my pc vs consoles

[Gasser243]

Hey bros,so i'm going to upgrade my pc and i want to know is it worth it or i should get an xbone or a ps4?here's my pc specs that i'm going to get
Cpu:intel i7 4790k
Cpu cooler:cooler master hyper 103
Gpu:msi gtx 970
Ram:16gb 1600mhz kingston
Mobo:msi z97s sli plus
Psu:cooler master v750 gold
Case:cooler master k380 with 3 additional sickle flow x case fans
Os:win 8.1 64bit
So is it worth upgrading? Since consoles are cheaper... or a console will be better?i don't want to upgrade till 3 years from my upgrade is it possible?since i want to run all new games at max settings on a 1080p 60hz monitor @40+fps is that possible?
Thx in advance
Sry 4 bad english 😀

 

[DasHotShot]

what I'm getting at is that what is considered high end often pushes the boundaries of what is affordable rather than what adds qualitative and quantitative enjoyment. At some point your are just buying expensive technology for the sake of it.

Especially when development becomes so biassed towards selling you the next greatest piece of hardware that they become stagnant in true innovation of making enjoyable games that aren't just polished re-hashes of what we have already played.

Already gpu's are fairly inefficient and are often handicapped by their own software drivers.

Also how long ago was it that 4k monitors were not used for gaming? Honestly I have fairly good eyesight, I'm an armature photographer so I can appreciate resolution.... but the difference between 4k and 1080p below around 60" and at comfortable sitting distances does not blow me away.

Certainly not as much as better colour replication and especially true black replication do.

Then you haven't been subjected to proper 4k content.

The difference on any refresh rate really, is day and night.

Where there is little to no difference is 1440p with high AA and 4k without. This is where people can be clever and wait till 4k is developed properly for gaming.

 

[ValeTudoGuy]

Ray tracing would be much more viable if rather than rendering an entire environment incase you walk over to that part, they created an algorithm that works out which part your looking at and just renders that snapshot rather than wasting processing power.

 

[Icaraeus]

The fact is that there is a massive difference between 1080p and 4K. I have not seen a 8K display but the amount of pixels compared to 4K is drastically increased. Hardware has advanced faster than the growth of software. There's no use in better hardware if software is not good enough. I agree with your point about GPUs being inefficient to an extent. DX12 API, Vulkan and the APIs that the consoles' use is very efficient. The truth is that the difference between 4K and 1080p is very noticeable. However, what makes a display best is indeed the quality of colour reproduction.

 

[Icaraeus]

Ray tracing would be much more viable if rather than rendering an entire environment incase you walk over to that part, they created an algorithm that works out which part your looking at and just renders that snapshot rather than wasting processing power.

Unreal Engine 4 already does that.

 

[Icaraeus]

what I'm getting at is that what is considered high end often pushes the boundaries of what is affordable rather than what adds qualitative and quantitative enjoyment. At some point your are just buying expensive technology for the sake of it.

Especially when development becomes so biassed towards selling you the next greatest piece of hardware that they become stagnant in true innovation of making enjoyable games that aren't just polished re-hashes of what we have already played.

Already gpu's are fairly inefficient and are often handicapped by their own software drivers.

Also how long ago was it that 4k monitors were not used for gaming? Honestly I have fairly good eyesight, I'm an armature photographer so I can appreciate resolution.... but the difference between 4k and 1080p below around 60" and at comfortable sitting distances does not blow me away.

Certainly not as much as better colour replication and especially true black replication do.

Then you haven't been subjected to proper 4k content.

The difference on any refresh rate really, is day and night.

Where there is little to no difference is 1440p with high AA and 4k without. This is where people can be clever and wait till 4k is developed properly for gaming.

I'm struggling to see the viability of 4K for the future. There are already 5K monitors.

 

[DasHotShot]

There also monitors over 5k, not the point.

Theoretically we should be using OLED...seeing as that is a much better technology than any of the standard panels sold right now.

Obviously the corporations set a standard that we buy into. I think 4k and VR will define the gaming display segment for the next 5 years at least.

I mean we are not staying on 1080p, clearly as the market is showing. So where else would we go if not 4k?

 

[Icaraeus]

Well within the next year or two a lot of people will transition to 4K/5K. Nvidia Pascal will push 4K a lot seeing as it'll even be capable of 5K gaming if not maybe 8K.

 

[DasHotShot]

I think the majority of users are only just adapting 4k TVs and exploring 1440p/4k screens. As such I think it is very viable and the logical next step before anything bigger.

The professional scene and Enthusiast envelope pushers will always be several steps ahead, with regard to 5k/8k or whatever else.

I think the resolution for mainstream screens and media content won't rise dramatically beyond 4k in the the next decade.

It will be a push towards higher quality visuals at these resolution which will drive change. Like the aforementioned OLED or similar technologies will be the next big thing I believe.

What's to say Apple don't release TV with a "retina" display...etc

 

[Icaraeus]

I'm just waiting for a high quality 4K 32 inch monitor and Pascal to release. Should last me many, many years.

 

[DasHotShot]

What will you play PS4 on...seeing as "next gen" doesn't do high res? xD

 

[Icaraeus]

My 110 inch 1080p projector. Why?

 

[DasHotShot]

It was banter. You can let your guard down. We have agreed to disagree already about PS4.

Let us put that behind us.

 

[Icaraeus]

Uh, I never had any guard up but whatever. You just can't get around the fact that everything I've said about the PS4 in terms of game performance is true, but whatever. I digress. The OP is long gone and you're finished so this discussion is pointless.

 

[ValeTudoGuy]

I either sit around 8' from a 55" screen or 3' from a 30" and seeing 4k content (admittedly not side by side) at the same distances I couldn't honestly resolve masses more detail. if I halved those distances then yes I certainly could. But I (just my personal choice) wouldn't find those distances comfortable f or gaming.

Photo or video editing on a 30" at closer for shorter periods would be a great use of 4k for me though.

 

[DasHotShot]

Uh, I never had any guard up but whatever. You just can't get around the fact that everything I've said about the PS4 in terms of game performance is true, but whatever. I digress. The OP is long gone and you're finished so this discussion is pointless.

Including the need for 4x Titan X to run Uncharted 4...oh wait...even that couldn't run it.

 

[Icaraeus]

Uncharted 4 is developed on a PS4 Devkit. Only the devkit and a PS4 can run Uncharted 4.

 

[Neur0nauT]

Unreal Engine 4 supports ray tracing. Ray tracing isn't really that intensive if you use it efficiently. You can do ray tracing fine on current hardware.

I wouldn't comment on things that you don't know enough about if I were you, it just makes you look foolish.

 

[Icaraeus]

I use Unreal Engine 4 for my game. It supports the use of distance field ray traced soft shadows. Ran at 90fps on my 270X, epic settings, 1080p.

 

[DasHotShot]

"Epic settings"

A disgusting example of the word being used incorrectly

 

[Neur0nauT]

I use Unreal Engine 4 for my game. It supports the use of distance field ray traced soft shadows. Ran at 90fps on my 270X, epic settings, 1080p.

Maybe I should have said: real-time fully Ray Traced graphics engine, not a few shadows and wisps of smoke for an E3 promo.

Why didn't you bump your RMA'ed 270X up to godlike settings @300fps 1080p? You know it can handle it. You should try using the Cryengine instead of the Unreal engine "for your game" It would run your 270X in 4K no problem. /S

 

[Icaraeus]

"Epic settings"

A disgusting example of the word being used incorrectly

Yes, "epic settings". There is such a thing in Unreal Engine 4.

 

[Icaraeus]

I use Unreal Engine 4 for my game. It supports the use of distance field ray traced soft shadows. Ran at 90fps on my 270X, epic settings, 1080p.

Maybe I should have said: real-time fully Ray Traced graphics engine, not a few shadows and wisps of smoke for an E3 promo.

Why didn't you bump your RMA'ed 270X up to godlike settings @300fps 1080p? You know it can handle it. You should try using the Cryengine instead of the Unreal engine "for your game" It would run your 270X in 4K no problem. /S

Not even going to bother writing out a response to your sarcasm after this.

 

[DasHotShot]

"Epic settings"

A disgusting example of the word being used incorrectly

Yes, "epic settings". There is such a thing in Unreal Engine 4.

Did I say there wasn't?

I said it is a gross misuse of the term "epic".

Pipe down

 

[Icaraeus]

It's not a misuse at all.

 

[ValeTudoGuy]

I have to disagree, it's a complete misuse of the word epic which implies a narrative in a stylised fashion usually relating to physical acts by a being.

To say otherwise shows an ignorance to the English language.

Hyper or Ultra would have made much more sense.