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

Forums - Gaming - Rise of the Tomb Raider PS4 Pro vs PC 4K VIDEO ANALYSIS DF

Chazore on 14 September 2016
Intrinsic said:
Chazore said:

Really if you go with those two points then it's very easy to just stamp it down that PC gaming isn't ever viable, because factoring in the hardware cost somehow means it's never worth it, not if a console can emulate fraction of it. Same could be said for anything even remotely expensive in this world.

We all know how a $400 PC runs, and we know how one runs at native 4k. I don't think we need to use that last point at all really because we already know the results. Gaming with a higher build will show results, but as usualw e have to fctor in price so it's never going to be worth it at all is it?.

Of course it's worth it. Value issubjective first and fore most so to make any value proposition fair you need to level the playing field. 

It makes zero sense pissing on something that costs a third of somwthing else and saying it doesn't perform as well but yet ignore the cost of the items. That's like saying, a Honda is slow because it can't do a sub 10 second mile like an Enzo Ferrari but yet forget to mention that the Enzo cost significantly more than the honda. 

For those that want the bleeding edge in tech and are willing to pay for it, there will always be value in what they get them, but when those people say things like.... "that's such a joke my 1080 can run circles around the PS4pro.... Don't you think it makes sense to also point out that said 1080 is just a GPU and cost more than the entire PS4pro? Isn't that a very very very important part of the argument?

I domt have anything against PC comparisons, but an analysis to show just how much more powerful one is over the other isn't an analysis..... to be fair here is what they should always do. And this is taking what you said into account to. The bolded part. 

 

  • Find what combination of settings the game runningon PC will have that best matches the output and IQ of the PS4pro.
  • Then tell us how much more or less it costs to build a PC that can give you PS4pro level performance. 
simple as that. Cause we all know that if you sink a limitless budget into PC you will obviously have better performance. It's not like they would compare a 1080 to an R9 370 and expect the same performance from them. So why compare a 4k machine powered by a 1080 and God knows what else to a $400 console? How does that make any sense?

 

The bolded part just returns us back to the original two points. What is the point in ever gaming on a high end seup if the cost is too much?. You're also turning it into a personal thing by including the whole PC pissing on console players role, that was already a part of the other thread, it shouldn't be a part of this one. 

There will always be a show of which piece of kit has against the other, consoles have done this for decades and PC vs other PC parts as well.

I'm not sure why future anaylsis should be just at the settings of the Pro, that in turn tells us that we get a PC running at the Pro level rather than what the ahrdware can actually do, really that benefits the pro mroe than it does for PC, why restrain better hardware at all, especially for the higher prices?, it just makes no sense to scale things back.

You know what a $400 level PC does against the Pro though, I'm not going to say it, Yuri has already said before on what a PC on the same budget as  pro will get you.

Again the whole value being subjective is a thing and does exist, but what we have here is the whole cheap objectively better than expensive argument and I'm asking, why bother going high?. I already know the differences and why, but I want you to make a point as to why rather than going with the subjective saying, tell me why buying more power, improved hardware is good than say always buying the cheapest parts and skimping out.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Around the Network
Intrinsic on 14 September 2016
Chazore said:

I'm not sure why future anaylsis should be just at the settings of the Pro, that in turn tells us that we get a PC running at the Pro level rather than what the ahrdware can actually do, really that benefits the pro mroe than it does for PC, why restrain better hardware at all, especially for the higher prices?, it just makes no sense to scale things back.

 

Again the whole value being subjective is a thing and does exist, but what we have here is the whole cheap objectively better than expensive argument and I'm asking, why bother going high?. I already know the differences and why, but I want you to make a point as to why rather than going with the subjective saying, tell me why buying more power, improved hardware is good than say always buying the cheapest parts and skimping out.

Because we know that a PC that costs 3 times as good will perform better. Same way how we know that a 1080 will outperform a 1070. If making comparisons of the two, Bonnie is expecting the 1070 to match the 1080, they are more looking at what they will get for their money. If the differemces or caveats are worth it. Hence why I say comparisons between PCs and consoles should be no different.

And as for the more power thing? I can't really answer that question without saying it's subjective. Take me for instance, I am due to buy a 4k tv, figure it's time I upgrade from over 9yrs if using 1080p. I am also interested in HDR and VR. But I'm not interested in spending more than a certian amount of money for all that, so that means PC rigs and PC VR is not even on my radar. For me, there is a lot of value in something like a PS4pro and a 60" 4k HDR tv. And at the very least I know I'm getting a better experience than what I had just a few months ago. But I'm not spending any more money for my PS4pro than I did for my PS4, in truth im spending $200 less but that's another matter. 

That whole argument can be made for a PC gamer. Maybe he wants to game at 8k, maybe he wants to game with triple monitors. Maybe he wants vive.... To him there is value in payingfor what he wants. 

And that's the important part. You look at it as paying more.... but paying more is only considered as more to someone that feels they are ok with less. For those that what they are paying for is the bare minimum of what they need to do what they want to do, they don't look at it as paying more. They looking at it as paying exactly what they have to pay. 

The TV I am going to get will cost me around $1500. I can get a similarly sized 4k tv for $500 less. I'm not paying more for my tv, I'm paying what my TV costs due to the things it does better than the cheaper ones. And I could be paying 4x more for other TVs, but to me the difference in performance isn't 4x better. 

But look at my TV... it can maintain a sustained brightness of 800+ nits. the $500 cheaper one can only manage 480+ nits. My TV as far as brightness which is important for HDR is literally 2 times better when doing the exact same thing. Yet I won't compare it to the other tv because it's cheaper. so of course it's not gonna perform like my tv. 

You get what I'm getting at?