unlikely we'll see more 720p games on PS4, I expect we'll see more on Xbox One and Wii U, as well as more sub-1080p games on PS4. |
Yes I meant BO3, I didn't know it had variable resolution, looks like some devs prefer variable resolution to maintain 60fps but its never too obvious while playing.
The games that are ported from PS3 still look better than most current gen games. Uncharted 2, 3, God Of War III and TLOU on PS4 blow away like 90% of current gen games graphically, and the ones I've played that look better than these are mostly all PS4 exclusives, the majority of multiplats don't look that good, even some of them being current gen excluusive.
Ballas said:
Yes I meant BO3, I didn't know it had variable resolution, looks like some devs prefer variable resolution to maintain 60fps but its never too obvious while playing. The games that are ported from PS3 still look better than most current gen games. Uncharted 2, 3, God Of War III and TLOU on PS4 blow away like 90% of current gen games graphically, and the ones I've played that look better than these are mostly all PS4 exclusives, the majority of multiplats don't look that good, even some of them being current gen excluusive. |
I agree that games like Uncharted 2-3 still look better than most 8th gen games. But the reason they can run at 1080p/60fps on PS4 is because the graphics are not as technically demanding as something like Star Wars Battlefront.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
Currently Online 
