Lets hope the improvements with the RTX next gen, is big enough that their 5060 series, is almost 4070 level, and not super expensive.
So PC users have a chance of building a equal PC for roughly the same amount of $ as a PS5pro.

I'm not suggesting the price is worth it but the 5090, based on rumors, is a beast.  The 4090 is 100% increase compared to the Pro, and the 5090 is 60 to 70% increase to the 4090.  

Not sure I'll grab one but man the 5090 sounds amazing.  

Does a game running on a 4090 looks twice as good as the same running on the PS5 Pro?

Or is it more about fps gains.

The dynamic of the PC market is similar to the console market. AMD, like XBox, is fizzling out of the gaming GPU market, their sales are collapsing:

https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/gaming-gpu-sales-decline#:~:text=These%20latest%20sales%20figures%20are,compared%20to%20the%20previous%20quarter.

AMD is now saying they won't compete with higher end Nvidia cards and want to focus on getting bigger in the AI server game and want to be known as an AI server company. Their shareholders want to see them compete in the AI server field as that's where the real money is, no one cares about gaming. 

Then you have Nvidia, but Nvidia is basically an AI server company at this point, gaming GPUs are a tiny part of their revenue now, all of their gaming GPU products (this includes royalties they get from the Nintendo Switch + 30/40 series GPUs) represented a tiny 9% of company revenue in their most recent financial briefing ... AI servers are way, way, way more profitable and a way bigger part of their business. 

All of that is to say ... the dynamics here aren't good for PC pricing in the long term. You have one company (AMD) that desperately is trying to appease shareholders by pivoting to AI servers, and that leaves Nvidia with a kind of quasi-monopoly. But they aren't likely to subsidize lower profits on gaming cards because really if anything they're wasting TSMC production capacity to make any of these gaming GPUs. They would make more money making AI servers cards, so it's unlikely they are going to want to price these things cheaply. 

As such, prices of modern cards will likely go up and continue to do so. 

That and PC GPUs in general is a declining market overall. 

Sales were better 10 years ago. 

You'll get better frame rate, but "twice as good looking" .... lol, good luck with that one. You'll get no where near "twice as good" in terms of actual graphical fidelity. 

The other unfortunate downside with PC is a lot of the extra power is simply wasted by terrible optimization. So you're paying a shit ton more in money, but that extra money doesn't scale to an equivalent leap in software performance. A lot of devs treat PC development like shit compared to console and don't properly use the extra power wisely at all and PC games are often buggy/laggy/awfully optimized even if the hardware is way better than a console. I get the feeling a lot of these studios are burnt out from just getting the PS5/XB versions out that they just sorta crap out whatever they have left in the tank to get the game on PC and don't particularly care if it's properly optimized. 

https://www.reddit.com/r/ItsAllAboutGames/comments/1d4g9rm/can_we_discuss_how_poorly_optimized_pc_games_are/

Not sure it is quantifiable, but yeah, ultra settings is a clear jump compared to the ps5.  Same with high RT.  And of course 120 fps is amazing.  I played Rift at ultra settings, 4k quality, high RT and averaged 100 to 120 fps.  It was amazing.  Worth the money is another question and depends wholly on personal situation.

But I do find games on a 4090 significantly better looking than ps5 games.  

Edit

The biggest differences tend to be volumetric, particles and lighting.  Density (crowds, foliage, etc) tend to be much different as well.

And personal opinion, 100 fps is nothing short of amazing.  The controls are so much more responsive and accurate, also super smooth looking.  

A 4090 is roughly 90% faster than a PS5pro.
You need a overclocked version to reach 100% increased.

However a 4090 costs like 1800$ or more, some are like 1900-2000$ (ones that are like 100% increase), for the GPU alone.

Do we even know how much faster then 5090 will be yet?
I heard rumors that Nvidia might price it at 2500$...

Yes, if you spend that much on a GPU, its going to be alot more powerfull than a PS5pro.

$2000 (or more) for a GPU is a bit ridiculous, you're getting nowhere near the equivalent added boost in graphics for what you're paying. It's basically spend 2x-3x more to get a better frame rate and a few moderate effects tacked on. 

I predict PC GPU sales (overall and especially of the newer card lines) will continue to decline as they have because the value proposition simply is not there for most regular consumers. Developers won't optimize properly for those higher cards as they're already burnt out just making the PS5/XBox versions on time as is. 

Nvidia will charge more because they effectively have lesser competition from AMD and Nvidia itself doesn't care as much about gaming when 91% of their revenue comes from elsewhere.

So probably not a great looking future for consumers on that front. You would want better competetion to push Nvidia to keep their prices honest, but AMD is fizzling out (much like XBox vs Playstation) and they are pivoting hard to focus on AI servers instead. There's not much incentive for Nvidia to really care much about the prices of GPUs as such. For people in that market, you either pay whatever they ask or go find another hobby. 

Sony probably has anticipated all this too. PC GPUs are expensive and likely getting even moreso, so they know they can move the Playstation pricing up too as they have little other direct competition (XBox is fizzling out). 

You would hope that AMD gets better sells, once Nvidia gets all greedy with prices but... nope.
I switched to a AMD card and have not had any issues at all.
A overclocked Rx 7700 XT is pretty close to a 4070 in performance, at alot less (380-390$). However it has no DLSS, so your stuck with FSR.
However to save like 220$ I feel like its a worthy tradeoff.

It feels an awful lot like what's happening in the console space ... XBox is falling apart ... AMD is falling apart in the GPU space, AMD GPU sales are terrible. Looks like people have just made up their mind that if they're going to commit to spending money on a PC, they want Nvidia and that's that. 

But for pricing that's not really great because the message sent to Nvidia is they don't have to try so hard and can charge basically as they please. 

AMD's higher ups (Lisa Su, etc) meanwhile don't give a crap because 99% of what they talk about is how to get into the hugely lucrative server AI business, AMD had ramped up massive amounts of spending to compete in that area. 

All that means is Sony doesn't probably have a whole lot to worry about. $700+ is a lot of money (relative to console's of the past), but it will still likely be a whole lot cheaper and more convenient than Nvidia's pricing without comp. Most people don't want a giant ass PC under their main television.