10 million gamers bought GTX680 class

console gamer logic: top down games look crap. So he pick them of his lame argument LOL

truth is that there are "down games" that looks amezing.

Also PC have exclusive are not consist only of this type of games...

I'm sorry but this must be a troll. This is the worst damage control I've ever seen. You really want people to take your word (which you have yet to cite) over the CEO of Nvidia?

Terrible terrible troll. Get banned again please. What are you up to, 5 alts?

Christ you cow alt accounts come out of the wood work so desperately and in great numbers at the moment, you can smell the desperation :D

Given that Civ V is ALWAYS in the top 10 on steam since its bloody release a few years ago... I would say that its a pretty big deal, but oh well..... it also got a 9... what did Destiny get again?

This may come as a shock to you, but many of us like games for gameplay, challenge and complexity.... not "walk down a corridor, aim at an enemy, shoot, watch a cutscene" ....which pretty much sums up the console blockbuster library these days... maybe the occasional race.... fighters not even unique to you anymore.

More like gamer logic as I game on both console and pc.

I didn't see any other pc games released this year that were talked about more here than Divinity and Wasteland.

The only pc exclusive this year that I know of that measures up to the multiplats is Lichdom which is a highly unpopular game.

Steam stats are dominated by graphically outdated games.

All those multiplats will be played better on more PCs than PS4s. Nice. Try to refute the OP before bringing multiplats up, since its a big win for PC. A biiiig win.

Your naivete is so adorable.

Not a cow, just an unbiased gamer.

Civ V you say? Why does this game have lower reqs than most multiplats over the last 3 years? Looks like pc exclusives are holding back pc gaming more than multiplats.

This is a thread about high end gpu sales which are for more advanced graphics. If you want to talk about game complexity you can start a new thread.

Now you change your argument to popular games?

@04dcarraher: how are you going to call me an idiot and your dumbass comes in here says what I already told him. The PS4s processor would murder that spec on any game that that was heavily multithreaded. 2x the performance of an equivalent spec pc. A 7850 simply won't touch a PS4.

Peasants keep displaying ignorance

@CroidX said:

@AM-Gamer said:

@clyde46: That's BS about BF4. There is nothing on the PS4 version equivalent to medium. It's a mix of high and Ultra and please stop using a bad launch port as to what the consoles can do and if you are at least list the proper settings.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-battlefield-4-next-gen-face-off

"Elbowing into the tussle is, as always, the PC version with its higher-grade particle and alpha effects, superior object draw distance and more refined shadow detailing at ultra settings. But it must be commended just how much of this maxed-out experience translates to next-gen platforms. The textures on PS4 and Xbox One are equal to the PC's highest, and water shaders carry over as-is"

As I was saying nothing is equivalent to medium. It mixes high and Ultra

Not bad for a sloppy first gen launch port.

This years biggest multiplat on consoles..... is Minecraft.

Actually there are multiple 1080p tvs that blow your 1440p monitor out of the water. Im sorry I will take superior black levels and contrast over a trash $250 dollar monitor. The fact you think your monitor is better then any 1080p tv shows how cluless you really are. Regardless the TV i was talking about isnt 1080p mine is actually 4k :).

Not to mention the PS4 has a grand total of two games that are not 1080p. Less then 1% of its library isnt in 1080p and you called it the 900p station. Really? Now go play your pc games hunched over your $250 dollar monitor. LMAO!

@NoodleFighter said:

Peasants keep displaying ignorance

Half those games look like shit and some of those are concept renders. Not a good case for you.

Either I have gone back in time or your so uninformed its a joke.... either way, another consolite that has a TV his console can't even utilise properly. meanwhile new Nvidia cards make it possible to have 4k quality on 1080 / 1440 screens.... oh snap, talk about useless upgrade for you sir..... I suppose all that 4k tv and film cont.... oh wait. If you even have one ofcourse.... but talk about a non-time appropriate upgrade... christ its worse than what PC Gamers do. 4k TV/Monitors right now are just stupid to purchase.

You hunch when you sit on a chair? I'm sorry to hear quasimodoI don't think we have such problems. either way, focus on a 24 inch good monitor is far better than any quality TV .... but since you like lying back and watching interactive movie games I'm not suprised if that isn't important to you.

Superior blacks and colour... it could be a friggin IPS panel for all you know.

What makes any 1080p TV magically better than a 1440p monitor and 4k TVs are becoming affordable fast with many under $2000 and nothing is stopping us from hooking up a PC to a TV like yours so either way you loose.

BF4 on PS4 is 1600x900, (mixes of medium, high, ultra), and almost 60fps. A HD7850 play BF4 the same way just like the PS4, the same true for other multiplats. On the other hand BF4 on my PC is flying at 2560x1440, 4XAA, ultra settings, 80fps+ and it cost me less.

4k content isnt worthless when you watch it on movies, you dont spend 11k on home theater just to play games. So its not a worthless upgarde. And for whatever reason even the PS4 still looks better on my 4k then my 1080p setup.

Honestly go watch a bunch of kids playing pc games and tell me they are sitting there with perfect posture . Watch anyone staring at a monitor. Thats why most of you look like hunched over trolls so yes I would say you pc gamers do have that probem. And no a 24 inch montior isnt going to be better then any TV. Your lack of knowledge is funny at this point.

There are multiple websites that measure things like contrast and black levels. Mine is among the highest for an LED tv although Plasmas always win in that regard( I still dont like the like the look of Plasmas). You dont spend nearly 5k on a tv without doing research. Regarldess its something I will still use long after my PS4 or any pc you are currently using.

I've never said that you need 40-50% more gpu power to match the ps4, I said that it is enough to always be sure that the pc outperforms the ps4.

@MK-Professor: There nothing that is low as medium on the PS4. And your pc runs it at those settings it wasn't $400. Regardless it matches the 7850 on a sloppy launch port that doesn't bode well for the 7850 or equivalent cards in the future.

There are settings that are medium, sloppy launch port can be said for the pc version as well. PS4 will be forever be equivalent to a HD7850.

Here is why my PC cost me less:

My i7 920 4.1GHz, mobo, ram, etc are 6 years old (still very powerful), so I will not count that as it consider last gen perchance, like the 360, ps3 etc

My GPU setup is two CF HD7950(OC to 1120MHz) and I have them from 2012(summer) and it cost me £230 each(£ 460 total + a couple of free games that came with them) PS4 cost at launch £400, using common sense if the PS4 released 18 months earlier it should have cost around £ 500, therefore a 4.3 times more powerful GPU setup for less than the cost of the PS4.

AS you can see my pc is 6 years old (expect the GPU’s) and it is 4.3 time more powerful than ps4. (I play my games at 2560x1400, max settings, 60fps)

Now if you consider the cheaper games, and also the fact that if I was a console gamer I will still have to own a PC, so for me consol gaming is unbelievable more expensive.

@Dasein808: not one of those kids is actually playing a console game. What is that a toys R us advertisement? If you think a office char is better then theater seating that's your problem.

My 1440p monitor is an IPS.

@MK-Professor: You are counting an upgrade as the total cost of your pc. Your GPUs alone cost more then a PS4. Not everyone has the rest of the parts put together.

But I have them for such a long time (so if you want a comparison will need to add and the cost of PS3, how much it cost 6 years ago?), also if I was a console gamer I will still have to own a PC + console. Do you see were I am going?

Jealous console peasant is jealous.

Just go back and play your 900p 30fps lower setting games while us big boys enjoy our 1440p 60fps+ max setting games.

If I wanted to play at 900p 30fps with lower settings then I would play on my ancient PC.

The only next generation experience is PC while the PS4/Xbox One are already last gen material.

Prove it.

Those pictures represent the difference between peasant posture and the dignified posture of PC gamers.

Consolites typically like to sit on the edge of their couch hunched forward like visually impaired trolls.

If I want comfort, I'll choose a couch over "theater seating" for PC gaming on my Samsung.

There might be many "light sources" in KZSF but none of all those fires are casting any shadows.

Here the lightning looks out of place and no shadows. KZSF's lightning manages to look really good at times but if you haven't seen better lightning in any game you have on pc, then you only have old pc games.

In what way does an upscaled 4x resolution look better than a native resolution..... its the damn opposite and you know it. meanwhile the new Nvidia cards render a 4k frame and downsize is onto a 1080p monitor... THAT is proper quality.... and you say I know nothing? christ.... all you have mate... is a very flashy upscaled tele .... but carry on the justifiaciton..... 90% of your content will Not utilise ANY of that TV's resolution benefits outside of you named it... select films. oh sure it WILL get more common. but when it come to GAMES your consoles will NEVER utilise it, not even remotely.

And when I say a 24' monitor is better, I wasn't referring to image quality alone.... ofcourse a friggin 11k tv will have better image quality, but your still sitting away from it, you sitll have to move your head around alot more, you have overall less focus, this isn't an opinion, this is logical conclusion.... from someone who does both! Not to mention, even the cheap end IPS monitors (You know, the ones designed for Graphics Design? colour accuracy?) but dem brights and darks right? SUCH PRETTY.

You say it will last a lot longer.... you'l have above 4k TVs by the time consoles actually use anything more than 1080p ... and Curved TV's for cinema setups will be more common.... but yea... im sure the next 7 years of your console life span will remain the same.

Man the consolite peasantry in this topic is sad and pathetic. With more and more devs jumping onto the PC bandwagon things aren't looking too hot for your consoles huh. Now you've moved onto bringing up sitting posture, calling the nvidia CEO a liar when he talks about sales for his own product, and talking about 4k tvs as if PCs can't connect to them...the peasantry is off the charts.

BTW console fanboys I hear your Sony overlords are releasing a new game. Pay only $59.99 and a Sony executive will come to your house and f*** you in the ass. Preorder now and he'll even use lube. You should jump on that right away because I hear they could use the money these days.

***Reach-around DLC: $10 extra.

@MK-Professor: For you that may be the way to go but it doesn't change the fact that your pc built from the ground up is over 2x the cost of a PS4.

@Materia_Ashes: Spoken like a true butt raging hermit. You all live in the land of fantasy. It doesn't matter if you can build high end SLI systems with 4k tv's. What matters is you scrubs don't own half the Shit you talk about. Now go panhandle for Star Citizen and STFU.

Even SLI systems struggle with native 4k.... damn... that console you have will never even see the light of day in glorious 4k. its ok though, that up scale is apparently "amazing" hah.

Even if it did cost 2 times more, it offers 4.3 times more performance(allowing me to play my games at 2560x1440, max settings, 60fps), therefore way more cost effective, not to mention that I have it for such a long time(6 years) so you should add the cost of the PS3 also. And also if I was a console gamer I will still have to own a PC + console, so console gaming for is just more expensive more me.

i was about to say that myself

The ignorance of consolites always cracks me up. You guys really have these strong opinions and feelings about things you know nothing about. And when faced with facts you dismiss them because acknowledging them would destroy the world you thought existed like the creationist who denys all the evidence of evolution and natural selection because breaks everything he thought was true. Really funny to watch.

true.

All those i7 haswell PC's on my ex-job were all used for gaming. /s

Why is it when Console gamers lose arguments to PC gamers they always run to the price? That's one of the great things about PC gaming. You don't have to just accept what is being sold to you. You can pick and choose whatever you want.


And the only people I have seen on this board that don't own what they talk about it console kids.

lol because you are proving the point that you have no understanding what the hell your posting.... "equivalent spec PC" means same type of cpu, and same type of gpu. which means that if a pc had a 6 core AMD cpu at 1.6 ghz and a 7850 then yes the PS4 can allow more performance. In a console the cpu does not have fight with the overheads like what are pc. Problem is that the 2x performance claims will not happen because of a few reasons

1. Cpu power of modern cpu's drawf what the PS4's measly cpu could ever dream of doing. It only takes an Athlon 2 X4 above 2.4 ghz to be able to out process the jag with the 6 usable cores @ 1.6 ghz in PS4. Clock per clock the jag architecture is only slightly faster then AMD's Athlon X2's from 2006... So as long as you have at least quad core cpu from 2008+ above 2.4 ghz PS4 cpu cant touch it. which means those cpu's have enough processing power to handle the overheads. Now if you have an intel made cpu from 2010 onward its game over big time.

2. All overheads are handled by the cpu which means that gpu does not magically gain more performance ie 1.7 TFLOP is still 1.7 TFLOP , just because its in a console, What low level coding and customizing settings to fit the gpu's abilities allow the cpu to feed the gpu the data it needs and allows the cpu to do the other tasks it needs to do without having to waste more cpu cycles getting through the overheads. the gpu then with its tweaked settings should in theory allow a smooth experience with the best settings that gpu can handle.

Fact is that we have seen plenty of examples that the PS4's cpu is holding back the gpu and developers are pushing the gpu to its limit.... which translates into lower fps and or dips.

Yes it will, a 2gb factory overclocked 7850 I won actually performs a little higher than a stock 7870, and a stock 7870 outperforms a ps4.

So 2560 teraflops is an overclocked 7850 vs 1.84 teraflops of a Ps4 GPU.

@monstersfa Nothing of what you said made any sense "30 fps simply looks smoother on console than pc."

why? HOW explain it to me

"I'm speaking of technical advancement. Notice how multiplats have higher reqs now than most pc exclusives."

That didnt make any sense either. Better graphics have better requirments, obviously AAA multiplats have higher requirements than Low budget pc exlusives, but the same goes for low budget multiplats such as 2d platformers.

"Speaking of shooters, Borderlands 2 pc version has more players than Wasteland 2. RE 4 came out when pc was still the shooter platform."

????

Borderlands 2 is more of a rpg than a shooter, wasterland 2 just came out and its a rpg, RE4 is a survival horror game.

Just wtf are you talking about?

"Google it and do some reading. Console games have some kind of smoothing effect going on."

No they dont, its just a 30 fps lock and games use better animations than in the past, that doesnt make 30 fps smoother on consoles.

"Why is the average multiplat far more demanding than the average pc exclusive? Why are all the most popular pc games technically outdated?"

The average multiplat? You do reallize that there are far more multiplats that are 2d indie games than AAA multiplats?

AAA= high budget therefore its a multiplat and has impressive graphics. A pc exlusive is usually a exlusive becuase its either rts, mmo, etc etc, so pc is the target platform and it must be playable on old pcs as well since they dont go for graphics or its a low budget game which obviously doesnt have the budget of AAA multiplats and exlusive. If a corperation owned pc as a platform they would throw money to make a technologically advanced pc exlusive, but pc is a free platform. Star citizen that has money thrown to it by outside sources is technologically advanced.

You are cluess about everything it seems

You talking about cgi video editing. I am talking about basic video editing and the fact of the mattter is, you dont need a freaking gtx680 to edit a freaking video. Then you go to freaking 2gb ram and dual cores. Seriously get your head together, its hard to follow when you cant even explain what you reffering to....also xeons and quadros are not good for games and they are not the cards that nvidia is talking about.

In conclusion it is you who doesnt know what he is talking about.

@dakan45: You want to try and edit video on a dual core system? Its painful and slow. Production houses are paying you to edit video, not play games troll.

The only delusional here is you. Tomb raider is the worst it has ever been it has no innovation or is anywhere near as good as the previous games.

The old tomb raider games took skill and had a unique gameplay The new tomb raider is yet another generic shooter with cover system and health reen. They had far better prototype ideas like horse riding in open maps, sillent hill like monsters, shadow of the colossus bosses and they ditched all that for a generic brown and grey setting and a game that plays like every game in the market. It costed 100 million to make and barelly managed to make profit.

This is what is ruining the industry, thats why you see generic trash like destiny cod and creed keep on making money and the rest are dying.

I dont know what resident evil has sold on pc, but to release 5, then 6, then release revelations and re-release a proper version of RE4 on pc... id say capcom is making money off pc or they wouldnt bother like they didnt on the past.

Yes there are f2p games, its sad but not all of them are bad.

But if you didnt act like a cluelless jerk you would see all those innovations that came from pc. Eg minecraft, atnichamber, papers please, the forest, the graphical advancements like FXAA basicly games on consoles are the same thing they always have been and pc actualy brings diffirent experiances to the table. The walking dead for example the developers of that game were always making pc adventures for many many years until consoles discovered them, even f2p and digital distrubition are innovations that came from pc and then cosnoles discovered them.

There is zero innovation on consoles just samey games one after the other. Consoles have put a block on techinological advancement, new ips and innovation.

@dakan45: The old Tomb Raider took skill? Have you played one lately? It doesn't take skill, it takes tolerance. The controls in those games are probably some of the worst I have ever experienced. They were ok back then because that is what we were used to. But today we know better. The new Tomb Raider was great. I enjoyed it more than any Uncharted game. I'm sorry you don't feel the same.

"The new Tomb Raider was great. I enjoyed it more than any Uncharted game. I'm sorry you don't feel the same."

Am sorry you actually believe that. The new tomb raider had horrible story, subpar shooting mechanics, awful level design, its no way better than uncharted.

Also yeah it took skill, its not easy to jump and grab a ledge when a boulder trap is chasing you nor its easy to jump roll and dodge attacks. But hey health regen infinite ammo for shotgun and assault rifles and cover systems, those all take skill right? Dont forget the quicktime events. The old tomb raider games had gameplay. The new tomb raider game is a "shoot the respawning hobos in the face" it doesnt take any skill putting it in the higher difficulity settings just makes lara takes less hits, all you have to do is quickly headshoting enemies and pressing the dodge button, it has no tactics, no depth no variety.

wtf am i reading....

@MK-Professor: Where do you keep getting 4.3 times the performance. Do you have benchmarks that back that up? Regardless it doesn't look 4x better not in the age of diminishing returns. And it simply doesn't have the games I want so for me it's not worth it.

The controls and graphics are what made those portions difficult. Not the game. The turning/movement was no better than the early Resident Evil games. The problem was that in Tomb Raider, there was precision required. You are misremembering the gameplay from the early Tomb Raider games I promise you.

Your gripes about Tomb Raider's (2013) QTE's and story are justified. But those things are also present in Uncharted. And Uncharted's press X to parkour was by no means exciting gameplay.

Diminishing returns buzzword and the preference card.