How the PlayStation 4 is better than a PC

[Spjut]

That's kind of proving his point.

But now we are at DX11/11.1, and even Carmack said back in 2011 that DirectX was now the better API.

Was it ever said which OpenGL the Linux version used? I just don't see the point in proclaiming Windows' inferiority when the game uses DX9. It's interesting to note that the OpenGL path was slower on Windows as well, but I had found it more interesting if the OpenGL vs DirectX subject was done with the latest versions.


Anyway, I think Grid 2 may be a good indicator of how the PS4's APU will stack up against the Titan. Grid 2 seems to be a much better fit for AMD's GCN architecture, and it's probably fair to assume the developers will focus on techniques that the PS4's APU are good at.

 

[Rakehellion]

What proof? That there's more overhead on PC? That isn't being debated or argued against.

Yeah, it pretty much is.

 

[2is]

Yeah, it pretty much is.

Show me where. I'd like to see who is calling shenanigans that the PC has more overhead than a console.

 

[notty22]

But now we are at DX11/11.1, and even Carmack said back in 2011 that DirectX was now the better API.

Was it ever said which OpenGL the Linux version used? I just don't see the point in proclaiming Windows' inferiority when the game uses DX9. It's interesting to note that the OpenGL path was slower on Windows as well, but I had found it more interesting if the OpenGL vs DirectX subject was done with the latest versions.


Anyway, I think Grid 2 may be a good indicator of how the PS4's APU will stack up against the Titan. Grid 2 seems to be a much better fit for AMD's GCN architecture, and it's probably fair to assume the developers will focus on techniques that the PS4's APU are good at.

Note the first 3 letters on assume. That's usually what happens to the person who chooses to do that. It was assumed the Wii U with it's new AMD gpu would have better graphics/games. Guess what? Now there are excuses as to why it does not. The developers, are letting gamers down. Who would have thunk?
John Carmack said, is also getting cliche.

 

[Spjut]

Note the first 3 letters on assume. That's usually what happens to the person who chooses to do that. It was assumed the Wii U with it's new AMD gpu would have better graphics/games. Guess what? Now there are excuses as to why it does not. The developers, are letting gamers down. Who would have thunk?
John Carmack said, is also getting cliche.

You may think John Carmack said is getting cliche, but his(and other graphics programmers) words are alot more credible than self-proclaimed experts here and on other forums.

 

[frozentundra123456]

If you don't like the numerous links in this thread, you can google it yourself.

Opinion: The PS4 will be better than the average gaming PC.
Fact: The PCI bus is significant bottleneck in PC gaming performance.
Fact: The PS4 eliminates this bottleneck.

There really isn't any point of contention you're making other than "burden of proof" which has been proven numerous times over.

I am a programmer and I've actually written programs in OpenGL. You'd be surprised at the hoops you have to jump through trying not to saturate that bus in order to get the most out of your GPU.

Burden of proof IS the whole point of a debate, and there can be none because the final PS4 is not out yet. No one is arguing that PS4 will not be more efficient than a PC. What is not yet clear is how much the added efficiency of the PS4 will require in PC hardware to make the performance equal. And speculative statements from developers with a vested interest in the hardware do not count.

 

[galego]

But now we are at DX11/11.1, and even Carmack said back in 2011 that DirectX was now the better API.

Except that Carmack was comparing a version of DirectX to a version of OpenGL and his point was more about easiness of coding than raw performance. He also said in the same interview (2011) that he doesn't have plans in moving to DirectX any time soon:

OpenGL still works fine, Carmack told Bit-Tech, and we wouldn’t get any huge benefits by making the switch, so I can’t work up much enthusiasm for cleaning it out of our codebase. If it was just a matter of the game code, we could quite quickly produce a DirectX PC executable, but all of our tool code has to share resources with the game renderer, and I wouldn’t care to go over all of that for a dubious win.

Neither OpenGL nor DirectX are the low-level (performance wise) libGCM style API used in the PS4. And, I repeat this once again, the PS4 allows for close-to-the-metal coding.

About DX11... I already provided links to Carmack and to Huddy noticing how DX11 gain in performance is small. I also provided a link to a twit from Carmack stating how a console is at least 2x more powerful than a PC with the same hardware... the tweet is back from 2011.

 

[galego]

Show me where. I'd like to see who is calling shenanigans that the PC has more overhead than a console.

It has been shown to you dozens of times in the form of messages, links, quotes... in several threads.

 

[2is]

2x more powerful than the same hardware is a whole lot different than 2.5x more capable than hardware that's already significantly more powerful. Jesus man, at least keep your BS consistant.

 

[galego]

You may think John Carmack said is getting cliche, but his(and other graphics programmers) words are alot more credible than self-proclaimed experts here and on other forums.

Exactly. The overhead figures claimed by Carmack have been confirmed by other well-known developers.

 

[Rakehellion]

Show me where. I'd like to see who is calling shenanigans that the PC has more overhead than a console.

Did you just get in on the last page?

Doesn't seem like it.

Sure, there are some differences but PCI-E 3.0 8x or PCI-E 2.0 16x seems to saturate the card in games.

Okay you got me with "facts". Please tell me in laymans terms how the "optimizations" on the ps4 will allow it to compete with a high end PC? Also exactly what in the ps4 hardware is eliminating "bottlenecks" that the computer supposedly has? And what exactly in the PC Is bottlenecking it from becoming the monster the ps4 is?

But if no bottleneck exists there will be no wins.

 

[frozentundra123456]

You may think John Carmack said is getting cliche, but his(and other graphics programmers) words are alot more credible than self-proclaimed experts here and on other forums.

Those doubting the claims about the PS4 arent proclaiming themselves experts. All we are saying is show some solid data from an unbiased review site. Obviously, it cant be done because the console is not out yet.

Personally, I have said over and over I think the PS4 will be a very good gaming device. What is unclear is how it will stack up against mid/high level PCs, despite how many developers with a vested interest in the console tout it prowess.

Just like if you go to a car dealer. He is going to say his model is the best. Is he going to say, yea, our model is OK, but the dealer down the street makes a better model? No of course not. It is just human nature and salesmanship.

 

[Rakehellion]

And speculative statements from developers with a vested interest in the hardware do not count.

Statements from people who actually have their hands on development kits, statements from people with decades of experience writing game engines, statements from people who when the hardware is actually released will be the ones writing the software that we'll use to benchmark the hardware are pretty fucking credible sources.

 

[galego]

Burden of proof IS the whole point of a debate, and there can be none because the final PS4 is not out yet.

This requirement is not made in the hundred of threads discussing other hardware/software. For instance, it is not made in threads discussing Haswell performance gain over IB, despite Haswell "is not out yet"

No one is arguing that PS4 will not be more efficient than a PC. What is not yet clear is how much the added efficiency of the PS4 will require in PC hardware to make the performance equal.

From my part I have always emphasized that I am working with estimations, not with final numbers. When I say 5x I don't care if it is finally 4.6x or 6.2x, because it is only some average estimation.

And speculative statements from developers with a vested interest in the hardware do not count.

Are you trying to say that the words of recognized developers have to be taken less seriously than the words of anonymous forum posters, with unknown identities and interests?

Moroever, I already cited a developer from the competence (Nvidia), who said essentially the same than the developers that you consider "with a vested interest in the hardware".

But, and this is the point, some of us are discussing the hardware and the technical details, not a mere "X said so".

I started to quote developers only when people asked for sources for some of the technical claims made, such as the existence of API overheads.

I continued citing developers when someone said that the they were said something different about the PS4, which was untrue as shown.

 

[galego]

2x more powerful than the same hardware is a whole lot different than 2.5x more capable than hardware that's already significantly more powerful.

And once gain you fail to obtain the point. Read again the messages and all the corrections to your posts.

 

[HeXen]

So much fail here. Stop reading paper specs, get over it. Let's get down to reality here which history proved over and over. A new console launch means the initial batch of games will meet or slightly beat the very few top graphic games on PC, after which a short time later, the average graphics on PC will be superior once again and remain a step ahead up to the point of diminishing returns...it's simple.

 

[futurefields]

So much fail here. Stop reading paper specs, get over it. Let's get down to reality here which history proved over and over. A new console launch means the initial batch of games will meet or slightly beat the very few top graphic games on PC, after which a short time later, the average graphics on PC will be superior once again and remain a step ahead up to the point of diminishing returns...it's simple.

So much fail here. Ladies and gentlemen do not listen to this man!

 

[Rakehellion]

So much fail here. Stop reading paper specs, get over it. Let's get down to reality here which history proved over and over. A new console launch means the initial batch of games will meet or slightly beat the very few top graphic games on PC, after which a short time later, the average graphics on PC will be superior once again and remain a step ahead up to the point of diminishing returns...it's simple.

Yeah, the PS4 will cost about $400 at launch. It might or might not beat a Titan, but it will beat a $400 gaming PC for years to come.

And really, people made the same silly arguments against the PS3 and Xbox 360 on release.

 

[futurefields]

Expect a lot of sub-1080p rendered games to maximize shader fx. I think 900p will be a popular target resolution, it splits the difference between 720p and 1080p TV's, and won't look *that bad* being upscaled to a 1080p TV.

For kids used to playing upscaled PS3 garbage, and who have never owned a "gaming PC" the difference should still be quite startling, in terms of image clarity.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

Yeah, the PS4 will cost about $400 at launch. It might or might not beat a Titan, but it will beat a $400 gaming PC for years to come.

And really, people made the same silly arguments against the PS3 and Xbox 360 on release.

Pretty sure it won't beat Titan. Just a hunch though.

 

[Rakehellion]

Expect a lot of sub-1080p rendered games to maximize shader fx. I think 900p will be a popular target resolution, it splits the difference between 720p and 1080p TV's, and won't look *that bad* being upscaled to a 1080p TV.

For kids used to playing upscaled PS3 garbage, and who have never owned a "gaming PC" the difference should still be quite startling, in terms of image clarity.

The PS3 came out in 2006, when few people had HDTVs, let alone 1080p sets. Today the story is quite different. The Wii U even targets 1080p.

 

[Rakehellion]

Pretty sure it won't beat Titan. Just a hunch though.

Thanks for contributing a useless bit of speculation that we've been arguing for the last 24 pages. I guess we're done here.

 

[blackened23]

Pretty sure it won't beat Titan. Just a hunch though.

Fantastic addition to a worthless thread.

 

[BrightCandle]

If they don't go native res then they will probably target an easy to upscale resolution. 540p was pretty popular for obvious reasons on the previous gen.

I think this time they have the performance to make it native, but with all the blur filters these days they probably won't need to.

 

[futurefields]

The PS3 came out in 2006, when few people had HDTVs, let alone 1080p sets. Today the story is quite different. The Wii U even targets 1080p.

Yeah, so my point is PS4 will still be a big leap over PS3, even if in some games it isn't able to render full 1080p. PS3 barely handles 720p with low res textures and crap lighting, sub 30 fps etc... if PS4 devs for whatever reason decide to target sub-1080p, it will be for more high-res shader fx, insane poly counts etc...

Wii U really does 1080p? With what level graphics detail?