Gamers Nexus pits the PS5 against a 4-year-old $500* PC. The results may surprise you. (Yes, clickbait title)

TLDW:

• DEVIL MAY CRY 5:
• They tried it only on games with native PS5 support.
• No RT on titles as GN used a 1060, so DMC PS5 version was only put on High Refresh Rate mode. No 4K either, just high-performance mode.
• Awful 1% and .1% lows on the PS5 vs a 4-YEAR-OLD GPU on DMC 5
• DIRT5:
• Dirt 5 has V-Sync disabled so there are some screen-tearing for the PS5, but nothing really bad.
• Dirt 5 PC graphics options is a mess.
• Ultra-high preset, then other settings set to low looks different than Ultra-low preset with settings set to low on PC, hence GN had troubles adjusting settings to match PC and PS5.
• Dirt 5 has no spectators at 120-fps mode on the PS5.
• 1060 struggled with Dirt 5 on PC, so they changed to a 1080(hence asterisk on the title.
• PS5 performed better than the 1080 on average FPS, but a bit worse on the 1% and .1% lows. But the PS5 renders the game to as low as 720p to reach the average frametime and 120 FPS, but it's 1080p sometimes too.
• Dirt 5 has a much better 1% and .1% lows vs DMC 5 on the PS5.
• BORDERLANDS 3:
• PC uses a 1070 Ti for BL3.
• Borderlands 3 default FOV on PS5 is 75, 90 for PC.
• PS5 has no motion blur in performance mode for BL3, but PC has it present on cutscenes even with the settings turned off.
• Texture streaming sucks on PC for medium settings on BL3.
• Normal maps at the beginning of the game is inverted on the PS5, hence somewhat incorrect shadow placements.
• 3300x + 1070 Ti performed better with matched settings vs the PS5 in performance mode.
• Bad 1% and .1% lows again for the PS5.
• Resolution drops too in order for the PS5 to reach the 120 FPS target framerate.

GN praises the value of the PS5 however, and I agree with that. The consoles have pretty good value for what they do. PC just does much better at the end other than gaming.

Now the New Console compare to Nvidia 1000 series. Thats rough

Lol that embarrassing..

I thought they were as powerful as a 2070, these figures clearly prove otherwise

lel, consoles losing to a 1060.

GG peasants.

From 2080ti to 2020 to 2070super to a 1060. I want to see Tormentos damage control this cuz he hasn't been doing his job as of late.

At this rate, it's going to be a 950 by next year.

Let's also not forget $499 for a PS5, $499 for the PS5 Pro in a few years, and $5/month for 7 years (the typical lifespan of a console generation) for online access and you're looking at over $1,400 for the PS5 over the next 7 years to only match or barely exceed a $500 PC built years ago. And also, $70 for a new game.

We tried the 1070 but it was just too good for the PS5 oh man

But let's be honest - of nobody can even buy PS5s it really doesn't matter how they compare to an old 1060

So wait? The PS5 beats the 1080 but is beaten by the 1060? Does this mean that that a 1060 is better than a 1080?????

No, it means you tweak the settings to fit the test. I’m not saying anything pro about the PS5, just that you can make anything look good or bad depending on how you look at things.

@Ibacai: So much hurt, he goes on to say that they could have used a lower performing gpu and matched the ps5 still... showing a GTX 780 lol but 4 year old tech is a good stopping point

@Ibacai: They tweaked the settings to match console settings on the games. Like visual settings. The more underlying stuff is how devs optimize their games on the platform.

EDIT: Also the 1% and .1% lows are fairly consistent on the PS5, showing that the consoles are still gimped on the CPU side, which is fine cos most of these consoles aim 4K anyway. But the PS5 is bad for high refresh rate gaming for now.

Well unless you specifically want Playstation exclusives, you might as well go PC. Exclusives are the only real reason to own any of them. That's why Nintendo does so well with even lower spec hardware. And a few games I cannot get on PC is the only reason I am considering buying a Series S when they are available again.

weakstation 5

9.2 tinyflops

You can include the XSX as well. Weak consoles, lol.

Think his summary pretty much puts where these consoles stand. Not close to high end today, but can match mid/high from 5 years ago... an affordable living room box

Yup. Just some delusional fanboys think these boxes have a 2080 Ti in them. It's 2060 at best when there's RT involved.

Six months from now: Gamer Nexus Pits The PS5 Against A GTX770 And The Results Are Surprising 😭

And not even that affordable when you figure in the cost to be allowed to play online.

Aren't they underclocked to compensate for the pitiful excuse for cooling that most consoles suffer from?

Per the GN testing for cooling, it's variable. Sony did say they're gonna have a firmware update to compensate the kinda bad airflow that the PS5 has, since the PS5 does have 1 memory module that's not properly cooled.

The video is a little silly. (As are some of the responses here)

- Let’s compare ANY other 3 games, and not only at the 120fps mode. The results favor the PS5 there.

- The PS5 is not a $500 console. It’s a $400 console with a $500 version with a disc drive.

- Why no Xbox Series X comparisons. Could Steve not find one?

- We are also forced to ignore the ssd

- And PC comparisons are at 1080p?!?!

Nope

@goldenelementxl: He can't get a Series X, he wanted to test it. Also, they changed the title.

Comparison are at 1080p cos they're comparing the performance mode.

This is also on their description.

First, as stated in the conclusion, there's a place for both PCs and consoles and it's not as simple as a price-for-price comparison. Still, as an exercise in understanding the graphics capabilities of a modern game console (the PlayStation 5 was used here), we set forth on matching the Sony PlayStation 5's 120FPS Mode graphics settings against a PC, the latter of which has individual controls for various in-game options. Once we matched the settings to be roughly equal, we ran benchmarks against GPUs (and one CPU) until we found a performance threshold roughly equal to the average FPS / frametime performance of the PlayStation 5. This gives us a relatively like-for-like comparison to better understand what the PS5 is comparable to -- it's about a GTX 1060, 1070, and 1080, depending on game, when not running ray tracing. Ray tracing would be something we need to test once more games support it on the consoles. Testing includes a grouping of three games, but the overall concept extrapolates to other games as well. We've established a range of performance to estimate rasterization performance at equal graphics quality (roughly) between the devices. Again, we think the PlayStation 5 and other consoles fill an important role in the market that can't be simply replaced by a PC, and likewise, a PC offers a lot of extensibility not given by a console. They both have an important place and thus this is more of an academic exercise in determining the performance and quality equivalence.

DMC5 Special Edition is only available on the PlayStation 5; it does not exist on PC or on the PS4. Borderlands 3 and DMC5 have both had specific treatment for PlayStation 5 and are more than just a backwards-compatible port. An example of a backwards-compatible-only port would be God of War, which is a PS4 game that has not had any treatment for the PS5. You can play it on PS5, but it is a PS4 game without any treatment for the PS5. Miles Morales is unsuitable for comparison because it does not exist on PC.

@jasonofa36: “ Still, as an exercise in understanding the graphics capabilities”

By testing a CPU bottleneck? Yes, some of us in the know understand the PS5/Series X CPUs are slower than zen 2 Ryzen 3 CPUs. But any game running at the 1440p-2160p resolution would show the PS5/Series X > GTX 1060, 1070 and 1080. So how are “graphics capabilities” being tested. Oh, and turn ray tracing on with those GPUs and watch what happens.

There is no way these comparisons are valid. It’s just silly.

@jasonofa36: “ Still, as an exercise in understanding the graphics capabilities”

By testing a CPU bottleneck? Yes, some of us in the know understand the PS5/Series X CPUs are slower than zen 2 Ryzen 3 CPUs. But any game running at the 1440p-2160p resolution would show the PS5/Series X > GTX 1060, 1070 and 1080. So how are “graphics capabilities” being tested? Oh, and turn ray tracing on with those GPUs and watch what happens.

There is no way these comparisons are valid. It’s just silly. These consoles even marketing 120fps is a joke. Is that the point Steve is really trying to make? Because they would be valid. But even showing a benchmark of a PS5 vs a GTX 1060 is being disingenuous

@goldenelementxl: Yeah, they're gonna test RT once more titles with RT comes out.

It just shows how 120hz on PS5 fares against 120hz on PC with hardware, and the closest and cheapest it can be compared to are with the 1060-1080.

They'll probably test more once the consoles get proper VRR support.

@jasonofa36: OK. But maybe Steve’s next video should be 1440p-2160p at 60fps. Those 1060-1080 cards, even at console settings would fall off real quick. What Steve basically did was benchmark the CPUs. No one outside of console fanboys are saying those CPUs are anything more than laptop grade. And a 800Mhz advantage in gaming is significant

Yikes GN usually is pretty sharp when it comes to tech, but this video is not exactly flexing that. How about trying out those RT or high resolution modes? XSX and PS5 will stomp all over a 1060 if he tests this.

Are people on this board seriously comparing a GTX 1060 to a PS5? XSX = RTX 2080, PS5 = RTX 2070S end of. I am hardly a ringleader for the consoles but we should eventually use common sense.

But that's not the point of the video. The test points out that the PS5 should be doing more than what a 1060 does at lower resolutions.

I'd rather have PC than a console if I were only to have one. So much fun can be had with the PC even if I lower the settings and resolution.

2 monitors and alt tabbing is too pleasurable.

Stopped watching after the DMC 5 video. The testing is seriously flawed.

PC version set to 1080p.

PS5 version doesn’t necessarily ever drop to 1080p in high framerate mode.. (the mode he put it in)

But that's not how this works. If you're testing higher framerates at lower resolutions, it's not the GPU that's being tested. That's a CPU benchmark. We aren't looking at a PS5 GPU vs the GTX 1060 comparison here. This is a Ryzen 3 3300X vs the PS5 CPU comparison

It’s worse then that tho, he’s not even matching resolutions

A PS5 runs DMC 5 at 4k with RT between 48 and 60 fps. So in other words it beats anything in the 1000 series.

this was as bad as gamer nexus... gamer chair reviews....

Well, at least ps5 is almost as strong as my secondary gaming rig used by the kids!

J/K. Review methodology isn't really useful here.

lol Shitsoles.

oof gamer chairs. What a scam.

Why was his gamer chair review bad? That thing is as dumb and overpriced as pair of Astros.

So there’s no guarantee his PS5 testing is 1080p like PC ?

Oh the hurt in here is hilarious, console gamers don’t have a clue. That is some serious bottleneck issues of the cpu can’t even keep up with a 1000 series card on low/medium settings haha then they are all crying ray tracing like it magically turns their machines into super high end systems. Oh get real

@rdnav2: well no because the ps5 had to drop to 720p at times so it could handle the frames lmao unable to have any crowd in dirt 5 either, but these consoles turn into super machines once ray tracing comes on lol

i mean what was the point of the chair review? seeing a sub cult of GN will now use the video saying only said chair is good . no other chair is.

If we chose a next gen title a 1060/70 or whatever would struggle to run it. Strange thread.

@Random_Matt: you will find those cards can run all titles... so I don’t see your point

last year only xbox one x ,ps4 pro vs rtx 2080ti ,same level.but

what this comparing shit $500?

At the price they go for, i don't think that will be the case.

:P