Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

My PC vs PS4 / Xbox One

Last response: in Video Games
Share
May 27, 2013 2:44:18 PM

Hi, I'm Mina Nasery from Egypt.

I'm a PC Gamer. Can somebody tell me do I need to buy a new PS4/Xbox One if I have the following Specs for PC ?

CPU : Intel i7 2700k @4.6 Ghz :
8 DP FLOPs/cycle: 4-wide AVX addition + 4-wide AVX multiplication
16 SP FLOPs/cycle: 8-wide AVX addition + 8-wide AVX multiplication

M.B.: AsRock z77 Extreme 4

GPU : Gigabyte nVidia GTX 670 Windforce 3x @1058 Mhz : output 2.46 TFLOPS

RAM: 16 GB of DDR3 [@1600 MHZ]

HDD: 500 GB


My point is the capability to run futuristic games, I know my specs should gets outdated after a year or two max, but should it run games like the next gen. consoles will do ? or it will be useless compared to them after two years from now ?

:) 

More about : ps4 xbox

May 27, 2013 2:54:35 PM

Umm, your specs are already better than the PS4/XB1. In 2 years you will still be able to play whatever games come at at at least all high settings. High settings are already equivalent or better than what the PS4/XB1 will offer at release anyways.
m
0
l
May 27, 2013 4:14:10 PM

minanasery said:
Hi, I'm Mina Nasery from Egypt.

I'm a PC Gamer. Can somebody tell me do I need to buy a new PS4/Xbox One if I have the following Specs for PC ?

CPU : Intel i7 2700k @4.6 Ghz :
8 DP FLOPs/cycle: 4-wide AVX addition + 4-wide AVX multiplication
16 SP FLOPs/cycle: 8-wide AVX addition + 8-wide AVX multiplication

M.B.: AsRock z77 Extreme 4

GPU : Gigabyte nVidia GTX 670 Windforce 3x @1058 Mhz : output 2.46 TFLOPS

RAM: 16 GB of DDR3 [@1600 MHZ]

HDD: 500 GB


My point is the capability to run futuristic games, I know my specs should gets outdated after a year or two max, but should it run games like the next gen. consoles will do ? or it will be useless compared to them after two years from now ?

:) 


Your PC is already significantly more powerful than the XBox One / PS4. The hardware specifications for those consoles, especially the XBox One, are very disappointing.
m
0
l
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !

Best solution

May 27, 2013 4:54:19 PM

Ya your system is about 2x stronger in the GPU department. Maybe 3x stronger in the CPU department. Double the ram...

Remember, Xbone and PS4ail are aiming for 1080p gaming (Which has been a PC standard for years already). 5-6 years from now, their games are going to be rendering at 1080p and probably won't be getting more than 30fps.

You can already get 2560 x 1440 27" monitors for about $300 now.

These new consoles are launching dated. If you keep a 1080p resolution, your system is going to be perfect for gaming for at least the next 3 or 4 years, maybe longer. You might be needing some extra GPU power if you want to step up to multi-monitors or Ultra HD resolutions though.

But good rig. Does it make you feel good that you're already 2x - 3x better than the next gen? :p 
Share
May 27, 2013 5:17:41 PM

while true that common computer builds completely thrash consoles do remember that often consoles are half the price as a decent gaming rig.
m
0
l
May 27, 2013 9:58:02 PM

airborne11b said:
Ya your system is about 2x stronger in the GPU department. Maybe 3x stronger in the CPU department. Double the ram...

Remember, Xbone and PS4ail are aiming for 1080p gaming (Which has been a PC standard for years already). 5-6 years from now, their games are going to be rendering at 1080p and probably won't be getting more than 30fps.

You can already get 2560 x 1440 27" monitors for about $300 now.

These new consoles are launching dated. If you keep a 1080p resolution, your system is going to be perfect for gaming for at least the next 3 or 4 years, maybe longer. You might be needing some extra GPU power if you want to step up to multi-monitors or Ultra HD resolutions though.

But good rig. Does it make you feel good that you're already 2x - 3x better than the next gen? :p 


Actually, the new consoles will still be 720p rendered in 1080p, so they're still not even up to par with an average PC resolution.
m
0
l
May 27, 2013 10:54:28 PM

To be fair, i think yes it good to feel that u have a powerful rig - compared to those newcomers - but i'm feeling doubtful too. and i'll tell you why, If the PS3 can run Metro Last Light with all of it's graphics and contents used in massive gaming in a way looks like near the PC and in 30 fps...all with his crappy Cell and RSX - too outdated as for now - so i wonder what can a console with the PS4 / Xbox One build can do and afford for gaming...and I know the answer already..The key lies on one word "Optimization"

but thx for the answer anyway :) 
m
0
l
May 28, 2013 6:05:38 PM

metro last light on ps3/360 is 720p, medium settings at best, no dx11, no advanced AA, no advanced AF... that comparison is flat out bogus... probably about 15-20% horsepower compared to 1080p and dx11
m
0
l
May 28, 2013 8:50:31 PM

I'm just maxing out metro LL for my specs as below @720p , and i found out that i'm running on 45-60 fps. when you gave me the specs ps3/xbox360 are running for it, i tried to run it on that PC, i found out it's clearly from 75-102 fps @720p...By the mathematical rule of Scissors..we can find that if the ps3 ran on my PC specs, even under direct x 9.5 [as they claim on it's reveling!!] it will be around 10-14 fps..and something similar will come to Xbox360

Am i right ?
m
0
l
May 31, 2013 10:50:48 AM

hard to beat a console in the value department
but top end PC always wins

so its a give or take
m
0
l
November 10, 2013 5:20:41 AM

mobrocket said:
hard to beat a console in the value department
but top end PC always wins

so its a give or take


It's not really that hard. And imagine how easy it will be in a year...6 months, even.
m
0
l
November 10, 2013 5:41:05 AM

@telfire

and by your same logic the same is true for a pc.

a pc purchased now is not going to be as powerful as one you purchase in the future for the same cash.

the only thing different is that consoles keep the same hardware more or less for the entire lifecycle. however as time goes on the price also drops.

yes a pc almost always will beat a console. however not everyone is willing to shell out more than $400 for a gaming system and some actually prefer consoles for PSN + XBL friend lists, demos, etcetera.

there really is no point to a console vs pc debate as they both have their own place.
m
0
l
November 10, 2013 5:43:28 AM

ssddx said:
@telfire

and by your same logic the same is true for a pc.

a pc purchased now is not going to be as powerful as one you purchase in the future for the same cash.

the only thing different is that consoles keep the same hardware more or less for the entire lifecycle. however as time goes on the price also drops.

yes a pc almost always will beat a console. however not everyone is willing to shell out more than $400 for a gaming system and some actually prefer consoles for PSN + XBL friend lists, demos, etcetera.

there really is no point to a console vs pc debate as they both have their own place.


A PC isn't expected to last 7 years though. And no, the price really doesn't drop anywhere remotely close to as much as PC hardware in that time frame.

I'm not trying to belittle anyone for buying consoles, do what you want. I would agree wholeheartedly that both have their place. But to claim that console hardware is even remotely competitive, let alone a "hard to beat value" is ludicrous, sorry.
m
0
l
November 10, 2013 6:09:31 AM

@telfire

you might be suprised. quite a few users look for a pc to last that period of time. there is another post i'm following where the user wants the pc to be competitive for 10 years. some people just do not have the money to throw around.

lets say you take the $ you would spend on a console and you put it into pc hardware instead. you might be able to edge out over the ps3 in performance. maybe. however in 7 years how is that going to perform? like shit unless you keep games at the same quality as when you first bought it.

in essence your statement would be completely null if playstation decided to lower its cycle to 5 years. however since playstation is not currently backwards compatible (hopefully that changes now that its running pc hardware of some sort) it doesnt make sense for such a low cycle.

console hardware is competetive at the price level. $360 for the console at launch (if you subtract the $60 controller which is included). most gaming computers are at least $600-800 with many breaking $1000 so i find it hard to make comparisons. in a few years the price will drop even more and while not by a huge margin remember that playstation typically takes a loss on systems sold so the second half of the lifecycle they recoup more costs.
m
0
l
November 10, 2013 8:15:14 AM

ssddx said:
@telfire

you might be suprised. quite a few users look for a pc to last that period of time. there is another post i'm following where the user wants the pc to be competitive for 10 years. some people just do not have the money to throw around.

lets say you take the $ you would spend on a console and you put it into pc hardware instead. you might be able to edge out over the ps3 in performance. maybe. however in 7 years how is that going to perform? like shit unless you keep games at the same quality as when you first bought it.

in essence your statement would be completely null if playstation decided to lower its cycle to 5 years. however since playstation is not currently backwards compatible (hopefully that changes now that its running pc hardware of some sort) it doesnt make sense for such a low cycle.

console hardware is competetive at the price level. $360 for the console at launch (if you subtract the $60 controller which is included). most gaming computers are at least $600-800 with many breaking $1000 so i find it hard to make comparisons. in a few years the price will drop even more and while not by a huge margin remember that playstation typically takes a loss on systems sold so the second half of the lifecycle they recoup more costs.


So a guy wants a computer to be competitive for 10 years, too bad, it's not going to happen. Consoles don't stay competitive either, it's not like they are any exception. If you keep the same hardware for 7 years it's not going to be that great toward the end. I really don't see how that changes at all if they lowered their cycle to 5 years. It's the same problem. They manufacture the thing years before releasing it, so by the time it comes out it's pretty old hardware, and by the end of its life it's going to be really old hardware. That's just how it is. I don't see why you're trying to argue it.

A nicer gaming computer is more expensive because it has many times more power. So it's you that's making unfair comparisons. If you spend $350 on a PC you can easily get console-level performance. And by the time console prices drop you'll be able to build that same PC for even cheaper.

It seems you fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of the console. It is certainly not to be competitive price to performance wise. If you enjoy console, if your friends have that console, or if you like exclusive titles, or just enjoy the experience, that's totally cool, get a console. Don't kid yourself into thinking it's a competitive performance though, if you care about better performance go PC even at the same budget point.
m
0
l
November 10, 2013 2:01:55 PM

or perhaps you just want to continue to argue when you yourself just proved my point.

in any case i'm done here. no point pushing further as you will just continue to disagree.
m
0
l
November 23, 2013 7:52:27 AM

ssddx said:
or perhaps you just want to continue to argue when you yourself just proved my point.

in any case i'm done here. no point pushing further as you will just continue to disagree.


ssddx, I hate to say it, but you don't really have a point. The actual cash value is still well within the PC's favor. Lets lay out the facts.

Console "optimization" isn't magic. They run their games at really low resolutions so that their low end hardware can actually play the games, and they cap their FPS at 30 most of the time on top of this.

Consoles tend to be "slightly" cheaper than PCs for a simple reason, they charge more for the games with their licensing fees. A comparable PC will run $100 - $200 more, but you have to calculate in game costs as well, over the life of the system.

Each brand new AAA game on PC doesn't have to deal with Xbox or PS licensing fees, and are almost always $10 cheaper because of this. So if you only bought AAA games, you'd only need to purchase 10-15 games over the course of the console/PC life cycle to validate the PC as the cheaper platform.

But that's not all, now look at steam sales, where you get tons of games, AAA and indie, for dirt cheap. Pennies!

You can also calculate more value because of things like Xbox Live, charges you $60 a year, for services that PC players enjoy for free. That adds up over a 5-8 year life cycle.

You can calculate even more value with all the free player-made mods that enhance your games long after their released. Skyrim on the PC for example is 1000x better than it's console counter part, for free.

And on top of this, who doesn't have a PC for day to day use? It's not like you're going to have a console and no PC. School work, office work, web surfing, streaming, etc, just about everyone has a PC of some sort. Console players are spending way more money because they often have a PC AND a console, where a PC gamer has an all-in gaming/multi-media/productivity power house.

Sorry, but the facts remain that PC is both a superior platform when it comes to graphics, performance and capabilities and is also the superior in value.

Steam sales. GG
m
0
l
December 3, 2013 2:17:48 AM

airborne11b said:
ssddx said:
or perhaps you just want to continue to argue when you yourself just proved my point.

in any case i'm done here. no point pushing further as you will just continue to disagree.


ssddx, I hate to say it, but you don't really have a point. The actual cash value is still well within the PC's favor. Lets lay out the facts.

Console "optimization" isn't magic. They run their games at really low resolutions so that their low end hardware can actually play the games, and they cap their FPS at 30 most of the time on top of this.

Consoles tend to be "slightly" cheaper than PCs for a simple reason, they charge more for the games with their licensing fees. A comparable PC will run $100 - $200 more, but you have to calculate in game costs as well, over the life of the system.

Each brand new AAA game on PC doesn't have to deal with Xbox or PS licensing fees, and are almost always $10 cheaper because of this. So if you only bought AAA games, you'd only need to purchase 10-15 games over the course of the console/PC life cycle to validate the PC as the cheaper platform.

But that's not all, now look at steam sales, where you get tons of games, AAA and indie, for dirt cheap. Pennies!

You can also calculate more value because of things like Xbox Live, charges you $60 a year, for services that PC players enjoy for free. That adds up over a 5-8 year life cycle.

You can calculate even more value with all the free player-made mods that enhance your games long after their released. Skyrim on the PC for example is 1000x better than it's console counter part, for free.

And on top of this, who doesn't have a PC for day to day use? It's not like you're going to have a console and no PC. School work, office work, web surfing, streaming, etc, just about everyone has a PC of some sort. Console players are spending way more money because they often have a PC AND a console, where a PC gamer has an all-in gaming/multi-media/productivity power house.

Sorry, but the facts remain that PC is both a superior platform when it comes to graphics, performance and capabilities and is also the superior in value.

Steam sales. GG


Also, the lifespan of PC hardware isn't so bad like people make it out to be. An 8800gt sill beats current-gen consoles and that's a 2007 gpu. In 2014, it will be 7 years old. People forget that you only need to upgrade frequently if you want the highest details, highest framerates, resolutions etc. If you wanna keep up with and even beat consoles, you don't have to upgrade so frequently.
m
0
l
December 3, 2013 3:29:39 AM

Can we please get a mod to close this thread? Started back in May and has been answered already.
m
0
l
!