Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Is my VGA stronger than PS4 And xbox one's VGA ?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 13, 2013 10:21:37 AM

ok i have GTX 770 4Gb SLI
do you think i will get better fps on games with 1080p ( if my game setting is same to them ) vs xbox one and PS4 ?

(my cpu is Core i7 950 @ 4Ghz)

if yes , how much more ? a lot ? or same ?
October 13, 2013 10:24:47 AM

Yes, I would guestimate yours is about 20% better than either of the new consoles.
October 13, 2013 10:27:30 AM

xerxces said:
Yes, I would guestimate yours is about 20% better than either of the new consoles.


do you know how much is the ps4 and xbox one's Vram ? is it more than 4Gb ?
Related resources

Best solution

October 13, 2013 10:37:49 AM
Share

First, I'd just like to address that you've spent (at least) $800 between both GPUs (assuming it's a 2-way SLI), and just 1 of those GPUs is the same price as an entire PS4. So why is this even a question? Just 1 of those GPUs is far more powerful than anything in the PS4 (which is the more powerful of the two new consoles). There's zero competition. And here's a chart of the BF4 Beta:



The Radeon HD 7850 is about equivalent to the PS4's GPU. If we want to be generous, we'll say it's about equivalent to an underperforming Radeon HD 7870. The Xbox One's GPU is about equivalent to a Radeon HD 7790, which I don't believe is listed here, but it's somewhere in the middle of Radeon HD 7850 and Radeon HD 7770. Now, look at the GTX 770. It blows both of them away. Then also consider that you have 2 of those, which is theoretically double the performance. This is at 1920x1080 with Ultra Settings. The PS4 and Xbox One, in order to achieve 60 fps with BF4, will be playing at 720p at 60 fps and likely medium or high settings.
October 13, 2013 10:56:03 AM

omidelf said:
xerxces said:
Yes, I would guestimate yours is about 20% better than either of the new consoles.


do you know how much is the ps4 and xbox one's Vram ? is it more than 4Gb ?


VRAM is an afterthought when it comes to performance and comparing cards. Even if the PS4 and Xbox One had 40 GB of dedicated VRAM, it wouldn't matter because those GPUs couldn't take advantage of it. 4 GB for 1920x1080 gaming is way overkill anyway.

Google is also your best friend, by the way. But the PS4 and Xbox One don't have dedicated VRAM. They share memory with the system. There's 8 GB of GDDR5 system RAM in the PS4, and it's divided up between the graphics card and the System, with apparently 3.5 GB of RAM dedicated to the operating system for the PS4. I forgot the exact details of how the Xbox One's RAM works, but it's somewhat similar and I know both have a combined 8 GB of shared RAM. So considering that you have 4 GB of dedicated VRAM, and likely 8 GB of System RAM, that shouldn't be any concern for you.

Consoles may have been kings of hardware back during the Generation 6 era, and somewhat at the beginning of the Generation 7 era, but now they're nothing compared to the level of performance that PCs can output.
October 13, 2013 11:16:53 AM

Deus Gladiorum said:
omidelf said:
xerxces said:
Yes, I would guestimate yours is about 20% better than either of the new consoles.


do you know how much is the ps4 and xbox one's Vram ? is it more than 4Gb ?


VRAM is an afterthought when it comes to performance and comparing cards. Even if the PS4 and Xbox One had 40 GB of dedicated VRAM, it wouldn't matter because those GPUs couldn't take advantage of it. 4 GB for 1920x1080 gaming is way overkill anyway.

Google is also your best friend, by the way. But the PS4 and Xbox One don't have dedicated VRAM. They share memory with the system. There's 8 GB of GDDR5 system RAM in the PS4, and it's divided up between the graphics card and the System, with apparently 3.5 GB of RAM dedicated to the operating system for the PS4. I forgot the exact details of how the Xbox One's RAM works, but it's somewhat similar and I know both have a combined 8 GB of shared RAM. So considering that you have 4 GB of dedicated VRAM, and likely 8 GB of System RAM, that shouldn't be any concern for you.

Consoles may have been kings of hardware back during the Generation 6 era, and somewhat at the beginning of the Generation 7 era, but now they're nothing compared to the level of performance that PCs can output.



Thanks for the answer , i didn't know ps4 & xbox 1's GPU are so poor and weak !
i mean 7850 ?! that's so cheep i dont know why dont they put something better in ps4 because seriously that cannot handle any next gen games !
October 13, 2013 11:58:22 AM

omidelf said:

Thanks for the answer , i didn't know ps4 & xbox 1's GPU are so poor and weak !
i mean 7850 ?! that's so cheep i dont know why dont they put something better in ps4 because seriously that cannot handle any next gen games !


Well, they're not weak either; not in the slightest. They're good GPUs, but up against a $400 monster there's no comparison nowadays. I mean, saying that they "cannot handle any next gen games" is a paradox, since in fact they are what define "next gen" consoles. If they were sporting the same hardware as a Nintendo 64, then next gen games (assuming developers and audiences didn't get up in a riot) would be built to run according to the limitations of that hardware. They are the standard for gaming right now, not PCs. But regardless, the hardware they're sporting is leagues more powerful than previous generations.

Battlefield 3 on consoles ran at 1280x704 with a pathetic form of Anti-aliasing and it had nosebleeds trying to hit 30 fps with settings lower than the PC's lowest quality settings, and couldn't handle more than 24 people playing. Battlefield 4 on next gen consoles will be running at 60 fps at what we can guess will be 1280x720, with some form of AA, and will still have 64 players at probably medium or high settings. Also don't forget that Battlefield 4 is a hell of a lot more demanding than BF3 was. On BF3 with my GTX 770 I've played around 21+ hours on 1920x1080 Ultra Quality with 4x MSAA, and I can count the number of times I noticed dipping below 60 fps on 1 hand.

For the GTX 770 on BF4, 66 fps is a really good average, but in BF3 I never even dipped below 50 fps at significantly higher settings (4x MSAA) and it was extremely infrequent. Battlefield 4 is very demanding, so even at 1280x720 it's impressive that consoles will be able to handle that at (a consistent) 60 fps especially compared to last gen.

March 18, 2014 4:18:00 PM

Deus Gladiorum said:
omidelf said:

Thanks for the answer , i didn't know ps4 & xbox 1's GPU are so poor and weak !
i mean 7850 ?! that's so cheep i dont know why dont they put something better in ps4 because seriously that cannot handle any next gen games !


Well, they're not weak either; not in the slightest. They're good GPUs, but up against a $400 monster there's no comparison nowadays. I mean, saying that they "cannot handle any next gen games" is a paradox, since in fact they are what define "next gen" consoles. If they were sporting the same hardware as a Nintendo 64, then next gen games (assuming developers and audiences didn't get up in a riot) would be built to run according to the limitations of that hardware. They are the standard for gaming right now, not PCs. But regardless, the hardware they're sporting is leagues more powerful than previous generations.

Battlefield 3 on consoles ran at 1280x704 with a pathetic form of Anti-aliasing and it had nosebleeds trying to hit 30 fps with settings lower than the PC's lowest quality settings, and couldn't handle more than 24 people playing. Battlefield 4 on next gen consoles will be running at 60 fps at what we can guess will be 1280x720, with some form of AA, and will still have 64 players at probably medium or high settings. Also don't forget that Battlefield 4 is a hell of a lot more demanding than BF3 was. On BF3 with my GTX 770 I've played around 21+ hours on 1920x1080 Ultra Quality with 4x MSAA, and I can count the number of times I noticed dipping below 60 fps on 1 hand.

For the GTX 770 on BF4, 66 fps is a really good average, but in BF3 I never even dipped below 50 fps at significantly higher settings (4x MSAA) and it was extremely infrequent. Battlefield 4 is very demanding, so even at 1280x720 it's impressive that consoles will be able to handle that at (a consistent) 60 fps especially compared to last gen.



I must say, my Gigabyte Over-clocked Edition 4GB DDR5 VRAM Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 eats BF4 on 1080p ultra 4xMSAA for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Just be sure you don't increase the resolution scale past the default 100% if you want to maintain >70fps average. You chose a great card, there, which has a clock and bandwidth that puts the consoles to shame.
!