Another "Xbox One & PS4 a generation ahead of high-end PCs, says EA exec"

Calin Banc · 23 May 2013 at 10:53

Get your BS detector Stalker, 'cause we shall find some disturbance in the zone:

http://www.vg247.com/2013/05/23/xbox-one-ps4-a-generation-ahead-of-high-end-pcs-says-ea-exec/

“ “These architectures are a generation ahead of the highest end PC on the market. Our benchmarks on just the video and audio performance are 8-10 times superior to the current gen.

The compute capabilities of these platforms and the data transfer speeds we can now bank on, essentially removes any notion of rationing of systems resources for our game engines.”

Yaayuh! · 23 May 2013 at 10:57

AHahahahahahahahahah1!!!
NO.

Uncle_Gravy · 23 May 2013 at 11:01

And this is coming from EA....Oh dear.

My fave comment if you scroll down that page

Well, if your precious Xbox One and PlayStation 4 come equipped with a built-in cheese sandwich maker I would say he’s right. That’s something I’ve always wanted in my PC.

Calin Banc · 23 May 2013 at 11:02

Well, in he's last world, may he just admit that - frack this, we have enough power again not to optimize future games that much.

VIPER258 · 23 May 2013 at 11:02

OMG! Talk about hype.
I guess I should sell my comp I paid over £1600 for and buy a PS4 and Xbox One. Lol

Darujhistan · 23 May 2013 at 11:05

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

jb7 · 23 May 2013 at 11:16

Yeah, that's why the consoles will output 1080p for games max. And in doing so, will be locked at 30fps.

All the new consoles will do is raise the lower bar again. That new amazing looking game on consoles? Get the PC version, increase the resolution (it already looks better), and increase the textures to max (now it looks a lot better)

Let's not forget that 1.6ghz jaguar cpu aka atom equivalent aka tablet cpu will be the heart of the new systems for at least 6 years... I can see it bottlenecking things within 2 years

rare · 23 May 2013 at 11:19

How stupid. They will say anything for the right price!

Judgeneo · 23 May 2013 at 11:21

lolEA...

andybird123 · 23 May 2013 at 11:30

I can believe certain benchmarks of the Xbox One being 8-10 times higher than Xbox 360, the 360 had around 300GFLOPs, so he is basically saying the One has around 3000GFLOPs... the problem with this is that just one 7970 / Titan has well over 4000GFLOPs

I can't see consoles making up for a 30% shortfall in raw performance with just optimisations... and then bear in mind that a true high end gaming PC often has 2 of these cards and runs at a much higher resolution or with more AA...

the one thing that consoles have this time around is more available RAM, which MIGHT mean that they are able to increase texture quality more than they otherwise would have, but PC's will still be able to match and use these textures

LurkingWeasel · 23 May 2013 at 11:36

Is this his attempt at justifying why PC gamers won't be getting the Ignite engine in their version of FIFA? :rolleyes:

XeNoN89 · 23 May 2013 at 12:47

In terms of architecture, hes pretty much right. However PC still obviously has far more power & performance

spoffle · 23 May 2013 at 12:52

andybird123 said:
I can believe certain benchmarks of the Xbox One being 8-10 times higher than Xbox 360, the 360 had around 300GFLOPs, so he is basically saying the One has around 3000GFLOPs... the problem with this is that just one 7970 / Titan has well over 4000GFLOPs

I can't see consoles making up for a 30% shortfall in raw performance with just optimisations... and then bear in mind that a true high end gaming PC often has 2 of these cards and runs at a much higher resolution or with more AA...

the one thing that consoles have this time around is more available RAM, which MIGHT mean that they are able to increase texture quality more than they otherwise would have, but PC's will still be able to match and use these textures

There's very little point in taking much interest in what these people say, however your examples aren't quite in the same area context wise.

It'll be in reference to 1080P gaming, where the sort of high end dual card set up really isn't necessary, additionally, the overheads of PC is very high, awfully so.

The level of optimisation is the same, PCs over come this by pure brute force of hardware power.

Given the same specs, a console with games written specifically for that console, typically run faster on the console compared to the PC.

IE, if you try and compare a 7870's performance to what we'll get with PS4, it's pointless as a PS4 will make much better use of the available power of a 7870 GPU than a PC would ever see.

opethdisciple · 23 May 2013 at 12:56

It's bs, they just want to hype it to make sales, thats all.

Locky · 23 May 2013 at 12:58

EA exec, I welcome you to my house, bring your best console and lets bench.

What a complete moron, oh wait.. we already knew EA is run by morons.

Locky · 23 May 2013 at 13:00

spoffle said:
Given the same specs, a console with games written specifically for that console, typically run faster on the console compared to the PC.

Faster is the wrong word, don't forget the 1080p max res and 30 fps lock down.

kaku · 23 May 2013 at 13:02

Same story every generation.

"This new console is so powerful we can do anything in the world and we'll never have to worry about anything!"

Dicehunter · 23 May 2013 at 13:03

What made me really laugh is when we saw the next "state of the art" CoD graphics, I swear I saw better than those graphics on Crysis 1, 6 years ago lol

spoffle · 23 May 2013 at 13:04

Locky said:
Faster is the wrong word, don't forget the 1080p max res and 30 fps lock down.

I'm not forgetting the res, I even specifically mentioned it.

As for 30FPS, I'm not taking that in to consideration because it's not a hard lock.

So I would say faster would be the correct word in that, typically if you're getting more FPS than is necessary, you can do one of two things, lock the FPS and save a bit of power, or increase the graphical quality, as an excess of FPS typically allows for that.

You know, slightly better view distance, or LOD in the distance, those sort of things.

Locky · 23 May 2013 at 13:07

spoffle said:
I'm not forgetting the res, I even specifically mentioned it.

As for 30FPS, I'm not taking that in to consideration because it's not a hard lock.

So I would say faster would be the correct word in that, typically if you're getting more FPS than is necessary, you can do one of two things, lock the FPS and save a bit of power, or increase the graphical quality, as an excess of FPS typically allows for that.

You know, slightly better view distance, or LOD in the distance, those sort of things.

I'm yet to see a console game on a console look anywhere near as good as the pc version.