So... Playstation 4 has better GRAPHIC than PC games..

No is $460..

I don't need to pay for online play period,once again factor in that your PC draws way more power to run than my console since you want to ad yearly cost lets go there,because a 600 watts PSU is not the same as the one the PS4 has,and with ever day rising energy builds those PSU will really pull way more than the PS4.

WTF BF4 doesn't even have great numbers online on PS4..hahahaaa

And i am sure it more have sold at least 1 million or close,drop the excuse not every one pays for online, even on xbox live which has the higher rate from the 46 million live users about half pay for live gold and half were silver users,thats 23 million on a user base of 80 million,thats little over 1 1/4 of the user base and the huge majority doesn't pay period.

Fact is you need $600 to beat the PS4 on PC period,you can cry all you want add all the cost you want,you need $600 and you will not beat the PS4 by much,considering you will get a 7870 which is the same tech inside the PS4,with a little higher clock and 2 CU more.

Remember we are on launch Resistance on 2006 didn't represent what the PS3 could do,Uncharted 3 and TLOU look like they were pull from different console if you compare them with Resistance or Genji.

DF says the textures are equal to PC max settings nice try dude.

Thats funny because the 7870 in Ultra which is the highest PC setting doesn't brake 40FPS on 1680X1050 let alone 1080p,1680x1050 is just a hair higher than 900p.

http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchmarks/page2.html

Not every PC will give you 1080p with 60 FPS with ultra quality textures dude..

You must be very young and not remember November 2005 when the 360 was walking over $1000+ PCs....

Cry more with your delicius tears.... But fact remains that ALL things equal (online+games) that $600 PC comes FAR cheaper than the PS4....

No the xbox 360 was stronger than 2005 PC,not by a land slide nor it walked over PC.

But MS invested most of its money on getting a decent GPU,back them we didn't have $1,000 dollar GPU like now,the 7800GTX was the king and was $500,even that the xbox 360 had no Wifi,HDMI,blu-ray and used cheap DVD, MS loss $125 dollars per unit,remember that those GPU on PC you get for $500 included a huge earning for those GPU makers,the GPU inside the xbox 360 cost Ms like $120 when that same GPU would have cost you $600,now GPU have a far bigger range or power levels and cheaper ones that perform well.

NO when you factor in electricity no matter what a PC with a 600 PSU will draw way more electricity than a PS4 will,Blu-ray which you people refuse to factor in and PSN+ free games,on PC you don't get free games with steam,unless your talking about an old ass game like L4D.

You need $600 and you will no beat the PS4 by much if by anything in the long run.

PC costs more, news at 11.

This thread title is still 100% factually proven wrong.

The 360 costed $715 to make:

http://www.joystiq.com/2005/12/28/xbox-360-costs-715-to-make/

Oblivion raped early 2006 MONSTER PCs:

http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2006/03/31/elder_scrolls_oblivion/4

Why PS4 doesnt rape R9 290X?

...because rape is bad?

@tormentos: do you know that there are more to max settings than textures right? YouTube DF video on bf4. It's in the 50s. Look it up yourself since you swear by them. Bf4 is 900p, high settings with ultra textures, and 50fps. This is fact. Deal with it.

Also no one is buying bf4 for the single player. Psn+ is mandatory. Cows don't play multiplayer now? Give me a break.

...because irrelevant watching birds swim in the desert?

wuahahahahah only morons could say such of pathetic thing..well they the upset camp lol.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkjS4wLEQX0

This is the PS4's performance in BF4. Notice how it's only "60fps" when nothing is going on. When you are actually doing stuff it's in the 40s and 50s. So as I said. high settings, ultra textures, 900p, 50fps. That is what you are working with on PS4. So you guys can stop lying to yourselves and face reality. I swear cows still believe in the tooth fairy and easter bunny. Whatever makes you sleep at night I guess.

low settings draw distance, medium settings shadows, high settings hbao, medium AA, high details on ground, not a single ultra settings exclusive feature

in the end jack frags was right, its mostly medium settings with 50fps

Oh and just so you guys don't come in here crying that it is a crappy port spread across 5 platforms, here is your beloved KZ:SF. The PINNACLE of PS4 graphics and performance. Exclussive game. Experience Sony devs. Surely they will hit that 1080p solid 60fps mark that you guys keep claiming from your "$400" machines...or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlAYu_Vs-js

So yeah I'll show you a $400 PC that can run BF4 at max settings, at 1080p, at a rock solid 60fps when you first show me a PS4 that can do the same.

GeForce 8800 GTX was the first PC GPU to have ~185 watts TDP and sets a new TDP template for future PC flagship GPUs..

Radeon X1950 XTX requires 125 watts which is close to Xbox 360's Xenos' 90 watts. PS4 haven't moved it's GPU TDP levels to Geforce 8800 GTX levels.

At the same tech level and process node, a GPU with 290 watts would beat a GPU at 100 watts i.e. more CUs.

It didn't..

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/microsoft-taking-126-hit-per-xbox-360/1100-6140383/

$126 dollars was what MS loss per unit,not $315 like that stupid article claims.

It was widely reported.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-elder-scrolls-iv-oblivion-xbox-360-versus-pc/1100-6147028/

Oblivion on 360 only r@p* low end PC on 2006,look at the link a 7900GTX was already beating the xbox one,oh and Oblivion on 360 wasn't even 720p native it was sub HD,while the PC version on the 7900GTX could go as high as 1680x1200 far higher than the xbox 360.

The xbox360 was a powerful consoles on 2005 and 2006,but it was far from what you want to make it see.

The PS4 doesn't beat the R290 because the PS4 doesn't have a powerful enough GPU period,sony is not on the market of losing millions any more,but it could be worse MS had the money and look at the xbox one.

Fact is a PC with a GPU as powerful as the PS4 cost you more than the PS4 period.

The 7870 does 40 FPS with ultra quality textures period,you can't compare a damn 7970 with a PS4 period,and this is launch i am sure latter games will look way better.

Fact is you pay more period and you will not find cheaper than PS4 hardware that is stronger,hell not even at the same price as the PS4.

And this is why i call you a moron show me a damn Walmart PC of $400 that can even run BF4 on low...hahahahaa

And this is where you damn argument fall apart,i already showed you people the damn 7870 doesn't even hit 60 FPS on ultra on 1680x1050 let alone 1080p,so yeah to get 1080p max setting you better open your damn wallet.

Fact is a $400 dollar PC is sh** period,the PS4 is $399 a complete system with nice graphics,oh and lets wait until 1 or 2 year down when developers start to take advantage of heavy compute on PS4,considering that Uncharted 3 and TLOU look like games that don't even belong on the PS3 i am sure the PS4 will get some great ones.

Hell steam stats speak louder than your damage control,most hermits don't go for ultra expensive GPU and the majority now are below PS4 level of power period,most used GPU Intel Integrated crap,most used CPU dual core,most video ram 1 GB,people like you like to show off,but with your wallet you don't support those expensive GPU.

I don't have to worry about the PS4 running or not a game 7 years from now,lets wait and see if the same can be say about the GPU out now..

QFTFT.

Specially most powerful than the PCs currently used by sheep or lems for sure.

There's your answer.

lol, el tormentos thinks PS4 version is running ultra textures settings......

Many textures such in rocks are well below high, also foliage density and detail are below high, lower quality shadows or lack there of. LOD is also lower. PS4 version uses assets from medium,high and ultra. with custom tweaking.

The PS4 and Xbox One versions of Battlefield 4 have comparable effects quality as PC on high and ultra settings (as opposed to full ultra settings). The upscale process from lower resolutions does muddy the clarity of water shaders on consoles, however.

Both Consoles use the same grade of texture quality as PC on high settings overall. Grass and rock detail and density is cut back considerably though, and draw distance for these elements is closer-field too. The PC version adds more defined shadows to the environment vs the consoles.

depth-of-field isn't as intense on PC during cut-scenes. This helps hide the cut down geometry and objects on PS4 and Xbox One at certain distances.

Quality on the PS4 is not the same as high/ultra. It a slew of low medium high and few ultra settings and lack there of.

PS4

PC

This is the life cycle of the PC vs CONSOLE parasitic argument:

1) year 1: consolites claim "most powerful thing evar" "crush pcs" ***

2)year 2-3: consolites claim "looks the same"

3)year 4 to 6: yea pc looks better but i dont wanna waste 3000$!!!11!!

4)year 6+: the new PSn XBn are gunna crush pczzz

Happens every time.

*** thanks to MS and Sony's cheap arses we were spared this initial phase, except for very few trolls

No, because it depends on the video card you are comparing it to. Consoles are a long way off from having anything looking like a GTX Titan. But then again, when you consider cost, it becomes debatable on what offers the better value.

A PC gaming computer for $400 is going to be awful. For that $400 you can get a complete separate system through PS4, as opposed to only upgrading your video card.

@-Unreal- said:

@tormentos said:

DF says the textures are equal to PC max settings nice try dude.

As far as texture and world detail go, normal mapping on the ground is identical in quality with the PC's maxed-out setting, even on larger areas where you might expect a compromise.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-battlefield-4-next-gen-face-off

Shadows are better on PC particle effects to and many other things,but mind you that they are comparing to full 1080p Ultra.

You need something good to get 60FPS on 1080p on Ultra,you can go 1080p on the 7870 but you will not get 60FPS,the 770GTX like to get 59FPS on ultra,not even the 7970 get 1080p 60FPS on UIltra.

Sssssshhhhsssss Don't use logic by steam stats the great majority of PC are under PS4 power levels,some how when hermits talk about specs and they forget not every one has a strong PC as few of them have,hell a dude on this thread just upgraded his GPU because he was one of those who could not even ran BF4 on his powerful 560TI at PS4 levels..hahaha

Few people actually can run BF4 better than the PS4 can on PC,most people don't buy ultra expensive GPU and they know it..hahaha

At least 10M steam users have GPU equal or more powerful than ps4 gpu. (therefore at least 10M PC gamers can play BF4 wth equal or better graphics and performance then PS4).

Also a HD7850 (or equivalent) is not ultra expensive GPU but rather a low-end one.

PS4 is not as powerful as high end gaming PCs, but there are no games that would take advantage of high end gaming PCs' hardware to its full potential or at least anywhere close. Thats why PS4 games look on par or better than current top PC games. It will probably not last long though.

A Core i3 3220 ( 2 cores at 3.3 ghz ) and a radeon hd 7870 will run Battlefield 4 much better than the ps4, meaning higher resolution, better graphics and at a higher frame rate. But the hd 7870 is about 25-30% more powerful than the ps4's "gpu". And I'm not sure how such a pc will hold up against the ps4 in the long run. Maybe newer games won't be kind to that i3 cpu. I certainly don't believe that a $400 pc can outperform the ps4 now or keep up with the ps4 in the long run. But a pc with decent graphics card like the hd 7950 boost coupled with an i5/i7 (sandy bridge or newer) at above 3 ghz will most likely always stay ahead of the ps4 in terms of graphical output.

@

Why not Athlon 750k? Or fx4300?

Thats why PS4 games look on par or better than current top PC games

And what games might those be?

Fx4300 offers a very good vale. I just used the i5/i7 and the hd 7950 boost as an example.

Do you think that PS4 will be upgraded? Or the magic optimisation fairy will make it breed graphics?

@True_Gamer_ said:

I do think the ps4 will be able to preform a bit better than a pc with equivalent hardware. It will of course not perform anywhere near as good as a pc with an i5/i7 (or amd fx-8xxx) with a radeon hd 79xx (or equivalent geforce gtx) Such a pc will crush the ps4, no doubt.

Try 900p in crysis and you will see that the upscaling fooling of braindead consolecasuals can work wonders "optimising" PC gaming. Upscaling and corridor games are the tricks that console game makers use to fool the casuals. I know loads of people that are convinced that all PS3 games run in 1080 just because the TV sais so.

old fart owned and destroyed.

BF 4 PS4:

It's like Hermits don't you get it? That's a $400 console. Not some electricity guzzling loud ass refrigerator PC tower. You don't have build it, mod it overclock it, scour the net for deals on parts or download drivers. You don't need to hack config files disable your anti virus. It plugs right into your TV you don't have to be stuck at a desk gettin carpal tunnel from the mouse and keyboard. You won't have to wonder when or if the next GTA or RDR will ever be on it. You'll have actual exclusives not ipad ports. You can trade games with your friends, you can rent games. You don't have to wait for a Steam sale on a trash game you already beat 3 years ago...

THAT's why consoles OWN PC all day every day. Nobody gives a shit about PC except WoW nerds and Starcraft fiends. PC gaming means doing so much more yet getting so much less; out of your system and out of life in general.

That's funny, because reviews from Gamespot, IGN, Eurogamer, Adam Sessler, Game Trailers and all agree Ryse has the best graphics of any next or current gen system lol. Suck it cow!

Gtx 780 is a $500 card and is probably 3x faster than the 7870 while the 360 outperforms the 7800gtx in most games. PS 4 is nowhere near as powerful for 2013 as 360 was for 2005.

Nor is AC 4.

If its on PS4/X1 then its next gen. Metro is not on PS4 or X1, AC4 is.

So consolers are poor,,lazy and dont know how things work...... thanks for clearing that up

@tormentos said:

@-Unreal- said:

@tormentos said:

DF says the textures are equal to PC max settings nice try dude.

@04dcarraher said:

lol, el tormentos thinks PS4 version is running ultra textures settings......

Many textures such in rocks are well below high, also foliage density and detail are below high, lower quality shadows or lack there of. LOD is also lower. PS4 version uses assets from medium,high and ultra. with custom tweaking.

The PS4 and Xbox One versions of Battlefield 4 have comparable effects quality as PC on high and ultra settings (as opposed to full ultra settings). The upscale process from lower resolutions does muddy the clarity of water shaders on consoles, however.

Both Consoles use the same grade of texture quality as PC on high settings overall. Grass and rock detail and density is cut back considerably though, and draw distance for these elements is closer-field too. The PC version adds more defined shadows to the environment vs the consoles.

depth-of-field isn't as intense on PC during cut-scenes. This helps hide the cut down geometry and objects on PS4 and Xbox One at certain distances.

Quality on the PS4 is not the same as high/ultra. It a slew of low medium high and few ultra settings and lack there of.

PS4

PC

As far as texture and world detail go, normal mapping on the ground is identical in quality with the PC's maxed-out setting, even on larger areas where you might expect a compromise.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-battlefield-4-next-gen-face-off

Shadows are better on PC particle effects to and many other things,but mind you that they are comparing to full 1080p Ultra.

You need something good to get 60FPS on 1080p on Ultra,you can go 1080p on the 7870 but you will not get 60FPS,the 770GTX like to get 59FPS on ultra,not even the 7970 get 1080p 60FPS on UIltra.

@dbtbandit67 said:

No, because it depends on the video card you are comparing it to. Consoles are a long way off from having anything looking like a GTX Titan. But then again, when you consider cost, it becomes debatable on what offers the better value.

A PC gaming computer for $400 is going to be awful. For that $400 you can get a complete separate system through PS4, as opposed to only upgrading your video card.

Sssssshhhhsssss Don't use logic by steam stats the great majority of PC are under PS4 power levels,some how when hermits talk about specs and they forget not every one has a strong PC as few of them have,hell a dude on this thread just upgraded his GPU because he was one of those who could not even ran BF4 on his powerful 560TI at PS4 levels..hahaha

Few people actually can run BF4 better than the PS4 can on PC,most people don't buy ultra expensive GPU and they know it..hahaha

Yes, just completely ignore the direct comparison screenshots in favour of an absolutely terrible website for comparisons which uses pre-rendered cutscenes for benchmarks and image quality samples.

**** me I just skimmed back over your post and you were actually talking about 59 FPS.

You need to stay out of hardware discussions because you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

i love you -unreal-

Funny the current graphics king is a rushed day 1 launch game. PC gaming is at a pretty sad state.

Why has it become a trend to say "majority don't have" and "$400 vs $400 pc"?!... You guys are missing the point of PC gaming. Customisability!

Games are great no matter what I have to play it on... But if I have a high end PC and a PS4 its a no brainer on what platform I will be getting the next multi platform game.

Consoles don't run there games on Ultra settings and nor do they run at high resolutions and if the game runs bad you have no option but to suffer through it. On a PC you don't if you have a high end PC you run it like a beast and if you don't you lower the settings and still get a smooth experience.

Also to answer the question f*** no a PS4 is good value for money like console are but nope BF4 at 1600x900 on medium settings doesn't look as good as 2560x1440 or 1920x1080 at 144Hz on ultra. Simple as that.

Fact is 70%+ of hermits couldn't run Killzone Shadowfall single player at 30fps let alone 60fps

Lmao no.

Those Intel Celeron dual cores and integrated AMD graphics could run Shadowfall at 75fps I know

I tried to run Battlefield 3 on my PC on absolutely minimum settings I was getting about 15fps.

Sad part is the 5% of hermits who actually have better visuals then PS4 live in an ivory tower and are totally unaware of the vast hermit/PC slum below them that's miles worse then anything on next gen consoles

Talk about complete ignorance.

Funny since a HD 7790 runs Battlefield 4 at 1920x1080 on medium settings at 58FPS average. That's a $120/£100 GPU, LINK.

Now look and listen to what I am about to explain right now there are 5,435,826 users on steam...

Now if you go HERE you will see a GPU section with percentages. If you add up all the GPU's better than or equivalent to a HD 7790 you will get a 18.5%... 5.4 million divided by 18.5 is 999,000. That's right now almost 1 million people just on steam who can run BF4 at medium settings at 1920x1080.

Here's the funny part... Those are just the active users right NOW!... Steam has 65 Million users. What happens when you divide 65 million by 18.5%?... 12,025,000 PC users who can run Battlefield 4 at 1920x1080 on medium settings at the very least.

That's steam alone.