Top
380°

War Thunder dev: 'PS4 will have greater visuals than average PC'

GameZone writes, "Here at the GameZone office, there's an ongoing debate as to whether next-gen consoles or PC will be the optimal experience for gaming in the future, especially in terms of graphics. I, being on the side of consoles, tend to believe EA when they say Xbox One and PS4 are "a generation ahead of the highest end PC on the market." My co-worker Andrew Clouther, a loyal PC gamer, believes that's horse sh*t (like Epic's Mark Rein who called bullsh*t)."

Read Full Story >>
gamezone.com
The story is too old to be commented.
MegaMohsi1189d ago

average PC right now? yes that's a probability. Average PC next year and beyond, doubtful

brbobcat1189d ago

What constitutes an "average PC"?

MaskedAnus1189d ago SpamShow
Aery1189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

If you start to compare only few simple number you don't really understand nothing about hardware.

Sometime looks like *everybody* have awesome rig, have already played the next PS4 title and know everything about hardware.

There are some fact about Ps4 and PC, but there are too many blind troll here that have time to waste writing terrible post.

In the end this place will turn in a fanboy party.
Have fun guys ...

MegaMohsi1189d ago

to me an average PC when it comes to gaming, which is what I'm assuming they are talking about would be as PC that can run games at medium-low settings. Most 400/low 500 nvidia cards can do that and dual core chips, the PS4/xb1 is better than that. However an average gaming PC by next year will surpass the PS4/XB1 IMO

reynod1189d ago

Well considering most PCs are office and home PC which arent ment for gaming yea it will outperform those.

However any PC with a half decent GPU will wipe the floor with the PS4. By half decent i mean anything featuring a 250usd GPU. GTX 760 being an example.

Heck PS4 isnt even out yet, 5 months later by the time it is, PC parts will again give you much more power for lower amount of money. No way consoles can compete and it really isnt about the power either, PS4 hardly launches with 15-20 games. Thats just a handful, many people may not even like all the games. PC on the other hand has thousands of games from over 25 years, add in capability to emulate any console in history(asides ps3 and xbox 360) its a one sided victory for the PC as long as the games are concerned.

decrypt1189d ago

Irrelevant..

Console gamers.. Dont care about graphics.

They care about the games, oh wait not many of those on the new consoles.

Kleptic1189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

^that is where it gets ridiculous...

This guys is saying 'average pc'...as in...the average hardware inside of the hundreds of millions of PCs out there...not the average PC fanatics attach to it...

the 'average' pc right now can barely play a PS3-like game...let alone anything coming later this year...

I just finished building my PC over the weekend...very above average on the grand scale, and WAY behind what current gaming pc's can do...but, the point, is that it was over $800 before any peripherals or a monitor...and WITHOUT a gpu (has the AMD A10 6800k for now)...

if you just go and click on a premade mid range pc from nearly any vendor...this pc will crush it...but if you are actually building something for gaming, this thing is already taxed...

So yes...there will be parts available, some already, that will trash the next gen consoles...those are NO WHERE close to mid range or average pc parts...those are all very much high end...you won't come close to a next gen console without $1000 spent...I guarantee it...

IcyEyes1189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

I'm PC elitist, but I'm not stupid.

Ps4 is an awesome piece of hardware.Period.

wishingW3L1189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

an Intel HD 4000 is not even average, that's the absolute low end! XD

Average would be something like a 9400 GT and even then that's still very low end, that card can hardly compete with a PS3 and X360. So let's up it to an 8800 GTX... PS4 is still a lot more powerful though. ;)

decrypt1189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

@kleptic

"you won't come close to a next gen console without $1200 spent...I guarantee it..."

1. You cant include the price of a monitor when building a PC, just the way you cant include the price of an HDTV when buying a console.

2. Here is a PC for 650USD that out does a PS4 already. Yet PS4 isnt even out yet. By the time its out you could probably build something cheaper and more powerful. http://www.tomshardware.com...

3. You fail to account PS4 has no BC, while PC has full BC. Hence do account for loss of games you bought this gen. For me i bought over 175 games on Steam, all remain playable if i decide to upgrade(which i dont need to since my PC is already more powerful than the PS4 to boot). If i bought those on console i would have to keep buying a PS3 just to play my old games every time it failed. Same can be said for my previous games IE bought during PS2 days. Yet i can still play those on my PC. Good luck buying a PS2 and PS3 over and over just so you can maintain PS BC.

4. You need to pay go online on console, thats 60usd a year. Online is free on PC. Reoccuring charges make console more expensive.

5. Most importantly console games cost 10-20usd more per copy. Even if you bought 20 games a year you paid between 200-400usd more for the games alone.

6. No Steam or greenmangaming like discounts.

So there you have it consoles have too many hidden costs that you dont calculate. Once you do take those in consideration, consoles all of a sudden become much more expensive to game on vs a PC.

The odds are further in the PCs favor if we consider almost everyone has a PC. To make it into a gaming machine all you need is a GPU. Which costs less than a console to begin with.

Kleptic1189d ago

the month old AMD A10 6800k w/ Radeon HD 8760d gpu is their new crossfireX gaming apu, meant to be pared with a dedicated crossfire radeon gpu...but very much would be an 'average' starter chip set for gaming purposes...won't even run BF3 at 30 fps on medium settings without overclocked ram...

its just a weird spot in the market right now...its hard to target exactly where the new consoles will be comparatively...you'll either be WAY underneath them in power...or far higher, at 4x the cost...in either case, by far the most affordable options are the consoles...by late 2014, that'll start to change rapidly...but i'm fairly sure a lot of the pc guys screaming how 'weak' the consoles are...haven't looked at parts availability and costs right now...

Kleptic1189d ago

decrypt...the $1200 was a typo, i meant 1k, and i was not including the cost of monitor...

but...if we're approaching from that angle...keep it even...

consoles come with all necessary peripherals, cables, etc. to play a game...and also come pre-loaded with a full OS...while, some will go the linux route as best as possible, the average pc gamer will require windows...

and sorry...you're $653 example is NO WHERE NEAR either console...an i3 with [email protected] is cost cutting...no other way to say it...

the gpu is obviously where the money is going, which is needed...and that cpu would be fine for most released stuff so far (who knows about the end of the year though)...but saying that 'out matches a ps4' is simply false...that system would be strangled in resources...and a 500w power supply with seemingly no additional fan support, is again, just looking for areas to cut costs...

and just addressing the limited ram in that build...by say doubling it, or even better to try and approach Ps4 bandwidth...with OC 2133mhz...you'll take that system over $800, depending on some sale prices...

and remember...you still don't have an operating system or a mouse and keyboard...'but, but, but that stuff is so cheap'...keeping your shatty old HP included mouse and keyboard doesn't count...

I get it...that thing would play some games...but a ps4, that is not...

decrypt1189d ago

@keptic

PS4 isnt out yet. Hence essentially we are comparing this PC against vaporware to be honest.

PC parts fall in prices darn fast. 5 months later you can expect 20-30% more performance for the same price. Its just the way things work.

Why would we count an OS? I am still using Vista on some of my PCs, no reason to upgrade. I wouldnt buy a new OS just because i made a new PC. Niether would i go about buying a new monitor, Mouse, Keboard, Casing, hard drive, dvd drive etc. PCs are long term investments, once parts are bought no need to keep rebuying. So really the costs can be significantly lower if you think of it as long term.

Now add in all the other points i mentioned. Console gaming being cheaper is a myth.

seanpitt231189d ago

I have a top gaming pc $1000 dollar upgrade just this year and iam still looking forward to buying the ps4 like I did when I bought my ps3 and I can tell you now I have never had an experience on pc like I had on ps3 with the last of us wow that game moved me. If naughty dog can make a game like that on ps3 I wouldn't like to think what they can do with the ps4.
I can tell you now that some of the games that Sony showed like infamous second son looked way better than anything on pc max settings right now.

Its not all about the power people its about the talented devs and what they can do and Sony has the best in the business.

isarai1189d ago

the most average specs of a PC, so somwhere between a $200 walmart tower and a $3,000 elite gaming rig.

ShinMaster1189d ago

So I'm not surprised that the PS4 will outperform the average PC. Especially with optimization.
Speaking of which, I didn't see any PCs with 2005/6 hardware pushing gfx like the ones seen in today's latest PS3 games.

For multiplatform games, next-gen starts when consoles say so.

BitbyDeath1189d ago

Go here -

http://store.steampowered.c...

Most popular would be close to average, give/take.

Kleptic1189d ago

@decrypt:

"Here is a PC for 650USD that out does a PS4 already. Yet PS4 isnt even out yet. By the time its out you could probably build something cheaper and more powerful."

then:

"PS4 isnt out yet. Hence essentially we are comparing this PC against vaporware to be honest."

...its cool...we're not arguing...I'm only saying PC gaming is a lot more expensive than many lead on...while console gaming is riddled with hidden fees...its not a cheap hobby.

blackmagic1189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

@Kleptic
"you won't come close to a next gen console without $1000 spent...I guarantee it... "

Oh really?!

Hate to blow your misconception out of the water but $869 pretty much pulverizes the PS4 and has free online and cheaper games to boot.

GPU
PC - 384 bit GPU @ 1Ghz with 4.10 TFLOPS performance, 288GB/s dedicated bandwidth, 2048 stream processors, 128 texture units
PS4 - 256 bit GPU @ 800Mhz with 1.84 TFLOPS performance, 176GB/s shared bandwith, 1154 Stream processors, 72 texture units

CPU
PC - 8 core desktop processor @ 3.5Ghz with 16MB cache
PS4 - 8 core tablet processor @ 1.6Ghz with 4MB cache

RAM
PC - 19GB total - 3GB 288GB/s GDDR5 + 16GB DDR3 PC2133
PS4 - 8GB 176GB/s GDDR5 shared

HD
PC - 1TB desktop drive (7200rpm with 64MB cache)
PS4 - 500GB laptop drive (unknown but laptop drives are typically 5400rpm with 8MB cache)

Sapphire 7970 GHz Edition -$310
http://www.newegg.com/Produ...
AMD FX 8320 Eight Core Processor- $145
http://www.amazon.com/AMD-P...
Asus M5A97 Motherboard - $69
http://www.newegg.com/Produ...
Patriot Viper 3 16Gb DDR3 PC2133 - $123
http://www.newegg.com/Produ...
Western Digital 1TB Hard Drive - $60
http://www.tigerdirect.com/...
Optical Drive - $15
http://www.tigerdirect.com/...
Cooler Master Case and 500W Power Supply - $57
http://www.newegg.com/Produ...
Windows 8 64 bit - $90
http://www.amazon.com/Windo...

starchild1189d ago

"infamous second son looked way better than anything on pc max settings right now."

Really? You have to be kidding. Infamous Second Son looks like a high end PC game, period. It doesn't look better than The Witcher 2 or Crysis 3 (or a few other high end PC games). And no way in hell does it look "way better" than any high end PC game. That's just fanboy talk.

starchild1189d ago

All this talk of PC gaming being more expensive is not really accurate.

With the cheaper price of games and free online I honestly believe that PC gaming is cheaper over the long run.

But it also depends on where you are coming from.

If you already own a decent gaming PC, next gen gaming is going to be a lot cheaper for you on your PC than on a console.

For example, I currently have an HD 7950 and an i5 2500k. I guarantee that I will be able to play next generation games at a similar level of quality to the PS4 and that is without spending a dime.

I might choose to use a frame limiter and lock the framerate to 30fps, but that's equal to the consoles anyway, only the consoles will probably be swinging between 20 and 30 fps.

What do I base these conclusions on?

Well, first I am looking at the average advantage consoles get from optimization and considering that an 8800gt can run games about as good as a PS3, I conclude that my hd 7950 with 24 compute units (versus 18 in the PS4 and 12 in the Xbox One) should have enough of a power advantage to outperform the consoles.

Second, I am looking at the announced Battlefield 4 beta system requirements which aren't much different than Battlefield 3. I am able to run Battlefield 3 at a steady 60fps, so it seems that Battlefield 4 should play at similar levels of quality and performance on my machine.

Remember that Frostbite 3 not only offers graphical and physics improvements, but it also contains optimizations that allow the same level of graphical quality to run more efficiently. I personally think Battlefield 4 is easily one of the best looking next generation games. If my PC can run Battlefield 4 well, it should be able to run other next gen games at least decently.

And, finally, even if I want better performance than I am getting with my HD 7950 I can always upgrade to a new graphics card.

There is simply no way that buying a new console would be a more economical way for me to play next gen games. That said, I am still getting a PS4 near launch for the PS4 exclusives and console exclusives.

GAMExxOVER1189d ago

The one grandma just bought. One that can just barley run the sims, On low settings and plenty of lag. That is your "Average" pc.

+ Show (20) more repliesLast reply 1189d ago
JsonHenry1189d ago

http://store.steampowered.c...

According the steam the average specs are not much or impressive. So yes, he is right. The PS4 is more than capable of trouncing the "average PC" in visual fidelity.

RandomDude6551189d ago

wow...intel hd3000 is the most used?
ummmmm.....

Truehellfire1189d ago

Yeah, but I don't believe that is a fair average. I would say the average PC of a "PC Gamer" is higher than that. Anyone who uses their PC as their dedicated gaming machine is usually packing something better.

GDDR6_20141189d ago

I have a gaming pc more powerful than ps4 specs but also laptops that I sometimes play older or indie games on, so the "average specs" of me is not impressive lol.

We'll find out soon enough with games like bf4 and watch dogs on how next gen consoles compare to a mid range gaming pc (to me this means an i5 and 7950, so about a $700 pc today). I suspect next gen consoles can do "high" settings on 1080p, but won't compare to some ultra settings that more high end pc's can do

mark134uk1189d ago

i dont know much about pc specs but would it cost a lot more to build a pc the same spec as the ps4?

Masterdon1189d ago SpamShowReplies(2)
TomOfAllTrades1189d ago

Well....you don't know that

3-4-51189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

Not like every single person with a PC is upgrading graphics cards next year just because. People who do that are in the 1%...maybe even less.

I just built(had one built) a PC a few months ago i5 7770 AMD 8Gb Ram and it runs every game on max no problem. ( ibuypower )

I can play Planetside 2 on full settings running as smooth as can be and I only paid $600 for the computer.

The PS4 is supposed to be better than this....So yea I'm it will be better than the average PC.

And it's running windows 8 ( which I was against at first) without any problems.

I feel like these issues talked about a lot are just a bunch of BS.

PS4 is going to look great for a long time.

Compare Xbox 360 games from 2006/07 - to 2013

Notice the upgrade ?

"but how can you get better graphics without upgrading you graphics card!!??" says the internet trolls.
FACTS

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1189d ago
Snookies121189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

They're on par with high end PCs... This coming from a PC gamer. My rig wouldn't be able to run Killzone at highest settings, at least not with 60fps. People always seem to forget that these specs inside consoles are going exclusively to games and nothing else aside from the OS taking some ram.

Belking1189d ago

"They're on par with high end PCs."

Sorry bud, but that isn't true. If your PC rig can't run Killzone, then you don't have a high end PC.

MaskedAnus1189d ago SpamShow
Doctoglethorpe1189d ago

"can't run kz at highest settings with 60fps" =/= "can't run kz at all."

Muerte24941189d ago

this age old argument. Look the easiest way to put it is.

PC = brute force (i.e. Battlefield running on GTX 780 with no optimisation @ E3)

Console = optimization (things would normally be harder to do on PC due to Read/Writing to memory cache and ports.)

cayleee1189d ago

@Muerte2494

We always here console folks talk about efficiency, however its all just talk really.

Most console efficiency involves cheating via Lower resolutions, low res textures, lack of AA, frame rate drops, smaller FOV, poor AF etc.

If consoles are so effiecient why is it the current gen consoles could never beat a 8800GTX?

8800GTX on paper is 2.5x more powerful than consoles and in real terms it plays games in 1080p, while consoles do 720p, thats 2x difference. So where did the console efficiency go?

Please stop kidding yourself, PC being badly optimized or using brute force alone is just console maker propaganda so they can justify selling their old hardware.

edgeofsins1189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

@cayleee

That is why we see games like Uncharted, Killzone, and The Last of Us run much better on a PS3 then BattleField does on a PC that has "comparable" specs?

That might apply to certain third party games but not the whole library. I'm definitely sure running games that look great that well on 512 MB's of RAM alone sure speaks when games generally use far more then that on a PC.

The definition of optimization doesn't mean they never cut corners to achieve similar results. They do that a lot but you see some crazy results when developers push harder to get the similar product on tighter limitations.

EDIT: And don't forget the price per performance. I know very well how to build a computer and how to get the best you can for a budget. For $400 I would not get the same quality as a PS4. Not counting any of it's included features like Bluray and a high quality controller. You don't have to like it, but quit arguing with it. As for optimization again, they clearly play games with intense graphics very smoothly. You can ignore consoles but don't be ignorant of their positives. I know paying for online sucks in a way but PSPlus is indeed a great deal. IF Steam had a subscription based service it would likely be similar.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1189d ago
Software_Lover1189d ago

It's not running on the PS4 at 60fps.

JsonHenry1189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

Seeing as how BF3 has the same visuals clarity as the Killzone game that was shown it leads me to believe that you do not own a high end PC because my old 7850 and Phemon 965 rig could run that game at max settings/1080p rez no problems. And that machine is 3 years old.

I honestly believe however that the games are going to look even better when released than what was shown. But the raw numbers say otherwise when trying to compare them with current high end PCs. (and it isn't a fair comparison anyway)

The truest way to judge the new consoles abilities are to build a PC with as close to similar specs of the console and see how high of a resolution/settings you can turn up and how it compares.

So basically build an AMD system with a 7970 (underclocked) and an underclocked 8350 and see how well, lets say for example BF4, plays running at the same resolution with similar GFX options enabled on the PC version to judge how well the devs are doing at taking advantage of each consoles closed systems.

givemeshelter1189d ago

@Snookies12

High End PC's are running GPU's that are 2-3 times more powerful then the entire PS4...that's the GPU alone without factoring in the CPU and memory.
Don't kid yourself. The PS4 is a great piece of powerful technology...for a console.

The_Troll_Whisperer1189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

I wish I had a gaming rig.

The_Troll_Whisperer1189d ago

@cayleee

Maybe because the 8800 was manufactured in 2008 while the Xbox 360 was conceived in 2005 and the PS3 in 2004... Both catching up to that would be like a turtle catching up to a hare.

PS3 and Xbox 360 CAN do 1080p (barely anyway) with games like WipEout HD, God of War 3, Metal Gear Solid 4, Forza, Gran Turismo, Tekken, NBA Live 06, etc.

And 720p and 1080p is not TWICE the difference. Twice the difference would be 2K resolutions.

Also, a 8800GTX CANNNOT run Battlefield 3, Crysis 3, Metro: Last night like PS3 (look up their respective settings on PlayStation 3) by its own self. THAT'S were optimization goes to.

I could care less if you disagree with me, because PC will always be superior. PERIOD. But I don't like it when their respective fanbase wants to put down console players like that. So if you are mad because I just put you in your place, shove your hate up your ass.

I have spoken.

cayleee1189d ago

8800GTX was manufactured in 2006, it released before the PS3 did.

1080p is 2x the pixels vs 720p.

8800GTX can easily run those games in 1080p albeit medium settings, consoles run the same games in 720p or below low / medium settings.

The_Troll_Whisperer1189d ago (Edited 1189d ago )

@caylee

Once again, it was commercially available in 2007 in the U.S.

720p times 2 is 1440p AKA 2K. It is not 1080p.

I'm calling bullshit, PS3 version of Metro Last Light runs it at an equivalent of medium/high settings. Look at the Digital Foundry article.

Let me quote what you said earlier: ''8800GTX on paper is 2.5x more powerful than consoles''

Now you're telling me ''8800GTX can easily run those games in 1080p albeit medium settings''

So you just said that it it ISN'T 2.5 more powerful. Interesting....

I have spoken

EDIT: I just got done reading a DF article on Crysis 3 on consoles and it says that it is the equivalent of medium/high on PC. And the frame rate is a constant 30 FPS at 720p on the Xbox 360. So that ruins your, ''consoles run the same games in 720p or below low / medium settings'' argument. Think i'm lying? Here's the link:
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1189d ago
Software_Lover1189d ago

And it begins.

I like how he said "average" pc, lol. Play with words.

It still probably wont compete with my HD 7950 and Ivy Bridge processor. Still good though.

MegaMohsi1189d ago

It comes close to my OC i7930 and OC gtx 660ti but still falls short

Software_Lover1189d ago

I've gotten lazy. I haven't overclocked in so long.

MaskedAnus1189d ago SpamShow
MegaMohsi1189d ago

@hdshatter

interesting, didn't know that, thanks for the info!

NarooN1189d ago

Well what he said is true, the average PC is the stuff you'll find from OEM's like Dell and HP, not super-impressive but sometimes still capable depending on the "model". On Steam's hardware survey, most people are using Intel HD 3000 and Intel HD 4000 -- in other words, integrated graphics. Most people are casuals who play light stuff.

The people who you see with Intel 3960x's and quad-SLI rigs make up a very very small niche market. Most "serious" PC gamers just buy what they need. PS4's APU iGPU is around the power of an HD Radeon 7850, a card that can run most modern games at 1080p with very playable framerates at high/ultra settings (inb4 Crysis 3).

So yeah, he's pretty much right, lol.

MaskedAnus1189d ago SpamShowReplies(1)