Playstation 5/Xbox 4: do we already have a PC as powerful?

#251 Edited by AzatiS (7613 posts) -

@emgesp said:

@AzatiS said:

@seriousgaming said:
@AzatiS said:

I think high end PCs as we speak , but high end not just good ones , are already equivalent of a PS5.

Equivalent to something that doesn't even exist, how impressive.

Well if you think that in 5-6 years from now , consoles will have more than 10GDDR5 of dedicated graphic memory ALONE , 32GB of system memory , 3-4 GPUS combined , CPU speeds of 5ghz++ and super speedy SSDs drives ... you need to reconsider.

Wii U , PS4 and X1 are equivalent to medium range PCs ... NO , hell ... LOW END ones ( X1 / Wii U ) upon their release ... What makes you think that PS5 or X2 will be any different ? You must be living in a fantasy world that is.

Do you honestly think the PS5 will be weaker than the most powerful gaming rig money can buy right now?

A high end rig of 2010 could surpass PS4 for fun . So why not ?

To help you , did you know that already as we speak there are rigs that running Battlefield 4 at ultra settings at 4k way above 60fps ? Can you imagine that for a minute ? I repeat ... BF4 Ultra settings , 4K resolution 60++FPS. You might see such things with PS5 , im seeing them now. When PS5 release ... PC gaming might be on the way for 100.000 K or something , who knows.

#252 Posted by emgesp (2149 posts) -

@AzatiS said:

@emgesp said:

@AzatiS said:

@seriousgaming said:
@AzatiS said:

I think high end PCs as we speak , but high end not just good ones , are already equivalent of a PS5.

Equivalent to something that doesn't even exist, how impressive.

Well if you think that in 5-6 years from now , consoles will have more than 10GDDR5 of dedicated graphic memory ALONE , 32GB of system memory , 3-4 GPUS combined , CPU speeds of 5ghz++ and super speedy SSDs drives ... you need to reconsider.

Wii U , PS4 and X1 are equivalent to medium range PCs ... NO , hell ... LOW END ones ( X1 / Wii U ) upon their release ... What makes you think that PS5 or X2 will be any different ? You must be living in a fantasy world that is.

Do you honestly think the PS5 will be weaker than the most powerful gaming rig money can buy right now?

A high end rig of 2010 could surpass PS4 for fun . So why not ?

To help you , did you know that already as we speak there are rigs that running Battlefield 4 at ultra settings at 4k way above 60fps ? Can you imagine that for a minute ? I repeat ... BF4 Ultra settings , 4K resolution 60++FPS. You might see such things with PS5 , im seeing them now. When PS5 release ... PC gaming might be on the way for 100.000 K or something , who knows.

Here's a difference. When the PS5 gets released they will take full advantage of the power. Name me one game that takes full advantage of a PC with dual Titan/780GTX setup?

#253 Edited by AzatiS (7613 posts) -

@emgesp said:

@AzatiS said:

@emgesp said:

@AzatiS said:

@seriousgaming said:
@AzatiS said:

I think high end PCs as we speak , but high end not just good ones , are already equivalent of a PS5.

Equivalent to something that doesn't even exist, how impressive.

Well if you think that in 5-6 years from now , consoles will have more than 10GDDR5 of dedicated graphic memory ALONE , 32GB of system memory , 3-4 GPUS combined , CPU speeds of 5ghz++ and super speedy SSDs drives ... you need to reconsider.

Wii U , PS4 and X1 are equivalent to medium range PCs ... NO , hell ... LOW END ones ( X1 / Wii U ) upon their release ... What makes you think that PS5 or X2 will be any different ? You must be living in a fantasy world that is.

Do you honestly think the PS5 will be weaker than the most powerful gaming rig money can buy right now?

A high end rig of 2010 could surpass PS4 for fun . So why not ?

To help you , did you know that already as we speak there are rigs that running Battlefield 4 at ultra settings at 4k way above 60fps ? Can you imagine that for a minute ? I repeat ... BF4 Ultra settings , 4K resolution 60++FPS. You might see such things with PS5 , im seeing them now. When PS5 release ... PC gaming might be on the way for 100.000 K or something , who knows.

Here's a difference. When the PS5 gets released they will take full advantage of the power. Name me one game that takes full advantage of a PC with dual Titan/780GTX setup?

Any game that plays at 4k ...here is your answer ... Ps4 cant even play most of current games at 1080p/60fps when PCs playing the same title on 1080p/60fps very easily. Low end to mid range rigs , im not even talking about high end that playing way beyond that up to 4k . So .... i dont get you

#254 Posted by RyviusARC (4586 posts) -

@2Chalupas said:

No single GPU in 2014 is as powerful as what would be used in a future PS5/XB4. Considering next gen consoles are probably 2020 at the earliest, I'm guessing it will be the top of the line GPU's of 2017 or 2018 that would be reflective of what would be used in a console releasing in 2020 (sort of like how the GPU's from the PS4 were considered high end from 2011 or 2012). Of course in a console they would also use an "energy efficient" version of the GPU which in itself is an advance in technology.

Someone could spend $5000 on a quad Titan setup, maybe 8 core CPU, and 64GB of RAM. Would that be competitive with PS5? Maybe, but it would be idiotic - and even if one were to do that, the games from 5 years into the future will outperform the games running on this super-hardware today.

Actually the PS4 is closer to the OCed GTX 480 of 2010.

And the PS4's CPU is weaker than CPUs from 2008 or hell a heavily Oced CPU from 2006.

The Xbox One is probably only a little better than an sli Oced 8800gtx 2006 build if not for the lower vRAM and poorer SLI performance from the older cards.

My guess is a Tri Sli GTX 880 build could probably rival or beat the PS5 if those consoles come out as weak as they did this gen.

#255 Posted by emgesp (2149 posts) -

@AzatiS said:

@emgesp said:

@AzatiS said:

@emgesp said:

@AzatiS said:

@seriousgaming said:
@AzatiS said:

I think high end PCs as we speak , but high end not just good ones , are already equivalent of a PS5.

Equivalent to something that doesn't even exist, how impressive.

Well if you think that in 5-6 years from now , consoles will have more than 10GDDR5 of dedicated graphic memory ALONE , 32GB of system memory , 3-4 GPUS combined , CPU speeds of 5ghz++ and super speedy SSDs drives ... you need to reconsider.

Wii U , PS4 and X1 are equivalent to medium range PCs ... NO , hell ... LOW END ones ( X1 / Wii U ) upon their release ... What makes you think that PS5 or X2 will be any different ? You must be living in a fantasy world that is.

Do you honestly think the PS5 will be weaker than the most powerful gaming rig money can buy right now?

A high end rig of 2010 could surpass PS4 for fun . So why not ?

To help you , did you know that already as we speak there are rigs that running Battlefield 4 at ultra settings at 4k way above 60fps ? Can you imagine that for a minute ? I repeat ... BF4 Ultra settings , 4K resolution 60++FPS. You might see such things with PS5 , im seeing them now. When PS5 release ... PC gaming might be on the way for 100.000 K or something , who knows.

Here's a difference. When the PS5 gets released they will take full advantage of the power. Name me one game that takes full advantage of a PC with dual Titan/780GTX setup?

Any game that plays at 4k ...here is your answer ... Ps4 cant even play most of current games at 1080p/60fps when PCs playing the same title on 1080p/60fps very easily. Low end to mid range rigs , im not even talking about high end that playing way beyond that up to 4k . So .... i dont get you

So you buy expensive PC components just to play multiplats at higher resolutions? I'm talking about actual graphics. No developer is making a game that is taken full advantage of the highest end GPUs on the market.

#256 Edited by emgesp (2149 posts) -

@RyviusARC said:

@2Chalupas said:

No single GPU in 2014 is as powerful as what would be used in a future PS5/XB4. Considering next gen consoles are probably 2020 at the earliest, I'm guessing it will be the top of the line GPU's of 2017 or 2018 that would be reflective of what would be used in a console releasing in 2020 (sort of like how the GPU's from the PS4 were considered high end from 2011 or 2012). Of course in a console they would also use an "energy efficient" version of the GPU which in itself is an advance in technology.

Someone could spend $5000 on a quad Titan setup, maybe 8 core CPU, and 64GB of RAM. Would that be competitive with PS5? Maybe, but it would be idiotic - and even if one were to do that, the games from 5 years into the future will outperform the games running on this super-hardware today.

Actually the PS4 is closer to the OCed GTX 480 of 2010.

And the PS4's CPU is weaker than CPUs from 2008 or hell a heavily Oced CPU from 2006.

The Xbox One is probably only a little better than an sli Oced 8800gtx 2006 build if not for the lower vRAM and poorer SLI performance from the older cards.

My guess is a Tri Sli GTX 880 build could probably rival or beat the PS5 if those consoles come out as weak as they did this gen.

There is going to be huge improvements in power consumption and efficiency by the time the PS5 roles out. In 6 yrs time AMD will be able to design an APU with more power than 2x Titans on a single die. I'm guessing anywhere from 12-18 Teraflops of raw power.

Titans are designed on 28nm process. The PS5 will most likely have an APU designed on a 14nm, or smaller process.

#257 Edited by flashn00b (2926 posts) -

Ehh, I would imagine that the goal for the PlayStation 5 is Ultra High Definition, or consumer level 4K.

#258 Posted by scatteh316 (4927 posts) -

I made a thread about this very topic months ago OP......

Last generation was the LAST TIME that a new console will release with the fastest hardware on the planet, it's all down hill for consolites from now.

#259 Posted by RyviusARC (4586 posts) -

@flashn00b said:

Ehh, I would imagine that the goal for the PlayStation 5 is Ultra High Definition, or consumer level 4K.

Then their games wouldn't look much better than PS4 games since it takes around 8x more power to run 4k compared to 1080p.

#260 Edited by faizan_faizan (7866 posts) -

@RyviusARC said:

@flashn00b said:

Ehh, I would imagine that the goal for the PlayStation 5 is Ultra High Definition, or consumer level 4K.

Then their games wouldn't look much better than PS4 games since it takes around 8x more power to run 4k compared to 1080p.

1440p's my guess.

#261 Posted by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

@RyviusARC said:

@flashn00b said:

Ehh, I would imagine that the goal for the PlayStation 5 is Ultra High Definition, or consumer level 4K.

Then their games wouldn't look much better than PS4 games since it takes around 8x more power to run 4k compared to 1080p.

lol. where in gods name are you getting this figure from?

#262 Posted by Mr_Huggles_dog (1203 posts) -

OMG enough with this shit.

PC is more powerful....but it doesn't play Gears of War (except the old as dirt one), Uncharted, Driveclub, Infamous, Killzone, Halo (except the old as dirt ones), Hot Shots Golf, Ryse, God of War, Red Dead Redemption, Medal Gear Solid (except the old as dirt one), Resistance, Vanquish, Little Big Planet, The Last of Us, The Order, and many more.

So that power is all going to boost FEZ to 4K @ 60fps.....whoopty fucking doo.

#263 Posted by RyviusARC (4586 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

@RyviusARC said:

@flashn00b said:

Ehh, I would imagine that the goal for the PlayStation 5 is Ultra High Definition, or consumer level 4K.

Then their games wouldn't look much better than PS4 games since it takes around 8x more power to run 4k compared to 1080p.

lol. where in gods name are you getting this figure from?

4k has 8x the pixel count as 1080p meaning it would need around 8x the power to run similar to 1080p.

#264 Posted by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

LOL

#265 Edited by RyviusARC (4586 posts) -

@mr_huggles_dog said:

OMG enough with this shit.

PC is more powerful....but it doesn't play Gears of War (except the old as dirt one), Uncharted, Driveclub, Infamous, Killzone, Halo (except the old as dirt ones), Hot Shots Golf, Ryse, God of War, Red Dead Redemption, Medal Gear Solid (except the old as dirt one), Resistance, Vanquish, Little Big Planet, The Last of Us, The Order, and many more.

So that power is all going to boost FEZ to 4K @ 60fps.....whoopty fucking doo.

Exclusive isn't really an argument since each system has their own.

Console owners might be gushing at The Witcher 3 but they will never be able to play The Witcher 1 which does have an impact on the story and the choices you make do affect The Witcher 2 which in turn will change what happens in The Witcher 3.

#266 Posted by RyviusARC (4586 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

LOL

care to explain what you find to be funny?

#267 Edited by m3dude1 (1315 posts) -

hermits and the things they say

#268 Posted by RyviusARC (4586 posts) -

@m3dude1 said:

hermits and the things they say

Yah facts are stupid.

#269 Posted by Mr_Huggles_dog (1203 posts) -

@RyviusARC said:

@mr_huggles_dog said:

OMG enough with this shit.

PC is more powerful....but it doesn't play Gears of War (except the old as dirt one), Uncharted, Driveclub, Infamous, Killzone, Halo (except the old as dirt ones), Hot Shots Golf, Ryse, God of War, Red Dead Redemption, Medal Gear Solid (except the old as dirt one), Resistance, Vanquish, Little Big Planet, The Last of Us, The Order, and many more.

So that power is all going to boost FEZ to 4K @ 60fps.....whoopty fucking doo.

Exclusive isn't really an argument since each system has their own.

Console owners might be gushing at The Witcher 3 but they will never be able to play The Witcher 1 which does have an impact on the story and the choices you make do affect The Witcher 2 which in turn will change what happens in The Witcher 3.

See....you're exaggerating YOUR exclusive but downplaying exclusives for the other hand.

Thats slightly dipshitish.

I know many console gamers that enjoyed TW2 just fine without having played the first....I bought it on PC but I still didn't play the first and didn't really care.

If the next Red Dead comes to PC you could say the same if the story continues with some of the same characters....same if they do another Last of Us....same for any of those games.

The difference is that TLoU, Uncharted and such games will NEVER be on PC. So while some might have to bite the bullet and not play the first game in a series...if someone is going to be stubborn and not get Sony console...they will NEVER get to play ANY of those games....so not playing 1 in a series of 3....no big deal.

#270 Edited by RyviusARC (4586 posts) -

@mr_huggles_dog said:

@RyviusARC said:

@mr_huggles_dog said:

OMG enough with this shit.

PC is more powerful....but it doesn't play Gears of War (except the old as dirt one), Uncharted, Driveclub, Infamous, Killzone, Halo (except the old as dirt ones), Hot Shots Golf, Ryse, God of War, Red Dead Redemption, Medal Gear Solid (except the old as dirt one), Resistance, Vanquish, Little Big Planet, The Last of Us, The Order, and many more.

So that power is all going to boost FEZ to 4K @ 60fps.....whoopty fucking doo.

Exclusive isn't really an argument since each system has their own.

Console owners might be gushing at The Witcher 3 but they will never be able to play The Witcher 1 which does have an impact on the story and the choices you make do affect The Witcher 2 which in turn will change what happens in The Witcher 3.

See....you're exaggerating YOUR exclusive but downplaying exclusives for the other hand.

Thats slightly dipshitish.

I know many console gamers that enjoyed TW2 just fine without having played the first....I bought it on PC but I still didn't play the first and didn't really care.

If the next Red Dead comes to PC you could say the same if the story continues with some of the same characters....same if they do another Last of Us....same for any of those games.

The difference is that TLoU, Uncharted and such games will NEVER be on PC. So while some might have to bite the bullet and not play the first game in a series...if someone is going to be stubborn and not get Sony console...they will NEVER get to play ANY of those games....so not playing 1 in a series of 3....no big deal.

Most games are multiplat and The Witcher was just an example.

There are plenty of PC exclusives but it depends on a person's tastes.

And without playing the first witcher you don't get as much background on the characters.

The first witcher explains the basics of The Witcher world in detail (taking a lot from the books) while the second game doesn't do this nearly as much.

Heck the first Witcher even partially explains who Ciri was which helps a little with the upcoming Witcher 3.

Also the first Witcher explains the origins of the world they are in and how elves, dwarfs and monsters inhabited the same space as humans.

This also can tie into one of Ciri's abilities which is like Alvin's abilities from The Witcher 1.

There are events that happen prior in the first game that are briefly told but it doesn't hold much emotion for someone who didn't play through it themselves.

Also The Witcher 2 is only on the Xbox 360 for consoles and The Witcher 3 is only on the PS4 and Xbox One for consoles.

So if you want to enjoy both you would need to have two consoles.

I am guessing you are the type to combine multiple consoles vs a single PC......

#271 Posted by Mr_Huggles_dog (1203 posts) -

@RyviusARC said:

@mr_huggles_dog said:

@RyviusARC said:

Exclusive isn't really an argument since each system has their own.

Console owners might be gushing at The Witcher 3 but they will never be able to play The Witcher 1 which does have an impact on the story and the choices you make do affect The Witcher 2 which in turn will change what happens in The Witcher 3.

See....you're exaggerating YOUR exclusive but downplaying exclusives for the other hand.

Thats slightly dipshitish.

I know many console gamers that enjoyed TW2 just fine without having played the first....I bought it on PC but I still didn't play the first and didn't really care.

If the next Red Dead comes to PC you could say the same if the story continues with some of the same characters....same if they do another Last of Us....same for any of those games.

The difference is that TLoU, Uncharted and such games will NEVER be on PC. So while some might have to bite the bullet and not play the first game in a series...if someone is going to be stubborn and not get Sony console...they will NEVER get to play ANY of those games....so not playing 1 in a series of 3....no big deal.

Most games are multiplat and The Witcher was just an example.

There are plenty of PC exclusives but it depends on a person's tastes.

And without playing the first witcher you don't get as much background on the characters.

The first witcher explains the basics of The Witcher world in detail (taking a lot from the books) while the second game doesn't do this nearly as much.

Heck the first Witcher even partially explains who Ciri was which helps a little with the upcoming Witcher 3.

There are events that happen prior in the first game that are briefly told but it doesn't hold much emotion for someone who didn't play through it themselves.

Also The Witcher 2 is only on the Xbox 360 for consoles and The Witcher 3 is only on the PS4 and Xbox One for consoles.

So if you want to enjoy both you would need to have two consoles.

I am guessing you are the type to combine multiple consoles vs a single PC......

I'm guessing you're the type to put all your argument into one game.

Jesus man....it's one game....lol it's the only fucking game in this case where the PC has a console gamer somewhat in a bind.

Again....there are numerous examples like this for console...why you're harping on TW so much is beyond me.

#272 Posted by RyviusARC (4586 posts) -

@mr_huggles_dog said:

@RyviusARC said:

@mr_huggles_dog said:

@RyviusARC said:

Exclusive isn't really an argument since each system has their own.

Console owners might be gushing at The Witcher 3 but they will never be able to play The Witcher 1 which does have an impact on the story and the choices you make do affect The Witcher 2 which in turn will change what happens in The Witcher 3.

See....you're exaggerating YOUR exclusive but downplaying exclusives for the other hand.

Thats slightly dipshitish.

I know many console gamers that enjoyed TW2 just fine without having played the first....I bought it on PC but I still didn't play the first and didn't really care.

If the next Red Dead comes to PC you could say the same if the story continues with some of the same characters....same if they do another Last of Us....same for any of those games.

The difference is that TLoU, Uncharted and such games will NEVER be on PC. So while some might have to bite the bullet and not play the first game in a series...if someone is going to be stubborn and not get Sony console...they will NEVER get to play ANY of those games....so not playing 1 in a series of 3....no big deal.

Most games are multiplat and The Witcher was just an example.

There are plenty of PC exclusives but it depends on a person's tastes.

And without playing the first witcher you don't get as much background on the characters.

The first witcher explains the basics of The Witcher world in detail (taking a lot from the books) while the second game doesn't do this nearly as much.

Heck the first Witcher even partially explains who Ciri was which helps a little with the upcoming Witcher 3.

There are events that happen prior in the first game that are briefly told but it doesn't hold much emotion for someone who didn't play through it themselves.

Also The Witcher 2 is only on the Xbox 360 for consoles and The Witcher 3 is only on the PS4 and Xbox One for consoles.

So if you want to enjoy both you would need to have two consoles.

I am guessing you are the type to combine multiple consoles vs a single PC......

I'm guessing you're the type to put all your argument into one game.

Jesus man....it's one game....lol it's the only fucking game in this case where the PC has a console gamer somewhat in a bind.

Again....there are numerous examples like this for console...why you're harping on TW so much is beyond me.

I just went into detail about The Witcher 1 because of what you said about not needing to play it to enjoy TW2 which you can but you won't get the most out of it without playing the first and beyond that reading the books.

Like I said there are many PC exclusives and many people have already pointed them out. Divinity Original Sin just came out and is a great game only on PC.

There is also Wasteland 2 and pillars of eternity and both are coming out soon.

Star Citizen is shaping up to be great and neither console could hope to run it.

I don't need to even make a list because I know you are just going to respond by saying every game on it sucks which is not the point of the argument because that is just an opinion.

#273 Posted by Mr_Huggles_dog (1203 posts) -

@RyviusARC said:

@mr_huggles_dog said:

I'm guessing you're the type to put all your argument into one game.

Jesus man....it's one game....lol it's the only fucking game in this case where the PC has a console gamer somewhat in a bind.

Again....there are numerous examples like this for console...why you're harping on TW so much is beyond me.

I just went into detail about The Witcher 1 because of what you said about not needing to play it to enjoy TW2 which you can but you won't get the most out of it without playing the first and beyond that reading the books.

Like I said there are many PC exclusives and many people have already pointed them out. Divinity Original Sin just came out and is a great game only on PC.

There is also Wasteland 2 and pillars of eternity and both are coming out soon.

Star Citizen is shaping up to be great and neither console could hope to run it.

I don't need to even make a list because I know you are just going to respond by saying every game on it sucks which is not the point of the argument because that is just an opinion.

I'm glad you can see in the future.

None of those which you mentioned are the AAA big sellers that you have on console. I'm not saying those games aren't going to be good, but the AAA exclusvies like there used to be aren't there anymore.

Star Citizen is a kickstarter funded by PC gamers....so you guys literally have to buy your exclusives with your own money.

J/k....Star Citizen looks like a good game.....but besides graphics I haven't seen anything making it the second coming like so many make it out to be.

#274 Posted by AzatiS (7613 posts) -

@emgesp said:

@AzatiS said:

@emgesp said:

@AzatiS said:

@emgesp said:

@AzatiS said:

@seriousgaming said:
@AzatiS said:

I think high end PCs as we speak , but high end not just good ones , are already equivalent of a PS5.

Equivalent to something that doesn't even exist, how impressive.

Well if you think that in 5-6 years from now , consoles will have more than 10GDDR5 of dedicated graphic memory ALONE , 32GB of system memory , 3-4 GPUS combined , CPU speeds of 5ghz++ and super speedy SSDs drives ... you need to reconsider.

Wii U , PS4 and X1 are equivalent to medium range PCs ... NO , hell ... LOW END ones ( X1 / Wii U ) upon their release ... What makes you think that PS5 or X2 will be any different ? You must be living in a fantasy world that is.

Do you honestly think the PS5 will be weaker than the most powerful gaming rig money can buy right now?

A high end rig of 2010 could surpass PS4 for fun . So why not ?

To help you , did you know that already as we speak there are rigs that running Battlefield 4 at ultra settings at 4k way above 60fps ? Can you imagine that for a minute ? I repeat ... BF4 Ultra settings , 4K resolution 60++FPS. You might see such things with PS5 , im seeing them now. When PS5 release ... PC gaming might be on the way for 100.000 K or something , who knows.

Here's a difference. When the PS5 gets released they will take full advantage of the power. Name me one game that takes full advantage of a PC with dual Titan/780GTX setup?

Any game that plays at 4k ...here is your answer ... Ps4 cant even play most of current games at 1080p/60fps when PCs playing the same title on 1080p/60fps very easily. Low end to mid range rigs , im not even talking about high end that playing way beyond that up to 4k . So .... i dont get you

So you buy expensive PC components just to play multiplats at higher resolutions? I'm talking about actual graphics. No developer is making a game that is taken full advantage of the highest end GPUs on the market.

When a game runs at ULTRA settings than low/mid = way better graphics

When a game runs at ULTRA settings + 60fps = way better performance

When a game runs at ULTRA settings + 60 fps + 4k resolutions = way better overall graphical quality than low settings / 30fps / 900p period.

Dont change subject , we were talking about how powerful a PC can be right now compared to a future console , not if developers taking advantage TECHNICALLY all this power. Thats entirely other topic.

#275 Edited by 04dcarraher (19603 posts) -

@emgesp said:

@RyviusARC said:

@2Chalupas said:

No single GPU in 2014 is as powerful as what would be used in a future PS5/XB4. Considering next gen consoles are probably 2020 at the earliest, I'm guessing it will be the top of the line GPU's of 2017 or 2018 that would be reflective of what would be used in a console releasing in 2020 (sort of like how the GPU's from the PS4 were considered high end from 2011 or 2012). Of course in a console they would also use an "energy efficient" version of the GPU which in itself is an advance in technology.

Someone could spend $5000 on a quad Titan setup, maybe 8 core CPU, and 64GB of RAM. Would that be competitive with PS5? Maybe, but it would be idiotic - and even if one were to do that, the games from 5 years into the future will outperform the games running on this super-hardware today.

Actually the PS4 is closer to the OCed GTX 480 of 2010.

And the PS4's CPU is weaker than CPUs from 2008 or hell a heavily Oced CPU from 2006.

The Xbox One is probably only a little better than an sli Oced 8800gtx 2006 build if not for the lower vRAM and poorer SLI performance from the older cards.

My guess is a Tri Sli GTX 880 build could probably rival or beat the PS5 if those consoles come out as weak as they did this gen.

There is going to be huge improvements in power consumption and efficiency by the time the PS5 roles out. In 6 yrs time AMD will be able to design an APU with more power than 2x Titans on a single die. I'm guessing anywhere from 12-18 Teraflops of raw power.

Titans are designed on 28nm process. The PS5 will most likely have an APU designed on a 14nm, or smaller process.

That isnt going to happen based on shrinking dies. Going from 45nm to 22nm only saves less then 50% TDP Going from 28nm to 16nm would see less difference in TDP. APU's have a TDP limit and space per die, which limits what they can stuff inside. Architecture changes and efficiency will be the major factor, but seeing an APU with processing power of two 250w TDP gpu's wont happen in a small package in an APU in a long long time.