Just Cause Dev Claims PS4 Will Out-Power Most PCs For Years

[BrotherRool]

Remember there's a lot of cruft required in making a game run on a PC that brings down it's specs a lot from what they should be on paper. Only last year John Carmack was airing his frustrations that a PC is 10x more powerful than a console, yet the drivers and API's are making it hard to leverage that power appropriately. When you combine that with the fact he's probably talking about the average computer, because you can't make an expensive game on the basis that only people with 16gb PCs can run it, it probably makes sense.

That's definitely there, I won't deny it for a second, but I think console industry shills are making a bigger deal of it than it actually is. A PC that is moderately more powerful than a console will probably run games at worst maybe a little slower than the console in question. To rhyme with your quote, I think Carmack also said that consoles have about double the efficiency of PCs thanks to the reasons you mentioned, a figure I wouldn't go around proudly stating as fact, but one that sounds not far off from reality.

Carmack, also, I've found to be rather full of shit in some of his statements. While the guy definitely knows his shit when it comes to hardware architecture, I have a feeling the quote you're talking about, and others like it, have more to do with him being a sellout ***** (to put it unnecessarily harshly) and a mouthpiece for the primary platforms of his development. Talking about hardware that's literally 15+ times more powerful as if it's hard - in any - fucking - way - to capitalize on that power is absolutely ludicrous.

One thing that also bears mentioning is that in gaming, two times the (effective) power doesn't actually mean as much as it sounds like in every case. Once you get past the basic assets of a game, there's a whole shitload of post-processing that goes on that generally absolutely demolishes framerates. It can literally mean something as relatively trivial as being able to change Anti-Aliasing from 2x to 8x, or something to that extent. The keyword here is can, of course.

What point was I making here? I don't even know at this point. As an addendum, I wouldn't call the 16GB figure you used particularly accurate, because PCs use two different sets of RAM for the system and the GPU, and because I'm not sure the actual RAM usage for a PC version of a console game goes up that much[footnote]Or that the RAM requirements will jump up that high anywhere within the next three-four years. Right now most PCs have at least 8 gigs, with at least 5 gigs being completely free for usage in games. And games rarely get to a gigabyte.[/footnote].

Ah okay, I always thought he was a bit more trustworthy. For what it's worth I don't think he meant that you can't get a lot more out of 15x more powerful computer than a console, but that you can get a lot less out of it than you might think thanks to some inefficiencies

 

[GundamSentinel]

Interesting how many people assume the figures for console hardware mean the same as the figures for PC hardware. The architecture for PC and console hardware is rather different (whatwith one being a dedicated machine and the other not so much). I'm not saying that what the dev claims about the PS4 is true (it is a pretty grand claim and the difference is really not that enormous), but I'm seeing a lot of comments here based on flawed arguments. Not to mention people assuming that just because they have a powerful machine, every PC gamer has one. This forum is hardly valid research material.

 

[3LANCER]

So... PC version of Just Cause 3 will be delayed? You know, like Bethesda does with DLCs?

 

[Da Orky Man]

I think he means it will out power "The average PC" for years to come.

no it think he means that you will actually have to use more power to get that damn thing running i.e. you wont be able to afford your future electricity bills.

A friend of mine managed to dodge that particular hurdle. He built his PC to pull enough power, just over a kilowatt at full blast, I believe, so that it can act as a small-room heater.

 

[devotedsniper]

The only way a PS4 can compete with a gaming pc is because games can be optimized a lot more for a ps4 than a pc simply because they know the exact hardware. A pc is always going to be able to outperform a console in terms of hardware, software optimization is a pc's downfall as dev's have to use hardware interface software such as drivers and directx to interact with the billions of hardware combinations out there.

Also while 8GB is a very good figure for a console, isn't that shared between the CPU and GPU? Where with any half decent pc your looking at 8GB RAM and also another 1GB or more in Graphics RAM.

I'll probably get people going yes but you still have OS's and background software taking up your RAM, to put it in context my rig (16GB RAM)uses 2.2GB to have all it's background processes running, along with skype, steam, 2 browsers and a HD video running, i still have just shy of 14GB to throw at anything, I'd be using less RAM if i closed most things which i don't use and don't forget the PS4 will still have it's OS and background processes running to just not as many. Also i don't even use 12GB of my RAM when I game, I've never seen my RAM usage go over 4GB and thats with all the big AAA games, Far Cry 3 was meant to need an 8GB machine to play it on maxed settings, it never went over 4GB (inc that 2.2GB).

 

[direkiller]

I won't even pretend to know computers, but I'm fairly sure even a cheap lump from PC world has at least 8GB. So does that make the PS4 an overly priced PC world knock off?

most cheep ones have 4gigs
but still
it takes $50,one hand, and 2 minutes to make most computers in the past 6 years have atleast 8gigs of good ram.(excluding time limit on laptops)

Less if you don't mind refurbished value-ram of questionable quality.

 

[afroebob]

Guys, guys guys, I think we misheard him. What he actually said was PS4 will outdo PCs for BEERS, see?

 

[thiosk]

phbttthbbbthhh

bluster, all of it.

I bought a state of the art computer, now 3 years old + but updated with a new video card, and from what I'm seeing so far, I am still kicking the ps4's butt.

 

[BrotherRool]

The reality is that it's largely irrelevant. For the first couple of years when that efficiency allows the cheap parts to perform on par with some of the more expensive ones, sure. But for the last few years we've been sitting at a point where your average gaming PC is able to do:
1) Everything a console can;
2) At 1080p (Which is more than double the 720p resolution that not all console games manage to run at);
3) With better textures;
4) With better draw distances;
5) With better shaders;
6) With better existing anti-aliasing;
7) At, usually, better framerates;

Is that average PC that a gamer has or average PC built specifically for gaming? I was checking Steam and 60% of Steam PCs (which are presumably better than an average non gaming PC) still have at most 4gb RAM which isn't super awesome is it?

 

[Oltsu]

My 5.3GHz i7 3930K at -35C, 1254MHz GTX Titan and 16GB (+ 6GB of GDDR5 of course...) of ram are all laughing.

Newsflash for the dev in question here; most PCs aren't used for gaming. A mid range gaming PC can easily outpace a PS4. Pretty soon after the PS4 launch AMD and Nvidia will be moving to TSMC's 20nm manufacturing process and GPUs will once again experience a generational leap. If the PS4 is easily beaten by PCs now, it'll be left in the dust only a few months after launch.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

8 GB outpowering PCs for years? My 3 year old laptop has 4 GB and I can get a new one for around the same price I got this one for with 8 GB of RAM and integrated graphics.

That is a decent laptop. A bargain gaming PC would easily match it for computing power, and, since it doesn't have the CPU and GPU drawing from the same ram, it would run a lot better. Also, I can run more than games on that PC.

If you take his statement to mean all computers, it's kind of like saying your car is faster than most cars, but when it competes with sports cars it gets completely blow out of the water.

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

snip

Is...is that Gabe Newell there? How did I miss that one? All I can say is well done internet. BTW does the glorious PC gaming master race phrase belong to Yathzee or was he just referencing somebody?

OT: I wonder how much he got for that commercial plug?

Oh well spotted. I was looking at it and wondering why one guy was old and fat while the others were all young and muscular.

 

[antipunt]

I'm sure this isn't a completely out of orbit statement. I mean, I'm sure the ps4 is going to be super beefy.

Problem is, HOW MUCH IS THE DAM THING GONNA COST. SERIOUSLY.

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

The PS4 will outpower more than 50% of PCs, regardless of specs. A PC with similar specs to the PS4 will be easily outpowered by it. Yes, a mid-high end gaming PC will be able to run games much better, with more graphical flourishes, but out of the huge numbers of PC's in the world, I reckon these gaming PC's will be a fairly low percentage of them. Therefore the PS4 WILL outpower most PC's.

That was a true statement back a few years ago, but given the architecture and the power difference between the intel and AMD processors this isn't going to be the case with the current generation of consoles, at least in regards to gaming rigs. What will be the case is that the the PS4 will run smoothly and be able to handle games at much better level than the previous generation ps3. There likely will be a 60 fps standard on games for the next five or six years on the ps4 post release.

Every generation people say that finally developers will forgo effects for IQ and FPS, but we already have the Killzone devs saying that an exclusive launch title will be running at 30 FPS [http://www.vg247.com/2013/02/25/killzone-shadow-fall-demo-runs-at-30fps-digital-foundry-tests-suggest/]. To be honest, that's why I don't take stock of the fact that consoles will be superior because devs can target the specs exactly; it's technically true, but they'll end up targeting pretty explosions instead of the boring parts of visuals like resolution, framerate, and AA.

...So the developers got what they wanted, and they are going to continue doing the 30 fps treatment? After having things run at 60 fps trying to go back to 30 fps generates migraines (and I mean that quite literally).

FWIW I think we will see many more 60fps games on the PS4 than there were on the PS3, especially as the console "matures". Just don't expect 60fps on all titles right off the mark.

 

[Steven Bogos]

It's cute of the unwashed console masses to aspire to one day be as great as the glorious PC gaming master race. Really, we serve as an inspiration to them. It keeps them working hard, and I feel like that's doing the world a service in and of itself.

Do you have this image as a high-resolution wallpaper?

 

[Programmed_For_Damage]

Console can no longer compete so now they are playing catch-up by trying to mirror the PC.

Old news. The original Xbox was pretty much a PC in a bulletproof case.

 

[RicoADF]

Took me only two comments before I saw someone calling 8 GB of RAM underpowered. As is to be expected I guess.

I was kinda concerned that my own computer could only manage 4 GB, due to how often PC gamers seem to scoff at such a "small" ammount... And yet I've had no problems with it at all. The only game I can think of that would actually require me to have more RAM is Rome Total War 2, which I'm undecided on.

I only have 8GB as anymore is wasteful on games and general usage. Heck it works fine for modeling and using PS, video editing etc.
Reason is that currently games are still 32bit and this cannot use more than 4GB of ram, and most don't even use 2. Hopefully PS4 etc will raise that.