Reply With Quote
I don't. But whatever the fps, gotta be smooth. I actually rather have a locked 30fps than something that jumps between 40 and 60 everywhere.
I find doubling the framerate from 30 to 60 to be an enormous leap.Visually, at 1080p, it's not THAT big of a leap though. I've played games like GTA V, Witcher 3, Battlefield: Hardline, SW: Battlefront on both, and gameplay and visuals are pretty darn smooth on the PS4... the PC version is certainly better, but it's not a huge leap, and frankly, as long as the game plays smooth and without stutters, it's hard to notice (unlike the XBox One which is visually tier at a lower res AND stutters the everywhere)
Obviously that gap will grow as newer GPUs come on the PC side, while the PS4 (or 4.5) remains somewhat the same, that's why I did build a PC after all this time around
I think 4k gaming will eventually come at that price-point, but it might be 3-4 years away. Probably not the next gen, but the one afterwards...
I don't. But whatever the fps, gotta be smooth. I actually rather have a locked 30fps than something that jumps between 40 and 60 everywhere.
I agree 100% on that, but I'd much rather have a locked 60 fps than a locked 30 fps. Besides, lots of PS4 games still jump around and can't give a locked 30 fps either. Witcher 3, for instance.
Uhmm.. nope, GTA V PC vs PS4 is a GIANT difference.. How you gonna say you can't notice half or more less frames per second? Not to mention the dynamic lighting, PCSS shadows, draw detail distance, 8X MSAA, etcVisually, at 1080p, it's not THAT big of a leap though. I've played games like GTA V, Witcher 3, Battlefield: Hardline, SW: Battlefront on both, and gameplay and visuals are pretty darn smooth on the PS4... the PC version is certainly better, but it's not a huge leap, and frankly, as long as the game plays smooth and without stutters, it's hard to notice (unlike the XBox One which is visually tier at a lower res AND stutters the everywhere)
Obviously that gap will grow as newer GPUs come on the PC side, while the PS4 (or 4.5) remains somewhat the same, that's why I did build a PC after all this time around
I think 4k gaming will eventually come at that price-point, but it might be 3-4 years away. Probably not the next gen, but the one afterwards...
8xMSAA?Uhmm.. nope, GTA V PC vs PS4 is a GIANT difference.. How you gonna say you can't notice half or more less frames per second? Not to mention the dynamic lighting, PCSS shadows, draw detail distance, 8X MSAA, etc
You'd need a 980 Ti minimum to do that . I actually can't notice a difference between 2xMSAA and 8xMSAA on that game, though 2xMSAA vs FXAA is pretty easy to tell since just FXAA leaves a lot of jaggies on NPCs. But getting 60 fps locked with just 2xMSAA requires a lot on that game. I needed to upgrade to DDR3-2400 RAM to be able to do it with my E3-1231v3 and OC GTX 970.
Comparing max to max not taking into consideration anyone's GPU8xMSAA?
You'd need a 980 Ti minimum to do that . I actually can't notice a difference between 2xMSAA and 8xMSAA on that game, though 2xMSAA vs FXAA is pretty easy to tell since just FXAA leaves a lot of jaggies on NPCs. But getting 60 fps locked with just 2xMSAA requires a lot on that game. I needed to upgrade to DDR3-2400 RAM to be able to do it with my E3-1231v3 and OC GTX 970.
Uhmm.. nope, GTA V PC vs PS4 is a GIANT difference.. How you gonna say you can't notice half or more less frames per second? Not to mention the dynamic lighting, PCSS shadows, draw detail distance, 8X MSAA, etc
I really can't tell much of a difference with MSAA, tbh... the framerate is legit, BUT if you can keep the 60fps steady. IIRC, you have a GSync monitor, which actually helps with that, but a lot of people don't.
It's hard to notice on most things, as GTA V is such an amazing pc port. But when you're in the city 2xMSAA really does clean up the lines on the people walking around, especially on their heads.
Power lines look like ass without MSAA
Actually, BB, youve often pointed out before the underlying problem before: console developers being ever reluctant passing on exponentially rising inflation and development costs.
Will I be buying? No. I do own a PS4, but didn't pay $400. It was more in the 200-250 range because of a Target sale + other discounts.
I buy/play maybe three games or so a year. And with the shift towards mobile platforms, I haven't spent much money on a desktop or laptop in probably a decade or more. I used to build my own systems and play PC games almost exclusively but priorities change. The reason I play games is more for the story/experience. Would I like better performance? Sure, but not at a higher price point. At the end of the day, I'm a cheap mother er.
Same her nigggga
STAION4.5 is going to be able output 4k
The Ps4 can't manage 1080p @ 60fps, but the PS4.5 is going to be able to handle 4k at 60fps? , most PCs can't do that yet.
And in 2 years it's going to be a mess trying to cram games on limited hardware to run @ 4k. Consoles are falling farther and farther behind the arms race.
This isn't true, tbh... the stuff we work on runs at 60fps @ 1080p... now, that it can keep up with that on new games with a lot of going on is a different story, lol
There were launch les les that were 720p. The PS4 has never been a reliable 1080p system for 60fps.
I think you're mistaken with the XBox One... the very worst PS4 les did 900p @ 30fps... (Trine 3D might be the sole exception)
http://www.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS...and_Framerates
Again, the hardware itself is more than capable of doing 1080p @ 60fps (while recording your gameplay, etc). It's not powerful enough to do 1080p@60fps when you have a ton of shaders and geometry going on. Definitely underpowered compared to a Haswell/GTX 9xx combo (My game box right now is a PC with a i5 and GTX 960, work machine is an i5/GTX 970). What they do have that's much nicer is they use a lower-level 3D API that's not quite OpenGL and not quite Vulcan, and it gives you fairly good access to compute units.
Disclaimer: I'm working with Sony on PS4 stuff ATM, and have a PS4 devkit sitting right next to me in the office.
both consoles 4k upscaled rendered ?
Cry, I thought you meant the hardware was not designed to do 1080p. If what you meant is that it's woefully underpowered compared to your current $300-$400 videocard lineups, I agree.
LOL these s always comparing top of the line PC videocards to non- upgradeable streamline consoles that are only meant for gaming.
Well, my point is that THOSE video cards are unable to handle 4k with today's games, let alone next years. I just don't see any possible way.
Anyone else remember the scam that was the Genesis 32X? Sony (and possibly Microsoft) are making the same mistake that Sega did. If they actually start with this bull of expecting people to buy pricey new hardware every two years, people will go running to PCs. After all, if you're going to be nickle-and-dimed, might as well get the best possible hardware. , even Nintendo might get a boost from this, since they aren't quite as greedy as Sony and Microsoft.
Bro.. No scam.. without the 32X there would be no Doom on console.. I had the 32X and the Sega CD
How so? Doom came out for the SNES a few months later, and it was the superior version. It had more levels and better music than the rushed 32X port.
Plus Sega did jack else with that thing. It was literally just a cash-grab to precede the Saturn cash-grab. Apparently the American side of the company wanted nothing to do with it, but the Japanese side forced them to release it.
The 32X was released a full year sooner.. plus, the SNES was pure garbage.. that was played in a tiny window and the textures looked way worse than 32x
But believe me.. the 32X was complete , no denying that. I had Doom and Virtua Racing, that's it.. SEGA ed their userbase on every system except Genesis
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
