@AM-Gamer:
My comment wasn't directed at PS4 vs PS4 comparisons. It was at PC vs PS4 for "graphics king." Naturally, PS4 exclusives should have better graphics than their multiplats, whether it's because they mostly consist of linear "cinematic" 30 fps corridor adventure shooters, or because they are Sony's first party IP's. I don't care how talented the devs are, you have to sacrifice a lot to produce decent visuals on low end hardware. "Graphics Kings" don't sacrifice anything. Crysis didn't in 2007.
"The PS4 was built for GPU compute."
You really like those brochures don't you. GCN is quite effective at compute, it's not a PS4 exclusive feature, and at a measly 1.84 TFLOPs the PS4 was sure as hell not "built for compute." PC's can use the feature too, but for obvious reasons, haven't had the need to implement it. We don't pair dedicated graphics cards with abysmal CPUs, and until DX12 features have come to light, GPU compute in gaming has been all but ignored (GCN has had the capability for a while now). There are currently plenty of downsides to using GPGPU in real time gaming versus utilizing a capable CPU. The Infamous Devs haven't unlocked the holy grail to gaming, they have simply shuffled resources to get the results they wanted. It's not mind blowing, but you're right it is a nice feature.
7850 with some boost - Middle-low to low end in 2015.
AMD Jaguar 8 core CPU - Lower than low end. It'll get smoked by a modern i3.
8GB GDDR5 - Anything requiring this kind of frame buffer would likely require a better GPU. I know this is unified, but still.
What about the PS4 isn't low end? GP-GPU hasn't changed the hardware at all, and it isn't unique to the innate capabilities of the PS4.
Log in to comment