Support NeoGAF

[shoegaze]

The CPUs in the PlayStation 5 and the Xbox Series X are models of AMD's (Advanced Micro Devices) third generation of Ryzen CPUs (the 3000 Series), which feature the company's Zen 2 microarchitecture; both CPUs have eight cores and can process two threads (i.e. programmed instructions) per core, which means that both CPUs can process sixteen threads simultaneously. The CPU of the PlayStation 5 runs at a variable frequency that is capped at 3.5 GHz; and the CPU of the Xbox Series X runs at a constant 3.6 GHz when its ability to process two threads per core is activated and runs at 3.8 GHz when said ability is deactivated.

Among the 3000 series of Ryzen CPUs, which is the series to which the CPUs in the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X belong, there are two models that have eight cores and can process two threads per core; hence, it's reasonable to assume that each of the CPUs in the PlayStation 5 and the Xbox Series X is one of these models. The models are as follows:

• Ryzen 7 3700x: 3.6 Ghz to 4.4 Ghz (the text is a hyperlink; click on it)
• Ryzen 7 3800x: 3.9 Ghz to 4.5 Ghz (the text is a hyperlink; click on it)

Based on the maximum frequencies of the CPUs in the PlayStation5 and the Xbox Series X being 3.5 GHz and 3.8 GHz, respectively, we can conclude that each of them is a customized Ryzen 7 3700x. Further proof of this is the 3700x's lower thermal design point of 65 watts relative to the 3800x's higher thermal design point of 105 watts; Sony and Microsoft would want the model with the lower TDP for their consoles since it's nearly as fast as the model with the higher TDP and would minimize the likelihood of their consoles overheating.

Hence, PC gamers are currently able to possess...

• The CPU that is in both consoles (i.e. Ryzen 7 3700x)
• More powerful models of the Ryzen 3000 series (e.g. 3900x [12 cores, 2 threads per core], 3950x [16 cores, 2 threads per core], 3960x [24 cores, 48 threads], 3970x [32 cores, 2 threads per core], 3990x [64 cores, 2 threads per core])

Furthermore, the Ryzen 4000 series of CPUs, which will be the successor to the Ryzen 3000 series and will feature AMD's Zen 3 microarchitecture, is expected to be released in the Fall. So, before either console is released, PC gamers will be able to possess CPUs with even newer technology and better performance than those in the consoles and others among the generation to which they belong.
___________________________

The GPUs in both the PlayStation 5 and the Xbox Series X are also customized versions of technology designed by AMD. The GPU of each console features a customized version of AMD's RDNA 2.0 (Radeon DNA 2.0) microarchitecture, which will debut in the successor to AMD's currently-available RX 5000 series of graphics cards in late Summer or during the Fall, before the PlayStation 5 and the Xbox Series X are expected to be released.

Hence, before the consoles are released, PC gamers will be able to possess GPUs that feature...

• Variable Rate Shading
• AMD's implementation of Ray Tracing
• Sampler Feedback Streaming
• 50% more performance per watt (per level of energy or heat)
• Higher base and boost frequenicies
• Increased number of operations performed per cycle

However, in the mean time, PC gamers can possess GPUs that outmatch those of the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X in terms of raw rendering speed (i.e. rendering without Variable Rate Shading or Sampler Feedback Streaming) when rendering imagery that does not contain ray tracing: the RTX 2080 Super (which is more powrful than the PS5's GPU) or the RTX 2080 Ti (which is more powerful than the XSX's GPU).

As for RAM, both consoles will have 16GB of GDDR6 RAM; GDDR6 is currently available on the Nvidia GTX 1660 Super and will presumably be on the next generation of graphics cards from both AMD and Nvidia.

However, PC gamers will have to wait a while for SSDs that are as fast as the one in the PlayStation 5, which can process data at 5.5 GB/s; it's a custom SSD with 12 channels and that is compliant with PCIe 4.0 and NVMe. At the moment, the fastest SSDs available to PC gamers that are compliant with PCIe 4.0 and NVMe can process data at 3.5 GB/s. It'll probably be a year or so until SSDs as fast as the one in the PS5 become available. As for the SSD in the XSX, it processes data at 2.5 GB/s, which is a speed that currently available SSDs for PCs can attain.

So, how long do you think it will take PC to completely advance past the tech in the PlayStation 5 and the Xbox Series X?

EDIT:

The point of this thread isn't to insult gaming consoles, because I like consoles (I have a PS4 Pro and an X1X). The point of this thread is simply to alleviate worry that the technology in the PS5 and the Xbox One X will lead gaming design in a direction that will leave PC behind, namely the super-fast SSDs in both machines (particularly that in the PS5) and the subsequent possibility of creating open-world games that are truly seamless (i.e. have no loading screens [whether hidden by forced traversal through corridors or unhidden], instant fast travel, no forced decrease in rate of movement in order to avoid outpacing the rate at which the world is rendered, etc). This is a worry expressed by the YouTuber Coreteks in this video.

Didn't read all of the op sorry, just because I'm too busy at the moment, but just wanted to mention that an absolute minority of gamers enjoy the latest and greatest hardware. Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's feasible for most.

 

[psorcerer]

I'm sure there will still be games on the new consoles that target 30fps. Just so they can pump up the eye candy. As long as the port is good getting 60fps on pc from a console title is quite easy.

With what army again? There is no CPU in PC that's twice as fast.
And I doubt there will be.
Remember it needs to be twice as fast per thread. Nobody will rewrite a console engine for more cores/threads just to get PCMR folks happy.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

With what army again? There is no CPU in PC that's twice as fast.
And I doubt there will be.
Remember it needs to be twice as fast per thread. Nobody will rewrite a console engine for more cores/threads just to get PCMR folks happy.

Lol are you sure you game on pc? You really think you need a cpu twice as fast as xsx to get double the framerate? Wow. Your troll level is impressive. With proper use of settings getting the framerate up to 60 will be no more difficult next gen than it is now. GPU comes first in gaming.

 

[Alphagear]

A small small percentage games on the super high end rigs, the vast majority of PC players are on 3-4 year old rigs that get periodically updated. Just check the steam hardware survey results The fact is that the new gen consoles will be at minimum on par or faster than the average PC for a bit. Yes the bleeding edge will always be faster, but if you need an article to know that then I'm not sure what you're doing on a site like Gaf.

Completely agree and with Mid life upgrades for consoles now a norm I doubt we will ever see the average PC ever having an advantage over consoles.

 

[Bogroll]

Is this like saying Bears shit in the woods.

 

[dano1]

Just why
My next iPhone is going to be better also...

 

[Neo Blaster]

you posted so your lie is not even true in your case.

Oh, did I hurt your feelings? There, there, you'll still be able to spend your couple thousand dollars on those exciting new pieces of tech.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Oh, did I hurt your feelings? There, there, you'll still be able to spend your couple thousand dollars on those exciting new pieces of tech.

Dont be jealous we have more disposable income than you.

 

[Neo Blaster]

Dont be jealous we have more disposable income than you.

Not jealous at all. I've had enough time with PCs to finally realize consoles are simply better cost/benefit nowadays. And 'we have more disposable income than you', really? How old are you, 10?

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Not jealous at all. I've had enough time with PCs to finally realize consoles are simply better cost/benefit nowadays. And 'we have more disposable income than you', really? How old are you, 10?

Aw. Poor triggered fanboy. I have consoles too. All of them. I like them. PC is just better for me in most cases. You get a very nice package with most consoles.

 

[Neo Blaster]

Aw. Poor triggered fanboy. I have consoles too. All of them. I like them. PC is just better for me in most cases. You get a very nice package with most consoles.

Yep, definitely around 10. And good for you to have consoles too.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Yep, definitely around 10. And good for you to have consoles too.

I'm sorry you can't handle a jab. What are you doing here then? Perhaps a sesame street gaming board would be better for you?

 

[nordique]

Current gen has held up well

Think about most ps4 games still tender at 1080p, 6-7 years after release. despite the very old jaguar Processor that core for core is probably even outclassed by the switch lol

Point is, these next gen consoles are in a much better position out the gate to last another 7 years on the CPU side

 

[Neo Blaster]

I'm sorry you can't handle a jab. What are you doing here then? Perhaps a sesame street gaming board would be better for you?

And are you really going on with this BS? Are you that insecure? 'PCs are omnipotent, master race steps on console peasants', feeling better now?

 

[OmegaSupreme]

And are you really going on with this BS? Are you that insecure? 'PCs are omnipotent, master race steps on console peasants', feeling better now?

I guess you missed the part where I said consoles are great too. I'll back off from you. I've hurt your feelings. Sorry.

 

[VFXVeteran]

And that cpu performance was unused. My old 2500k was only strained by cities skylines fast forward and .... Shadow of the Tomb raider village segments lol. I did ot 3700x though... and don't use it almost for nothing

The same will be said of next-gen consoles. Most games will be GPU-limited like they're supposed to be.

 

[VFXVeteran]

My argument was this perception that ALL gamers are playing on superior hardware.

That level of choice also comes with drawbacks.

When was the last time a game was fully optimised for PCs.

You need alot more and pay alot more to get the same results as consoles.

What do you call fully optimize to mean? A game running at 60FPS @4k or a game running 30FPS @4k? GPU running at 99% utilization?

I'm curious where this myth of PC games not being optimized like the consoles (even though they share the exact same hardware) come from?

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

I mean, yeah, nothing mentioned here is wrong. We all know the consoles won't outperform top-of-the-line PC GPUs even at launch.

But, the thing the consoles have is supreme affordability for performance comparable to high-tier PC GPUs. That's always been the appeal of them. Try building a custom PC with performance equivalent to a PS5 or XSX for under $2000. I doubt it can be done. You'd also need to factor in a monitor, keyboard, mouse etc. because PCs aren't necessarily built for televisions the way consoles are.

The amount of PC gamers who are going to cough up the money for top-of-the-line or even next-gen console equivalent hardware is actually pretty small, I think people overestimate the size of that group of gamers. Truth is a lot of these PC GPU cards also sell to visual effects studios, rendering farms, medical groups, server companies etc. as well. I know AMD and Nvidia are both making more compute-orientated GPUs for non-gaming tasks but that doesn't mean only high-end PC gamers will be buying the gaming-orientated GPUs, either.

 

[VFXVeteran]

I mean, yeah, nothing mentioned here is wrong. We all know the consoles won't outperform top-of-the-line PC GPUs even at launch.

But, the thing the consoles have is supreme affordability for performance comparable to high-tier PC GPUs. That's always been the appeal of them. Try building a custom PC with performance equivalent to a PS5 or XSX for under $2000. I doubt it can be done. You'd also need to factor in a monitor, keyboard, mouse etc. because PCs aren't necessarily built for televisions the way consoles are.

The amount of PC gamers who are going to cough up the money for top-of-the-line or even next-gen console equivalent hardware is actually pretty small, I think people overestimate the size of that group of gamers. Truth is a lot of these PC GPU cards also sell to visual effects studios, rendering farms, medical groups, server companies etc. as well. I know AMD and Nvidia are both making more compute-orientated GPUs for non-gaming tasks but that doesn't mean only high-end PC gamers will be buying the gaming-orientated GPUs, either.

Consoles don't perform at high-tier PC GPUs. There wasn't a single multiplatform game this generation that ran equivalent high-tier GPUs with the same 3D features/resolution/FPS.

 

[kraspkibble]

no shit. zen 2 cpu LOL and a 9-12tf gpu? and only 16gb ram? right now those specs if it were a PC would be quite respectable but by the time they launch PC will be way ahead with zen 3, new intel cpus, new amd/nvidia gpus, and 32GB is becoming more popular. next year PC will be on DDR5 + PCIE 5.0. ddr5 speeds will be ~3000-8000mhz (ddr4 is 2133-4000 or so). pcie 5.0 ssds will make the SSD of the PS5 look like a slow piece of crap. the PS5 will have only 5.5GB/s and up to 7GB/s for exandable drives. PCIE 5.0 will let PC go up to 14GB/s.

consoles are always playing catch up. they just so happened to "catch up" a bit more this time but yeah they will be dated in terms of PC comparison at launch.

 

[Jadsey]

In other news... the Pope is Catholic.

Thanks OP.

 

[Sethbacca]

Consoles don't perform at high-tier PC GPUs. There wasn't a single multiplatform game this generation that ran equivalent high-tier GPUs with the same 3D features/resolution/FPS.

And yet there isn't a single PC only game I'd take over any of the tier 1 first party output on console.

 

[D3SCHA1N]

 

[VFXVeteran]

And yet there isn't a single PC only game I'd take over any of the tier 1 first party output on console.

So what? I spoke a fact. You turn around and speak your subjective tastes.

 

[Sethbacca]

So what? I spoke a fact. You turn around and speak your subjective tastes.

Yeah, not disputing your assertion. I'm just saying that these high end rigs largely go to waste. So it's all just e-peen bragging in the end.

 

[VFXVeteran]

Yeah, not disputing your assertion. I'm just saying that these high end rigs largely go to waste. So it's all just e-peen bragging in the end.

Again, you are injecting your opinion. If it takes a high-end GPU to run nearly every game @4k/60FPS, how is it a waste?

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

Yeah, not disputing your assertion. I'm just saying that these high end rigs largely go to waste. So it's all just e-peen bragging in the end.

I guess the waste part depends on your FPS/settings preference, especially with mods that can greatly enhance textures and view distance/LOD in some games.

I don’t feel like my 2070 Super is going to waste when I’m getting 90+FPS with everything ultra

 

[hyperbertha]

Exactly. PC will crush my PS4 copy of The witcher in terms of IQ and image enhancement etc. But it's still built to the lowest common denominator.

Next gen-game design will be built round the largest market - why would devs not cater for 75% of people who play games on lesser specs? Consoles have usually had a mid range GPU (at launch) equivalent. However it's now superseded the lowest PC threshold by virtue of the SSD. PC will still outgun consoles in raw power but as long as they still cater to HDD then we'll still have games constrained by it. XsX, PS5 and rigs with SSD wont need to see those jedi fallen order gap squeezes. But we still will because the game will be developed to run on all PCs which will need the time to stream.

Take those PCs out the equation and make SSD the baseline for all 3rd parties then you'd see significant gains.

what is 'IQ'?

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

what is 'IQ'?

Image quality, at least that’s how I use it

 

[Elog]

Most of my best gaming experiences over the last 5 years have been on consoles that have been vastly inferior to the PC landscape in terms if hardware - and on several occasions the graphics have been superior from an experience point of view. Please note that my PC is an OC 7900K@4.5Gz on all cores and an OC 1080Ti. Just proves the point that hardware is not all some people want it to be.

 

[Sethbacca]

Look. We know this shits subjective. If you feel like paying 6x more for a high end PC to have high fps and extra resolution then do it. For me, I'd rather have more complex games with more on screen game elements and AI design complexity than extra fps and resolution. Which really only happens when consoles change the baseline periodically (with the occasional outlier like Star Citizen).

Do what you like.

 

[DoctaThompson]

Like I said earlier, consoles already have ultra models and textures (proof is already in this thread). If getting ultra grass lod and water physics is that important to you, go ahead.
I for one am hard pressed to notice differences between the pro versions and the pc versions. People here praise fps, but rdr2 on ultra is still capping 40 ish on pc so I really don't get the appeal.

This is about choosing whether you want AAA console exclusives or the extra bells and whistles on the PC version of third party games and IMO this task is too easy. Last gen I had a PC for third party and a Ps4 pro for exclusives and tbh I can do without the bells and whistles.
Next gen, all games are pretty much guaranteed to have a 60 fps performance option on console so even the fps maniacs have no real argument for pc really.

You really have no clue how games work on pc, do you? If someone wants, they can run rdr2 @4k, 100fps. Yes pc can handle maxed out everything, but some ppl may lower settings from ultra, to high, to get a huge fps boost. You do realize that is an option right? It's not like console where you are forced to play the game at sub 22fps. PC players have options. Further more, 40+ fps is still more than double that of consoles minimum fps, everything ultra, in native 4k. (Not checkerboard rendering lololol)

It must suck to be a fanboy, where you try and shit on something superior to what you own, just because of pure jealousy. Who hates on higher fps than consoles can do? Come on man, grow up already.

 

[Alphagear]

What do you call fully optimize to mean? A game running at 60FPS @4k or a game running 30FPS @4k? GPU running at 99% utilization?

I'm curious where this myth of PC games not being optimized like the consoles (even though they share the exact same hardware) come from?

Well I currently have a Ps4 pro and a fairly average pc with an 8 core amd 8350 and an rx570 4gb and a SSD. 16gb system ram.

Last game I tried was Resident evil 2 remake on both.


Rx 570 is arguably on par or better than the ps4 pro gpu.

That 8 core 8350 though ancient is arguably on par or better than the 8 core jaguar cpu.

Not to forget a ssd on the pc just to run windows and games.


Looks and runs better on the ps4 pro though arguably my pc has better specs.

Please explain why I cant get a stable 60 fps even at 1080p on my pc. 1440p and 1620p are out of the question.

Its 1620p on ps4 pro.

 

[DoctaThompson]

PC Master Race is funny,

You see stats on Steam and:

Top 3 video cards used: GTX 1060, GTX 1050 Ti, GTX 1050

Top 2 output video resolution: 1920x1080 and 1366x768

The big advantage that PC had in this generation was CPU performance. That will be gone with Zen 2

You do realize there most used gpu on steam, gtx 1060 is still stronger than the strongest console, xb1x? Next gen consoles aren't out yet, and many pc players are itching for an upgrade. Why wouldn't someone upgrade their gpu for less money than a next gen console? That's literally how most people upgrade their pc's. They wait till consoles come out, buy a future proof gpu, and enjoy better visuals and framerate.

 

[psorcerer]

Lol are you sure you game on pc? You really think you need a cpu twice as fast as xsx to get double the framerate? Wow. Your troll level is impressive. With proper use of settings getting the framerate up to 60 will be no more difficult next gen than it is now. GPU comes first in gaming.

That's what PCMR was touting this gen. Somehow it will change next gen?
Let's see, it will be spectacular.

 

[njean777]

Meh, still gonna buy the Xbox. I prefer consoles so it is what it is, and yes I have had gaming Pc's. Just not my cup of tea, and I prefer Macs over it lol. Just how it is.

 

[Fbh]

Hasn't this always been the case?
Was anyone expecting consoles would now outperform PC's for years to come at a fraction of the price ?

The real question is still price. I don't give a shit if I CAN build a PC that can easily outperform next gen consoles, I care about how much it will cost.

If you can give a $600-700 build that will outclass a $400-500 next gen console then cool. If you are simply talking about high end PC parts and $1500+ builds then "outclassing" consoles should be the absolutely bare minimum you should expect from a MUCH higher investment.

 

[hyperbertha]

You really have no clue how games work on pc, do you? If someone wants, they can run rdr2 @4k, 100fps. Yes pc can handle maxed out everything, but some ppl may lower settings from ultra, to high, to get a huge fps boost. You do realize that is an option right? It's not like console where you are forced to play the game at sub 22fps. PC players have options. Further more, 40k fps is still more than double that of consoles minimum fps, everything ultra, in native 4k. (Not checkerboard rendering lololol)

It must suck to be a fanboy, where you try and shit on something superior to what you own, just because of pure jealousy. Who hates on higher fps than consoles can do? Come on man, grow up already.

Seriously how insecure are you buddy? PC to me is inferior as long as it doesn't have many of the console exclusives. LIke I said, the 60 fps argument is pointless because next gen all consoles will have the 60 fps option for any game that requires it. I'd much rather have good games than turn up the Grass LOD and Depth of field to ultra in my Ubisoft game. Still can't see a meaningful difference between RDR 2 pro and PC version. xD And I'm no fanboy of anything I own a PC capable of 60 fps at 1080p and I still spend 80 percent of my time on ps4.

 

[FireFly]

Lol are you sure you game on pc? You really think you need a cpu twice as fast as xsx to get double the framerate? Wow. Your troll level is impressive. With proper use of settings getting the framerate up to 60 will be no more difficult next gen than it is now. GPU comes first in gaming.

I thought the point was that PCs could handle console games at 60 FPS at the same quality levels?

 

[The Pleasure]

I love pc superiority topics while they whine and cry for games to come. Waiting for red dead 2,horizon zero dawn, gta or anything else? Pc gaming is best exemplified as this

 

[DoctaThompson]

Seriously how insecure are you buddy? PC to me is inferior as long as it doesn't have many of the console exclusives. LIke I said, the 60 fps argument is pointless because next gen all consoles will have the 60 fps option for any game that requires it. I'd much rather have good games than turn up the Grass LOD and Depth of field to ultra in my Ubisoft game. Still can't see a meaningful difference between RDR 2 pro and PC version. xD And I'm no fanboy of anything I own a PC capable of 60 fps at 1080p and I still spend 80 percent of my time on ps4.

How insecure can you be, that you are stuck in denial, and cannot grasp the reality, that pc will always have superior hardware. Why is that such a foreign concept for you to finally get? So you have a next gen console? Do you know if all games will be 60fps? Over 85% of people voted that next gen consoles will have 30fps games. What does that tell you?

Just because you are a blind fanboy, and can't realize the difference between sub 30fps, and 120fps maxed out everything, doesn't mean everyone else is blind. Even YouTube compressed videos show a night and day difference in texture quality and framerate alone.

If you weren't so insecure, you wouldn't even be in this thread to begin with. Many people have proven you wrong, and all you can do is, click on the funny emote, and display your ignorance, over and over.

Like I said earlier, i don't mind consoles at all. But I work hard, and I appreciate all of the benefits that gaming on a PC can offer. I could strictly game on a console, but why would I downgrade my experience?

 

[Alphagear]

Lets be honest, the truth is that for me to get something on par to XSX/PS5 specs wise I would need to spend twice the amount of money. Atleast 1000 pounds or dollars.

Why would I do that?

 

[DoctaThompson]

Lets be honest, the truth is that for me to get something on par to XSX/PS5 specs wise I would need to spend twice the amount of money. Atleast 1000 pounds or dollars.

Why would I do that?

Why buy a big house, when an apartment can do just fine? Why but a nice car, when a bicycle could do the job? Why fly first class, when economy gets you to the same destination?

I spent more on my pc than a next gen console, but I'm getting every possible benefit, and then some. My last upgrade was 2 years ago, and my pc will defecate all over next gen consoles. My choice, my decision. Not sure why there are so many insecure people in this thread. I never realized how toxic and insecure Fanboys can be. This is not aimed at you by the way.

 

[VFXVeteran]

Looks and runs better on the ps4 pro though arguably my pc has better specs.

What about the game looks better on your PS4 Pro?

Please explain why I cant get a stable 60 fps even at 1080p on my pc. 1440p and 1620p are out of the question.

Its 1620p on ps4 pro.

You can't compare a setting you want with the hardware you have with a setting that's locked on the PS4Pro. The PS4Pro doesn't run at a true 1620p. There are elements in the render that are being reconstructed, so it's impossible to narrow down what it's *true* rendering resolution is. Screen-space FX and rendering features are rendered at lower resolution or altogether missing on the consoles. Are you running at the max settings on your PC? If you are, turn down the settings to mimic what the PS4 Pro settings are.

Here's a guide on rx570 and it's performance numbers.

People should do their homework before jumping to conclusions that PCs are unoptimized vs. the consoles. While the consoles' optimize by removing features and rendering at lower res to avoid heavy bandwidth, I would not consider that an advantage at all. I don't want sacrifices in rendering for the sake of running at a fast FPS. For me, I want the best match of the developers vision when creating their game. And that's always going to be running the game on the highest settings possible with the best GPU hardware available.

 

[hyperbertha]

How insecure can you be, that you are stuck in denial, and cannot grasp the reality, that pc will always have superior hardware. Why is that such a foreign concept for you to finally get? So you have a next gen console? Do you know if all games will be 60fps? Over 85% of people voted that next gen consoles will have 30fps games. What does that tell you?

Just because you are a blind fanboy, and can't realize the difference between sub 30fps, and 120fps maxed out everything, doesn't mean everyone else is blind. Even YouTube compressed videos show a night and day difference in texture quality and framerate alone.

If you weren't so insecure, you wouldn't even be in this thread to begin with. Many people have proven you wrong, and all you can do is, click on the funny emote, and display your ignorance, over and over.

Like I said earlier, i don't mind consoles at all. But I work hard, and I appreciate all of the benefits that gaming on a PC can offer. I could strictly game on a console, but why would I downgrade my experience?

So now you are resorting to strawmans and cover ups? Do you really think next gen games won't have an option to run at 60 fps? Even if by some miracle they didn't, the FPS and hack/slash games will be 60 fps on console anyway. Keep venting your insecurities its amusing. Its okay buddy, Your 3k didn't go to waste you can still see all that gorgeous grass at high LOD in far cry 5. That's got to count for something right?

 

[VFXVeteran]

Lets be honest, the truth is that for me to get something on par to XSX/PS5 specs wise I would need to spend twice the amount of money. Atleast 1000 pounds or dollars.

Why would I do that?

You wouldn't. But that doesn't mean the high-end PC hardware is inferior to the low end console hardware. This topic is about the consoles being behind before they are even released yet - and that's a true statement regardless of cost. If this thread was about the best bang for your buck, I can see some validity to these arguments. However, what we are seeing is people willing to admit the PC has the better hardware diminish it's validity to gaming by injecting price into the argument. Again, another way to feel superior even if your console can't outperform the competition.

 

[mejin]

The majority will still continue to play on peasants builds. PS5 and XSX is the jump we need.

 

[Alphagear]

You can't compare a setting you want with the hardware you have with a setting that's locked on the PS4Pro. The PS4Pro doesn't run at a true 1620p. There are elements in the render that are being reconstructed, so it's impossible to narrow down what it's *true* rendering resolution is. Screen-space FX and rendering features are rendered at lower resolution or altogether missing on the consoles. Are you running at the max settings on your PC? If you are, turn down the settings to mimic what the PS4 Pro settings are.

Here's a guide on rx570 and it's performance numbers.

People should do their homework before jumping to conclusions that PCs are unoptimized vs. the consoles. While the consoles' optimize by removing features and rendering at lower res to avoid heavy bandwidth, I would not consider that an advantage at all. I don't want sacrifices in rendering for the sake of running at a fast FPS. For me, I want the best match of the developers vision when creating their game. And that's always going to be running the game on the highest settings possible with the best GPU hardware available.

Thanks for the reply.

Tried everything on settings and still dont get the performance we see on ps4 pro. Specs are arguably the same.

My point on console games better optimised than pc equivalents still stands.

 

[Keihart]

I have a good enough PC because of VR and other stuff, but the gimnastics or refusal to accept that consoles are what really drive developers to build games for better hardware baffles me.
The target platform it's more often than not consoles because of the player base, so PC elitists should be ecstatic about every new console gen.

 

[NT80]

This is untrue; the PC version of Red Dead Redemption 2 blows the console versions out of the water, into the sky, through the atmosphere, and out of orbit.

The specs of that PC are so far beyond the PS4/X1 that it's almost like comparing them with a next gen console. I would expect far better than that if it were fully exploited. I can't imagine the cost.