Alien I: Ps4 struggles to get 30fps, 750TI maxes at 60 min.

From Eurogamer,

The PS4 delivers a v-synced, fairly stable 30fps presentation with no screen-tear. Combat scenes against the alien and other foes incur a light drop in smoothness, but the engine quickly recovers and any loss in performance is minor.

The refresh rate isn't perfect though, and dips in smoothness appear in the form of brief pauses, which prove a little distracting. Here we see frame-times between 200-460ms depending on the amount of duplicate frames displayed. The anomaly regularly occurs throughout the game, although the frequency appears to vary depending on the environment.

Yet a 750Ti (and lower) has no problems:

Consoles are very weak.

$1,000 cpu lol

Like you need that for this game xD

Any decent CPU released in the last 5 years would suffice. You'd have to be pretty cheap to get a CPU as crappy as the PS4s for a desktop PC

I helped my friend build a budget PC with a 750 Ti and a dual core G3258 Pentium Anniversary Edition CPU - a $65 part - primarily for playing League of Legends. He bought Isolation and gets 60 fps locked with all details maxed out.

That's as much of a budget PC as it gets and it still outperforms the PS4. What a joke.

Did you see what CPU they are using? And the clock speed?

16gb ddr4 ram?

Pentium should do just fine.

Tell me what level of cpu you need to prevent bottlenecking of the 750ti. Seems like gpu's are advancing at a much faster rate than cpu's so my guess is that a mid range gpu would need a fairly high end cpu to see the gpu's max potential.

PS4 is is indeed weak.

Interesting...Sony made some huge sacrifices when they abandoned The Cell for a cheaper, less efficient processor in the AMD developed APU processor. Console gaming is dead, and the future will be built on mobile.

@loco145 said:

From Eurogamer,

The PS4 delivers a v-synced, fairly stable 30fps presentation with no screen-tear. Combat scenes against the alien and other foes incur a light drop in smoothness, but the engine quickly recovers and any loss in performance is minor.

The refresh rate isn't perfect though, and dips in smoothness appear in the form of brief pauses, which prove a little distracting. Here we see frame-times between 200-460ms depending on the amount of duplicate frames displayed. The anomaly regularly occurs throughout the game, although the frequency appears to vary depending on the environment.

Yet a 750Ti (and lower) has no problems:

Consoles are very weak.

Not sure if serious.

...yes

To test out GPU?

Depends on the game.

The FX 6100 is a ~80€ CPU and still is enough for 120 fps average

@Ben-Buja said:

@monstersfa said:

@Ben-Buja said:

@monstersfa said:

$1,000 cpu lol

Like you need that for this game xD

Any decent CPU released in the last 5 years would suffice. You'd have to be pretty cheap to get a CPU as crappy as the PS4s for a desktop PC

Tell me what level of cpu you need to prevent bottlenecking of the 750ti. Seems like gpu's are advancing at a much faster rate than cpu's so my guess is that a mid range gpu would need a fairly high end cpu to see the gpu's max potential.

Depends on the game.

The FX 6100 is a ~80€ CPU and still is enough for 120 fps average

Pretty clear from that graph that it takes an incredibly shitty CPU to bottleneck the game to even 60fps, let alone 30fps. I really can't explain why it performs so horribly on the next gen consoles. Even with their crappy netbook CPUs, they can't seriously be THAT bad--I mean, this is a game with nothing but incredibly tight corridors and closed ship interiors with little AI.

@Ben-Buja said:

@monstersfa said:

@Ben-Buja said:

@monstersfa said:

$1,000 cpu lol

Like you need that for this game xD

Any decent CPU released in the last 5 years would suffice. You'd have to be pretty cheap to get a CPU as crappy as the PS4s for a desktop PC

Tell me what level of cpu you need to prevent bottlenecking of the 750ti. Seems like gpu's are advancing at a much faster rate than cpu's so my guess is that a mid range gpu would need a fairly high end cpu to see the gpu's max potential.

Depends on the game.

The FX 6100 is a ~80€ CPU and still is enough for 120 fps average

With Two 500 dollar gpus.

My $200 fx8350 and $350 gtx970 run the game at 2K, 60fps solid. Damn well optimized if you ask me.

The PS3 Cell was a combination of a normal cpu core PPE and 7 fast SPE's processors meant to normally do gpu workloads. The Cell was designed to be a all purpose processor that can do both all jobs for gaming. The PPE core of the Cell was the "cpu core" and it was/is slower then Pentium 3's. so the PS4 cpu trump's the PS3 with normal cpu workloads. The SPE's were designed for parallel workloads and graphics. And when multiplats and ports on PS3 not match 360's quality because developers only used the PPE, and or a few SPE's.

@daious said:

@Ben-Buja said:

@monstersfa said:

@Ben-Buja said:

@monstersfa said:

$1,000 cpu lol

Like you need that for this game xD

Any decent CPU released in the last 5 years would suffice. You'd have to be pretty cheap to get a CPU as crappy as the PS4s for a desktop PC

Tell me what level of cpu you need to prevent bottlenecking of the 750ti. Seems like gpu's are advancing at a much faster rate than cpu's so my guess is that a mid range gpu would need a fairly high end cpu to see the gpu's max potential.

Depends on the game.

The FX 6100 is a ~80€ CPU and still is enough for 120 fps average

With Two 500 dollar gpus.

He asked what kind of CPU would be necessary for a 750ti to not be bottlenecked under 60 fps average. This chart proves that even a FX 6100 is more than enough for the task, when we take the other benchmark into account which shows the 750ti being at 76 fps average

Isn't it all tight corridors with last gen graphics?

It really is. Very few characters on screen, low resolution textures overall, this is not a graphical powerhouse of a game by any stretch. It looks alright, but I don't think this is a game that is going to wow anybody in 2014.

@monstersfa: Corridors, yes mostly. But, the best looking corridors Ive ever seen. Phenomenal lighting and effects.Every room has a unique, eery feel, while still being something you would expect from the Alien universe.

Technically, not necessarily demanding, but the art is superb, and each area is crammed with little details.

My cpu usage only reached 30% all cores at most while playing Isolation

Isn't it supposed to go the other way around? Console optimization or whatever the consolites are calling it.

I would like to see a benchmark with a i5 2500 and a 750 ti or something like that. You know, what an average PC gamer will have.

Seeing these 5960X benchmarks are getting me excited to put the new parts in.

The average gamer is far from a i5 2500

mine hovers around 50-80% (i5 4590; r9 280x unlocked fps 1.1ghz core clk)

assessed from screens taken with msi afterburner.

@MonsieurX: Yeah you're probably right. In my circle that's about average but I could see high school/college students running more modest specs.

I tried out the game maxed out and was surprised at how mediocre it looked. The art and design is good, but it just isn't as pretty as I thought it would be considering how closed up the game is.

I was expecting to get the same feeling I got when Dead Space 1 came out last gen, but Alien is just dull as hell instead and doesn't have the "next gen" feel. I wouldn't be surprised if the console versions were just straight ports.

i was playing the Crew Expendable DLC that might be why.

Well this game is made by Creative Assembly who are PC centric devs

waht. are you for real. waht.

Don't argue with Cranler please. As shown above, he's going to keep moving the goal post and the thread will derail into hell.

Not cranler. The games is poorly optimized on console. Killzone SF has much better graphics and a higher framerate.

PC's have always been better than consoles but do you think console gamers care? Nope!

Yes I agree and that's probably because the developer is PC focused and doesn't know how to use the power of the PS4.

Well you only started caring when you got xboned.

How did "fairly stable" become "struggles" when it comes to frame rate? Just curious what went through your mind when you typed that.

@shawty_beatz: I got boned by no x

75% of gamers on Steam have 4:3 monitors lmao

No way the average pc gamer will have an i5 with a gtx 750ti

More like intel hd 4000 graphics and an i3 Cpu LMAO

@chikenfriedrice: gr8 m8 i appreci8 u dont h8

Really? Then how come the current steam survey says: 1920 x 1080 - 33.31% and 3840 x 1080 - 25.92%?

Almost 60% of Steam users have high monitor resolutions, resolutions that the PS4/X1 struggle to achieve, pleb.

Source: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

Blame the xbox one not the PS4.

Even the 7770 has better frames which is a joke.

Lol at your chart read fail.

25.92% of multi monitor users use 3840x1080. You really though that more than 25% of pc gamers use multi monitor setups?

43% of steam users are 900p or below.

I never said that more than 25% of pc gamers use multi monitors. Lol at your reading fail.

Nope, you added the 1080p users and the 3840x1080 users to arrive at your almost 60% statement.

Where did you get the almost 60% number from then?

Steam chart shows that 37% of steam users have a 1080p or higher primary display res.

that console optimization lol. So I have no reason to buy a PS4 and the only reason I have to buy the xbone is halo master chief collection. For someone who has always had a new console within a year of launch I must say I'm highly disappointed. Has nothing to do with specs btw. Where are the games that I can't play better on my PC (i.e. exclusives worth playing)?

Also will people stop using steam surveys. They don't mean anything. It only shows how desperate you are to try to prove a failed point when you start using them.

I said that 60% of Steam users have high monitor resolutions, which is factually correct.

I'm told a PC must be 2-3x as expensive to match the power of the PS4.

What wizardry is allowing such cheap PCs to outperform consoles?

apparently PC gamers are better at designing gaming systems than console makers with all their high paid engineers. We learned a long time ago what a bottleneck was and spec our machines accordingly.

But all those well-informed Sony fans told me all about GDDR5, and how they have 8gb of it, and things like that.

It made me scared.