Sony Playstation 4 - Impact on the PC games industry?

I think the big thing is being able to multitask properly. How many games even today can you alt-tab out of without them crashing? It's a bit of a joke really... being able to switch off the console in the middle of a game, then switch it back on and carry on where you left off is another awesome feature as well as the playing whilst downloading thing. If I could whack a mouse and keyboard in this I'd be tempted to switch tbh, use a Windows tablet for everyday stuff and jump on the desktop on the rare occasion a PC exclusive that I'm interested in comes out.

I really hope Valve have something amazing up their sleeves... a gaming-oriented operating system would be more than enough to make me happy
 
Last edited:
Craterloads said:
I think it will suffer
Click to expand...

I think this to, PC gaming will continue to suffer in terms of quality of ported games and crap support. At the end of the day for me, games are games, and tbh i don't care what they are played on, as long as they look good enough to immerse me, and runs smoothly 99.9% when it comes to performance. If that means me playing them on a console to get the better experience so be it!
 
Last edited:
Deific said:
Nuff said?

I think people are highly over-estimating the leap in visual power that new consoles are going to bring to PC.

Also seen reports that the PS4 GPU is equivalent to a clocked 7850? If so, it's laughable. My Xfire 5850's, which are going on members market for around 50 quid each put out more power than that.
Click to expand...

That's a £150 card. It's mid range, and current generation. It isn't laughable at all, not for a console. Sony don't have the luxury of putting second hand graphics chips in their systems.
 
Last edited:
Daichin said:
That's a £150 card. It's mid range, and current generation. It isn't laughable at all, not for a console. Sony don't have the luxury of putting second hand graphics chips in their systems.
Click to expand...

7850 is low range mate.

low 7850 > mid 7950/7970 > high 7990

Same as low 660ti > mid 670/680 > high 690
 
Daichin said:
That's a £150 card. It's mid range, and current generation. It isn't laughable at all, not for a console. Sony don't have the luxury of putting second hand graphics chips in their systems.
Click to expand...

My cards can only be bought for second hand, granted, go for around £50 and are now considered a low end card. I'm aware that Sony can't use the second hand market, but still - the fact that I have 2 low end cards which are cheap as chips and together out-perform the 'next-gen' of console in terms of raw power, which isn't even released for another year, just seems ridiculous to me. No doubt optimization will have a part to play, but if anything, a game would have to be poorly optimized for me to see worse performance than a PS4.
 
Last edited:
Murray said:
Consoles can't even play all the games that PCs can. So the PC as a gaming platform is no where near useless.
Click to expand...

This for me

When I'm able to play something like Morrowind + Overhaul mod, or any of the other massive back catalogue of PC games on a PS4 (plus mods:)), I'll reconsider my use of PC as a gaming platform.

Its apples and oranges though
 
660Ti and 7850 are at the higher end of midrange. Above them is high end. Below them is lower end. Anyone who says otherwise is plain wrong. The high end always has a far greater range of prices because it includes the ultra-super-niche terrible value-for-money cards.
 
Kenai said:
If a 660Ti is low end, what does that make the 610, 620, 630, 640, 645, 650 650Ti and 660? :p
Click to expand...
I was wondering this. I'm out of the loop as far as computers hardware goes now but even I know that a 7850 isn't low end.
 
I think any new console can only have a positive effect on PC gaming and gaming in general. More, better looking games for everyone - win win.
 
Warbie said:
I think any new console can only have a positive effect on PC gaming and gaming in general. More, better looking games for everyone - win win.
Click to expand...

Indeed. At the end of the day the vast majority of 'big' games these days are designed for consoles first and foremost. At present developers are making do with 512mb of ram in both the 360 and PS3, a paltry amount in anyone's view. The PS4 will bring 8GB of GDDR5 as a single example. The GPU and CPU are also far better chosen, being a much smaller bottleneck compared to the coding nightmare that was the Cell, the lackluster GPU and the stupidly-slow read speeds of the Blu-ray drive found in the PS3.

Any advancement will encourage developers to up their game.
 
Love how we still have the 'PC's dying brigade' :D

The xbox 360/ps3 didn't do it and these won't either. Big company's make a lot of money out of PC's and I doubt they (including AMD) will suddenly stop.

Plus a new console downstairs to kick back and play some games (not fps - pc only :) ) isn't a bad idea.
 
The 7850 is not mid range, it is definitely not high-mid range either, thats the 680 and 7970. The 7850 barely out performs the 6850 and is beaten by the 5850, you lot are ruled too much by price, the only thing the 7850 does better than the previous cards before it, is the fact it is more power efficient. A 7950 is a huge leap from a 7850, and the 7970 is a tiny leap over the 7950, whereas the 7990 is a gigantic leap over a 7950. Same with Nvidia, 660Ti is much better than a 7850 but it is still completely trumped by the 670, which is very slightly beaten by the 680 and all 3 of them are absolutely blown away by the £800 690 which is todays high end alongside the 7990.
 
^

Actually the 7850 out-performs the 5850, but only very slightly. However, as a 'next-gen' card, it's not very next gen. I would class it as one of the lower mid-range cards.
 
Last edited:
Yes yes, but these are consoles we're talking about, not PCs.

First - Price
Consoles are there to cater to the majority of consumers, not the enthusiasts that mid-high end hardware attract. They will not spend more than £400 on a system (as was proven with the PS3 £450 price tag fail of a launch) and as a result concessions have to be made. Chucking a £800 graphics card in there would be financial suicide for any console manufacturer.

Second - Efficiency
Consoles are just so much more efficient in terms of hardware power required for graphical prowess. Just look at what the PS3 has inside, then look at what it's capable of. God of War 3 is stunning even by PC standards (ok, low res at only 720p, but it still looks wonderful on my 42" TV) yet is running on a GPU, CPU and Ram that are just so very much weaker than what will be available to play with in the PS4.

We will see a huge leap in graphics next year, developers will have more to play with on the PS4 and thus will be able to push things further on the PC with nowhere near as much effort as it takes to improve things from the 360/PS3 to PC. I'd put money on it. Who cares whats mid, high or low end, at the end of the day it's a big step forward for the industry, something we arguably haven't seen since Crysis 1.
 
Last edited:
No chance, Crysis 1 had nothing to do with consoles and the only reason that consoles can do what they can is due to developers being incredibly lazy on PC. The PS4 really isn't going to improve graphics over what we have right now on PC by a huge margin, it'll simply output higher resolutions at faster framerates.

Deific said:
^

Actually the 7850 out-performs the 5850, but only very slightly. However, as a 'next-gen' card, it's not very next gen. I would class it as one of the lower mid-range cards.
Click to expand...

So the 6850 and 5850 are mid range cards? I don't think any of them can handle Witcher 2 on any decent settings though, nor can they max out Battlefield 3 without dodgey performance. Right now as of 2013 a mid ranged card should be able to max everything, which by rights the 670/7950/680/7970 cards pretty much can, with a few exceptions.
 
Omaeka said:
So the 6850 and 5850 are mid range cards? I don't think any of them can handle Witcher 2 on any decent settings though, nor can they max out Battlefield 3 without dodgey performance. Right now as of 2013 a mid ranged card should be able to max everything, which by rights the 670/7950/680/7970 cards pretty much can, with a few exceptions.
Click to expand...

I ran both The Witcher 2 and BF3 on a single 5850, high settings, with upwards of 30fps. I would call that 'decent' and I've already said 5850 is a high low-end card.
 
Omaeka said:
The 7850 barely out performs the 6850 and is beaten by the 5850,
Click to expand...

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/charts/2012-vga-gpgpu/compare,2947.html?prod[5733]=on&prod[5935]=on

Deific said:
^

Actually the 7850 out-performs the 5850, but only very slightly. However, as a 'next-gen' card, it's not very next gen. I would class it as one of the lower mid-range cards.
Click to expand...

More than slightly, at least 10% and up to 200% faster in everything.

Omaeka said:
So the 6850 and 5850 are mid range cards? I don't think any of them can handle Witcher 2 on any decent settings though, nor can they max out Battlefield 3 without dodgey performance.
Click to expand...

I'd say they're lower mid range, still capable of running any game at medium/high 1080p.

Omaeka said:
Right now as of 2013 a mid ranged card should be able to max everything, which by rights the 670/7950/680/7970 cards pretty much can, with a few exceptions.
Click to expand...

Why would a mid range card be able to max everything? That would render anything faster pointless.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom