Avalanche Studios exec: 'PS4 will out-power most PCs for years to come'

[Bigdoggy]

By the time that happens you will need a better card anyway.

[Sufi]

By the time that happens you will need a better card anyway.

exact-o-mundo or however people say it.

[Rekmon]

But if that is the case why does my computer show i have 2GB video memory when I only have 2 1GB cards. Going by what you are saying my computer should only shoq 1GB, shouldn't it?

Watch the usage in game...you'll see the memory usage matches across both cards.

I bet, is he running a really high resolution? My friend with the 690 is only running at 1920x1080 but we are frame-whores so he wanted to put his 120Hz monitor to good use. I know i have a serious case of PC envy right now

Actually...he's running it on a single Kuro Elite at 1080p. It's way overkill.
On the other hand the only game that has managed to bring his minimum frame rate dips to under 60 was Metro 2033. Even Crysis maxed out with any type of AA doesn't go under 60.

Yeah i thought it was something like that. So is the titan the fastest single card GPU now then? Wonder how long ATI will take to release their counterpart. I don't think they beat the 680 for fastest single GPU unless the 7970 did it? I'd probably rather have the titan over the 690. I think it is supposed to run much quieter, use less energy and stay cooler than the 690

Yes. Personally I think the 7970 is a better price/performance deal, even in Xfire. However...Well lets say the guy in the Ferrari never looks at a Honda and wishes he didn't spend so much

It is much quieter, but that is because of how Nvidia changed the throttling/thermal limitations.

Glad you corrected me, i'd still be making the mistake otherwise.

Heh...sorry about that. I wouldn't worry much about it, most people have already accepted the slaughter of the English language

[Bigdoggy]

exact-o-mundo or however people say it.

The same thing happened with Crysis 1 when that first came out. I can say that I've learned a lot of lessons as a PC gamer and rushing to get the best GPU and CPU just for one game, it never ever works out.

I remember when Crysis 1 came out, people rushed out including me to by the top end GPU which was the 8800GTX and 8800Ultra which was an overclocked 8800GTX anyway. So, now we have our 8800Ultra and look, we can play crysis on Ultra high settings but it still ran like completely shit until over a year or so later when better GPU's came out. Now, PC enthusiasts will twist this any way they possibly can but I don't listen to such rubbish. I use video editing software and stuff like that, but I am mainly a recording/mixing artist so it doesn't matter. But what does matter is I know the point of current highend GPU's. IF they can't use the full features of the GPU's then that GPU doesn't count. They are mainly for rendering like I have pointing out many times over again.

Now, with the PS4, I wouldn't expect the memory of what they use for the GPU to pass 3GB of GDDR5 because there is much more running in the background compared to crossgame chat. You have that memory set aside for the OS, background content (this is big, it's going to use a good bit of ram), Current game being played.

Okay now look at that GDDR5 and how they will treat it like I just wrote up their ^.

So now you have your normal GPU memory of lets say 3GB, now use more for system memory we will say 2GB more, now we are at 5GB with some set aside for the OS which is a bit more. Eeven if it was 3GB GPU, 3GB system, 2GB left which will be used for background downloading, OS, and other things I most likely missed.

With that being said I expect 3GB of memory for the GPU to be used, I highly doubt it will go over that. Now, most of the PC cards have much more bandwidth Vs what the PS4 is offering even though it's 8GB GDDR5. The cards themselves are obviously and clearly much more powerful than the PS4 but the games currently right now are obviously much better on the PC Vs. the PS3. I am sure the PS4 will be more mid range with 1080p resolution. 720p is still awesome to use with a much better performance in my opinion.

As I've said time and time again if consoles want to compete with PC, they will have to compete with low to mid-range PC's. It's pointless to compete with high end PC's since there are only couple of games that use those high end cards. Not many at all, I wont even be using all the fingers to count on that hand. lol

[BoyBettaKnow]

I'll have to download GTA again as that is the only game I have that shows video memory but on that it always let me select from 2048mb

edit: Here is a screenshot from Max Payne 3 from my PC

[chrisw26308]

Pop-in has nothing to do with the amount of RAM you have available. When it comes to pop-in or pop-up, that's much more of a bandwidth issue than an issue with the amount.

And getting into bandwidth will open up a whole new can of worms, because quite frankly the PS4 fairly limited on that account.

so where is the bandwidth problem in the ps4?

I was assuming that with 8 gigs to work with enough data could be loaded from the hard drive into memory so that the gpu can do its job without pop in.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

[baho]

Are you telling me that there's a developer out there willing to use up the entire power of SLI Titan x Titan? I think your thinking is fantasy-like.

Seriously... please excuse me if i offend you, but i do not want to continue a conversation with you. I feel trolled

Just to humour you, the whole idea is that "PS4 will NOT outpower most gaming PC's for years to come". Actually, a good chunk of the gaming PC market is already more powerful than the PS4. And the high end PC's already put PS4 to shame. It's just reality and it's normal. The comments from the Avalanche Studios exec are targeted towards people like you, to build hype for the machine.

Yes, PS4 is wonderful for what it's meant to be and it certainly will out-power "most PCs" for years to come. Problem is that "most PCs" are not even meant for gaming. They are used for work related stuff in offices and what not. If comparing strictly to gaming PCs, it's situated in a mid range class at the moment. By the time PS4 is released new hardware for PCs will be released as well (or shortly after) and it's even going to drop down from that mid range status it's got now.

Again, the discussion is not about devs focusing exclusively on high end PC's, the discussion is about the Evolution studios exec comment "ps4 will out-power most pcs for years to come". But i understand why you needed to steer the chat in a different direction

[Sufi]

Seriously... please excuse me if i offend you, but i do not want to continue a conversation with you. I feel trolled

Just to humour you, the whole idea is that "PS4 will NOT outpower most gaming PC's for years to come". Actually, a good chunk of the gaming PC market is already more powerful than the PS4. And the high end PC's already put PS4 to shame. It's just reality and it's normal. The comments from the Avalanche Studios exec are targeted towards people like you, to build hype for the machine.

Ok, here’s the problem. I don’t know if you have read my previous posts as they weren’t directed towards you but you and I are talking about two different things.

For example, there’s not single game out there and probably never will be that completely utilizes the power of a single Titan, much less two of them. By the time a game comes out that actually fulfills the theoretical power of a Titan, you would probably roughly need a GPU twice as powerful as that.

This is for PC because of the way it works. It’s not designed primarily for games and you have a million different cofigurations, thus you will always be plauged with inefficient bloated coding.

If the PS4 was equipped with the Titan, it would already start showing a good chunk of that at launch. I hope you undersatnd what I’m trying to say here.

i.e. if you take the graphics card that’s equipped in the PS4 right now and try to play PC games with it, you wouldn’t be able to play the games of today at full details, much less in the future.

Yes, PS4 is wonderful for what it's meant to be and it certainly will out-power "most PCs" for years to come. Problem is that "most PCs" are not even meant for gaming. They are used for work related stuff in offices and what not. If comparing strictly to gaming PCs, it's situated in a mid range class at the moment. By the time PS4 is released new hardware for PCs will be released as well (or shortly after) and it's even going to drop down from that mid range status it's got now.

Problem with that is that most of those PCs are used by gamers. There lies the issue. No one is saying that the PS4 will outpower the best PCs for years to come (most PCs include the category you just talked about) although it will be comparable in the beginning.

Again, the discussion is not about devs focusing exclusively on high end PC's, the discussion is about the Evolution studios exec comment "ps4 will out-power most pcs for years to come". But i understand why you needed to steer the chat in a different direction

How am I steering the chat in a different direction? I’m trying to help you understand theoretical power and its efficient/inefficient use.

[Completely Average]

so where is the bandwidth problem in the ps4?

I was assuming that with 8 gigs to work with enough data could be loaded from the hard drive into memory so that the gpu can do its job without pop in.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2

The total system bandwidth is only about equal to a mid-range PC video card and some of that has to go to the CPU. It wouldn't take much to max it out at high resolutions.

It's enough of an issue that you'll probably see most games either staying at 720p resolutions, running lower levels of AF, not including AA, or a combination of those to get all of the effects in. Getting long draw distances adds to the bandwidth requirements, so in time you may find developers still have to reduce that as well.

It really depends on the game and what the developer feels is important, but the system is somewhat bandwidth limited. Certainly enough that 1080p and 60FPS is going to be a very rare thing.

[Fijiandoce]

The total system bandwidth is only about equal to a mid-range PC video card and some of that has to go to the CPU. It wouldn't take much to max it out at high resolutions.

It's enough of an issue that you'll probably see most games either staying at 720p resolutions, running lower levels of AF, not including AA, or a combination of those to get all of the effects in. Getting long draw distances adds to the bandwidth requirements, so in time you may find developers still have to reduce that as well.

It really depends on the game and what the developer feels is important, but the system is somewhat bandwidth limited. Certainly enough that 1080p and 60FPS is going to be a very rare thing.

wut?

care to list a mid range GPU alone with an equal bandwidth?
assuming you aren't one of those PC elitists, mid range cards are in the region of 80GB/s, PS4 is reported at more than double that. it's even higher than a 7870 which has a bandwidth of 170 or something.

CPUs don't require that much bandwidth which is why they still make do with DDR3 in desktops.

this will mean better AA and AF
and with FXAA and AF taking next to no performance hit or resources i don't see why this is even an issue....

[PeanutButterMunky]

wut?

care to list a mid range GPU alone with an equal bandwidth?
assuming you aren't one of those PC elitists, mid range cards are in the region of 80GB/s, PS4 is reported at more than double that. it's even higher than a 7870 which has a bandwidth of 170 or something.

CPUs don't require that much bandwidth which is why they still make do with DDR3 in desktops.

this will mean better AA and AF
and with FXAA and AF taking next to no performance hit or resources i don't see why this is even an issue....

The GTX 690 has 384 GB/sec of bandwidth. :-0

[Fijiandoce]

The GTX 690 has 384 GB/sec of bandwidth. :-0

pft, PC elitist

if you consider that a mid range card then what would you call a high end model

[Coconut_Crunch]

I think a midrange card would be an example of the Radeon HD7850 or around that area. Those cards get 150GB bandwidth or so I read 2GB GDDR5, 150GB bandwidth.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/201...-hd-7850-2gb/1

The radeon HD 7990 would be highend.

[Acid Snake]

Looks like the PS4 is going to be awesome. But out powering the PC for years to come? Puh-lease! I call horseshit.

[PeanutButterMunky]

pft, PC elitist

if you consider that a mid range card then what would you call a high end model

Was a joke. That card is over a thousand bucks.

I suppose a higher end card is made of unicorn tears and pixie dust.

[keefy]

Well they may be able to have higher res textures since the unified memory will allow it. Not many video cards have more than 2GB VRAM on a PC.
1GB is pretty much the standard thesedays.

A good rule of thumb I think is to look at the steam stats page, millions of peoepl submit their reults each month.
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

40% have 1GB (including the 1023MB as well)

If you are a developer why bother caterign to the minority 0.6% with 3GB VRAM

And LOL @ persons with 128MB vRAM tin this day and age.

[Coconut_Crunch]

Well they may be able to have higher res textures since the unified memory will allow it. Not many video cards have more than 2GB VRAM on a PC.
1GB is pretty much the standard thesedays.

A good rule of thumb I think is to look at the steam stats page, millions of peoepl submit their reults each month.
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

40% have 1GB (including the 1023MB as well)

If you are a developer why bother caterign to the minority 0.6% with 3GB VRAM

That's crazy haha

[Fijiandoce]

I think a midrange card would be an example of the Radeon HD7850 or around that area. Those cards get 150GB bandwidth or so I read 2GB GDDR5, 150GB bandwidth.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/201...-hd-7850-2gb/1

The radeon HD 7990 would be highend.

i have a 6870 and i would consider that card 'high end', anything higher is enthusiast territory
1080p and ~60fps with highish settings is the norm for my card

to use amd (because their numbering is coherent)
x7xx Mid range
x8xx High end
x9xx High-Elite

all 79xx cards have a memory bandwidth over 200gB/s if im not mistaken, as such they are priced accordingly

Was a joke. That card is over a thousand bucks.

you ain't a PC elitist until you've got 3 GTX Titans in SLI

[Rekmon]

For example, there’s not single game out there and probably never will be that completely utilizes the power of a single Titan, much less two of them. By the time a game comes out that actually fulfills the theoretical power of a Titan, you would probably roughly need a GPU twice as powerful as that.

Debatable...really depends on the end user. Somebody running super high resolutions or multi-monitor setups could easily cause a Titan to struggle. Typical gamers: Nah, not going to happen.

I'll have to download GTA again as that is the only game I have that shows video memory but on that it always let me select from 2048mb

edit: Here is a screenshot from Max Payne 3 from my PC

It's an anomaly in the game engine for MP3, and it wouldn't surprise me if GTA4 did the same thing (same devs...same engine...)

Grab EVGA precision or MSI Afterburner and put on Vram logging, then go fire a game up

[Coconut_Crunch]

i have a 6870 and i would consider that card 'high end', anything higher is enthusiast territory
1080p and ~60fps with highish settings is the norm for my card

to use amd (because their numbering is coherent)
x7xx Mid range
x8xx High end
x9xx High-Elite

all 79xx cards have a memory bandwidth over 200gB/s if im not mistaken, as such they are priced accordingly


you ain't a PC elitist until you've got 3 GTX Titans in SLI

wouldn't 179GB of bandwidth be more than enough?

[Fijiandoce]

wouldn't 179GB of bandwidth be more than enough?

PS4 is reported to be at 192GB/s (???)

that is quite a sizeable bandwidth for a machine that will cost the same as a single GPU with equal specs.

more fast ram could mean better draw distances, more things on screen, and if my hopes for the PS3 gen can actually come true for PS4, approximative real time physics (using GPU of course )

[Coconut_Crunch]

oops my mistake, it's not 179, it's 176GB/sec..

foward to 3:35

[PeanutButterMunky]

PS4 is reported to be at 192GB/s (???)

that is quite a sizeable bandwidth for a machine that will cost the same as a single GPU with equal specs.

more fast ram could mean better draw distances, more things on screen, and if my hopes for the PS3 gen can actually come true for PS4, approximative real time physics (using GPU of course )

No, it's 176 GB/sec.

PS4 is equipped with 8 GB of unified system memory, easing game creation and increasing the richness of content achievable on the platform. GDDR5 is used for this memory, giving the system 176 GB/second of bandwidth and providing a further boost to graphics performance.

http://www.scei.co.jp/corporate/rele.../130221a_e.pdf

[admartian]

I don't know about this. Current PCs most likely. But PCs "for years to come"? Haven't we heard this before?

[Fijiandoce]

oops my mistake, it's not 179, it's 176GB/sec..

foward to 3:35

No, it's 176 GB/sec.




http://www.scei.co.jp/corporate/rele.../130221a_e.pdf

my mistake, i knew it was at the higher end just not where exactly