As always with ANY company that flogs cpus,gpus, etc.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
As always with ANY company that flogs cpus,gpus, etc.
I mentioned it in the context of AMD GPU development, as what the console does gives us the best insight as to what we can expect from the next RDNA GPUs, so let's not go off-topic into PC vs consoles. But let's be clear, a PC would wipe the floor with a console from a value perspective, and it's not even close (and without a single used component, because then it would just plain unfair for the poor console). The only advantage for a console is around simplicity of use, nothing more.
Funny how you forgot to mention the £50/year you have to pay for for basic functions on consoles. So if we assume you keep this for 4 years until PS6 then that's another £200 you have to add to the costs for PS5P.
Feel free to add another £30 for M/KB + OS key (even though it can be got for free - legally) to the PC. Still lower than the console. Never mind over a longer timeframe..
Feel free to add another £30 for M/KB + OS key (even though it can be got for free - legally) to the PC. Still lower than the console. Never mind over a longer timeframe..
I mentioned it in the context of AMD GPU development, as what the console does gives us the best insight as to what we can expect from the next RDNA GPUs, so let's not go off-topic into PC vs consoles. But let's be clear, a PC would wipe the floor with a console from a value perspective, and it's not even close (and without a single used component, because then it would just plain unfair for the poor console). The only advantage for a console is around simplicity of use, nothing more.
Funny how you forgot to mention the £50/year you have to pay for for basic functions on consoles. So if we assume you keep this for 4 years until PS6 then that's another £200 you have to add to the costs for PS5P.
Feel free to add another £30 for M/KB + OS key (even though it can be got for free - legally) to the PC. Still lower than the console. Never mind over a longer timeframe..
You built a good system there for that money but that 4060 Ti is not going to cut it vs the PS5 Pro, Linus made the same argument and built a system for about the same money, with a case, a used case, and an RX 7800 XT, even with that he struggled to keep up with the PS5 Pro performance just in raster, RT blew it out of the water and in raster the RX 7800 XT is a solid 40% faster than the 4060 Ti, its even 15% better in RT.... so yeah, if an RX 7800 XT can't match a PS5 Pro a 4060 Ti is way out of it.
You need a 4070 S, at least. That's £550 minimum just for the GPU.
Last edited:
Actually, it's about on par with the 2080 Ti. Realistically it's even worse than that because on PC you can tweak it better and that doesn't include the RT differential nor DLSS quality advantage. So I'm being generous with the 4060 Ti in fact (I'd have chosen the 4060 if not for the 8 GB vram). After January it's going to be even worse for the PS5P.
Source
Soldato
At the most with RDNA4 I'm expecting a 7900XT at around 400-500 quid with better RT and lower power consumption.
1 of the head fellers said he wants to massively up market share and he's not going to do that at over £500 what with food, water, gas, electricity, rent, tax etc... going up and up and up, 400 quid would be ideal as they'll fly off the shelves and his market share comment will happen, He needs to keep the prices down or RDNA4 will be an instant fail on launch day.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,868
Keep dreaming man, AMD love to milk as much as the next guy. And that next guy is Nvidia.
7900 XT is probably a bit too much but maybe in the right ballpark. It's similar to what we sometimes see as a difference for 7900 XT vs 7800 XT & 7800 XT vs 6800 XT, so in the 20-30% faster range.
Considering we saw 7800 XT launch at $500, a 7900 XT (minus 5-10% performance) with 16 GB Vram, better RT, better acceleration for FSR4, launching around $500 wouldn't be too wild. Maybe $450 if they're aggressive. $400 would be hard to imagine given that they're hungry for better margins and they just fired a whole bunch of people at Radeon precisely for that reason.
Definitely wouldn't mind it though.
Actually, it's about on par with the 2080 Ti. Realistically it's even worse than that because on PC you can tweak it better and that doesn't include the RT differential nor DLSS quality advantage. So I'm being generous with the 4060 Ti in fact (I'd have chosen the 4060 if not for the 8 GB vram). After January it's going to be even worse for the PS5P.
Source
I'll be honest with you, for some time now i don't trust anything DF say when it comes to anything involving Nvidia. Take this for example, they are using a single game to base their entire argument from, i think its probably the only game they could find that suits the argument they wanted to make.
And you're parroting their argument, based on a single game.
Last edited:
It doesn't sound like either of you watched the video. They are looking at one game, and it's established that Alan wake 2 is one of the worst ps5 pro games so far, the ps5 pro is under performing in this game for some reason. The image quality of pssr in this game is poor compared to other games that use it. Remedy dropped the ball on this one, this is more of a developer issue than a ps5 pro issue
That being said, my personal opinion of the machine has not changed - it's way overpriced and if you are a pc gamer who's PC needs an upgrade spend that money on a new GPU instead of a ps5 pro because a $700 GPU will smash the console
Last edited:
I mentioned it in the context of AMD GPU development, as what the console does gives us the best insight as to what we can expect from the next RDNA GPUs, so let's not go off-topic into PC vs consoles. But let's be clear, a PC would wipe the floor with a console from a value perspective, and it's not even close (and without a single used component, because then it would just plain unfair for the poor console). The only advantage for a console is around simplicity of use, nothing more.
Funny how you forgot to mention the £50/year you have to pay for for basic functions on consoles. So if we assume you keep this for 4 years until PS6 then that's another £200 you have to add to the costs for PS5P.
Feel free to add another £30 for M/KB + OS key (even though it can be got for free - legally) to the PC. Still lower than the console. Never mind over a longer timeframe..
I have a PS5 and have zero additional costs. Basic functions assumes I can’t play my PS5 without them and that is not remotely true.
Funny how your build has no controller or OS license. Go ahead and add another ~£70 to that cost there. Then factor in the time it takes to setup your OS and gaming. You would also then need to add the costs of a keyboard and mouse as the OS is unusable with a game controller.
If that utterly pointless video wanted to look even remotely credible, then compare against an AMD GPU.
Yeah same here. Don't want to turn this into a consoles vs PC thread but given the tech inside there was always going to be a bit of discussion here. I own one and it seems a very decent uplift over base with games like Hogwarts really showing a huge increase in IQ.
Not sure what's going on with Alan wake and still not played it, originally as it had no physical release and now because I have decided to get it on PC I need the price to drop to something I consider fair for a game I will play once.
I feel we need to wait for some games to appear in the next 12 months to really get a handle on how good it is but so far tlou and tlou2 really do look exceptional.
Last edited:
Yeah, the PS5 Pro is impressive for what you get for the money. But for an equivalent PC with a 4060Ti level GPU, you would spend about £200 more. That may not sound much, but it’s roughly 30% more expensive.
Though as you say this is about RDNA4. My expectations based on rumours is that we will see a GPU roughly in par with a 4080 in raster (within 10%) and 4070Ti and for RT.
Or if we compare to AMD, a bit faster in raster than a 7900XT and about 25% faster in RT. Currently this level of performance costs about £750+, so if it does come in at about $500 - $600 it will be a good GPU from a price/perf perspective.
Assuming AMD don’t take the **** like they did with the 7900 GPU release.
Though as you say this is about RDNA4. My expectations based on rumours is that we will see a GPU roughly in par with a 4080 in raster (within 10%) and 4070Ti and for RT.
Or if we compare to AMD, a bit faster in raster than a 7900XT and about 25% faster in RT. Currently this level of performance costs about £750+, so if it does come in at about $500 - $600 it will be a good GPU from a price/perf perspective.
Assuming AMD don’t take the **** like they did with the 7900 GPU release.
Last edited:
I'm critical of DF myself, but the issues they have is around their framing of things and not around inaccurate or dishonest testing. Plus it's not a single game. We have the performance profile of multiple games which were tested against the desktop equivalent. This looks to be in line with that. The big 2 Q around PS5P (and consequently future RDNA) were how it would handle ML-upscaling & RT. Now we have the answer. Once RDNA 4 hits it will seal the deal.
I don't post videos I don't watch, unlike others. At no point do they say it's underperforming. You need to be able to understand the difference between a game having a disappointing upgrade & a bad performer - if it was the latter than we would see the 7700XT f.ex. do much better, but we don't. As for the image quality of PSSR it's perfectly in line with the other games as far as its characteristics go, but instead the issue is that it's not as well suited for such lower resolutions and the rendering style of Remedy's engine, at least compared to DLSS. And the reason for it should obvious - even low-range Nvidia cards have a monstrous amount of acceleration for DLSS compared to what's available to the console (and will still be far above even AMD's dGPUs) due to area concerns as well as different architectural choices made by AMD. This showing isn't shocking, the only thing that shocks me here is that people still haven't figured out what DLSS actually is 6 years later & what tensor cores do and how many there are (nor how many are actually needed for ML-upscaling).
And once RDNA4 hits and you can build an exactly equivalent PC for cheaper than the console, will you then accept it's worse value or will you move the goalposts? If only I could wonder.
Tbf TLOU games already looked good & had high res to begin with, it would've been hard to screw them up. Besides, we have no shortage of PS5P enhanced games to compare & draw info from, no big wait necessary.
Soldato
What is this answer?
Sorry but the irony of you talking about me moving the goalposts… while you move the goalposts.
Your premise based on that nonsensical video, was we now KNOW the PS5 is only a marginal update and therefore RDNA4 will be similarly poor.
I said the comparison was flawed because it was using a GPU way beyond the price/perf of what is in the PS5 Pro.
Compare in more than one game and with a 7700XT or even a 7800XT to see how it fares. If it exceeds either in RT, then RDNA4 is an improvement, because the current PS5 is barely able to match 6700XT performance. This removes the brute force variable in our measurements.
RDNA4 rumours point to about 4080 in raster and RT. That means marginally slower than a 7900 XTX in raster, and about 35% faster in RT.
Personally if it gets within 5% or even 10% of that for £550 or so, that would be 7900XT raster and 4070Ti Super in RT and that would be great. Being a good GPU is not about being the fastest, but about meeting good price/perf. Something both AMD and Nvidia have utterly failed to achieve in their news GPU releases for the past few years. So my hopes are not great.
Last edited:
You're right, i don't
Adjusted for performance (meaning for an FSR4 with much more available acceleration than what's in PS5P) - Slight edge to DLSS, on par with XeSS XMX. PSSR in AW2 is a fair bit worse than DLSS but it's more of a worst-case scenario atm for it (there's a lot to say here vis-a-vis Remedy history but not gonna bother).
RT just as anemic as the RT jump from RDNA2->3. In other words business as usual for AMD, just more disappointment. Personally it's expected, I've said for years that they're not gonna do much different architecturally outside of major console release (i.e. PS 6). Radeon only still exists for semi-custom, hoping for a lucky breakthrough which can put them back in the running for dGPU too but it's nothing serious. Any other resource is going to go into Instinct et al.
Caporegime
People are forgetting the PS5 PRO is very CPU bound, ie, more like a Ryzen 2700x in performance. Unless you equate the CPU in all the tests with a downclocked 4700G the tests are meaningless trying to look at uarch. BTW, enthusiasts on this forum are out of touch as usual - the most common graphics cards on steam are the RTX3060 and RTX4060 coupled with a six core CPU under 4ghz. Most gamers experience of RT is based on that hardware. Most prebuilt PCs under £750 have an RTX4060. Most gamers don't build their PC and buy a prebuilt desktop or laptop which usually has an Nvidia card. Half of graphics cards are in laptops. Even if RDNA4 is good unless AMD commits to enough volume for OEMs, Nvidia will outsell them. But their CPUs, consoles and commercial dGPUs take importance over desktop gaming cards.
Last edited:
Associate
nvidia will not be committing a lot to oem's.. as they have a huge backlog of supercomputing orders
also nvidias strategy in this round will be to maximize sales at the top end while holding back supplies in the mid range for the same reason, so there's not going to be a lot of 5060/5070s in circulation, totally amd's game to lose
also nvidias strategy in this round will be to maximize sales at the top end while holding back supplies in the mid range for the same reason, so there's not going to be a lot of 5060/5070s in circulation, totally amd's game to lose
You have this on good authority, or is this just wild uneducated guess? Because lol if you think Nvidia will leave the OEM and low to mid range market for AMD to simply walk into.
All you show by that “guess” is that you don’t know how competitive business works.
The only way any company abandons a market to a rival, is if they can’t compete (see AMDs lack of top end hardware). Sometimes it’s not about maximising profit, but preventing your competition from gaining influence.
Last edited: