The R7-260 and R7-265 are comparable to the GPUs found in the Xbox One and PS4.
So in a nutshell: 1. PC 2. PS4 3. XBone is that about right???
Yes, all depends on how much money you want to spend...a $400 PC wont outperform a PS4 however...
Ok - thanks for the answer ^^
As far as I know most gamers already have PCs, most of them build their own, heck even Walmart specials PCs CPU are not bad they only need a decent GPU. Put any $200 video card or above in a system with AMD 980/Intel I5 3470 or better and you have greater than PS4 power. Keep in mind the PS4 APU only cost between $100 and $130 depending on the source. With that said, for the next couple of years buying a PS4 or XB1 might be the better investment unless Mantle really takes off. Only a handful of titles can max out current $200 and above graphics cards with the usual being Crysis , and Metro Light games. From what I've noticed consoles games seem to drive PC graphics optimization, so buying $200-300 graphics right now you would probably good for at least 3 years. On the other hand PS4 and XB1 will probably continue to impress until new consoles come out like this past generation. http://www.eetimes.com/docu... http://tech.firstpost.com/n... http://www.newegg.com/Produ...
And a $400 PS4 doesn't do everything a PC allows, so I never considered this a worhwhile argument.
@slaphappy sooooo the advantages of a $400 pc is that you can do resumes. A 400 dollar phone can do things a 1000 pc can do. so Note 3 > $1000 pc
@SlapHappyJesus That's true, but the debate was gaming performance. A $200 laptop does more than the PS4 can do, but when it comes to gaming A PS4 doesn't begin to "lose" until you get to the $600 point for a "QUALITY BUILT" Gaming PC.
Lol these new cards are launching at $100-150. By the end of the year you could so your point is moot. What console gamers Dont get is why would you build a 400 console when you can build a $500-600. If a 500 build is more powerful than consoles now, what would happen in a yr or 2. You would have gfx that's so called gens ahead what they already are. So try harder with downplaying PCs when next gen console are not that impressive
You could build a PC with components totaling approx $450 which would have better graphics than a PS4 utilizing an R9 270x. Not to mention the vast versatility a general purpose computer would allow the owner to further his/her life, whether it be for education, career, or hobbies all of which make the PC 100x times more valuable.
Exactly. Put a $200 video card in the average quad core PC that has been around for the last 3-4 years and the PC will outperform the PS4 and the Xbox1. WORST case scenario is you have spend another ~$40 to $75 to upgrade your RAM as well. But at the end of the day you still have a more powerful (and more useful!!!) machine than either current console. But who buys consoles for the best performance??? Not me. I buy them for the games I can't get on PC!
What PC gamers fail to get is that a lot of gamers prefer a gamepad over mouse and keyboard. Specs don't matter if the controls suck to me.
But many have applauded Microsoft for tailoring their Xbox 360 controller to be used in most mainstream titles on the PC platform. I would like to see the controller for the One supported soon as well. For adventure/action, rpgs, simulation, and the occasional arcade game I end up tossing the wireless receiver on USB and wholla, all buttons are programmed with the inclusion of force feedback, aka rumble. Couple of rechargables and a quick charge kit mean I never have to worry about my controller dying mid game. It is really not a bad setup. Thinking about it now, having swappable rechargeable batteries and the quick charge was the best way to go. Having to plug in your controller seems more tedious and cumbersome, unless you desire to have a direct connection for lower latencies.
So basically xbox one has a $109 card and PS4 has a 150$ card You can play xbox one at 1600x1200 res with only 'good' quality settings. you can play ps4 at 1980x1080 at 'ultra' or 'very hign' quality settings, with every game except Crysis 3? Now who is still in denial?
@f6zSoldier And what console gamers often forget is that PC isn't just about M+K (even though I prefer it for all shooters), but the ability to use any device. I have a 360 gamepad for my PC that I use for racing/adventure games. PC is choice, console is limitation. Saying that, I have owned almost every console as well, but PC is my primary platform.
For $115 on newegg.com you can buy a Radeon HD7870 which will destroy the PS4's GPU. And since most people already have a PC, all you need is a video card to do some killer PC gaming.
If you don't need a portable computer, I would suggest a PC. A desktop computer will do everything you need for work and entertainment for a price comparable to a console + laptop. If you have a separate television for gaming and enough room in your home to put your workstation alongside your telley, then you can use your PC like a console for all your entertainment needs. As for the mobile phone comment, try typing out your resume on that. Of course, if your idea of work is a resume then it follows that you do not need a workstation.
keep dreaming a 400$ now can outperform PS4 easily
Look at all the Xbox fans suddenly start backing the PC when it's clear the Xbox can't trump a PlayStation console. Little do they know how irrelevant it is to bring up PC in a console-versus-console argument.
Except everyone has a PC. You only need a $400 GPU which will OBLITERATE a PS4.
@ABizzel1 ,.. You will need much more than 600 for a 'gaming' pc to outperform PS4 gaming wise ,.. Might get a decent gpu(s) and Cpu that will run crap on par for a year or two,.. You would need a pretty fucking great machine just to run FF14 (if it is really as rumored 1080p, ultra, 60fps),.. I mean 1500+ (if not more) type of good. Consoles don't have much overhead, bottlenecks, compatibility and optimization issues, more programing to the metal(on consoles).. You need almost 2-3x the raw brute force power to be in the same spot with PC. Not dissing PC gaming, since I just got my pretty buff rig,.. but cannot wait to get my PS4 (around the time infamous hits)
A $600 Gaming PC gets you an FX 6300, R9 270X, 8GB RAM. This PC will compete with the consoles all generation, the PS4 could surpass it later on, but as of now this PC offers better performance. Add an extra $200 and you get an FX 8320, GTX 670, 16GB RAM. The PS4 won't surpass this PC at all. Console overheads are around 30% - 50% over PC equivalent hardware. Only exclusives aim for the 50% performance boost, while 3rd parties are closer to the 30% boost since they generally have to port to so many platforms including PC. PC is getting better performance with Mantle and soon CPUs will be built onto the GPUs for even better performance (effectively making them APUs, NVIDIA's Maxwell and Volta). The R9 270X already has a near 30% performance lead over the PS4. Add in the potential boost from Mantle and only PS4 exclusives and games late in the PS4's lifecycle will outperform the R9 270x. The PS4 will never be able to catch up to an R9 280x (GTX 670's near equivalent) which is nearly 2x as powerful.
Lol need a PC that's 3x stronger. What ? The last PC I built had a gtx 460 and I'm not seeing anything that new what these consoles are doing. If price really matter you can build a cheap rig for around the price of the new console and perform better but it would be quality parts but it would last a couple of years. Keep hyping up these consoles like they are doing something new
@abizzel R9 270X is $300 now. GTX 670 is usually much more expensive than a GTX 760 and it is used and takes some effort to get. The CPUs are good choices for a cheap build. 16GB RAM is nothing any gamer needs especially when BF4 uses only around 2GB of RAM. For $800 you can build a sweet rig but IMO you are not very used to creating a set up at that price that has a nice balance of quality and performance
@LAWSON I don't know what's going on with AMD, but these price hikes have to stop. The R9 270 (no x) is still $199 at Microcenter, and $250 for the R9 270x. You can still get a GTX 660 and end up with near identical results, and that I know is $199 and less. Microcenter http://www.microcenter.com/... I got a 670 from Microcenter for $240 which is why I used the 670. The GTX 670 was $280 on newegg, but now it too went up to $330. The 760s went down with one as low as $230, when they were $260 (at the time for $20 more you might as well get the 670 IMO). The GTX 760 is the best deal of these with the current prices, and with that price you might as well aim for a $650 - $700 build that will be better than the consoles. How the 270x can expect to sell costing more than the 760 is beyond me, but the GTX 760 is now the new best card in the mid-range :D 16GB was just for other applications like music and video editing which is generally what people who are in the $800+ range are looking for as well, and IMO I just have this idea stuck in my head that low budget $400 PCs = 4GB RAM, mid range $600 = 8GB RAM, high range $800 = 16GB RAM, Max that baby $1,000+ = 32GB RAM. It's just a habit :D
$1500 needed on a PC to match PS4? Mad as a mad monk. PS4 will struggle to match a machine with an old 7970ghz in it, it can maybe get on par with a 7870ghz down to console optimisations. I haven't yet seen a PS4 multi that an 7870ghz/R9 270X couldn't do at least as well as PS4. Anything more than that is more performance IMO. This year will see a decent hike in performance for your money too, with new generation hardware incoming.
Lmao you can't be serious "$1500+(if not more) type of good" You clearly know nothing about PC gaming...
A $1500+ rig will be playing games at 1440p/1600p let alone 1080p lol. http://videocardz.com/image... "You need almost 2-3x the raw brute force power to be in the same spot with PC." The PS4/Xone are designed just like PC's (X86) and there specs are that of a Low-mid end gaming PC. To think a AMD R7 260/265 & a low clocked 8 core AMD CPU will compete with something 2-3 times more powerful is ludicrous.
@ all the PC elitists, I cannot for the life of me understand why this discussion is still going on?! You CANNOT compare a PC to a console! How many times must I say this?! You know for being such elitists you are not very smart. The PC will always be able to give gamers better graphics, but takes more of your time to keep it up to date and anyone saying anything else is wrong I've had PC's from before most of you where born. The reason people get a console is that when I go to gamestop Friday after work to buy a new game I don't have to worry about my PC having the specs required nor do I have to start downloading drivers etc. I just insert the disc in my console and a few minutes later I'm playing my game. So for every gamer on a PC right now every comparison you make with the PS4 and a gaming rig is moot because everyone knows the PC is more powerful.
It's because all you retarded console fanboys keep lying about PC's though. If I said the X1 was more powerful than the Ps4 what would you say? Not having to worry if your PC can run it? REALLY? You have to be lying mate. The only time you have to worry is an option, which is if you want to MAX a game.
@irishguy If you say the X1'is more powerful than the PS4 I'd say you're a MS fanboy. I never said that the PS4 nor the X1 is more powerful than a PC I said the complete opposite you'd be crazy if you think a console is more powerful than a PC. So you never have to update drivers that take a lifetime to even find on the internet? That has never happend to you I guess? All I'm saying is that with a console you don't have to buy a new graphics card every 3-4 years, and no depending on you budget you maybe don't have to with a PC either. But you cannot say that having a PC gaming rig does not take more time and money than owning a console that costs 400$ and lasts for 7-10 years. For people like me that have a life, a job, kids and a wife don't have the time nor the energy to keep updating a PC. So when your grown up, not living with mommy and daddy and have life outside gaming then you can talk.
Cynade, The dude is beyond help this is the second day he's come into a topic ranting and isn't even using correct discussion points. Lol irishguy, You 're doing it again. you're in these articles and you have zero idea what is even being discussed. No one goes around saying PS4 XBONE have better graphics then PC. no one. Again we come back to this. How do you expect to have a discussion with people when you can't even get your head around the topic?
You're not that far off base depending on how much is spent on the gfx card, but this author of this article is off base. This just seems like click bate. The author tells us that these cards represent the the gdx card in the ps4 & xone but they don't. He never addresses the difference in the rop's, cu's or stream processors in the ps4 vs. this r7-265 card and that's a big deal. Then he never addresses the fact gfx cars are a completely separate piece of silicon not an APU style SOC that speeds communication between gfx card, cpu, and any co-possessors up as there is not bottleneck through any kind of connection port. To be fair he also never addresses the use of es-ram(which greatly increases it's available bandwidth far beyond the mentioned r7-260), it's move processors, or it's other 15 co-possessors that reside on it's SOC on the xone. My point is that these cards have been highly modified from anything that AMD has or will have on the market and the SOC design of these chips offer an advantage to them that simply can't be easily duplicated on dedicated gfx card' at those price points yet. The ps4 is a beast, and it's easy to code for period. The xone with it's media box focus, es-ram, move processors, and 15 co-processors reminds me of Sony last generation. It was crazy hard to program for for the but once the tools and middle wear were in place it performed a lot better I expect the same from the xone.
Kinda strange MS paid AMD more than Sony for the gpu architecture
The eSRAM is one thing, but another common factor is that Sony's simply buying more supply than MS so they're getting a greater discount. If you commit to buying more supply you can get greater benefits (in this case reduced price). Say MS purchased 10 million of the year, and Sony purchase 15 million for the year, then Sony likely is going to get a better deal especially if they negotiated. On the flip side, Sony could also be using the APUs to upgrade the servers powering PS Now, although this is less likely considering Gaikai's set up and still is a decent set for streaming PS3 games, but if PS4 games are going to eventually join then it makes sense to have the same or better hardware running them. So that could be another reason on top of eSRAM. Speaking of Gaikai I wonder if they're going to let PS3 games be upgraded to 1080p @ 60fps via PS Now. I suspect if that were to happen it'll be in a future update, but considering most PC games ran at those settings on Gaikai I would hope it's possible.
Yeah that's absolutely true. No matter what at the the end of the day, both console will produce great games with great graphical fidelity.
Is that why I can go out and buy a PS4 in every store? Cuz they have more supply?
@TheRedButterfly No, but that's a reason they've been able to sell out in 52 countries in less than 3 months, and why they have 5 million consoles sold already. I didn't say they produced more consoles I said they could be buying more supplies, next time try applying your reading comprehension skills before being attempting to be a [email protected]@$$, so you don't get schooled.
Tom's Hardware never lies. Looks like there are some stark differences with the GPU in PS4 and X1.
So did AMD just admit that the GPU found in the PS4 can comfortably render at 1080p res while the GPU in the Xbox One will struggle? Holy.... incoming $hitstorm for the XB1!
No not really. Guru3d said the r7 260 isn't great for 1080p with high settings PC Perspective said the r7 265 is good for 1080p AMD said nothing about the capabilities of either card (in this article, I'm sure they have product descriptions elsewhere). TomsHardware has a graph that says the r7 265 is a little better than the r7 260x. Neither card is actually directly comparable to the APUs in the consoles. So all we can take away from this is the numbers we already know, the PS4 APU has more cores/stream processors/ROPS/Tflops etc that we already know.
PS4 Handles 1080p fine. As for BF4(as much as i love it) is a bugfest. Not really surprised it's 1600x900 on PS4. Trouble is, people say 1080p, like it's the same textures,lighting,shadows,aa from PS3, just upgraded to 1080p, When we all know it's a whole new ballgame. I'm sick of idiots thinking that xboxone and PS4 are close in power. They are not and will never be. PS4 has near enough double the power gpu wise.
Matter of perspective. I have two R9 290s in crossfire. I say the consoles are very close in power.
You are either on serious drugs or just a flat out liar if you think the PS4 is comparable to 2-R9 290's in Crossfire. Either that or you have no idea how to set up your PC. I have both the PS4 and the X1, compared to my gaming rig with a GTX780 the graphics on both are a joke.
Whoosh, that was exactly his point.
With both systems offering many games that don't run at 1080p, let alone at anything higher than 30fps if so, I would say using the word "comfortably" is a bit of a stretch, honestly.
How many ps4 games run under 1080? I actually don't know any besides bf4 and would like to be aware.
7 games on the Xbone - under 1080p only bf4 on ps4, runs under 1080p http://www.ign.com/wikis/xb... p is the new Bit.
@savage_beast Thanks for the info. Also kudos on providing a link to back up your information.
No, The Xbox One GPU is very easily capable to render 1080p frames, just not full next gen graphics setting. The WiiU has games that run 1080p, but they don't look as good as Xbox One games in 1080p, same as PS3 and 360 who both have some games that run 1080p. The only problem I have is how PS4 owner think there console is soooooo much more powerful than Xbox One when it's not. I have an Xbox One and I know just like any one with common sense knows the PS4 is more powerful, but it's not leagues ahead as everyone seems to think, Just the next card up when comparing the two. The Xbox One is so close to reaching that point that it makes me sad that MS did not push just a little more to get it closer to what the PS4 can deliver as it would not have cost them hardly anymore to do. Maybe next time they won't underestimate Sony :/ @Savage Beast, You are right bro, but there are more games that run 1080p than not on Xbox One, here is what I can think of: Need For Speed, NBA 2k14, Madden, NBA Live, Fifa, Zoo Tycoon, Tomb Raider, Crimson dragon, lego Marvel, Max, loco cycle, Skylanders, Dying Light, and Im sure others I might have forgot
Well well well! Did everyone get that? AMD have laid the cards on the table, now can we all just play the hands we were dealt!?
I'm just impressed at what that card can do for $150.
PC gamers have been saying this for the longest. How are people surprise cheap gfx cards can compete with these next gen consoles . Hopefully this will shut PS fanboys up when they say you need a $400 GPU to compete with ps4
Well, I've also been PC gaming for years and your comment is ridiculous. Three things: 1) No one ever said the PS4 had a $400 GPU. 2) Prior to now, the closest equivalent to the PS4 GPU would set you back at least $200. 3) A full PC rig that could produce similar specs to the PS4 would set you back around $650-$700. Let's say $200 total for the CPU and GPU (and I'm being cheap on the CPU), $70 for a reliable mainstream motherboard, $60 for the HDD, $90 for the memory, $70 for the power supply, $45 for the case, $50 for the Blu-ray drive, and let's say $50 for a mouse/keyboard/gamepad (I'm being very cheap here too), and $10 for sundry crap like thermal paste and cables. That's $645, and that mobo probably doesn't even have wireless N onboard. I'm also being cheaper than I'd ever realistically be with the parts. That would probably be a minimally upgradable rig. I'd never build such a piece of crap PC for myself...I'd realistically be spending closer to $800 for the same target performance, because I care about aesthetics and reliability. For a pure gaming platform, the PS4 is a much better deal.
In lay man terms??
Ps4's gpu is still better and they basically told us things we are already seeing and misterx was wrong as usual but he will either ignore this or spin it.
MisterX should be liable for all his false information. I can't believe people go to his blog in a serious fashion. It's like reading a bunch of mentally challenged 3rd graders talk about quantum physics using keywords they heard on Big Bang Theory
BRILLIANT ANALOGY. +bubs
Unfortunately this article will fizz out. From the horses mouth but will always be denied reality. Any other power article will hit 901 degrees with 500 comments. But the main architect behind the gpu says and puts it in writing, now what. But let Microsoft, Crytec or Turn 10 say it's so much powerful and the opps will eat it up. Smh... Your move fanboys
People that still deny the PS4 have better specs are now akin to those who believe in creationism. (note, that's completely different that being religious)
I thought the PS4 card has some optimizations, I don't think this article accounts for that. Doesn't the PS4 have 8 ACE cores vs 2 on the XB1. This might not matter for the comparison done in the article, but I have read at least 2 tech articles talking about how this will make a huge difference down the road. The 8 ACE cores and the 32 ROP cores found in the PS4 GPU are comparable to high end GPUs even if the rest of the GPU is more mid to lower range.
The article is more about just comparing what the PC counterparts are in general. Sony and microsoft obviously have some propriety architecture within their GPU's that will not be in the PC version.
Agreed, but the optimizations mean that these are not exact replicas of the cards that are in the PS4 and XB1 and the console cards are probably a little more capable than what these cards would be in a PC. I am not sure exactly what optimizations the XB1 card has other than esRam, but I know that Mark Cerny talked a lot about the ACE cores. I'm excited to see what these cores can do for future games when utilized in the fashion they will be on consoles. I don't see these optimizations taking place on PC as much, even though you can get much more powerful GPUs in a PC, games rarely use the power as efficiently as consoles do. (to PC games this is not a declaration of war just a fact. I too have a PC I can game on, even if not an all out gaming machine)
Captain obvious enters the room sparkles a smile from his teeth then leaves giggling ......lets just face facts what with microsofts greedy attempt at d.r.m extortion it was pretty obvious they would be more stingy with the hardware in the xbone then that of the ps4 ,im a pc gamer but you cant wave a stick at what the ps4 is capable of......
Interesting to know of their PC GPU equivalents.. While the 265 performs better, it doesn't seem like a huge difference. The card only struggled with Crysis 3. I might use the 265 in my mini-ITX build.
These articles are amusing because, well...the comments section. At this point arguing over which console is more powerful should be irrelevant. Want to shut the Xbox guys up? Wait it out. When bigger better games come out throughout the year we'll see the difference.
Guess the truths hurts when your in the xbox camp
console gamers dont care about high end grafics if we did we would be gaming on pc and althou i am a sony fanboy i dont get all the xbone bashing maybe my eyesight is bad but personaly i dont see the diference between 1080p and 720 p