PC GPU Power: Now measured in terms of Xbox Ones

#201 Edited by StrongBlackVine (8418 posts) -

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects). The only exceptions are games like Witcher 3.

#202 Edited by farrell2k (6675 posts) -

@tormentos said:

But the R270 is not the one he used on his price list,it was the R260X which is cheaper than the $179 R270.

I don't think he even has that mother board,and just look at it for a damn change,it has 1 PCIE slot and PCI close nothing more basically is very small.

In fact he did like sh** dude that Dual core is a kick on the ass of that PC and a bottle neck,minimum requirements doesn't mean optimal,you can meet minimum requirements and still have a horrible experience,you have to downgrade everything to hit playable frames.

Look how the R290 drops 51 FPS from using a dual core CPU hell that one is actually faster than the one he got,and it drops 45 FPS drop from the Athlon X4 to the Dual core.

In fact he can play Watchdogs which requires a quad core minimum,many games from now on will require more than 4 cores and many for optimal performance require 4 or more even an A10 which is consider low end is powerful enough to run it at 94FPS the dual core fail,he did a terrible job and basically has successfully bottleneck it self from the very start.

Oh wait windows we most believe that he got it free some how,so it should not be counted because he got it so every one else will to..

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3EyML

Now that ^^ PC beat the PS4 but is $599 after rebates not $334..

It has blu-ray like the PS4,and it has wifi like the PS4 as well,oh and i went easy on the ram the PS4 has 8GB of GDDR5,i chose 4GB for system memory and a 2GB cards the PS4 still has 2 GB of memory.

What a poor attempt at a pcpartpicker troll, tormentroll.

You can get the r9 270 for $159, you don't need an optical drive, that motherboard already comes with an ethernet card, so you don't need that. YOu can get 4gb ram for less, a much less expensive case, and can definitely get a less expensive power supply. This is more like it for $400. You can be smart and game on linux, or you can buy windows 7 for around $55. How much is the PS4 with a year of PS+?

There. Now for $458 you have a pc that is 1.5x faster than the ps4 with windows, or a pc that is 1.5x faster than the ps4 for $400. :)

#203 Edited by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects). The only exceptions are games like Witcher 3.

That would be false

#204 Posted by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@tormentos said:

But the R270 is not the one he used on his price list,it was the R260X which is cheaper than the $179 R270.

I don't think he even has that mother board,and just look at it for a damn change,it has 1 PCIE slot and PCI close nothing more basically is very small.

In fact he did like sh** dude that Dual core is a kick on the ass of that PC and a bottle neck,minimum requirements doesn't mean optimal,you can meet minimum requirements and still have a horrible experience,you have to downgrade everything to hit playable frames.

Look how the R290 drops 51 FPS from using a dual core CPU hell that one is actually faster than the one he got,and it drops 45 FPS drop from the Athlon X4 to the Dual core.

In fact he can play Watchdogs which requires a quad core minimum,many games from now on will require more than 4 cores and many for optimal performance require 4 or more even an A10 which is consider low end is powerful enough to run it at 94FPS the dual core fail,he did a terrible job and basically has successfully bottleneck it self from the very start.

Oh wait windows we most believe that he got it free some how,so it should not be counted because he got it so every one else will to..

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3EyML

Now that ^^ PC beat the PS4 but is $599 after rebates not $334..

It has blu-ray like the PS4,and it has wifi like the PS4 as well,oh and i went easy on the ram the PS4 has 8GB of GDDR5,i chose 4GB for system memory and a 2GB cards the PS4 still has 2 GB of memory.

What a poor attempt at a pcpartpicker troll, tormentroll.

You can get the r9 270 for $159, you don't need an optical drive, that motherboard already comes with an ethernet card, so you don't need that. YOu can get 4gb ram for less, a much less expensive case, and can definitely get a less expensive power supply. This is more like it for $400. You can be smart and game on linux, or you can buy windows 7 for around $55. How much is the PS4 with a year of PS+?

There. Now for $458 you have a pc that is 1.5x faster than the ps4 with windows, or a pc that is 1.5x faster than the ps4 for $400. :)

...one that has half the hard drive space, but it will burn your house down when that PSU catches on fire

#205 Posted by farrell2k (6675 posts) -

@lostrib said:

...one that has half the hard drive space, but it will burn your house down when that PSU catches on fire

Space has absolutely nothing to do with performance, and the power supply is UL certified. But again, do you guys who like to complain about every stupid little thing think that the power supply in the PS4 is NOT the cheapest functional one Sony could put in there? Reminds me of the PS3.

#206 Posted by CrownKingArthur (5085 posts) -
@lostrib said:

it will burn your house down when that PSU catches on fire

oh_you.png

#207 Posted by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

...one that has half the hard drive space, but it will burn your house down when that PSU catches on fire

Space has absolutely nothing to do with performance, and the power supply is UL certified. But again, do you guys who like to complain about every stupid little thing think that the power supply in the PS4 is NOT the cheapest functional one Sony could put in there? Reminds me of the PS3.

Okay but you're not really matching the PS4. And it doesn't meet requirements for some of the games coming out, Watch_Dogs has minimum of 6GB RAM. Although I guess that doesn't really matter since you want to run linux which completely limits your game library

And that PSU looks like crap from a crap company. there are reports of Diablotek PSUs catching on fire.

Just stop it with this $400 PC bullcrap

#208 Posted by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur said:
@lostrib said:

it will burn your house down when that PSU catches on fire

oh_you.png

http://roaringcow.blogspot.com/2012/02/my-diablotek-experience.html

#209 Edited by StrongBlackVine (8418 posts) -

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects). The only exceptions are games like Witcher 3.

Why so many hermits complain about consoles holding PC gaming back then?

#210 Posted by mems_1224 (47860 posts) -

@StrongBlackVine said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects). The only exceptions are games like Witcher 3.

Why so many hermits complain about consoles holding PC gaming back then?

Same reason people complain about last gen games holding back current gen games. when you have to make a game work for the shitty systems you have to make compromises. common sense.

#211 Posted by tormentos (19314 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@asylumni said:

@farrell2k: Nope, never said you got the system free, you got the os for free. And getting the os for free doesn't erase the value nor the need for the os.

It's not a straw man. You can't just use one or two components to compare 2 systems; you need to include all aspects of the systems.

Since when does a PC need windows to play games? This is just console kid nonsense where I post a system that will outperform the ps4 and xb1 and it outrages you so much that you go out of your way to nitpick every stupid little thing. The images graphs in this thread show that the $339 system will outperform the ps4. You're just going to have to deal with it.

You are a troll and the system you build doesn't beat the PS4,it had a R260X which is slower than the damn PS4 period.

And i find funny how hypocrites Hermits actually haven't call you out on your sh**,this are the same buffoons that make fun of the Jaguar on PS4,but say sh** about a moron talking about using a dual core on 2014,man i own that same CPU on my PC is from 2005 is old as hell and basically bad for a system today,the fact alone that you can't play Watchdogs on that PC with that CPU says it all.

You can't just take a code that written for 4 cores and slap it into a dual core and expect it to work,one thing is supporting quad or 6 cores and also having support for Dual core,and another is having a game that requires minimum 4 cores that will not work period,your PC was lame,and you leave windows out.

And unless you are a magician you need windows to runs the majority of games on PC.

#212 Posted by StrongBlackVine (8418 posts) -

@mems_1224 said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects). The only exceptions are games like Witcher 3.

Why so many hermits complain about consoles holding PC gaming back then?

Same reason people complain about last gen games holding back current gen games. when you have to make a game work for the shitty systems you have to make compromises. common sense.

So that means console games are the baseline and my original statement was correct.

#213 Posted by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@StrongBlackVine said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects). The only exceptions are games like Witcher 3.

Why so many hermits complain about consoles holding PC gaming back then?

Why did you just reply to yourself?

#214 Edited by StrongBlackVine (8418 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects). The only exceptions are games like Witcher 3.

Why so many hermits complain about consoles holding PC gaming back then?

Why did you just reply to yourself?

It was a mistake I meant to reply your comment saying I was wrong.

#215 Edited by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@StrongBlackVine said:

@lostrib said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects). The only exceptions are games like Witcher 3.

Why so many hermits complain about consoles holding PC gaming back then?

Why did you just reply to yourself?

It was a mistake I meant to reply your comment saying I was wrong.

And thus, you were doubly wrong

lol

#216 Posted by CrownKingArthur (5085 posts) -
@lostrib said:

@CrownKingArthur said:
@lostrib said:

it will burn your house down when that PSU catches on fire

oh_you.png

http://roaringcow.blogspot.com/2012/02/my-diablotek-experience.html

yea ok lostrib man, ok. for that specific manufacturer you've convinced me there is a track record of arson.

it seems the quality assurance at the manufacturers is not up to spec, the guy found a screw 'trapped' in a blob of glue, not unlike a mosquito in jurassic park. he cites other customers from amazon who were buying that same (though 2nd gen) model psu.

however, i maintain that an 80+ PSU, even a cheap one - with sufficient wattage it should be sufficient.

to play devil's advocate - because i try to be a fair dude. PC Part Picker estimates 329W max for farrell2k's new build. I would go for a minimum of 329/0.8 = 411W, so a 450W PSU with 80+ certification. i think the 350W psu he's chosen is underspecced.

#217 Posted by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur said:
@lostrib said:

@CrownKingArthur said:
@lostrib said:

it will burn your house down when that PSU catches on fire

oh_you.png

http://roaringcow.blogspot.com/2012/02/my-diablotek-experience.html

yea ok lostrib man, ok. for that specific manufacturer you've convinced me there is a track record of arson.

it seems the quality assurance at the manufacturers is not up to spec, the guy found a screw 'trapped' in a blob of glue, not unlike a mosquito in jurassic park. he cites other customers from amazon who were buying that same (though 2nd gen) model psu.

however, i maintain that an 80+ PSU, even a cheap one - with sufficient wattage it should be sufficient.

to play devil's advocate - because i try to be a fair dude. PC Part Picker estimates 329W max for farrell2k's new build. I would go for a minimum of 329/0.8 = 411W, so a 450W PSU with 80+ certification. i think the 350W psu he's chosen is underspecced.

Yeah I noticed that too, but i forgot to mention it.

I don't mind using budget PSUs but there is a line.

I'm actually using a budget OCZ 600W PSU from my original budget build

#218 Edited by clr84651 (5530 posts) -

Yes, it's well known that there's always more processing power available when buying PC.

You can't build a PC gaming machine for less than a PS4 with HDMI & a controller are at $400 with equal or greater CPU, RAM, & GPU.

Those who want to spend more and build a PC gaming machine can do so and achieve a more powerful gaming machine.

#219 Posted by tormentos (19314 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

What a poor attempt at a pcpartpicker troll, tormentroll.

You can get the r9 270 for $159, you don't need an optical drive, that motherboard already comes with an ethernet card, so you don't need that. YOu can get 4gb ram for less, a much less expensive case, and can definitely get a less expensive power supply. This is more like it for $400. You can be smart and game on linux, or you can buy windows 7 for around $55. How much is the PS4 with a year of PS+?

There. Now for $458 you have a pc that is 1.5x faster than the ps4 with windows, or a pc that is 1.5x faster than the ps4 for $400. :)

See you refuse to make a fair comparison..

Blu-ray i don't care if you like it or not is a damn advantage and kick the living crap out of any streaming service you have on PC.

Wifi you don't have it as well,for some one who accuse sony of using nothing but cheap parts you sure are cutting corners,but wait what the fu** does a 250GB HDD does there the PS4 one is 500GB.

Hell i should add 2GB more of memory you still are short 4Gb + 2Gb = 6 the PS4 has 8GB,but then again the PS4 has 8GB of GDDR5 which you can't freaking buy like the cheap 4GB you just use on that set up..lol

I don't need PS+ to play games,is need it for online play,but then again if i get PSN+ i also get games which on PC also cost money and which you will not get without extra cost all months..

At least i make you step up your game and actual drop your whole dual core crap..

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-the-next-gen-digital-foundry-pc

Maybe you should read this ^^ it tell you something about your R270 vs the PS4...

While the R270 can go 1080p on BF4 it will drop frame wise under the PS4 performance,maybe you know why the PS4 version is 900p.

Not much separates the Radeon R9 270 and 270X in actual gameplay conditions. Here we're comparing 1080p on high settings against PS4. We've got the extra resolution but not the locked frame-rate we want. Indeed, PS4 runs faster...

Not much separates the Radeon R9 270 and 270X in actual gameplay conditions. Here we're comparing 1080p on high settings against PS4. We've got the extra resolution but not the locked frame-rate we want. Indeed, PS4 runs faster...

TressFX on both PC and console incurs a highly significant GPU hit. It's especially an issue at close-range. Turning it off helps, but we're still not at the frame-rate we want on PC.

Whats that play with tressFX off because you R270 will fall into sub 30 FPS while the PS4 version remains at 50FPS average..?

The R270 is basically a few frames faster than the PS4 dude,no big deal lets talk in 3 years when your R270 start to suffer because it has only 2GB of memory while the PS4 can use 5GB memory can be as big bottle neck as lack of GPU power or CPU for that matter.

#220 Edited by lundy86_4 (43891 posts) -

@clr84651 said:

Yes, it's well known that there's always more processing power available when buying PC.

You can't build a PC gaming machine for less than a PS4 with HDMI & a controller are at $400.

It's actually pretty close this time around, but it simply shows the difference between mass-produced hardware costs versus paying retail.

#221 Posted by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@farrell2k said:

What a poor attempt at a pcpartpicker troll, tormentroll.

You can get the r9 270 for $159, you don't need an optical drive, that motherboard already comes with an ethernet card, so you don't need that. YOu can get 4gb ram for less, a much less expensive case, and can definitely get a less expensive power supply. This is more like it for $400. You can be smart and game on linux, or you can buy windows 7 for around $55. How much is the PS4 with a year of PS+?

There. Now for $458 you have a pc that is 1.5x faster than the ps4 with windows, or a pc that is 1.5x faster than the ps4 for $400. :)

See you refuse to make a fair comparison..

Blu-ray i don't care if you like it or not is a damn advantage and kick the living crap out of any streaming service you have on PC.

Wifi you don't have it as well,for some one who accuse sony of using nothing but cheap parts you sure are cutting corners,but wait what the fu** does a 250GB HDD does there the PS4 one is 500GB.

Hell i should add 2GB more of memory you still are short 4Gb + 2Gb = 6 the PS4 has 8GB,but then again the PS4 has 8GB of GDDR5 which you can't freaking buy like the cheap 4GB you just use on that set up..lol

I don't need PS+ to play games,is need it for online play,but then again if i get PSN+ i also get games which on PC also cost money and which you will not get without extra cost all months..

At least i make you step up your game and actual drop your whole dual core crap..

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-the-next-gen-digital-foundry-pc

Maybe you should read this ^^ it tell you something about your R270 vs the PS4...

While the R270 can go 1080p on BF4 it will drop frame wise under the PS4 performance,maybe you know why the PS4 version is 900p.

Not much separates the Radeon R9 270 and 270X in actual gameplay conditions. Here we're comparing 1080p on high settings against PS4. We've got the extra resolution but not the locked frame-rate we want. Indeed, PS4 runs faster...

Whats that play with tressFX off because you R270 will fall into sub 30 FPS while the PS4 version remains at 50FPS average..?

The R270 is basically a few frames faster than the PS4 dude,no big deal lets talk in 3 years when your R270 start to suffer because it has only 2GB of memory while the PS4 can use 5GB memory can be as big bottle neck as lack of GPU power or CPU for that matter.

so you're comparing r9 270 running BF4 at high settings 1080p, to PS4 which is running some setting combination at 900p? yeah seems fair

. Bearing in mind that the AMD cards are still delivering a massive 44 per cent boost in resolution over the PS4

And then you want to compare the r9 270 with TressFX to the PS4 which is running a different version of Tomb raider?

At least try to give a fair comparison

#222 Edited by clr84651 (5530 posts) -

@lundy86_4 said:

@clr84651 said:

Yes, it's well known that there's always more processing power available when buying PC.

You can't build a PC gaming machine for less than a PS4 with HDMI & a controller are at $400.

It's actually pretty close this time around, but it simply shows the difference between mass-produced hardware costs versus paying retail.

Without the HDMI cable & controller, the cheapest you can build a PC equivalent to a PS4 is for $584. If you add a HDMI cable & controller to PC it goes over $600.

#223 Edited by farrell2k (6675 posts) -

Can someone explain to tormentroll that BF4 on PS4 is not 1080p and not on high settings? He won't believe me.

#224 Edited by lundy86_4 (43891 posts) -

@clr84651 said:

Without the HDMI cable & controller, the cheapest you can build a PC equivalent to a PS4 is for $584. If you add a HDMI cable & controller to PC it goes over $600.

Could you post that specific build?

#225 Edited by melonfarmerz (1235 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

Can someone explain to tormentroll that BF4 on PS4 is not 1080p and not on high settings? He won't believe me.

It's not even worth it man. You're completely right in what you're saying, it doesn't take a genius to realize the PC version of BF4 is of a higher graphical calibre, therefore would achieve lower frame rates than the PS4 on similar powered GPU's, but 20 or so people have been in your shoes and tried arguing with him. He brings up the exact same DF BF4 and Tomb Raider screencaps in every other thread he posts in and you really can't convince him otherwise. But that's the general mindset of console gamers anyways so why bother?

#226 Posted by clr84651 (5530 posts) -

@lundy86_4 said:

@clr84651 said:

Without the HDMI cable & controller, the cheapest you can build a PC equivalent to a PS4 is for $584. If you add a HDMI cable & controller to PC it goes over $600.

Could you post that specific build?

I watched a video here on GS that went over it. I watched it and thought their prices for some things were lower than most people could find like the OS for $79.

#227 Edited by CrownKingArthur (5085 posts) -
@farrell2k said:

Can someone explain to tormentroll that BF4 on PS4 is not 1080p and not on high settings? He won't believe me.

the man's a black bar apologist.

so thank you ever so kindly for the invitation, however I must politely decline.

#228 Posted by farrell2k (6675 posts) -

@melonfarmerz said:

@farrell2k said:

Can someone explain to tormentroll that BF4 on PS4 is not 1080p and not on high settings? He won't believe me.

It's not even worth it man. You're completely right in what you're saying, it doesn't take a genius to realize the PC version of BF4 is of a higher graphical calibre, therefore would achieve lower frame rates than the PS4 on similar powered GPU's, but 20 or so people have been in your shoes and tried arguing with him. He brings up the exact same DF BF4 and Tomb Raider screencaps in every other thread he posts in and you really can't convince him otherwise. But that's the general mindset of console gamers anyways so why bother?

Wow, he's that big of a troll in denial? Actually, that doesn't surprise me.

#229 Posted by lundy86_4 (43891 posts) -

@clr84651 said:

I watched a video here on GS that went over it. I watched it and thought their prices for some things were lower than most people could find like the OS for $79.

So, you're just assuming that it's the lowest? Other sites have posted builds for around $400, with a few caveats. Mostly your typical pros and cons. For example, ExtremeTech.

#230 Posted by tormentos (19314 posts) -

@lostrib said:

so you're comparing r9 270 running BF4 at high settings 1080p, to PS4 which is running some setting combination at 900p? yeah seems fair

. Bearing in mind that the AMD cards are still delivering a massive 44 per cent boost in resolution over the PS4

And then you want to compare the r9 270 with TressFX to the PS4 which is running a different version of Tomb raider?

At least try to give a fair comparison

Me not at all DF did dude..

Yes and the PS4 has what 20% frame advantage.? so is not a clear win.?

The PS4 version also runs TressFX on a optimized version but still runs it,no matter what your argument can be running it optimize still runs it,the PC version didn't because frames would drop more than 50%..

#231 Edited by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@lostrib said:

so you're comparing r9 270 running BF4 at high settings 1080p, to PS4 which is running some setting combination at 900p? yeah seems fair

. Bearing in mind that the AMD cards are still delivering a massive 44 per cent boost in resolution over the PS4

And then you want to compare the r9 270 with TressFX to the PS4 which is running a different version of Tomb raider?

At least try to give a fair comparison

Me not at all DF did dude..

Yes and the PS4 has what 20% frame advantage.? so is not a clear win.?

The PS4 version also runs TressFX on a optimized version but still runs it,no matter what your argument can be running it optimize still runs it,the PC version didn't because frames would drop more than 50%..

you're trying to argue that the PS4 is better using unfair comparisons.

That's the issue

#232 Edited by 04dcarraher (20113 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

Can someone explain to tormentroll that BF4 on PS4 is not 1080p and not on high settings? He won't believe me.

He's just a dumb troll bear him no mind. Anyone with an ounce of sense can figure out that PS4 runs BF4 at 900p, not running ultra settings but a slew of settings with a mix of medium high and few ultra settings or lack there of. Then with Tomb raider he ignores the fact that Tressfx on ps4 is more optimized and down toned vs the plain tressfx 1.0 that'ss on PC. Then ignores the fact that PS4 lacks same quality of SSAO, tessellation is missing, and uses lower quality textures in some cases.

#233 Edited by clr84651 (5530 posts) -

@lundy86_4 said:

@clr84651 said:

I watched a video here on GS that went over it. I watched it and thought their prices for some things were lower than most people could find like the OS for $79.

So, you're just assuming that it's the lowest? Other sites have posted builds for around $400, with a few caveats. Mostly your typical pros and cons. For example, ExtremeTech.

PS4 is the lowest priced build for it's capabilities. PC build is higher, but it depends on how low someone can get the parts & OS for that determines just how much higher. Someone building a gaming PC should be willing to spend $600+ to make it worth while.

#234 Edited by asylumni (2179 posts) -

@farrell2k: So back to only 4GB of RAM, not enough, a poor power supply that is barely rated above the system. But my favorite is the seller with a half star rating and comment, "Complete waste of time. Seller is not legitimate." So you've been scammed out of $56 and still have no os.

#235 Posted by asylumni (2179 posts) -

@lostrib: I'd say it's just as unfair to judge the PS4 using only rushed launch ports as well.

#236 Posted by Jankarcop (10241 posts) -

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects).

PC had more aaa-aa exclusives than all 3 consoles combined last gen, and this current gen.

What is the point in lying about something so easy to look up and prove?

#237 Posted by mems_1224 (47860 posts) -

@StrongBlackVine said:

@mems_1224 said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects). The only exceptions are games like Witcher 3.

Why so many hermits complain about consoles holding PC gaming back then?

Same reason people complain about last gen games holding back current gen games. when you have to make a game work for the shitty systems you have to make compromises. common sense.

So that means console games are the baseline and my original statement was correct.

Doesnt mean they're the best systems and thats not really something to brag about. Congrats, you get the inferior version of all multiplats. yay?

#238 Edited by StrongBlackVine (8418 posts) -

@Jankarcop said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects).

PC had more aaa-aa exclusives than all 3 consoles combined last gen, and this current gen.

What is the point in lying about something so easy to look up and prove?

AAA in budget, not scores.

#239 Posted by StrongBlackVine (8418 posts) -
@mems_1224 said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@mems_1224 said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

@Cyberdot said:

@StrongBlackVine said:

Considering console gaming is still the baseline for games in general

lol

LOL really? All PC gets is improved versions of consoles games(talking AAA multi-platform projects). The only exceptions are games like Witcher 3.

Why so many hermits complain about consoles holding PC gaming back then?

Same reason people complain about last gen games holding back current gen games. when you have to make a game work for the shitty systems you have to make compromises. common sense.

So that means console games are the baseline and my original statement was correct.

Doesnt mean they're the best systems and thats not really something to brag about. Congrats, you get the inferior version of all multiplats. yay?

I was not bragging about it.

#240 Edited by GravityX (715 posts) -

Man I really hope a lot of you buy new graphics card. LOL Gullible peeps

#241 Edited by hoosier7 (3913 posts) -

@asylumni said:

@farrell2k: So back to only 4GB of RAM, not enough, a poor power supply that is barely rated above the system. But my favorite is the seller with a half star rating and comment, "Complete waste of time. Seller is not legitimate." So you've been scammed out of $56 and still have no os.

You don't need more than 4GB if you're going purely for gaming. Unless you're running lots of applications at once or really can't cope with a couple of seconds added to your load times then you'll see no noticeable difference between 3GB and anything up.

http://www.pcreview.co.uk/articles/Hardware/How_much_RAM_do_I_really_need_for_gaming/2/

#242 Edited by farrell2k (6675 posts) -

@asylumni said:

@farrell2k: So back to only 4GB of RAM, not enough, a poor power supply that is barely rated above the system. But my favorite is the seller with a half star rating and comment, "Complete waste of time. Seller is not legitimate." So you've been scammed out of $56 and still have no os.

For one dollar more, you can buy a 450 W power supply, and for 10 or so more, you can upgrade to 8gb. I don't see the point, but whatever. You have a PC for $415 that is 1.5x as powerful as the PS4...

I still don't see the problem with running Linux. The PS4 certainly doesn't run Windows. Are you trying to make the argument that if the PC doesn't run all the exact same games as the PS4, its hardware somehow less powerful? That makes no sense.

#243 Edited by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@asylumni said:

@lostrib: I'd say it's just as unfair to judge the PS4 using only rushed launch ports as well.

I didn't bring up the launch ports. Those were all el tormo

#244 Edited by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@asylumni said:

@farrell2k: So back to only 4GB of RAM, not enough, a poor power supply that is barely rated above the system. But my favorite is the seller with a half star rating and comment, "Complete waste of time. Seller is not legitimate." So you've been scammed out of $56 and still have no os.

For one dollar more, you can buy a 450 W power supply, and for 10 or so more, you can upgrade to 8gb. I don't see the point, but whatever. You have a PC for $415 that is 1.5x as powerful as the PS4...

I still don't see the problem with running Linux. The PS4 certainly doesn't run Windows. Are you trying to make the argument that if the PC doesn't run all the exact same games as the PS4, its hardware somehow less powerful? That makes no sense.

Because running Linux limits your library and many major releases

#245 Edited by asylumni (2179 posts) -

@hoosier7 said:

@asylumni said:

@farrell2k: So back to only 4GB of RAM, not enough, a poor power supply that is barely rated above the system. But my favorite is the seller with a half star rating and comment, "Complete waste of time. Seller is not legitimate." So you've been scammed out of $56 and still have no os.

You don't need more than 4GB if you're going purely for gaming. Unless you're running lots of applications at once or really can't cope with a couple of seconds added to your load times then you'll see no noticeable difference between 3GB and anything up.

http://www.pcreview.co.uk/articles/Hardware/How_much_RAM_do_I_really_need_for_gaming/2/

Up to about mid last year, I would've agreed. The problem is, when you're building a computer, you shouldn't just look at the games that came out 2-4 years ago, but ahead as well. And what I see coming is Watchdogs with a minimum requirement of 6GB of RAM and I don't believe it's the last we'll see of that requirement (or even a little higher). The extra 4GB of RAM really isn't that much of an added cost and will most likely extend the useful life of the PC a significant amount.

#246 Edited by asylumni (2179 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@asylumni said:

@lostrib: I'd say it's just as unfair to judge the PS4 using only rushed launch ports as well.

I didn't bring up the launch ports. Those were all el tormo

I'm aware, I just thought it was something that should be noted and ties in to what you were saying, I just couldn't quote well on my phone.

#247 Edited by farrell2k (6675 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@asylumni said:

@farrell2k: So back to only 4GB of RAM, not enough, a poor power supply that is barely rated above the system. But my favorite is the seller with a half star rating and comment, "Complete waste of time. Seller is not legitimate." So you've been scammed out of $56 and still have no os.

For one dollar more, you can buy a 450 W power supply, and for 10 or so more, you can upgrade to 8gb. I don't see the point, but whatever. You have a PC for $415 that is 1.5x as powerful as the PS4...

I still don't see the problem with running Linux. The PS4 certainly doesn't run Windows. Are you trying to make the argument that if the PC doesn't run all the exact same games as the PS4, its hardware somehow less powerful? That makes no sense.

Because running Linux limits your library and many major releases

Still don't see the problem. Owning a XB1 and not and PS4 limits your library as well. Does it mean that the hardware becomes less powerful, or what? Inconsistent argument and straw grasping seems to be the staple of system wars.

#248 Posted by lostrib (40236 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@lostrib said:

@farrell2k said:

@asylumni said:

@farrell2k: So back to only 4GB of RAM, not enough, a poor power supply that is barely rated above the system. But my favorite is the seller with a half star rating and comment, "Complete waste of time. Seller is not legitimate." So you've been scammed out of $56 and still have no os.

For one dollar more, you can buy a 450 W power supply, and for 10 or so more, you can upgrade to 8gb. I don't see the point, but whatever. You have a PC for $415 that is 1.5x as powerful as the PS4...

I still don't see the problem with running Linux. The PS4 certainly doesn't run Windows. Are you trying to make the argument that if the PC doesn't run all the exact same games as the PS4, its hardware somehow less powerful? That makes no sense.

Because running Linux limits your library and many major releases

Still don't see the problem. Owning a XB1 and not and PS4 limits your library as well. Does it mean that the hardware becomes less powerful, or what? Inconsistent argument and straw grasping seems to be the staple of system wars.

Owning any one platform limits your overall library. But using just linux limits your access to even the PC library, you don't have full access to the platform.

So looking at multiplats (since that seems like the fair thing to compare), PS4 would have access to all the multiplats, while a PC with linux does not.

Just having equal power for 400 is meaningless when it doesn't even have the full PC library of games

#249 Edited by asylumni (2179 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

@asylumni said:

@farrell2k: So back to only 4GB of RAM, not enough, a poor power supply that is barely rated above the system. But my favorite is the seller with a half star rating and comment, "Complete waste of time. Seller is not legitimate." So you've been scammed out of $56 and still have no os.

For one dollar more, you can buy a 450 W power supply, and for 10 or so more, you can upgrade to 8gb. I don't see the point, but whatever. You have a PC for $415 that is 1.5x as powerful as the PS4...

I still don't see the problem with running Linux. The PS4 certainly doesn't run Windows. Are you trying to make the argument that if the PC doesn't run all the exact same games as the PS4, its hardware somehow less powerful? That makes no sense.

It's not that it doesn't run the same exact games as the PS4, but that it greatly limits the number of PC games that it plays. I wish it weren't true, but unfortunately it is.

#250 Posted by farrell2k (6675 posts) -

Both of you are attempting to shift the argument from hardware to software. The topic of discussion is hardware, and it is still true that $400 hardware outperforms the ps4. Why does this threaten you so much? 6 months from now it will be $350 hardware. No big deal.