Do you think the PC/console gap will close in the future?

it was clearly more technical and complicated than just comparing fill Rates. You simply have to google Xenos vs X1800 to see that. People with wayyy more knowledge about this than us usually came to the conclusion of X1800 to X1900 performance.

https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/how-can-we-compare-the-xenos-to-other-unified-shader-pc-gpus.40252/

Would be nice if next gen consoles performed as well as Xenos did for its time. But that’s looking like a pipe dream these days.

altho I do think They’ll compare better vs PC than Xbox One did at launch

The DIY PC crowd are among the most stubborn, me included. I wouldn't try forecasting its demise. I mean, the journalists who went ooh and aah over mobile/tablets back in 2010-2011 confidently predicted PCs will be extinct by 2016-2017. Well, it's 2018 and pffffft. I'm glad they don't work in weather forecasting because I'd fire them if I was in charge.

I assembled my first DIY back in 1992 and it was barely mid-range. Back then it cost me $1200. In 2018, that amount is now equivalent to $2100. Even with the high price of video cards, it wouldn't stop me from assembling a new PC now if I need to....esp when it has a lot of uses aside from gaming.

.....Link is pointless to the point..... You have no understanding why.....

With the Xenos one main thing it had over the X1000 series was its unified shader processors... its power didn't allow it to match or outperform the x1800 or x1900 series when it came to pixel pushing power or texture fill rate. The only aspect that allowed the 360 gpu to perform in the realm of the x1800/x1900 or Geforce 7800's was when the game took advantage of the custom API that bypassed the limitations of pre DX10 API which allowed much more draw calls over Direct x 8 or early versions of DX 9. Or depending if the game was heavily shader based vs geforce 7's.

But the fact is once you brute forced through DX9 limits with a strong enough cpu, gpus like the non-unified shader Radeon X1950 Pro out performed the 360 with games like Crysis 2 Even with all the optimization and maturity the 360 had by 2011.

These current consoles are using semi-modified pc hardware with coding and infrastructure very similar to the PC environment, which is why we are able to almost directly compare equivalent gpu hardware between the two platforms.

In other words, Xenos performance was comparable to a X1800 XT at launch (that was a $550 dollar videocard)

But it wasn't really... it took quite abit of time after release before graphic engines and devs to learned to support multithreading and the hardware. Cards like Geforce 6600GT beat the 360 with games like Prey, or Call of Duty 2 with x1800XT able to play it at 1600x1200 with an avg of 31 fps vs 360's 1024x*** type of resolution. Or 7800GTX getting 2x the framerate with FEAR vs 360 version.... By the time games started to take full advantage of the 360's hardware. Nvidia and ATi had gpu's that were multiple times faster.

So physically the Xenos was weaker than x1800xt, however in some instances where low level api and optimization allowed the Xenos to pull its weight, but you cant forget about the compromises made to run alot of those games too.... odd sub 720p resolutions, lower settings across the board especially textures etc.

There will always be a gap, a difference. Its a question of whether the difference matters to gameplay and enjoyment. Its getting to the point where the difference matters less and less. Those of us old enough to remember the 90's clearly, remember that the big deal every console player made about Goldeneye on N64 was hilarious, because us PC gamers (I was one) were playing Quake I/II/III, Unreal Tournament, etc. Competitive shooters that absolutely were out of the question on consoles at the time. Consoles were touting laughable, horrible low-res 3D graphics that didn't compare in the least to what was going on with PC's*. Until the next generation. This didn't *exactly* change with the PS2 and OG Xbox, but I started to see the fun factor of consoles rising when I played Halo and Final Fantasy X. With PS3 and Xbox 360, I was sold - I understood PC's were continuing to provide the highest quality graphics, but consoles weren't shabby anymore, and now the experience was immersive and fun enough to make one question if the extra $1000-1500 was even worth it. For some, it is, and I always got that.

And now, with the current mid-gen consoles, we have games that are either native 4K or close, some running at 30 FPS (Witcher, Horizon Zero Dawn, Forza Horizon 3, etc) or even 60 FPS (COD WWII, Diablo III, Halo 5, etc). Visuals and controls aside, there really aren'y any PC games that are out of the question for consoles anymore. While PC gamers might scoff at 30 FPS, really take a look at where consoles are now, where they came from, and where they're going. Eventually 30 FPS/4K will be a thing of the past for consoles. For many people now, they're having so much fun it doesn't matter. When every console game is 4K (or higher) and 60 FPS in the future, there will still be the question of what difference does the extra money for a gaming PC get me, and does it matter to how much fun I'm having?

*I feel the need to say this in bold, because this is something PC gamers who trash consoles and their very existence don't seem to understand: Video game consoles always have, and always will, enable households who can't afford a gaming PC the opportunity to afford at least one device in their home for the purpose of playing video games. And that's inarguable truth. A poor dad can go to a pawn shop today, buy a PS3 or Xbox 360 for $75 - hell, maybe he could afford two! - and take it home to his kids and they can have more fun than they ever would if he had a "bleeding edge" PC.

1) Source?

2) Right, but new more powerful ones come out every 3-6 months with newer tech beyond what a console can ever offer. It's essentially the same principle where "Money = Options".

3) I don't think you know what the word means.

The only source I can find that would that can support his claim is that Asus Gaming laptops sales have increased. In 2016 Asus sold 1.2 million gaming laptops and in 2017 they sold 1.5 million. They're looking to sell 2 million this year which may be plausible due to the high prices of GPUs and RAM in the DIY market.

But he is wrong about laptops being the same as consoles. Laptops have way more upgradeability than game consoles. The most you can do on a console is swap out hard drives while on laptops you can increase your RAM and the tech for laptops in recent years has advanced to the point you can even upgrade the CPUs on some and there are external graphics card boxes you can attach to them that allow you to "upgrade" your laptop with a full size graphics card. In the next decade we might be able to get laptops with fully upgradeable GPUs once we get some that are small and low power enough. It's already happened with CPUs as desktops CPUs are now small and low power drawing enough to be used in laptops.

PC gaming shifting completely to prebuilt systems is not happening unless the price increases from RAM shortages and cryptomining are permanent and that's likely not going to happen. In a year or two things will go back to normal. I do expect the sales of prebuilts and laptops to be high right now since any newcomers or people looking to build a new rig will likely turn that route.

As long as developers prioritize graphics on console games, 60fps will never be the standard for the majority of games that aren't 2D or low quality/demanding. Devs have no other choice but to sacrifice performance in favor of graphics so console gamers can get their "next gen" experience. Running games such as Diablo 3 at 60fps 4K isn't an impressive feat as its a very low demanding game and Halo 5 and COD target 60fps regardless of mid gen upgrades and while they aren't ugly games they aren't graphics kings either and don't have much going on that is very demanding. Competitive shooter scene on consoles still isn't as big as PC, outside of Halo and COD there isn't much going on for consoles and still ain't as big as whats on PC. Even with multiplats such as Overwatch and Rainbow Six Siege the competitive scene is still much bigger on PC.

Before the price increases from cryptocurrency and RAM shortages consoles had lost most of their price advantages this gen, there were plenty of gaming rigs you could build that were on par or faster than the PS4 and Xbox One for $400-$500 a few months after their launch. For $150 someone could buy a GTX 750 ti or a GTX 1050 ti and put it in a cheap prebuilt PC they already own and now their PC would match or exceed a PS4 or PS4 Pro in performance. You have to pay $50-$60 a year in order to play online on consoles which adds up over time. Games are also cheaper on PC and actual free games being given away. You can use any controller you want on PC. You can decide how your games look and perform on PC while with consoles you're stuck with whatever the developer gives you.

You can mod games on PC while consoles can't. There are many PC games that aren't on consoles and consoles severely lack representation of genres such as MMOs, MOBAs, RTS, Simulators and etc to the point you could call them PC exclusive genres. 3rd party console exclusives are nearly dead at this point and PC has access to most "console exclusives" on Playstation and Xbox. Only on PC can you play games such as Cuphead, Gears Of War 4, Quantum Break, Crackdown 3, Sea Of Thieves, Street Fighter V, Nioh, Nier Automata, Ni No Kuni II, Guilty Gear XRD, Hellblade, Tales Of Berseria and many more all in one place while on consoles you would have to buy both of them in order to play all these games and you may not even buy/play enough games on one of these consoles to justify purchasing it and paying for online. PC is the leading trend setter in gaming with hit games and genres spawning on PC first such as PUBG with the battle royale genre or Minecraft and DayZ with survival crafting games.

No one needs a console but everyone needs a PC to be apart of the modern world so a PC has many more uses than gaming and watching netflix unlike consoles.

The thing is, consoles always have way more overhead and a price expectation that doesn't come close to a PC, but needs to get paid through its life cycle. MS/Sony/Nintendo want to get paid too. On the PC you don't have that, which will always be in some way an advantage.

Consoles will always be, in the end, as expensive as a high end PC rig if you play more than a handful of games. Or there is an enormous gap in the performance.

The only disadvantage to having no large company interest in PC is there is little marketing for PC and there will be less push for cool/drastic/polished hardware innovations for PC like we see with the Switch.

Anyone saying having 60 fps is not a huge advantage over 20 to 30 fps is lying due to fanboyism. We see this in partisan politics when people refuse science (evolution or climate) due to simialiar tribalism.

It's a psychological issue.

One can argue that the point of diminishing returns is already here.

PC hardware is 5x more powerful, does it look 5x better or even 2x better?

With each generation it will matter less and less, especially with console being the lead platform, optimization and level design built around that.

4k is only worth it for big screen TV, not for 23 inch monitor.

PC is going the way of the pickup truck market, you have to be some kind of contractor or developer, it's not for "regular" people.

I think the next 'gaming boom" will be on mobile platforms with augmented reality, alternate reality and similar.

The original "gaming" was card games, board games and similar.

Early gaming was side-scrollers.

Late gaming was FPS/TPS/RTS.

Future gaming will be holograms, Pokemon Go style games, especially with consciousness about obesity epidemic, parents don't want their kids sitting with a controller, they want them moving.

Look at the Wii, look at Switch, look at standing desks.

Xbox was on the cusp of being innovative with Kinect, what if they never offered controller gaming? What if they offered a machine with Kinect-ONLY.

Sort of like Wii without the wiimote.

And then build the games around that, real exclusives?

Every time ppl talk about graphics, graphics, graphics it just shows how little imagination or understanding most people have, like "just pack more bits on the screen and move them FASTEERRRRR."

At some point most games will simply stream.

Just like PC moved from physical media to Steam, it will move from Steam to Netflix.

All you can play $19.95 a month, doesn't matter what machine you use.

Console companies understand these trends while the PC crowd is still stuck in 1996 trying to squeeze more fps out of Crysis.