Support NeoGAF

[Thrakier]

The only "good" thing about a console it's the exclusive games. Other than that, the PC offers a *vastly* superior gaming experience.

 

[Hazaro]

Not every game at 60fps with full settings on.

Some games are just poorly optimized.

I just want to break this myth of everything will be great with a mid range rig. you are going to have to lower settings for. A lot of newer games with a mid range rig.

MAX/FULL/ULTRA are called that for a reason. They are usually horribly optimized and offer marginal benefit.

I aim for 120FPS and routinuely run medium or high.

 

[docbon]

consoles are a curated experience. you pay a modest price, get your modest hardware and get a guided tour of the lot. they are great entry level or supplementary devices, but offer the user no agency beyond what the manufacturer has planned for them.

there is a lot of fervour right now as some of those who are deeply connected to their hobby are having trouble coming to terms with the fact that their preferred console model is one which doesn't necessarily reward a large degree of investment. they offer a prescribed package tailored to the mass market.

if you are someone who wants to invest in this hobby beyond treating it as a distraction, you must have a PC. it's not even a question. in both next gen console's entire lifetimes, they won't build anything close to library of defining titles already available to the PC today. though i'm not sure how much of that you can already explore on your laptop.

there are big things coming to the PC market. DD has given way to an entire frontier of maverick game design, price and distribution which the consoles are scrambling to emulate, multiplatform support will be of unprecedented quality, the oculus rift is on the cusp of starting a revolution, esports is firmly rooted on the platform and 20nm GPU tech should see a performance leap like we haven't seen in years.

so i guess it all comes down to how active you want to be in your hobby. do you want to kick back at the end of the day and enjoy titles for what they are, enjoying tightly honed AAA blockbusters and signed-off indie titles without too much scrutiny or agency beyond playing the game itself? or do you want to actively invest in crafting the best experience you can for yourself, personalised for your idiosyncrasies?

all this is before getting into a power debate, the results of which are already firmly established. i will say that come october, the radeon 9000 series is dropping and the 20nm fabricated nvidia maxwell is pencilled in for q1. should you choose to go with PC, if you can wait until then, do.

Probably the best piece of advice so far, especially with regard to emerging technology in PCs. Oculus Rift alone has a ridiculous amount of potential that will set it apart from console experiences, until the consoles themselves add support that is. Even then, they'd need the horsepower to maintain a consistently high framerate at a high resolution.

 

[Finaika]

Hell, I have a GTX460 and a CPU so old it's not even funny anymore, and I still can play a lot of games at 60fps these days.

Is this true?

 

[Vlaphor]

I'm in a similar predicament where my PC is just powerful enough to not need upgrading anytime soon, but there are more powerful options out there.

i7 930 (no idea how to overclock, though everyone says that it's easy)
12gb of ram
GTX 570

I know I don't need to upgrade, but I kind of want to. I was waiting until after the next gen consoles came out to decide what to do, but neither system has any exclusives that I want right not (at least not enough to buy a new console for). I'll be getting enough money for a decent upgrade at the beginning of next year, as well as fall of next year, and I'm trying to think of what to do. Maybe buy some parts (mobo/cpu) now, then beef up the video card in the fall perhaps.

If I were going to get a console now, it'd be a PS4, with a XBone after a price drop.

 

[TheD]

It does bother me. not everyone has a copy of windows laying around with an unused licenses and good m/k can easily cost $200+ .

The you guys say " you only need a super cheap m/k". But when the gaming mouse and gaming keyboard threads pop up you guys throw out some very expensive recommendations.

I have gtx770 and ivy bridge i7 3770 along with a nice case , nice m/k , 2 hhd, 8 gigs of ram. And it wasn't cheap. And there are still games I can not play on full settings just because they are not really optimized that well.

Stop with the hyperbole.
You don't need to spend $200 on a keyboard and mouse!

I gamed for ages with a cheap MS mouse and keyboard, nothing wrong with them.

It does a little because if you not playing games at full settings in 1080p at least then why not just get a console for a lot less of price is the issue?
And also why shit on console players at that piont as well?

Maybe because this is not some binary thing!
A game running on PC at not 100% ultra maxed out settings at 60FPS does not mean it is automatically just the same as the console version!

 

[Arulan]

I'm in a similar predicament where my PC is just powerful enough to not need upgrading anytime soon, but there are more powerful options out there.

i7 930 (no idea how to overclock, though everyone says that it's easy)
12gb of ram
GTX 570

I know I don't need to upgrade, but I kind of want to. I was waiting until after the next gen consoles came out to decide what to do, but neither system has any exclusives that I want right not (at least not enough to buy a new console for). I'll be getting enough money for a decent upgrade at the beginning of next year, as well as fall of next year, and I'm trying to think of what to do. Maybe buy some parts (mobo/cpu) now, then beef up the video card in the fall perhaps.

If I were going to get a console now, it'd be a PS4, with a XBone after a price drop.

A decent overclock on your i7 930 would help you a lot. Here is a guide to walk you through it.

http://www.overclock.net/t/538439/guide-to-overclocking-the-core-i7-920-or-930-to-4-0ghz

I'd suggest holding off for now if you can get a good overclock on your CPU unless there is a specific game you're really looking forward to that requires it.

 

[Dahaka]

Is this true?

Sure, but with lowered settings.

 

[pixlexic]

you never hear die hard PC gamers say " PC graphics are superior! but I have to tone down the settings". lol

just bringing in some reality to this built up fantasy.

I am buying all 3rd party games this holiday on PC thats coming out on pc, but some of these barely under $1k rigs you guys are throwing out will probably have to dail back the settings on a few of them.

 

[Lasthope106]

$300 is mid range now?

I would say that yes it is. My 560 Ti cost me $250 when I bought it two years ago, and that to me was mainstream, which I consider lower than mid-range.

 

[Pakkidis]

I'm in the same dilema as the OP. New PC or console. Ultimately I decided on PC, here's why

PROS:

-My current PC is 10 years old, so I think it's about time I upgrade
-The new PC will go in my room as oppose to a console which will be in the basement
- Been console gamer for the last 10 years time to try something new
- Cheaper games and better deals
- I never buy console day 1 anyways
- No yearly subscription bullshit

CONS:
- Very expensive, almost 4 times as much as current price of consoles
-Getting games to work on PC can be a frustrating experience
-missing out on exclusive console games


Ultimately I decided on PC. The specs Im aiming for are;

AMD FX 8350
2tb hard drive
3 gb vid card
8 gb ram

 

[Mr. Poolman]

It seems to me that the OP has already made up his mind and is going to get a PS4.

When the time comes, and you are ready, you will join us PC gamers in the sun

 

[Sentenza]

Is this true?

Why it shouldn't be?
Sure, it's true, it's just about making some reasonable compromises.
For a start I play at 1680x1050 (not the now "usual" 1920x1080) because that's the native resolution of my monitor and every time I have performance issues I lower or turn off settings I don't care much about, like AA, ambient occlusion, PhysX, sometime shadows.

It depends on the games, really. The least demanding, I don't even need to lower a thing.
The most resource-intensive, I may have to compromise more.
What's important to me is native resolution (because of image clarity), good framerate and the best textures available. Everything else is negotiable, searching the best balance between visual appeal and performances.

That's another thing I love about PC gaming: it gives me options, it lets me choose how to enjoy the game at the best of my personal preferences and possibilities.
Incredibly, even without having to spend millions of dollars in a new system, regardless of what some users can claim in this topic.

 

[kharma45]

I'm in the same dilema as the OP. New PC or console. Ultimately I decided on PC, here's why

PROS:

-My current PC is 10 years old, so I think it's about time I upgrade
-The new PC will go in my room as oppose to a console which will be in the basement
- Been console gamer for the last 10 years time to try something new
- Cheaper games and better deals
- I never buy console day 1 anyways
- No yearly subscription bullshit

CONS:
- Very expensive, almost 4 times as much as current price of consoles
-Getting games to work on PC can be a frustrating experience
-missing out on exclusive console games


Ultimately I decided on PC. The specs Im aiming for are;

AMD FX 8350
2tb hard drive
3 gb vid card
8 gb ram

Get a 3570K or a 4670K, not an 8350 unless it's hugely cheaper.

 

[TheD]

you never hear die hard PC gamers say " PC graphics are superior! but I have to tone down the settings". lol

just bringing in some reality to this built up fantasy.

I am buying all 3rd party games this holiday on PC thats coming out on pc, but some of these barely under $1k rigs you guys are throwing out will probably have to dail back the settings on a few of them.

One of the points of getting a PC is to play with higher settings than the consoles, just because you can not hit some insane setting in a game does not make that invalid!

 

[Sentenza]

Always depends on game, resolution and settings.

GTX460 is a pretty outdated card: PS4's GPU has 100% more FLOPS than GTX460 and some PCgaffers consider PS4 "low-end". lol

Ohohohoh.
OHOHOHOH.
HI-LA-RIOUS!

Well, except I never claimed my system was better than a PS4 and it's also several years old, which is why I'm planning to change it.
It's not something that's going to be released at the end of 2013.

 

[Dahaka]

One of the points of getting a PC is to play with higher settings than the consoles, just because you can not hit some insane setting in a game does not make that invalid!

I think he's also trying to say that in arguments people bring up the best screenshots possible while playing on medium or even lower themselves because their machine is not the kind that would represent the platform well. That's the irony in so many "vs." threads.

 

[DocSeuss]

I have all the parts for a new PC lined up, which would cost me around $1200. On the other hand, PS4 is a much cheaper alternative and has console exclusives that really interest me, plus all the PC games I would end up getting ayway. I will end up getting PS4 at some point - the only thing that made me seriously consider PC is the impending death of my current laptop. I've never been a big PC gamer, but maybe now is the time to switch?

So, GAF, can you sell me on one or the other?

Also, nobody say XBO - I don't plan to get one anytime soon.

Now is the time to switch; I'm sure you could build a cheaper PC than $1200, though.

What exclusives on the PS4 interest you? The massive lack of exclusives for the PS4 is one of the reasons I'm not interested in buying one. By next summer, the PS4 will have... only one game I really want.

Practically every game announced on the PS4 so far has a PC version as well, since they've announced, like, 90% Indie games so far.

Why it shouldn't be?
Sure, it's true, it's just about making some reasonable compromises.
For a start I play at 1680x1050 (not the now "usual" 1920x1080) because that's the native resolution of my monitor and every time I have performance issues I lower or turn off settings I don't care much about, like AA, ambient occlusion, PhysX, sometime shadows.

It depends on the games, really. The least demanding, I don't even need to lower a thing.
The most resource-intensive, I may have to compromise more.
What's important to me is native resolution (because of image clarity), good framerate and the best textures available. Everything else is negotiable, searching the best balance between visual appeal and performances.

That's another thing I love about PC gaming: it gives me options, it lets me choose how to enjoy the game at the best of my personal preferences and possibilities.
Incredibly, even without having to spend millions of dollars in a new system, regardless of what some users can claim in this topic.

Tuco and I may butt heads at times, but when he's right, he's right.

 

[TheD]

Always depends on game, resolution and settings.

GTX460 is a pretty outdated card: PS4's GPU has 100% more FLOPS than GTX460 and some PCgaffers consider PS4 "low-end". lol

You can not 1:1 compare peak theoretical floating point performance between microarchitectures!

And Tuco did not say it was as good as the PS4's GPU anyway!

 

[SolVanderlyn]

It seems to me that the OP has already made up his mind and is going to get a PS4.

When the time comes, and you are ready, you will join us PC gamers in the sun

OP here - and yes, this seems to be the case. I would love to jump on the PC game train, and it will happen eventually. I think it will be sometime in the future, however.

What really sold me on the "PS4 now - PC later" philosophy is the upgradeable nature of PCs. There's also the excitement of being part of a console launch, which I would miss out on if I chose PC now. I figure my laptop will last until 2014, at least, and by that point, $1200 will net me a much nicer array of parts than it can do right now. I realize that this is sort of a catch-22 in that "next year" will always offer a better array of parts than it will "now", but I feel that this argument holds more weight at the eve of a new console generation because it gives the PC scene time to more significantly advance beyond consoles.

Thank you, everyone, for your insight! A lot of really well thought out and detailed arguments. Really helped me to make a final decision.

 

[pixlexic]

One of the points of getting a PC is to play with higher settings than the consoles, just because you can not hit some insane setting in a game does not make that invalid!

Yeah but just being in 1080p and having to cut back aa, texture res, draw distances.. Ect isn't being better than anything. It's just being Ina higher resolution.

It's like how many people's pcs will be able to play bf4 in the settings that is greatly above the ps4?

pretty sure what's been shown was all settings up .. at1080p and 60fps. The rigs recommended In This thread probably won't hit that.

but if your goal is to fore go top of the line for stable frame rates then don't pretend like these cheap pcs will get both.

 

[Arcteryx]

Well if your laptop is about to die...the PS4 isn't really a great replacement.

That said, I would pick up a new computer, maybe lower the price a bit to ~$800-1000 and wait on the PS4 until you see some stuff that is a MUST have/hear how the initial buyers like it so far.

 

[SirButterstick]

That's not true at all.

Every platform has it pros and cons. Please stop disguising your personal beliefs as universally valid facts. I'm a multiplatform gamer myself, I own a very decent PC and I can only shake my head at your stupid post. PC gaming is nice and everything, but many PCgaffers here just deceive themselves.

Explain pls

 

[SniperHunter]

I think you made the right call. No point in buying a PS4 for multiplatform games. Sony hasn't announced that many exclusive titles for PS4 atm, relying too much on indies. I am not getting a PS4 atm either, buying new console hardware at launch is always a bad move (especially Sony or MS hardware)

So yea build dat PC and buy a PS4 in 2015 for $350 with cheaper exclusive games.

 

[TheD]

Yeah but just being in 1080p and having to cut back aa, texture res, draw distances.. Ect isn't being better than anything. It's just being Ina higher resolution.

It's like how many people's pcs will be able to play bf4 in the settings that is greatly above the ps4?

pretty sure what's been shown was all settings up .. at1080p and 60fps. The rigs recommended In This thread probably won't hit that.

but if your goal is to fore go top of the line for stable frame rates then don't pretend like these cheap pcs will get both.

If the settings and/or performance is still better than the consoles.... IT IS STILL BETTER THAN THE CONSOLES!
Use some damn logic!

That system that Addnan posted will easily smash what the PS4 will be doing in BF4, it does not matter if it is the max the game is capable of or not.

 

[kevm3]

Really it depends on how much you like Sony's exclusives and how much you like what is offered on PC. Right now, I'd probably go PS4 and wait two or three years down the line to build a pc just to have a graphics card that will be able to max out multiplatform games. You can do that now, but it will cost more obviously... but it'd be better later on so you can have a better idea of what it will take to max games out for a long time in the future since there will be a baseline of the hardware needed to do that.

 

[Sentenza]

Both GTX460 and PS4 use 1D shaders and PS4 easily wins the spec sheet war against the former in terms of FLOPS, fillrates, VRAM pool and bandwidth.

So, why are you insisting in comparing my GTX460 with a PS4, exactly?
What are you trying to argue for?

 

[Lamptramp]

I too had the same dilemma, in the end I've decided on a PS4.

I spend all day on a PC at work and I don't relish the thought of maintaining a PC when I leave work too.

Also although I have a fairly large living room I don't have a lot of space around my TV, no handy corners etc. A PS4 is pretty svelte and will sit quite unobtrusive in the space I have. The premium I would have to pay to make a PC so small is one that it makes sense to pay.

It's true that a PC is potentially the stronger choice when it comes to value for money over time and range of game available, but that upfront cost is still there and is a factor to me in my situation. Sony have seemingly also embraced low-budget games and having a large breadth of incoming titles, which made the choice that little bit easier.

 

[SniperHunter]

So, why are you insisting in comparing my GTX460 with a PS4, exactly?
What are you trying to argue for?

You tag is hilarious hahahaha

 

[pushBAK]

I'm in the same situation. Other than my video card my PC is from 2009, plays everything I throw at it ATM but can't max out more recent games.

I'm opting for a PS4 at this point in time, as I've recently come off of PC games and gravitated to my PS360 backlog. I'm genuinely having more fun on consoles than I've had on PC in the past few months. The only game I ended up play day after day was League of Legends...

 

[Stallion Free]

PS4 better than a 460? What a huge win.

 

[FACE]

Always depends on game, resolution and settings.

GTX460 is a pretty outdated card: PS4's GPU has 100% more FLOPS than GTX460 and some PCgaffers consider PS4 "low-end". lol

Mid-end by 2013 standards, yes. But you can keep comparing the PS4 to a mid-end GPU released in 2010 if it makes you feel better.

 

[Sentenza]

You tag is hilarious hahahaha

Yeah, extremely vile and unfair, and I have no idea who chose it and why, but I'm growing almost fond of it after a while.

PS4 better than a 460? What a huge win.

Eh. It was a low budget GPU even in 2010 when I bought it to upgrade my old system a bit.

 

[SniperHunter]

I'm in the same situation. Other than my video card my PC is from 2009, plays everything I throw at it ATM but can't max out more recent games.

I'm opting for a PS4 at this point in time, as I've recently come off of PC games and gravitated to my PS360 backlog. I'm genuinely having more fun on consoles than I've had on PC in the past few months. The only game I ended up play day after day was League of Legends...

yea same here. I didn't play any PC games from Jan to October 2013 because I was studying calculus and advance functions like a mad man. I got a 7970 in Oct 2013 and I enjoyed maxing out games like Far Cry 3 and PlanetSide 2. But I can't remember the last PC exclusive title I enjoyed...right now I am happy with a PS3, PC and Vita. I will probably clear up my back log for those systems before moving on.

I want a PS4 just for Shadow Fall, I really love those Killzone games for whatever reason.

 

[TheD]

Actually you can: Both AMD and Nvidia are using 1D shaders for their GPUs today and if you know fillrates and bandwidth you can guesstimate perforcmance quite well based on paper specs.

The times of "Nvidia FLOPS are worth more than AMD FLOPS" are long gone. A couple of years ago, AMD used 5D (and later 4D) shaders for their VLIW architectures, while Nvidia used 1D shaders. AMD's VLIW chips had crazy amounts of FLOPS in theory, but since the architecture was not able to deliver it's full theoretical power in real life scenarios, people started talking about PaperFLOPS and how much more efficient Nvidia cards are.

Both GTX460 and PS4 use 1D shaders and PS4 easily wins the spec sheet war against the former in terms of FLOPS, fillrates, VRAM pool and bandwidth.

Not on floating point alone.

e.g, go look at some GCN vs Kepler compute benchmarks or HD7970 vs GTX780 (they both have around the same peak theoretical floating point performance).

And the GTX460 is

 

[FACE]

Yeah, extremely vile and unfair, and I have no idea who chose it and why, but I'm growing almost fond of it after a while.

Mod that tagged you was probably a fan of Skyrim

 

[pixlexic]

If the settings and/or performance is still better than the consoles.... IT IS STILL BETTER THAN THE CONSOLES!
Use some damn logic!

That system that Addnan posted will easily smash what the PS4 will be doing in BF4, it does not matter if it is the max the game is capable of or not.

How can I use logic with no real examples? I have yet to play a ps4 game to compare it to the PC version and at what setting.

I do know what an i7 3770 and gtx oc 770 can do.
I also know what the bf4 demo rigs had running in them.

 

[Ywap]

If you are a good person and feel that you are worthy of 60fps then go with PC, otherwise settle with PS4.

 

[schwabdizzle]

Both is honestly the way to go.

 

[SniperHunter]

Both is honestly the way to go.

in the long run yes, but at launch? no way! You are forgetting the red ring of death and fat PS3's dying and crashing alll over the place

 

[RedSwirl]

Just asking the PC people here again though: How well do you think a GTX760 will hold up over the next couple years?

The only "next-gen" game I might run on it this year is Watch_Dogs. Going into 2014 the first next-gen game I know I'm going to buy is probably Witcher 3. Otherwise I'm mostly going to be using it to run games that came out within the last couple years (Tomb Raider, Skyrim, Far Cry 3, etc.).

 

[bengraven]

So much fucking misinformation about PCs.

And hell, you don't even need to build one - I found a decent one for 500 back in 2008 on NewEgg that still runs most modern games with medium-upper medium settings and is more powerful than the current gen by far.

 

[Finaika]

in the long run yes, but at launch? no way! You are forgetting the red ring of death and fat PS3's dying and crashing alll over the place

My 60gb fat PS3 still works even today.

 

[SniperHunter]

My 60gb fat PS3 still works even today.

IMO Nintendo consoles are the only ones worth buying @ launch. I don't trust MS or Sony launch hardware.

 

[OmegaTreeFish]

To me it makes more sense to use that money for a ps4 and new laptop (you would be surprised what those new i3,5,7 chips onboard graphics chips can play).

That way you can play the new games on PS4, and some older games for cheap on ya laptop.

Then in 3-5 years when consoles start showing signs of age get that PC to get the best performance if you feel the consoles are lagging behind.

edit
Unless money isnt a concern at all I personally think buying a new PC at a console launch is the worst time because the parts are so expensive to match / beat the consoles to a worth while level. A few years after launch its plummeted in price to do so.

My gaming PC (that I actually dont really use anymore but thats a different story) is 4.5 years old now and still runs everything much better than xbox / PS3 and was a pretty cheap PC to upgrade to at the time for what I was getting.

 

[Arulan]

How can I use logic with no real examples? I have yet to play a ps4 game to compare it to the PC version and at what setting.

I do know what an i7 3770 and gtx oc 770 can do.
I also know what the bf4 demo rigs had running in them.

Showcase PC builds are not indicative of the actual requirements of the game, even at max settings. They tend to be fitted with every luxury you can buy such as water-cooling systems, an SSD, and an overkill in terms of RAM, and GPUs. Most importantly however, the showcase builds were running the game at 3200x2000.

DICE has also previously stated that the requirements for BF4 will be similar to that of BF3.

 

[Stallion Free]

Yeah because GTX780 has something that Nvidia calls "Hyper-Q". It increases GPGPU efficiency greatly.

AMD has the same tech. A HD7970 doesn't use it, but PS4 and AMD's upcoming GPUs will use it. It's the asynchronous fine-grain compute stuff Mark Cerny talked about. By the way: A Geforce Titan has 32 compute queues for Hyper-Q, PS4 will have 64.

Is that why BF4 is downgraded on PS4?

 

[Finaika]

Just asking the PC people here again though: How well do you think a GTX760 will hold up over the next couple years?

The only "next-gen" game I might run on it this year is Watch_Dogs. Going into 2014 the first next-gen game I know I'm going to buy is probably Witcher 3. Otherwise I'm mostly going to be using it to run games that came out within the last couple years (Tomb Raider, Skyrim, Far Cry 3, etc.).

GTX760 blows the PS4 out of the water.

 

[hemtae]

Not good. GTX760 has 2GB VRAM, but Killzone Shadow Fall, a release title for PS4, already uses 3GB for graphics tasks alone.

Just think back a little: PS3 and Xbox360 had 256MB VRAM. How long did you have "awesome" PC graphics with 256MB VRAM?

And why exactly would the 4GB version not work?

 

[mephixto]

Just asking the PC people here again though: How well do you think a GTX760 will hold up over the next couple years?

The only "next-gen" game I might run on it this year is Watch_Dogs. Going into 2014 the first next-gen game I know I'm going to buy is probably Witcher 3. Otherwise I'm mostly going to be using it to run games that came out within the last couple years (Tomb Raider, Skyrim, Far Cry 3, etc.).

Not so well, in case of Nvidia try to aim always for a 770 and up.