can the ps4 produce better graphics then a super rig

[KainXS]

on the multi-platform games I would think you get the performance of a comparable pc specwise and BF4 and Ghosts are examples. Still the better games are made for the ps4 the less the consoles will drag down the games when ported to pc.

 

[lyndonguitar]

Actually this is incorrect. BF4 on PS4 is High settings and at 1600x900 to maintain 60 FPS

and as I've said it runs at 900p 60FPS.

http://pixelenemy.com/battlefield-4...-night-day-difference-to-current-gen-version/

I've seen gameplay videos and comparisons myself and It looks like they use medium settings. even if they use high settings my point still stands.

 

[Durvelle27]

and as I've said it runs at 900p 60FPS.

http://pixelenemy.com/battlefield-4...-night-day-difference-to-current-gen-version/

I've seen gameplay videos and comparisons myself and It looks like they use medium settings. even if they use high settings my point still stands.

Its hard to make conclusions off videos also. I have played it myself and it looks great

 

[Mussels]

Actually this is incorrect. BF4 on PS4 is High settings and at 1600x900 to maintain 60 FPS

ok, how does the map size and player count compare?

 

[Durvelle27]

ok, how does the map size and player count compare?

Its basically like PC now. Has large maps and 64 players but as of now I've only found 4 servers with ppl in them on 64/64

 

[leeb2013]

despite the initial OP, it's turned into an interesting discussion afterall! LOL.

I find this chart interesting. Baring in mind you don't need a Titan to achieve 4.8 TFLOPs, an $500 R9 will now achieve that or 2x7950 ($400) will get 8 TFLOPs vs 1.8 for the PS4. I don't think the PS4 is 4x as efficient at gaming, and as I said, we're already comparing to a 2 year old GPU on the 7950.



But I reiterate what I said before, the PS4 is built to meet a price/performance ratio and it achieves amazing visuals for the cost.

AMD Mantle could be interesting if it works. But I can't figure out why AMD would want consumers to be able to get the same performance from cheaper graphics cards. It's almost like they're shooting themselves in the foot. Bringing out a new top end card, then reducing the need for it as a lower end card will run the game fine with Mantel.
Isn't the reason we buy new top and GPUs to play the latest games on max?!

 

[MxPhenom 216]

Actually this is incorrect. BF4 on PS4 is High settings and at 1600x900 to maintain 60 FPS

Still not all that impressive, considering we are onto next gen.

 

[xenocide]

AMD Mantle could be interesting if it works. But I can't figure out why AMD would want consumers to be able to get the same performance from cheaper graphics cards. It's almost like they're shooting themselves in the foot. Bringing out a new top end card, then reducing the need for it as a lower end card will run the game fine with Mantel.
Isn't the reason we buy new top and GPUs to play the latest games on max?!

Mantle won't be used on either Console this generation--Microsoft and AMD already confirmed that much. I believe (personally) the idea behind Mantle is two fold. For starters, it will give GCN-based cards a leg up for a generation or two until Nvidia can get it implemented if that's an option, or if they decide to create their own API which would be shit-tastic for developers. On top of that, it allows them to force more work onto GPU's, rather than CPU's. AMD hasn't really been able to reliably beat Intel's performance in the field of gaming (for a number of reasons) but if Mantle works as intended the CPU becomes a nonissue and their cheaper more thread-friendly CPU's look a lot more appealing.

 

[MxPhenom 216]

despite the initial OP, it's turned into an interesting discussion afterall! LOL.

I find this chart interesting. Baring in mind you don't need a Titan to achieve 4.8 TFLOPs, an $500 R9 will now achieve that or 2x7950 ($400) will get 8 TFLOPs vs 1.8 for the PS4. I don't think the PS4 is 4x as efficient at gaming, and as I said, we're already comparing to a 2 year old GPU on the 7950.



But I reiterate what I said before, the PS4 is built to meet a price/performance ratio and it achieves amazing visuals for the cost.

AMD Mantle could be interesting if it works. But I can't figure out why AMD would want consumers to be able to get the same performance from cheaper graphics cards. It's almost like they're shooting themselves in the foot. Bringing out a new top end card, then reducing the need for it as a lower end card will run the game fine with Mantel.
Isn't the reason we buy new top and GPUs to play the latest games on max?!

You dont seem to fully understand how Mantle works. For one Mantle does work, the problem for it now is game developer support for it. So far im pretty sure only EA confirms that they will use Mantle in all games that use Frostbite 3.0.

 

[THE_EGG]

Better than a super rig? No.

Better than a PC at the same price? Yes.

 

[patrico]

erm no lol, see ya next gen, and erm no again lol

 

[Lionheart]

I'll grab a PS4 some time next year for the exclusives mainly

 

[brandonwh64]

but "coding to the metal"

[YT]o-pN8qAiZhQ[/YT]

 

[Dent1]

yep and I believe BF4 for example will be upscaled from 720p on Xbone and 900p on PS4. http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Confirmed-Battlefield-4-720p-Xbox-One-900p-PS4-60210.html

Microsoft says the initial games will be upscaled. The next batch will be full 1080p.

AMD Mantle could be interesting if it works. But I can't figure out why AMD would want consumers to be able to get the same performance from cheaper graphics cards. It's almost like they're shooting themselves in the foot. Bringing out a new top end card, then reducing the need for it as a lower end card will run the game fine with Mantel.
Isn't the reason we buy new top and GPUs to play the latest games on max?!

From a customers point of view its great because less techy gamers can still run the latest games, whilst enthusiasts with more powerful GPUs won't have to upgrade as soon. Win/win.

 

[RCoon]

[YT]o-pN8qAiZhQ[/YT]

Those guys were my heroes when I was 16.

Also, why is this thread even a thread. The answer is straightforward.

 

[Mussels]

despite the initial OP, it's turned into an interesting discussion afterall! LOL.

I find this chart interesting. Baring in mind you don't need a Titan to achieve 4.8 TFLOPs, an $500 R9 will now achieve that or 2x7950 ($400) will get 8 TFLOPs vs 1.8 for the PS4. I don't think the PS4 is 4x as efficient at gaming, and as I said, we're already comparing to a 2 year old GPU on the 7950.



But I reiterate what I said before, the PS4 is built to meet a price/performance ratio and it achieves amazing visuals for the cost.

AMD Mantle could be interesting if it works. But I can't figure out why AMD would want consumers to be able to get the same performance from cheaper graphics cards. It's almost like they're shooting themselves in the foot. Bringing out a new top end card, then reducing the need for it as a lower end card will run the game fine with Mantel.
Isn't the reason we buy new top and GPUs to play the latest games on max?!

mantle will make them a fortune via APU's - imagine if a $150 APU can play modern games on low to medium settings without any trouble at 720p, you could get a gaming PC cheaper than a console.

 

[AlienIsGOD]

he graphics processing power of a simple 7950 is double that of the PS4. Assuming the 'to the metal' efficiency of the PS4 made it twice as efficient, it would still only match the 7950.

The 7950 was released 2 years ago, so the PS4 is probably at the level a mid-high end PC graphics card was back then.

PS4 has the rough equivalent of a 7850 in it actually. 1152 shaders + reports of 128 more being locked, which would then give it the same shader count as a 7870 (1280). So no a 7950 isn't twice as fast a a PS4.

 

[Mussels]

PS4 has the rough equivalent of a 7850 in it actually. 1152 shaders + reports of 128 more being locked, which would then give it the same shader count as a 7870 (1280). So no a 7950 isn't twice as fast a a PS4.

compare the full specs, not just shader count.

so shader/rop count, clock speeds, VRAM speeds, memory bus width.

 

[Durvelle27]

compare the full specs, not just shader count.

so shader/rop count, clock speeds, VRAM speeds, memory bus width.

1152 Shaders (18 CU), 800MHz, 5500MHz GDDR5 (176GB/s), 256Bit

 

[xenocide]

1152 Shaders (18 CU), 800MHz, 5500MHz GDDR5 (176GB/s), 256Bit

Fore Reference;
Reference HD7850: 1024 Shaders, 32 ROP, 860MHz Core, 4800Mhz GDDR5 (156.3 GB/s), 256-bit.
Most Third Party HD7850's: 1024 Shaders, 32 ROP, 900-1000MHz Core, 4800MHz GDDR5, 256-bit.

 

[TRWOV]

No, but you can watch porn on it (with official support no less)

 

[leeb2013]

No, but you can watch porn on it (with official support no less)

yeah, but not at 1080p

 

[de.das.dude]

because ps4 is a closed architecture and can "code to the metal" optimization, could it produce better graphics then a duel titan set up, a duel r9 290x set up, sli titan set up etc. etc.

Nope, Never /thread.

 

[silentbogo]

mantle will make them a fortune via APU's - imagine if a $150 APU can play modern games on low to medium settings without any trouble at 720p, you could get a gaming PC cheaper than a console.

But at the same time you can play the same games on PS3 @720p for a lot less money

About the original topic.

PS4 or any other console will never be able to beat a Hi-End Gaming PC due to the fact that by the time it comes out it will be at least one generation of hardware behind the PC market, but still it is not the reason not to buy it.

If you are not trying to achieve the best performance at super-high resolutions with maxed out video settings, and just trying to get satisfactory and consistent gaming experience - then PS4 is definitely what you are looking for.

First of all you get a long-term platform support (8+ years), as for the previous generations of consoles, plus it will serve as a nice replacement for a variety of other devices, like media players and streaming servers.

Secondly, it drains a lot less power and needs less maintenance than a high-end computer.

Buying a PS3 was my best investment so far, so I'm really looking forward into purchasing a PlayStation 4.

 

[Dent1]

But at the same time you can play the same games on PS3 @720p for a lot less money

Really? PS3 games cost more than PC games.

If you have a library of games you will pay more for the PS3 overall.

Amazon: Assassin's Creed IV
PS3: £39.97
PC: £29.99