The new PS4 destroys all current top of the line PC's on the market

[roms15]

I am a PC Gamer, with a 3570k/680 gtx PC.

But wow, I am blown away by the specs of the new PS4, its gonna take the PC's a while to catch up when the next gen consoles are released.

[Vegetto991]

nice troll thread

[Azn00Superman]

I am a PC Gamer, with a 3570k/680 gtx PC.

But wow, I am blown away by the specs of the new PS4, its gonna take the PC's a while to catch up when the next gen consoles are released.

[roms15]

Not trolling and the question is do GPUs become dated "more quickly" with the arrival of new consoles as opposed to say the last 4 years where no new consoles came to market. Keeping in mind that although the hardware in consoles will never on par with PC, game developers are able to squeeze more out the HW since they do not have to deal with the fragmentation.

I'm just curious for those of you who had the GTX 7800/8800, did you find that your GPUs weren't cutting it shortly afterwards? Is this the trend?
It honestly depends.

You have to think how game developers have been treating console and PC games for the past several years since the 360 and PS3 were released in 2005.

The advantage the consoles had over the desktop PC was programming close to baremetal. Almost always it is a small OS kernel sitting between the hardware and the game. For example, for the PS3, the game is separated between a hypervisor (for security) and the OS and then the hardware. The 360 is modeled similarly to Windows on the PC but obviously a lot more optimized-- small kernel, single hardware configuration meant more focused drivers for each component of the console, and so on.

To put in it perspective: It was not until the first games released for DirectX 10 around 2007 on the PC showcased graphics that the 360 and PS3 have been doing since 2005. That meant games were a good two years behind the next gen console at the time of their release. And, these consoles were sporting either a modified Radeon 1950 GT for the 360 or a modified Nvidia 7800-series GPU in the PS3. The 360 was using a highly modified DirectX 9 that had features that wouldn't show up in DirectX 10 in Windows Vista released in 2006. Unfortunately, first DX10 games didn't show up ONE YEAR later. Crysis in 2007, as unoptimized the game was or how unprepared the hardware was at that time, showcased what's possible with DirectX 10. Unfortunately, both the 360 and PS3 were showcasing graphics on par to DX10 games released two years after their console's respective launches. As for the PS3, I would not be surprised the graphics API and console drivers/extensions had added features to OpenGL 2.0 that wasn't available until OpenGL 3.0 hardware released later on.

That's how optimized a game console is compared to a PC. You're talking about a single hardware configuration focused on doing one thing-- play games. That's not including media services such as movie streaming and music playback.

It wasn't until better games were released with higher resolution textures and higher polygon count on the PC and then DirectX 11 came about that the consoles actually were behind in graphics quality. So, we're talking about sometime around 2010, about five years after the 360 and PS3 launch.

It's unfortunate though that many games today on the PC are console ports not taking advantage of the full potential of a computer's graphical hardware. Of the very few games, and I'm talking about a handful of them, on the market today and to be released this year do indeed push graphics hardware on the PC quite a lot. Games such as the upcoming Bioshock game, Battlefield 3, Farcry 3, Metro Last Light and a few other games.

So, when we talk about the next generation consoles from Sony and Microsoft that may be released either the end of this year or some time in 2014, we can apply that same logic to the console and PC games again. Why? Just take a good hard look at game development between consoles and PCs, and console ports in general. Then, take what I said above. Put that altogether and you'll have a very good idea what the games will be.

The next generation consoles will, again, use mid-range graphics hardware released in the last six to seven years if I'm assuming research into a console successor began one year after the 360's and PS3's launch dates. And, if AMD is the rumored GPU in both of Sony's and Microsoft's consoles, we're looking at a mid-range Radeon 4000, 5000, and 6000 series GPU.

Now, we begin the process of elimination. Assuming that Microsoft will opt for DirectX 11 at minimum, we can eliminate the Radeon 4000 series altogether. That leaves the Radeon 5000 and 6000 series. For the next PS4, it'll be OpenGL and for that to have features on par with DX11, we're looking at OpenGL 4.0 minimum. That would mean OpenGL 4.2 capable hardware-- Radeon 5000 and 6000 series.

Next, we consider power usage and the case size of the next consoles. The 360 has been known to have problems with overheating. The PS3 has had similar cases but not at the same number of failures as the 360. Therefore, we eliminate Radeon 5800-series and Radeon 6900-series. This leaves us with Radeon 5700-series and Radeon 6800-series.

Unlikely that Microsoft will repeat the same mistakes, the next GPUs will have to be on a 32nm or 28nm process. This should allow something like a Radeon 5770 or Radeon 6850/6870 to fit within a power profile of either console. And, that would be the HIGHEST possible GPU in my assumption.

If they are going to use an AMD APU of some kind, we're looking at no higher than a Radeon 6550 GPU (Llano) or Radeon 7660D (Trinity). So, these would be the lowest GPU possible in either console.

At bare minimum, I assume these games will be running at constant 30 FPS or 60 FPS, with 2X to 4X AA (MSAA or similar), 1080p maximum resolution (1920x1080), and the equivalent to a PC game with medium to medium-high settings. Textures and 3D data will need to fit within at minimum 1 GB of VRAM to at most 2 GB of VRAM at the same time.

Given that, take the same hardware optimization of the PS3 and 360 before them, and we're talking about the next gen console games that are on par with PC games that are currently DX 10.1 or DX 11 games. Give them more optimization from the developers themselves, the next gen console games will probably look better than PC games within two years if going by my two year assumption from above.

Looking at it that way, current DirectX 11/OpenGL 4.2 graphics hardware we have today will be the bare minimum to keep up with the next generation consoles. So, we're talking about Radeon 5000 or Geforce 400 series at the bare minimum. To stay on par or slightly ahead of the curve, or on par with the consoles coming out, Radeon 6000 or 7000 series, or Geforce 500 or 600 series minimum.

Unfortunately, if the trend continues that PC games look no different than their console counterparts, I wouldn't expect PC games at minimum two years after the next Xbox or PS4 release to actually match or exceed them in graphics quality. Again, assuming the two year gap as it was before between the PS3/360 and DirectX 10 games. So, we're looking at graphics cards like the Radeon 8000/9000/10000 or Geforce 700/800/900 series graphics cards with DirectX 11.1 or DirectX 12 capability. And, that's assuming PC game developers continue to push game graphics further on the PC that would't be possible in the limitations of a console. But, for that to happen, it'll take time and that is why I assume at least two years if going by the previous 360/PS3 launch and DirectX 10 game releases.

So, if you have a Radeon 4000-series or Geforce 200-series, upgrade to the generation or two above that-- Radeon 5000 and higher, or Geforce 400 and higher. You will be fine until next gen console games become more optimized and look better than the PC counterparts. And, since most PC games will be nothing more than console ports once these next gen consoles are released, you can still keep that video card. Until game developers on the PC take advantage of more powerful hardware available to PC users and possible new DirectX or OpenGL APIs like DX11.1, DX 12 or OpenGL 4.3 or 5 (?), then consider upgrading again. But, you will have to wait for that to happen and that's probably some time after these next generation consoles are released-- games and video cards released in 2015 at minimum to 2016.

[cncman]

Not trolling and the question is do GPUs become dated "more quickly" with the arrival of new consoles as opposed to say the last 4 years where no new consoles came to market. Keeping in mind that although the hardware in consoles will never on par with PC, game developers are able to squeeze more out the HW since they do not have to deal with the fragmentation.

I'm just curious for those of you who had the GTX 7800/8800, did you find that your GPUs weren't cutting it shortly afterwards? Is this the trend?
It honestly depends.

You have to think how game developers have been treating console and PC games for the past several years since the 360 and PS3 were released in 2005.

The advantage the consoles had over the desktop PC was programming close to baremetal. Almost always it is a small OS kernel sitting between the hardware and the game. For example, for the PS3, the game is separated between a hypervisor (for security) and the OS and then the hardware. The 360 is modeled similarly to Windows on the PC but obviously a lot more optimized-- small kernel, single hardware configuration meant more focused drivers for each component of the console, and so on.

To put in it perspective: It was not until the first games released for DirectX 10 around 2007 on the PC showcased graphics that the 360 and PS3 have been doing since 2005. That meant games were a good two years behind the next gen console at the time of their release. And, these consoles were sporting either a modified Radeon 1950 GT for the 360 or a modified Nvidia 7800-series GPU in the PS3. The 360 was using a highly modified DirectX 9 that had features that wouldn't show up in DirectX 10 in Windows Vista released in 2006. Unfortunately, first DX10 games didn't show up ONE YEAR later. Crysis in 2007, as unoptimized the game was or how unprepared the hardware was at that time, showcased what's possible with DirectX 10. Unfortunately, both the 360 and PS3 were showcasing graphics on par to DX10 games released two years after their console's respective launches. As for the PS3, I would not be surprised the graphics API and console drivers/extensions had added features to OpenGL 2.0 that wasn't available until OpenGL 3.0 hardware released later on.

That's how optimized a game console is compared to a PC. You're talking about a single hardware configuration focused on doing one thing-- play games. That's not including media services such as movie streaming and music playback.

It wasn't until better games were released with higher resolution textures and higher polygon count on the PC and then DirectX 11 came about that the consoles actually were behind in graphics quality. So, we're talking about sometime around 2010, about five years after the 360 and PS3 launch.

It's unfortunate though that many games today on the PC are console ports not taking advantage of the full potential of a computer's graphical hardware. Of the very few games, and I'm talking about a handful of them, on the market today and to be released this year do indeed push graphics hardware on the PC quite a lot. Games such as the upcoming Bioshock game, Battlefield 3, Farcry 3, Metro Last Light and a few other games.

So, when we talk about the next generation consoles from Sony and Microsoft that may be released either the end of this year or some time in 2014, we can apply that same logic to the console and PC games again. Why? Just take a good hard look at game development between consoles and PCs, and console ports in general. Then, take what I said above. Put that altogether and you'll have a very good idea what the games will be.

The next generation consoles will, again, use mid-range graphics hardware released in the last six to seven years if I'm assuming research into a console successor began one year after the 360's and PS3's launch dates. And, if AMD is the rumored GPU in both of Sony's and Microsoft's consoles, we're looking at a mid-range Radeon 4000, 5000, and 6000 series GPU.

Now, we begin the process of elimination. Assuming that Microsoft will opt for DirectX 11 at minimum, we can eliminate the Radeon 4000 series altogether. That leaves the Radeon 5000 and 6000 series. For the next PS4, it'll be OpenGL and for that to have features on par with DX11, we're looking at OpenGL 4.0 minimum. That would mean OpenGL 4.2 capable hardware-- Radeon 5000 and 6000 series.

Next, we consider power usage and the case size of the next consoles. The 360 has been known to have problems with overheating. The PS3 has had similar cases but not at the same number of failures as the 360. Therefore, we eliminate Radeon 5800-series and Radeon 6900-series. This leaves us with Radeon 5700-series and Radeon 6800-series.

Unlikely that Microsoft will repeat the same mistakes, the next GPUs will have to be on a 32nm or 28nm process. This should allow something like a Radeon 5770 or Radeon 6850/6870 to fit within a power profile of either console. And, that would be the HIGHEST possible GPU in my assumption.

If they are going to use an AMD APU of some kind, we're looking at no higher than a Radeon 6550 GPU (Llano) or Radeon 7660D (Trinity). So, these would be the lowest GPU possible in either console.

At bare minimum, I assume these games will be running at constant 30 FPS or 60 FPS, with 2X to 4X AA (MSAA or similar), 1080p maximum resolution (1920x1080), and the equivalent to a PC game with medium to medium-high settings. Textures and 3D data will need to fit within at minimum 1 GB of VRAM to at most 2 GB of VRAM at the same time.

Given that, take the same hardware optimization of the PS3 and 360 before them, and we're talking about the next gen console games that are on par with PC games that are currently DX 10.1 or DX 11 games. Give them more optimization from the developers themselves, the next gen console games will probably look better than PC games within two years if going by my two year assumption from above.

Looking at it that way, current DirectX 11/OpenGL 4.2 graphics hardware we have today will be the bare minimum to keep up with the next generation consoles. So, we're talking about Radeon 5000 or Geforce 400 series at the bare minimum. To stay on par or slightly ahead of the curve, or on par with the consoles coming out, Radeon 6000 or 7000 series, or Geforce 500 or 600 series minimum.

Unfortunately, if the trend continues that PC games look no different than their console counterparts, I wouldn't expect PC games at minimum two years after the next Xbox or PS4 release to actually match or exceed them in graphics quality. Again, assuming the two year gap as it was before between the PS3/360 and DirectX 10 games. So, we're looking at graphics cards like the Radeon 8000/9000/10000 or Geforce 700/800/900 series graphics cards with DirectX 11.1 or DirectX 12 capability. And, that's assuming PC game developers continue to push game graphics further on the PC that would't be possible in the limitations of a console. But, for that to happen, it'll take time and that is why I assume at least two years if going by the previous 360/PS3 launch and DirectX 10 game releases.

So, if you have a Radeon 4000-series or Geforce 200-series, upgrade to the generation or two above that-- Radeon 5000 and higher, or Geforce 400 and higher. You will be fine until next gen console games become more optimized and look better than the PC counterparts. And, since most PC games will be nothing more than console ports once these next gen consoles are released, you can still keep that video card. Until game developers on the PC take advantage of more powerful hardware available to PC users and possible new DirectX or OpenGL APIs like DX11.1, DX 12 or OpenGL 4.3 or 5 (?), then consider upgrading again. But, you will have to wait for that to happen and that's probably some time after these next generation consoles are released-- games and video cards released in 2015 at minimum to 2016.

tldr

[roms15]

tldr

well its a shame, that post will explain why PC gpu will fall behind at the release of a new console

[KrayzieMiscer]

wow did anyone see those graphics just now??

fuuuuuuuuuuck

[ShoryuBrah]

in on roll bread

[SpasticNutcase]

cant wait for new xbox release, still watching the PS4 reveal now

[Vegetto991]

well damn if it can play a graphically intensive game like diablo iii I guess you are right op!

[Krunk Fu]

You guys haven't heard? They are releasing the PC 5000! It's actually 4 dimensional, so you can get digital blow jobs. PS4 dun goofed

[suparstarx]

You can already play games of that detail on the PC right now. But the software is different when you have titles made for one specific set of hardware configurations for consoles versus PC games that have multiple configurations.

[Celticsfan94]

killzone graphics looking pretty good:

http://www.********.com/photo.php?v=...type=2&theater

[Newwt]

Um no, Watchdog dev just said games were running on PC with PS4 specs on Gametrailers live stream.

be gone console peasant.

[tdnick]

Um no, Watchdog dev just said games were running on PC with PS4 specs on Gametrailers live stream.

be gone console peasant.

How does that change anything?

[JM18]

Um no, Watchdog dev just said games were running on PC with PS4 specs on Gametrailers live stream.

be gone console peasant.

watch dogs looks so sick. also it will be on all consoles/pc, even wiiu. game comes out this holiday

[SevnStars]

in.

[Forest239]

killzone graphics looking pretty good:

http://www.********.com/photo.php?v=...type=2&theater

Holy chit....

I wonder what Xbox has to compare. They have a longer time before they release specs so I hope they out do the PS4. (no homer but I am a Halo brah)

[suparstarx]

watch dogs looks so sick. also it will be on all consoles/pc, even wiiu. game comes out this holiday

but the Wii-U isn't next gen Kappa

[wayprotein]

To put in it perspective: It was not until the first games released for DirectX 10 around 2007 on the PC showcased graphics that the 360 and PS3 have been doing since 2005. That meant games were a good two years behind the next gen console at the time of their release.

ROFL no not even close

Doom 3 was released for PC in 2004 it was released a year later on xbox 360 and looked liked blurred sh!t by comparison.

[ShangTsung]

Nice try OP.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/02/21/pc...-winner-right/

Someone close this thread now.

[YesWayNoWeigh]

pc tards are so insecure

[SynapticCleft]

Not trolling and the question is do GPUs become dated "more quickly" with the arrival of new consoles as opposed to say the last 4 years where no new consoles came to market. Keeping in mind that although the hardware in consoles will never on par with PC, game developers are able to squeeze more out the HW since they do not have to deal with the fragmentation.

I'm just curious for those of you who had the GTX 7800/8800, did you find that your GPUs weren't cutting it shortly afterwards? Is this the trend?
It honestly depends.

You have to think how game developers have been treating console and PC games for the past several years since the 360 and PS3 were released in 2005.

The advantage the consoles had over the desktop PC was programming close to baremetal. Almost always it is a small OS kernel sitting between the hardware and the game. For example, for the PS3, the game is separated between a hypervisor (for security) and the OS and then the hardware. The 360 is modeled similarly to Windows on the PC but obviously a lot more optimized-- small kernel, single hardware configuration meant more focused drivers for each component of the console, and so on.

To put in it perspective: It was not until the first games released for DirectX 10 around 2007 on the PC showcased graphics that the 360 and PS3 have been doing since 2005. That meant games were a good two years behind the next gen console at the time of their release. And, these consoles were sporting either a modified Radeon 1950 GT for the 360 or a modified Nvidia 7800-series GPU in the PS3. The 360 was using a highly modified DirectX 9 that had features that wouldn't show up in DirectX 10 in Windows Vista released in 2006. Unfortunately, first DX10 games didn't show up ONE YEAR later. Crysis in 2007, as unoptimized the game was or how unprepared the hardware was at that time, showcased what's possible with DirectX 10. Unfortunately, both the 360 and PS3 were showcasing graphics on par to DX10 games released two years after their console's respective launches. As for the PS3, I would not be surprised the graphics API and console drivers/extensions had added features to OpenGL 2.0 that wasn't available until OpenGL 3.0 hardware released later on.

That's how optimized a game console is compared to a PC. You're talking about a single hardware configuration focused on doing one thing-- play games. That's not including media services such as movie streaming and music playback.

It wasn't until better games were released with higher resolution textures and higher polygon count on the PC and then DirectX 11 came about that the consoles actually were behind in graphics quality. So, we're talking about sometime around 2010, about five years after the 360 and PS3 launch.

It's unfortunate though that many games today on the PC are console ports not taking advantage of the full potential of a computer's graphical hardware. Of the very few games, and I'm talking about a handful of them, on the market today and to be released this year do indeed push graphics hardware on the PC quite a lot. Games such as the upcoming Bioshock game, Battlefield 3, Farcry 3, Metro Last Light and a few other games.

So, when we talk about the next generation consoles from Sony and Microsoft that may be released either the end of this year or some time in 2014, we can apply that same logic to the console and PC games again. Why? Just take a good hard look at game development between consoles and PCs, and console ports in general. Then, take what I said above. Put that altogether and you'll have a very good idea what the games will be.

The next generation consoles will, again, use mid-range graphics hardware released in the last six to seven years if I'm assuming research into a console successor began one year after the 360's and PS3's launch dates. And, if AMD is the rumored GPU in both of Sony's and Microsoft's consoles, we're looking at a mid-range Radeon 4000, 5000, and 6000 series GPU.

Now, we begin the process of elimination. Assuming that Microsoft will opt for DirectX 11 at minimum, we can eliminate the Radeon 4000 series altogether. That leaves the Radeon 5000 and 6000 series. For the next PS4, it'll be OpenGL and for that to have features on par with DX11, we're looking at OpenGL 4.0 minimum. That would mean OpenGL 4.2 capable hardware-- Radeon 5000 and 6000 series.

Next, we consider power usage and the case size of the next consoles. The 360 has been known to have problems with overheating. The PS3 has had similar cases but not at the same number of failures as the 360. Therefore, we eliminate Radeon 5800-series and Radeon 6900-series. This leaves us with Radeon 5700-series and Radeon 6800-series.

Unlikely that Microsoft will repeat the same mistakes, the next GPUs will have to be on a 32nm or 28nm process. This should allow something like a Radeon 5770 or Radeon 6850/6870 to fit within a power profile of either console. And, that would be the HIGHEST possible GPU in my assumption.

If they are going to use an AMD APU of some kind, we're looking at no higher than a Radeon 6550 GPU (Llano) or Radeon 7660D (Trinity). So, these would be the lowest GPU possible in either console.

At bare minimum, I assume these games will be running at constant 30 FPS or 60 FPS, with 2X to 4X AA (MSAA or similar), 1080p maximum resolution (1920x1080), and the equivalent to a PC game with medium to medium-high settings. Textures and 3D data will need to fit within at minimum 1 GB of VRAM to at most 2 GB of VRAM at the same time.

Given that, take the same hardware optimization of the PS3 and 360 before them, and we're talking about the next gen console games that are on par with PC games that are currently DX 10.1 or DX 11 games. Give them more optimization from the developers themselves, the next gen console games will probably look better than PC games within two years if going by my two year assumption from above.

Looking at it that way, current DirectX 11/OpenGL 4.2 graphics hardware we have today will be the bare minimum to keep up with the next generation consoles. So, we're talking about Radeon 5000 or Geforce 400 series at the bare minimum. To stay on par or slightly ahead of the curve, or on par with the consoles coming out, Radeon 6000 or 7000 series, or Geforce 500 or 600 series minimum.

Unfortunately, if the trend continues that PC games look no different than their console counterparts, I wouldn't expect PC games at minimum two years after the next Xbox or PS4 release to actually match or exceed them in graphics quality. Again, assuming the two year gap as it was before between the PS3/360 and DirectX 10 games. So, we're looking at graphics cards like the Radeon 8000/9000/10000 or Geforce 700/800/900 series graphics cards with DirectX 11.1 or DirectX 12 capability. And, that's assuming PC game developers continue to push game graphics further on the PC that would't be possible in the limitations of a console. But, for that to happen, it'll take time and that is why I assume at least two years if going by the previous 360/PS3 launch and DirectX 10 game releases.

So, if you have a Radeon 4000-series or Geforce 200-series, upgrade to the generation or two above that-- Radeon 5000 and higher, or Geforce 400 and higher. You will be fine until next gen console games become more optimized and look better than the PC counterparts. And, since most PC games will be nothing more than console ports once these next gen consoles are released, you can still keep that video card. Until game developers on the PC take advantage of more powerful hardware available to PC users and possible new DirectX or OpenGL APIs like DX11.1, DX 12 or OpenGL 4.3 or 5 (?), then consider upgrading again. But, you will have to wait for that to happen and that's probably some time after these next generation consoles are released-- games and video cards released in 2015 at minimum to 2016.

Should put this in OP. Long but good read

Agreed with OP though, PC have better hardware, but console hardware are sporting a different architecture than their PC equivalent. Game developers optimize codes for games better on consoles than on PC. So what OP says about PS4 having better graphics is true. However OP puts a lot of speculation into his explanation. If coding is the only issue, PC will see update drivers for graphics cards and patches for DX11 to handle the new code that PS4 and new Xbox will bring.

[Max1mu5]

Sorry but those pre rendered settings were running on PCs and I will guarantee the graphics will not look that good when it actually releases because the "gameplay" will be edited to look really good like all game trailers these days with adobe after effects.

Flashback to the PS3 unveiling with the doctored Killzone 2 vid and the real game looked nowhere near as good.

[AXnyc]

[crosso]

How anyone can compare the last gen is beyond me. PC's running at 1080p vs consoles running below 720p lol
The same thing will happen here. 1080p is standard for PC, with a lot of people going beyond that now. Consoles are now only just able to render 1080p, and even then the gameplay is pre-rendered running on PC hardware. What actual gameplay will look like is probably comparable to high settings of high end pc games, no where near ultra.

[thewiz8807]

Nah bro.

[wowbob396]

well its a shame, that post will explain why PC gpu will fall behind at the release of a new console

so wait if I am getting your original post (don't want to quote it to minimize scrolling), the stats of the GPUs being used in the next gen consoles don't necessarily have a ton of horse power as compared to other high end GPUs but rather, the optimization and the fact that there is far less of a gap between the program and the hardware itself means it is a lot easier to code? Sorry if I am just regurgitating what you just said or butchered it, but if what I said is correct then it isn't it kind of a shame that they don't put as much time into PC game optimization, albeit a bit trickier, to make PC games much better than what they are currently. They probably do it though to cater to the casuals to get an equal experience to PC games.

[AXnyc]

[QUOTE=wowbob396;1029049883][quote]well its a shame, that post will explain why PC gpu will fall behind at the release of a new console

so wait if I am getting your original post (don't want to quote it to minimize scrolling), the stats of the GPUs being used in the next gen consoles don't necessarily have a ton of horse power as compared to other high end GPUs but rather, the optimization and the fact that there is far less of a gap between the program and the hardware itself means it is a lot easier to code? Sorry if I am just regurgitating what you just said or butchered it, but if what I said is correct then it isn't it kind of a shame that they don't put as much time into PC game optimization, albeit a bit trickier, to make PC games much better than what they are currently. They probably do it though to cater to the casuals to get an equal experience to PC games.

Exactly. They can't do it for PCs because people have 20 different videocards with 20 different cpus who purchase their pc games. The only way they can really do this if they select a certain spec and optimize it to that, problem is you would isolate majority of your customers.

If you were to put 690GTX into the new PS4, the latest current cpu and 8-10gig of ram and optimize games only for that spec.....shiiiiiiit......whatever they released today would look like **** to tech demos they could push with the hardware i mentioned. This is also why we need next gen consoles to push pc gaming further.

Look up XBOX360 hardware specs then take a pc with the same specs, that pc wont be able to run most of the newer games that have been ported to xbox360 with those specs because developers can optimize those games so well on "closed" hardware.

[Auburn RSX-S]

Deep down gameplay in-engine reveal. IS THIS REAL LIFE?

I'm a die hard pc gamer but please show me anything on a PC that looks remotely like this.