1040°
Submitted by SwiderMan 653d ago | news

Nvidia compares PS4 specs to a 'low-end CPU'

TechRadar: "Compared to gaming PCs, the PS4 specs are in the neighborhood of a low-end CPU, and a low- to mid-range GPU side," said Nvidia's Tony Tamasi to TechRadar.

As Nvidia's senior vice president of content and development, he sees the PS4's specs as outdated, even today.

"If the PS4 ships in December as Sony indicated, it will only offer about half the performance of a GTX680 GPU (based on GFLOPS and texture), which launched in March 2012, more than a year and a half ago." (NVIDIA, PC, PS4, Sony)

Alternative Sources
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 »
Lior  +   653d ago | Well said
Well it is a low end CPU
JsonHenry  +   653d ago | Well said
It is a low end CPU with a mid-low GPU. But you've seen what devs have done with the pathetic PS3/Xbox hardware over the years. I have no doubt that games will be stunning on the next gen titles for quite some time to come.

@Bicfitness- you are wrong and here is the proof. It is mid at best - http://www.videocardbenchma...
#1.1 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(124) | Disagree(24) | Report | Reply
Hydrolex  +   653d ago | Funny
NVidia is just butt hurt !

Thissss ass is on fireeeeeeeeeeeeee by Alicia Keys
#1.1.1 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(256) | Disagree(62) | Report
bicfitness  +   653d ago | Intelligent
A 7870, the PS3's approximate GPU (even the mobility version) is hardly mid-low end. Those things still retail for hundreds and are among the top performing single card soultions on the market NOW. It may not be in the same league as Nvidia's $1000 GPU, but really, what is? And who the heck wants to spend that much money on a GPU? I custom ordered a Sager, and even though I use it heavily, I still have second thoughts about the price I paid.

Cost to performance ratio always weighs in favour of consoles. Always. Especially at launch.
Hydrolex  +   653d ago | Well said
Comparing a 400 500 dollar Console to a PC is just freaking stupid... can't believe Nvidia said that.... that GTX 680 itself was 500 dollars...

Of course sony could make a high end console, but that would cost 1 1.5k and they will go bankrupt because not many people would buy that
#1.1.3 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(118) | Disagree(11) | Report
ABizzel1  +   653d ago | Well said
Low-end CPU, Mid-rang GPU, B@d@$$ RAM ;D

As the others said, NVIDIA is just mad they're not getting any console business this generation.

The only option left is the Nextbox, but all rumors point to them going with AMD as well.

They're the only ones to blame, if you don't want to run a fair business then no one will want to work with you. You can't charge full retail for a product years later, when you've had multiple hardware improvements come out over those years. Hardware depreciates in value annually, and by a significant amount. Heck sometimes it drops significantly within the year. NVIDIA knows that, but they don't want to abide by that.

AMD does and are willing to commit to the terms of the console manufacturers, so NVDIA missed out.

The 3 console business should put AMD's numbers back up, but I'm sure we'll see NVIDIA have a drop especially if the PS3 stops selling as well, and Tegra 4 doesn't take off.

LOL NVIDIA. Grow up. AMD offer affordable prices, and since you want to charge a premium you're stuck with companies that are willing to charge a premium as well, like Apple.
#1.1.4 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(73) | Disagree(19) | Report
Hydrolex  +   653d ago | Well said
HAHAH believe me, if Sony bought their GPUs from Nvidia, this story would have been totally DIFFERENT

" PS4 is a Strong console, we provided Sony with one of our BEST EXCLUSIVE GPU'S available for consoles." and it still would have been a mid rang GPU
Dylila  +   653d ago
it is amazing how the supposed low end specs of the ps4 have displayed graphics exceeding all games ive seen on pcs using the best nvidia cards. killzone shadow fall is said to be using 1.5gbs of ram while the system has 8gbs of gddr5 ram available to be shared.

i cant even imagine what uncharted 4 gran turismo 6 and other playstation exclusives will look like. rumoured specs of ps4 and xbox 720 were revealed by leaked documents last year with everything about the ps4 coming true so onecan also believe the 720 specs. knowing all these things about the ps4 and 720, the ps4 will be making a lot of people depressed and angry like the infidels that didnt believe in the ps3 producing anything like killzone 2.

the ps3 with its weak specs are doing things and did things never seen on any platform. the pc is an amazing platform due to its unlimited power of upgrading but that today is a moot point. we're at a point now where graphics are at a plateau so you wont see much improvements unless resolution will get a massive increase and or we go to holograms. crysis 1 to crysis 3 took 7 years but they look very similar with crysis 3 being superior.

big console devs are way more creative which is evident by devs like naughty dog, sony santa monica, guerilla games, media molecule and others but i think its because they had lower specs to work with and mold. there are so many games on the playstation 3 never matched anywhere else and done with a lot of quality. ps4 will dominate this generation based on what sony have done with ps1, ps2 and especially ps3. killzone shadow falls looks better than every game available while utilizing little specs of the ps4.

i cant imagine what amazing games ps4 will have but i know that ps4 exclusive devs will be trend setters like they are now on ps3.
#1.1.6 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(56) | Disagree(53) | Report
gaffyh  +   653d ago | Well said
It's also worth remembering, that the OS overhead for games consoles is usually very tiny. I think the PS3's OS runs on 64 MB of RAM, and that's it. This is not the case with PCs which have a big overhead with Windows OS, print spoolers, antivirus, component drivers and software etc.
#1.1.7 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(23) | Disagree(4) | Report
HammadTheBeast  +   653d ago | Well said
Yeah it is low end...

COMPARED TO THE $1000 PARTS WE SELL!!!
morganfell  +   653d ago | Well said
You cannot compare a console GPU in a vacuum without considering the CPU and RAM to which it is mated. The components may be similar to those found in a PC but everything, from the OS to the manner in which they are co-located on die to the system by which they utilize memory, is wholly different from a PC.

Nvidia isn't going to win any maturity contests. Had they not been so greedy and realized Sony and MS needed to reduce console costs then they might be in a different position. Personally this kind of attitude makes me look at Radeon cards for my PC.

EDIT: He is stating the obvious? No. People with a simple view and that lack understanding agree.

And how about we discuss the importance of PC games to publishers?

People need to quit kidding themselves that the next gen will actually help PC gaming. It's a pipe dream. People have no idea what is involved in PC development and they actually believe the devs will flip a switch and get a magical PC version. It doesn't work like that. Also people fail to understand the budget that is set aside for support - pubs aren't just going to cough that up for low return PC versions.

The versions that do go to PC, well, just remember they were built for console first. We have Blizzard and everyone else formerly PC exclusive is next. How does that feel for a little truth.
#1.1.9 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(27) | Disagree(16) | Report
WrAiTh Sp3cTr3  +   653d ago
So just because the guy is stating the obvious, people are mad? You fanboys are plentiful, so why does everyone else need to stroke your delusional egos?
starchild  +   653d ago | Well said
I'm a PC gamer, but even I think this trend of comparing consoles to PC gaming hardware straight accross is silly and pointless.

There are lots of reasons I could go into why you can get a lot more out of a console than a similarly spec'ed PC, but we can all see for ourselves that consoles always acquit themselves quite well given the static hardware they ship with.

Sure, PCs can always pretty up the visuals a bit and that is one of the benefits I enjoy about the PC, but the consoles really are the nucleus that the industry revolves around and they seem to dictate the baseline visuals that we will be experiencing. PS4 and next Xbox games will look great and will be a profound leap over current gen console games.
TheTwelve  +   653d ago | Well said
Wow NVIDIA is ANGRY
aceitman  +   653d ago
ps3 is basically 1/2 gig (512)and amazing looking games came out from 1st party devs imagine 8 they will blow us away period e3 will show and tell all , killzone is in beta form .
scott182  +   653d ago
Who cares about specs? When sony game devs are so talented making those mind blowing games both graphically and gameplay wise... Who needs any more than what they are putting into it? Any more would be overkill.
Tsar4ever  +   653d ago
Sony is not trying to compete with the pc, it annonced it wanting to be more like a pc for the sake of dev parity. So I don,t understand all this
Partisan reteric from nvidia and pc community. As
Far as harware is conserned, ps4 and pc are like
Family now. Maybe all this hate or envy is really
About the ps4's GDDR5 memory, and it,s unpresedent
Valumn. Not even nvidia's super pc titan card have as much gddr ram.
MikeMyers  +   653d ago | Well said
Did Nvidia say the same thing prior to the PS3 coming out? Nope.

http://www.edge-online.com/...

Look at how supportive they were with Sony and the PS3 back then but blasted Microsoft. Which of course was expected since Microsoft went with ATI instead (on the Xbox 360) after being partnered with Nvidia for the original Xbox.
#1.1.16 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(23) | Disagree(3) | Report
AsimLeonheart  +   653d ago
Nvidia is just bitter that hey did not get the contract from Sony for the GPU/CPU for PS4. That is why they have been spouting this hate towards PS4 and Sony. If Sony had hired them to make the GPU/CPU then Sony and PS4 would have the best in the world even with the same specs that have been announced. Greedy and butthurt businessmen!
" But you've seen what devs have done with the pathetic PS3/Xbox hardware over the years"

Soo seeing that it's x86 and devs say "F**k it let just push pc cuz we can and it's easy!!"

How good will ps4 look?

Ps3 and 360 games look good next to pc because they won't make games look way way different onpc. The cards pc gamers have now will be ready for next gen ports but have been available for years.

If BF3 has 48 extra players and bigger maps on pc then it make me wonder if they will push pc higher than ps4?

Or make it 1:1 with ps4 version?

x86 make the industry interesting now.

Will a game bigger than planetside 2 come that will push pc? When then about ps4?

Ps4 is great for the exclusives like pc is. But What will make ps4 look relevant is if the hold back a gtx760 to make games look the same as ps4 games.

Understand what I am sayin? I am not trying to come at you bro.

Also ddr4 and gddr6 comes out next year.
http://vr-zone.com/articles...

lol If only ps4 was coming out hoilday 2014 it would have gddr6.

I would be stupid to not still get ps4 though.

As long as devs hold back pc then ps4 games will look good or at least decent next to it.
#1.1.18 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(9) | Report
knowyourstuff  +   653d ago
The reason Killzone looks so amazing with "low end PC specs" is because there is no complex operating system like Windows running in the background. The OS is by comparison much simpler, there are no programs running in the background like a PC, plus games are made specifically catered to the architecture of that console.

PC's are different, where sometimes your specific architecture isn't as compatible as it should be, where some brands of video cards just work better on some games than others and vice versa, some sound cards don't work on certain games, it's a bit more hit and miss. However with a PC, when you do hit, you have the potential to knock it out of the park with higher resolution, better anti aliasing etc.

However you will be expected to pay more per year upgrading your rig if you want the absolute best there is to offer, so it's all about tradeoffs.
#1.1.19 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(20) | Disagree(5) | Report
SilentNegotiator  +   653d ago
Makes you wonder if they're doing stuff for the next Xbox, them carrying on like this.

But then, AMD more or less beat them to the punch for once, so they could be annoyed even if they dropped out of the console market all together.
SwiderMan  +   653d ago
@SilentNegotiator Nvidia kind of rips on Xbox 720, too, so I don't know how likely it is that they will design Microsoft's next GPU.
SilentNegotiator  +   653d ago
@swinderman

Well anyway, even in that case, they would benefit from belittling the new consoles to try and get people to go PC.

As AMD snatches up big contracts, Nvidia must be very intimidated.
#1.1.22 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(2) | Report
Ju  +   652d ago
Makes me wonder why they even bother selling a Tegra chip, or what was that all about their "useless" Project Shield then? The 680 makes those look like child play.

Must not apply to in house products, then, I suppose?
chaos-lockheart  +   652d ago
I don't seem to see Nvidia talk a lot when the PS3 had their GPU, now its AMD with Sony and now they are like saying how the PS4 is not a good investment. And they are like comparing so many hardware specs.
Bigpappy  +   652d ago
The guy is not out there slamming the PS4. He was asked and is giving his professional assessment. The PS4 looks to be a great jump from this gen of consoles. But why does it have to match a high end PC for you guys to be happy. Sounds like a lot of PS fans want Sony to build and expensive console and give it to them, at a big lost, in the name of gaming.
R6ex  +   652d ago
Hope Nvidia will produce its own console (with high-end parts) someday.
SkyGamer  +   652d ago
NVidia is right. By the time the ps4 ships, AMD will already have that mobile processor in laptops. The 7970m was already in macs over a year ago today and by December, 2 years old! If MS releases laptop specs, I will definitely skip next gen. Don't buy into the hype and bs! AMD hasn't been the same since the advent of multi-core. Such a shame too because they kicked some serious booty with their Athlon FX series. Talk to anyone who knows a little about computers, you mention AMD and instantly techs know you aren't talking about performance. Sad when a Core i5 2500k will outperform MOST anything AMD has to offer. This is coming from a tech who owns both AMD and Intel and NVidia. Sony wanted to be more development friendly, great! Going in AS a "Computer Entertainment System" with low end PC specs is just really foolish. Xbox has always been a "Video Game Console." MS knew that you distinguish yourself as a PC and you have the lifespan of a PC.

P.S. There is a BIG difference in GDDR5 and DDR3. One is in video cards and is limited and the other can do anything.
#1.1.27 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(9) | Report
jmc8888  +   652d ago
People are SOOO stupid.

I agree with Henry that we've seen miracles of what the previous consoles can do, and we'll see the same thing from this gen....

But it ISN'T a 7870, it's less than a 7850.

7870m does not equal 7870, it's like saying a car with a v8 is just as fast as the 4 cylinder version is.

On top of this you don't need a "GTX 680 that costs 500" to beat it.

Hey but aren't you losing that entire battle with that?

Because the PS4 should be 500-600 most likely, perhaps $429...if we're lucky.

But again...the 680 isn't the 670. The 670 is ONLY 10 percent less power...which can be overclocked to exceed the 680's power FWIW. But let's forget that. The 670 IS 1/3 more raw power than the PS4.

So the 670 isn't 500, it's 400...except everywhere I look I see it for 339-369...

But wait there's more!

The GTX 700 series will be out BEFORE the PS4 hits shelves.

So expect 40-60, perhaps up to 100 percent increases for the same prices.

So instead of 33, how about 100 percent increase in PC's for $399 when a PS4 costs what it does??
Irishguy95  +   652d ago
I see there are plenty of ignorant who think the Ram will actually improve the games. Again, Ram is a limiter for the Gpu. The GPu is the one that does all the work. Then comes the CPu. Again 4GB is all the Ps4 needed. The only reason sony want 8gb's was because MS is rumored to have GB's. They're just playing it safe for the sake of covering their *** again console features(such as voice chat on Ps3, if only sony had their ram shared)

Again, stick 8GB's of ram in the ps3 and 360. Do you think they games will improve noticeably? No they won't, the Graphics processing unit is not improving, nor is the Cell. If only it was that easy to upgrade your PC.

Also I thought the Ps4 is supposed to have something equivalent to a 560ti? That is one of the most common gaming GPu's no? mid to high power at great cost.(Albeit, outdated by the 600 models) It's what I would buy if I was upgrading my PC(although again, the 660ti since it's newer)

Edit-- You know why Sony emphasized the 8GB's Ram? Because only a small minority of gamers know that it won't really make a difference from 4Gbs. The rest think Ram is a vital component which provides 50% of the power required for good graphics
#1.1.29 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(7) | Report
scissor_runner  +   652d ago
For the people impressed by the ps4 just know the jump could have been way bigger. Also understand the gt690 will go on sale very soon after the ps4 release, making it affordable.

The big talk in computer graphics is every one using direct x 11 gear now even good ol maya. The price problem will pop up again. The only thing that will save the ps4 is game play.
SephirothX21  +   652d ago
@MorganFell
Blizzard are bringing Diablo 3 to PS4. A game that's out on PC over a year already. You think that means they will concentrate less on PC? Some games are meant for a keyboard and mouse. Your comment about console ports to PC is not true. Yes multiplatform games will be tailored for PS4 and 720 hardware specifically but because PS4 hardware is a lot more similar to what is in your average gaming PC when compared with the PS3 hardware, devs have to do less work to make the games perform well on all three platforms. Remember, the multiplatform games will be on the next Xbox which will be using DirectX 11 graphics API which is the graphics API most supported for PC games currently. I'm currently writing a game engine with DirectX 11 and my code runs well on different laptops with different hardware. PC is the premium gaming platform and it comes at a much higher price than consoles and therefore PCs and consoles shouldn't really be compared. Having said that, PS4 is still a big leap over PS3 and multi games will now take more advantage of the GTX 680 sitting in my PC.
bangshi  +   652d ago
How is he wrong? You provide a link where the aformentioned graphics card is in the 'High End' list and it is the 14th highest card.

Actually he is wrong in that it compares best to the 7870.

It actually sits somewhere in between the 7870 and the 7850.

The GTX 660 also occupies that space.

The GTX 660 is a high end card.

I think people here have no clue what a high end card is.

The likes of the Titan, 680, 690, 7970 are enthusiast cards.

Low, Mid, High, Enthusiast.

Those are your brackets.

The PS4 GPU is most definitely mid-to-high. At the moment.

When it releases, that could be different, but this year is a re-badge year so don't expect big jumps in performance across the board on new cards. Certainly not 100% as jmc8888 claims above.

The CPU is certainly weak, but it doesn't need to be high end.

Even then, it isn't just about saying part X is weak and part Y is weaker. It is the sum of all parts, and how those parts operate together.

For example, a car with 'weaker' parts could outperform a car with stronger parts if its weaker parts have greater efficiency.
#1.1.32 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report
vulcanproject  +   652d ago
Don't see what the fuss is about, he is only pointing out the obvious and well known.

He is probably just highlighting what I have been saying for some time, the gap between the PS4 and a good PC is larger than it was between a good PC and Xbox 360, when that generation began back in 2005.

The consoles are giving away more to PC than they ever have before. Xbox 360 had a GPU as fast as anything around up to about 6 months before it launched, PS4's GPU wasn't considered high end as of about March 2012, a year ago already and 18 month+ by the time it makes it market.

But thats obvious to me.

Everyone banging on about how consoles can rival PC when they launch well they used to be able to because they used to be pretty high end stuff.

That just isn't the case with PS4. Its a midrange PC, at best.
#1.1.33 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(3) | Report
PeaSFor  +   652d ago
whats the price tag of a GTX680 again?
i paid my msi gtx680 lightning 545$,....and thats JUST THE CARD WITHOUT THE WHOLE SYSTEM..

now if nvidia can compare a fully functioning console with a price tag of 449-500$(i guess) to a single pc PART wich cost 550$.... welll, thats just silly, retarded and blatantly out of context.

bravo Nvidia...bravo.
Gamer1982  +   652d ago
Exactly games will look 10X better than they do now but not on an obvious level. People who know nothing about graphics will disagree. As for comparing it to the GTX680 I find that hilarious as its gonna launch at nearly half the price of it! And thats not just the graphics. Thats the whole damn system! Nvidias just really annoyed Sony didnt go to them this generation for graphics chip and went AMD instead as they saw the console and thought..Damn this things gonna sell soo many AMD chips..
adorie  +   653d ago
Yes and no... It's not as simple as adding more CUDA CORES and upping the clocks. The chip is a SoC and it seems AMD has made it clear that's where they're heading.

John Carmack didn't say anything negative about it. That right there shows me the thing has a lot of potential to exploit. Let's not forget UE4 tech demo running on PS4, and not even fully optimised, if some of these articles are correct.

Nvidia just wants more Titan sales... they need to shuddap and bring on Maxwell. Cause I wanna upgrade already.
#1.2 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
solid_warlord  +   652d ago
No ones gonna buy titan, just ultra geeks
ijust2good  +   652d ago
Titan GPU is for geeks...how on earth will anyone will pay for any graphics card worth more than a PS3 was on launch. No normal people with buy such as expesive crap just to play video games.
SwiderMan  +   652d ago
Maybe, just maybe as the casual takes over, hardcore will migrate to machines that tailor to that experience (like PC gaming and GPUs like the Titan).

It's getting harder and harder for console game companies to eek out a profit with triple-A console games.
Andreex  +   652d ago
Carmack? Pffft that guy stopped being relevant in 2001...who cares what he says, he is just a has been
scissor_runner  +   652d ago
There is the problem right there. Devs will not have too many problems on the ps4 but buyers will. Every one except the so called hardcore console gamers know nvidia and intel wipes the floor with amd right now.

Amd is not worth a premium price so if Sony try's to pull a $600 or above system launch lots of people will not see the value.

Sony fans should even know game play and art are the cornerstones to good games not tech. They need to say some thing like we have the tech, price and games you want and get off this we are so powerful. Or maybe it's the fans doing this.
Linsolv  +   652d ago
Carmack said years ago, though not in these terms, that he'd decided it was time to stop fighting consoles. It's not surprising that he would then go on to not complain if it was middle-end (especially since it will let him work with x86 code, which means PCs get to take full advantage) because I think in his mind, consoles will always be and have always been middle-end. But his insistence on fighting them, he regrets, says it was a bad choice. So he wouldn't bring it up.
vulcanproject  +   652d ago
Nvidia will sell every Titan they make over the next few months. It is a limited edition part anyway.

Its not about that, its about what the mainstream parts will be like by the time PS4 actually get released and settled, by the time that happens, Titan performance WILL be closer to mainstream.

Fact is its still only about 20 percent faster than a 7970 ghz and that part will be replaced with a refresh by the time PS4 arrives, the entire graphics card lineup will be replaced with faster parts closer to Titan.

The OEM parts will be rebadges for AMD but I am confident their board partners will be able to push refined silicon further beyond 7970 ghz. In fact said card can already be overclocked beyond 1200mhz and within a whisker of Titan, not impossible third party boards of just a rebadge on a newer revision can do that out the box.

I don't expect a massive leap in performance this year from PC GPUs but it'll get another small step from silicon refinements before PS4 even launches.
#1.2.7 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
awi5951   652d ago | Trolling | show
MariaHelFutura  +   653d ago
And the troll train keeps chuggin'.....
The_Con-Sept  +   652d ago
Agreed. Seems like someone is a little bit mad about not getting in bed with Sony this generation....
camel_toad  +   653d ago
I've always had a top of the line or near top of the line pc every time a new console generation begins and the consoles always have had an edge when they first hit because they are generally dedicated to gaming.

It's not until halfway or until the end of a console's life cycle that pcs edge them out.

Pc games will always have the advantage in the long run but with the graphical dedication of a new console launch the consoles take the lead in the first half (Nintendo being the exception).
#1.4 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
ijust2good  +   652d ago
Ps4 will be relevant the next 4 years
awi5951  +   652d ago
My old ATI 4870 i had was always better than any of the console GPu's. You should have seen bad company 2 running on my old rig. It blew the console versions away. It would run witcher 2 on max when i bought a second one on ebay for 40 dollars. No game on console came close to a 80 dollar crossfire build i made on the cheap 5 years ago. My old card would run any current game even crysis on ultra at 30 fps if it didnt max out any other game at 100fps.

Hell with a single gpu crysis was the only game that would hurt that card. I played every game that came out on pc pretty much, Fallout 3, dead space,dragon age, mass effect, left4dead, the batman games,the elder scrolls games, all of them ran on max settings. And they looked way better than the console versions. These past few years i had to upgrade for BF3 thats the only games that would hurt that old card.
#1.4.2 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
Good_Guy_Jamal  +   653d ago
To be honest, this is all greek to me. GPU's and CPU's and CTU's don't mean anything to me, although I'm almost certain Jack Bauer worked at one of them!
What I do know is that developers seem to be very happy with the specs and that's all that matters in the end because they are the ones that make my games!
seanpitt23  +   653d ago
Sour grapes because Sony didn't want to pay for over priced nvidia specs and went with AMD instead
ATi_Elite  +   653d ago
Silence Nvidia has spoken!
What he said is really true even though Sony fanboys don't want to accept that.

BUT.........

He didn't mention that Devs will be able to program to the Metal thus getting a lot of performance out of the PS4. It will be perfected over years so it will be pushed to it's limits unlike PC's which are RAW unoptimized power from Day 1.

all in all comparing consoles to PC is stupid anyway.

PC = the Bleeding Edge tech and innovation
Consoles = that tech optimized and perfected.
#1.7 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(28) | Disagree(12) | Report | Reply
Th4Freak  +   653d ago
From my last comment: "What bothers me is how hipocrite this guy is, why didn't they say that in 2006 when the PS3 was launched and also that same month they released the GeForce 8 Series?

From Wikipedia: "RSX: Based on G71 Chip in turn based on the 7800 but with cut down features like lower memory bandwidth and only as many ROPs as the lower end 7600."

That means that the 8800 GTX wasn't only one generation ahead but also it is about 150% powerful than the RSX. So the question is why didn't they trash talked in 2006 when the PS3 was released and it has a "low-end" chip made by them?

It very clear that these guys are just butthurt because Sony told them to f*ck themselves, otherwise why would they keep they mouth shut when they released an outdated GPU for the PS3 7 years ago?"
#1.7.1 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(21) | Disagree(0) | Report
Ezz2013  +   653d ago
The Glorious PC Gaming Master Race
@ATi_Elite
you forgot to say this
ZoyosJD  +   653d ago
Cards are defined a low, mid, high and enthusiast for each new series.

For example from wikipedia:

Entry-level cards 73xx - 75xx
Mid-range cards 76xx - 77xx
High-end cards 78xx - 7970 GHz Edition
Enthusiast cards 7990

By any means that is a high end card.

Look at steam system spec survey. Less than 5% of PC gamers have a rig that is even that powerful even from an unoptimized standpoint.

And even if it were true, they are just being salty.
delboy  +   652d ago
Ps360 was cuting edge on relase,ps4 and next box are not.
End of story.
DigitalSmoke  +   652d ago
Its not about WHAT he said, its about the motivatuion behind it, and its a envious one.
Nvidia is known to be extremely expansive when it comes to their custom hardware, their frames per sec to dollar metric shows this for the PC market as well.

That being said, as a PC gamer, ill take optimized Uncharted experiences over stuttery, bad optimized and lack of feature filling PC titles anyday.
MarkusMcNugen  +   652d ago
@ZoyosJD

"For example from wikipedia:

Entry-level cards 73xx - 75xx
Mid-range cards 76xx - 77xx
High-end cards 78xx - 7970 GHz Edition
Enthusiast cards 7990"

Sorry my man, it seems youve mistaken the 7970 and the 7970m. M, which stands for mobility, which is for laptops...

Heres the spec difference between a 7970 and a 7970m:

Radeon HD7970 -
Memory: 3072 GBs
GPU Clock: 925 MHz
Memory Clock: 1375 MHz
Pixel Fillrate: 29.6 GP/s
Texture Fillrate: 118.4 GT/s
Bandwidth: 264 GB/s
Bus Width: 384 bits
GLOPS: 3788.8

Radeon HD7970M -
Memory: 2048GBs
GPU Clock: 850 MHz
Memory Clock: 1200 MHz
Pixel Fillrate: 27.2 GP/s
Texture Fillrate: 68 GT/s
Bandwidth: 153.6 GB/s
Bus Width: 256 bits
GLOPs: 2176

The GPU in the PS4 will be more like a 7970m, not a 7970. Thats a big difference.
#1.7.6 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report
imdaboss1  +   653d ago
Nvidia is salty as fukc ..Whats up with all the damage control? I understand Sony and Microsoft dont want to deal with you but there no need to be bitter..No one wants to do business with you guys in the futures anymore,since you acting like a sore loser right now..Thanks for stating the obvious but it still dont change the fact PS4 is a high end PC and developers goin to push the hardware to its fullest by using their engines..
RandomDude655  +   652d ago
PC games will now be optimized for amd gpus due to the consoles (Also a lot of coders for OpenCL and not CUDA).
Mobile/Tablet will continue to be majority powervr gpus.

They are scared.
#1.8.1 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report
1nsaint  +   653d ago
OH REALLY NVIDIA!!! Here's my low end pc specs: 1.7 ghz singlecore CPU, 1.5 gb RAM
256 mb nvidia graphic card.. This bitch cant even handle ps2 games on max graphics

So Yeah that's really comparable to a ps4.... -.-
iamgoatman  +   653d ago
That's not low-end, that's ancient!
1nsaint  +   653d ago
@imgoatman i know... :'( xD
Reverent  +   653d ago
How about this. My specs:

Dual Graphics Card 7670M HD + 7770M HD 2GB GDDR5
1.9 Ghz Quad-core CPU, 8GB RAM. (Mid-Highish Range Specs)

MY PC can't run a lot of modern day games at even mid-high settings. So to say the PS4 is using low-end specs is F**king stupid.
ZoyosJD  +   653d ago
@reverent...two mobile graphics cards you can't even crossfire.

Your either confused, wasting a lot of money, or both.
OpenGL  +   652d ago
@ZoyosJD

It sounds like he's using an AMD A8-4500M, so it's actually an integrated Radeon 7640G. Asymmetrical Crossfire isn't supported but the 7640G is still useful for switchable graphics.

If he's made two mistakes and is actually using a 7670M then yes he can utilize asymmetrical Crossfire as it is not based on GCN.
ZoyosJD  +   652d ago
@OpenGL...yeah, I would hope he's getting some use out of whatever he is using.

But, nontheless SLI or Crossfire in a laptop, even with mid range cards...you'd be looking to melt it.

And dat in-efficency; the last time I saw a decent SLI or crossfire output was a custom Linux kernel for a server using a multi-card business solution and asymmetrical doesn't sound halfway as appealing as traditional in a non-custom environment.
The_Infected  +   653d ago
Yea and all 8 cores will be utilized by damn good Developrs since they will be focusing on dedicated hardware. So that low/mid range CPU will scream.
mistertwoturbo  +   653d ago
Nvidia is just sour about it. They have basically no stake in the PS4/NextBox/Wii U so they'll say anything they can.

With that said, the CPU is obviously "low-end" in the computer world, but who cares? It's not going to be used to do Video Editing or server work or anything like that.
GraveLord  +   653d ago
CPU isn't as important these days. It'll get the job done. Anyway the GPU can lift some of the load off the CPU.

LOL at Nvidia so butthurt over AMD being in all next gen consoles.
CouldHaveYelledUiiW  +   653d ago
His comment is kind of misleading what many have said is that the great thing about the PS4's Architecture is insane amount of GDDR memory that they have, 8 Gigs.

This is unprecedented, this will allow for extremely efficient operation. So, what ever the specs on the GPU and the CPU are the mass amounts of RAM- makes everything run smoother than even some faster Chips and GPU could accomplish.

This is exactly what the WiiU had accomplished (2GBs of GDDR)- except on STEROIDS.

PCs WILL surpass but NOT yet.
#1.13 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
CheexInk  +   652d ago
Are you kidding? Why is everyone obsessed with RAM? RAM is not a performance part. Buying "high-end" RAM and tweaking timings is only something a serious overclocking enthusiast does because it amounts to next to nothing in terms of performance. Performance comes from your CPU and GPU, your RAM and Motherboard just have to be able to handle them.

PCs have been surpassing this configuration for a couple of years now and it will be even further past when they are actually released.
CouldHaveYelledUiiW  +   652d ago
@Cheexlnk

"Performance comes from your CPU and GPU, your RAM and Motherboard just have to be able to handle them. "

So, your saying that a System that has a Great Internal Architecture can handle the Power of the CPU and GPU BETTER-

That is exactly what I said.

Even as Nividia Hates their are developers singing the praises of PS4 over PC.

"LISTEN!",
I'm not a Sony Fanboy-

In fact I argue with them a lot. But I think you are being bigoted toward Consoles.

PC's are awesome, I agree.
(I own a Wii and a PC. So I don't even care about the best HD and graphics)
And PC's will most of the time be more powerful, but if the developers are correct- THAT "TIME" AIN'T NOW.

BUT
That does not mean PS4 won't be surpassed, soon.
CheexInk  +   652d ago
Who do you think has a more accurate opinion of computer architecture, game devs trying to get people hyped for their next-gen titles or people that are making the cutting edge of GPUs and motherboard chipsets? And I'm sure the devs are ecstatic, they have every reason to be. When you compare the PS4 to the PS3 or 360 then it IS a huge leap. It's just that it's still going to be a low-mid range PC when you compare it to something someone would build today or especially when the PS4 is actually released.

"So, your saying that a System that has a Great Internal Architecture can handle the Power of the CPU and GPU BETTER- "

That clearly ISN'T what I said. I was commenting on what you said about RAM which does not equal Great Internal Architecture. If you want to talk about that then you should be talking about how they put the CPU and GPU on the same die, not how their RAM is so OMGFAST because that makes practically no difference.

Even with that "new" architecture (which is just an extension of the low end laptop APUs AMD has already been putting out for a couple years) it is not going to make up for the fact that they are using low-end parts because that's just how consoles work.
falcon79  +   652d ago
Look at NFS wiiu,the dev says out right it matches the HIGH END pc version in graphics with improved night the wiiu is already achieving what this guy says ps4 can't do ? he says ps4 is a low end pc ? so it can't do games equal to a high end pc like what wiiu has done already ? WiiU will be fine in graphics nextgen,physics with all that eDRAM and cache will be awesome on 1st party games i'm glad i got a wiiu.
jerethdagryphon  +   652d ago
To help with the ram is king debate. This is a example of how ram actualy affect data . The following is an analogy.

You work in an office manually transcribing books . You open them and start writing them out thats your job.

However your desk is only 1 square foot barly enough room to open an book and not enough to write as well so you open the book read a line close the book and write the line . This is the equivalent of
4mb ram (I know you could do more with 4mb but its an analogy)

Doubling the desk to 2 square foot means you can read and write at the same time

Doubling again means you can have 2 books on the go

Doubling to 8 squarefoot gives you the ability to have more pafes avalibpe at once

And on it goes 8 gb ram means the game can have hundreds 9f pages or files or what ever loaded and ready to be manipulated

It willean better models and textures yes as those are things that cant really be loaded in parts

At the end of the analogy a 8 gb desk is 2048 square feet of workspace. Of corse too large a ram pool used to slow down pcs but not anymore
showtimefolks  +   653d ago
So just because Sony or ms didn't want to pay top end to nvidia all of the sudden they have hings to say about consoles

It was nvidia who failed MS with original Xbox. They expense we so much that ms just moved on

You can buy better products than paying for anything nvidia, they are like apple charge for their name sake
solid_warlord  +   652d ago
Jelousy
AO1JMM  +   652d ago
Truth
colonel179  +   652d ago
I don't care if it's a low end PC as long as is a high enough leap from the PS3. I don't understand why everyone is obsessed about this. Why does it have to be the best supercomputer in the world? Was someone actually expecting that?

Also, Nvidia is butthurt or something, because they are trying to downplay the PS4 so much.
SwiderMan  +   652d ago
@R6ex Nvidia is developing Project Shield, a handheld system that plays all Steam and PC games through local WiFi (when you have a GeForce card).

I got to play it - it's pretty nifty, and it can be streamed back out to the television.

So imagine having a GeForce card-equipped PC with all of your Steam games in a computer or bedroom, using the handheld controller on the balcony or outside, or, heck the toilet and when you're on the in the mood for a really big screen, streaming it to your bigscreen TV.

Eventually, I think that (not Project Shield in particular, but the concept of having a portable device project [through streaming] to other TVs or devices) in the future.
badz149  +   652d ago
do you really think that SHIELD is going to do any good to them?
I don't know what nVidia is smoking but how the hell do they even think that the SHIELD is going to take off successfully! sure...it can stream you Steam games but only if you're AT HOME! outside, it's just an overprice Android just like any other Android phones only heavier and bulkier...only god knows why anyone would use it outside!

when the only place you can use it to it's full capabilities is AT HOME, why don't you just game on PC then? bigger screen, better resolution and most importantly...keyboard + mouse! that's why I think nVidia in out of their mind because pc gamers love kb+m, so why would they go handheld which is limited to a gamepad? and someone with a powerful enough card to allow streaming to the SHIELD means that he/she is a hardcore pc gamer thus again...why the hell would they choose the limited handheld over their pc setups? casuals aren't going to buy SHIELD so...who's going to buy it then?

back on topic, this is nVidia getting butthurt and anything they said won't stop the next gen consoles from selling! sure...GTX680 is powerful but if the PS4 manage to sell like 5 million in its 1st year...has there been 5 million pc gamers that have the 680 until now? I seriously doubt it! statistic from Steam shows that majority of gamers are only at mid-range and I doubt these are going to outperform the PS4 just like my i5 + 6850 aren't going to magically run games better than the PS4 given that it struggles to run most new games at 1080p at 60fps!
Psn800  +   652d ago
They got to have a go why I wonder ? ATI ARE THE BEST ,
IAmLee  +   652d ago
Jeeze, talk about being butthurt :')

I've seen like 3 different things they've said now, and that's since yesterday, so much butthurt.
fermcr  +   652d ago
Not bashing the PS4 or Next Xbox, since both of them will probably use AMD/ATI (ATI belongs to AMD) CPU/GPU, but in the PC market, Intel have the best CPU's and Nvidia have the best GPU's.

I can understand why Sony and Microsoft went with AMD/ATI. They might not be as good as the Intel/Nvidia combination, but it's cheaper and gets the job done quite nicely.
#1.21 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
falcon79  +   652d ago
PS4 is Basically atom cores very poor :'-( WiiU has 3 powerful cores with eDRAM cache ive never seen that before in fact the wiiu cpu in the only cpu with eDram cache on the cores very powerful and lots of Bandwidth RAM on the wiiu chips.

a tricore 4 stage pipeline risc cpu with 4/5 instructions per clock a high bandwidth edram catch 4 x data compression,graphics data custom burst pipes to gpu,custom regesters and instructions at 45 nm MCM with high speed connectors not standard buses IS CUTTING EDGE TECH.
broadway @729mhz would beat a intel ATOM @1.6mhz with shere ease it will litterally leave it for dead and thats wii,expresso per core easily destroys each jaguar core expected in the other systems there basically AMDs version of ATOM slightly better,same catch,same pipe stages,same VERY BASIC x86 core just some added basic out of order thats it.
1up  +   652d ago
yeah the cpu isnt that great and yes the gpu is a low to mid range card, if u really want to game on the pc u would pick up something better.

and to all u guys that keep pulling the 8gb gddr5 ram card. show me the rams clock speed and its latency ratings before u go on and on about it, because when it comes to ram thats whats important.
brich233  +   652d ago
specs are not going to matter, the console will be competitive and the games will look good for 5-10 years plus
TAURUS-555  +   652d ago
this guys jealous cuz hes gonna be getting a cheap 720.
yeahokchief  +   652d ago
I wouldn't be surprised if the lowlife losers who troll on forums comparing pcs to consoles were all just nvidia employees.

I buy hardware for The Gamez. Not to waste money on some overpriced crap! PS4 will be awesome and 4x cheaper than mid level pc gaming! So even if it is low level pc I think that is extreme value especially when you consider all the exclusives, an online experience less rampant with cheaters/piracy, games releasing on console first and not ever having to mess with drivers or other miscellaneous incompatibilities/upgrades.

If I do buy another pc, it will be a very moderate one just to play dota 2 and for a few design softwares.

I can gaurantee you i'm never spending up to $400 on a graphic card.

Their mobile graphic cards are a complete ripoff. They jacked up their prices like nuts when they 7970m had the enduro problems.

If it weren't for Nvidias ridiculous prices I might have a new laptop right now and be a pc gamer in addition to ps3. They did this to themselves by ripping off their customers. I only buy value.
#1.26 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
FanboyPunisher  +   651d ago
The level of stupidity and console fangirls defending crap hardware is pathetic.

Well,we canonly hope 1080p finally becomes standard for consoles;lol!

Please get a grip;PS4 is low end.
Nyxus  +   653d ago
'"What you get today in terms of performance is what you're stuck with 5-10 years down the road. PCs don't have these problems," he told TechRadar.'

Stop the presses!
smashcrashbash  +   653d ago
Captain obvious strikes again.Hello. That is true with every console.Have you guys just come down from space or something?
Nyxus  +   653d ago
Exactly. And at the end of the day, it does not matter. Right now I'm playing Ni No Kuni, a newly released game on six year old hardware, and it's great. So why would I be worried about the PS4?
HammadTheBeast  +   653d ago
He's so stupid, you spend the same money upgrading PC's, while devs unlock more power from consoles. Either way, same thing.
imdaboss1  +   653d ago
Its obvious they are hurting right now since Sony didnt do business with them.. All the negative talk about the PS4 makes them a cry baby.Why cant you say anything good about the PS4?
aquamala  +   653d ago
very true

if you want to argue consoles cost less, you get more for the money, or you can optimize more with consoles. I get that and agree. But what he said is correct regarding the hardware specs.
#3 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(18) | Report | Reply
Th4Freak  +   653d ago
Wow, someone is severely butthurt.

http://cache.ohinternet.com...
#4 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(28) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
arbitor365  +   653d ago
an 8 core CPU is not "low end." period
JsonHenry  +   653d ago
It is when compared to its PC counter-parts. And since it is an off the shelf PC CPU then it is, in fact, low end no matter how you look at it. And it will be even lower by release date of the PS3. But no worries. Both the PS3 and Xbox had low end CPUs (yes, the cell was low end despite the hype) and they worked great for years.
Pandamobile  +   653d ago
Actually, the PS3 and 360's CPU's were more on the high end.

360 and PS3 games were bound by their crappy GPUs, which led to a lot of ports to PC (GTA IV being a major culprit) requiring really good CPUs in order to run smoothly.
Bakkies  +   653d ago
Hello.

PS3 CPU: 218 GFLOPS
Xbox360 CPU: 115 GFLOPS
Core i7-980 @4.5GHz: 95 GFLOPS

*FLOPS (or flops, for FLoating-point Operations Per Second)

You are wrong, now you must admit you are wrong, so you can go on with your life, but you're not, you are going to slither out of this one.

Unless you can find that illusive low-end cpu nobody has ever seen or heard of.
mcgrottys  +   653d ago
@Bakkies

you are comparing 3 completely different architectures, but I will have to agree that they were not low end.

PS3 = Cell,
360 = PowerPC
Intel = x86

and also remember that 8 logical cores beats out 8 cells in almost anything, sure things like folding@home and other software ran better on the Cell but that is because it was designed for specific hardware while for home computers there is fragmentation. I'm sure if they designed it to take better advantage of multi threaded processors and there was no need to worry about overhead then the i7 would smash the Cell.
#5.1.3 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(1) | Report
Rush  +   653d ago
You do know that if GFLOPS meant real world performance a low end GPU would destroy any processor on the planet at everything....

Of course only knuckleheads believe it's good to measure a CPU's performance via GFLOPS...
#5.1.4 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(3) | Report
papashango  +   653d ago
really dislike when people try and determine CPU power and efficiency on GFLOPS.

so freaking stupid.
Ezz2013  +   653d ago
well, i have never in my life see someone get this butthurt it mind blowing

sony wanted ATI ..Nvidia's senior vice president get over your self and stop crying
Tr10wn  +   652d ago
I kinda get his point i mean hes not lying or anything he's proving facts, by the end of this year i will have a PC with better specs than the PS4 for less than 400$ excluding RAM but since the leap from DDR2 to DDR3 wasn't that big i dont expect DDR5 to be a game changer, Nvidia and Intel are better than AMD/ATI period there is no question about it, the PS4 would have been much better if they went with a Nvidia GPU but i guess it would be much more expensive.
ninjahunter  +   653d ago
Actually, AMD High end 8 COre CPUS only compete with intel Quad cores when overclocked. and im not talking about APU's, not a single AMD apu competes with even a decent i3
OpenGL  +   652d ago
And this isn't based on Bulldozer, Piledriver, or Steamroller, it's based on Bobcat which is meant for tablets and netbooks.
Tr10wn  +   652d ago
FX-8350 and FX-6300 compete with most i7 and i5 piledrivers are getting pretty good benchmarks.
Dasteru  +   653d ago
8-core means nothing if they are very low power cores.

http://www.newegg.ca/Produc...

That is 8-core, it is much more powerful than the CPU in the PS4 and it is considered low end.
dktxx2  +   653d ago
Totally different. PS4 games will be optimized for 8 cores, where as PC games are still being developed for dual cores as the minimum. That is why clock speeds matter so much in PC gaming, the sheer number of cores can't really be taken advantage of. Consoles don't have to worry about this.
Dasteru  +   653d ago
Clock speeds don't really matter either though.

There is more to determining a CPUs power than simply number of cores and clock speed. Yes the PS4 will do well with it but that doesn't change the fact that it's still a weak CPU in general, 8-cores or not.

I wasn't trying to imply that the PS4 wouldn't be good because of the CPU, i was simply stating that you cannot say a CPU is powerful just because it has 8 cores.
Shikoro  +   653d ago
Cost: $159.99
Thermal Design Power: 125W

PS4's CPU is probably around $40 and 20-30W respectively, it's a lot more power efficient and requires less cooling.

No matter the CPU, the GPU is the one which does most of the graphics calculations so them going with a lower power CPU and a fairly powerful GPU was the best choice.

After all, we're seeing the results of its power in the announced games so nVidia guy's opinion is void.
Dude420  +   653d ago
Of course clock speed matters, as well as # of cores and architecture, they all go hand in hand.

New architectures are designed to be more efficient in power and data calculations. Core speed will determine how much data is crunched in a given amount of time with said architecture. The number of cores is a way to avoid high clock speeds which results in decreased heat.

This is why the PS4 CPU has 8 cores, to prevent overheating, and at the same time, developers can take advantage of multi-threaded performance.
#5.4.4 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report
imt558  +   652d ago
So what if is more powerful. PC games will never use GPU and CPU to the max. You can buy Titan if you want, but which game will use Titan's raw power to max???? Consoles is another system because it is "closed platform".

One phrase to all of ya and to Nvidia :

Don't underestimate the power of Playstation!
aquamala  +   653d ago
is a $150 CPU not low end?

amd FX-8100 is about $150 now, it has 8 cores and runs at 3.1Ghz when the rumored PS4 CPU runs at only 1.8Ghz
dktxx2  +   653d ago
Speed won't matter that much. Ps4 Developers can optimize for all 8 cores, while PC developers have to get their game running on dual cores as the minimum. They can't touch any more then 4 cores, no time.
Dasteru  +   653d ago
@dk:

There is nothing technically preventing PC developers from using all 8 cores, it is just very expensive and impractical in most cases.

95% of games these days are made primarily for the PS3/360 then ported to the PC since the console are a larger source of revenue for them.

It simply isn't practical for them to recode a game that was initially developed for a single core, to utilize an octa core.

Now that the PS4 has an octa core CPU, PC games should start utilizing them also as it will no longer be an excessive amount of extra work to port them that way.
aquamala  +   653d ago
@Bakkies

I feel like it's 2006 again. You're comparing the single precision GFLOPS of the Cell vs the double precision GFLOPS of the i7-980. The double precision GFLOPS of the Cell is only around 21 GFLOPS
ATi_Elite  +   653d ago
an 8 core CPU is not "low end." period
LMFAO!!!

Compared to my 4 Core i5 2500k @ 4.5GHZ it is!!!

Only 8 core better than a Core i5 is a 8 Core Intel.

Sorry Bro. AMD makes Good CPU's but Intel just Smoke them!
Bladesfist  +   652d ago
Wrong the 8350 blows the 2500k out of the water if you look at the benchmarks. Also people saying games are not optimized for 8 cores on PC are crazy. The engines are what need to be optimized to use multithreading and FB2 already uses all 8 cores of my CPU equally.
TheKayle  +   653d ago
is a low spec low end pc...cpu and gpu side

as will be maybe the xbox
josephayal  +   653d ago | Well said
People will buy next gen console because they want to play games not Cpu's
MariaHelFutura  +   653d ago
Best comment you've ever written. Imo, anyway.
GiantFriendlyCrab  +   653d ago
all the sudden Nvidia is attacking ps4, they are just butthurt
MysticStrummer  +   653d ago
They sound like a girl that got dumped, calling her ex's next girlfriend a skank.
dark-kyon  +   653d ago
cited ptaegel
"Sounds a lot like a first wife bad-mouthing the ex-husband who has just married a much younger, hotter wife."
Drainage  +   652d ago
or an ex-husband marrying an ugly, older wife and speaking facts. lmao
Moac  +   653d ago
Even if this was true, it speaks more of the horrible lack of hardware optimization on PCs then PS4s hardware.

it seems that PC games in general need far greater hardware to output console like graphics( of course the most high end pc will have games with "better graphics"...)
Dasteru  +   653d ago
Actually most PC versions of games don't even have settings low enough to accuratly compare to the console versions.

Part of the reason PCs need better hardware to play the same games even on lowest settings is because the lowest settings are still higher than the console versions.

If you set the res to 1280x540 then go into the ini settings file and manually lower everything like LOD and terrain detail to the same levels that the consoles run at, they will run fine on really weak hardware. The ingame sliders don't typically allow anything to be set that low.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Watch that for a good example, Crysis 1 360 vs PC on low settings. The PC version is still very clearly superior.
#10.1 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(19) | Report | Reply
-Gespenst-  +   653d ago
Yeah with consoles you don't have to worry about getting short-changed. All the games run the same on all the Ps4s.

Also developers can learn the tech and get the most out of it instead of trying to optimise for dozens of different hardware. I think that's why we got games that looked as good as Uncharted and God Of War.
#10.2 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
reynod  +   652d ago
"Yeah with consoles you don't have to worry about getting short-changed."

Thats not true,

How are Skyrim, Farcry 3, Crysis 3, BF 3 running on PS3? all of them Lag and there is nothing you can do about it.

At least on PC the community comes out with patches and you can upgrade hardware too. With console you are stuck.
reicoy  +   653d ago
I think Nvidia are just butt hurt from AMD building the CPU and GPU.
MysticStrummer  +   653d ago
Clearly. Funny stuff.
ninjahunter  +   653d ago
People actually believe AMD couple pump out a powerful APU on the spot? Eh.... IDK, AMD is about 2 or 3 CPU generations behind Intel, and AMD APU's are at least one or two CPU generations behind their real CPUs.

Like how the GX60 was designed, Its got a pretty solid GPU that will handle most things, then the CPU is "good enough".

Im personally glad they went with a weaker CPU, Its a lot easier, cheaper and optimal to upgrade a GPU. So you know Grab a Nice i5 or amd FX chip and your set till next gen. Pc had a lot of trouble this gen because consoles had way stronger CPU's than their GPU and in 99% of cases its the opposite for PC, then you would get all these ports being bottlenecks on mid range machines.
papashango  +   653d ago
This guy is as close as I've seen someone come. AMD are at least 2 generations behind Intel.

If they had anything to match Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge offerings they would have launched it long ago. Console gamers don't seem to realize how bad of a situation AMD is in.

That said I'm glad they 1upped their competition by getting the console contracts this gen. AMD simply must not be allowed to go out of business. For the consumers sake.
mushroomwig  +   653d ago
This is damage control on Nvidias part, they wanted Sony to offer them more money. This is what happens when companies don't get what they want, they have a tantrum.
ninjahunter  +   653d ago
Wait... You think Nvidia, A company that nearly has a monopoly on PC gaming, and makes up to $1000 off a single Graphics card sale would come crying because Sony, who has never had a Nvidia Chip, didnt choose a nvidia chip?

People are getting awfully butt hurt about the PS4, and PC for some stupid reason or another, and Nvidia probably isnt one of them, their biggest issue is deciding whether they should wipe their butts with $50 dollar bills or $100 Dollar bills.
strickers  +   653d ago
Ps3 was an Nvidia GPU. Doh!
vandal GAB  +   653d ago
lame
#13.1.2 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(1) | Report
Oh_Yeah  +   653d ago
PS3 had a nvidia gpu...and obviously them speaking out against PS4 shows they care that Sony didn't choose them again, but they'll be fine.. they have mobile gpus in almost every tablet and smart phone out there, and a bunch of overpriced gpus for pc gamers to pick from.
#13.1.3 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(3) | Report
Reborn  +   653d ago
Business is business. So yes, like any business, they are probably frustrated they didn't get any "business" this time round.

I'm sure Sony could have used them. However, would consumers be willing to part with that level of cash? Highly doubtful. Especially in this economic uncertainty.
Th4Freak  +   653d ago
"Sony, who has never had a Nvidia Chip" WHAAAAT???

Sorry about caps but your ignorance almost give me a heart attack.

May I ask what GPU is in the PS3? Maybe a company also called Nvidia made the chip right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

What bothers me is how hipocrite this guy is, why didn't they say that in 2006 when the PS3 was launched and also that same month they released the GeForce 8 Series?

From Wikipedia: "RSX: Based on G71 Chip in turn based on the 7800 but with cut down features like lower memory bandwidth and only as many ROPs as the lower end 7600."

That means that the 8800 GTX wasn't only one generation ahead but also it is about 150% powerful than the RSX. So the question is why didn't they trash talked in 2006 when the PS3 was released and it has a "low-end" chip made by them?

It very clear that these guys are just butthurt because Sony told them to f*ck themselves, otherwise why would they keep they mouth shut when they released an outdated GPU for the PS3 7 years ago?
#13.1.5 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(0) | Report
Tito08  +   653d ago
Ninja, you're the weakest link!
DarkHeroZX  +   653d ago
lol the thing is nobody is out buying those $1000 GPUs though. If you gave me $1000 right now to buy a single GPU I'd give you the finger and go pick up a PS$, Next box, and Wii U. Nvidia hasn't monopolized anything. They have lost grounds in the PC market, been booted out of the console business, and can't seem to get a foot hold in the mobile market.
Walker  +   653d ago
Nvidia's damage control, LOL !
pissed999  +   653d ago
Can we shut up about 8gb of ram now? Pc wins suckers.
DEATHSTROKE-cro-  +   653d ago
wins at what ?
who uses full power of PC to make their games? no one.

at least Sony first party studios will use the full power of PS4.
reynod  +   652d ago
Yea just like they used the full power of the PS3.

Too many games running in 720p or below and still doing below 25fps:

Check out

Farcry 3,
Crysis 3,
Mafia 2,
Skyrim,
Fallout 3

Etc.

Dont pretend consoles have it perfect cause they dont. In fact more games this gen have run better on PC than on console.
DEATHSTROKE-cro-  +   652d ago
I have ps3. do you ?

I have Far Cry 3 and looks great on ps3.
I have Killzone and Uncharted and God Of War....

all look amazing. below 25fps?! yeah, funny.
too many game running below 720p?
I love how you think that most games are below HD. haha
most people don't even see the difference between 720p and 1080p.

yes, the did use the power of ps3.
they have exclusive studios.
THAT'S what I said.

a lot of console games didn't even come to PC.
the fact is, no one uses full power of PC.
it's not my fault you don't like that.
#15.1.2 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report
MariaHelFutura  +   653d ago
Actually PC loses, since most of it's fanbase seems to be thieving d-bag's.
-Gespenst-  +   653d ago
Yeah, it is sort of annoying. All my friends that have PCs just refuse to buy games.
DarkHeroZX   653d ago | Trolling | show
carreirabr  +   653d ago
At least the PS4 won't be wasting lots of processing cycles with Windows kernel procs.
cayleee  +   652d ago
They said the same thing about the PS3, watch how poorly that performed.
carreirabr  +   652d ago
I'd love to see a equivalent of Killzone3 - Uncharted3 -GOW3-Ascension running in a 7 yo hardware like a P4 machine with a NVidia 7K series and Windows.
Clarence  +   653d ago
These guys are really throwing a temper tantrum. The PS4 will be a beast. There just mad that Sony refused to pay their price for their tech. Their going to be even more piss when the PS4 start selling like crazy.
#17 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(17) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
cyhm3112  +   653d ago
sour grape
thebudgetgamer  +   653d ago
Haha! Nvidia's mad.
m2stech  +   653d ago
Just curious! which is better for gaming, 8-core 1.6gnz cpu or 4-core 2.6ghz cpu assuming same class/generation of cpu ?
SpecialK  +   653d ago
Depends on how the game is written.

Technically 8 cores would be better. however at the moment games are only really starting to get to grips with quad core processors. You can still play high end games with a decent intel dual core.

But the gaming sector is behind in that sense. If you look at professional programs for creating and editing 3d visuals, where programs are written for multiple cores, the performance jump is pretty large.

Thats why I went for an amd processor in my PC, more cores for less money than intel. I dont use it for gaming much but for running lots of things at once and rendering images, absolutely brilliant.

For consoles, since code is written specifically for them, I expect more cores will be brilliant for games. Plus when the console isnt doing anything intensive, it can simply just use less cores saving money.

so yeah, Im my view they made the right choice.
jerethdagryphon  +   652d ago
Unless a program needs raw speed more cores is better some things need speed over efficiency and then its clockspeed you want I have a amd 955 quadcore and nothing I do has taxed it for games I just tell one core to run windows and 2 to run the game its backed by 8gb ddr 3 ram. Cores = jobs more cores more gets done per cycle and remember a lot of intel products use hyper threading to simulate more cores then they actually have it is an odd way of working taking parralleization to the extreme its like telling you bos s you coworkers there when he isnt while doing his work between your own jobs

And the 8 1.7 ghz jag cores will do the same work per second as aquad core 3.4 ghz a quad core in basic terms not going into flops single or double precision just basic terms its a weak cpu to whats avalable but more then enough for the task
unicron7  +   653d ago
Better luck next time nvidia with those next gen console contracts. Butt hurt much?
bub16  +   653d ago
whats with all the nvidia hate on ps4! this is like the 3rd article ive seen today!
solar  +   653d ago
because Nvidia stated they didnt like Sony's offer for internals for the PS4 so of course, no one can turn down the ol' great Sony.

Nvidia made a business decision. so they must be hated.
GarandShooter  +   652d ago
Sony made a business decision so they must be hated.

Hmmm, seems to work both ways.

If you had another bubble, I'd ask how you overlooked that.
SAE  +   653d ago
GOD. We will never finish. it's stupid comparing both!! I have a Ps3 , Vita , Mac and PC. Each are used for different reasons. Ps3 for exclusives and playing with friends. Vita for playing while i'm out. I use Mac because i love the OS more then the windows. I have a normal pc( Wish i have powerful one though lol) to do what ever i want to do. So why compare if they all give you different experience and features!! Just buy what you like >.<
#23 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
-Falaut-  +   653d ago
catch these tasty tears in a bottle and sell it.
Twinzclipz  +   653d ago
they are ENVIOUS
Twinzclipz  +   653d ago
@nvidia are you Mad Bro?!!!
chukamachine  +   653d ago
I look at it like this.

Metro to me is so so looking, overrated and runs like complete and utter shit unless you have a beefy gpu. It's a sloppy engine.

There are better looking games that run better for less hardware.

disagree all you like.

The best looking games on PC Are, crysis3,bf3,moh warfighter/
Grimhammer00  +   653d ago
PC's cost more
PC's get viruses.
PC's have bloat
PC's have far less game releases.
PC's have games that aren't all equal in terms of spec requirements
PC's have most of the worst DRM
Orpheus  +   653d ago
And you made your comment from a PC. (or a Mac if that makes you feel better)
TheGamingArt  +   653d ago
I'm making this comment from a $2,000 PC
MariaHelFutura  +   653d ago
I've been posting comments from my PS3 and cellphone all day....
TheGamingArt  +   653d ago
and I'm making this comment from a $200 console..... hu? (had to prove that point because you were being a smart ass). Anyways, if a 1/4th the price console can play games at a higher degree than Uncharted... why the hell would you zoom towards the $1000 versus < $400? This is a stupid argument all together and Nvidia wouldn't be commenting if they made that deal with Sony. That much is obvious.

I'd also like to point out this horse shit comment: "What you get today in terms of performance is what you're stuck with five - 10 years down the road. PCs don't have these problems," he told TechRadar.".

PCs don't get outdated in 10 years LOL. I don't think I've ever owned a PC for 10 years without NEEDING to upgrade the motherboard AKA getting a new computer.
#28.1.3 (Edited 653d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report
Dasteru  +   652d ago
1: Higher initial cost, yes. higher cost to maintain over the life of a console, no. Once you have a good system built, half the parts can be reused for a long time. Case, PSU, Motherboard (until the socket type becomes obsolete), Disk drive, HDD, Sound card, OS can all be reused.

I can easily keep my system up to date with the same $400-500 every 5-6 years just like it costs to keep buying new consoles. Maybe $100 more expensive over the same time at most. But then i also save atleast $10 per game purchased on PC vs consoles, and as much as $30 less per game during steam sales. According to Raptr the average console gamer owns around 40-50 games, that means i can save $400-500 over that 5-6 years which can then be put towards PC upgrades, basically keeping my rig up to date for free.

My average upgrades every 5 years is

GPU: $150
CPU: $150
Ram: $50

Another $100-120 every 2 upgrades for a new Mobo.

Thats about it. The rest can be reused almost indefinitely as long as it doesn't burn out. (keep the guts dusted regularly)

2: Not always, I built my system over 3 years ago and i haven't yet got a single virus on it.

3: True but with a program like Gamebooster you can almost entirely eliminate the background garbage while gaming.

4: Over the past 6 years the PS3 has had around 110 exclusive games released for it. The 360 has had around 150 exclusives, The PC has had over 800 exclusives and that isn't even including indies or MMOs. Just because you do not pay attention to the latest game news and releases for the PC, doesn't mean they don't exist.

5: True, but not really a problem if you have a decent rig.

6: True, but you can always dl cracks and remove all the DRM from the game if it is giving you trouble.
#28.2 (Edited 652d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
cayleee  +   652d ago
@Grimhammer00

Dasteru covered all your points.

Ill just point out on DRM. Consoles actually have worse DRM than PC. Atleast with PC i can play games i bought 20 years back.

Can you play your PS1, PS2, PS3 games on PS4? No you cant. Not unless you keep rebuying all the old consoles.

And yea in the long run its always cheaper to have a PC. Since games are cheaper and upgrading ever 3-4 years about the same as getting a console, because its not like a console lasts more than 3-4 years. You need to replace it all the time. Might as well use the money making an upgrade that actually provides more power, with console you are stuck with the same old tech even when you replace the machine.
clintagious650  +   653d ago
Who cares about these guys, they dont make games so they can shove their graphic cards up their azz. Can your high end graphic card play games, go online? U cant even do sh** with that $1000 graphic card unless u spend even more for a high end pc.
KillrateOmega  +   653d ago
Well, it's looks like someone is salty...

Guess they're not exactly pleased about how their negotiations with Sony went. Regardless of how secure they are in the PC market, that's still 7 years or so of basically guaranteed income that they will be missing out on.
ginsunuva  +   652d ago
Actually the profit from consoles would be so little for Nvidia that it means nothing. Trust me. It's insignificant to Nvidia's future plans. Their resources are being saved for elsewhere as they take over the mobile cpu market and soon arm pc's.
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
20°

5 things that would make Red Dead Redemption 2 amazing

13m ago - GameZone: "With open job positions at Rockstar San Diego, who developed Red Dead Revolver and Red... | PC
20°

Elite: Dangerous Hands On Preview - PixlBit

25m ago - PixlBit | "There are flight sims, there are space sims, and then there is Elite: Dangerous, an am... | PC
30°

Media Create software sales (12/15 – 12/21) – Top 50

25m ago - This week’s expanded Japanese software sales are as follows | PS3
30°

How Nintendo Turned Around the Wii U

26m ago - Geek.com examines how Nintendo have turned the Wii U from a launch disaster into a must-have cons... | Wii U
Ad

Start Making Games for the PS4

Now - Want to design the next generation of video games? Start learning game design today. Click for more info on how to get started. | Promoted post
40°

Jay Petrequin’s Favorite Games of 2014

26m ago - Each member of Hey Poor Player will be posting a list of their personal favourite games of 2014.... | PC