EA: PS4, XBox One Are a 'Generation Ahead' of Gaming PCs

[hapkido]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
8-10 times an Xbox360 or PS3 is still A LOT slower than current top-end gaming PCs. They'll be MAYBE mid-range gaming PC territory if you are ok with 30 FPS and really narrow FOV. By the time these things are actually released, they'll be 2-3 generations behind PC hardware. There's nothing wrong with that, but let's call it like it is. PCs will always be the enthusiast gaming market.

 

[twztechman]

I think Rajat has that five year thing backwards. The current consoles are just catching up with the PC I had 5 years ago.

 

[Super_Nova]

God, i hate this new messageboard:-(

 

[smeezekitty]

The higher end PCs should still be much stronger. In any case, system on chip has one huge disadvantage: virtually not upgradability.
Not an issue with a console but a problem with a PC.

 

[computertech82]

EA always lies. One of the many reasons they are voted WORSE company.

 

[thomron1977]

Tell that to my 2 4gb 680s u stupid A%% mofo.

 

[tomfreak]

Delusional guy. both consoles are basically a dual Kabini CPU + 7790/7850. Even my 2500K rig is already ahead of both consoles.
it is also an x86 system so there is no such thing as code optimization anymore. if the game is optimized in those console it will be optimized for PC.

 

[Fulgurant]

Not in this generation, but at the point when the PS3 was announced, it was actually more powerful than any pc on the market. The PS4 and XBOX One are pretty much just lower-mid range pc's.

That's a good point. When the PS3 was announced in 2005, it boasted (if I recall correctly) a GPU that was analogous (perhaps even superior) to a 7800 GT. At the time, that was the second-best card available. So although the PS3 wasn't better than then-current high-end gaming PCs, it was firmly in the high end.

To torture the analogy, if the PS4 were to launch with a GPU similar to a GTX 670, then it would be on similar footing, in PC-comparable terms, to the PS3 when it was announced. But the PS4 is launching with a GPU similar to an HD 7850 or GTX 650 Ti Boost, which costs about half as much as a 670.

So it's reasonable to assume that the PS4 will actually age far quicker than the PS3 has aged.

On the other hand, back in 2005, there was a much narrower range of what we gamers might call "acceptable" performance for GPUs. Everyone was using more or less the same resolution (1280x1024), and you genuinely needed a good-to-great graphics card to max it out. These days, the 'standard' resolution is 1080p, and even mid-range cards can play most games at 1080p at high or near-max settings. The really high-end current cards (and/or SLI setups) are generally reserved for greater-than-1080p configurations, or for 120 Hz monitors, or for people who simply insist on the best possible performance in the most demanding games for as long as humanly possible.

Suffice to say that it's a good time to be a PC gamer on a budget.

And, apparently, it's a good time to be designing and marketing a gaming console. Sony isn't going to make much, if any, profit on the hardware they're selling, but they're probably not going to take a significant loss on it either.

 

[cozmium]

Right, because we all love EA, value their opinion and trust them with what they have to say... yeah...
Also a 'generation' is what... 6-8 months or so? Nice try EA, I bet pc users are terrified.

 

[ZeroTrouble]

I'm failing to see how a $600 unit can be superior to current computers that have individual parts that are worth $300 each.

 

[rush21hit]

Actually, what Taneja said in this article is make sense. Do the writer of this article even realize how efficient and how blazing fast the underlying architecture design by AMD for both? They pretty much just create another, and far better version(if not what AMD meant to be) and to put to perspective, it's an APU on steroids.
8 core, GCN 2.0, hUMA and 8GB DDR5? This thing would eat any high-end setup on their knees. The iGPU alone stands for peak at 8,1 TFLOPS. Just a dip under 6950. To put this in to perspective, even by puny GPU ranked as low as(by today standart) 7600GT on previous console, developers manage to pull off some seriously breathtaking gaming experience. Well, if we talk about HD resolution the previous might not fare well. Still, developers did great job so far even it never took far off from 720p.
Now imagine, what developers can do with such power of the next-gen console has to offer.
Even the fundamental purpose about console vs PC is miles away. PC has too much constraint, regardless of its far better performance by each part. Everything has to be accounted for. Not to mention developing programs code that would smoothly run on many many many combination of hardware that available on PC's market.
Console has no such constraint. The developers knew what they're dealing with, and to expect.
In my opinion, it would be interesting to see what next-gen games has to offer. Then again, I don't suppose my rusty 4890 can cope with it...

 

[RealityClash]

EA, the biggest s**t talkers of the gaming industry

 

[Fulgurant]

Why is this surprising? Developers for consoles only have to program for 2-3 hardware configurations at most instead of the of the millions of different combos in the PC world. They can optimize the game for those specific hardware specs and don't have to worry about those specs changing. That's why the iPhone consistently runs circles around other smartphones with more cores, higher frequencies, etc. The hardware and software are optimized to run together...just like console games. I left PC gaming behind years ago...what's the point when your graphics card is obsolete 6 months after you buy it. You buy a console and don't have to buy anymore hardware for years. Although the PS4 has slightly better specs I'll be getting the Xbox One.. Illumiroom is going to be a game changer when it goes live. I'll have 20 thumb downs because I said something bad about PC gaming and someone good about Apple. Let the hate begin..lol

If you genuinely feel that PC graphics' cards go obsolete every six months, then you're listening to the wrong people -- myopic, l33t-enthusiast kiddies. If anything, the pressure to upgrade on an aggressive schedule has gone down over the last few years, not up. Partially because of consoles, actually. 😉

And although it's true that console software benefits from optimization, and that therefore console hardware will age better than theoretically equivalent PC hardware, there are limits to optimization. If the EA representative had simply said that the PS4 is better than the average PC, or that it features next-gen hardware (technically true), then no one would be beating him up for it. But no, he had to wander off into the realm of absurdity by claiming that the PS4 outclasses $2000+ computers.

No one would believe that. Not even the most anti-rational technical luddite. Put the two price tag numbers next to each other ($2000 and the ~$500 you're likely to pay for a new console) and the claim becomes instantly preposterous -- and yet we still somehow have console advocates like you defending it, because EA wasn't brazen enough to put numbers to their bald-faced lie.

 

[Fulgurant]

Actually, what Taneja said in this article is make sense. Do the writer of this article even realize how efficient and how blazing fast the underlying architecture design by AMD for both? They pretty much just create another, and far better version(if not what AMD meant to be) and to put to perspective, it's an APU on steroids.
8 core, GCN 2.0, hUMA and 8GB DDR5? This thing would eat any high-end setup on their knees. The iGPU alone stands for peak at 8,1 TFLOPS. Just a dip under 6950.

Where are you getting that number? The estimates I've read put the PS4's GPU at ~1.8 TFLOPS. Which is the neighborhood of the HD 7850, which is a decidedly mid-range GPU.

 

[JOSHSKORN]

Can't wait to see the first titles demoed. I plan on getting the XBOX One.

 

[smeezekitty]

God, i hate this new messageboard:-(

Agreed. It is acting terrible right now.

 

[Fulgurant]

Where are you getting that number? The estimates I've read put the PS4's GPU at ~1.8 TFLOPS. Which is the neighborhood of the HD 7850, which is a decidedly mid-range GPU.

Here's a link: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6972/xbox-one-hardware-compared-to-playstation-4/2

 

[horrormaster]

Not even worth a serious comment

 

[fnh]

EA are dreaming up 'next-generation' possibilities of 'always online', 'micro-transactions' and 'social interaction' after its debacles on the PC market.

 

[unksol]

Doesn't EA know you're supposed to come off as at least remotely believable, to suck people in, when you troll? Other wise you just get laughed at and ignored

 

[falchard]

It surprises me how the Chief Technology Officer knows so little about technology. He does know a SoC is older than a socket. SoCs are also more unreliable than a socket incase he forgot about the Red Ring of Death. I agree there are advantages to a SoC, but there is no hope for a 5 billion transistor SoC on a 22nm process node.
Also, the new consoles are kinda a generation behind the most extravagant PCs.

 

[deadfear]

FALSE.

 

[DarkForce_256]

Okay sure, Sony and Microsoft are making $1500 future computers and selling them for ~$400, makes perfect sense!

 

[fantasticles]

I just don't know what to say... let the flaming begin?

 

[joytech22]

If the architecture is a generation ahead, why don't they prove it with a tech demo showcasing how it's any better?
I'll bet you $100 they can't design a tech demo for the consoles that wouldn't run on a "High End Gaming PC", which they seem to be comparing these consoles to.