All it means for gamers is an increase in the likelihood that amd gpus will continue to age better in the majority of high end multiplatform games
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
VentureBeat: AMD beats out Nvidia and Intel for PlayStation 5 processor — and what that means for gamers
- Thread starter SharpX68K
- Start date
I am not. I simply said that when new console hardware is announced, a minority of PC gamers usually throw cold water on the specs from the off. This time we don't even have the full specs so the same is happening around SSD's and RT.
Maybe people should wait until we see some next gen games that use SSD's and RT (aswell as a CPU 500+% the performance of Jaguar) considering what first party console developers achieved with a "laptop GPU and notebook CPU"...
What it means is there will be real competition to nvidia pc market finally.
If ps5 turns out to be +11 tf then I really don't see a point on gaming pc anymore even tho I'm saying this while I have 2080 rtx pc myself.
If ps5 turns out to be +11 tf then I really don't see a point on gaming pc anymore even tho I'm saying this while I have 2080 rtx pc myself.
They can't change the architecture or go with another company for one simple reason: to allow BC with PS4 with no hurdle or needed emulation.
Navi is AMD's last iteration on GCN, not a new architecture.
It's possible that everything they had planned for GCN finally comes together and surprises us, as there were features for Vega they were never able to get working, but I'm skeptical to say the least.
Even if something entirely unrealistic happened and it was somehow kicking every current PC's ass (that's not going to happen) it wouldn't really change anything for me.
Do you really want to go back to gaming at 30 FPS?
Have your gaming experience controlled by the whims of the developers and platform holder?
It's all about being cost effective but maximizing the tech in an all-in-one box.
I have no idea why people argue about this shit till they are almost in tears. Consoles cannot go above $499, and even that is pushing it, as $399 is preferred. That is the ceiling, end of.
So it has always been about what loss a manufacturer is willing to take on each box, if a loss at all, to hit the price point which is needed to make sure your console isn't DOA. Apart from price, timing is the next important factor, as launching first might mean just missing out on some new tech, but launching second can mean less market share.
Consoles aren't PCs. They have limitations.
I have no idea why people argue about this shit till they are almost in tears. Consoles cannot go above $499, and even that is pushing it, as $399 is preferred. That is the ceiling, end of.
So it has always been about what loss a manufacturer is willing to take on each box, if a loss at all, to hit the price point which is needed to make sure your console isn't DOA. Apart from price, timing is the next important factor, as launching first might mean just missing out on some new tech, but launching second can mean less market share.
Consoles aren't PCs. They have limitations.
What are you talking about ? 30fps ? Im preatty sure next ps5 can do 144+ frames with the new cpu they are talking about and with some TV allow 120Hz gaming this won't be a problem anymore. Also it doesn't have to be better than the most expensive pc out there getting close being able to do 120-144 fps is good enough at least in my opinion expensive pc gears makes no sense. That's why I think nvidia will do something about it and step it up.
Get ready to be disappointed if you think developers aren't going to waste all that power on ≤30 FPS games again.
Not gonna happen. This gen cpu is very outdated that's is why we can barely get 60fps in games.
Now they seem to have focused more on cpu compared to this gen.
Every game could have been 60 FPS this generation if developers had targeted it. The CPU was not the issue.
Yes the CPU was the biggest issue. CPU in gaming is mostly focused on Performance of a game while GPU is focused on graphics and such.
The CPU was more than enough to power 60 FPS games.
The issue is that developers were targeting 30, not the hardware.
We did not go from the majority of games being 60 FPS to 30 FPS because hardware got slower.
Hardware got faster every generation. Developer priorities changed.
Its really different situation than new gen. Alot of developers have mentioned that they struggle to achieve 60fps and it requires a loy of resources and time not everyone can achieve 60fps even on mid core graphics. Now that cpu is significantly better its possible to achieve 60 fps pretty much on any demanding game even open world games.
Cerny isn't really known for spouting buzzword BS though. He's a very clever, serious guy. He knows what he's talking about. And IMO it would be weird for him to be talking about raytracing support if he only means through software. The PS4 also "supports" software raytracing, it would just be very shit.
Was he the cat responsible for the FP16 / random-packed math stuff with the Pro or was someone else?
That's not how that works. Both the CPU and the GPU have everything to do with performance, they just handle different tasks. If one of them can't keep up, performance will suffer.
But yes, the CPU was certainly the most limiting factor of these consoles, much more so than the GPU.
The GTX 480 was decent performer for it's price, but AMD at the time had a cheaper card I believe for around $380-420, but it was 15-20% slower VS $500 for the GTX480. Those cards ran extremely hot, I had 2 of them in SLI, and both ended up dying in around 3-4 years time. Both had lifetime warranty so evga ended up replacing them for something better in the end.
The media everywhere has to make a horse race out of anything, even things that weren't a race at all. And this isn't just for gaming news, all news for all industries does this.
Ah gotcha that makes sense. I had to put a third party cooler on mine because it was hitting 105C under load so I understand the heat struggle lol
1. You're just painting everyone with anything tempered to say as a bitter PC gamer. Do you realize how immature that is? That was the birth of my statement about tech threads. Sorry people are killing the hype train by being realistic, but claiming it just has to be some PC MAZTER RACE meme shit is beyond silly.
2. The consoles do have a tablet CPU. Facts. Why does that bother you so?
3. Can I be really real? 1080p at shaky 30fps is such a low bar as far as targeting for graphics. These games SHOULD BE amazing looking with such an ancient specification as the standard. That is the real "secret sauce" of the current consoles.
For the record you popped up out of nowhere with this line of "why PC gamers gotta be so defensive" when it wasn't even going on in the thread. Let people voice their opinions without creating a narrative and painting them into a box.