NextGen Console Graphics And Effects on PC (E3 Coverage!)

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

You mean it's finally getting to Crysis-levels from 2008?

Has anything far surpassed modded Crysis 1 yet?

 

[Erenhardt]

If the PCI-E controller was not located on the CPU die, then maybe latency would be more of an issue..

PCI-E connection have huge latencies.

http://www.plxtech.com/files/pdf/technical/expresslane/Overcoming_PCIe_Latency_PLX.pdf

The availability of low-latency switches from PLX Technology makes the job of
everyone producing a PCIe-based infrastructure easier. These industry-leading switches
drop latency to as low as 110ns, or 87 percent lower than competing devices on the
market. Low-latency switches such as these should be the first choice of system
engineers interested in producing high-performance systems.

Now, here you really want to use pigeons.

 

[aigomorla]

I present to you XBOX1 !!!

uhhh wait.. that looks like a Sandy-E system with a GTX card...

Explain please...

There is no way in hell a 500 dollar console will meet even half way to that system which is hiding under that cabinet pretending to be XBOX1.

 

[TestKing123]

PCI-E connection have huge latencies.

http://www.plxtech.com/files/pdf/technical/expresslane/Overcoming_PCIe_Latency_PLX.pdf

Now, here you really want to use pigeons.

You have no idea what you're talking about. You don't even know what you're referencing in that link. Modern GPU's don't even come close to saturating the PCI-e lanes. And, the only time it is really relevant for gamers is if video memory exceeds GPU memory and texture swapping occurs. Not really a problem for video cards with 2GB of memory or more.

Of course, when talking about a unified architecture where GPU and CPU shares memory resources, then bandwidth becomes crucially important. This has always been the case for integrated chipsets in years past and no different for APUs. It should now be painfully obvious why this isn't relevant for dedicated GPUs on the desktop. Desktops don't need GDDR5 for system memory because it isn't bandwidth starved to begin with. That, and GDDR5 latency is atrocious compared to DDR3, which is far more important for system memory. The fastest DDR3 is with the lowest CL timings. GDDR5 CL timings are nowhere near as tight as DDR3, and since bandwidth isn't a problem to begin with, introducing that extra latency is going to SLOW your system down. That's why GDDR5 isn't on the desktops, NOT EVEN FOR SUPERCOMPUTING/PROFESSIONAL use, and why it's for GPU purposes only where bandwidth is far more important than latency (hence the G in GDDR5).

All of this is common knowledge by the way, except for console fanboys it seems.

 

[Vesku]

http://www.sisoftware.net/?d=qa&f=gpu_mem_latency

Depending on implementation specifics tightly integrated GDDR5 for unified memory doesn't necessarily have to have "huge" latencies.

 

[finbarqs]

I present to you XBOX1 !!!

uhhh wait.. that looks like a Sandy-E system with a GTX card...

Explain please...

There is no way in hell a 500 dollar console will meet even half way to that system which is hiding under that cabinet pretending to be XBOX1.

duh! it's not overclocked!!!!

 

[notty22]

PlayStation 4 is destroying the Xbox One in Amazon customer poll

It's gone higher.
https://www.facebook.com/AmazonVideoGames?v=app_153839431317646&rest=1

 

[hawtdawg]

There have been statements from game devs, 2X would be the lower end of the claim. But also common sense applies, look at the available power of the Xbox360 and compare that to a PC with about the same power, then consider visually what was done on each platform.

I think you're a bit off on this. I had a laptop for several years that hat an ATI 3650 with DDR2. The GPU was about on par with the 360's GPU from everything I've read (it was a bit slower than an x1950 pro). I could run any cross platform game at 720p on mediumish-high settings at 30 fps or more, and this was in 2010, so the systems had been out for a while.

You also have to remember that at no point were the 360 and PS4 producing better graphics than a PC, and by your claims, they should have been blowing it out of the water. This time around, we're dealing with systems that are relatively half as powerful.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

They should just scrap it at this point.

 

[hawtdawg]

I don't know why anyone is arguing about latencies, GDDR5 has maybe twice the latency of DDR3. Don't forget that MS had no issues using GDDR3 in the 360 either. CPU memory latency is maybe the least important aspect of the performance of these systems. The lack of bandwidth is going to hurt the XB1 100 times more than latency will hurt the PS4.

 

[aigomorla]

u do know sony was caught streaming at E1.

It wasnt even the PS4 which was doing demos.

Personally both companies have been caught with there pants down speaking fud.

I don't know why anyone is arguing about latencies, GDDR5 has maybe twice the latency of DDR3. Don't forget that MS had no issues using GDDR3 in the 360 either. CPU memory latency is maybe the least important aspect of the performance of these systems. The lack of bandwidth is going to hurt the XB1 100 times more than latency will hurt the PS4.

u know what is gonna hurt these systems more is the fact its dependant on an Optical Drive solution.
Loading screens will take FOREVER!

Unless the game did an full install on a hard disk, and even then the HDD would have limited space...
the weakest bottleneck in all these consoles will be the optical or mechanical drive it uses.

LOL i hope we dont go back to cartridges... oh man.. usb3.0 DRM cartridges which look like flash drives would be hilarious cuz we did a full 360.

 

[hawtdawg]

I think we'll see large/full installations with these systems. There's really no way to do it otherwise. The HD's should allow for several games to be installed at once, so I don't see it being a real problem.

 

[24601]

u do know sony was caught streaming at E1.

It wasnt even the PS4 which was doing demos.

Personally both companies have been caught with there pants down speaking fud.



u know what is gonna hurt these systems more is the fact its dependant on an Optical Drive solution.
Loading screens will take FOREVER!

Unless the game did an full install on a hard disk, and even then the HDD would have limited space...
the weakest bottleneck in all these consoles will be the optical or mechanical drive it uses.

LOL i hope we dont go back to cartridges... oh man.. usb3.0 DRM cartridges which look like flash drives would be hilarious cuz we did a full 360.

Console tards are like Apple tards.

They have their own personalized Reality Distortion Bubble.

This is why Microsoft even went into the hardware business in the first place.

It's because you can get away with giving less stuff for more money.

Hopefully stuff like Tegra 5 and it's counterparts in Apple ecosystem and Mali and PowerVR and Adreno get their gear up to snuff quickly enough to force this to be the last home console generation and push the real developers back to PC (and some of them of course to handhelds).

 

[hawtdawg]

Console tards are like Apple tards.

They have their own personalized Reality Distortion Bubble.

This is why Microsoft even went into the hardware business in the first place.

It's because you can get away with giving less stuff for more money.

Hopefully stuff like Tegra 5 and it's counterparts in Apple ecosystem and Mali and PowerVR and Adreno get their gear up to snuff quickly enough to force this to be the last home console generation and push the real developers back to PC (and some of them of course to handhelds).

I think we'll see this generation favor PC's the most. The majority of games will probably be made PC first, and then down-scaled for the consoles.

 

[railven]

u know what is gonna hurt these systems more is the fact its dependant on an Optical Drive solution.
Loading screens will take FOREVER!

Unless the game did an full install on a hard disk, and even then the HDD would have limited space...
the weakest bottleneck in all these consoles will be the optical or mechanical drive it uses.

LOL i hope we dont go back to cartridges... oh man.. usb3.0 DRM cartridges which look like flash drives would be hilarious cuz we did a full 360.

Well this is odd, since XB1 doesn't use optical drives for game play. The disc is just an install disc, you can't play XB1 games off the disc. Full install required for every game.

Not sure how PS4 is handling it, me thinks since they aren't going full DRM, games will have option to load off disc.

 

[cmdrdredd]

u do know sony was caught streaming at E1.

It wasnt even the PS4 which was doing demos.

Personally both companies have been caught with there pants down speaking fud.



u know what is gonna hurt these systems more is the fact its dependant on an Optical Drive solution.
Loading screens will take FOREVER!

Unless the game did an full install on a hard disk, and even then the HDD would have limited space...
the weakest bottleneck in all these consoles will be the optical or mechanical drive it uses.

LOL i hope we dont go back to cartridges... oh man.. usb3.0 DRM cartridges which look like flash drives would be hilarious cuz we did a full 360.

See you have no links to back up your statement. However I have a link that says otherwise.


http://www.playstationlifestyle.net...n-pcs-with-nvidia-cards-bodes-ill-for-launch/

It is not true as the article says that “all E3 demos run on hi-end PCs”. The Witness was running on PS4 dev hardware, and it looked to me like all the other PS4 games were running on dev kits as well.

Dev hardware is the hardware that will be in the final retail box, but in a less consumer-oriented package.

Dev kits almost always have more RAM yeah. Better CPU+GPU, no…

All the indies I know were running on the PS4.

We worked very hard to get our game running on the actual PS4 hardware and operating system in time for the show. As did many other devs.

 

[Greenlepricon]

Console tards are like Apple tards.

They have their own personalized Reality Distortion Bubble.

This is why Microsoft even went into the hardware business in the first place.

It's because you can get away with giving less stuff for more money.

Hopefully stuff like Tegra 5 and it's counterparts in Apple ecosystem and Mali and PowerVR and Adreno get their gear up to snuff quickly enough to force this to be the last home console generation and push the real developers back to PC (and some of them of course to handhelds).

There's no reason to call anyone a tard for any reason. If you have the cash to blow on an apple product and like them, then that's all well and dandy (though admittedly I hate them). My 7950 last year cost me $330. A ps4 would only cost me $70 more, and would have probably taken 1/10th the time to set up than the time I spent just replacing that gpu. In my opinion there aren't many options that I can get that are that cheap, easy to set up, and will let me have fun without worrying about settings and the like. I can't easily invite friends over and say "bring your laptops so we can all run Battlefield 3". In fact only about 2 of my friends have the hardware to do that at some level that looks moderately nice on the PC. I know consoles hold back some potential in games, but I still enjoy playing games whether or not they all look as good as Crysis 3. I think they have an important role in gaming, and hoping that they disappear is like asking for all of that to be thrown in the garbage.

 

[Udgnim]

Intel's been caught faking

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Otcge1cn8Os

 

[24601]

There's no reason to call anyone a tard for any reason. If you have the cash to blow on an apple product and like them, then that's all well and dandy (though admittedly I hate them). My 7950 last year cost me $330. A ps4 would only cost me $70 more, and would have probably taken 1/10th the time to set up than the time I spent just replacing that gpu. In my opinion there aren't many options that I can get that are that cheap, easy to set up, and will let me have fun without worrying about settings and the like. I can't easily invite friends over and say "bring your laptops so we can all run Battlefield 3". In fact only about 2 of my friends have the hardware to do that at some level that looks moderately nice on the PC. I know consoles hold back some potential in games, but I still enjoy playing games whether or not they all look as good as Crysis 3. I think they have an important role in gaming, and hoping that they disappear is like asking for all of that to be thrown in the garbage.

What makes consoles more expensive is the Games and the fact that consoles invented the DLC model which the PC gamer has shunned like the plague.

It's like saying Smartphones are $99 or Free when really you are just ignoring the deferred costs.

TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) matters, and consoles and Smartphones make almost all their money on the fact that American consumers are just too stupid to care about TCO.

 

[RussianSensation]

u know what is gonna hurt these systems more is the fact its dependant on an Optical Drive solution.
Loading screens will take FOREVER!

XB1 requires all games to be installed on HDD to be played. For PS4, you have an option of replacing the HDD with an SSD right away or later in life just add a 1TB SSD. I believe PS4 might even have a SATA 3 connection. Finally, is waiting 1 minute instead of 30 seconds for a game to load such a deal-breaker when you have a 2-3 hour gaming session?

The best thing about these consoles are 8GB of system memory and x86 CPUs. This means developers will be able to port cross-platform titles to the PC a lot easier. Also, because the systems are DX11.1 compliant, we should see DX11 effects become even more predominant on the PC which is a great thing!

Hopefully stuff like Tegra 5 and it's counterparts in Apple ecosystem and Mali and PowerVR and Adreno get their gear up to snuff quickly enough to force this to be the last home console generation and push the real developers back to PC (and some of them of course to handhelds).

What people do not understand is that AAA games and existing game development costs a lot of $ if you want high production values. These types of games, especially $50-60 games, will not work on smartphones/tablets due to small screen and awful controls. The next gen console may be streaming from the cloud but we need consoles because not everyone likes the idea of gaming at a desk on a PC in terms of actual comfort. Not to mention consoles destroy PCs when it comes to social gaming & sports games. Consoles and PCs can co-exist, allowing for a large installed userbase, and then developers are more likely to make games since with a large userbase, there is less risk for achieving your revenue targets. Plus, the average console game costs more $, which means console gaming profits are likely higher per game than on the PC, which is why so many developers keep focusing on consoles.

TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) matters, and consoles and Smartphones make almost all their money on the fact that American consumers are just too stupid to care about TCO.

Ford F150 has continued to be the best selling pick-up truck. I am sure pick-up truck owners will attest to its long-term reliability, excellent cargo utility, ability to drive on rough roads/high snow, tow their friend's broken down vehicle, etc. However, there are those people who do not care at all about the F150 or its advantages and would rather get a Porsche Cayman S. The reason consoles and PCs co-exist is because consoles offer certain things PCs don't. For certain gaming genres & social gaming, the PC is inferior.

As far as cost goes, you can buy 1 console for 2 of your kids and have them play multiplier games together with their friends. Let's say if 2 of your kids have 2 friends, all 4 would need $1000 PCs for a similar experience and those PCs would need to be upgraded over the next 8 years many times. Not only does that cost more per 1 family but you'd need to find that many families who are even interested in building PCs. You also didn't consider that not everyone in the world lives in a 2000-4000 sq ft homes and not everyone has an office for a computer/or space for a desktop tower in their condo. A lot of people would nowadays find it more convenient to have a laptop (work/travel/school) + console + tablet. For many people having a desktop + laptop has become redundant. Also, not everyone knows how to build PCs like we do, which means their gaming PC costs hundreds more.

Finally a lot of professionals who already work all day on the computer in the office may detest the idea of coming home and gaming for another 2-3 hours at a desk. They may want to sit and relax in their couch on a living room and kick it back on a 65 inch plasma.

When PS3 came out, it cost $600 and the graphics were far inferior to the PC. We had Crysis 1. Now we are seeing a $400 console and game graphics are very close to the best the PC has to offer right out of the gate. Crysis 3 on PC vs. launch PS4/XB1 games is nowhere near as ground-breaking as Crysis 1 was vs. 360/PS3 games. In the next 2-3 years game developers on the PC will need to work extra hard to attract PC gamers to the platform. With NV selling GTX780/Titan for $650-1000, the average consumer not knowledgeable about PC gaming probably thinks it takes a $650-1000 GPU alone to max out PC games vs. $400 PS4.

 

[24601]

XB1 requires all games to be installed on HDD to be played. For PS4, you have an option of replacing the HDD with an SSD right away or later in life just add a 1TB SSD. I believe PS4 might even have a SATA 3 connection. Finally, is waiting 1 minute instead of 30 seconds for a game to load such a deal-breaker when you have a 2-3 hour gaming session?

The best thing about these consoles are 8GB of system memory and x86 CPUs. This means developers will be able to port cross-platform titles to the PC a lot easier. Also, because the systems are DX11.1 compliant, we should see DX11 effects become even more predominant on the PC which is a great thing!



What people do not understand is that AAA games and existing game development costs a lot of $ if you want high production values. These types of games, especially $50-60 games, will not work on smartphones/tablets due to small screen and awful controls. The next gen console may be streaming from the cloud but we need consoles because not everyone likes the idea of gaming at a desk on a PC in terms of actual comfort. Not to mention consoles destroy PCs when it comes to social gaming & sports games. Consoles and PCs can co-exist, allowing for a large installed userbase, and then developers are more likely to make games since with a large userbase, there is less risk and more ability to sell more units. Plus, the average console game costs more $, which means console gaming profits are likely higher per game sold than on the PC, which is why so many developers keep focusing on consoles.



Ford F150 has continued to be the best selling pick-up truck. I am sure pick-up truck owners will attest to its long-term reliability, excellent cargo utility, ability to drive on rough roads/high snow, tow their friend's broken down vehicle, etc. However, there are those people who do not care at all about the F150 or its advantages and would rather get a Porsche Cayman S. The reason consoles and PCs co-exist is because consoles offer certain things PCs don't. For certain gaming genres & social gaming, the PC is inferior.

As far as cost goes, you can buy 1 console for 2 of your kids and have them play multiplier games together with their friends. Let's say if 2 of your kids have 2 friends, all 4 would need $1000 PCs for a similar experience and those PCs would need to be upgraded over the next 8 years many times. Not only does that cost more per 1 family but you'd need to find that many families who are even interested in building PCs. You also didn't consider that no everyone lives in a 3000 sq ft homes and not everyone has an office for a computer/or space for a desktop tower. A lot of people would nowadays find it more convenient to have a laptop (work/travel/school) + console + tablet. For many people having a desktop + laptop has become redundant. Also, not everyone knows how to build PCs like we do, which means their gaming PC costs hundreds more.

Zero sum game man, Zero sum game.

If you destroy one of the players, the other players gobble up the rest.

If consoles are destroyed, PCs will get most of the devs with Smartphones/Mobile devices getting the rest.

There's nothing stopping Microsoft or Sony from coming out with an AMD APU that happened to be exactly the same as the hardware they have right now and selling it as a PC.

Walled gardens are just monopoly grabs to fragment markets artificially lowering competition so as to extract maximum profit from them.

Only ones getting shafted are the consumers in this equation.

This is basic economics.

You destroy the walled garden monopolies of the consoles and those "special sauce" things you attribute to the consoles suddenly stop becoming "special sauce" and are instead incorporated as PC gaming traits.

 

[AnandThenMan]

There's nothing stopping Microsoft or Sony from coming out with an AMD APU that happened to be exactly the same as the hardware they have right now and selling it as a PC.

So remind me again why they are bothering to make a console?

 

[RussianSensation]

If consoles are destroyed, PCs will get most of the devs with Smartphones/Mobile devices getting the rest.

What makes you think smartphones/mobile developers have any interest in making blockbuster AAA titles for $100-200 million?

You are also implying that if consoles are destroyed, console gamers will shift to PC gaming and mobile/smartphone gaming to compensate for the lost profits developers currently get from console gaming. If this doesn't happen, the installed userbase on the PC will be far smaller than the overall installed userbase of consoles + PCs. That would make game profits fall significantly because the costs to design AAA games are fixed.

There's nothing stopping Microsoft or Sony from coming out with an AMD APU that happened to be exactly the same as the hardware they have right now and selling it as a PC.

I don't understand your point. They just did exactly that, minus the Windows 8 OS and mouse/kb. XB1/PS4 are PCs with minor customization. If you are talking about MS/Sony doing a custom in-house design and not hiring AMD, then this strategy has already failed when Sony dumped millions of dollars into the failed CELL. MS and Sony are better served sourcing professionally designed products from Intel, AMD and NV, rather than doing in-house designs.

Walled gardens are just monopoly grabs to fragment markets artificially lowering competition so as to extract maximum profit from them.

That's because you view consoles and PCs as direct substitute products. In your mind whatever a console can do, so can a PC. This is a false premise. PC fails at initial start up cost, fails at social gaming with friends, fails at sports games, and fails from ease of use in comparison. With GeForce experience, the PC is getting closer and closer to the console gaming experience thanks to JHH.

I view consoles and PCs as trucks and sports cars. A console has far lower start-up cost, allows me to play with 4 friends in 1 living room without needing to spend $4000 on 4 PCs + Monitors and it'll last a lot longer than my PC. My PC is like a sports car - it offers the best performance but only I want to use it. I don't want to share my sports car with 4 friends since I bought it for myself and not for my friends. Also, I enjoy the tinkering itself.

I look at consoles and PCs as servicing completely different purposes, even those both can play games, just like a truck and a sports car serve different usage patterns even though both are automobiles.

Only ones getting shafted are the consumers in this equation. This is basic economics.

Consumers were given a choice from the 1980s whether to buy a console and PC. Since consumers keep buying either or both, the market is working as intended providing choice to consumers. Since consumers have embraced more options, consoles and PCs can be viewed both as complimentary and as substitute products.

You destroy the walled garden monopolies of the consoles and those "special sauce" things you attribute to the consoles suddenly stop becoming "special sauce" and are instead incorporated as PC gaming traits.

Consoles are not monopolies since consumers have alternatives for their gaming needs. You seem to have a huge problem with consoles but have been unable to explain why, while ignoring that PCs have major disadvantages for millions of people. If you think consoles hold back PC gaming graphics, the same has been true since Crysis 1/Metro 2033. At least now we are getting a bump in their specs so that the PC gaming graphics can once again start to advance.

 

[24601]

What makes you think smartphones/mobile developers have any interest in making blockbuster AAA titles for $100-200 million?

You are also implying that if consoles are destroyed, console gamers will shift to PC gaming and mobile/smartphone gaming to compensate for the lost profits developers currently get from console gaming. If this doesn't happen, the installed userbase on the PC will be far smaller than the overall installed userbase of consoles + PCs. That would make game profits fall significantly because the costs to design AAA games are fixed.



I don't understand your point. They just did exactly that, minus the Windows 8 OS and mouse/kb. XB1/PS4 are PCs with minor customization. If you are talking about MS/Sony doing a custom in-house design and not hiring AMD, then this strategy has already failed when Sony dumped millions of dollars into the failed CELL. MS and Sony are better served sourcing professionally designed products from Intel, AMD and NV, rather than doing in-house designs.



That's because you view consoles and PCs are direct substitute products. In your mind whatever a console can do, so can a PC. This is a false premise. PC fails at initial start up cost, fails at social gaming with friends, fails at sports games, and fails from ease of use in comparison. With GeForce experience, the PC is getting closer and closer to the console gaming experience thanks to JHH.

I view consoles and PCs are trucks and sports cars. A console has far lower start-up cost, allows me to play with 4 friends in 1 living room without needing to spend $4000 on 4 PCs + Monitors and it'll last a lot longer than my PC. My PC is like a sports car - it offers the best performance but only I want to use it. I don't want to share my sports car with 4 friends since I bought it for myself and not for my friends. Also, I enjoy the tinkering itself.

I look at consoles and PCs as servicing completely different purposes, even those both can play games, just like a truck and a sports car serve different usage patterns even though both are automobiles.



Consumers were given a choice from the 1980s whether to buy a console and PC. Since consumers keep buying either or both, the market is working as intended providing choice to consumers. Since consumers have embraced more options, consoles and PCs can be viewed both as complimentary and as substitute products.



Consoles are not monopolies since consumers have alternatives for their gaming needs. You seem to have a huge problem with consoles but have been unable to explain why, while ignoring that PCs have major disadvantages for millions of people. If you think consoles hold back PC gaming graphics, the same has been true since Crysis 1/Metro 2033. At least now we are getting a bump in their specs so that the PC gaming graphics can once again start to advance.

You really have compartmentalized your mind to a very high degree.

Your post does not agree with itself.

You can have one or the other, not both.

You say Xbox One/PS4 and PC are the same, only when it suits the particular part of the argument where it would suit you.

You make no allowances to the fact that none of the "exclusive" things about consoles are actually hard-ware limited, especially not this generation.

You use the hypothetical outcome with no change that would result from that hypothetical outcome, such as assuming that a PC that does what the XBox One or PS4 does is impossible (by some internal compartmentalization again)

Truly amazing spinster. I bet people actually believe these logical fallacies of yours.

 

[ShintaiDK]

PlayStation 4 is destroying the Xbox One in Amazon customer poll

It's gone higher.
https://www.facebook.com/AmazonVideoGames?v=app_153839431317646&rest=1

Xbox One is also an extension of Microsofts extreme arrogance to its consumers the last few years. And just like Windows 8, most people simply reject it.

Even with same hardware, for me it would still be a no brainer to pick the PS4, if I had to pick any of the two.