Why the PS4 will have best graphics this 8th generation and much better than what a pc can do?

And DF completely sealed the fate of g-puking and his favorite plastic box with this years back:

All of which begs the question: could these new consoles run Crysis 3? Ryse delivers the full suite of CryEngine features with excellent image quality and it's still just a launch title. Given the experience of working on such a product, we have little doubt that Crytek could produce a Crysis Trilogy of sorts for next-generation consoles with few compromises.

Source

Actually, the 780 came out in 2012, the 780Ti came out in 2013.

@clyde46: Blah! Even worse. This thread is hilarious.

Well done TC.

Well done. Good Job. Unbelievable.

All wrong. 780 came out in mid-2013 and 780 Ti in late-2013 to compete against the R9 290X.

Really? Dam, I remember buying my 780Ti a few weeks before I got a PS4.

@clyde46: It came out like three weeks before the PS4. What you said makes perfect sense.

As usual. He thinks throwing random words in one sentence makes him look smart.

TC = FANBOY = FUCKING IGNORANT

My stock Gtx 780 I am using right now runs Witcher 3 at very high setting, 1440p, I repeat 1440p, and 60 fps. TC are you high. PS4 runs W3 at medium setting at 1080 and 30 fps with huge frame drops. Are you are anew local vIillage idiot ?

I call bullshit. If you enable Hairworks and put Foliage Visible Range to anything above High then your fps will tank with a 780 at 1080p. It's gonna be way worse at 1440p.

Too chickenshit to post as your main, Gpuking?

SONY decided to give us the world's most powerful video game console in the history of video games. Simple. really.

Not in your wildest dreams will a console beat a PC. PC's had better hardware 6 months after the PS4 and Xbone launched. I play mostly on consoles but this is common knowledge.

Is it really that hard to just accept better graphics are on PC?

Probably I know my specs better than you. So no bullshit. GTX780 is still very powerful card. With latest drivers it beats Titan in many benchmarks.

EDIT: I do have got one thing wrong. There isn't very high settings in W3. After high goes immediately ultra. So I had preferred higher resolution of 1440p at high settings over ultra 1080p

cows continue to make themselves look bad on system wars lol

Indeed powerful, yet they forgot to put out a bunch of good games yet lol

@jhonMalcovich: I call BS on your claim of your standard 780 beating a Titan since the 780 is a cut-down Titan in the first place.

Also

@vickysaiyajin:

Reasons why your wrong:

John Carmack quote is comparing/talking about Direct x 9 vs last gen console API with cpu overhead. Even with 4A dev with Metro is about the same thing comparing low level API vs DirectX with comparable hardware ie same cpu power and gpu power......

The fact is that Pc cpu's have eclipse consoles from 2007 onward, which means unless your running an old ass cpu consoles will never surpass, that applies again with 2009+ era cpu vs current consoles. With DX11 and the fact that vast majority of devs using same cpu usage methods on consoles negates any type of API advantage you may see in a closed low level environment. Which is why we are seeing multiplat games looking and running better on a pc with a stronger cpu and weaker and comparable gpu to PS4

Also the PS4 is not running a gpu that is as fast as a 7870 etc its abit slower, the only thing it has is that is special is its higher ACE Unit count. That 8GB GDDR5 means squat with a good chunk that memory is allocated to OS and features leaving on average 2-3gb of memory for GPU vram.

Also your clearly a noob when it comes to comparing and understanding PC hardware and claiming what have you claimed without understanding the context.

Any Pc sporting a modern AMD quad core or intel quad core cpu with a 7870 or GTX 660ti type gpus will perform better then the PS4. As for example a modern PC with i5 and GTX 970 is able to run Batllefront at 2715x1527 resolution on ultra with an average of 50 fps while PS4 is stuck with 1600x900p with settings with a mixof medium and high and very few ultra setting with fps still dipping below 60 FPS. Resolution alone is 2.8x with 970.... the PS4 even a gpu weaker than PS4's GTX 750ti is able to run 1080p with full high settings with an average of 45 fps . even a 270x is able to supply 60+ fps average at 1080p. and yet PS4's optimization means what?

also looks like your also overlooking Direct x 12 with will provide console like low level coding to all PC DX11 gpus so which means that if it had any type of advantage PS4 had with comparable hardware now will be gone and dead.

@jhonMalcovich: Proof or GTFO. You're basically claiming your 780 is faster than my former 970. Not just a bit but a lot.

The whole optimization crap has gone down the drain this generation since it has been proven that a system with GTX 750 Ti with a Dual Core CPU can outperform these consoles with ease.

And please note that the 750Ti is a weaker GPU than the one found in the PS4. And PC is using DirectX 11, a high level API compared to the low level API, GNM, the PS4 uses.

Proof of what ? That Witcher 3 runs 1440p and 60 fps on my GTX780?

No, your claim that your 780 beats a Titan.

If you overclock it with as simple tool as MSI Afterburner it does

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7356/capsule-review-evga-geforce-gtx-780-superclocked-acx/2

I did so it works form pretty much equal or close to Titan performance.

Yes, on the flipside I can also OC the Titan.

And the difference will be only like 5 fps. Even at stock speeds gtx780 and Titan are just 5 fps apart.

With latest drivers the difference is even less.

5? I'm seeing around 8fps difference according to Anandtech. Still the point remains, the Titan is faster than your 780 at stock and when OC'd so why did you claim your 780 was faster?

@vickysaiyajin:

Windows 10 is a free upgrade for Windows 7/8/8.1 users and it's comes with DirectX12. JohnC made his pro-console statement prior to AMD Mantle and MS DirectX12.

@jhonMalcovich: That you run it at High and 1440p at 60fps.

My stock 780 is faster thant TItan becuase I overclocked it with MSI Afterburner. I meant my OC 780 is capable to outperform Titan, which is true. the difference of 8 fps between Titan and GTX is at 1080p. At higher res, the difference is getting smaller. So overclocking slightly 780 beats Titan.

Ps4 has the power of a 780gtx? That explains why the ps4 underperformed so badly. I can't believe people actually put effort into writing the dribble...

Well it's not actually at steady 60. It's more or less between 45 and 55, which is good enough for me.

lol stop trying to not claim your fam

@MonsieurX: cause if you see multiplats a ps4 runs many games even better than gtx 980ti. example toukiden kiwami and batman AK

@MonsieurX: http://wccftech.com/witcher-3-initial-benchmarks/

gg a titan more powerful than a gtx 780 does only 30 fps in witcher 3 lolololol a 1000$ card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqSATR1L098

and on 2x titan sli in crysis 3 a 3-4 year old game in 1080p drops to 55 fps at even at non demanding sequences.Imagine what a gtx 780 wil do lolololol.

@ronvalencia: still directx12 doesnt do shit and is still terrible compared to a consoles api.And for staters windows 10 os costs 120$

^now he's really not trying

perhaps pc gamers are trying to prove that pc is still relevant in gaming world

No, not even remotely close, even when AK was all fucked up it still ran better, far better.

The Titan is a notoriously expensive card not worth at all what it costs, and it's always outdone shortly by something much less expensive not to mention the architecture is dated. On top of this the GPU in the PS4 is based upon GCN so it's not even comparable to a 7850 as that is not a GCN based card. It's more in line with a dumbed down R9 270/R7 260X as that is the replacement for the 7850/7790 with GCN architecture. The Witcher 3 on PlayStation 4 after 8 patches still does not maintain 30 FPS, it still drops to the mid 20's, not to mention it's running at what would be the equivalent of medium with some high settings, not even remotely close to Ultra settings and all that comes with.

That benchmark you posted is from a garbage website, it's no Guru3D who is the absolute last word in the PC hardware industry in terms of hardware reviews. At 1920x1200 (A higher resolution) the Average FPS for a Titan at Ultra settings is 40 FPS, this is also with shit undeveloped drivers at the point of release and before the game was subsequently updated 8 more times. You're reaching really hard right now for something that's never going to come, the PlayStation 4 GPU is not even remotely as powerful as a Titan, no where close.

You're delusional as shit.

@vickysaiyajin: Keep dreaming

You win the award for biggest meltdown on SW

It's funny the things some people will talk themselves into believing because they refuse to accept reality

Mummy only buys them one console a generation so they have to hype it no matter what!

pretty much this, but xbone isnt always the limiting factor, often times the low end pcs are. DICE LA already had to downgrade the dragon valley remake coming with the bf4 holiday patch because low spec pcs couldnt handle it.

killzone also has much better AA than battlefront(although killzones aa has already been completely outclassed by other developers). the fxaa is just pure shit as everyone knows, and the taa is borderline broken as beyond being so incredibly blurry it makes nvidias old quincox look absurdly sharp by comparison, it also has the worst ghosting ive ever seen in a video game.

@Juub1990: ahahaha. bf4 does not use PBR. PBR allows developers to make materials that respond to light in a more realistic manner across a variety of conditions. theres no longer any need to manually tweak the diffuse, ambient, specular, etc maps of every single material for every single lighting condition. unfortunately the effectiveness of this is tied to the developers having good source materials for their PBR implementation. thats why the current results vary so wildly. also, lots of developers are claiming their crap is PBR when little(if any at all) of the the art was authored for it and very little of their lighting pipeline is physically correct to begin with(usually only specular.)

@zeeshanhaider: no it doesnt, what they said was that a very select part of their lighting pipeline was physically accurate. none of the art was authored with PBR in mind tho so its moot.

I'm pretty sure PC's had better hardware when the PS4 and Xbox one were first announced let alone 6 months after they were launched.

@nyadc: Batman AK was not fucked up.Pc hardware is fucked fucked up.

don't kid me lol batman arkham knight is terrible on any pc and full of stutter and frame pacing issues.Unless you use gameworks ps4 and xbox version has better AA and rain effects on suit.

si yeah xbox and ps4 played the game way better than a pc.

in terms of raw power ps4 is a enhanced hd 7870 or a r9 270x.It is gcn based architechure and has more Compute units tand gddr5 than hd7870.witcher 3 on ps4 runs solid 30 fps now and not to mention 30 fps on console is smoother than 30 fps on pc or a stuttery unstable 60 fps.

The article is not garbage.And yeah a gtx 780 struggles to hold 35-40 fps in any game like batman ak,witcher 3 and when games like final fantasy type 0 are brought up it even gtx 980ti drop and plays in 10fps

or 9 fps.So comparing multiplats is pointless cause many multiplats run better on consoles compared to pc.

comparing true optimized power of consoles a xbox one can reach gtx 760 whereas a ps4 can be as good as gtx 780(according to jon carmack and many dev's).

And I am a pc gamer and can post the specs of my rig

so you stop living in delusion and accept reality.