Console XBOX ONE X Series or pc ?What faster

DeliciousStorage · 1 Apr 2020 at 16:14

Grim5 said:
who said 250 is mid range?

Good point, probably closer to £200. The best way to define mid range would be to look at the most common graphics cards, from the steam survey that would be GTX 1060 level of performance.

Scougar · 1 Apr 2020 at 16:52

The only question is: Do you want a Console or a PC, and which one suits your usage ?

I keep buying consoles, and then they just sit there, not being used or very rarely when family comes round for thanksgiving or something.

I edit video, write code, browse the web, go on forums etc, edit pictures and play games. A console doesn't fit all those for me personally.

Not to mention, controllers suck for First Person Shooters.

Scougar · 1 Apr 2020 at 16:54

Robert896r1 said:
XSX will comfortably out perform the PC equivalent hardware due to it being a closed system with custom development tools designed to maximize the hardware. As developers gain more experience and the toolset matures the games will continue to look better. That's why 2nd gen console games are decidedly better looking than launch period games as 2nd gen games tend to be developed from the ground up on the platform with a mature toolset.

Comparing raw specs of a console and PC equivalent has limited use due to above.

This. Each game will be tailored for performance and looks, and will get MUCH better optimizations compared to the PC equivalent.

Shawreyboy · 1 Apr 2020 at 17:24

DeliciousStorage said:
Good point, probably closer to £200. The best way to define mid range would be to look at the most common graphics cards, from the steam survey that would be GTX 1060 level of performance.

If we are quoting on tflops, the current Xbox One X is already more powerful that a GTX 1060... One X has 6 flops and 1060 has 4.4 so its current equivalent is a around a 1070. Series X figures are quoted at 12tflops which a 2080 is very near to (twice as fast as a 1070) so given the figures quoted the Series X is somewhere around a 2080 or slightly faster which means they are right in saying it is twice as fast as One X.

Shawrey

Little_Crow · 1 Apr 2020 at 17:32

There is also the £10+ extra often charged for console games over PC - though monthly game passes might favour console gamers with a better catalogue and platform exclusives.

On the flip side, if you're not someone who has to have the latest AAA title on release, then the competition between the various PC vendors can lead to some decent discounts - so a plus for PC.

Controllers are fine for driving/piloting vehicles, but for everything else it's keyboard and mouse for me, and I've been gaming far too long to change now, so consoles just aren't of interest

ic1male · 1 Apr 2020 at 17:39

Crikey, is he back again. OP had a PC last month and had to sell it due to financial reasons. So here we go again it seems.

Perfect_Chaos · 1 Apr 2020 at 18:12

Scougar said:
This. Each game will be tailored for performance and looks, and will get MUCH better optimizations compared to the PC equivalent.

We'll see, i still think a 3070 should be faster for at least 2+ years as it will be priority for optimisations. No doubt DF will have frame rate comparisons later this year.

Hedge · 1 Apr 2020 at 20:11

ic1male said:
Crikey, is he back again. OP had a PC last month and had to sell it due to financial reasons. So here we go again it seems.

Im sure I remember him just asking constant questions in the past. About literally every detail. I was convinced he was just a troll.

Grim5 · 1 Apr 2020 at 20:12

DeliciousStorage said:
Good point, probably closer to £200. The best way to define mid range would be to look at the most common graphics cards, from the steam survey that would be GTX 1060 level of performance.

lol no, mid range in 2020 is 400

the gtx1060 is a entry level at best, it's equal to current consoles only, that's low end stuff mate

Scougar · 1 Apr 2020 at 20:33

Perfect_Chaos said:
We'll see, i still think a 3070 should be faster for at least 2+ years as it will be priority for optimisations. No doubt DF will have frame rate comparisons later this year.

Just to be real clear here... 'Optimizations' might include things like removing scenery, shrub removal, tricks like they play with lower res rendering etc, lesser quality textures. They might even have hardware AA built in to avoid that plenty. The higher end PC will still be faster, and LOOK BETTER, just the software will take every single scrap of performance from that set configuration and make it work for them like trying to support hundreds of different PC configs can't.

darket · 1 Apr 2020 at 22:10

Scougar said:
The only question is: Do you want a Console or a PC, and which one suits your usage ?

I keep buying consoles, and then they just sit there, not being used or very rarely when family comes round for thanksgiving or something.

I edit video, write code, browse the web, go on forums etc, edit pictures and play games. A console doesn't fit all those for me personally.

Not to mention, controllers suck for First Person Shooters.

I know exactly what you mean , i have a pile of consoles, i play the odd game but they mostly just sit there .

I think microsoft have made a critical error , they said with this release that their main competitors were the pc , and platforms like stadia (not so much imho) and it's been happening for a while with 'elite' controllers and allowing mouse and keyboard, i have many friends who have been devoted console players (all but casual gamers) and the one thing they all loved was the level playing field , everyone had the same hardware and microsoft want to dilute that and i think in doing that they'll shoot themselves in the foot.

I'd hazard a guess that the vast majority of pc gamers will never make the switch to a console anyway, the prices are high and the choice poor dependent on the genre , most triple A console games are dire, for example Cod MW looks amazing but the gameplay is just awful and the same goes for pretty much every console shooter , no good rpgs , no good strategy games , no mmo's , lack of indy games , flight games , space games , i could go on forever.

b00merang69 · 1 Apr 2020 at 22:14

@ OP

A little outdated but fact remains the same (all the hardware inc PC has moved on).

DeliciousStorage · 1 Apr 2020 at 22:19

Grim5 said:
lol no, mid range in 2020 is 400

the gtx1060 is a entry level at best, it's equal to current consoles only, that's low end stuff mate

Do you have any logical reasoning to back up your claim that mid range is £400 or are you just disagreeing with me based on a wild guess? Mid range is defined as the arithmetic mean of the largest and the smallest values in a sample or other group. Steam survey is a pretty good sample to look at, so how from that do you come to the conclusion that £400 is the average?

mmj_uk · 1 Apr 2020 at 22:38

PC will have more bottlenecks due to the PCI-E and DRAM architecture. CPU and GPU basically aren't as well integrated with one another as the consoles will be.

I think PC's are becoming less and less attractive for gaming and the next generation will only accelerate that decline.

james.miller · 1 Apr 2020 at 22:57

DeliciousStorage said:
Do you have any logical reasoning to back up your claim that mid range is £400 or are you just disagreeing with me based on a wild guess? Mid range is defined as the arithmetic mean of the largest and the smallest values in a sample or other group. Steam survey is a pretty good sample to look at, so how from that do you come to the conclusion that £400 is the average?

You cant define where a card sits within a range based on sales, you would do it based on performance.

Grim5 · 1 Apr 2020 at 23:30

DeliciousStorage said:
Do you have any logical reasoning to back up your claim that mid range is £400 or are you just disagreeing with me based on a wild guess? Mid range is defined as the arithmetic mean of the largest and the smallest values in a sample or other group. Steam survey is a pretty good sample to look at, so how from that do you come to the conclusion that £400 is the average?

wut... so if someone came on here saying I want to buy a mid range gpu your answer would be to go buy a 4 years old second hand gpu?

you obviously don't know what the term "mid range gpu" means, it has absolutely nothing to do with ownership statistics

DeliciousStorage · 2 Apr 2020 at 00:09

Grim5 said:
wut... so if someone came on here saying I want to buy a mid range gpu your answer would be to go buy a 4 years old second hand gpu?

Where did I say that? What I would do is look at the most popular cards from each generation and their launch prices, then find an average price. Obviously I wouldn't pick a 4 year old card, I would pick the best value for money card at a mid range price. You couldn't just say that because the GTX 1060 was mid range then the 3060 is going to be mid range even if they increase the price to £400. The GTX 970 is more popular than the GTX 960, but in the next generation the GTX 1060 is more popular than the GTX 1070 because they increased prices and shifted everything up a tier.

james.miller · 2 Apr 2020 at 00:45

DeliciousStorage said:
What I would do is look at the most popular cards from each generation and their launch prices, then find an average price.

That doesn't tell you anything about the cards in question. If you are going to segment cards in to tiers then it HAS to be based on performance, it's the only way.

DeliciousStorage · 2 Apr 2020 at 00:51

james.miller said:
That doesn't tell you anything about the cards in question. If you are going to segment cards in to tiers then it HAS to be based on performance, it's the only way.

Don't be absurd. Mid range is determined by popularity, and popularity is mostly determined by price/performance. By your logic, if they released a generation of graphics cards at £100, £200, £5000, £10,000, £20,000, you'd be recommending a £5000 graphics card for a mid range system.

james.miller · 2 Apr 2020 at 00:56

I'm afraid it's you who is being absurd. You are believing the most popular cards sit in the middle of the range but that is never the case. Consumers spend whatever they can justify, that says nothing about the mid range in pricing OR performance and since price doesn't ever scale 1:1 with performance then you can't use price either; it has to be performance.

DeliciousStorage said:
By your logic, if they released a generation of graphics cards at £100, £200, £5000, £10,000, £20,000, you'd be recommending a £5000 graphics card for a mid range system.

Of course. If would be the mid range card. Do I think that would make it the most popular card? No, not necessarily...but that's a different question.