gundamkyoukai
Member
More like blame TDP and console makers not willing to lose loads of money .
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Digital Foundry: Unreal Engine 4 PS4 vs. PC
- Thread starter RibbedHero
- Start date
More like blame TDP and console makers not willing to lose loads of money .
dragonbane
Member
We should wait for final kits first before jumping to conclusions. It will look good enough in the end.
alexandros
Banned
as it's always been, specially for your wallet if you're always trying to keep with the high-end PC hardware. 2014 GPUs are not the point of the comparison here, Eurogamer is trying to compare current high-end PCs with the tech inside PS4/Durango (most probably cheaper consoles than whatever PC the UE4 demo was running on), read the OP carefully before replying, I'm a junior but know the rules here.
then again, why not running that UE4 demo on a 7850 or 7870 card ? aren't they more in line with PS4/Durango tech than a high-end GTX 680 (?)
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
PS4 is a baseline for the engine, not low-end PCs.
alexandros
Banned
These "pc extremists" understand what you don't: The high-end card of today is the mid-range card of tomorrow.
sleeping_dragon
Banned
Reply to me when you guys find a PC with 8GB DDR5 RAM
in a couple of years the bleeding edge will be raining hot piss down all over tech comparisons with GPUs packing 20nm tech and stacked RAM.
if you tie your hopes and dreams to mass market products of fixed spec compromise, i suggest you learn a little humility or bring an umbrella.
Dictator93
Member
you know there ways to turn off certain engine features right?
Just because a game has to cater to minimum spec does not mean that spec has to be able to render all features baseline.
He is referring to the fact that gfx technology will be held back because the PS4 as a minimum and dominant spec (games are primarily made for consoles in multi-platform dev).
There by cutting out the chance of an incredibly interesting chance to have gfx technology advance. The chance for PC graphics to advance will be lessened and will stagnate even more in 1 to 2 years time...
Let alone 3 or 5 years where PCs will almost unrecognizably powerful in comparison to their little console brothers... but will still be rendering these console up-ports at 100s of fps.
Tell me more about these GeeBees.
RibbedHero
Member
Those 8GBs didn't seem to make a difference in this case. (I know Epic may not have access to an 8GB devkit). So many PS fanboys (for lack of a better term) seem to think that the RAM is the component doing all the graphics rendering.
LittleNemoNES
Banned
Wow! Looks great. Video footage of the PS4 version looks way better than the still image that has been passed around to inflame fanboy-ism.
Can't wait for the next Elderscrolls on UE4.
On PC, of course
Can't wait for the next Elderscrolls on UE4.
On PC, of course
RibbedHero
Member
Wow! Looks great. Video footage of the PS4 version looks way better than the still image that has been passed around to inflame fanboy-ism.
Can't wait for the next Elderscrolls on UE4.
On PC, of course
Bethesda use their own (and incredibly buggy) engine, not UE. With off the shelf PC components Bethesda shouldn't have as much a problem porting the game to PS4 as they did with the PS3.
Reply to me when you find anything with DDR5 ram.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Their engine is modified middleware so one can always hope that they start with a new middleware this gen and modify it as they did with Gamebryo.
The G in GDDR5 is optional when you are rushing to brag about PS4 specs.
Dictator93
Member
Wow! Looks great. Video footage of the PS4 version looks way better than the still image that has been passed around to inflame fanboy-ism.
Can't wait for the next Elderscrolls on UE4.
On PC, of course
I would not be surprised if the next elderscrolls continued on gamebryo. If they were handed off an idtech (due to Zenimax internal engine stuff) their incompetent tech team would probably not be able to produce a game.
I wish I was kidding.. but based upon Skyrim... I do not expect much in the way of advance for that team.
Windom Earle
Member
Not really a bit surprise, but yeah, the PS4 tools are still very early and the 8GB will be siginificant in other sectors than just graphics.
I will probably rock my PC for multiplats and PS4 for exclusives. But you just know there will be badly optimized multiplats that run like crap on PC. (Even with my 680). So the PS4 will be the better choice in some cases.
I will probably rock my PC for multiplats and PS4 for exclusives. But you just know there will be badly optimized multiplats that run like crap on PC. (Even with my 680). So the PS4 will be the better choice in some cases.
shinobi602
Member
Yup, we've all seen what the best of PS4 can do. Pack it up guys.
Wishmaster92
Member
perfect.
SniperHunter
Banned
whatever helps you guys sleep at night.....i am just glad ue4 wont be used as much this gen. good thing almost every big studio now has there own in house engine.
RibbedHero
Member
We'll hopefully see far, far fewer poorly optimised games with the standard PC components both consoles have.
KaiserBecks
Member
"Must have been a rushed port...", "most likely an early Devkit", "Unreal engine is not that important, Killzone looks better"...
People who had an utopian impression of their beloved future hardware seem to prefer complete denial over recognizing this for what it actually is.
I don't know why you people would expect the PS4 to automatically destroy a pricey high end (yes, I consider my 680 to be high end, Titan is for enthusiasts who stopped caring about quality/price ratios) GPU, but the fact that it performs close to, or even par with, a 680 is very, very impressive. This shouldn't be about who outperforms whom, the pros and cons on both sides won't change. We should be glad that this kind of quality will be the future standard.
Consoles will build up from there and PCs will benefit from having a much higher denominator. When I saw the first videos of Battlefield 3, I was praying that the future console generation will give developers a GPU that is comparable to a gtx 580.
Now they're getting something that comes close to a gtx 680. Cheer the fuck up.
People who had an utopian impression of their beloved future hardware seem to prefer complete denial over recognizing this for what it actually is.
I don't know why you people would expect the PS4 to automatically destroy a pricey high end (yes, I consider my 680 to be high end, Titan is for enthusiasts who stopped caring about quality/price ratios) GPU, but the fact that it performs close to, or even par with, a 680 is very, very impressive. This shouldn't be about who outperforms whom, the pros and cons on both sides won't change. We should be glad that this kind of quality will be the future standard.
Consoles will build up from there and PCs will benefit from having a much higher denominator. When I saw the first videos of Battlefield 3, I was praying that the future console generation will give developers a GPU that is comparable to a gtx 580.
Now they're getting something that comes close to a gtx 680. Cheer the fuck up.
Just FYI it isn't, as far as I am aware you would have to have two sets of texture assets in order to make both options work in the same game. A decently large amount of that can be automated, but not all.
I didn't understand why people were so down on the demo in the other thread, I thought it still looked great even though the cut-backs were obvious. No matter what, these games and demos still look a ton better than what we're getting with the PS360 and that's all anyone should be expecting. There's no way we were ever going to get GTX680 results in a $400-$500 console.
The arch may be slightly less than what we've seen in the last few generations, but just because the architecture is known, that doesn't mean it'll be tapped out much faster.
Though there is a difference between the upcoming generation and all of the previous generations, past consoles such as the PSone, xbox, and 360 have all demonstrated equal leaps in progression even though they were easier to work with than their competitors.
Coding to the metal is a myth from everything I've read, but you're right that the PS4 won't have the same overhead as a PC using Windows.
The arch may be slightly less than what we've seen in the last few generations, but just because the architecture is known, that doesn't mean it'll be tapped out much faster.
Though there is a difference between the upcoming generation and all of the previous generations, past consoles such as the PSone, xbox, and 360 have all demonstrated equal leaps in progression even though they were easier to work with than their competitors.
Coding to the metal is a myth from everything I've read, but you're right that the PS4 won't have the same overhead as a PC using Windows.
SniperHunter
Banned
yea so Epic might add it when that transition takes place..they kept modifying UE3 over the years. And don't tell me about graphics card brah, I went from a 4850 to a 5850 to a 7970 last gen...I know how quickly these cards get outdated
PC fans shouldn't blame PS4 for the removal of a feature...Epic probably know's the majority of PC gamers don't have the cards that said feature atm, so they will add it later. In other words the min required specs haven't evolved yet, but they will in 2 years or whatever.
Windom Earle
Member
Good point, here is hoping!
PuppetSlave
Member
"pc extremists"...
This is priceless, seriously hilarious. No offence meant, but stop and listen to what exactly you are typing.
People need to take things less personally and perceive everything as an attack upon their own person, or whatever it is they are doing.
It's not healthy identifying so much with your hobby. It's better to walk away if you find it upsets you too much.
The fact is that most PC gamers(even the PC only people) want the consoles as powerful as possible since that only means that much more to build on as the years go by in the PC ports.
This is priceless, seriously hilarious. No offence meant, but stop and listen to what exactly you are typing.
People need to take things less personally and perceive everything as an attack upon their own person, or whatever it is they are doing.
It's not healthy identifying so much with your hobby. It's better to walk away if you find it upsets you too much.
The fact is that most PC gamers(even the PC only people) want the consoles as powerful as possible since that only means that much more to build on as the years go by in the PC ports.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
It's no different than this generation. There are still tons of devs who haven't shown off any engine and most likely will be using the engine. And they will still account for a large percentage of the games released.
I see people keep mentioning optimisation, in respect to what the hardware will be able to pull off in a couple of years.
You do realise that optimisation and ways of making things look impressive is what the developers have been doing for years now, I think the developers are now way ahead of the where the actual technology is, we have the methods to produce fantastic visuals represented in real time, but the technology has still to evolve a little bit further until the imagination can be realised.
You do realise that optimisation and ways of making things look impressive is what the developers have been doing for years now, I think the developers are now way ahead of the where the actual technology is, we have the methods to produce fantastic visuals represented in real time, but the technology has still to evolve a little bit further until the imagination can be realised.
SniperHunter
Banned
I was laughing when I typed it, I am PC gamer too! I am not just as invested as some of the guys who regularly posts in these type of threads. Been a supporter of Steam ever since HL2 launch
don't forget PC games need to run on such a wild range of hardware... also take into account drivers, OpenGL or "to the metal" code to DirectX compatible code porting... it's not as easy as you'd imagine, also that PC UE4 demo was carefully crafted to take advantage of the hardware it was going to run on as a show off (i7 + 680) I'm pretty sure it would crash the very instant you swapped that card with a 78XX GPU or a different CPU.
Metalmurphy
Member
Didn't someone from Epic said they got this running in just a few days? Pretty sure I read that somewhere.
Some of the differences between the demos, like the texture difference, doesn't even make sense. There's no reason for it to look that bad with 8GB.
Some of the differences between the demos, like the texture difference, doesn't even make sense. There's no reason for it to look that bad with 8GB.
Beermeister
Banned
Alpha PS4 devkits.
" ...while the PS4 tools and APIs are still in their initial stages of development - it's going to take time for devs to fully get to grips with the new hardware. Over and above that, assuming this is the same demo that was shown at the PlayStation 4 reveal, we know for a fact that most studios only received final dev kits in the weeks beforehand, the suggestion being that most of the UE4 work will have been produced on unfinished hardware."
...
PuppetSlave
Member
I was laughing when I typed it, I am PC gamer too! I am not just as invested as some of the guys who regularly posts in these type of threads. Been a supporter of Steam ever since HL2 launch
Oh so you were joking.
You got me good, thought you were serious.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Not a big deal to me since Sony and Microsoft's first-party studios will blow away every other game out there in a year or so, including on PC. Can you imagine Sony Santa Monica's next-gen engine? Naughty Dog? MS' 343 Studios? UE4 being gimped isn't a big deal, especially when so many devs are using their own in-house engines now. It's the first-party exclusives that are going to make these consoles shine the most.
SniperHunter
Banned
Really? Some of the biggest and best UE3 games were made by EA last gen and now they transitioned over to Frostbite 3.0...
Square Enix = Luminous
Capcom = Panta Reih
Sony = Ice
Crytek = Cry Engine 3(lol)
EA = Frostbite 3.0
Activision = Developing their own engine ATM
Bethesda = Gamebyro lol
Microsoft = well they will get an exclusive ip from Epic, one from crytek, and probably work on an inhouse engine for Halo, Kinect games, Forza
Konami = Fox Engine
Valve = Source 2.0
who is left?
That's a ridiculous assumption.
I keep reading about all these PS fanboys that do think that. But then people ravage the one person that actually posts something that is dumb as if they haven't eaten in weeks.
How about we don't generalize groups of people and rather address individual misconceptions so everyone, participating or just reading can learn from these technically minded threads.
Ice is not an engine. It's the graphics team.
Sony has a multiplatform engine though: PhyreEngine.
At first I agreed but then I thought, what about the AMD driver support.
nelsonroyale
Member
The console hasn't even released and people are already making up their minds about certain things (actually, some made up their minds before even the first rumour of specs). I find the whole competitive element to this tedious. I also find it interesting the whole console vs PC gaming discussion. I started gaming on PCs during the floppy disk and amstrad days, probably same as a few here. This childishness of the console vs PC stuff has a reached a new level during the latter half of this gen...Ergo, I seriously doubt this feature will be locked off for high end PC gpus. Or else it will implemented later. For consoles, I will bet they will introduce the tech later down the line with further optimization. UE3 changed a lot during this gen, and the same is likely to happen next gen...
Haha "technically minded threads" before a console release. I wish that were the case. I tried my best to explain everything for a few months, but then I realized that 80% of the posters "participating" in these threads don't give a shit about how stuff works, only that their favourite companies' X is larger than the other Xs.
Not at all. It reached a new level with the new upcoming consoles. People generally weren't interested in PC comparisons before that (because the result was blindingly obvious).
Make no mistake, every single one of "them" is serious. And most of "them" will show their ugly hypocritical faces once the inevitable Unreal Engine 4: PS4 vs. Durango comparison thread hits GAF.Oh so you were joking.
You got me good, thought you were serious.
I know it sucks. But the Wikipedia mantra of "Assume good faith" is the best you can do.
I genuinely learned from threads such as these, as I was never much into hardware or graphics technology.
I would be highly surprised if the demo was ported in just a few days, even with the similarities to PC hardware.
Also, just because there's 8GB of memory in these systems, that doesn't mean devs have access to all 8GB for graphics.
Yeah, I couldn't agree more with this. Tech discussions are almost impossible here when everyone just wants to think, believe, or hope what they want.
1st Course
Member
Sony deveolpers obviously know their stuff better than anyone else, but when I think about it that 8 GB GDDR5 setup does look very weird. I really can't imagine how a game that utilize 7-7.5 GB of VRAM at 1080p is going to looks like, even Rage with 16K textures appearntly just use a little over 2GB of VRAM. Is it even possible for a 1.80 Tflops GPU to push over 7GB+ Vram without starting to fall apart? It will be very interested to see how can take advantage of the PS4 8GB GDDR5 ram.
Sorry not buying this. I remember reading the Wii U threads and people going on and on about alpha kits etc, and people coming in slamming them. So i doubt it will run significantly better once the final kits are out.