Sections

PS4 “will out-power most PCs for years to come”, says Just Cause dev

Monday, 11th March 2013 05:09 GMT By Brenna Hillier

Avalanche Studios chief technical officer Linus Blomberg has great faith in the PlayStation 4′s hardware, as well as Sony’s plans for the new console’s business model.

Speaking with GamingBolt, Blomberg said that a new console cycle is always “very exciting”, and this one is well overdue.

“The consoles desperately need a boost since having been overtaken in terms of performance by PCs several years ago, and also losing market share to mobile platforms,” he said.

“I’m glad Sony decided to go with 8GB RAM because it means that the PS4 will out-power most PCs for years to come.”

That statement makes a lot more sense when you remember that gamers tend to have much more powerful PCs than your average consumer, a mass-market PC developers have to factor in when making games scaleable. It seems Blomberg was in general quite impressed with the hardware.

“The off-the-shelf philosophy behind the architecture makes sense from a pricing and heating point of view, but it also means that Sony more easily can make incremental improvements of their system,” he noted.

“If that’s actually their plan I don’t know, but it could help preventing the inevitable loss of market shares that the long console cycles entails.”

Blomberg also showed enthusiasm for Sony’s vision for the PS4′s business model.

“The PS4 will not only be a very powerful gaming machine from a hardware perspective, but it will also be a social tool and integrated marketplace more akin to the successful mobile devices,” he said.

“It’s the best of all worlds in a way; great performance for demanding high-end gaming, good social ecosystem and connectivity, and integrated business marketplace.

“For Avalanche Studios as an open-world games developer this is super exciting and opens up many new opportunities. It’s a perfect fit for the types of games we do, and we are confident that we’ll bring open-world gaming to a whole new level because of it.”

Avalanche is believed to be working on Just Cause 3 and a Mad Max game. It is likely to reveal one or the other over the next few months, probably at or leading up to E3 2013 in June, as it’s been dropping teasers.

Thanks, GameInformer.

Latest

96 Comments

  1. G1GAHURTZ

    I’m sure it will, since ‘most’ PCs aren’t used for gaming.

    #1 2 years ago
  2. Diingo

    I saw my brother play Far Cr 3 recently on the 360… whoah, that 8 year old hardware is really starting to show its age. I miss the days of getting excited over new consoles, its been so long that I almost forgot the feeling.

    #2 2 years ago
  3. xxJPRACERxx

    He used the 8 GB RAM to prove his point? Majority of PC have that as standard now. And what about CPU and GPU which already are much more powerful on PC… And why bother, Patcher already said the next xbox is gonna win! ;)

    #3 2 years ago
  4. G1GAHURTZ

    The majority of PCs in the world have nowhere near 8GB of RAM as standard.

    #4 2 years ago
  5. Hirmetrium

    @4: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey says that the majority have 8GB. 22.62%, with 9.01% for those having 12GB and above. The other 50% indeed linger in the 2-4GB region.

    #5 2 years ago
  6. Phoenixblight

    @3

    http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey?platform=pc

    That’s 22% of the people on Steam and those that did the poll. Its definitely not a standard as majority of people have below 8GB and this is just those that use steam and took the poll.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. Hirmetrium

    Phoenix, suggest an alternative then. I’m inclined to believe anybody who plays games on their PC is likely to use Steam, and those who don’t are in the minority. Can only work with the resources available :P Assuming that a good “selection” opts in, it should be accurate enough.

    #7 2 years ago
  8. Vice

    Weeeell I dunno, this sounds like a bs to me… I have 12 for example…

    #8 2 years ago
  9. Phoenixblight

    @7

    Its not a standard 30% has 8GB or more and as I said that is just those that are doing the poll which you have to actively pursue to do. I know I haven’t done a poll since last fall.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. smoke.tetsu

    Amount of RAM != the Power of my system. My current outgoing system has 12GB of system RAM but that doesn’t make it powerful enough to run next gen titles. In fact I’m upgrading to a newer system because of that.

    The whole VRAM situation on PC is another fine example of this. You could theoretically have as much VRAM as an old card can adress installed to it but it’s not going to make it as fast as a newer card for newer games.

    He is right about one thing though, the PS4 is probably going to be more powerful than the average computer that a person is using if enough people refuse to upgrade to newer hardware for one reason or another.

    I’d be surprised however if on brand new systems that people didn’t buy at least 8GB of RAM preinstalled. On my new system I’m getting 16 with a few slots free so I can upgrade later on.

    It’d be kind of great though if all one needed to boost their system beyond what it could do originally is just keep on adding RAM if the amount of RAM did equal how much power the system has. We’d never have to upgrade to newer hardware then just keep adding RAM!

    #10 2 years ago
  11. KrazyKraut

    Where is Erthazus?

    #11 2 years ago
  12. Phoenixblight

    If you look at the steam numbers and compare them to the Ps4 specs and this article would be right. It will certainly be more than powerful than the majority of PC gamers at least from that Steam poll.

    #12 2 years ago
  13. smoke.tetsu

    In other words just adding RAM to a system wont make it more powerful than another system if the rest of the hardware is not up to snuff. Otherwise I could take a 5 year old system.. equip it with 96GB of RAM and have it outperform a PS4. Since having more RAM would exponentially increase the power right?

    Not that I’m pro-console just that those are the facts. That’s not how RAM works…

    My current GPU has 512MB of VRAM but I know even if I somehow where able to equip it with 8GB or more of VRAM it still wouldn’t be fast enough to carry me into the next few years with new titles due to the GPU itself being long in the tooth and not supporting enough features to take advantage of new titles at playable framerates.

    #13 2 years ago
  14. Timurse

    Oh come on guys! Don’t try to play idiots here, puhleeeez. PS4 has 8GB of GDDR5 memory. Which type your 12GB machines have? What speed specs for the memory you have?

    #14 2 years ago
  15. G1GAHURTZ

    @5:

    Even for gamers on Steam, that poll clearly shows that around 70% of them have less than 8GB of RAM.

    So thanks for emphasising my point even more so.

    If that’s true among gamers, what about people who only use PCs for online shopping and email?

    #15 2 years ago
  16. smoke.tetsu

    Does it even matter what they have if they don’t game? Unless they do productivity stuff that’s RAM hungry like in the scientific field or 3D rendering.

    Also, even if the majority of steam users have less than 8GB of RAM there’s nothing stopping them from deciding to upgrade if they need to. Nobody is married to their systems and can upgrade at any time.

    But even so.. like I said more than once already. Simply upgrading their RAM wont suddenly make their system more powerful. In terms of power RAM is the bottom of the chain even if you can slap in the same kind of GDDR5 ram into a PC that the PS4 has. If the rest of their system is not up to snuff they are just not going to compare..

    I must sound pro PS4 at this point don’t I? Far from it… I just realize the facts… and RAM is not the only factor that determines power. Far from it.

    #16 2 years ago
  17. Max Payne

    But not all 8gb will be available for games. 1 or 2 gb will be reserved for OS and graphic GPU.
    So developers will probably have 4-6gb to actually use for games.

    #17 2 years ago
  18. Phoenixblight

    @17

    Its shared and the PS4 has Vram as well for the GPU not to mention a console OS doesn’t need as much Ram as a standard PC’s OS does.

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-spec-analysis-playstation-4

    Developers have been saying the OS uses about 512 Ram when windows 7 and 8 use roughly 2Gb right out of the box.

    #18 2 years ago
  19. Kalain

    Could it be that most people never upgraded beyond 4Gb because the vast majority of games didn’t use more than 2GB of ram?

    #19 2 years ago
  20. Max Payne

    @19 Yep. Most games are consoles port so they are already ”optimize” not to use more then 1gb :D

    #20 2 years ago
  21. roadkill

    But my 2 year-old PC is already better than the PS4. So how can it out-power even THIS generation!? I’m not even talking about the components that we’ll be able to buy in 6 months.

    #21 2 years ago
  22. peteb

    @14 Totally spot-on. Everybody here is missing the point that its 8GB of DDR5 RAM, not DDR3.

    #22 2 years ago
  23. Hirmetrium

    @15: Remind me why you are attacking me then? I was providing a source of information. There’s no need to be rude.d

    I’ve never seen speed of RAM make a difference, probably because nothing is designed to use RAM speed. May be different in the PS4′s case (designed ground up for high-speed RAM).

    #23 2 years ago
  24. Malmer

    Not having to constantly copy stuff back and forth between system memory and video card memory like a PC ought to make a huge difference as well. Having 8 GB of memory like that gets rid of a big bottleneck.

    #24 2 years ago
  25. Fin

    ERTHAZUS MODE: ON

    lol ps4 sux cant run crysis 3 on ultra on 2560×1600 with my 12gb gtx 780 at 60fps. 8gb? LOL i have more graphics memory in my phone (that can do Metro 2033 at 1080p 60fps). go back to halo black ops u retarded fanboys. i cant play anything at less than 2560×1600 60fps or i might die.
    cod sux but i still played it for 500 hours

    #25 2 years ago
  26. smoke.tetsu

    @22 If you are counting me in that assertion then you are reading what you want to read and not actually what I’m saying.

    Also as shiny and new as the way they are using GDDR5 RAM is I bet that’s not the thing that would give the PS4 its performance edge against competing systems. Rather the other hardware in their system and any software optimisations they may have that other systems may lack…. especially if the system it’s being compared to haven’t been upgraded for a long time. On the other hand it can only help I guess.

    But it’s probably not going to be the single factor that causes the PS4 to outperform everything else on the market.

    I just can’t help but feel this debate over the amount of RAM and how much power it provides comparing one system to another is kind of silly when other factors of a system are actually more important. On the other hand if one doesn’t have enough RAM then even newer hardware can struggle.

    #26 2 years ago
  27. mistermogul

    “That statement makes a lot more sense when you remember that gamers tend to have much more powerful PCs than your average consumer”

    But his statement that PS4 “will out-power most PCs for years to come” is irrelevant for the “average consumer” segment of the market as they don’t play games!

    #27 2 years ago
  28. KrazyKraut

    @Fin
    i lol’d and then i lol’d again

    I mean…look what is possible on the PS3 (256 RAM) or X360 (512 RAM). I even would have problems to run uncharted or Gears with 1 or even 2
    GB RAM on the PC i guess.

    #28 2 years ago
  29. Samoan Spider

    Hmm, but there’s a flipside to this. When dev’s properly optimise their code to comfortably cope with multiple 64 bit cores, the current accepted performance of your average gaming PC will jump. But there’s no denying the PS4 is a powerful beasty (and 720 I guess when we know more). Its very likely to out perform the average PC for a fair while though so I have to agree. ‘Years to come’ though? Not so much. But who cares, I’m a gamer so I’ll game on whatever I have :)

    #29 2 years ago
  30. Lord Gremlin

    Well, PS4 is 8 gb of DDR5. Modern high-end PCs have up to 5 GB of DDR5 (top Nvidia cards). So for a while PS4 will be on par/a tad better than the beefiest of PCs.
    Soon enough, PC will move ahead BUT – most PCs out there are not high-end gaming rigs.
    Plus, iron level coding people. No drivers. 512 mb of RAM on console yields you same as 4 GB on PC. Granted, PC moved over 4 gb a while ago, hence consoles are left in the dust, but that’s something to consider. Once PCs will start to get 32 gb of DDR5 then PS4 will be left in the dust too, but that will take several years.
    P.S. People seems to confuse DDR3 and DDR5 here. DDR3 at this point ain’t worth shit.

    #30 2 years ago
  31. DrDamn

    @23
    I think G1GA’s point was that 22.62% is not a majority. The majority have less.

    @29
    Why hasn’t that happened already – or what’s changed which will make this happen now? We’ve had multiple 64-bit cores for a while haven’t we? (genuine curious question)

    I’m not going to get into the power-nomics of it all. Just going to point out that another dev is pointing out that 8GB is good and very useful to have.

    #31 2 years ago
  32. manamana

    Lol’d@fin and GHz is bang on. April26 can’t come soon enough to see what M$ has in store for us.

    #32 2 years ago
  33. Samoan Spider

    @31 You’re right, we’ve had them for a long while now. But the software needed to be engineered to manage the 4-6-8 cores and that hasn’t happened in many cases except your hardened PC devs and even they don’t always get it right. I don’t know why but the list of genuinely multi-threaded games is quite short. Even 90% of games are 32 bit not 64 bit for what its worth. Now that the console market is moving in the right direction, the leg work will be justifiable and the PC will benefit from the end result.

    Oh and weighing in on the RAM front. I have 4gb. I could do with 8 or maybe I’d go to 12 and remove my pagefile entirely but my system copes well enough. Will the PS4 be better? You’re damn right it will be. But as the sum of its parts. Not only because of the 8gb. Its important, but not the be-all and end-all.

    #33 2 years ago
  34. smoke.tetsu

    @33 Which is what I’ve been saying all along but is seems to be conveniently ignored for the most part! Most people around here seem to be hung up on RAM alone as if it’s the single deciding factor.

    #34 2 years ago
  35. DrDamn

    @33
    One of the key advantages a console has is that it is a fixed system, so devs can look at the ram and say *everyone* will have this. That will impact game design in a way that won’t happen currently on an 8Gb PC. When a game is running on and using 8Gb it is usually a game designed for a 2 or 3Gb machine trying to use the extra memory as best it can, not a game designed for 8Gb from the start. That will help somewhat in terms of power, but a lot more in terms of design and gameplay.

    #35 2 years ago
  36. twisted89

    I’m going to assume this guy has just smoked too much crack and doesn’t understand you can actually upgrade PC’s unlike consoles and that GDDR5 RAM doesn’t automatically make something a super computer.

    #36 2 years ago
  37. Samoan Spider

    @34 Well I thought I’d reiterate what you’d said but I had noticed it was getting glossed over. As a very long time PC owner and tinkerer (since my first 286 50mhz), I decided long ago that having tons of RAM was a fools errand for what I needed. Because it isn’t the magic bullet.

    @35 I agree and whilst optimisation is hard for a PC because of the broad hardware base, I can’t help but feel that having solid multi core and large memory addressing built in will be good news.

    #37 2 years ago
  38. G1GAHURTZ

    @23:

    Edit: I’m just saying that the majority actually have less than 8GB.

    Sorry if I sounded rude.

    #38 2 years ago
  39. LordSkyline

    @*Several of you*
    GDDR5(Graphics Double Data Rate v5) is NOT = DDR5 (which would be Double Data Rate Gen5), DDR4 isn’t even out yet. While yes the point does stand that GDDR5 has higher transfer rates than DDR3 (even that depends widely on the Chip it is used with), it is not =DDR5.

    #39 2 years ago
  40. Ali

    Avalanche studios just joined Erthazus’ black list of shitty and dormant devs.

    #40 2 years ago
  41. Erthazus

    @G1GANOOB, You are an idiot. end of story.
    Ram is the cheapest thing in the PC. Next year 8 GB Of Ram will cost 40$
    I had 8 GB Of DDR3 since 2008 and it was not for gaming.

    Also, why you are an idiot. because “CLICK ON THE RAM” thing and you will see that a lot of people have more then just 8 GB OF RAM.

    for example 9% of Steam Users already have more then 12.

    My PC right now have 16 GB Of Ram and 2 years later I will have 32 or maybe 64.

    #41 2 years ago
  42. silkvg247

    At first I laughed, but then I realised yeah, probably not that many hardcore PC builders out there. Mainly laptop users and mid range desktops.

    #42 2 years ago
  43. noherczeg

    So it will outperform them because they pack a nice HW in it, and that is the whole reason? How stupid is this??

    If the PC gamer who has shitty hardware and wants to play something decent in the future he/she’ll upgrade, and bamm, there goes all your statistics about what’s up CURRENTLY on the PC market.

    The sad fact is that there is a significant part of those who didn’t upgrade yet, because the low-end console HW capped what devs could do with games. Just look at Crysis for example. The first installment still looks awesome, Crytek even said that CE3 is capped due to CURRENT hardware limitations. Chances are (plenty of people have proven even above, but in general too), that if someone has bought a decent PC one or two years ago, he/she’s still able to play anything at 1080p and 30+ FPS on at least medium settings.

    So what I’m saying is, that there isn’t really a big need currently to have a beast PC, because software doesn’t really rely on it (with a few exceptions).

    #43 2 years ago
  44. Erthazus

    Funny stat: 3840 x 1080 – 20% Of people on Steam using multi-desktop resolution. These guys are hardcore.

    how much NEXT-GEN consoles will do? Yeah right. 1080p. Welcome to 2001 year.

    #44 2 years ago
  45. Dragon246

    8GB GDDR5 RAM costs upwards of (estimated around 110-140$). Its maybe the MOST EXPENSIVE part of the PS4.
    So it definitely as a major improvement.

    http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=514688

    A 500$+ gaming machine for 400$? If true, then sign me up.

    #45 2 years ago
  46. Fin

    @41

    Dang, forgot to work the word n00b into someone’s name.

    Think I was on the nose otherwise 8)

    #46 2 years ago
  47. roadkill

    Erth I don’t know why you bother going into detail. These people buy consoles. It’s like talking any kind of tech to a farmer. He’ll never understand what you’re talking about. He’ll still be happy that he has a tractor though.. :) So let them drive their tractors while we drive our Porches. ;)

    #47 2 years ago
  48. smoke.tetsu

    @45 Because being more expensive automatically makes something better right?

    If anything what would make it better is anything but. I know there’s the old adage “you get what you pay for” but not always.

    Also the higher the number in the name the better it is obviously!

    #48 2 years ago
  49. RocknRolla

    #3 xxJPRACERxx
    Did you even read the entire thing? They can do a lot more with 8 gb memory now compared to before, yes PS4 will look a lot better than most PC´s out there but of course there will be some bad ass PC´s that will look just slightly better, but the price that are going to be on those PC´s are you willing to pay 5 times more than a PS4 will cost? don´t think so, I have high expectations for the PS4 now that the developers are happy with the “developer friendly” system they can´t complain and are going to HAVE to make even greater games, that is good for us “gamers” don´t you all agree? I wish all the best for the new Xbox but I have been with Playstation since the very start and am looking forward to PS4 :) <3

    #49 2 years ago
  50. Dragon246

    @47,
    Exactly. I like tractors, especially the big ones that convert a Porsche into scrap in one go 8)

    #50 2 years ago
  51. Dragon246

    @48,
    So you know more than the devs that have seen the real deal, working on it for months/years, and liking it?

    #51 2 years ago
  52. livewired500

    The article makes sense. PS4 should fall in around a medium spec PC. Should compare to a $1200+ Laptop, or a $1000 PC for around $400-500 off the shelf. They will probably lose a couple few hundred bucks on each machine.

    The only issue is that by the time the PS4 hits the shelves the next gen CPUs and GPUs will be out, but really only a small percent of high end gamers will upgrade right away.

    #52 2 years ago
  53. Strabo

    @39 Adding to this, GDDR 5 isn’t used in PCs as system RAM because it would have zero benefits outside of GPUs (so APUs would profit, but they again are far too limited by the processing power to justify the expense of big bandwith RAM), because a CPU isn’t bound by the RAM bandwith at all (for the part where it needs extremely fast memory modern CPUs have lots of cache). That’s why PCs only use GDDR 5 for where it makes sense – the GPU.

    Since the PS4 will use RAM for both the CPU and the GPU it does indeed profit from it – but only because using normal DDR 3-RAM for the GPU would be slowing the whole thing down.

    #53 2 years ago
  54. Samoan Spider

    @53 And just to add to what you’ve added, MS might do some clever things here to overcome the bandwidth deficiency in DDR3 by using a small amount of ES/EDRAM in there as they did with the 360.

    Anyway, has anyone stopped to think what would happen if the distro that Valve uses for its Steambox can be dual-booted on a gaming PC. I presume its likely an opensource product anyway. So my point is, how will the PC fare when you get rid of the huge OS overhead?

    #54 2 years ago
  55. Dragon246

    @54,
    ‘So my point is, how will the PC fare when you get rid of the huge OS overhead?”
    You cant. And that’s the problem. Windows games needs windows to run, and windows needs ram+gpu+cpu to run. That is a part of the reason why similarly priced PCs just cant compete with consoles, ever.

    #55 2 years ago
  56. Samoan Spider

    @55 But then why are Steam pushing a linux based distro with the Steambox if nothing will work on it? They’re betting big on this so you can bet your arse they’ve covered bases. So now you’ve got Steam games running on a non windows system. Linux can be a lot thinner in terms of overheads anyway, so assuming Valve deliver on what they’ve promised, why does Windows need to be involved?

    #56 2 years ago
  57. freedoms_stain

    @55, he said Dual-boot the Steambox distro on a Windows PC.

    Presumably if Valve were building a custom Linux distro for their own hardware they would minimise resource usage of that distro.

    DamnSmallLinux fits in 50mb with a full graphical UI and a ton of software included and can run entirely within memory of 128mb or greater.

    I’m not saying Valve are going to hit anything like that light, but the possibilities for an extremely light OS are there when you’re using Linux.

    #57 2 years ago
  58. smoke.tetsu

    @51 I never claimed as such. Besides, there has always been developers who like console hardware and that doesn’t factor into how better or worse it is than the PC in the long run except when they decide to make games console exclusive. Why try to attack me personally just because you disagree with what I had to say?

    @54 I find it interesting that people claim operating systems have huge overhead when most of the time their CPU cycles go idle most of the time and even when running games only a certain percentage of it is even used a lot of times. You’d think the CPU would always be working hard given the HUGE overhead that operating systems have right?

    What I would hand them however is that perhaps having the hardware abstracted away by API layers isn’t as efficient. But guess what? Some consoles do this too. Like say, Xbox 360. Microsoft does not allow direct to the metal programming but did that make the PS3 1000x more powerful than the Xbox360 in multiplatform titles?

    #58 2 years ago
  59. DrDamn

    @56
    “They’re betting big on this”

    I’m getting growing feelings that no they aren’t. As an idea I love it, but for it to really work well they would need to chuck everything at it. I don’t feel from recent comments and statements they are doing that – it sounds much more like a cool little project and less like a serious effort to compete with Sony/MS in the home console arena.

    #59 2 years ago
  60. Dragon246

    @56,57,
    We know how little support for linux is in comparison to windows dont we?
    I am saying, Valve cant pull this off imo, at least not at the scale many people are expecting. I don’t even think Valve can sell more than, lets say 5-10 million max. Why would someone support an entirely new OS just for such a small fanbase?
    Sony and MS broke their way through console biz through sheer money power, and to this day sell new (early in gen) consoles at a loss. I can bet nextbox and ps4 will be sold at a substantial loss, and Valve cant afford that.

    @58,
    Dont take it as an attack mate. But you certainly were saying something on the lines that- “It doesn’t matter”. And devs disagree with you, and they know better, don’t you think.

    @59,
    I agree. They are not doing anything to generate even an iota of hype. It really seems like a prototype project. It may damage their rep though even steambox doesn’t stand upon the grand expectations of their fans.

    #60 2 years ago
  61. G1GAHURTZ

    @The Latvian:

    1. Logic is wasted on you.

    2. Learn to count (as well as spell).

    #61 2 years ago
  62. smoke.tetsu

    @60 That’s what I call a failure of understanding as what I said there had more to do with the hardware itself and less to dow with how much it costs. All I was saying in that moment was “the capabilities of the hardware count more than the price”. Understood? Good.

    To be frank I do kind of think the whole GDDR5 thing is a tad overblown. But why does it even matter what I think? The facts will speak for themselves.

    And how do you know I’m not in the industry? ;) That’s a little presumptuous of you to put some people on a pedestal and assume I’m a nobody. Devs are not infallible authorities.

    #62 2 years ago
  63. PC_PlayBoy

    Consoles are shit. There is no comparisons.

    #63 2 years ago
  64. Dragon246

    @62,
    You misunderstood at first. I mentioned price in response to a guy though erroneously thought that gddr5 ram is cheap, and you took it in an entirely new direction.
    And all I am saying that the improvements matter. PS4 is better than current-gen, its next-gen. Thats all I said. And I completely and humbly disagree with you if you are saying otherwise because that is plain wrong.

    #64 2 years ago
  65. Samoan Spider

    @60 I know how little support there is for Linux, and I’m really having a pie in the sky moment with that thought process but my point is that if all the promises come true, could it not be interesting? However I do agree that things aren’t looking quite so rosy and I’m also worried it might not be what we’re hoping/expecting. Anyway, hope for the best and expect the worst and you’ll never be disappointed.

    @58 Just a point of contention. When a system is idle, its idle. My CPU will sit at 0% and maybe spike a few percent as services do their thing, but yes, its idle. With 2gb+ sat in memory. Then when something gets asked of the processor, the CPU starts doing its thing. Now, the difference between what the process is actually using and what the system says its using is the overhead. That’s the point. When Windows is asked to do something, there is the process running, then there’s all the services’/process’ running on top of that to make it happen. The overhead is there and it IS huge.

    #65 2 years ago
  66. Dragon246

    @65,
    Problem is that many people (not you) are really thinking steambox to be the god console, which it just cant be.
    This year is probably the most exciting one in a very very damn long time :)

    #66 2 years ago
  67. Samoan Spider

    @66 Agreed, good times ahead for gamers

    #67 2 years ago
  68. smoke.tetsu

    @65 Well, here’s the thing… just because all those services are in a list and can be ticked on or off that doesn’t mean they are all active and taking up CPU time at all times. Otherwise there would be no idling, period. It is true however that operating systems have generally speaking taken up more overhead than having no OS. That’s simple logic.. however, I do think in modern days just how much is kind of overestimated. Usually by people trying to put down the PC platform in favor of consoles.

    BTW about the Steambox.. as far as I’m concerned it’s really just a living room PC and not really a console.

    #68 2 years ago
  69. freedoms_stain

    @60, there’s not much support, but with Valve backing it has more potential to grow than ever before.

    Plus, we don’t know what Valve are doing, they could be working on their own Wine-like compatibility layer built specifically for gaming. Similar to GoG tweaking and testing old games on modern hardware before they sell it, Valve could certify Windows games in their compatibility layer before selling them as Linux compatible.

    #69 2 years ago
  70. Samoan Spider

    @68 Well I’m objective in the sense that I see good and bad in everything, but these days I’m almost fully invested in PC gaming. I agree that the services aren’t all running even when enabled, but perhaps my definition of a huge overhead is unfair as I’m particularly sensitive to the loss of any cycles not dedicated to the game I’m playing :). In the same way that Erth et al need to learn that the consoles are not the scourge of evil that they’re made out to be and they’re actually looking very good. Perhaps a touch of the Ubermensch attitude wouldn’t hurt people. Make your own decisions and live with them without forcing your will and fanatical ideology on others.

    @69 and Valve have hired Linux devs to port games over so its not impossible to imagine it working.

    #70 2 years ago
  71. smoke.tetsu

    Here’s something else that has to be considered though. Many people play a game on the PC at much higher settings than the equivalent game is expected or allowed to run on that a typical console and then turn around and think it’s all due to overhead of these little demon services and APIs stealing away all their precious CPU cycles.

    Stuff like raising the resolution and settings probably has a lot more overhead than those little services do.

    For many people if a PC can’t do more than what a console can do then it’s not equal. If a PC can’t run Crysis 3 at 60FPS @ 1080p or above then it’s not as good as a console running the same game at reduced settings at 720p @ 30FPS it seems.

    #71 2 years ago
  72. Dragon246

    @69,
    “there’s not much support, but with Valve backing it has more potential to grow than ever before.”
    You also know how famous (or imfamous :P ) Valves gaming output is. I understand that Valve name can pull a few indies, but Steam on windows will always be there, and that will be the bread and butter for indies and Valve, not steambox.

    Here is a theory/speculation from me, I think Valve is taking this step not because they want to, but because they are forced to, by none other than MS, makers on windows, the most popular PC OS in the world. MS is slowly but surely making a move to make windows an app store like thing, where they are the major (not only, because anti-competition lawsuits are nothing to scoff at, ms recently was fined a massive 700 million $) provider for everything. This would put Valve in a really bad place. So they are preempting that and expanding their bases with linux, a freeware.

    #72 2 years ago
  73. Samoan Spider

    @72 I would agree but substitute MS moving to apps for Apple making a move to console like gaming. I think there’s another dog in this race and people are not watching it or missing it.

    @71 Yup, you’ve got a point there. Thing is, I play PC games on my TV. I’d rather have 720P/900P on max settings with a perceptibly better looking game, than a slideshow at 1080p just for the sake of it.

    #73 2 years ago
  74. smoke.tetsu

    @73 On the other hand.. finances permitting you aren’t stuck with having to use those settings as a PC is typically more upgradable than an average console. So it’s not really a choice between 720p\900p at max settings with playable frame-rates or 1080p or above as a slideshow unless you are strapped for cash. :)

    #74 2 years ago
  75. Dragon246

    @73,
    But what would Apple (or in that case valve)do that sony,ms or ninty are doing now?
    Lets see. More competition is better for consumers, so I am definitely not complaining 8)

    @74,
    Most people are indeed not interested in 1000$ pc gaming, they other more important stuff to deal with and just dont want to spend that much on gaming, that’s why consoles are best for them, as they pay for a hardware once and get great performance at a reasonable price for more than half a decade.

    #75 2 years ago
  76. Samoan Spider

    @74 Well having an 8 month old daughter has focused my money spending elsewhere. And forever more. But yes, its my choice to game at mostly 900P with eye candy. All it would take would be a processor upgrade and I’m there comfortably because my card is already up to scratch. But that’s kinda the whole point isn’t it? PC gaming is always about choice. Console gaming isn’t. Some people like the tinkering and the power of choice. Some like simplicity. Neither is wrong.

    @75 Well Apple could paint a turd silver and someone would buy it. But competition is good and I’m all for it.

    #76 2 years ago
  77. sagtlthl

    @25
    LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL, very funny, you made my day

    #77 2 years ago
  78. Dragon246

    @75,
    I dont think so mate. Looks like they remember Pippin everytime they see consoles :)
    Audiences are completely different. I totally see them doing mediocre outside portable/computer biz.

    #78 2 years ago
  79. Moonwalker1982

    I guess i’m not gonna argue with a dev that has seen and examined the devkit no doubt, but aren’t PC’s pretty much always more powerful and better? I thought that was pretty much a fact for like…well since PC came and consoles.

    #79 2 years ago
  80. theevilaires

    You know they more I see that controller the more I like it.

    #80 2 years ago
  81. deathm00n

    @79 Just read the headline again “PS4 will out-power most PCs for years to come” most PCs aren’t high end. And I know for sure it will out-power 100% of mine and my friends computers.

    You people should learn to read what’s really written. He never said it will be more powerfull than every PC. It will be more powerfull than the regular PC your mom uses to play The Sims 3 and you brother to play Call of Duty, but I doubt it will be more powerfull than the PC you will use to play The Witcher 3.

    #81 2 years ago
  82. Bomba Luigi

    I hate stuff like this, its just confusing. A PC can have very diffrent Hardware inside, there is no Norm of how much Power a PC has, and the Hardware is too not used the same way as in a Console, its all very diffrent.

    To what Kind of PC does he compare the PS4? I can see that the Average PC will be behind the PS4, but if someone feels like to put some Thousand Bucks in Gaming Machine he will probably have no problem outpowering the PS4.

    Its just confusing. Consoles and PCs are so diffrent things (just diffrent, no Side is better then the other), why want people always compare them in silly ways?

    #82 2 years ago
  83. xxJPRACERxx

    Hey Samoan Spider, just to point out it’s impossible to have a 286 running at 50 MHz!

    #83 2 years ago
  84. Samoan Spider

    @83 You’re quite right. It was 1986 to be fair. Must’ve been a 12mhz. It was my 486 later on that was 50mhz. I remember having to map out the 640k of RAM I had every time I wanted to run a game that flipping needed 1k more than I had available at that moment. Good times though.

    #84 2 years ago
  85. blackdreamhunk

    consoles = Ice queen

    Pc gaming = Borg queen

    Borg Queen meets Ice Queen

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAHW7GMbgLg

    all the sony PS4 willing be doing is standardizing 8 gig ram for all new games. By the way ram is very cheap now a days $ 50 will get you 8 gigs of ram.By the time the ps4 comes out it will be even cheaper for the pc.

    #85 2 years ago
  86. Cobra951

    @55: Right. But it goes much further than that. PC games have the practical necessity of a hardware abstraction layer. On the other hand, a console has a fixed hardware configuration, and can dispense with the likes of DirectX entirely. It can be used directly by the game software. The difference this makes in performance potential is huge. It’s the reason why current consoles, nearly 10 years out of date, can still surprise us with good-looking, fluid games. The hardware tech may be fixed, but the software tech is not. Game engines continue to optimize the ways in which they get into the hardware.

    Now imagine a console with this same advantage, and with hardware brought up to date. At first, a lot of middleware will keep it looking not much better than what it replaces, but as time goes by, and devs learn how to get into the chips themselves, it can far outstrip what a HAL-saddled PC of the same vintage can do.

    #86 2 years ago
  87. Hybridpsycho

    “PS4 will out-power most desktop PCs for years to come.”

    It won’t however “out-power” most gaming PC’s for years to come. Anyone who has a PC for gaming that costs just a little more than a console has a better piece of hardware for gaming than the console.

    #87 2 years ago
  88. nollie4545

    There is NO FUPPING WAY a PS4 is going to out gun even a 3 year old modest desktop PC with a half decent discreet graphics card. End of story. Even if the PS4 had DDR7 RAM and 256GB of it, there is just no way the CPU and on die GPU from AMD is going to touch the combined poke of a multicore CPU and an on card GPU with about 3.5 billion transistors. I just can’t be done- its been tested, AMD on die GPU cannot touch even last gen graphics cards at high resolutions, forget it. Even a GTX 560ti and a X4 AMD phenom can utterly hammer an AMD APU into the ground the moment a game is brought into the equation.

    You talk about OS overhead and other crap like it is a performance killer- W7 is probably the most lightweight application a gaming PC will run today. Seriously, W7 will barely cost 2% of one core whilst running and maybe at maximum 2GB of RAM. Your average gaming PC has a heap of cores and more RAM than any application can use. I have a heap of recent games and NONE of them take my CPU anywhere near the 50% mark on all cores simultaneously. Gaming is just not that CPU intensive at the moment and processor technology is advancing all the time, what costs 400 bucks today will only be 200 in two years time.

    Seriously, PS4 fan boys, don’t con yourselves that your console is going to suddenly mean you can play Crysis 3 at 60fps and with quality settings on ultra. That just isn’t possible with the hardware they are going to put in this console. If you wanted that kind of performance you’d need a GPU which will probably cost $1000, or more likely, twice the cost of your console at launch.

    #88 2 years ago
  89. TheDarkWeapon

    @49

    Oh boy, I remember those comments from the PS3 now XD, makes me giggle. Remember the fact that PS3 was a SUPER COMPUTER!!!! that would not be matched IN GENERATIONS, and that it baked bread??

    Those statements came in when PS3 hardware was above that of the PCs back then ( 7SPE with unified memory architecture and blazing fast computing power )… CELL MAN… CELL

    The PS4 is not even selling itself like that today, it has CURRENT PC hardware, something you can grab on the store right now (go out check it).

    That “developer friendly” system you are talking about it’s probably running on a PC right now, and that same system is probably going to be used for PC-Console and Console-PC ports.

    That’s why I don’t understand your comment, PC can be upgraded, if you have a PC now, just upgrade some parts… why would you want to pay 5 more times when you could just spend $200 dollars on another GPU and sli or xfire… :/, you don’t make any sense right there.

    #89 2 years ago
  90. v3nture

    Despite the fact that this is false, what really bothers me about this is that the PS4 will be using a more advanced AMD apu. AMD’s strongest APU, A10 5800k, only manages 60fps in Arkham City on high settings, not ultra, no AA, and only at 720p. Even if the APU in the ps4 was to do 4 times better than that, which is a huge step in terms of performance, would still be beat by any low-mid end CPU and a 7850/nvidia equivalent. Also, the Unreal Engine demo that Sony showed was clearly running at lower settings compared to the PC one Epic showed off which was running on a 680.

    #90 2 years ago
  91. Cobra951

    @90: Not to endorse bringing a thread back to life after 2 months, but I must say that 60 fps, properly synched, is *exactly* the one and only correct frame rate on a 60Hz HDTV. Anything more is wasted. Anything less will jitter, judder or stutter.

    #91 2 years ago
  92. Christopher Jack

    @90, I don’t know why you brought a 2 month old article back to life but the PS4 also has a Radeon 7870. With this precise architecture being focused on for the PS4 it could deliver visual results similar to a GTX 660Ti or Radeon 7950.

    #92 2 years ago
  93. GPTurismo

    There are a few points people are missing. Yes, GDDR5 is amazing, but the 8GB of ram is shared between system and gpu. The same is for the Xbox One, but it’s shared memory is GDDR3 which makes me worry about gfx performance.

    On top of that, the CPU, GPU and Memory all talk to each other directly with an open interconnect versus having to bottleneck data through controllers and buses. That is an amazing thing that I wish would come to PC’s of all levels of performance. It really is a critical flaw in the x86 architecture unless you go with a custom system such as this.

    The direct interconnect will make the system shine. Do any of you know if the XOne has a similar set up?

    #93 2 years ago
  94. nollie4545

    GDDR5 is not amazing, it is used for GPU memory for a reason. DDR3 is used for system RAM for a reason.

    Anyway, lets get this down in writing so you consolers understand it: PC performance today is bottle necked by CPU clock speed and GPU clock speed. Even a GTX 680 cannot saturate a PCiE 2.0 bus. Memory speed or latency is still no issue on a modern motherboard, the transfer speeds are insanely quick. I have seen rigs benchmarked with memory of hugely different speeds and the gain in gaming FPS is almost non-existent. Its like a formula one team trying to make their car go faster by using different colour paint.

    The main problem consoles are going to have is that the whole idea of an APU is a cheap, quick and easy one. If it was that good, gaming PCs would all have APUs, this technology is not new, its been in many consumer gadets for years.

    Secondly, the other thing consoles are going to suffer from is there dependence on a good old fashioned mechanical hard drive or worse, optical drive. So no real improvement on last gen load times, no matter how good your magic dirt cheap APU system on a chip is.

    PC gamers had access to complete ready to use motherboards with soldered on CPUs and graphics processors and sound processors over a decade ago. They were good value but ultimately they died out; no one wanted to be held back by an ancient and non-upgradable piece of hardware.

    If all these ‘buses and interconnectors’ were so slow and such a performance mangler, then Intel would not be using the very same technology in massive server systems attached to thousand dollar CPUs- it would all be system on a chip. Only it isn’t.

    AMD have given both console makers a solution which is cheap and cheerful, I bet a combined system using Intel and Nvidia components would have cost them double.

    #94 2 years ago
  95. Rockin a Jack D

    From Siliconera:

    Final Fantasy XV is being created at a quality higher than next-gen consoles are capable of, and the game is being ported down to consoles capable of running DirectX 11. Nomura specifically says that Square Enix will consider releasing the game for other hardware capable of running DirectX 11 as well.

    We’re going to assume that a PC release for FFXV is a very serious possibility.

    http://www.siliconera.com/2013/06/25/final-fantasy-xv-will-be-considered-for-any-hardware-that-uses-directx-11/

    Consoles always have and always will be inferior to PC’s.

    Can’t believe that so many gamers buy into the Sony/MS PR bullshit. It’s all spin…

    #95 2 years ago
  96. wargodadams

    This is a joke. If you take all the PCs out there, yes, this statement might be true. If, however, you take only the PCs that are used for gaming a large portion of PCs already out-power the PS4. Like the Nvidia guy said, “300 watts is never going to compete with the 3 and 4 times that much power that PCs are capable of.”

    PCs are capable of raw horse-power that consoles will never put out. That said, you are going to pay a premium for that additional power. If he’d have just said, “I’m glad Sony decided to go with 8GB RAM because it means that the PS4 will out-power most PCs for years to come-with roughly comparable price-points.” I’d be fine with the statement.

    #96 1 year ago

Comments are now closed on this article.