• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Game exec : 'PS4 will out-power most PCs for years to come' ...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Typical exec speak to tout the next gen console. Don't even know why people even bother to go all uppity about it. Face it, console gaming is much more lucrative than PC gaming. Certainly 8gb of RAM goes a long way for console, so much more so than PC.
 
Anteaus said:
"I'm glad Sony decided to go with 8gb RAM because it means that the PS4 will out-power most PCs for years to come."

I don't understand this statement. What does one have to do with the other? Based purely on his reasoning, my current PC which has 16GB RAM already "out powers" the PS4 which isn't even released yet. They shouldn't brag about something they should have had in the first place. 512MB ram was a joke even when the PS3 was released.

As a side bar, it's not like the PS4 is doing anything special. Both the PS3 and PS4 operated at 1080P, except that the PS4 will actually have hardware that can do it properly instead of the RAM/GPU limited setup the PS3 had. Also, next year when console gamers finally have a system that can actually apply some anti-aliasing and and they get all hot and bothered over their graphics, PC gamers will have already been operating at 2560X1600 and above for years now. Sure not everyone uses those resolutions, but it's not because they don't have the option.

No, console gamers are basically going to get the exact same thing they have now, except it will a be able to do it right. It's sidegrade, not an upgrade. They get 1080P, except now they actually have enough GPU to do AA/AF. They get 8GB ram, so now developers can actually design levels without texture raping or cheating with abusing MIP mapping and motion blur. They get harddrives large enough to not mandate upgrades. They get X86 processors, because they finally realized that developers neither want nor need overpriced processors that unnecessarily complicate development yet net no overall benefits in performance. Its current gen+, not next gen.

I think Sony and MS should just STFU about their new consoles and just release them quietly and let gamers get on with it.

"The exec said the platform was perfect for the open-world action games Avalanche specialises in. "We are confident that we'll bring open-world gaming to a whole new level because of it," he said."

Open world gaming indeed. He's just excited because for the first time they can actually load a whole level into RAM without crippling performance.
Click to expand...

Most developers have said that the thing most limiting on current systems is RAM.
 
ImpulsE69 said:
Wasn't the PS3 touted as being so powerful, but they barely tapped it's capabilities? Besides they only had to match the 360.
Click to expand...

I remember them saying something like that. But did they ever get a true 1080p output from games? Or was it more upscaling crap from a lower resolution?

I watch my fiancee's kid play COD. It looks washed out and jaggy on the PS3.
 
dagamer34 said:
Don't forget that most younger people who would want to play games are far more likely to buy laptops as their primary computer, especially as they go off to college. No way your average person buys a laptop that is more powerful than the PS4, and then there's no way to upgrade it.
Click to expand...

Actually referencing the same link in my prior post it seems the fastest mobile GPU offered at the moment, the GTX 780M is about 2.2Tflops.

Again we're talking about hardware available now, whatever is available at the PS4s launch is going to be faster still.

I remember them saying something like that. But did they ever get a true 1080p output from games? Or was it more upscaling crap from a lower resolution?

I watch my fiancee's kid play COD. It looks washed out and jaggy on the PS3.
Click to expand...

Actually a fair number of games fail to even render at true 720p, much less 1080p, large AAA titles like GTA IV run at 640p even after all the draw distances and texture quality has been slain.
 
frozentundra123456 said:
Unfortunately unless you are into MMOs, which I am not, there is not that much left that is PC specific. The cross platform games may have better graphics, but the gameplay on the computer is much the same for most games. I still do prefer mouse and keyboard though.

I know there are exceptions like Starcraft and some less popular RPG, but that is about it.
Click to expand...

ehhh, what? Pretty much every strategy game! AKA the only games that don't bore me in <35 min.
 
Grooveriding said:
http://www.computerandvideogames.co...s4-will-out-power-most-pcs-for-years-to-come/




PS4 Specs (http://www.anandtech.com/show/6770/sony-announces-playstation-4-pc-hardware-inside) :

- 8-core x86-64 CPU using AMD Jaguar cores (built by AMD)
- High-end PC GPU (also built by AMD), delivering 1.84TFLOPS of performance
- Unified 8GB of GDDR5 memory for use by both the CPU and GPU with 176GB/s of memory bandwidth
- Large local hard drive


lol. Want some of what this guy is smoking.
Click to expand...
Marketeers are clever. He might be technically correct as most PC's are just relics for serfing the web, or business machines for business use.

What gamers should care about is the fact that those marketers (and the companies who pay them) think that PC gamers are complete morons who won't see the subtext... i.e. that the statement about "most PCs" is completely and utterly irrelevant because the "most PCs" market does not apply to gamers in the slightest.

always good to see the marketing depts of big companies trying to pull a fast one.
 
BlitzPuppet said:
LMAO. I remember working on a PC when I had my original Droid and thinking "Holy shit, my phone has a faster processor than this POS"
Click to expand...

Did you then realize that the CPU in the PC could do about 20x the actual work of the "faster" processor in your phone and get back to work?
 
Childs said:
Does anyone know if this is current gamers or just anyone who installed Steam at one point? Maybe someone who started out with HD graphics, then upgraded later on?

I could understand old GPUs on the list, but some of those low end non integrated gpus you actually had to buy. And these are people playing games, not just mom and pops surfing the web.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it's anyone who's logged in in the last 30 days. Results aren't cumulative (that wouldn't make any sense).
 
Childs said:
I could understand old GPUs on the list, but some of those low end non integrated gpus you actually had to buy. And these are people playing games, not just mom and pops surfing the web.
Click to expand...

people playing with just on old shitty igp is actually REALLY high...i myself uses an old HD4650, but i am not a "gamer" acording to some users :hmm:

this game exec, is not high, nuts or delusional... PS4 will beat more than 70% of gamers rig...if not more

if you are one of those that uses a GTX680, and some friends uses them too, be glad...but remember you are still with the 2%, a 300+ bucks card isn't a commom card AT ALL
 
He's speaking specifically about what 8GB of unified memory means for games. (especially open world ones).

I personally don't want to see them chase highest res textures and other memory eating stuff that sees minimal returns for going a lot higher. Give me a solid framerate at a good rendering resolution, more enemies, longer draw distances, and larger maps with less loading.
 
Olikan said:
people playing with just on old shitty igp is actually REALLY high...i myself uses an old HD4650, but i am not a "gamer" acording to some users :hmm:

this game exec, is not high, nuts or delusional... PS4 will beat more than 70% of gamers rig...if not more

if you are one of those that uses a GTX680, and some friends uses them too, be glad...but remember you are still with the 2%, a 300+ bucks card isn't a commom card AT ALL
Click to expand...

I wonder what an Origin hardware survey would look like. The Steam numbers always seem very, very low. Does for example, the integrated graphics include people who also have a dedicated GPU? Anyone with an iX cpu would inflate the Intel graphics numbers. Its hard to imagine anyone who plays games more than occasionally wouldnt at least have a dedicated GPU, even if its mid range and a couple of generations old. I dont expect everyone to have a 680, but at least 260 level.
 
Last edited:
darkswordsman17 said:
He's speaking specifically about what 8GB of unified memory means for games. (especially open world ones).

I personally don't want to see them chase highest res textures and other memory eating stuff that sees minimal returns for going a lot higher. Give me a solid framerate at a good rendering resolution, more enemies, longer draw distances, and larger maps with less loading.
Click to expand...

I don't mind low res textures when it doesn't matter. Some people bitched about that in Crysis.

OMG DID YOU SEE THE LOW RES BUSH WAY OFF ON THE SIDE OF THE ISLAND THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WIHT THE GAME?

I agree, I'm more interested in things like draw distance, sharp edges, etc.
 
Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the ps3 still surpasses 'most pcs' in gaming performance. The average PC is a turd in gpu horsepower. Lots and lots of IGP solutions out there.
 
Grooveriding said:
An i5 3570K/2500K & 7850/660 will blow the PS4 out of the water. Both are reasonably priced gaming PC setups.

The last console releases were close to on parity with where the best PCs were at for the time. This time out the consoles are far, far behind where PCs are at, not even matching mid-range powered gaming PCs. To put it in context, the PS4 wouldn't be able to power BF3 ultra settings natively @ 1080P, unless their plan would be to give gamers a 20fps experience.
Click to expand...

that's like...2% of PC's, brah.

The 8gb is a good point, really. Most high end gaming PCs can barely utilize more than 6gb or so, and for only a select few games

add to that with consoles and their games, you have much better optimization than you do with PC games that need to work with various unknown types of hardware.

It does sound like the PS4 will be damn impressive for at least a year or two.
 
zinfamous said:
that's like...2% of PC's, brah.

The 8gb is a good point, really. Most high end gaming PCs can barely utilize more than 6gb or so, and for only a select few games

add to that with consoles and their games, you have much better optimization than you do with PC games that need to work with various unknown types of hardware.

It does sound like the PS4 will be damn impressive for at least a year or two.
Click to expand...

Impressive for 2 years, ok for 4 years, asking for more after that. Then again, try running any new game on $500 hardware from 2005-2006 and see where that lands you today. Consoles have never been about raw performance, but performance/$.
 
I'm not knocking the PS4. I'm certain console gamers are going to stain their shorts when they get a look at Battlefield 4 on the PS4.

Out-powering 'most pcs' is cheeky language I guess. Most PCs out there are going to be desktops used for outlook, ms office in workplaces etc. I was, hopefully obviously, making the comparison to gaming PCs. :ninja:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top