Is my computer better than the PS4?

As of what you have right now, no it is probably not. From speculations it is about the same quality.

I'm pretty sure only 4 cores will be used for gaming and another 4 cores is used for running background application and services in the PS4.

unreal9400 said:

I'm pretty sure only 4 cores will be used for gaming and another 4 cores is used for running background application and services in the PS4.

That is highly unlikely. The only reason games, of the last few years, have only used one or two cores is the main consoles , PS3 and xBox 360, only had a dual or tri core cpu. Now that developers will have the potential to use more cores the most likely will.

I'm sorry to say that it isn't future proof.

The only future-proofed PCs are those with high-end processors such as AMD's FX 8350, as well as Intel's i5s and i7s.

As for the graphics card, only cards like the GTX 770/780 and AMD's 7950/7970/7990 cards are "future-proof"

8gb of RAM will be enough for a while though, I don't think 16gb will be necessary for gaming for quite a while yet.

Apologies.

ps4 i think has a 7850 equivalent, 8 core jaguar cpu (low clocks like 1.something ghz), 8 gigs of ddr5 ram. remember the ps4 is a console, all of them are the same. that means optimization is superb. i would say your computer is not as powerful as the ps4 is believed to be. Upgrade your gpu, and cpu for sure if you want a pc that will destroy the ps4

you should really upgrade your cpu imo. ram is fine (i have 6 gigs and can run bioshock infinite mostly max in eyefinity with no less then 54 fps with 1.2 gigs free) Gpu is on the weaker side, however its not too bad. But if you just put this build together dont worry about it, unless you really want to spend more money

ikes9711 said:

unreal9400 said:

I'm pretty sure only 4 cores will be used for gaming and another 4 cores is used for running background application and services in the PS4.

That is highly unlikely. The only reason games, of the last few years, have only used one or two cores is the main consoles , PS3 and xBox 360, only had a dual or tri core cpu. Now that developers will have the potential to use more cores the most likely will.

Only time will tell.
That's just my opinion.

ikes9711 said:

unreal9400 said:

I'm pretty sure only 4 cores will be used for gaming and another 4 cores is used for running background application and services in the PS4.

That is highly unlikely. The only reason games, of the last few years, have only used one or two cores is the main consoles , PS3 and xBox 360, only had a dual or tri core cpu. Now that developers will have the potential to use more cores the most likely will.

Actually the PS3 had lots of cores... just in an unusual configuration.

JRAtk94 said:

I'm sorry to say that it isn't future proof.

The only future-proofed PCs are those with high-end processors such as AMD's FX 8350, as well as Intel's i5s and i7s.

As for the graphics card, only cards like the GTX 770/780 and AMD's 7950/7970/7990 cards are "future-proof"

8gb of RAM will be enough for a while though, I don't think 16gb will be necessary for gaming for quite a while yet.

Apologies.

You don't need a high-end CPU to keep up with the Jaguar cores in the PS4. It has 8 cores, yes, but those cores are slow. Like, really slow. 1.6 GHz and low performance per clock.

Sakkura said:

You don't need a high-end CPU to keep up with the Jaguar cores in the PS4. It has 8 cores, yes, but those cores are slow. Like, really slow. 1.6 GHz and low performance per clock.

To compete with the console's optimisation, a PC needs a comparatively more powerful CPU. In terms of physical specification, it isn't difficult to match the PS4, but to outperform it, we'll need much more than simply comparable hardware.

JRAtk94 said:

Sakkura said:

You don't need a high-end CPU to keep up with the Jaguar cores in the PS4. It has 8 cores, yes, but those cores are slow. Like, really slow. 1.6 GHz and low performance per clock.

To compete with the console's optimisation, a PC needs a comparatively more powerful CPU. In terms of physical specification, it isn't difficult to match the PS4, but to outperform it, we'll need much more than simply comparable hardware.

+1

ikes9711 said:

unreal9400 said:

I'm pretty sure only 4 cores will be used for gaming and another 4 cores is used for running background application and services in the PS4.

That is highly unlikely. The only reason games, of the last few years, have only used one or two cores is the main consoles , PS3 and xBox 360, only had a dual or tri core cpu. Now that developers will have the potential to use more cores the most likely will.

actually mate the ps3 has a single core that could handle 7 threads. with 1 redundacy unit. so it was in essance an 8threaded single core 3.whatever ghz cpu.

HEXiT said:

ikes9711 said:

unreal9400 said:

I'm pretty sure only 4 cores will be used for gaming and another 4 cores is used for running background application and services in the PS4.

That is highly unlikely. The only reason games, of the last few years, have only used one or two cores is the main consoles , PS3 and xBox 360, only had a dual or tri core cpu. Now that developers will have the potential to use more cores the most likely will.

actually mate the ps3 has a single core that could handle 7 threads. with 1 redundacy unit. so it was in essance an 8threaded single core 3.whatever ghz cpu.

nope the ps4 and the xbone one have the same cpu, its an 8 core not single core, although it can handle 8 threads

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6770/sony-announces-playstation-4-pc-hardware-inside

@guitargod213

HEXiT was talking about the PS3, which had a PowerPC core delegating work out to 7 SPEs, that were like little vector processors... Although, I don't really agree that it's like a single core CPU running multiple threads, since the Cell's architecture made keeping the SPEs busy more difficult that that would suggest.

fulle said:

@guitargod213

HEXiT was talking about the PS3, which had a PowerPC core delegating work out to 7 SPEs, that were like little vector processors... Although, I don't really agree that it's like a single core CPU running multiple threads, since the Cell's architecture made keeping the SPEs busy more difficult that that would suggest.

damn lol i somehow completely missed that thanks for the correction

JRAtk94 said:

Sakkura said:

You don't need a high-end CPU to keep up with the Jaguar cores in the PS4. It has 8 cores, yes, but those cores are slow. Like, really slow. 1.6 GHz and low performance per clock.

To compete with the console's optimisation, a PC needs a comparatively more powerful CPU. In terms of physical specification, it isn't difficult to match the PS4, but to outperform it, we'll need much more than simply comparable hardware.

Still, even a Core i3 would be much faster than it.

Sakkura said:

Still, even a Core i3 would be much faster than it.

I hope so, I'm planning a new build using an i3. That's reassuring.

I figure to have a PC run PS4 ports well, you'll need a 7870 2GB and a decent quad core processor, like a sandy i5. We're talking about a typical mid range system being able to do the job... so long as the optimization isn't terrible.

with the architecture being amd, im hoping that optimization for amd cpus improves. Skyrim for example hates amd cpus lol

Someone has stated that in the past games used only 1 or 2 cores in most cases, and that this was due to the consoles holding the market back.
Im not so sure thats correct. I spoke with a programer from crytek around 2008, when people started noticing that Crysis was poorly coded.

He said that coding for multiple processors is a LOT harder that optimizing just a few. The main issue is that the probability of error is multiplied by the amount of cores and the amount of running codes. Mathematicly he said that coding for 4 cores is roughly 64 times harder and time consuming compared to two cores.

Finally he told me that unless a studio has 0 pressure on them, coding for more than 2 coes is actually counter productive, since the game will be way too buggy.

Of course this might not be true, but it does sound logical.

guitargod213 said:

with the architecture being amd, im hoping that optimization for amd cpus improves. Skyrim for example hates amd cpus lol

Jaguar cores are completely different from Bulldozer and Piledriver, so I doubt it.

So what do I need to upgrade to outperform the PS4. If you could send me specific parts that would be great, because I want to start saving up now.

You'll need to replace the CPU to a better A-series, although it would be better to go with FX series or transfer to Intel's Core i5 series.

The latter two options would require a new motherboard though.

The graphics card should be at least a GTX 660 / HD 7850. Although GTX 660 Ti / HD 7870 would be better and GTX 670 / HD 7950 better still.

8gb RAM is fine.

JRAtk94 said:

You'll need to replace the CPU to a better A-series, although it would be better to go with FX series or transfer to Intel's Core i5 series.

The latter two options would require a new motherboard though.

The graphics card should be at least a GTX 660 / HD 7850. Although GTX 660 Ti / HD 7870 would be better and GTX 670 / HD 7950 better still.

8gb RAM is fine.

+1

CPU: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113284 OR http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113327

GPU: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131484 OR http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125441
It would be best however to get this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202003