DF: Black Ops Cold War PS5 vs PC

To sum it up you can't spot the difference in a $400 PS5 vs a $2000 PC without pausing the game and pulling out a magnifying glass.

THHBO

Ooohhh... in before the PC crowd start making excuses. A first for me.

PS5 also has the controller advantage too. So we can throw in Lems in the ownage too.

Very true. Lems have even been trashing their new controller.

Is that magic $499 3070 even exist?

Well isn’t it up to the devs to push a game to do better on more capable hardware? 🤷‍♂️

DF doesn't even bother with the XSX now because it can't hang with PS5 or PC.

It is like a support group in here. 😂🤣

The console been released for just 2 months and we're already getting graphical settings lower than the lowest available on pc LOL. What went wrong?

@NathanDrakeSwag: So all you can do is shitpost a bs reply to my post then? All righty then troll, gotchya. 👍

“On the AMD side of things, I found the RX 6800 XT's result to be off-pace - it has 72 compute units vs the 36 inside PlayStation 5, it's based on the same architecture, and clock speeds are broadly equivalent, yet it delivered just 29.4 per cent of extra performance.“

RDNA2 is so silly. The 6800XT has twice the CUs and only offers a 29% bump over the PS5. This also kinda adds fuel to the fire regarding the Series X performance. The Series X has a hefty CU count advantage, but a 400MHz clock speed penalty compared to the PS5. Well now it’s all but confirmed the clock speed > CU count with this architecture. If a 36 CU advantage at the same clock speed only yields a 29% gain, how does a 16 CU advantage with a 400MHz disadvantage compare?

RDNA2 is looking SUPER suspect right now. The Xbox team better be on the phone looking for answers...

And that hippie from Gamer Nexus might wanna brush up his resume

Once again it comes down to the price argument. Got anything else? No? OK bye.

Look I'm happy you're happy driving around a Honda Accord, I really am. But don't hate us if we want to drive a Corvette or Ferrari instead.

So you're using a mouse and keyboard now?

...No?...

...Then no advantage. The rumble gimmick is cool, don't get me wrong, but I don't see how it is advantageous.

Stay strong, brother.

Oh so now you are throwing the lazy dev excuse for PC?

If this comparison would be for the xbox you would be saying how great it is doing for sure.🤣

Near 3070 performance not bad for $400 vs a PC that obviously cost allot more.

@tormentos: Didn’t say that they were lazy, simply saying that the only thing this proves is that the devs didn’t push the PC version. Is that not an accurate conclusion to make? 😐

@tormentos: Of course it will keep up with the 3070 when there are graphical settings lower than low 🤣

And this is just CoD we're talking about. What about an actual demanding game? And spoiler, the SSD won't help.

Medium / low and doesn't even run fixed 4k. Ew.

Thats not true watch the video, the PC version has higher setting in many things over the PS5 version, they version match as much as possible but PC was still doing a little more work still.

But for $400 dollars vs that PC is quite an achievement.

Now Sony fannies think the PS5 is near RTX 3070 performance....

Rumble gimmick? Shows how much you know about the PS5 controller 😄

It is a gimmick. You are just in denial. 😂🤣

I feel sorry for these jealous fanboys calling the crown jewel DualSense controller a gimmick just because they can't get their hands on one.

@tormentos: The PC has a whole range of configurations and performance levels. The PC version can very much outperform any console version if the devs push it hard enough. Again is what I’m saying inaccurate? 😐

Funny, I am calling it a gimmick and I have one. 😂

Quick, find another defense. 🤣

*sigh*

fine, fine...."haptic feedback" gimmick.

*it does rumble though, right?

@Pedro: Sony Defense Force, activate! 😅

lol it's running at dynamic 4k with most settings at medium, some lower than low or off with no RT ambient occlusion and RT shadows missing in some scenes.So the PC can't even completely mimmick PS5 settings to get a complete accurate comparison. Did you cows not pay attention to the part where digital foundry said they weren't the using the RTX cards to their full strength by having DLSS enabled? The RTX 2070 Super which was performing worse than the PS5 began to outperform it by 10 fps in DLSS quality mode. Now what do you think an RTX 3070 is going to do with DLSS when it already outperforms it without it.

I am beginning to think our ps5 is very underpowered. Thanks god the SSD will save the day, tho.

Did you really claim ownage on Call of Duty? Call of Duty? LMFAO

Alex also said the PS5 is running effects at a quarter resolution which has a rather large impact on performance whereas the PC can’t drop that low.

He stresses that it’s not a 1:1 comparison and that he’ll try to test how much performance is lost on PC as a result.

PS5 is probably 2070S level overall with all settings matched.

That could explain the disparity. Those are bandwidth-heavy effects that run at a quarter resolution on PS5. PC can't go below.

I guess they keep comparing pc to PS5 instead of the weakboxSX because they don’t want any more death threats from the psycho Xbox fannies after exposing how much shittier it is.

@Juub1990: I wonder how shitty the Xbox would do in comparison with its missing smoke, missing muzzle flashes and low quality shadows ?

PS5 is the premium call of duty experience.

So, the PS5 is running particles at 25% resolution of PC and DLSS is not even being used for better performance on PC.

There are no bragging rights to be had vs. PC.

Honestly I love both the look and performance of the last two COD games.

Lol, facts. Knew exactly how this thread would end up with the usual cow suspects.😂

i’ll wait till they compare the elite console and pc,not this 9.2 tinyflops shit

hah

It doesn't keep up is actually slower than a 3070, i never claimed it keep up, i say NEAR which is true.

Meanwhile they don't even lose their time testing your 40% stronger xbox series X.

Well from this comparison it is, now define NEAR.

No you know what you did and it backfire.😂😂😂

Your 40% stronger series X got ignore by DF they skip it in favor of the better performing console.😂

I am sure the new dev kit will save you.

But but but 40%..

Ignore him he is mad because DF didn't even care about the xbox and went straight for the PS5 for making the comparison, so much of the strongest console ever make.🤣

@tormentos: You're wrong on so many levels

The console is running graphical settings lower than the lowest available on the pc, just like the ps4 pro, and you're talking about the series X 🤣

Regardless, at the top end, an RTX 3090 delivers an 81.2 per cent boost to performance in this segment at equivalent settings, while RTX 3070 is just 8.6 per cent faster. An RTX 2070 Super can't match PlayStation 5 - in fact, it's 20 per cent slower.

On the AMD side of things, I found the RX 6800 XT's result to be off-pace - it has 72 compute units vs the 36 inside PlayStation 5, it's based on the same architecture, and clock speeds are broadly equivalent, yet it delivered just 29.4 per cent of extra performance.

And this explain why your xbox series X perform worse..🤣

Oh that fast and narrow approach sure worked for sony, wonder how MS feel about this.

@tormentos said:

@hardwenzen said:

@tormentos: You're wrong on so many levels

The console is running graphical settings lower than the lowest available on the pc, just like the ps4 pro, and you're talking about the series X 🤣

Regardless, at the top end, an RTX 3090 delivers an 81.2 per cent boost to performance in this segment at equivalent settings, while RTX 3070 is just 8.6 per cent faster. An RTX 2070 Super can't match PlayStation 5 - in fact, it's 20 per cent slower.

On the AMD side of things, I found the RX 6800 XT's result to be off-pace - it has 72 compute units vs the 36 inside PlayStation 5, it's based on the same architecture, and clock speeds are broadly equivalent, yet it delivered just 29.4 per cent of extra performance.

And this explain why your xbox series X perform worse..🤣

Oh that fast and narrow approach sure worked for sony, wonder how MS feel about this.

My Xbox? You're trying too hard. Here's a video for you

Who the hell would want to play a FPS with a gamepad? M/KB will always be better. Also who the hell cares about the COD series it's responsible for the dumbing down of the FPS genre along with Halo.

LMAO @ cows who think their precious toy is an 3070 equivalent while conveniently leaving out the low than lowest on PC and not even 4K.

In reality with the same effects and RT it's performing worse than 2060.

Like clock work, Sony fannies deflect to Xbox.😂🤣

"Bu buh but Xbox"

Poo TC. lol :P

Herms be getting worked up over a game most of them probably don't even play and couldn't tell the difference even if it was right in front of them 😀

Sorry bro no you lived by the sword you die by it.😂

To late for backtracking..

Regardless, at the top end, an RTX 3090 delivers an 81.2 per cent boost to performance in this segment at equivalent settings, while RTX 3070 is just 8.6 per cent faster. An RTX 2070 Super can't match PlayStation 5 - in fact, it's 20 per cent slower.

DF also make pretty clear the settings are not an exact match but the closes they could get.

It's an interesting exercise, but in this case mostly an academic one in several respects. Beyond the issue we have in precisely matching settings and where we can't access dynamic resolution scaling on PC (more's the pity!) it's not entirely representative of actual use-case scenarios.

In AC Valhalla a 2070 super wasn't a match for the PS5 either it was much slower as well, so for $400 dollars you simply can't ask more and you can't deliver better results on PC for that price.

Take into account than in 2013 a 7850 was beating the PS4 without much effort, and that was lower than mid range back then.

Either way near 3070 is ok by 8% or 40% thats one good ass GPU.

Define near.🤣