Top
660°

PS4 vs PC, A Better Understanding

There are so many comments going around on how someone’s PC “kicks the crap out of the PS4 specs”, how others feel like this wasn’t a “substantial leap over PS3″, that “demoing a single head isn’t very impressive” That to many Sony's next gen announcement was a let down. I can’t help but feel how much misunderstanding there is and how that goes around as blanketed statements. This article goes on to address a lot of these topics on why these may not be the case.

Read Full Story >>
bradfordtaylor.com
The story is too old to be commented.
joab7771311d ago

I like reading articles written by people that actually understand what is happening. He didnt seem to have an agenda one way or another. For me, i have loved this gen. I look at the ps4 as taking it a step further. I have considered pc gaming but it has too many cons for me. I am 35, work alot and ultimately, i would miss the console exclusives. I am not a fan of meyboard and mouse play, especially on a monitor. I like to relax and play on my large screen TV. Also, pcs are more expensive and i already know that every year or two, i will feel compelled to upgrade. If i am gonna play pc, its gonna be because of its advantages. And it is interesting that mkst developersdidnt know the ps4 would have 8 gb of ram. Were most of those demos done on 4 gb dev kits? Great read and i know we will be surprised. I will be happy no matter what.

decrypt1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

Its not about the Specs really, even a mid range PC will be more powerful than the PS4. What it comes down to is the Games.

PC has thousands of games in its forte. Games from all the ages, starting from 25 years ago. Steam alone has a library of over 1000 games. PC can literally emulate any console in history(aside PS3 and Xbox 360), hence it essentially has thousands of games under its belt.

Meanwhile PS4 will be starting from 0 games. Its unlikely the PS4 even in its life time will see the games collection that even Steam alone has.

Now sure PS4 will be featuring the Sony exclusives, however for every Sony exclusive there are PC exclusives out there.

Hence it just comes down to personal taste. I would say no harm owning both platforms. PC for an insane number of games, PS4 for the Sony exclusives.

T9001311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

@truegame

"A good Technical read."

How was it a good technical read. If anything they fail to mention about many things that the link within the article from PC gamer talks about:

CPU- They fail to mention the CPU within the PS4 is really underpowered. Its AMD Jaguar CPU which is designed for mobile platforms. Its no where close to the performance of Desktop CPUs of today. Specially Desktop CPUs from AMD itself will stomp it to the ground, never mind Intel.

GPU- Here is where the PS4 redeems itself, however even this is strictly Low - Mid range as of today in the PC world. By the time PS4 launches PC would have moved ahead and even the GPU in the PS4 will be comparable to Low end PC part.

Hence from a performance perspective expect PS4 to be outdated rather quickly. Even quicker than the PS3 was outdated.

Now that the PS4 is essentially a low end PC. Its actually good for PC game development as games will now be designed on PC architecture and will be more optimized for PC.

Consoles going PC arch this gen just means better optimization for the PC as we wont be getting games made for consoles then ported to PC.

I would see this is a win win situation for PC.

ado9081311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

..........

mistertwoturbo1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

^T900

A 2GHZ Jaguar 8 Core CPU is going to be doing nothing but 100% allocated to the games.

Why is it so hard for people to understand how a console works?

Let's make it simpler.

An N64 is clocked at 93.75MHz, all it is designed to do is play games. It wasn't designed to run Microsoft Office 1995, or do complex calculations. It's designed only for gaming!

When Naughty Dog said they are "Taxing the cell 100%" they really mean it. It's not "Taxing the cell 100% while running an OS, web browser, Youtube video, or tons of other applications."

That's what a PC is for, and that is why we need more powerful PC CPU's.

People aren't buying game consoles to do Video Editing for movie file conversions.

And what was the advantage of PC games over these past few years? Mostly higher resolution and Textures. Sure there is dynamic lighting, Tessellation, etc. but those are all going to be done on the PS4 as well. But most of this stuff DID NOT come from the CPU, it came from the GPU and the fast GDDR5.

And what is going to be on the PS4? Fast GDDR5 for BOTH the CPU and GPU. While I can agree that the "potential" on paper of the PS4's CPU and GPU are going to be outdated over time, that doesn't mean developers can't optimize more and more through the console's lifecycle.

We won't see the PS4 start to lose legs until they max out that 8GB of GDDR5 and get both the CPU and APU running at 100%, 100% of the time.

T9001311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

@mistertwoturbo

I know how CPU utilization works, dont lecture me on it.

Go ahead look at the CPU utilization on a windows PC when its at idle. There hardly is an CPU utilization.

So its not like the Windows OS is a huge hog on games, thats simply not true. Unless you are trying to run a video editing app in the background while playing a game.

I was merely saying that the Jaguar CPU even though 8 core is a mobile platform CPU. Compared to a desktop CPU its not powerful at all.

Same goes for the GPU, its comparable to a midrange GPU of today. However at launch it will essentially be comparable to a low end GPU.

People thinking PS4 will be anywhere close to PCs in power will again be disappointed.

Essentially what you will be getting with the PS4 will be a locked down low end PC.

Edit:

"And what was the advantage of PC games over these past few years? "

Do you possibly think doing stuff like dynamic lightening, Tessellation, Physx, higher resolutions, AA is a small advantage. If anything PS4 is finally catching up to what PC was doing few years back.

If anything the eyecandy on games will be further uped now that the next gen is here and it will be all the more difficult to do the effects you just mentioned. That is where the PC will accelerate.

Specially PC may be the only platform next gen doing Ray-tracing. Consoles will again be left behind. So stop kidding yourself, consoles only just caught up to what the PC has been doing for years.

AllroundGamer1311d ago

agree with everything, very well said. I always mixed playing consoles and PC games, am a PC/PS3/Xbox360 owner now and in the PS2 days i was mostly console gamer, but with less and less exclusive titles nowadays i'm returning back to the PC. Xbox360 really had not many exclusive games for me (don't like the generic Halo and Gears games). So i won't probably buy any nextgen console, but will wait if Sony will try to have some exclusives like on the PS3, then i will consider buying a PS4. Also i don't think MS will have any good exclusives nextgen...

piroh1311d ago

@decrypt

you didn´t read the article do you?

vulcanproject1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

"A 2GHZ Jaguar 8 Core CPU is going to be doing nothing but 100% allocated to the games"

No, it isn't. This is what I have been saying. Did you even see what Sony were trying to do with their platform? All this multi tasking, opening fully featured HTML5 internet browsers in games, apps in games, background downloading of everything, netcode running inside the OS to allow spectating across all games, directors modes, probable all inclusive joypad tracking via camera etc etc.

Be absolutely clear that Sony will lock off at least one of the cores to dedicate for the OS, potentially even more.

The same for the memory. This HD video compression will be handled by dedicated hardware but not dedicated memory. That will chew up RAM(a lot of it, no doubt), along with the OS, along with the room needed for all the background apps and the ever present UI and the idea you can launch stuff else in games, Vita streaming....

PS4 has 8 cores and 8GB of RAM.

It is a safe bet AT LEAST one of those cores and 1GB RAM (probably actually MORE) will be locked off from the start that devs cannot use.

Sony will probably play it safe and lock off a couple of gigs of RAM if anything, in case they have future plans to expand functions. The exact same thing was done for PS3.

Mainly because once you give up that memory to developers to make a game, you can't get it back. So in the first year or more typically memory is held back in reserve before being released to devs.

Even as you speak about 8 cores and 8Gb of RAM and this decent GPU, the reality is it'll be no more than 7 cores and maybe 6GB of RAM, possibly with a section of the GPU cordoned off as well for games for at least the first year of the machine's life.

Consoles have overheads as well, previously quite small.

But what Xbox Next is allegedy trying to do and what we know PS4 is trying to do is be the most ambitious multi tasking console ever built.

Kiss goodbye to quite a lot of system resources to make that happen before devs even write their first line of code.

slayorofgods1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

8gbs of ram to work with is also a lot of ram.. I still only have 4GBs in my pc. I've want to upgrade but it keeps coming back to the how necessary is it really to upgrade besides to say I have a lot of ram debate.. The i7 is also a way more powerful processor then my amd quad core, I have not needed that extra cpu power this generation either, unless I wanted to say I had the more powerful pc.. So it all comes down to what is actually needed to handle the generation as well.

So we will have 6GB's of ram running on the PS4 to play games, I doubt we will even use that much on most. It's not like the PS4 is even that dwarfed from being able to update in the background.. AND THANK GOD WE CAN DO THAT NOW, the PS3 limitations in that regard were very annoying.

PC's have been pushing multitasking for years, now the PS4 is becoming all all in one media entertainment device, not a 1 process at a time device.. These are things the PS3 started doing, but the PS3 was very limited in doing these things.. Believe it or not most people do use their PS3's for other things then just playing a game.. PC's, tablets, ect all use multitasking techniques, now so do gaming entertainment devices.. Some resources are needed to do this. Not a big deal to me.

Cupid_Viper_31311d ago

@ VulcanProject

"No, it isn't. This is what I have been saying. Did you even see what Sony were trying to do with their platform? All this multi tasking, opening fully featured HTML5 internet browsers in games, apps in games, background downloading of everything, netcode running inside the OS to allow spectating across all games, directors modes, probable all inclusive joypad tracking via camera etc etc.

Be absolutely clear that Sony will lock off at least one of the cores to dedicate for the OS, potentially even more."

I could be wrong about this, but didn't Sony clearly say that the PS4 will have a secondary processor to handle the OS and other features such as streaming and what not?

"This is enabled by a secondary processor that allows for background work while the main processor is handling gameplay." http://thenextweb.com/gadge...

ZombieNinjaPanda1311d ago

There is a lot of false information in your post. Yes you'll miss the console exclusives, but you can connect a gamepad to a pc. whether it be a ps3 controller, xbox 360 (this is preferred) or a custom on. You can also connect a pc to your tv and relax on your couch. And upgrade every 2 years? No wonder everyone thinks it's so expensive. I know people that haven't upgraded in 4 years and still play games on high to ultra settings.

slayorofgods1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

it sure does Viper

"This is enabled by a secondary processor that allows for background work while the main processor is handling gameplay."

I'm sure we will find out more about the cpu as we near the launch.. But, we all know that it is more powerful then say a 360's tri core at 3 +ghz's. To say the cpu will hold the PS4 back is being overly cynical imo (or complaining about just 6 gb's of memory). We all know it will come down to the gpu's power that determines the power of the PS4 (and what holds the ps3 and 360 back the most) and that is something we know a lot about on the PS4.

DigitalSmoke1311d ago

@decrypt

PC titles are so badly optimized, that still to this day there's nothing that looks moves and played like Uncharted.
Talking all this good shit about hardware which has the pottential to blast away any console out now, means nothing without software specially writen for it, witch is not happening...

So have fun with the fast hardware without having anything that really harnassis its power.
Sharp 2gigabyte textures will only get you so far son.

Bin there done that.

Jakens1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

@ T900
I could be wrong but I respectfully disagree with this statement.

"we wont be getting games made for consoles then ported to PC."

X360 and PS3 development have shown what will happen in about two years or so. Meaning that development happens on PC but will concentrate on the X720/PS4 specs.

nosferatuzodd1310d ago

to t900 there is not a direct way of purchasing a similarly designed system. There is not an 8 core APU for purchase. Most people are just running a quad core setup. Not to mention the PS4 has a second chip for background processes that helps take even more load off the APU. There is no memory available to purchase that provides the same speed as the PS4. Sure you might have 16 GB of DDR3 for your system and 3 GB of GDDR5 for your video, but it’s not the same as the PS4′s unified 8 GB of GDDR5 clocked at 176 GB/s for system and video. i think that settles it what youre saying

Jakens1310d ago

@ DigitalSmoke

I would agree that PC titles are not optimized. I always thought that the cost was prohibitive. It turns out that X360/PS3 games sell more copies than some of the "pretty" PC games. I support PC too, but I won't give up next gen systems to go fully PC.

Ju1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

LOL. Do you guys actually understand what you are saying: "Even as you speak about 8 cores and 8Gb of RAM and this decent GPU, the reality is it'll be no more than 7 cores and maybe 6GB of RAM, possibly with a section of the GPU cordoned off as well for games for at least the first year of the machine's life."

Yes, so? I mean, first, you have to utilize 8 (!) cores at max and more than 6GB before you run into a bottle neck here. Hint: With current games, none (and I really mean NO! game) today needs more than 6GB RAM and more then 4 cores!

I am quite excited. I mean with that many cores you can run parts of your buffers on the CPU (e.g. depth buffers for shadow maps or what ever) etc. For low performance buffers which don't need a lot of bandwidth - basically all non texture related tasks in a deferred renderer - could run on this beast for free. Maxing the shaders for what they do best: Moving data (and work on per pixel effects).

Additionally, its shared memory. You can have your shadow map in the same mem and simply hand it over to the GPU. No memory transfer at all! Now you have 8GB, too. So, no worries. You won't run out of mem anytime soon.

None of that can be done on a PC. You simply cannot do that. You cannot allocate a core at 100% and guarantee you have the resource (what if you want to support Dual core machines???). You simply cannot render depth buffers (or motion vectors) into System memory because even if the GPU does a fetch using DMA it will have to shove this over PCIe.

I don't know guys. Just wait and see. We are nowhere near to see what this beast can do. And you already try to low ball the machine. You'll be up for a surprise.

Oh, and BTW: Looks like they run the TCP/IP stack on a dedicated ARM core, and probably do video de/encoding in HW. Encoding does not (!) need a lot of memory (it is heavily compressed) and depending what you do...you'd hand this (small encoded) buffer directly to the ARM core. And this is the reason why you can go into the UI and actually watch a game; because this does not (!) allocate any resources of the rest of the system.

vulcanproject1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

'Secondary processor' is inaccurate from that report. What it has is a dedicated coprocessor for the compression and decompression of HD video. Not some magic bullet processor to do everything else. Video. Thats it.

Its a DSP addition. Not some extra CPU....

http://www.joystiq.com/2013...

"Cerny said that the PS4 is equipped with always-on, always available hardware for both video compression and decompression"

I clearly stated this in my first post!!!! I also pointed out that coprocessor or not, It. Still. Uses. Main. Memory.

I don't know what people don't understand sometimes, it is exasperating. I can try and explain it as simply as possible and yet you and a million others don't seem to get it.

The processor dedicated for the video compression DOES NOT run the OS, DOES NOT have all this dedicated memory for the OS or anything else from what we know, does not handle the UI, does not handle apps or concurrent internet browser functionality...etc etc.

Even as a coprocessor handles HD video compression(because that is demanding) where is the data held for it to work on? Well? In. Main. System. Memory. It'll be dumped to the hard drive but as it gets worked on it'll be in and out of system memory.

People, seriously. Please read what I say properly.

As for Ju then nobody is moaning about the resources available to devs.

MY POINT WAS THAT CONSOLES HAVE OVERHEADS AS WELL. PS4 will have the most resources reserved than anything around now because it is trying to do the most at once.

All I see here is people banging on like PS4 has nothing to do but run games and all the hardware is dedicated to that- like the guy that said 8 cores and 8GB.

What I said is devs won't have all of every core, all 8 cores and all 8 GB of system memory to build their games for.

I guarantee that. They didn't with Ps3, they didn't with 360, they don't with Wii U.

Take it as read. I said little else but contradict the people that say the entire system is just all for games, when blatantly it isn't.

kevnb1310d ago

there were n4 emulators while the console was style on the market, just saying. Not only that, the n4 did a poor job at playing its games, the framerates were horrible.

Ju1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

@Vulcan. Hint: You can can grab that video stream within the encoder engine, btw. Thus no (!) read access and no bandwidth requirement into GDDR. Just a thought :) (streaming a video is minimal overhead. It's just an "animated" texture. Should not tax the system too much if you have 176GB/s available (this is, if you want to actually "see" it - and this is unlikely happening in the game unless you make this part of the game (e.g. stream to a billboard). - I can't do math no more...a 1080p frame (RGBA-32bit has ~8MB. Pushing this into a texture with a sustained 30fps framerate requires only (!) ~240MB/s (about 0.125% bandwidth)

vulcanproject1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

How much memory the DSP will require is debatable and up in the air. It might very well be quite minimal but it isn't free.

That was really my point. You don't get something for nothing. Remember everyone hyped up the ol eDRAM in Xbox 360? 'Free' AA they cried. No, but thats not how it worked lol. What the DSP does is give very cheap video compression, and removes that particular load from the CPU. It can't hide a big stream of HD video from needing SOME memory though. It can't execute a frickin Internet browser or boss the GPU about.

Sony have no doubt designed the machine to take up minimal resources when it comes to dealing with the video feature but it doesn't excuse it from having some memory footprint. It doesn't stop the fact that a bunch of system memory must be reserved for the OS and everything else they want to do.

There is plenty of memory in there, but the system has overheads like any other, more than any other console around now anywaysss.....

I wouldn't be even slightly surprised if they ring fence 1GB system memory, nor even more if they are thinking about possible future additions. Nintendo have.

PS4 is a interesting bit of hardware but PC will have no problem overpowering it, sooner rather than later. Lets not all pretend otherwise, it is rather delusional.

By the time PS4 even gets going most good video cards are gonna end up with 4GB of memory with 200GB/s+ bandwidth and another 8GB+ of slower, but lower latency system memory. That is better for the CPU in some ways.

Devs might use like 3GB of video memory for their games, obviously no problem for video cards in the next 18 months that will end up with 4+ gigabytes.

PS4 will be a nice system with decent performance. PC gamers need not worry about potential ports.

Ju1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

Well, you are grasping for straws here ;) And of course, you can always brute force overpower on the PC.

But take a guess why NVidea is putting 6GB GDDR onto one card - because no matter how much brute force you apply to a PC, you simply cannot overcome the PCIe bandwidth bottleneck. Nothing what SLI or crossfire can do about it - and with that said, it creates another bottleneck for the CPU which now has to access VMEM through PCIe. PC != perfect gaming architecture. Never will be.

Those GPUs are so fast and get starved by the slow bus (and DDR3) memory. Unless they sooner than later replace PCIe, there will always be a bottleneck in PCs.

And yes, 0.125% bandwidth is practically free - especially because you don't need to run any code either on the GPU nor on the CPU to decode and show this video (other than setting up the buffers).

I have no more bubbles, so I have to cramp it in here...bubble bottleneck...lol

I still believe Gaikai has contributed to the video streaming implementation and that's why I believe they do not tax GDDR when encoding video. To run and stream games over a network they must have put a video encoder and network processor after the GPUs encoder engine (what are they called no, not a DAC any more - ROPs or what? But there you get your memory fetch. As long as you have access to those buffers, you can encode this signal for free - well, you simply hook int LVDS or something). Otherwise this would have required some SW and would not have worked with all games (SW modifications for games). My best guess is, Gaikai is not just SW but also the IP they have on that encoder/decoder engine. And I am also guessing, this piece of HW (incl. that ARM cpu) is now part of the PS4.

vulcanproject1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

What PCI express bottleneck Ju??? Doesn't really exist yet. You sure you know what YOU are talking about?

"Additional PCIe bandwidth has proven to be generally unnecessary when it comes to GAMING..........but right now PCIe 2.1 x16 (8GB/sec) handles the task with room to spare."

http://www.anandtech.com/sh...

PCI express 2.0 isn't even overloaded yet, let alone the newer PCI express 3.0 which is twice as fast - the standard on all new boards. PCI express 4.0 is due in another 3 years or so. The buses always keep ahead of the GPU requirements. Always have!

They are putting more memory on their boards because everyone is. Its inevitable. PC ends up with more everything and eventually brute force wins.

It just does.

These GPUs are certainly not starved, when the top end PC stuff already has like 100GB/s+ MORE dedicated bandwidth than PS4's GPU shares.... I repeat, SHARES with the rest of the system - 9 months before the thing even turns up. We just established here PCI express is not a bottleneck so whats your argument again? Lol.

It wasn't about bandwidth with the DSP, it was about working on the actual video, not displaying it. It's not about how fast you can MOVE it around the system (i.e bandwidth), its about where you have to store it to do process on it(in system RAM).

Video compression = uses memory that will have to be reserved if it is going to be 'always on' and can't be used by devs for games. If you write it uncompressed to HDD, it murders HDD transfer rates. If you compress it realtime before you write, it takes up (some) system memory. Its just a fact.

Besides the fact when you dump it onto the HDD you still have a bottleneck SOMEWHERE that slows key system aspects.

Unless Sony plan on shipping each machine with a decent sized SSD (unlikely because of the cost!) then that'll eat up HDD write/read time as well.

Thats just another advantage of PC that the slowest part of the machine, the HDD, is now hugely faster as most enthusiasts I know have some kind of SSD.

Maybe you could replace it in PS4 but Sony and devs will have to assume that it is a slower mechanical drive in there, so a user replaced SSD would probably still be under utilised.

reynod1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

@Vulcanproject

Intelligent comments as usual.

Nevermind Ju, hes simply doing what he does best defend Sony hardware even though he knows hes spewing crap.

@Ju

By that regard PS3 is way more efficient compared to a PC, yet a 5 year old PC with a 8800GTX runs circles around it. Why does that happen? Despite all the console optimization.

Its simple the overheads and bottlenecks you speak of simply arent as severe as you make them out to be.

History will repeat it self. PS4 will be outperformed by 600 USD PCs when it does release.

Will be funny seeing Ju try to defend it at that point. PS4 will get outdated much faster than the PS3 and with much cheaper hardware.

Its amusing he actually compares the 8 cores on the PS4 with current desktop processors and goes on to say "current games barely use 4 cores". Bias much Ju really, you should have come up with something better, this is lame even by your standard. Comparing a portable CPUs cores a Desktop CPU.

T9001310d ago

@Ju

"because no matter how much brute force you apply to a PC, you simply cannot overcome the PCIe bandwidth bottleneck"

You need to read up a bit on tech and update yourself.

Check out Hardocp's review of PCI 3.0. They make a comparison with TRI SLI with the highest end GPUs. Its PCI 2.0 vs PCI 3.0.

Guess what both the setups performed nearly identical. What could be the reason?

If PCI 2.0 was so bandwidth starved surely it should have been outperformed by 3.0

This did not happen as both the setups performed near identical. Hence that tells us even PCI 2.0 is by no means bandwidth starved, nevermind PCI 3.0.

Here is a link for your reference:

http://www.hardocp.com/arti...

This proves even PCI 2.0 is by no means bandwidth starved despite using TRI SLI setup that would be way more powerful than even the upcoming consoles.

HappyGaming1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

All I know is that comparing specs for specs is completely pointless because if you compare a PS3 to a PC with a Geforce 7800 and 512mb of RAM I can bet you you couldn't get it to run a game like the Last of Us

Computersaysno1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

True gumtrol but then the last of us is a PS3 exclusive so you cant run it with any PC specs.

You cant run SimCity on PS3.

We are such a long way from 7800GTX now. 7800GTX actually ran a lot of games better than PS3 did back ye olden days 2006. Elder Scrolls 4 and FEAR ran better on a good Pc with a 7800GTX.

Ps3 came out after Geforce 8800. Blew away Ps3 in truth.

dcbronco1310d ago

@Viper

You're exactly right. The main APU will be for games. Most of the other things will be handled by specialized equipment or a secondary CPU. In the PS3 and based on Microsoft diagrams on the 720 as well. The 720 is supposed to use a second APU. And the main point went right over the heads of the PC people. HSA.

A lot of that speed and power of the PC is not outdone by the difference in the latency of the APU in HSA. The entire article was pointing out that this is a whole new way of computing. With GPUs used for every process that fits them better. And GPUs are far more powerful than CPUs for some things. No gaming PC uses the GPU the way an HSA system does. I would think that PC users would at least acknowledge how much more powerful GPUs are. So if they are being used completely like a CPU why can't you make the connection that it will be a more powerful system. A lot of those things that PC CPUs are being used to do that require so much power are being moved to the GPU where they can be done far more easily.

Computersaysno1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

Not you again dcbronco.

Waffling on about your HSA jargon like it is some magical super advanced mega gain that will boost Ps4 to the stars.

We have seen the gain from APUs versus discrete on Pc. It is minimal no matter what is done with it. http://www.tomshardware.com... Discrete always wins on performance. It will when it comes to Pc versus console as well. You can always change your graphics card. You cant change whats inside Ps4.

Ps4 is a games machine not used for GPGPU purposes like a fooking workstation.

Developers care about how fast their textures will be transformed or how many polygons they can use on their meshes not about your constant jargon around HSA.

The latency gain is just stupidly overstated by you without even realising that the GDDR5 memory that the Ps4 cpu has to deal with will have crap ass latencies. Huge bandwidth fo sho and crapass latency.

What the X are you jabbering on with about using the GPU side in ps4 to overpower Pc in terms of compute like physics.

"lot of those things that PC CPUs are being used to do that require so much power are being moved to the GPU where they can be done far more easily."

Where do you think that idea came from and was used in the first place?

What do you think Nvidia Physx on PC is?

Errrrrrm thats right. That will be physics calculated on the GPU because it can done very fast. Thats been around been around for ages on PC, thats the whole point of DX10, then 10.1, then 11 and now 11.1. To expand the abilities of the GPU.

Every single fuxxy PC DX11 class gpu has the ability to be extremely versatile. Nextbox will only use a superset of DX11.1 duuuuuuh.

It just isnt new. Except on consoles I guess!

dcbronco1310d ago

Wow Computersaysno, there you go again. To you I guess Intel is still selling only Pentium 4s. Or is it that Intel is the only company that can improve a core. Every APU from now to the end of time will be a Bulldozer core. My comments weren't aimed at you. Well, I guess in general. I also guess you didn't watch the slideshow on the advantages of HSA in gaming. Maybe you believe the current APUs use HSA(they don't). And while I believe the PS4 will be a monster machine, I believe the next Xbox will be even better. But let's continue this when Jaguar is released.

Computersaysno1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

HSA is good as a concept but not a big deal right now for these consoles. Nextbox and Ps4 are not full HSA.

In the short term it is meaningless. It is literally meaningless for anyone who is aiming to build a medium to high end gaming PC inside the next 18 months.

In 18 months it might have more interest on the PC scene but it wont happen overnight.

It is interesting you mentioned Intel because very little works without the backing of intel in the PC space. Intel are just so much bigger than AMD. Little gets taken up without them having a big say in it.

Intels cpu market share is what? 80 percent?

Remember when AMD tried to add these 3DNow! extensions to their CPUs to improve vector processng? They pushed it really hard. Was a revolution in cpu! http://china.amd.com.cn/CHC... See the quotes on this now practically dead instruction set from 15 years ago. Look at em all raving over this.

Problem was, Intel werent interested in supporting it or including it in their chips by licensing.

Funnily enough it never caught on and is dead as a dodo.

Intel saw their x64 extensions, and went in with them. The inclusion of them in Intel hardware made them mainstream.

AMD struggle to do anything by themselves because Intel is the market leader by a giant margin. Unless AMD can get Intel on board and have something like HSA as an open platform which i dont think likely it isnt likely to be a full on revolution.

If it does then Intel will probably do their own thing and simply because they are so big we'll end up with what they develop.

Intel are so big they could buy Nvidia. Was rumours of that a while back. Dont think it will happen but anything is possible. We need AMD to compete but if such a thing were to happen something like AMD HSA could be crushed or minimised ever so easily should such a company desire.

Its not a fair fight but hey. Alls fair in love and war!

dcbronco1310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

Computersaysno,

You sound like so many people that believe the status quo will never falter. Intel is the big dog and always will be. You are in for a huge shock. Intel tried and failed and seem to be willing to bet on more transistors. That will fail. AMD has come up short but have the sense to keep going. Because of that they will be the winners in the near future. Your way of thinking is why so many lose in the markets. They can't see the writing on the wall. You obviously haven't really looked at what AMD is doing. If you had, you'd know they are also working with ARM and other companies. It doesn't only work on x86. It works for other architectures too. Go read up a little more on HSA and what AMD is doing and less Intel or just wait until the end of the year. You obviously don't know what the HSA Foundation is, you don't know that Jaguar cores are going to have unified memory(one of the main advances for HSA), you can't seem to understand that the chips are modified on top of that. You don't even understand that Larrabee was Intel's attempt at HSA. Let's just wait.

DragonKnight1310d ago

Why do people insist on making these articles? You can't make a console article with the letters "PC" in it without poking a huge hornets nest of insecurity and superiority complexes. This page has already erupted into never ending arguments and will continue to devolve into more PC vs. Console B.S. where it is somehow imperative to prove that PC is and always will be superior as though it actually matters. *sigh* This site...

+ Show (30) more repliesLast reply 1310d ago
2pacalypsenow1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

Im a PC/Ps3/Xbox360 gamer and have invested lots of money on pc hardware in the last 2 years and might get the titan. But its annoying how Pc gamers always talk about graphics and how they can build a pc with $10 that is 10x powerfull than a ps3,x360 etc and a zillion games from 100 years ago, its getting old ! If Pc's are so great why are you here trying to prove something everyone already knows and doesn't really care about? go play thos games.Those Pc gamers are just jealous the pc isnt getting the attention it used to have but that's just how the world is. consoles are most mainstream and they sell more games than pc's now . The ps4 will have less power on paper than most $1400 pc's but they will still make gamer that will rival most pc's with limited specs

JackBNimble1311d ago

I'm a PC/PS3 gamer, and for some reason it seems pc gamers have gone into full defence mode to knock the PS4 down. WHY? PS4 has only closed the gap, it isn't over taking the high end gaming rig.

You PC elitiest sound like big babies because according to you nothing can ever come close to PC graphics and game play.

Don't worry, next gen chipsets will be coming out soon enough.

irepbtown1310d ago

I agree, and the article covers this well.

PS4 has closed the gap, it's up to Microsoft to do the same.

sklorbit1310d ago

JackBNimble is correct. There is no reason for PC elitists to be as scared as they are, PC will still be a great platform for gaming.

Even though i have played a ton of PC in the last few years, I hate being among this shitty fanbase. WAY less mature then i would have ever expected... Even 12 year old kids on COD are less sensitive than PC master race.

gamernova1310d ago

@irepbtown & JackB
The Ps4 has closed the gap on what PC? When you say PC, you act like these is a set PC that is constant in everyone's set up. The ps4 has improved but no way has it closed the gap.

What annoys the PC gamers is that console guys don't care about specs and play our specs down as "graphics aren't that important". Then they get a new console and all I see is how the graphics are so much better and some ignorant gamers even say the playstation is better than a PC (which again begs the question of what PC they're talking about) and also makes me laugh when I look at my cosmos 2 set up lol

Anyway, now specs seem to be really important for console gamers. All PC gamers are trying to do is educate the masses that although the ps4 is definitely going to be better than the ps3, it cannot compete with a mid range to high end pc. But again, what defines mid and high? See, that is why you cannot really say that ps4 is closing the gap on PCs. You are not comparing it to a console, you are comparing it to a computer that can have very different specs from the next guy.

Some idiot above said that the hardware from the ps4 is there to play games only. So you're telling me that the playstation os along with any background apps that maybe running and all the features that are in game are not going to be dependent on the hardware at the same time as the game itself? Consoles are not all about gaming anymore. Just like cell phones are not all about making calls.

So in conclusion, that is why PC gamers are annoyed. Specs are suddenly important when new consoles come around. If console gamers took the time to praise the PC graphic superiority, maybe pc gamers would be happy to praise their new consoles.

Instead I see people on Titan benchamarking videos claiming that the ps4 smokes the titan and ARES II. Are you serious? If PC gamers are elitest and whiners, then console gamers are just plain stupid.

But I know, as apparently very few do, that it is not cool to generalize. But everyone here likes to group PC gamers as elitests so whatever.

JackBNimble1310d ago

@ gamernova
Maybe you should read my comment again , but read it slowly this time, because it obviously went way over your head.

Btw, when I speak of Elitiest, I am speaking of people who have attitudes like you.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1310d ago
The_Infected1311d ago

What's funny is the graphics are amazing but I still see people "mostly Xbox fanboys" saying it don't look that amazing which is BS.

What people fail to understand is although the graphics are amazing with the powerful hardware in the PS4 you get way better physics, AI, etc. the worlds and character become more real and Interactive. That alone is as good or better than the amazing graphics we see on PS4.

mistertwoturbo1311d ago

Absolutely loved this article. Right on the mark on all aspects. Bravo!

imdaboss11310d ago

The other point in all of this is that what we were shown was nothing more than early builds of titles and tech demos. Killzone, Deep Down, UE4s and Quantum Dreams demos already looked on par, if not better in some areas, than Crysis 3.

amen to that

Persistantthug1310d ago

Maybe N4G should open a forum topic or section specifically just for Console Warz.

Nitrowolf21310d ago

they did a few years back, it was called the flame zone and was a tab where Feature is now. Then for some reason they closed it off

Goodfella781310d ago

Best article i"ve read in a long time......

Spenok1310d ago

Absolutely.

I really appreciate the fact he is knowledgeable about what he is talking about. And gives valid points to why people are being far too rash with what they have seen. Especially when they are looking at brand new, never before seen way of making games.

Oh well, I have a good feeling Sony (and Microsoft) will have them put their foots in their mouths when their respective systems release.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1310d ago
smashcrashbash1311d ago

It all stems from people being somehow angry about the PS4's existence. Nintendo people seem to be upset that Nintendo is no longer the only next gen console anymore therefore their predictions of Nintendo taking all the marbles before Sony and Microsoft have a chance to react is no longer viable. Microsoft people seem to generally be upset that Sony jumped ahead and announced their console first which people insisted that they wouldn't. PC people seem to be generally angry about Diablo 3 on the PS4 and keep striking back about how powerful a PC is and droning on about specs and power and how the PS4 can never compete. I think most of these people were crossing their fingers hoping the PS4 was not real and when it was it threw them for a loop.That is why they find petty things to harp on about like not seeing the PS4's casing, spreading lies and claiming strange things like the PS4 doesn't really exist and Sony is just pretending that it does.

miyamoto1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

yeah some insecure people here on n4g blasted me when I predicted Diablo will be coming to PS4 without even doing their research.
these people are jealous and close minded. all they see are the bad and ugly of PlayStation brand or any brand ftm. what a sorry state of mind.

pS4 is embracing the universal approach when it comes to game development nothing wrong with it. In fact its beneficial to most devs anf pubs hence PC devs flock to PS4

Irishguy951311d ago

Diablo wasn't that good anyway...was disappointing. Torchlight 2 ftw

opabato1311d ago

Wii U never was next-gen. It's even weaker than ps3/x360 except the gpu which simply happened because AMD didn't have anything weaker atm lol

nintendoland1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

14 agrees 1 dislike
---> proof that this is sony fanboy site
agreeing with bs...

ado9081311d ago

@nintendoland

Let me guess you're that 1 dislike and your name says it all.

Hufandpuf1311d ago

Wii U is not weaker than the current gen consoles. look at the Need for Speed game that was ported to the Wii U, it looks gorgeous. Not saying that the Wii U will be as powerful as PS4, but it can hold it's own i believe.

Qrphe1311d ago

It's not weaker than the PS360, the ram itself should be proof of that.

It may not be PS4-tier but if you keep on saying stuff like that still months after it came out you can only be marked for trolling.

SnotyTheRocket1310d ago

"Next-Gen" doesn't refer to graphics....

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1310d ago
BitbyDeath1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

PC crew were banging on about how PS4 will never get close to PC long before PS4 was even announced.

Crow has been served and now they're in denial about everything. Quite sad really, they should just be happy that PC has more of a chance of getting more 3rd party ports from consoles.

xPhearR3dx1311d ago

Denial about what? The PS4 isn't available to consumers, by the time it releases it will be no where near what a PC is capable of. Hell, it still isn't as of right now.

Eldyraen1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

Only thing I agree with about your post is in regards to ports.

I just want a good game and don't care who makes it, but the fact is this last generation of consoles hasn't been that bad for PC either. More than likely we'd not had gotten quite a few games that came out otherwise. We've gotten a few franchises we've never had before plus 'better' versions of several games (graphically at least). Unfortunately it does work both ways as Battlefield 3, while still fun, diverted a bit from the original in part due to being designed for a more console fanbase--but at least they gave us nice graphic upgrade and 64 players still.

Until I see more Killzone though (the entire game), I reserve judgement about how it'll contend with Crysis 3--graphically speaking at least. More than likely Killzone will be a 'better' action shooter (Crysis has always, or should had always, been about playing it your way which 3 returns to) but I don't like to judge a game based on a small video and C3 really is the most graphically detailed game out today (screenshots look great, but it doesn't really do it justice either--very little of that game doesn't scream urban jungle at its finest, and what doesn't fits the other settings perfectly). The PS4 video does however make me very interested in seeing what else GG managed to pull off with the new hardware as I wasn't expecting it to look as nice as it does and that's just the first look at the game. At this point I'm highly optomistic and just looking forward to playing Sony exclusives with even better visuals and at a higher resolution. I hated going back down to 720p or lower to play console games no matter how enjoyable they were (its huge--don't kid yourself).

None of that is a PC fanboy speaking either, just an honest gamer with a bit of a graphics wh*re in them. I wouldn't be a bit disappointed if somehow Killzone looked better than PC games, but neither will I be disappointed if it doesn't even reach it. Either way, I'm hoping for a great game with stellar visuals beyond my earlier expectations (which, to be honest, was lower than what they actually managed to achieve by a long shot. The flight in and out of the city was incredible in particular and in regards to PS4 fanboy's assumptions... that at least looks on par or better than C3. The actual run and gun gameplay portion not quite so much but, again, it could had been the location as pristine visuals have less impact as larger scale, highly detailed levels of Crysis 3.

PC and today's consoles will hold me over till then though and not like its going to go anywhere after I get a PS4.

EbeneezerGoode1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

Actually I think you are showing some of that blinkered, biased view too. You should try walking the centre line that you speak of and accept that no console now or a year from now can possibly 'surpass' what a PC is capable of from a technology standpoint.

However as a big PS3 fan and future PS4 owner, I realise that games and gameplay are really what matter and I am very much looking forward to getting my grubby mits on the new PS4 controller and getting stuck into some KZ:SF and the next uncharted. Stuff that simply isn't available on the PC regardless of the tech.

Don't under-estimate what a fast/enthusiast PC can do though! The new GPUs will be releasing around the same time as the PS4, and while they are not a massive upgrade over this gen they will or should be able to push many games over 60fps at 'ultra' details on resolutions consoles can't even dream of. Both have their places, it's that simple.

I think PC and (future) PS4 owners should unite and realise it's THE power combo to own for all round gaming. Wii U? not so much, NextBox? ... jury is out on that but I doubt they'll be anywhere near as gamer focussed as Sony, and I hate the way MS has held the PC to ransom of sorts with games on the Xbox 360 being bought off to avoid PC (to try and force PC owners to buy 360s). As an ex 360 owner and current PS3 owner all I can say is "good luck with that path MS, don't be surprised when core gamers bite you in the wallet like they have with Nintendo)

Oh and I agree with the above poster about the KZ:SF fly in video (before the shooting started) it looked awesome and literally made my jaw drop when I watched the Sony meeting! The last time that happened to me was Crysis 1 on PC so Sony are doing something right. That game alone is a system seller if the quality shown in that fly over is kept up through the game.

And I don't care one bit that it looks better than the majority of PC games (at this time) cos that's a developer/artist's achievement more than a tech one. PS4 specs just allow it to be done, and I'm hoping too we see much better PC ports next gen (for those games I prefer on PC - mainly FPS that are not Sony exclusives)

imt5581311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

@ Eldyraen :

KZ : Shadow Fall already looks better than Crysis 3 in many areas. Check this picture :

http://www.imagetoo.com/ima...

Don't forget that KZ : Shadow Fall is developed on "old" PS4 specs with 4GB GDDR5. Imagine what will GG do with 8GB GDDR5.:)

BitbyDeath1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

@EbeneezerGoode, Some say Killzone looks better than Crysis 3 others say Crysis 3 looks better than KZ.

You gotta admit the differences are not great, and KZ still has months left of development.

Also this is a launch title, so it's only going to keep getting better where as PC games do not improve as fast hence the last game to hold the graphical benchmark being Crysis 1 which released in 2007 and before that I believe was Doom 3 in 2004.

PC can obviously upgrade tech faster but devs do not code for the latest hardware as most PC gamers do not have the requirements to run it.

RumbleFish1311d ago

OMG! Buy less expensive console games, build a pc and look, what it can do. Then return to the console world and you'll miss so many things.
No one who has a good pc now was inpressed by anything shown at the playstation event because we have this kind of graphics for some time now and some pc owners have those graphic quality with a higher framerate than the PS4 will ever have. The PS4 is far away from the power of last years gaming pc with a high end SLI or Crossfire. The pc is expensive but the games are much cheaper.
The pc will probably not have some features they have shown such as sharing and other types of social features. But if you want to do that, there's allways a way to do so on the pc. There's practically nothing you can't do on pc because there are so many crazy people doing their thing on pc. I am a cured playstation fan and I wanted to play with the DS3 on my pc. I can do that because a crazy chinese made a driver for pc. He even bought a license from MS from donations. SONY didn't give me a windows driver for the DS3. They have the best game pad available and don't sell it for the most sold platform! How stupid is that.
SONY misses on so many opportunities. And like last gen there might be features they've announced now that have to be supported by the games themselves. How many games supported remote play? Lair! Nothing against Lair. I liked the game apart from the lousy framerate.
Where was the famous psp rearview mirror?
Just wait and see what the thing really can do when it is available before you claim victory over gaming pcs.

imt5581310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

Edit to my post above :

Info from Beyond3D :

KZ : Shadow Fall is developed on devkits with only 1.5GB GDDR5 RAM. Look picture one more on link above and try to imagine how it will look with 8GB GDDR5 RAM available in final devkits. Guerilla Games FTW!!!:)

Muerte24941310d ago (Edited 1310d ago )

I think you're making the point for everyone when you said "..PC is CAPABLE of". You guys on PC are literally comparing locked in hardware to open ended hardware. Mentioning GFX titan and latest CPU from AMD/Intel. Point is that even PC developers are starting to invest in consoles proves which one is best. Just ask the PCheads pissed @ the Diablo3 announcement. It's true that PC "CAPABILITIES" far outway consoles, but the price to performance isn't there. GFX Titan alone is 1k. You're spending all that money and you're only getting better frame rates, and MAYBE AA.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1310d ago
MaxXAttaxX1311d ago (Edited 1311d ago )

I know that some brag about specs their "rigs" don't even have!

I'm sorry about Diablo 3. I didn't ask for it. I'm sorry about your loss, including other former PC exclusives. But it seems like PC devs are just giving them to us because consoles are pretty profitable.

PC fanboys will talk about how ""BY THE TIME PS4 IS RELEASED IT WILL BE NO MATCH FOR PC"". But who gives a sh**. This goes back to the bragging of specs that many of them don't have. It's mostly hypothetical. Just because certain set ups are possible, doesn't mean every PC gamer shares the shame experience. And most PC games don't even require such high specs to run in the first place.

It's not a competition. Bit they think it is because they're so insecure.