How the PlayStation 4 is better than a PC

[blastingcap]

Yeah but that's not really the point, as of today(or when the consoles actually launch) the gaming experience on a console will be much better than most high end PC configs till the time there is virtually no room for code optimization left on the PS4/Xbox. The PC's can still brute force their way to higher resolutions & more visual effects but its literally "throw the kitchen sink at it" approach & highly inefficient !

You know what's inefficient is having a closed-off, proprietary box that can't do as many things as a PC (or even a smartphone or tablet!) can do, yet still costs hundreds of dollars.

People arn't threatened by the ps4 they are just sick of hearing how its going to demolish all computers and make any technology on the market obsolete overnight. Which it will do neither.

The first console games (when the console does arrive in predicted 'holiday season this year') will be probably not be be optimized for the console and will run equivalently between the console and the pc (i'm guessing quite a few ports will probably be from pc to console due to the similar architectures and the fact that companies are going to want to get next-get out the door as fast as possible). Over the next few years ps4 games will be coded closer to the metal and efficiency will outstrip the pc. However, by the time that happens the 7850 will be considered a low end card (in two + years) and the pc will easily be able to brute-force past the console. Differentiating this generation from the last is that both the pc and the console will be built on similar architectures which will let a few of the optimizations carry over (no HSA obviously or other similar features). Last time we had the top end on a different architecture. This time we have mid range gpu and low end cpu on virtually the same architecture.

This

(well, sans the unifed memory... we'll see how that one plays out)

 

[Ajay]

You know what's inefficient is having a closed-off, proprietary box that can't do as many things as a PC (or even a smartphone or tablet!) can do, yet still costs hundreds of dollars.

This

LOL! Good point, and that's why console games can extract so much performance from the hardware. It's also why some are predicting a decline in console sales compared to the previous generation.

 

[Schmide]

Really? bluray decoding is free? So that's why WiiU skipped the bluray playback even though the system reads bluray games. I'm pretty sure it's like 10$ for bluray and 15$ for DVD.

Dude Sony is a original member and leading developer of the Blu-ray Disc Association. Me thinks they get some perks.

 

[BrightCandle]

The ps4 supports dynamic allocation of memory, it therefore can not meet a true definition of real time. It might be able to scrap together a soft real time stamp, but then you can do that on windows as well given a loose enough window of delivery. The ps4 is certainly not a hard real time OS so you have to stretch the meaning of real time. Designed around not impacting games it certainly will be, but its not real time.

Windows is not massively inefficient for games. It might introduce a bit of latency but there is just no way programming down to the ps4 api will be 3-4 times quicker. That never happened for the previous generations and it won't for this one either.

The last gen consoles managed to get to the visual level they did based on a few key shortcuts they took to deliver what on a PC was done more accurately. The first was a big reduction in resolution, sometimes as low as 420p despite the output display. Secondly they added blur filters (fxaa and other post processing blur filters) that did cheap anti aliasing like passes over the image. These two "advances" bring a great deal of the increased visuals the games have. They also reduced the polygon counts and a variety of other things that were present on the PC. This clawed back performance so they could run better lighting, better post processing effects etc which in the end made the game look better. But that performance came from compromising in other areas, reducing fidelity in areas where it mattered less based on the format. There is no 200% cost on windows and directX. On Windows every game normally renders with 4 to 5 times the number of pixels of a console, has therefore also a need for higher polygon counts and better textures and uses a real anti aliasing technique rather than just a blur filter. Worse than that the accuracy of many of the post processing effects has to go up, and most people want 60 fps not 30fps. Consoles get to the visual quality they do by taking shortcuts not because of a magic cost of Windows making hardware bad.

 

[Sohaltang]

Dude Sony is a original member and leading developer of the Blu-ray Disc Association. Me thinks they get some perks.

I know this. I'm talking about the 700$ PC build that someone posted from newegg. Maybe newegg is BDA member too?? Those are all things you will have to add to that 700$ build to get it to do what the PS4 can day one. The actual price is closer to 1000$. If I'm wrong post the link or screenshot to the build.

 

[blastingcap]

I know this. I'm talking about the 700$ PC build that someone posted from newegg. Maybe newegg is BDA member too?? Those are all things you will have to add to that 700$ build to get it to do what the PS4 can day one. The actual price is closer to 1000$. If I'm wrong post the link or screenshot to the build.

For many people a PS4 is all they need. Blu-Ray, some online surfing and connectivity, play games without fiddling with drivers.

For others like myself, you may be better off with kb/mouse when making things like spreadsheets, word docs, photo editing, etc. You don't need to spend $1k to build a very powerful PC. Time sales right and recycle hardware from previous builds when possible.

 

[Blitzvogel]

I for one would love to have a PS4 as a PC, the hardware is pretty substantial. It should be reasonably small and efficient. The problem is that it's not a PC with an open OS. And I'm sure port expansion is limited. And I wonder if the HDD will even be "officially" upgradeable.

That said, any current FX-8xxx or i5 or i7 will likely still destroy the x86 cores in the PS4, even years from now when games are "properly optimized" for it. The real question is how the processing paradigm perhaps changes with HSA.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Yes, but it's 2-3 the "same spec'd silicon" which is slow CPU cores and a midrange at best GPU.

And has 8 gigs of unified GDDR5 memory, I am not aware of any other device like this. But putting that aside, I am still waiting to hear what people think Sony should have done. If the hardware is average at best, who could have provided better?

 

[Olikan]

Neither is the PS4. Point was that its the same PR as always from the companies that are locked to the consoles. And people hype it every time.

ok, point taken... but did PS4 already had some harsh word? aside from internet forums, please ¬¬

That's really dependent on what game you're talking about, but no matter which game, the CPU is definitely required to perform certain actions before a frame is ready to be rendered. To call it irrelevant is very short-sighted.

at 1080p, CPU baraly matters...is all about, GPU and bandwidth

and if the 3c/6t cpu in xbox can handle 720p, and... security, audio and VLIW compilers
pretty sure a 8 core jaguar can handle 1080p and nothing more

 

[Blitzvogel]

And has 8 gigs of unified GDDR5 memory, I am not aware of any other device like this. But putting that aside, I am still waiting to hear what people think Sony should have done. If the hardware is average at best, who could have provided better?

What I don't get is how do people forget about the financials involved with console hardware versus PC hardware. Consoles are often sold at a loss while PC hardware is sold at a decent profit. Console companies that practice this risk a very substantial loss in a very defined market which means that "sweet, super powerful console for only $400" could end up as a big paperweight in a year or two if the sales and software are not there to support it.

 

[BrightCandle]

I don't think they could have done better based on the budget and power constraints. Its not that the ps4 is bad, its simply not modern PC gaming levels of performance. They could have kitted it out with triple titan level hardware, 4GHz CPUs and lots of high speed ram and had it be 3 times the size, draw a KW in power and cost $2000. It would definitely then compete well against the competition except on price and running costs.

Consoles put good amounts of hardware down for their price. But what they don't do is compete with higher priced solutions on performance. Its a dedicated piece of hardware specced to be good at playing games at a price they think will sell well. Its not the fastest solution for gaming, its the mass market fixed hardware solution you stick under your telly for 5 years. It by definition is going to target bang for buck.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Right. It's shifting the goalposts of the OP to say "but look at the price".

Of course the PS4 will be a good value at that price, and you won't be able to build a better gaming PC with legal copy of Windows at that price.

But the PR hype is claiming the PS4 will be better than any PC at any price. Which is silly, and worth calling them on.

The PS4 will be good, especially "for the price.". The slow CPU and midrange graphics will work better than they would in a Windows PC. That's a given.

It's PR puffery to claim more than that.

 

[cmdrdredd]

And has 8 gigs of unified GDDR5 memory, I am not aware of any other device like this. But putting that aside, I am still waiting to hear what people think Sony should have done. If the hardware is average at best, who could have provided better?

which is SHARED. How many times do I need to repeat this. the 8GB is not dedicated to the GPU. You share it with the OS, apps, games that are loaded, background tasks, network tasks etc. By the time you're done who knows what's left. I can tell you this though, a Titan has 6GB dedicated just to it. 6GB dedicated > 8GB shared.

 

[blastingcap]

I don't think they could have done better based on the budget and power constraints. Its not that the ps4 is bad, its simply not modern PC gaming levels of performance. They could have kitted it out with triple titan level hardware, 4GHz CPUs and lots of high speed ram and had it be 3 times the size, draw a KW in power and cost $2000. It would definitely then compete well against the competition except on price and running costs.

Consoles put good amounts of hardware down for their price. But what they don't do is compete with higher priced solutions on performance. Its a dedicated piece of hardware specced to be good at playing games at a price they think will sell well. Its not the fastest solution for gaming, its the mass market fixed hardware solution you stick under your telly for 5 years. It by definition is going to target bang for buck.

I haven't had a console in ages... so maybe you or someone else can answer this, but: how is the PS4 to be cooled? Does it have a CPU fan, GPU fan, case fans? Even a midrange gaming PC has got at LEAST three fans (CPU, GPU, case), and even the smallest fans ought to be in the 50mm range for GPUs, 80mm for CPU/case fans, for PCs. But I'm not sure about consoles.

 

[AnandThenMan]

which is SHARED. How many times do I need to repeat this. the 8GB is not dedicated to the GPU. You share it with the OS, apps, games that are loaded, background tasks, network tasks etc. By the time you're done who knows what's left. I can tell you this though, a Titan has 6GB dedicated just to it. 6GB dedicated > 8GB shared.

The fact that the memory pool is one in the same for the GPU and CPU is what makes it so incredible. 6 gigs of memory dedicated to the GPU is nice, what is not so nice is having shuttle data across a relatively slow bus, in fact it's ridiculous and antiquated when you think about it.

Also the overhead of the PS4 memory and resource wise will be much, much lower than a Windows PC.

 

[blastingcap]

which is SHARED. How many times do I need to repeat this. the 8GB is not dedicated to the GPU. You share it with the OS, apps, games that are loaded, background tasks, network tasks etc. By the time you're done who knows what's left. I can tell you this though, a Titan has 6GB dedicated just to it. 6GB dedicated > 8GB shared.

Access time could theoretically be much faster for the shared 8GB GDDR5 vs the split DDR3/GDDR5 on PCs.

 

[Cloudfire777]

PS4 use a mobile CPU and a mobile GPU (its a desktop GPU but undervolted). So the cooling/power requirements isn`t as big as a desktop with 250W GPU, 100W CPU.

 

[AnandThenMan]

If I had to guess I'd say the PS4 will have one fan, possibly two. But I don't see why they would not be able to use one large-ish fan with air ducting and a large heatsink which would encompass the APU, memory and some other components at the same time. A 250 watt video card has little trouble getting away with one fan.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Source

so in short 30fps cap with eyecandy > 60fps

Exactly... This is where the problem lays. With the developers who will skimp out on a game and might just bring that type of attitude to the PC. "30 FPS is good enough." No it's simply not.

Yeah it seems alot of gamers don't trust AMD on this, I mean seriously WTH, but surely 1080p is viable on a console ! You may not get tressfx & all that extra hair but with decent optimization one should be able to get 1080p @ 60fps !

Right...it'll run Crysis 3 with all the details of a PC today at 1080p locked (no shifting to 1280x1080 or something stupid) and 60fps? Nope.

Talking about total sales, not number of users. Grandma with a dell from 6 years ago aint playing Crysis 3 or Battlefield 4.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Funny how you ps4 guys are talking about bottlenecks and how the ps4 will eliminate them. Yet a current gaming PC running 10x more power isn't being bottlenecked. But you guys think a puny little 7850 with a garbage AMD CPU is bottlenecked and the ps4 design will reduce it?

 

[Cloudfire777]

Funny how you ps4 guys are talking about bottlenecks and how the ps4 will eliminate them. Yet a current gaming PC running 10x more power isn't being bottlenecked. But you guys think a puny little 7850 with a garbage AMD CPU is bottlenecked and the ps4 design will reduce it?

Its not about bottlenecks. Its about optimizing the PC architecture, or go slightly different ways, to gain better performance.

A 7860, 8 core APU, GDDR5 as system memory, plus the optimisations will go a long way. Will it beat a Titan? Nah I don`t think so. But just look at the PS3 with 256MB DDR3 system memory, a Cell processor that developers had problem coding to, and the games that came out of it.

There is no doubt we will see many beautiful games from PS4

 

[cmdrdredd]

I'll own one but I'll still say the PC is the superior hardware. It just doesn't get all the same games.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Its not about bottlenecks. Its about optimizing the PC architecture, or go slightly different ways, to gain better performance.

It's both. Shuttling data back and forth between the CPU/GPU really makes no sense. It's there because that is how the PC is designed, a modular and upgradable platform. But that flexibility is also a liability.

Also the division between the CPU/GPU is also silly, they really should be one in the same piece of silicon. Which is slowly happening.

I'll own one but I'll still say the PC is the superior hardware. It just doesn't get all the same games.

It's superior mainly because it's flexible, and the performance is what you are willing to pay for it. Hey I doubt I will buy a PS4, in fact I've never even owned a console except way back when before Sony even had a console. But I can appreciate how Sony has gone about things.

 

[Aikouka]

The fact that the memory pool is one in the same for the GPU and CPU is what makes it so incredible. 6 gigs of memory dedicated to the GPU is nice, what is not so nice is having shuttle data across a relatively slow bus, in fact it's ridiculous and antiquated when you think about it.

Also the overhead of the PS4 memory and resource wise will be much, much lower than a Windows PC.

What you're talking about mostly affects GPGPU computing, but how much does faster access to CPU-allocated memory by the GPU actually affect our gaming? I'm not saying that it isn't a benefit or that it's worthless, but I'd love to see some real numbers on how much performance it would gain versus a different implementation.

It might be good to keep in mind that even though the PS4 may be able to access CPU-allocated memory faster, but high-end GPUs have either a modest amount more bandwidth or significantly more. For example, the PS4 has 176GB/s, the GTX 680 has 192GB/s, the GTX Titan has 288GB/s, the 7970 has 264GB/s, and the 7970Ghz has 288GB/s. Although, would the PS4's GPU even need more bandwidth or is it even capable of saturating its current amount? That's a good question.

I haven't had a console in ages... so maybe you or someone else can answer this, but: how is the PS4 to be cooled? Does it have a CPU fan, GPU fan, case fans? Even a midrange gaming PC has got at LEAST three fans (CPU, GPU, case), and even the smallest fans ought to be in the 50mm range for GPUs, 80mm for CPU/case fans, for PCs. But I'm not sure about consoles.

I've taken apart a fat PS3 (80GB partial-BC unit) and a fat 360 (12GB non-HDMI unit), so I've seen their cooling. The PS3 uses a rather large fan that sits on top, which is why it has that big ol' hump. The 360 uses a really small fan (I'd guess around 40mm) in the back that pulls the air through the fins on the heatsinks. The PS3 seems to be a bit quieter than the 360.

As for the current models, I still find that the PS3 is quieter than the 360, and consequently, I prefer using the PS3 for Netflix.

 

[futurefields]

So a PC GPU does 2 commands of GPGPU at a time?
But the PS4 has Queues of 64? which is 32 times more than a PC's?

So a PS4 gpu will have 32x the performance due to a larger queue, is that what we are assuming now?

The entire PS4 system is going to operate at less wattage than a desktop gpu alone.

Raw performance will be comparitively low, games will depend on optimizations to look as good as a gaming PC.

No way around the psu equation.