PS4 vs. PC side-by-side comparison in Unreal Engine 4
- Thread starter Rob Robson
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I still don't understand the point of this comparison. It would be better to compare the PS4 to the PS3, Xbox 360 or the newest Xbox console. Comparing it to a PC is just a pointless exercise. A "current gaming PC" is consistently upgradeable and can be almost if not completely customized. It damn well better be hilariously outpowering the PS4. The point of a gaming console is exclusives and having a decent medium for the games that are not. Or at least to me it is. Even if a PS4 outpowered a "current gaming PC", it wouldn't be long by any stretch before that would change so again, pointless exercise. Furthermore, rumor has it that the PS4 will cost less than the PS3 when it first came out, not more.
The thing is that with Moore's law it doesn't really matter how extremely powerful the preview PC is.EightGaugeHippo said:
Every single year the power of PCs (and all transistor-based devices) rises by approximately 40% (so it doubles every two years).
It's not going to take very long at all for easily affordable PCs to match whatever machine they're using in the preview.
By the time Unreal Engine 4 will have games for it, which should be around the time the PS4 and the next XBox are released the currently cutting edge machine that was used for these demos will no longer be cutting edge, it'll be the average new gaming PC at best.
Hold your index finger up in front of your eyes, about 5-10cm away. Notice how the background gets blurred? That is depth of field. Depth of field is there in games to simulate the human eyes, which adds immersion. You can legitimately not like it, which is fine, but it's a very good technique when well implemented for those that do.Zachary Amaranth said:
On the PC you don't have to have it if you don't want.Zachary Amaranth said:
However DoF somewhat makes the scenes look more realistic since some of the scene is out of focus. So you would want it enabled if you care about stuff looking realistic. It's just another feature that you have available to you though.
Anyone else asking a very clear question here, what spec is the PC running? The OP suggest that the GPU in it is half the cost of the PS4, but I question the OPs info and clear bias towards the PC. Well let me clarify it with 30 seconds of google.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-unreal-engine-4-ps4-vs-pc
The PC spec is a fucking
Core I7 alongside a 680GTX
I have to ask OP, did you exclude this info to rally the attack against the consoles, the info is freely out there and like I said took me less than 30 seconds to find?
A Core I7 and a 680GTX is not half the expected price of the PS4 it is nearly twice the price the 680GTX alone is more than the expected retail price of the PS4 coming in at £400 for the cheapest model that I could find?
So what the demo ACTUALLY shows is the new hardware bring a pretty good fight to the much much more expensive PC hardware.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-unreal-engine-4-ps4-vs-pc
The PC spec is a fucking
Core I7 alongside a 680GTX
I have to ask OP, did you exclude this info to rally the attack against the consoles, the info is freely out there and like I said took me less than 30 seconds to find?
A Core I7 and a 680GTX is not half the expected price of the PS4 it is nearly twice the price the 680GTX alone is more than the expected retail price of the PS4 coming in at £400 for the cheapest model that I could find?
So what the demo ACTUALLY shows is the new hardware bring a pretty good fight to the much much more expensive PC hardware.
Consoles are single purpose machines. You play games on them and maybe watch Netflix. PCs are multi-purpose machines so of course they are going to be more expensive and especially if they can't make the cost of the console back with the price of games. It's like comparing a motorcycle to an average sedan, motorcycle is faster and way better experience but most people need some other vehicle for day to day life. Comparing a single purpose machine to a multi-purpose one, with very little else in common, is disingenuous at best.Laughing Man said:
Not this one. Especially as if I wanted a gaming PC or a PC period, I would just build one, like the one I'm using now.Forlong said:
This tech demo ran using the 680GTX, and that is somehow half the cost of the PS4? Get a grip OP. If anything this is showing how well the PS4 can hold it's own against very expensive hardware. The PS4 is never going to beat a high-end PC in graphical prowess, but as many people have pointed out, it doesn't need to.
What the hell does "the PC" mean?
There are thousands of combinations of processors, motherboards, GPUs, power supplies, solid state drive or hard state drives. Did they strap together 50 GPUs with a custom operating system to handle them all and then immerse them in a aquarium filled with mineral water for coolant when they overclock everything? Are they running it off of a geforce 7 series from 6 years ago? Are they running on a commodore with 64 kb of memory?
There are thousands of combinations of processors, motherboards, GPUs, power supplies, solid state drive or hard state drives. Did they strap together 50 GPUs with a custom operating system to handle them all and then immerse them in a aquarium filled with mineral water for coolant when they overclock everything? Are they running it off of a geforce 7 series from 6 years ago? Are they running on a commodore with 64 kb of memory?
Anyone expecting a $400-500 console to keep up with a $1200+ PC needs to wake up and smell the coffee.
Current-gen consoles have made everybody realize that consoles DON'T need crazy specs to last for years and years. It's all about giving developers breathing room and freedom to push games further, but consoles haven't been graphics powerhouses for a LONG TIME since consumer-grade graphics cards entered the PC market!
PS4 is more than good enough to give devs that freedom and future expansion.
> i3/i5/i7 Sandy or Ivy Bridge CPU (difference in gaming performance is quite small between them)
> GTX660 / HD7870 for midrange
> GTX680 / HD7970 for high-end
> 680 SLI / 7970 XFire for extreme-end
Current-gen consoles have made everybody realize that consoles DON'T need crazy specs to last for years and years. It's all about giving developers breathing room and freedom to push games further, but consoles haven't been graphics powerhouses for a LONG TIME since consumer-grade graphics cards entered the PC market!
PS4 is more than good enough to give devs that freedom and future expansion.
You seem a bit unfamiliar with current gen gaming PC's. Firstly motherboard/PSU/SSD/HDD are irrelevant to performance. Secondly there are actually not very many combinations with modern-day gaming PC's. You can most commonly expect to see stuff like:Mycroft Holmes said:
> i3/i5/i7 Sandy or Ivy Bridge CPU (difference in gaming performance is quite small between them)
> GTX660 / HD7870 for midrange
> GTX680 / HD7970 for high-end
> 680 SLI / 7970 XFire for extreme-end
Dat depth of field! :O
Having not been a PC gamer since Oblivion came out (and having a shitty mid-low range tower to play it on) I'm amazed at what current gen PCs can do.
Having not been a PC gamer since Oblivion came out (and having a shitty mid-low range tower to play it on) I'm amazed at what current gen PCs can do.
For me it's panning back & forth on which looks slightly better. In the end, I just wish I'd had my sunglasses on.
In the end, the only thing that matters is whether you're more comfortable with a joypad or a mouse & keyboard (& in the end, both hurt anyway).
In the end, the only thing that matters is whether you're more comfortable with a joypad or a mouse & keyboard (& in the end, both hurt anyway).
That's not even true at all. Older motherboards don't have the proper slots for newer GPUs and memory sticks. So having an old motherboard is an automatic blow to your ability to have a high performance computer. If your power supply doesn't have enough wattage for your setup, your computer wont perform much at all. And overclocking your PC requires a higher wattage PSU. Also SSDs are quite noticeably way faster at data access than HDD which allows it to pull up information faster, and thus load anything installed on it faster. If you have to grab new data it can find it more quickly which can effect the performance of games that don't save everything in working memory. In fact Treyarch whined about the fact that they couldn't add too many more weapons to black ops 2 without slowing it down for exactly that reason.Yuuki said:
You seem a bit unfamiliar with how computers work in general. Just because the GPU and the processor are the main workhorse parts doesn't make the other pieces "irrelevant."
I'll tell you what. You build a high end performance PC with a 145 watt PSU, and a Shuttle AK32 VIA KT266 mobo. And then I will admit that those pieces are irrelevant.
Oh good because the thread said PS4 vs Modern PC... oh wait no it didn't.Yuuki said:
Consoles will always be underpowered compared with PCs. Why? Because they *have* to come in at a £200 price point, or no one will buy them. £200 for an entire console often means console manufacturers will take a loss on hardware sales and make it back on game sales.
Think about the PC you'd get for £200 (just the computer, not peripherals). My GFX card alone costs more than that, my processor 3/4 of that, etc. It's disappointing that the PS4 is just the same thing again with slightly increased numbers, you'd have thought they'd at least *try* to innovate. But this is completely expected and par for the course.
The tragedy is that all our gaming PCs power is wasted as the vast majority of games we get are shitty console ports. In the case of Dead Space 3, they didn't optimise or change a single thing for the PC port, so lazy were they. Despite the power of our computers, we get games designed for 256MB RAM and shitty 2005 graphics because that's what current gen hardware developers code for.
I miss the days when Epic, iD and others would constantly be releasing the most demanding games, games which kept up with and were in constant battle against each new GFX card generation. Each pushed boundaries and strove to be the most technically brilliant and visually exciting. Now they just desaturate every game, paint them grey or brown, blur the textures and call it "art style".
Think about the PC you'd get for £200 (just the computer, not peripherals). My GFX card alone costs more than that, my processor 3/4 of that, etc. It's disappointing that the PS4 is just the same thing again with slightly increased numbers, you'd have thought they'd at least *try* to innovate. But this is completely expected and par for the course.
The tragedy is that all our gaming PCs power is wasted as the vast majority of games we get are shitty console ports. In the case of Dead Space 3, they didn't optimise or change a single thing for the PC port, so lazy were they. Despite the power of our computers, we get games designed for 256MB RAM and shitty 2005 graphics because that's what current gen hardware developers code for.
I miss the days when Epic, iD and others would constantly be releasing the most demanding games, games which kept up with and were in constant battle against each new GFX card generation. Each pushed boundaries and strove to be the most technically brilliant and visually exciting. Now they just desaturate every game, paint them grey or brown, blur the textures and call it "art style".