PS4 GPU already down to $144.99

Since Sony is buying the GPUs in bulk, they probably get a special, lower price per unit. Plus, it's not like they're paying for a full PCI-e graphics card. They're likely paying around $100 per GPU unit or somewhere around that.

Honestly you forum posters can be totally retarded. The graphics chip in PS3 is outdated yet it still produces games with amazing graphics with TLOU being the latest example of this. The difference between console games and PC games is there is no PC game that fully takes advantage of a graphics chip by extreme optimizing. They have to make a game work well on a variety of chips available for to PC market. They only need to work with one with consoles (or two if we're counting the One). The consoles don't need a 780 to compete because they only need the power of a midrange chip to make that huge leap that we will see in TLOU2 that can easily look just as good as PC games if not better.

Honestly you forum posters can be totally retarded. The graphics chip in PS3 is outdated yet it still produces games with amazing graphics with TLOU being the latest example of this. The difference between console games and PC games is there is no PC game that fully takes advantage of a graphics chip by extreme optimizing. They have to make a game work well on a variety of chips available for to PC market. They only need to work with one with consoles (or two if we're counting the One). The consoles don't need a 780 to compete because they only need the power of a midrange chip to make that huge leap that we will see in TLOU2 that can easily look just as good as PC games if not better.

Kjranu

http://uk.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29355105/the-last-of-us-massive-graphics-downgrade-pics-and-video-comparison

Looks like ass to me.

Generic animations are now NEXT GEN...LOL

Multiplat handing TLOU it's ass....

[QUOTE="Kjranu"]

Honestly you forum posters can be totally retarded. The graphics chip in PS3 is outdated yet it still produces games with amazing graphics with TLOU being the latest example of this. The difference between console games and PC games is there is no PC game that fully takes advantage of a graphics chip by extreme optimizing. They have to make a game work well on a variety of chips available for to PC market. They only need to work with one with consoles (or two if we're counting the One). The consoles don't need a 780 to compete because they only need the power of a midrange chip to make that huge leap that we will see in TLOU2 that can easily look just as good as PC games if not better.

AMD655

http://uk.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29355105/the-last-of-us-massive-graphics-downgrade-pics-and-video-comparison

Looks like ass to me.

[QUOTE="AMD655"]

[QUOTE="Kjranu"]

Honestly you forum posters can be totally retarded. The graphics chip in PS3 is outdated yet it still produces games with amazing graphics with TLOU being the latest example of this. The difference between console games and PC games is there is no PC game that fully takes advantage of a graphics chip by extreme optimizing. They have to make a game work well on a variety of chips available for to PC market. They only need to work with one with consoles (or two if we're counting the One). The consoles don't need a 780 to compete because they only need the power of a midrange chip to make that huge leap that we will see in TLOU2 that can easily look just as good as PC games if not better.

Kjranu

http://uk.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29355105/the-last-of-us-massive-graphics-downgrade-pics-and-video-comparison

Looks like ass to me.

[QUOTE="Kjranu"][QUOTE="AMD655"]

 

http://uk.gamespot.com/forums/topic/29355105/the-last-of-us-massive-graphics-downgrade-pics-and-video-comparison

 

Looks like ass to me.

AMD655

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="Kjranu"][QUOTE="AMD655"]

Oh, you mean the biased crap about TLOU and PS3?

I see lol.Kjranu

No not biased. I also have an AMD rig and a PS3. I have played a lot of top of the line PC games and not many "blow" TLOU out of the water. Of course I'm not saying that TLOU is teh best graphics ever to have graxe teh galaxy but it looks damn, damn good for a 7 year old hardware. That was my point. If they can do that magic with a 7 year old hardware, just imagine what they can do with a 7850-like chip on the PS4. A quantum leap.

You come across way too fanboy like in the first place, you deserved what you got.....

And yes, you practically did state TLOU is the be all end all, when i found it to be pretty meh and generic overall.

Giving off a fanboy impression doesn't make my point one bit less valid. It's definitely not generic. It's one of the greatest looking games out there and they did that with a 7 year old hardware. That's it.

You cannot have played many games in your time then, TLOU looks meh...

Can we stop it with the stupid comparisons? Even ignoring the fact that the specs don't line up properly, the GPU in the PS4 is customized heavily enough it's more of a GCN1.5 or GCN2.0 part than it is a standard GCN chip.

Can we stop it with the stupid comparisons? Even ignoring the fact that the specs don't line up properly, the GPU in the PS4 is customized heavily enough it's more of a GCN1.5 or GCN2.0 part than it is a standard GCN chip.

Aidenfury19

[QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

Can we stop it with the stupid comparisons? Even ignoring the fact that the specs don't line up properly, the GPU in the PS4 is customized heavily enough it's more of a GCN1.5 or GCN2.0 part than it is a standard GCN chip.

AMD655

GCN is an architecture AMD plans to stick with for awhile, there will be several revisions of it and given how heavily customized it is, it's not unreasonable to expect that AMD will make use of some of those changes in subsequent revisions. We know for instance that they're trying to push hUMA and prior GCN parts didn't support it.

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

Can we stop it with the stupid comparisons? Even ignoring the fact that the specs don't line up properly, the GPU in the PS4 is customized heavily enough it's more of a GCN1.5 or GCN2.0 part than it is a standard GCN chip.

Aidenfury19

GCN is an architecture AMD plans to stick with for awhile, there will be several revisions of it and given how heavily customized it is, it's not unreasonable to expect that AMD will make use of some of those changes in subsequent revisions. We know for instance that they're trying to push hUMA and prior GCN parts didn't support it.

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="Kjranu"] No not biased. I also have an AMD rig and a PS3. I have played a lot of top of the line PC games and not many "blow" TLOU out of the water. Of course I'm not saying that TLOU is teh best graphics ever to have graxe teh galaxy but it looks damn, damn good for a 7 year old hardware. That was my point. If they can do that magic with a 7 year old hardware, just imagine what they can do with a 7850-like chip on the PS4. A quantum leap. Kjranu

Yet only scored an 8.0 with Gamespot?

[QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"] No such thing as GCN 1.5/2.0AMD655

GCN is an architecture AMD plans to stick with for awhile, there will be several revisions of it and given how heavily customized it is, it's not unreasonable to expect that AMD will make use of some of those changes in subsequent revisions. We know for instance that they're trying to push hUMA and prior GCN parts didn't support it.

The architecture might have, but the hardware doesn't. Not even Kaveri will fully support HSA, you'll have to wait another year for that IIRC. Nor will the PS4 fully support HSA, but it's a heck of a lot closer than anything released to date is.

This thread is so dumb

seanmcloughlin

[QUOTE="AzatiS"][QUOTE="True_Gamer_"] What PC will it take to run BF4 on PS4 settings? See my point?AMD655

As for VRAM , 2GB is todays requirements .. in 3-4 years from now i bet that will be the minimum.

We talking about power overall here so i just proved PCs can , as we speak , be as powerful as a future console ( is not even out yet ) without too much of effort or super expensive hardware. Period

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="AzatiS"] A PC with a decent GPU with 2-3 GDDR5 , 32GB Ram which is really cheap and a decent CPU like 3570k which can OC up to really nice speeds... and voilaAzatiS

As for VRAM , 2GB is todays requirements .. in 3-4 years from now i bet that will be the minimum.

We talking about power overall here so i just proved PCs can , as we speak , be as powerful as a future console ( is not even out yet ) without too much of effort or super expensive hardware. Period

Whats the price of the Wii:U or Xbox One GPU?

[QUOTE="AzatiS"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"] 16GB of ram is pointless, let alone 32GB for system memory as a gamer. 2GB is all you need for Vram.AMD655

As for VRAM , 2GB is todays requirements .. in 3-4 years from now i bet that will be the minimum.

We talking about power overall here so i just proved PCs can , as we speak , be as powerful as a future console ( is not even out yet ) without too much of effort or super expensive hardware. Period

Because you can't make good use of the memory bandwidth available with 16 or 32GB, 8GB is anything but stupid for the PS4. On the other hand using a dedicated 2GB of VRAM WOULD be stupid at this point.

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="AzatiS"] Sorry but if you run 64bit OS which will be must for next-gen gaming , 8GB is the least you need. Why not have 16GB or even 32GB if you like multitasking since its really cheap to have nowdays?

As for VRAM , 2GB is todays requirements .. in 3-4 years from now i bet that will be the minimum.

We talking about power overall here so i just proved PCs can , as we speak , be as powerful as a future console ( is not even out yet ) without too much of effort or super expensive hardware. Period

Aidenfury19

Because you can't make good use of the memory bandwidth available with 16 or 32GB, 8GB is anything but stupid for the PS4. On the other hand using a dedicated 2GB of VRAM WOULD be stupid at this point.

[QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"] You simply do not need 16 or 32GB, it is stupid.AMD655

Because you can't make good use of the memory bandwidth available with 16 or 32GB, 8GB is anything but stupid for the PS4. On the other hand using a dedicated 2GB of VRAM WOULD be stupid at this point.

The whole point of the PS4 and XBONE's memory setup is that there is almost no distinction made between VRAM and system RAM, available memory is shared between the two and both the CPU and GPU are on the same die.

It lets you get rid of the PCIE bottleneck entirely so you actually can make better use of the 4GB+ of memory you're allocating to the GPU.

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

Because you can't make good use of the memory bandwidth available with 16 or 32GB, 8GB is anything but stupid for the PS4. On the other hand using a dedicated 2GB of VRAM WOULD be stupid at this point.

Aidenfury19

The whole point of the PS4 and XBONE's memory setup is that there is almost no distinction made between VRAM and system RAM, available memory is shared between the two and both the CPU and GPU are on the same die.

It lets you get rid of the PCIE bottleneck entirely so you actually can make better use of the 4GB+ of memory you're allocating to the GPU.

Just so you all know, PS4/X1 will get decimated very soon...

[QUOTE="AzatiS"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"] 16GB of ram is pointless, let alone 32GB for system memory as a gamer. 2GB is all you need for Vram.AMD655

As for VRAM , 2GB is todays requirements .. in 3-4 years from now i bet that will be the minimum.

We talking about power overall here so i just proved PCs can , as we speak , be as powerful as a future console ( is not even out yet ) without too much of effort or super expensive hardware. Period

Actually a modern gamer could easily hit 8-12 without trying that hard. I do all of the time. I'm happy I have 16 gigs. It's cheap anyways. 

[QUOTE="AMD655"][QUOTE="AzatiS"] Sorry but if you run 64bit OS which will be must for next-gen gaming , 8GB is the least you need. Why not have 16GB or even 32GB if you like multitasking since its really cheap to have nowdays?

As for VRAM , 2GB is todays requirements .. in 3-4 years from now i bet that will be the minimum.

We talking about power overall here so i just proved PCs can , as we speak , be as powerful as a future console ( is not even out yet ) without too much of effort or super expensive hardware. Period

Wasdie

Actually a modern gamer could easily hit 8-12 without trying that hard. I do all of the time. I'm happy I have 16 gigs. It's cheap anyways. 

Well i guess it depends on the usage, i encode/video edit a lot, run multiple browser tabs, and game, never use all 8GB of memory, not even close.

AMD655

You wouldn't if you don't turn off page file memory. You should do that. Then see how much RAM you actually soak up. Keeping page file memory on will have Windows cache stuff onto your harddrive so there is always a RAM buffer. 

[QUOTE="AMD655"] Well i guess it depends on the usage, i encode/video edit a lot, run multiple browser tabs, and game, never use all 8GB of memory, not even close.

Wasdie

You wouldn't if you don't turn off page file memory. You should do that. Then see how much RAM you actually soak up. Keeping page file memory on will have Windows cache stuff onto your harddrive so there is always a RAM buffer. 

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]

[QUOTE="True_Gamer_"] It will produce same graphics on same settings. So you where saying?Tessellation

7850: 1024 SPs, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 153GB/s bandwidth.
PS4 : 1152 SPs, 72 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 176GB/s bandwidth.

(higher is better)

Also, for PC you need higher than the console equivalent.

[QUOTE="R4gn4r0k"]

I doubt Sony buys them on newegg. They buy them in large numbers so they pay even less per card.

danjammer69

Learn to read. Where did I say they buy this exact card ?

Dumbass.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="AMD655"] You simply do not need 16 or 32GB, it is stupid.AMD655

Actually a modern gamer could easily hit 8-12 without trying that hard. I do all of the time. I'm happy I have 16 gigs. It's cheap anyways.

In an interview, Chris Roberts stated he expects Star Citizen to be looking for 8GB of system RAM, that's only 1 to 1.5 years away. There has been no mention of VRAM as yet other than some very loose prospective system requirements.

[QUOTE="AMD655"] Well i guess it depends on the usage, i encode/video edit a lot, run multiple browser tabs, and game, never use all 8GB of memory, not even close.

Wasdie

You wouldn't if you don't turn off page file memory. You should do that. Then see how much RAM you actually soak up. Keeping page file memory on will have Windows cache stuff onto your harddrive so there is always a RAM buffer. 

i heard that this is only really applicable to XP, and not Vista or W7

(err in terms of visible performance gains in Vista and W7 as compared to XP)

[QUOTE="AMD655"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Actually a modern gamer could easily hit 8-12 without trying that hard. I do all of the time. I'm happy I have 16 gigs. It's cheap anyways.

GarGx1

In an interview, Chris Roberts stated he expects Star Citizen to be looking for 8GB of system RAM, that's only 1 to 1.5 years away. There has been no mention of VRAM as yet other than some very loose prospective system requirements.