Will an i5 2500k be sufficient to keep up with PS4/Xbox 720?

[futurefields]

Will the i5 2500k be sufficient cpu power to last through the next generation of consoles games (Modern Warfare 7, Grand Theft Auto 6 etc etc...) ?

What do you guys think?

 

[Joseph F]

I think that it could easily handle the first generation of 720/PS4 console ports. (Not that there's any real information about either, at the moment)

 

[exar333]

Yes

 

[T_Yamamoto]

Sure.

 

[cmdrdredd]

If your standard is a console, a modern CPU and GPU combo PC won't be held back at all.

 

[Puppies04]

Consoles basically run on the PC equivalent of "low" settings so a 2500K should be able to keep up with them for several years as long as it is paired with a reasonable GPU (and we aren't talking GTX680/7970 here)

 

[Beavermatic]

You have to figure that any nextgen console that is yet to be released has been in development for a few years. They've already decided on things like video cards, cpu's, ram, drives, etc for at least a year and a half, if not further back. Development models have to be produced as do prototypes of production models, a couple years in advanced, that are forwarded to the industry to get a idea of what they will be developing for, what they will be designing accesories, what the limitations will be. Launch games will have been in development for at least a couple of years by the time the consoles are actually released to retail market.

So that standard is likely of hardware a couple years old, and mid-range standards of that time period. And when I mean mid-range hardware, dont expect a midrange CPU or RAM in a console... those are always going to be second rate crap that may not even qualify for entry-level on a PC. The GPU inside of the console is the primary focus. So for your Xbox 720 or PS4, take whatever was mainstream back in 2010 and thats likely what kind of GPU performance youll have in those consoles.

It's almost assured a highend PC from 2009 would still easily outperform the PS4 or Xbox 720. Now the only difference is API standards, they can add last minute additions that Direct X or OpenGL have updated since (yet that can still be restricted by the base hardware they choose).

Any Enthusiast/Gaming/Performance PC from the past 2 years, even mid-range, would easily blast the capabilities and of a PS4 or Xbox 720. Why? Because their console hardware is already years outdated due to their development and release timeframe. It's already old by the time its release compared to PC hardware.

All a console can and ever will be is *literally* a yesteryear entry-to-midrange PC with a controller that cuts corners and uses graphics reduction tweaks (lower polys, blur, fog fx, no AA, terrible texture quality, horrid texture sizes, upscale from a lower native resolution to make you think your running at a higher resolution such as 1080p, color depths and palettes that might be as well be binary, etc) to juice every possible polygon and frame out of it to keep up with the times. The developers also are able to work with one single platform of hardware, instead of a bazillion possible hardware configurations like you have in the PC industry. This lets them heavily optimize the game for the limits of that hardware alone, and also greatly reduces production time and testing. That sounds like a GREAT thing, but not for the advancement of technology or graphics itself... because you can only develop for a single piece of old hardware, so your limited to that on the technical front.

 

[nenforcer]

Intel's manufacturing tech is always ahead of the rest of the industry by at least one node. Your 32nm Sandy Bridge CPU from 2011 is likely to be of the same manufacturing node or only slightly behind any console manufactured for release in fall of 2013.

Intel has been shipping .22nm Ivy Bridge in volume while TSMC is struggling to get out .28nm GPU's for both AMD and nVidia.

 

[Red Hawk]

Next gen consoles will use 8 core Xeon processors and a Radeon HD 7970 GHz edition crossfired with a Geforce GTX 680 for hardware PhysX effects. You'll need a PC 4 years from now to play those games.

 

[yours truly]

I think people underestimate what next gen consoles could potentially bring to the table.

You should remember the 360 was being developed at a time when PC's were struggling to run Doom 3. No PC back in 2005 could run something like BF3 even on ultra low settings but the xbox and PS3 are still chugging away.

If Microsoft and Sony want a 10 year life cycle from their next consoles, they have to be pretty beefy specs and incredibly well optimised. I wouldn't be surprised if Google, Apple or Samsung entered the console market one day too and I wouldn't be surprised if next gen consoles leave up-to-date PC's in their dust.

 

[laputan machine]

I think people underestimate what next gen consoles could potentially bring to the table.

You should remember the 360 was being developed at a time when PC's were struggling to run Doom 3. No PC back in 2005 could run something like BF3 even on ultra low settings but the xbox and PS3 are still chugging away.

If Microsoft and Sony want a 10 year life cycle from their next consoles, they have to be pretty beefy specs and incredibly well optimised. I wouldn't be surprised if Google, Apple or Samsung entered the console market one day too and I wouldn't be surprised if next gen consoles leave up-to-date PC's in their dust.

The companies seems to have harder and harder time making a profit on consoles, and since the customers get them because they're comparably cheap and accessible I do not at all see that xbox 720 or ps4 will be powerhouses. Microsoft seems to want to take their console into a more htpc direction, and the Wii-U appears lackluster in terms of graphics. With Sony's financial woes I doubt they will want to spend anymore on the console than they must.

 

[yours truly]

The companies seems to have harder and harder time making a profit on consoles, and since the customers get them because they're comparably cheap and accessible I do not at all see that xbox 720 or ps4 will be powerhouses. Microsoft seems to want to take their console into a more htpc direction, and the Wii-U appears lackluster in terms of graphics. With Sony's financial woes I doubt they will want to spend anymore on the console than they must.

yeah that a fair point. If Kinect 2 is to be at the heart of the 720 and the rumours are true that it'll have a HD 6670 or similar then it's definitely going to be competing with the WiiU. That's great for children and families but for gamers on the whole it'll be a backward step. It certainly won't have a 10 year life span as the fad will wear off quick. Devs obviously are asking for much more grunt and Microsoft have the clout to develop a powerhouse. They have a massive user base and to alienate those customers and studios like Dice, IW, Epic etc would be foolish. They might as well just release a 360 v2 instead but I reckon they will knock something out that'll be pretty special.

I can see Sony pulling out of the console market after the PS4 and concentrate on mobile gaming instead, leaving an opening for someone bigger..

just as an afterthought. I can imagine Dice reeling off a list of demands they want from the 720 for BF4 - huge maps, full scale destruction, 128 players at 60fps at 1080p and MS are like yeeahhhhh, how about table tennis with the player being a cuddly bear instead with a sparkly star as the ball and a rainbow as the net.

I'd like the cute, weird, fluffy stuff to come from Japan and the hyper realistic alien, terrorist shooter from the states.

slightly ot, but if anyone has seen the film Real Steel with Hugh Jackman. I'm certain Microsoft are teasing as to what kinect 2 is about. At the end of the film, in the stadium, there's advertising hoardings all over for Xbox 720. Hugh Jackman can control a robot via a touch screen display, or voice control or just by moving his body about.

I think this is what kinect 2 will be anyway, pretty much kinect 1 with an optional touch screen display.

 

[shadow_k]

while were on the topic of consoles

what improvemtns will be see other than better hardware (CPU, GPU, RAM and Stroage)

the stroage sytem for the next gen will mostly to be a flash (where the OS is installed at) and hard drive (game saves music etc)

the PS3 can do everything right now so i really dont see a new console coming in 2 years time except wii u

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Will the i5 2500k be sufficient cpu power to last through the next generation of consoles games (Modern Warfare 7, Grand Theft Auto 6 etc etc...) ?

What do you guys think?

I guarantee you it won't be anywhere close to be able to max out the first generation of games with minimum FPS at 60 FPS plus at 1080p max without AA.

Irrespective of your GPU.

Of course some next gen games may run that well (mentioned above) but at least a few or maybe even 25-50% of them won't run anywhere close.

To get acceptable performance you will need a 3770k and to unleash the true power either haswell or its successor will be needed.

Those who think otherwise ought to take a lesson or two in history

 

[GotNoRice]

I guarantee you it won't be anywhere close to be able to max out the first generation of games with minimum FPS at 60 FPS plus at 1080p max without AA.

Irrespective of your GPU.

Of course some next gen games may run that well (mentioned above) but at least a few or maybe even 25-50% of them won't run anywhere close.

To get acceptable performance you will need a 3770k and to unleash the true power either haswell or its successor will be needed.

Those who think otherwise ought to take a lesson or two in history

So a 3770k would give him acceptable performance but a 2500k won't be fast enough? That's a pretty silly statement, don't you think? Most Sandy Bridge chips overclock better than their Ivy Bridge counterparts, enough to make up any IPC difference. My 2500K @ 5Ghz for example, isn't slower than your 3770K at only 4.3. In fact, the opposite is likely the case.

 

[Spjut]

There's an interesting discussion in this thread about the PC's big disadvantage when it comes to draw calls, the dev here think it's going to be a grim future for the PC if it isn't fixed. It's 6 months ago.

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showpost.php?p=1336825638&postcount=80

AMD also took draw calls as an example on the current APIs' issues

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Have a look at bf3 multiplayer benchmarks. 2500k and 2600k are a league apart. Where 2500k is unplayable, 2600k is acceptable,

3770k is even better. And benchmarks only show half the story. The real smoothness int showed in numbers.

3770k may not do a good job then. But it may be tolerable while 2500k is unlikely to be tolerable or at least has a much lower chance.

This is because of HT which newer engines and games will have better support of,

Anyway, Haswill will be needed to max things out. 3960x may not do that well then

And it doesnt matter if sb gets higher fps, it won't be as smooth and will lag compared to a I'vb with slightly lower fps. Not ATM but in the future. You would know if you try every CPU and hardware with every game over the last 10 years.

 

[grkM3]

Have a look at bf3 multiplayer benchmarks. 2500k and 2600k are a league apart. Where 2500k is unplayable, 2600k is acceptable,

3770k is even better. And benchmarks only show half the story. The real smoothness int showed in numbers.

3770k may not do a good job then. But it may be tolerable while 2500k is unlikely to be tolerable or at least has a much lower chance.

This is because of HT which newer engines and games will have better support of,

Anyway, Haswill will be needed to max things out. 3960x may not do that well then

And it doesnt matter if sb gets higher fps, it won't be as smooth and will lag compared to a I'vb with slightly lower fps. Not ATM but in the future. You would know if you try every CPU and hardware with every game over the last 10 years.

Iv ran booth and a overclocked 2500k vs a overclocked 2600k is just the same,I actually get better fps when I shut hyper threading off and run a true 4 thread core.

Im pretty sure next gen systems are not using x86 cpus and wont even use any type of faked cores/hyper threading,they will use true raw cores and prolly wont even be x86 cpus

a 2500k at 4.8k will run fine with a gtx680 and you wont see much going to an 8 threaded chip

 

[poohbear]

You have to figure that any nextgen console that is yet to be released has been in development for a few years. They've already decided on things like video cards, cpu's, ram, drives, etc for at least a year and a half, if not further back. Development models have to be produced as do prototypes of production models, a couple years in advanced, that are forwarded to the industry to get a idea of what they will be developing for, what they will be designing accesories, what the limitations will be. Launch games will have been in development for at least a couple of years by the time the consoles are actually released to retail market.

So that standard is likely of hardware a couple years old, and mid-range standards of that time period. And when I mean mid-range hardware, dont expect a midrange CPU or RAM in a console... those are always going to be second rate crap that may not even qualify for entry-level on a PC. The GPU inside of the console is the primary focus. So for your Xbox 720 or PS4, take whatever was mainstream back in 2010 and thats likely what kind of GPU performance youll have in those consoles.

It's almost assured a highend PC from 2009 would still easily outperform the PS4 or Xbox 720. Now the only difference is API standards, they can add last minute additions that Direct X or OpenGL have updated since (yet that can still be restricted by the base hardware they choose).

Any Enthusiast/Gaming/Performance PC from the past 2 years, even mid-range, would easily blast the capabilities and of a PS4 or Xbox 720. Why? Because their console hardware is already years outdated due to their development and release timeframe. It's already old by the time its release compared to PC hardware.

All a console can and ever will be is *literally* a yesteryear entry-to-midrange PC with a controller that cuts corners and uses graphics reduction tweaks (lower polys, blur, fog fx, no AA, terrible texture quality, horrid texture sizes, upscale from a lower native resolution to make you think your running at a higher resolution such as 1080p, color depths and palettes that might be as well be binary, etc) to juice every possible polygon and frame out of it to keep up with the times. The developers also are able to work with one single platform of hardware, instead of a bazillion possible hardware configurations like you have in the PC industry. This lets them heavily optimize the game for the limits of that hardware alone, and also greatly reduces production time and testing. That sounds like a GREAT thing, but not for the advancement of technology or graphics itself... because you can only develop for a single piece of old hardware, so your limited to that on the technical front.

erm, that's not entirely true. When the PS3 and XBOX 360 were first released, you needed a very high end rig to compete with them.

 

[Beavermatic]

erm, that's not entirely true. When the PS3 and XBOX 360 were first released, you needed a very high end rig to compete with them.

When Xbox 360 was released, I had a SLI'd 7800GTX System running an Athlon 64 that whooped the 360's ass all over the place. Sure that was high end, but even the guys with the 6800's and single 7800's were tromping the 360. Same with the PS3.

In 2007 I was able to run Crysis with a Geforce 8800GTX at nearly max settings on a single card, minus antialiasing.

Crysis, even 5 years later, STILL looks far better than any 360/PS3 game. I wouldnt be suprised if the next consoles would look only as good as crysis, if even that.

 

[Puppies04]

I guarantee you it won't be anywhere close to be able to max out the first generation of games with minimum FPS at 60 FPS plus at 1080p max without AA.

Considering that the consoles won't be "maxing out" the games to the standards you just described and the original question " Will an i5 2500k be sufficient to keep up with PS4/Xbox 720?"I won't even bother replying to the rest of your post.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

You can't explain this LOL

1. Using a 590 not on board

2. Check only Shogun 2 benchmark. It is the only game using a CPU test and not general benchmark.

3. 3570k stock > 2600k at 5Ghz in this game

4. Points to the future

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/04/23/intel-core-i7-3770k-review/7

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Xbox 360 came out in 2005 end

Games of 2005-2007

A64 Winchester compare to 2600k
Ran pretty bad at max settings. Medium was much better. And I had a 1900xtx

A64 Venice compare to 3770k
Newer, better. Not in terms of fps tho. But not good enuf

Ideal: C2D compare to Haswell
Ran great even with 7900GTs

MW and Carbon NFS for instance
Same with SC Double Agent
Same with Rainbow Six Vegas
Same with NWN2
Same with Gothic 3
Oblivion wasn't maxed out for years later tho more bcc of the gpu


I can bet a 100 bucks that there will be at least two games within 12 months of release of either the next xbox or ps4 which won't run at max with no AA even at 1080p with min fps above 50 with a 2500k irrespective of speed, but a good Haswell at stock will do just fine.

 

[NvidiaNerd]

yesss.... by a longshot, the ps4/xbox 760 is a modified "jaguar" cpu with 8 cores (which 4 aren't even used because due to hyperthreading issues with games) so the performance per core is what matters and due to the fact that the console cpu dont consume as much power and arnt overclockable, so 1.6 ghz frequency that they run on isn't going to cut it, and thats a full load as well. while the i5 2500k cpu runs at 95W and is fully overclockable to past 4 ghz, even reaching 5ghz.

 

[JumBie]

How...how did this happen.