Been Retired From Console Gaming Long-Long Time Ago, Then I Found This!

[_Hustler_One_]

Found that a PS4 Pro and Xbox One X GPU equivalent are these 

 

Seriously? Those are way below my judgement about gaming console GPU power..

http://www.logicalincrements.com/articles/graphicscardcomparison

 

I really don't expect a PS4 with that low GPU.. Long time ago I was about to buy a PS4, but other real life needs said "no"..

 

Do anyone here have a PC which strong enough for gaming but still running a gaming console side by side?

 

My last gaming console was Nintendo New 3DS, it was exclusively bought for only play a single game through its life time, Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate.

 

But a PS4 Pro and an Xbox One X are that low is like serious "seriously?!"

 

Or maybe it's just me..

[Mira Yurizaki]

Yes, they're basically that low. Keep in mind the original PS4 was released four years ago and development of its hardware had to have been at least 1.5 to 2 years, so the selection of hardware at the time of release already made it "obsolete."

 

The thing is that console developers enjoy two things:

• Consistent hardware and software configurations, so they can make reasonable assumptions on how the system behaves
• API that has more direct access to the hardware, rather than hide it by abstractions to accommodate other hardware.

But also note that console developers also tend to target a specific frame rate. If we take an example review of the RX 470, if it can't achieve 60 FPS, it will likely have a 30 FPS target in the console or have its graphical settings turned down so it can achieve 60 FPS (although these tests were at 1080p, considering the PS4 Pro wants to do higher resolution, most of these games will likely just be 30 FPS anyway)

[flibberdipper]

Currently balling on a GTX 480 and can confirm it trades blows with our Xbox One VCR as well as one of my friends' launch PS4 (depends on how well optimized something is). Though in fairness to the XB1X, the things it does with that "little" graphical oomfh is pretty damn impressive if you ask me. Hitman 2 looks nutty on it.

[_Hustler_One_]

10 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Yes, they're basically that low. Keep in mind the original PS4 was released four years ago and development of its hardware had to have been at least 1.5 to 2 years, so the selection of hardware at the time of release already made it "obsolete."

 

The thing is that console developers enjoy two things:

• Consistent hardware and software configurations, so they can make reasonable assumptions on how the system behaves
• API that has more direct access to the hardware, rather than hide it by abstractions to accommodate other hardware.

But also note that console developers also tend to target a specific frame rate. If we take an example review of the RX 470, if it can't achieve 60 FPS, it will likely have a 30 FPS target in the console or have its graphical settings turned down so it can achieve 60 FPS (although these tests were at 1080p, considering the PS4 Pro wants to do higher resolution, most of these games will likely just be 30 FPS anyway)

Those 4K advertising on their website that gave me the judgement of serious strong GPU power is under the hood.. Then I ended up disappointed even I don't have one..

[KarathKasun]

15 minutes ago, _Hustler_One_ said:

Those 4K advertising on their website that gave me the judgement of serious strong GPU power is under the hood.. Then I ended up disappointed even I don't have one..

What do you mean?  The consoles do not run 4k native except in a very few games, and only on newer versions of the hardware.  Generally they just scale up from somewhere near 1080p.

 

I also dont understand how you think they were better than a PC of equal total price.

 

Historically console GPU's have been very under powered compared to PC's.  In the PS2/GC they had special tricks for special effects, but they were heavily resolution limited.

[_Hustler_One_]

15 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

What do you mean?  The consoles do not run 4k native except in a very few games, and only on newer versions of the hardware.  Generally they just scale up from somewhere near 1080p.

 

I also dont understand how you think they were better than a PC of equal total price.

I think I didn't say that they were better than PC of equal price, it's you judging me negatively. I was just thinking they shouldn't have been that low yet I do know they wont be better than a PC gaming, but again, shouldn't have been that low..

 

I checked the PS4 website, they says some 4k gaming. So I assume its GPU is equivalent to at least GTX 980 Ti to be able to run at 4k resolution comfortably but I missed it..

[Mira Yurizaki]

8 minutes ago, _Hustler_One_ said:

I checked the PS4 website, they says some 4k gaming. So I assume its GPU is equivalent to at least GTX 980 Ti to be able to run at 4k resolution comfortably but I missed it..

Consoles also don't run at maximum detail of what the PC side can set graphical settings to. Maximum detail is what most hardware reviewers run their tests at.

 

On a side note, while that list claims the PS4 Pro's GPU is the same as an RX 470, spec wise, it's an RX 480 that doesn't boost.

[KuJoe]

If game developers only had to program for a specific set of hardware they can do wonders with optimization. Consoles always need less hardware because the software is specific to the hardware compared to PC where the developers have to code for an API (i.e. Vulkan, OpenGL, DirectX) and have to make sacrifices to ensure it will run on a wide number of videocards and CPUs (thus adding overhead and reducing frame rate, detail, or both).

 

Optimization is a beautiful thing.

[minibois]

When your GPU is on the level of PS4 Pro/Xbox One X but you still can't play Red Dead Redemption 2

[KarathKasun]

18 minutes ago, _Hustler_One_ said:

I think I didn't say that they were better than PC of equal price, it's you judging me negatively. I was just thinking they shouldn't have been that low yet I do know they wont be better than a PC gaming, but again, shouldn't have been that low..

 

I checked the PS4 website, they says some 4k gaming. So I assume its GPU is equivalent to at least GTX 980 Ti to be able to run at 4k resolution comfortably but I missed it..

 

RX 470/GTX 1060 3gb are powerful enough for 4k with low/mid settings as long as you do not run out of VRAM.  Heck, a 1050Ti can play older games in 4k easily.

 

Its not so much a dig at you personally, but much of the "gamer" demographic has unrealistic ideas of what is required for specific things.  4k does not require much GPU power for example.  Especially seeing that consoles regularly target ~30 fps.  I could generally do that with an RX 470.

[_Hustler_One_]

12 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Consoles also don't run at maximum detail of what the PC side can set graphical settings to. Maximum detail is what most hardware reviewers run their tests at.

 

On a side note, while that list claims the PS4 Pro's GPU is the same as an RX 470, spec wise, it's an RX 480 that doesn't boost.

The game developers which optimize their level of graphical setting for the hardware right?

 

My last Playstation is a PS3, then I jumped to Nintendo 3DS to play MH4U only.. I like to jump across platform only to be able to play my favorite games like Granturismo series, Monster Hunter series, Armored Core series, Ace Combat series, Metal Gear series, then I decided to retire from console gaming or the whole gaming world itself... But now I'm hooked up so hard on World of Tanks instead, can't get enough of it.. hahaha...

[_Hustler_One_]

1 hour ago, M.Yurizaki said:

most of these games will likely just be 30 FPS

 

25 minutes ago, KarathKasun said:

consoles regularly target ~30 fps

I never thought that they run games at this level. I always thought they runs at 60 fps minimum..

[Mira Yurizaki]

7 minutes ago, _Hustler_One_ said:

I never thought that they run games at this level. I always thought they runs at 60 fps minimum..

3D console games seldom target 60 FPS. The decision to go with 30FPS I would argue is better because if the developer can't squeeze out all the performance to guarantee 60 FPS almost all of the time, then it would be better to just go with something lower so it can be that 100% of the time. If they don't, then the game will suffer from tearing like no other and that gets distracting fairly quickly. Also, for action games that require tight timing like fighting games, consistency absolutely trumps performance.