How the PlayStation 4 is better than a PC

[IHateMyJob2004]

BLA BLA BLA

I'll get a PS4 if I don't have to pay for online services. That is why I am leaving Microsoft.

 

[showb1z]

What about Guerrilla Games running all kind of simulations to find bottlenecks in the hardware designed and next claiming that the PS4 is beyond a high-end gaming PC?

What about Quantic dreams testing?

That must be why Killzone is limited to 30fps (you know that game Guerrilla is making).

Also, Thief and "most next-gen console games" according to your god of quotes, John Carmack.

Tip: Those are both Sony-owned studios, you might want to get a little more critical of these sources of yours.

 

[futurefields]

There aren't even that many magic optimizations that get done. It's more like tradeoffs. Developers learn which FX are most important to get that "next-gen look" (HDR, volumetric lighting, motion blur, depth of field etc...) and they sacrifice things like resolution and framerates to get there.

For example, if you really examine Halo 3 vs Halo 4.

Halo 4 renders at a higher native resolution, but if you look close, Halo 3 textures are higher resolution than Halo 4's. Halo 4 has no motion blur whereas Halo 3 does, but Halo 4 appears to have higher poly counts.

I think early Xbox 360 games actually had higher resolution textures and in many cases rendered more objects on screen, and more recent games actually have lower poly counts and lower resolution textures in order to give more headroom for post-processing shader fx to get that "next gen" look.

A lot of the newer Xbox 360 games that have supposed "great graphics" are using bloody awful texturing, they look horrendous when you walk up to a tree or building. Whereas some of the earlier games had some pretty good textures.

It's all about tradeoffs really.

 

[galego]

That must be why Killzone is limited to 30fps (you know that game Guerrilla is making).

Yes their killzone demo is 1080p @ 30 fps.

Elemental demo from Epic only could achieve 30 fps on an high-end PC with an i7 (HT) + 16 GB RAM + GTX-680 (2 GB) when targeting the sub 1080p res.

What was your point? that the high-end PC is slow because cannot achieve 1080p @ 30 fps?

Tip: Those are both Sony-owned studios, you might want to get a little more critical of these sources of yours.

This no-argument was tried before. What they say about the PS4 is confirmed by independent developers. Lottes (Nvidia) was quoted before saying essentially the same than Quantic: the PS4 performance is years ahead of PCs. :biggrin:

 

[2is]

He didn't mention the word performance at all and from what I can tell, his original blog post was taken down. Looks like it was recognized as BS.

 

[showb1z]

What was your point?

My point (as you know of course) is that, according to your own sources, a lot of games are going to target 30fps on PS4 while they happily run at much higher framerates on the PC.
It just makes me wonder what they're going to waste all those imaginary teraflops of performance on.

How about we just stop this nonsense, after all Haswell is almost out. I'm sure you'll have your hands full explaining to all of us how much it failed.

 

[HeXen]

If they made early games like Killzone 1 for PS3 right now using the latest engines, it could achieve 60fps. KZ4 using an engine from the future on the PS4 could likely get 60fps or more too. The new engines for specific hardware are never 100% efficient.

Either way, no one buys a game based on FPS alone. I suspect many PC gamers have played new games at max settings and dip below 30fps cause they don't have the epic hardware build and I'd be willing to bet some PC gamers here end up doing some games at 30fps too on occasion so don't be a hypocrite over frame rates. I seriously wonder how many PC gamers here will play Metro Last light..etc on medium or low settings just to get high FPS?? I bet no one but the weird nerdy guy.

 

[Erenhardt]

My point (as you know of course) is that, according to your own sources, a lot of games are going to target 30fps on PS4 while they happily run at much higher framerates on the PC.

Name me 1 (one) game for PS4 that does more than 30 fps on the PC

 

[MrK6]

If they made early games like Killzone 1 for PS3 right now using the latest engines, it could achieve 60fps. KZ4 using an engine from the future on the PS4 could likely get 60fps or more too. The new engines for specific hardware are never 100% efficient.

Either way, no one buys a game based on FPS alone. I suspect many PC gamers have played new games at max settings and dip below 30fps cause they don't have the epic hardware build and I'd be willing to bet some PC gamers here end up doing some games at 30fps too on occasion so don't be a hypocrite over frame rates. I seriously wonder how many PC gamers here will play Metro Last light..etc on medium or low settings just to get high FPS?? I bet no one but the weird nerdy guy.

+1

Very few people care about FPS.

 

[futurefields]

For me it depends on the game.

Crysis 3 and Far Cry 3 I try to keep at minimum 40fps.

But games like Diablo 3 I try to keep locked at 60fps.

 

[showb1z]

Either way, no one buys a game based on FPS alone. I suspect many PC gamers have played new games at max settings and dip below 30fps cause they don't have the epic hardware build and I'd be willing to bet some PC gamers here end up doing some games at 30fps too on occasion so don't be a hypocrite over frame rates. I seriously wonder how many PC gamers here will play Metro Last light..etc on medium or low settings just to get high FPS?? I bet no one but the weird nerdy guy.

What? Of course people don't buy a game based on fps, most console gamers don't even know what framerate is.
The only reason this gets mentioned is because what this implies about Galego's PS4 performance fantasies. Like the last 40 pages of this waste of a thread.
And if you're fine with 30fps, great for you. But I usually can't play if it doesn't at least maintain 60fps 95% of the time.

Name me 1 (one) game for PS4 that does more than 30 fps on the PC

Thief

No benchmarks obviously, but this thread is 200% speculation.

 

[frozentundra123456]

My point (as you know of course) is that, according to your own sources, a lot of games are going to target 30fps on PS4 while they happily run at much higher framerates on the PC.
It just makes me wonder what they're going to waste all those imaginary teraflops of performance on.

How about we just stop this nonsense, after all Haswell is almost out. I'm sure you'll have your hands full explaining to all of us how much it failed.

Actually he is managing to do that already, as you predicted.

 

[2is]

If they made early games like Killzone 1 for PS3 right now using the latest engines, it could achieve 60fps. KZ4 using an engine from the future on the PS4 could likely get 60fps or more too. The new engines for specific hardware are never 100% efficient.

Either way, no one buys a game based on FPS alone. I suspect many PC gamers have played new games at max settings and dip below 30fps cause they don't have the epic hardware build and I'd be willing to bet some PC gamers here end up doing some games at 30fps too on occasion so don't be a hypocrite over frame rates. I seriously wonder how many PC gamers here will play Metro Last light..etc on medium or low settings just to get high FPS?? I bet no one but the weird nerdy guy.

While this may be true, I'm not sure what your point is in relation to this thread. This is about how capable the PS4 is compared to PC's that are far more powerful, which after dozens of baseless claims, got changed to how capable it is compared to PC's with similar hardware.

 

[Erenhardt]

What? Of course people don't buy a game based on fps, most console gamers don't even know what framerate is.
The only reason this gets mentioned is because what this implies about Galego's PS4 performance fantasies. Like the last 40 pages of this waste of a thread.
And if you're fine with 30fps, great for you. But I usually can't play if it doesn't at least maintain 60fps 95% of the time.


Thief

No benchmarks obviously, but this thread is 200% speculation.

So, your speculations are OK, but Galego's are plain fantasies... IC

 

[2is]

So, your speculations are OK, but Galego's are plain fantasies... IC

One of them passes their speculation off as undeniable fact in addition to mis-quoting and clearly taking bits of information from the whole and weather deliberate or accidental, misinterpreting said information.

There's a big difference between presenting speculation as speculation, vs presenting it as fact while other people correct you along the way.

 

[galego]

My point (as you know of course) is that, according to your own sources, a lot of games are going to target 30fps on PS4 while they happily run at much higher framerates on the PC.
It just makes me wonder what they're going to waste all those imaginary teraflops of performance on.

Hum:

for Shadow Fall the emphasis is placed on a cinematic spectacle rendered at 1080p30. The frame-rate is confirmed to be capped at 30FPS during interviews with the studio, and based on our feed we see this is absolutely 100 per cent stable throughout the entire demo. No drops, no screen tearing - it's a smooth play-through all the way, suggesting that the frame-rate could be running higher if it weren't locked down on this figure.

Still waiting your comments on the high-end i7 with the GTX 680, which could not play the elemental demo at 30 fps unless the resolution was dropped to below 1080p.

About the killzone demo:

Based on specs alone, the PS4 clearly has far more to offer than what we're seeing, and it's worth remembering that Guerrilla would have developed a large chunk of Shadow Fall on incomplete hardware. Our understanding is that final kits based on actual PS4 production hardware are a relatively recent phenomenon, and now the developer has a fixed target to aim for, we may well see significant engine improvements. But if this stands as the level of technical quality we should expect for Shadow Fall's final release, we'll be due for one of the most technically compelling launch titles we've seen in a very long time.

 

[galego]

About games running faster...

http://www.destructoid.com/jon-blow-ps4-games-to-run-faster-than-pc-248474.phtml

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/03/12/j...ware-equivalent-game-will-run-faster-than-pc/

 

[futurefields]

Lol, both those links are about the same guy saying the same thing, which is -

"According to the man behind The Witness, equivalent games will run faster on PS4 than PC."

What PC?

A Core 2 Duo with a 4850, or an i5 2500k with a 7950, or an i7 3770k with SLI GTX 680's?

Dumb articles are dumb.

 

[toyota]

lol all this "potential". again we will all look back and laugh at this thread within a few of years.

 

[2is]

lol... So a developer behind a game exclusive to PS4 is hyping up PS4's potential? And citing the same source from two different publications must mean it's doubly true.

I'd hate to think how many IQ points I've lost reading some of these things.

 

[Cerb]

lol all this "potential". again we will all look back and laugh at this thread within a few of years.

Sure, but we're bored now.

 

[Majcric]

There aren't even that many magic optimizations that get done. It's more like tradeoffs. Developers learn which FX are most important to get that "next-gen look" (HDR, volumetric lighting, motion blur, depth of field etc...) and they sacrifice things like resolution and framerates to get there.

For example, if you really examine Halo 3 vs Halo 4.

Halo 4 renders at a higher native resolution, but if you look close, Halo 3 textures are higher resolution than Halo 4's. Halo 4 has no motion blur whereas Halo 3 does, but Halo 4 appears to have higher poly counts.

I think early Xbox 360 games actually had higher resolution textures and in many cases rendered more objects on screen, and more recent games actually have lower poly counts and lower resolution textures in order to give more headroom for post-processing shader fx to get that "next gen" look.

A lot of the newer Xbox 360 games that have supposed "great graphics" are using bloody awful texturing, they look horrendous when you walk up to a tree or building. Whereas some of the earlier games had some pretty good textures.

It's all about tradeoffs really.

Well said bro. Galileo, should take notes on this and try to learn something instead of gazing at the stars so much.

After the PS4 is launched and doesn't meet the hype there will be an echo of untapped power waiting to happen just like the last console generation.

Hint: this untapped power never happens.

 

[Cerb]

Well said bro. Galileo, should take notes on this and try to learn something instead of gazing at the stars so much.

After the PS4 is launched and doesn't meet the hype there will be an echo of untapped power waiting to happen just like the last console generation.

Hint: this untapped power never happens.

Actually, it does happen, it's just that the untapped power is much smaller than the power we can put to bear though hardware's brute force, and performance per dollar improvements over hardware generations, so the console's relative performance will decay at a lower rate than a PC's. But, this is countered by PCs being replaced or upgraded, which more than negates that, within 1-3 years (well under 3 for high-end PCs, but 2-3 for cheaper gaming PCs).

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

If the PS4 does end up faster at some things I hope it will make people in the PC industry e.g. Micro Soft to make a lean Gaming OS

 

[3DVagabond]

If the PS4 does end up faster at some things I hope it will make people in the PC industry e.g. Micro Soft to make a lean Gaming OS

That would be nice. Or even a "gaming setting"?