Price comparison PS4 vs PC(way more powerful than PS4)

@Butcer2: The case and CPU come with fans. Also, videocards have more outputs than consoles. Someone could just plug their PC into their HDTV. I use a 42" 1080p HDTV with my PC...

Games aren't much, much cheaper. The majority are $10 cheaper. The only thing is that it's usually more convenient to look for deals on PC since basically everything is done massively through the Internet.

Nah, games are much, much cheaper if you shop the sales. I got Splinter Cell: Blacklist Deluxe Edition for $15 (compared to $70), I found Batman Arkham Origins for $28, Deus Ex: Human Revolution was only $4 a year ago, and then I got Bioshock Infinite, Far Cry 3, Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon, and Tomb Raider for free with my PSU and videocard...

I recently bought Batman AO for PC at a 54% discount compared to buying the Xbox 360 / PS3 version. Pretty much bought Batman AO new on PC, day 1, for the same price I'd pay for a used console copy about 3months post release.

But I'm not in America, and the American dollar makes PC gaming very cheap.

This PC is way more powerful than PS4 (~1.7 times more powerful CPU & ~1.8 times more powerful GPU)

As you can see almost double the performance. So stop believing to myths and accept the facts.

This year alone I saved over $120 just on AAA releases over console gamers. I bought games than that though, probably saved a total $180-$200 worth of games this year. Over the course of this generaiton I probably spent as much money as a console gamer did in online fees and games and hardware, except I got to play MANY more games, AND I got to upgrade my hardware AND I've had a much higher quality of gaming experience.

at the same time one has to take into consideration the extra things running in the background on PC for example the OS footprint for a starter is much larger, the Direct X API is much less optimized for hardware due to the varying amounts and vast choices of hardware currently available on the market.Not to mention as time has progressed over gens we have seen a rise in power necessary to run PC games sure its a wide variable but there has been some increase in minimum spec as the gen has progressed whether due to careless optimisation by the dev's or just general advancements for example the switch to multicore eariler this gen could be considered a small game changer.

Sheer power does not always equate to better, for example take 2 cars one is say...a 700bhp sports car with rear wheel drive and the other is a mere 92bhp compact, lets say you are in a city the compact car will perform better at those tasks, where as motor way driving will be much more comfortable in the sports car per se.Every hardware is good at different things whilst im not argueing the semantics about which is better it more or less boils down to your own preference,needs and general intrest in said devices.

I personally opt for consoles as for me its a far more social and convenient choice that suits my lifestyle better, im pretty lucky if i get a couple hours here and there nowadays between working,relationships and the general wider world, tbh i dont even see myself updating to next gen til around late 2014/15.

Im not believing any myths, its just you have the arguementative skills of a brick wall and the arguements are as thin as a paper bag.Lets break it down AGAIN.

Resolution, not something i personally care or bother about, im far more intrested in the weight of the game itself and what it does right from a gameplay standpoint i could easily go back to any previous gen and play games, i recently replayed the PS2 version of GTA SA sure its horrible by even its xbox counterpart and can seem muddy visually but its still a fantastic game and other aspects make this point null in that cases and many other cases.

KB/M setup, another preference arguement it suits some genre's and not others im not a massive FPS guy, im more into games like Fifa and GTA hell even games based round rythym cant really see myself using a Kb/m on rocksmith 2014 can we i need my shiny ibanez or p-bass(that probably cost more than your computer).

Just some food for thought, although i fully expect the same irrational brick wall arguement from yourself.

PC gaming is cheaper than PS4/Xone.

$400 console + $250 online + $10+per game
= about $1250 PC.
$500 console + $300 online + $10+per game
= about $1400 PC.

That is without upgrading (new rig) and without sales and with only 1 game per month in a generation that would last only 5 years.
If this generation is another 8 years instead of 5 and you would look for sales and get $15 per game off compared to the console versions, you are looking at

$400 + $400 + $1440 = a $2240 PC (without screen)
$500 + $480 + $1440 = a $2420 PC (without screen)

PC gaming is cheaper than PS4/Xone. You don't have the huge overhead of MS or Sony that you have to pay for.

My laptop is more powerful than PS3, yet my PS3 wins. Sure i can run weak graphical multiplat games like Mass Effect or Dead Space sharper, but i dont see my laptop running MUCH better looking Uncharted 3 or GTAV... yh no chance with GTAV lol.

Do you realize that these new consoles are allocating between 3 to 3.5gb of memory for their OS and features.... And Windows 7/8 only uses on average 1-2gb from a separate pool of memory. Also why keep on believing the myth about direct x.... this isnt 2004 anymore with direct x 9..... we are in the age with modern API's the same ones that these consoles are using their basis from..... Also pc games with min specs has to do with whats is being done differently. Modern games that are using direct x 10/11 API are rendering more more effects and things that the consoles are not hence the need for higher requirements over the years. But the base line for the same engines that have been used since 2007 like Unreal engine etc their requirements have stayed pretty much the same over the years.

Yo, @04dcarraher

Have you ever had to deal with Seagates RMA process?

@clyde46:

sent you a PM

Why are you putting up 5 years of online? if you're putting 5 years of online you should put the price tag on replacing parts on the PC that will most likely mess up along the way... don't even try to BS me.. i've been messing with PC's for about 4 years now.. ( not as long as some of you ) but far more than enough to realize a Console can out live a PC... hell the other day My PSU died on me, and before that my HHD was having a lot of issues so i had to buy an SSD ( 240 gb that i got for a cheaper price :3 ) so that was 50 for the PSU + 170 for the SSD = 220 dollars... more than half of a new console already. Be real.. you have to be really dumb to imagine PC gaming isn't expensive.. it's nothing more than a luxury. You'll get more for your buck for gaming if you stick to consoles. I wouldn't try to talk anyone into gaming PC being cheaper.

You need to understand that a HD7850 will play games with similar graphics and performance like ps4, let alone the more powerful HD7950OC, and console optimization is a myth. I remember back in 2006 console peasants saying "a 8800GTX wont play the games the ps3 will put out in a few years time" LOLOLOLOLOLOL. Today a 8800GTX from 2006(that is older than ps3) still play games with BETTER graphics and performance than consoles. Even a prehistoric ati1950x(two times slower than the 8800GTX) play games like crysis2 link with similar graphics and performance like consoles.

Face it, you are butthurt because it is possible to build a PC(much more powerful than next gen console) at similar price range, and that put next gen console in a more miserable position that what already are.

Um No! An inaccurate and false assumption the vast majority of computers /Laptops sold today are premade with Windows already loaded and trying to get around MS ( 1 computer per perches) BS rules are like pulling teeth now a days, not to mention that suggesting we do otherwise is considered piracy which still could be a bannable offense at GS.

I'd say the vast majority of people who are not already hermits (PC gamers) don't have a old copy of windows lying around, in fact I'm willing to bet most people who want to get into PC gaming are going to have to add another 100-200$ for a half decent monitor.

People who use MACs, Tablets and Laptops, you know those things that are out selling PC now a days. This logic really falls apart when you take into the fact almost everyone has an HDTV for watching TV and movies already.

Not everyone has a KB, Mouse, Headset, let alone a "GAMING" KB, Mouse, Headset. Yes there is a difference and yes they're more expensive

You all have to understand that while multi platform games will look the same on a 7870 as a PS4, that PS4 exclusives will still look much better than anything a 7870 or 7950 can spit out.

As Carmack said , mostly because of Focus on Single Spec

False... 7950 is nearly 80% faster then the PS4 gpu, it will have better performance and will able to run games at higher resolutions and render more complex effects. Even if developers can only use 25% of the 7950's processing power that is still 45% of the PS4's gpu's processing power.

And yet Killzone already arguably looks better than BF4 Ultra 1080p Settings.

I don't know, BF4 looks pretty sick on PC.

What is a gaming KB ?

These guys? lol.

-----

Anyway, it's a pretty decent deal. The lack of Windows hurts it, but if SteamOS is decent, that may be a moot point.

also Killzone is linear shooter, and that its 30fps but they had to downgrade aspects to make it 60fps but it cant keep a 60 average and only has 24 player count

Like i said, arguably.

And it looks better than any PC game on your PC

was that stab?....... aw I would hope it would look better then any game on my pc im still using a 2011 gpu at the moment.

And yet this is pointless because you cannot directly compare the components of PCs and consoles.

The computer the TC cited will not be able to run games as well as either console will, especially after a few years and developers have learned all the nuances of maximizing the console's performance.

And I'm a PC gamer.

8800GT still runs games better than a PS360. 7950 will always runs games better than a PS4 dude.

False,You can compare pc's with these consoles because they are using semi modified pc hardware.

factors between them using low end x86 cpu , and using mid ranged pc based gpu's voids the whole concept of them optimizing the consoles where they get any large performance gains beyond their design limits. This is not 2005 or 2006 where where they had to take years learn how to code for multi core cpu's and unified shader based gpu's. This time around they know what they have in front of them and know what their able to do.The PS4 is a more straight forward console in design where it's potential will be maxed early, unlike the X1 where devs have to learn how to use the ESRAM and other items. The gpu in the build is 80% faster then the PS4 gpu. The gpu will be able to match and out pace the PS4 until the end of the generation just like the 8800GT has this gen.

Cool?

I buy consoles because of its exclusives that I cant play on PC. Good specs are nice but its not why I opt for consoles over PC.

Its about time you hermits start putting that out on your little tiny brains of yours.

Is it even release ?

LOL @ this thread. You Hermits really are insecure. You're all just angry because while you can prey on the Lemmings with the fact that all of the lemmings' games end up on PC, you can't prey on the PS3/4 because we have enough solid titles of our own to stand alone. Buzz off.

That's subjective.

And I play mostly on PC because I prefer the PC exclusives, and consoles look and run like @ss.

When are consolite idiots like you going to start putting that into your little, tiny brains?

The main point about AMD Mantle is to bring console GCN optimizations to the PCs equiped with GCN.

AMD Mantle + Radeon HD 7950 has both runtime efficiency and brute force.

The difference between NV's 8800 and AMD's 7950 is that AMD has "copied" some low level console APIs (which is based on GCN) and called it Mantle.

When PC fanboys start throwing out lame ass stats for no reason in order to prove how awesome their pc is I am reminded of this.......

The upfront cost for PC gaming is high, it's stupid to argue that.

But the thing I've found about Steam sales is, while it saves me money on individual games, I end up buying some games just because they're on sale and I think I'll play them at some point down the line (or just because they're so damn cheap). Then I end up not playing many of them. I try to convince myself I'll get to them eventually, but I know that's not true.

With consoles, because I'm spending more money on games, I make better decisions on which games I'm buying. I also try to get more playing time out of individual games (through replays, collectibles, etc). Which I like, and it means I don't need to buy as many new games. I also wait for games to drop to at least $30.

So in the long run, I'd say the cost for games are about equal for consoles and PC. This is just my experience of course.

Art is subjective(your opinion), so you can't say "arguably looks better than BF4 Ultra 1080p Settings."

however it is a FACT that the pathetic ps4 can only play BF4 at 900p high settings at best, while my pc can play BF4 at 1440p, ultra, 80fps. As you can see I use facts and not opinion.

Also a HD7850 play bf4 with similar graphics and performance like the ps4, so that is another blow to all these console gamers that were saying ps4 will perform like a 7970 or 290X LOLOL

so many console gamers(as expected) saying that you need to add windows, they need to realize that a the overwhelming majority of pc gamers when they build a new pc they donot need to add this to the total cost because they already have copy of windows laying around, or can get a free copy from uni or from a friend etc. The same it true to some degree for people that are not pc gamers.

Also every console gamer forget(on purpose) to include that cost of online play that is far grater than the cost of OS.

still though, look at a start of gen game for example r6 vegas has a vastly different minimum spec from say max payne 3, games over the gen have become more complex and you seem intently focused on the graphical aspect whilst forgetting he other aspects within the arguement.

It's still a fair point to bring up that one still needs to do incremental upgrades over the gen, something you seem intent in brushing under the carpet.Im not butthurt either much to your disbelief and happily could game away on an n64 like i did all weekend with the other half because we had a wee retro weekender and never once bothered bout anything but the fun aspect.

also is it not mentioned in the crysis video thread it all comes down to drivers :P

minimum spec increase over time because low settings(for pc) increase in quality over time, lowest settings on a pc game back in 2006 look worse than the console version, now lowest settings on pc look better than the console version, simply because minimum spec increased.

You don't need(it is optional) to upgrade, I told you hundreds of time a pc back in 2006 with a 8800GTX(than is older than ps3) still play games with BETTER graphics and performance than consoles. (same will be for this gen).

You talk about fun aspect, let me tell you something, today the overweening majority of the games are multiplats, therefore the the same game with "2560x1440, max settings, 60fps, larger fov, control scheme of your choice, mods, etc" IS ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE MORE FUN than playing it like that "1280x720, low settings, 25-30fps, small fov, one control choice, NO mods, etc". I never said game A is better than game B we are talking about SAME game being played the superior way vs the inferior way.

not sure what is your point with the drivers?(of course you need to update your driver from time to time)

Upgrading isnt optional if you want to be able to play new releases later in the gen. If you bought an 8800gtx you are limited to DX10 games, which means you cant play games like crysis 3.

If you bought any other card in 2006, because most people dont want to spend $600 on a GPU alone, you are stuck with DX 9 and unable to play games like battlefield 3.

Additionally in 2006 the only OS available was windows XP, which is not supported by many modern games. Because of changing DX standards on PC over the course of a consoles lifetime, anyone that wants to be able to play new releases will at the very least likely need at least 1 GPU upgrade, and at least 1 OS upgrade if not more. Also, a top of the line rig from 2006 (8800gtx) would likely struggle to outperform consoles on many current games. Anything less than a top of the line rig, would drastically underperform vs consoles.

Simply put, any gaming PC built today is going to require upgrades if you want to be able to meet minimum system requirements for the entire gen, they are not optional.

It is optional at that is a fact.

Funny how your hole argument is based on ONE game and not on the others thousands games LOL. however there is an DX10 mod for crysis 3...

Vista released the same day as the 8800GTX(2006). Also xp do pretty well in current games for 13 years old os, cant say that same for ps2...(see what i did there)

A 8800GTX play current games with BETTER graphics and performance than 7th gen consoles. Even a prehistoric ati1950x(two times slower than the 8800GTX) play games like crysis2 link with similar graphics and performance like consoles.

Simply put, what happened in 7th gen will happened in 8th gen, meaning a HD7970(that is two times faster than ps4 gpu and 22 months older than ps4) will play games of the 8th gen with better graphics and performance than 8th gen consoles, a gpu's like the HD7850 will play games with similar graphics and performance like 8th gen consoles.

I suppose its not a fact if you dont mind being unable to play some games. Vista was released in 2007, it was only released to manufacturers in 2006 so they could finalize drivers and what not, but not to the general public.

8800GTX can play some current games better not all. Even if you can manage a workaround for crysis 3 whether or not the game is playable is another story.

Comparing a best case scenario doesnt really prove squat. Chances are DX standards are going to change over the next 6-10 years (whatever the life of next gen consoles is), and you will be forced to upgrade and at the very least you are going to desperately want to upgrade, thus the intelligent thing to do would be to plan to upgrade. After all, If big games like Crysis 3 and COD ghosts are already requiring DX11, and since games didnt start requiring DX10 until years after the 8800gtx was released you will almost certainly be required to upgrade next gen.

Anyone thinking they will be able to play games all next gen on a 7970 are likely in for a rude awakening.

unable to play a few games because they push new standards is the nature of pc gaming, but consoles are static still stuck on the hardware standards their designed from..

Its only been in the last year where we have seen a few direct x 11 only basis games let alone only seeing a couple direct x 10 minimum in the past 4 years, so 2006-2012 with 6 years of playing almost all games better then consoles is a good run for a single gpu on pc

Pc gaming hardware API's have slowed down to the point where you can keep a up to date gpu at time of purchase for 3-4 years easily. Not sure where your getting at because pc gamers upgrade because they want to experience more and better features and abilities. The need to upgrade is more of an option and totally depends on the person's needs or wants. Direct x 11 will be the standard for a long time because DirectX update cycle is no longer driving the market.

A 8800GTX(and slower gpu's as well) play all the 7th gen games with better graphics and performance than 7th gen consoles, you simply can't argue about this. Crysis 3 dose have DX10 mod and also at the lowers settings still looks better than the console version and also run better on a 8800 than a console. as you can see a 8800 can still play any game. You didn't tell me how a ps2 can do with current games?

Also it is a BIG FACT that a HD7970 will play 8th gen games with better graphics and performance than 8th gen consoles. Just like in 2006 with high-end pc's that still play 7th gen games with better graphics and performance than 7th gen consoles and also without the need of an upgrade.

Console fanboys need understand that:

• High-end PC's from 2006 play all the 7th gen games with better graphics and performance than 7th gen consoles.
• High-end PC's from 2012 will play all the 8th gen games with better graphics and performance than 8th gen consoles.

No slower GPUs will not play all the 7th gen games, as there are quite a few DX 10 required games. The 8800s were the only cards capable of DX10, any other card on the market would be unable to play many games 7th gen games consoles can. So if you built your PC before november 2006, you were boned... or if you put any other card besides an 8800 in your high end PC you were boned.

Its also not fact that a HD7970 will be playing future games for the same reason, DX standards change over time. And DX 11 has been out for years going into this gen, whereas DX10 didnt even exist when the last xbox was released.

You need to understand, that simply because you say something, doesnt mean its true.

There are actually quite a few games requiring DX 10 or better.

When the 360 was released, DX10 didnt even exist. This time around DX 11 has already been kicking around for multiple years.

All im saying is that the notion of not needing to upgrade and being able to last out the entirety of next, probably wont happen.