Lol here goes someone who doesn't understand technology or how you need a pioneer, for everyone to follow. Why didn't AMD implement raytracing from 2 years ago? Why can't AMD compete with Nvidia on high end or enthusiast gpu's?
If a ps5 game used 12GB of vram, the data couldn't fit in rtx2080ti memory.
20 years ago PC gaming was a really different thing than console gaming. The libraries had very little overlap, even among consoles platforms, point and click, RTS, sim games, etc. Were very deeply rooted in) PC gaming culture.
no just reflections shadows, etc. What I'm saying is the next step beyond that full path tracing isn't possible on consoles but neither is it possible on pcs.
Well, to be fair the the Radeon R9 290X was already more than double as fast when it launched in October 2013. The difference is that was a $549 card that fell to $399 in a year. Where as the 3080 Ti will probably be something rediculous like $1200. Also worth noting that the ~$250 price range was stagnant for 3+ years this generation, until the arrival of the 1660 Ti, which still only offered around 50% more performance than the 970.
PC games won't be made with PS5's SSD speed in mind for awhile if not ever.
So many console warriors throw that line "well how many pc gamers have a *insert gpu here* ? The average pc player has a better gpu than current consoles. Further more, how many people have a ps5 or series X right now, at this very moment?! You would sweat everyone in this forum, as they keep mentioning how SSD are suddenly going to change the world, cure cancer, ends poverty, and is the root cause of world peace. Or how "next gen" games look so spectacular in 4k@120fps. I can only laugh at these time travelers.
Lol! I'm on board! Count me in!
Correct
www.pcgamesn.com
www.pcgamesn.com
What if I feed my SSD's from other SSD's, and solder an influx capacitor directly to my gpu, and run my fans at 88%.... Would I stand a chance? Serious question btw.The PS5’s SSD could spell doom for next-gen PC game ports
There's a chance the console's SSD could be a boon to PC gamers, but equally it might mean we're only seen as a last-gen platform
Correct
The PS5’s SSD could spell doom for next-gen PC game ports
There's a chance the console's SSD could be a boon to PC gamers, but equally it might mean we're only seen as a last-gen platform
Quick question... Did you for any second while writing that post, come to the realization that ALL games are developed on a PC? All assets, textures, effects, rendered scenes, audio, etc? Then the game gets downgraded and ported to consoles. If games are made on a PC, which is obviously faster and more powerful than the consoles the game gets ported, does this mean consoles are now going to develop games? As in no need for a pc anymore? Can I go out and buy a ps5 or Xbox series X, and run ZBrush or other 3D/modeling programs? Can I sell my pc, and run AutoCAD on consoles now? If not, then you really need to rethink your post, and realize consoles don't really have any advantage besides pricing.
I don't think you're looking at it the right way. PC's are used to develop games because they have the input devices and software tools necessary to make all the code and assets, not because it's stronger than the hardware you're developing for necessarily.
PC versions of games have to be made to fit a wiiiiiiiide array of configurations with most NOT owning a SSD and a super small amount being equipped with a PCI E 4.0 mobo.
The bolded is 100% true.VFXVeteran actually could be one of the best posters on GAF if he wasn't so biased for PC and biased against consoles. He's smart, but his bias leads him to say some really dumb stuff. It clouds his judgement and that's disappointing.
And the 2nd bold is again 100% on point. It's weird that he feels the need to tell people what "WILL" happen with next-gen consoles. If we would have let him tell it 8 years ago, he would have said something like God of War wouldn't have been possible (graphics wise).
Since consoles and pc are so similar, now more than ever, it's easy to develop and port games to consoles. You believe that a pc creates all of these assets, textures, levels, etc, but can't run a next gen game? Or that consoles have better hardware than the fastest pc from 2 years ago?
What if I told you a secret? You don't need a super fast ssd to still have better performance than next gen consoles. What if I told you my ram purchased several years ago, is faster than ps5 ssd? Why do you think a console ssd, which is slower than ssd's that were in pc's from 2019, will suddenly make pc obsolete? Ps5 doesn't even have the fastest ssd, and it's not even on the market yet, to make baseless claims like this.
To be fair, he said it might launch simultaneously or later, iirc.According to
People tried it, the ramdisk, installing directly to ram. It wasn't much faster than a sata ssd, just a bit faster than an hdd. Probably the bottlenecks Cerny talked about keep it from being much faster.
Definite consumer PC. Microsoft demoed Gears of war 5 using a threadripper (Which isn't really a consumer cpu. You wouldn't use that for gaming). And hypothetically speaking, what would it matter if it is a consumer pc or enterprise pc? Wouldn't the fact remain that pc's have more powerful hardware than consoles? It's not like developers have access to some secret sauce hardware, that consumers have no access too. I'm not really sure what you are trying to argue here.So clueless are you saying they use consumer PC's to make console games?
On Xbox side at least, games will initially be cross platform, so they will already have to run on a mechanical hard drive.
There are ps5 dev kits. As for the pcs they might have custom pcie4.0 ssds with custom i/o to mimic ps5's i/o, we don't know if they do, but seems reasonable.
First of it's people that create all those assets, not the PC.
Not sure where you got installing a game to my ram? I simply said my ram is muuuuch faster than ps5 ssd. The average pc gamer has 16gb of ram or more. Which again, is faster than ssd's in console. I can stream assets from ram to gpu, with no hiccups. If i install the same game on a hdd and ssd, I won't suddenly get a huge boost in fps, or any at all for that matter. Pc and consoles are built and designed differently. Consoles only have vram. Pc has 16gb of ram or more, plus the vram from gpu. This is why pc gamers have nothing to worry about, as shortcuts aren't really on pc. It's merely a way to save money building consoles. If that was the way to go, pc's wouldn't have system ram anymore, and would rely on only vram. Consoles have been doing this for well over 15 years, and pc's haven't changed, because it's an inefficient design. Pc's aren't made solely to game on. They are multi faceted for many different uses. Hence no shortcuts taken in pc architecture.
I never said they lost the lead. I said they would have gain the lead again. Put in better words, it the first generation to match what's available on PC hardware for a fraction of the cost. I have a PC too. I've done the comparisons and at least for me, it would take more than just a GPU upgrade to match what the Series X is offering this coming gen. I would need to upgrade my CPU as well as my RAM. A 2080 super right now goes for $699. We'll see what it is in November but the point is that consoles and pc will be much much closer in performance than ever at the start of next gen. That's just facts.
PC hasn't changed because it cant. It's a legacy "monster" for good and for bad.
Or, you can buy a pc, never have to spend money for online gaming each year, games are substantially cheaper, and you won't need to buy a mid cycle console refresh like the pro or 1X, and have money left over for games. If you are content with not upgrading mid cycle, then you got a point. With practically all games coming to pc, it's a win win.
Why would I want to run my browser in my gpu memory? Or mindlessly utilizing the gpu, when it's not needed? I much prefer how pc is designed, as if it took shortcuts to build, it would be a lesser experience. Can you imagine how gaming would be when you run out of vram because you are streaming, listening to music, have a million tabs open in the background, and worst of all, be limited to a single pool of ram? That sounds terrible, and could be why consoles can only play games and Netflix. Not really anything else.
The PC you game on is a consumer PC. This is not what they make games on.
Consoles are made with gaming in mind the PC is not.
So if I change out my cpu for a workstation processor, and get an RTX Quadro, then it WOULDN'T be a consumer pc, right? Although I'm a consumer and have access to the parts, the same way you and everyone else with a wallet, have access to these parts. I personally would never game on a Quadro or workstation cpu, as I'll more than likely lose performance while gaming.
Value, yes. Performance, no.
I'm not saying dev.s will have to do anything special to benefit. What I'm saying is that it is conceivable that in order to mimic the whole benefits of ps5 ssd to expedite dev. similar might exist in some manner on the dev. pcs.
Many including AMD talking about APUs have talked about the benefits of unified memory architecture. That's one of the reasons the 360 was easier to develop than ps3, it's unified memory architecture.
That and saying that games on next gen consoles will seemingly look no better than current games, has been quite puzzling.
That would make your PC non consumer so again you are wrong.
And this is why the PC has bottlenecks
Unified memory works better for a console, not a pc. Can you imagine the cost of going from 32ggb of ddr4 and 11gb of gddr6, to 43gb of gddr6? I'll take a hard pass on that, and I'll wait for ddr5 ram. And 360 and ps3 were demolished by pc's around the same time or earlier than it's release. Same with ps4/xb1, and will happen again this year.
Why wouldn't that be enough to make console games? It's literally exactly what next gen games are being created with lol. Is there some hardware out there that you know about, that no one else knows? Should I call for a mod to get you vetted status? Please spill the beans!
Kameo on 360 bested any platformer on PC at least for a couple years as did Gears.
Proof? I'm only seeing comparisons which the pc version looks substantially better?
You might like there art style but technologically they weren't doing anything out of the ordinary.
