PC is "Far Superior" to Next-Gen Consoles, Says Nvidia

[fenrizz]

PC has a larger library including EVERY previous console generation and the GTX Titan kicks the crap out of EVERY consoles GPU so it's not really that surprising. If you want high-end gaming just put in 4 titans in quad-SLI and crank everything up to 11 at 4K+ resolutions. Can you get such power in a console?

Even as a PC Gaming Elitist myself I have to ask if you can get that kind of power in under a 400 dollar package...cause last I checked that was about half the price of one Titan.

There is no question that running four titans in quad SLI will hammer the ever living dogshit out of anything that any console can do, but you've essentially also spent $4,000 to do it.

I'm no console apologist, I don't use my XBox 360 for anything but watching TV shows on demand and I barely use it for that now that I have Netflix on my Nexus 7 but regardless of that, you have to be somewhat impressed with what the PS4 is doing at its price point....the XBox One...not so much.

PS4 price point..... plus playstation plus.

2 years of PS+ is 100$

So to have a ps4 for two years is already 500$

PCPartPicker part list [http://pcpartpicker.com/p/2bBw1] / Price breakdown by merchant [http://pcpartpicker.com/p/2bBw1/by_merchant/] / Benchmarks [http://pcpartpicker.com/p/2bBw1/benchmarks/]

CPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor [http://pcpartpicker.com/part/amd-cpu-fd6300wmhkbox] ($117.96 @ OutletPC)
Motherboard: Asus M5A78L-M LX PLUS Micro ATX AM3+ Motherboard [http://pcpartpicker.com/part/asus-motherboard-m5a78lmlxplus] ($39.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill Sniper Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1866 Memory [http://pcpartpicker.com/part/gskill-memory-f314900cl9d8gbsr] ($52.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive [http://pcpartpicker.com/part/western-digital-internal-hard-drive-wd10ezex] ($54.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: MSI Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition 2GB Video Card [http://pcpartpicker.com/part/msi-video-card-r78702gd5toc] ($149.99 @ Newegg)
Case: HEC Enterprise MicroATX Mid Tower Case [http://pcpartpicker.com/part/hec-case-enterprise] ($9.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair Builder 500W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply [http://pcpartpicker.com/part/corsair-power-supply-cx500] ($25.99 @ Newegg)
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 (OEM) (64-bit) [http://pcpartpicker.com/part/microsoft-os-gfc02050] ($79.98 @ OutletPC)
Total: $516.88
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-11-29 20:27 EST-0500)


Pretty much the same price as a ps4+2 years of ps+ and outdoes the ps4. If you already have an OS or use steam os then it is less.

You forget to include the free AAA and indie games that comes with a subscription for Playstation+.

Anyway, of course a (new) PC is going to be more powerful than a console but that is missing the point.
Or rather, shooting in the opposite direction of the point entirely.

 

[Vylox]

I still find it funny that these consoles are less machine than my 2+ year old tablet.... Which cost less than the consoles! (Price of my tablet new, $400..)
Its also interesting to note that for under $400 one could get a laptop that outperforms the new consoles.... for less than $400 one can easily get a tablet that outperforms those same consoles. And for under $400 a person can get a decent gaming desktop that outperforms these consoles.



Seriously. This isn't news or anything, its pure PR.

 

[Furism]

d viability moving forward.

I've been hearing this for like 13 years (PS2 release) Also games on PC tend to be cheaper on average than on the console, so you need to factor that in. Personally I think the solution is indeed smaller form-factor PCs, with optional external components using Thunderbold or USB 3.0.

Or, ideally, an external GPU that I can connect/disconnect from my laptop. When I'm at home I can get high-end graphics, but then I can still travel and have all my stuff with me without going through the hassles of synchronizing docs and all that. I've seen some prototypes Thunderbold-connected external GPUs (until recently, USB couldn't be as fast as Thunderbolt) but they were not market ready (being prototypes). I think Nvidia should investigate this more than small form factor PCs. Anybody can build small form-factor PCs. Not everybody can make an external GPU.

 

[not_you]

Yep... Nvidia got it right...
A decently built PC (Within the past 3 years) is better than the consoles out this week....

Simple...

That pretty much says it all....

 

[GundamSentinel]

To be honest, I can nwever tell the damn difference in gameplay or graphics anyway. My PC copy of Bioshock Infinite looked and felt the same as my mates 360 version. My PC version of Borderlands 2 looked and felt the same as my PS3 copy. My Assassins Creed 3 PC copy wouldnt even fucking play, but my PS3 copy had no problems.

It all feels the same to me to be honest. The only difference I notice between my PC and my consoles is that my back hurts a lot less when playing the latter....

Same. Gaming to me is more than graphics. Even when I see the difference in graphics I just don't care.

For me the big advantage of a console it that you can buy it and don't have to worry about it any more. Just put in a game, lie on the couch and play it. The fact is that I've been able to use my PS3 to play practically every new release I like for the past 6 years without buying any new hardware and without faffing about trying to get it to work properly. PC cheaper? Maybe, but not for me.

 

[Flutterguy]

Just tell the developers to reverse current mentality to PC-first mentality, and it might work. But 90% of them probably don't even think of the difference between KB+M and controller, which can produce nigh-unplayable ports.

Just plug in a controller. Worst case scenario you will have to get 1-2 mods to make it work for any particular game.

Seriously though computers are a commonplace staple of the modern home. They can run games with much better graphics, and do well, everything else better then consoles too. This is why the xbox focused so much on switching between programs and interworking social media, gimmicks are the only thing keeping them relevant.

 

[Snotnarok]

That's as may be, Matt Wright, but if you cannot provide that superior experience at a price competitive with the console option the flailing and failing global economy simply will not be able to bear the price.

In terms of gaming - a standardized product like the consoles or, soon, the Steam Box is much easier to plan for, requires less testing across the dozens of possible hardware combinations and is, thus, somewhat easier to plan for.

I love my PC but I just don't see its continued viability moving forward.

But that's not exactly true when the numbers are added up when gaming on PC

You can make a pretty nice gaming PC for 500-600 okay yes, that's expensive but when buying the games is where you're saving far far more money. The deals have been head spinning, Batman Arkham Asylum & City GoTY, Scribblenauts, FEAR 1-3 MK Kollection, few other titles for $5 bucks total? How much would that cost even going off used prices? Many games are currently 50-70% or more off on steam, origin, green man gaming, amazon. That's something you don't see on the other end, yes decent deals like $5-$15 off but 75%? Not unless it's a bomb of a game.
$60 per controller, proprietary headset connectors, monthly fees for online play and features? You can get a pretty solid keyboard and mouse set up for PC for cheap, or hell, use your old PS2, 360...Genesis, SNES controllers if you want with a cheap adapter, net is free, headsets you can do any you'd like pretty much, even bluetooth phone headsets if you have one.

On top of that you can just do more, I'm an artist so make art on my PC and hook it up to my TV and play games with friends with my old 360's controllers. ...Yeah I'm aware saying doing art is a rather specific desire but well what else do you plug when you love doing something?

Sure the start up is cheaper but god damn the only reason I grab a console game is if it's exclusive or handheld...Love my handhelds D:

 

[Artlover]

Yep... Nvidia got it right...
A decently built PC (Within the past 3 years) is better than the consoles out this week....

You give the PS4 & XB1 too much credit. A cheap 5+ year old eMachine can out perform either.

The fundamental problem of the XB1 and PS4 is they are just low/mid spec'ed PC's that were already outdated when they were designed years ago, and yet, struggling to do 720 @ 30fps with few games running at 60fps or 1080p.

That is not next gen. That is not even current gen. The Xbox360 and PS3 already do 720 @ 60fps with no issues at all and can do 1080 @ 30fps with a bit of effort. Hell, even the Gamecube from the 6th generation can do 1080.

A decent computer from 10 years ago can easily run 1960x1280 @ 60 fps all day long.

Lets ignore GFX for a minute. Let's talk CPU. Lets look at the XB1 as an example. Do you realize that it's actual performance is barely any better than the Xbox360. Why? While, the XB1 has 8 cores. 2 are reserved for the OS, only 6 are used for gaming, and are only running at 1.75 GHz. The X360 was 3 cores at 3.2 GHz. That translates into 10.5GHz vs 9.6GHz of processing power. Not much differences, and it shows.

I'm not impressed by what I have seen by either the XB1 or the PS4. Neither gave me any reason to buy them. Every game demo I've seen does nothing but reinforce the idea that the Xbox360 and PS3 are equally as good and I might as well just keep my old systems and my money.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

And cue the people tearing their throats out over which piece of hardware they enjoy playing their games on better in 3, 2, 1.

ERMAGHERD, NVIDIA RR STUPID, MY MICROWAVE OVEN IS BEST TO PLAY COD GHOSTS WITH.

To be fair, yes, my microwave is the best experience I've had with CoD Ghosts.

Back on topic: what nVidia said is pointless, and the title should be changed as it seems a bit bait-y.

They only said that PCs are way more powerful than next gen consoles, which is true, but the title might mislead people.

Off topic gripe: WHY WONT UBISOFT PATCH AC IV ALREADY, FFS.

I BOUGHT A FUCKING 670 LIKE A MONTH AGO, AND AC IV DOESNT EVEN LOOK THAT GOOD, YET MY CARD STRUGGLES TO RUN IT ABOVE 30 FPS ON MAX.

WHAT THE FUCK MAN.

It feels like next gen ports are following a trend of being badly optimised.

Pssstt, get 3D3Overrider and force vsync and triple buffering.
Pretty much solves the under 30fps issue on every pc.

OT:
Wow, I never knew Nvidia, I never knew....

Vsync is off.

I always turn it off when investigating how well the game can run on my pc.

And when on max, its at 30-40 fps when I am just exploring an island, on ship battles it could very well drop to like, 20.

I don't play it on max, but the fact that I can't at a decent framerate pisses me off, as my card more than meets the recommended requirements, and can run Far Cry 3 on Max at a constant 60fps.

Weird, I had the same problem up to the point where I installed D3Doverrider and forced vsync and triple buffering.
Got the fix off the steam forum, solved the fps problems for pretty much everyone in the thread.

I have now have around 30-40fps on sea and 40-60in towns.

EDIT:If I remember correctly the vsync option is broken, so it doesn't matter whether you have it on or not in game.
Forcing the vsync through d3doverrider, nvidia panel or Ati's equivalent should supposedly fixing it.

^ Those are pretty much my averages too.

I only ever turn vsync on if:

1) I can run the game on max at +60fps

2) Screen tearing is horrendous

But usually I test my rig before vsync, as that can impact frames significantly.

But GOSH DANG, if I can devour Far Cry 3 on max, and Witcher 2 at near max(no uber) both at 60fps, then why is AC IV so problematic?

Because Ubi are lazy.

 

[Colt47]

It's almost as if Nvidia forgets that the primary reason consoles exist is to provide a stable, low maintenance means of enjoying video game software. The PC will always be better than consoles as far as performance, but it pays for it in stability and a need for regular maintenance.

Everyone says this, yet it never feels true. My 360 needed to update constantly. Whenever I popped in new games, update. Whenever MSoft decided to change the dashboard, update. When I downloaded some title from the store, update. The only updates my computer needs is a antivirus update that does itself automatically in the background, a windows update that only requires 2 clicks to get through, and a graphics driver update that again takes 2 clicks to get through.

Not only that, but my 360 has died far more than I've had computer hardware errors. I've had to replace 3 360s and a PS3 over the years. The only pieces of hardware I've ever had to replace because they broke down in my computer were 2 graphics cards. My extraordinarily old 8600 (or 8800? its been a long long time) that lasted me years. Years and years even. The fact that it even lasted that long was quite extraordinary honestly. Then there was my 250 that I bought for 80 bucks which I had for about 2-3 years before it crapped out on me.

Consoles being a cheaper, stabler and low maintenance alternative to PC's have been a myth since the 360 and PS3 days.

How long did you own each Xbox 360? Also how long did you own the PS3? I've owned my white brick of an Xbox 360 since 2007 and it still runs as good as the day I bought it. Unfortunately, I never owned the original PS3 so I really can't comment on that systems lifetime performance. I tend to take very good care of my consoles and still have a working launch PS2 with the hard drive (been playing old games I've bought off E-bay recently).

 

[AstaresPanda]

All already know this, but when ever we say it we are called "pc elitist" or rich nerds who spend all their time hunched over a pc and piss away what was another comment before 2500 every 6 months.

 

[Ushiromiya Battler]

And cue the people tearing their throats out over which piece of hardware they enjoy playing their games on better in 3, 2, 1.

ERMAGHERD, NVIDIA RR STUPID, MY MICROWAVE OVEN IS BEST TO PLAY COD GHOSTS WITH.

To be fair, yes, my microwave is the best experience I've had with CoD Ghosts.

Back on topic: what nVidia said is pointless, and the title should be changed as it seems a bit bait-y.

They only said that PCs are way more powerful than next gen consoles, which is true, but the title might mislead people.

Off topic gripe: WHY WONT UBISOFT PATCH AC IV ALREADY, FFS.

I BOUGHT A FUCKING 670 LIKE A MONTH AGO, AND AC IV DOESNT EVEN LOOK THAT GOOD, YET MY CARD STRUGGLES TO RUN IT ABOVE 30 FPS ON MAX.

WHAT THE FUCK MAN.

It feels like next gen ports are following a trend of being badly optimised.

Pssstt, get 3D3Overrider and force vsync and triple buffering.
Pretty much solves the under 30fps issue on every pc.

OT:
Wow, I never knew Nvidia, I never knew....

Vsync is off.

I always turn it off when investigating how well the game can run on my pc.

And when on max, its at 30-40 fps when I am just exploring an island, on ship battles it could very well drop to like, 20.

I don't play it on max, but the fact that I can't at a decent framerate pisses me off, as my card more than meets the recommended requirements, and can run Far Cry 3 on Max at a constant 60fps.

Weird, I had the same problem up to the point where I installed D3Doverrider and forced vsync and triple buffering.
Got the fix off the steam forum, solved the fps problems for pretty much everyone in the thread.

I have now have around 30-40fps on sea and 40-60in towns.

EDIT:If I remember correctly the vsync option is broken, so it doesn't matter whether you have it on or not in game.
Forcing the vsync through d3doverrider, nvidia panel or Ati's equivalent should supposedly fixing it.

^ Those are pretty much my averages too.

I only ever turn vsync on if:

1) I can run the game on max at +60fps

2) Screen tearing is horrendous

But usually I test my rig before vsync, as that can impact frames significantly.

But GOSH DANG, if I can devour Far Cry 3 on max, and Witcher 2 at near max(no uber) both at 60fps, then why is AC IV so problematic?

Because Ubi are lazy.

I didn't imply they weren't lazy, I just gave you a few options that have solved screen tearing and low fps for a majority of steam users.

Anyways, thank you for mentioning Witcher 2, I gotta play that again.

 

[Nieroshai]

I have a PC to do what a console can't, which is much. I do, however, have consoles to do what a PC can't, such as load in a timely manner, standardize drivers, upload patches without prompting me, run at good graphics and framerate without having to buy new hardware every two years, and--with the current console gen--snap from ANY game, no matter how intensive the requirements, straight to netflix, and install a new game, while chatting with my friends. My PC CAN do that laundry list of things, but I tell you it WON'T. It will crash if I try half that list, regardless of my actual CAPABILITY to Alt-Tab to other windows and apps.

 

[FalloutJack]

This just in: Nvidia says "Stop having fun, guys!". More news as it develops.

 

[Funyahns]

I have a PC to do what a console can't, which is much. I do, however, have consoles to do what a PC can't, such as load in a timely manner, standardize drivers, upload patches without prompting me, run at good graphics and framerate without having to buy new hardware every two years, and--with the current console gen--snap from ANY game, no matter how intensive the requirements, straight to netflix, and install a new game, while chatting with my friends. My PC CAN do that laundry list of things, but I tell you it WON'T. It will crash if I try half that list, regardless of my actual CAPABILITY to Alt-Tab to other windows and apps.

Wait you think consoles load faster than a pc? I can boot my computer from off and be on the internet in about 30 seconds. Drivers and such are hardly an issue, I can think of maybe 4 times where I could not play a game because I needed to update my video drivers in the past decade. Your pc should be doing windows updates on its own. What other patches do you have to get prompted for? Java? You don't need a high end pc for good frame rates.

Sounds like your missing a solid state hard drive to me. That is probably the greatest new piece of pc tech in a decade.

 

[Something Amyss]

Well it's entirely predictable that Nvidia would say something like this; not least because.. haven't they come out and said it before in the not-too-distant past?

Wasn't there a taste of sour grapes the first time, too?

That's as may be, Matt Wright, but if you cannot provide that superior experience at a price competitive with the console option the flailing and failing global economy simply will not be able to bear the price.

In terms of gaming - a standardized product like the consoles or, soon, the Steam Box is much easier to plan for, requires less testing across the dozens of possible hardware combinations and is, thus, somewhat easier to plan for.

I love my PC but I just don't see its continued viability moving forward.

And publishers, the big ones anyway, think consoles are where the money is at (I'm not commenting on whether or not it is, as I don't know and don't care), so they'll get the love. It doesn't matter who has the better machine if the experience is gimped by a lack of the games, or bad ports, or...Whatever.

 

[Something Amyss]

I have a PC to do what a console can't, which is much. I do, however, have consoles to do what a PC can't, such as load in a timely manner, standardize drivers, upload patches without prompting me, run at good graphics and framerate without having to buy new hardware every two years, and--with the current console gen--snap from ANY game, no matter how intensive the requirements, straight to netflix, and install a new game, while chatting with my friends. My PC CAN do that laundry list of things, but I tell you it WON'T. It will crash if I try half that list, regardless of my actual CAPABILITY to Alt-Tab to other windows and apps.

Cheaping out on my graphics card and processor, I went four years between new equipment. That's half a console generation (r more), and that was on low-end hardware. I don't get this whole frequency thing.

 

[James Crook]

Yeah sure, the PC is far superior to Next-gen consoles and ARE affordable if you know your stuff and get around to building one.
But not with your GPUs, Nvidia.
Also, come back to me when you get your partners at Ubisoft to actually abide by your words and do some work optimizing their games.