graphics - PS4 vs PC

slickdeals.net, research, rebates, it's not hard to do.

I think I would just have a hard time, even with that, staying under $450. Plus I'm a huge SSD fanboi, I'm NEVER going back to platters, so that right there kind of blows up that kind of budget.

at the time, ssds were not cheap, but they've come down considerably. I have an 80gb ssd and a 1tb hard drive. granted I had the tb hdd from my backup. the case was free after rebate. most of the money went into the gpu, cpu, and ram. also went with amd. made some sacrifices but wasn't a big deal. just built it for ps2.

Funny. My gaming rig was only ~$500 and it plays PS2 on Ultra just fine. Sure all I was buying was a CPU, GPU, and mobo. But that's whats nice about a PC, you don't have to replace the entire thing when it comes time to upgrade. Everything else carried over from the previous machine, including the RAM. My case and PSU have lived though 3 console generations. I can't say the same for any of the consoles I have owned over the years.

Its pretty hard to justify spending $400 on a console that can only do one thing when for a little more I can get a box that can do that one thing better and do a ton of other stuff too.

Ps4 basics

2GB gfx with some added witchery to boost performance 7/10 it works well
DDR5 2555MHZ 8gb stick 10/10 good RAM
CPU AMD(whafuq?) jaguar 8 core (sounds great doesn't it) @1.67ghz...... 1/10 dafuq?

SONY and jokesoft, with EVERYTHING THEY "LEARNT" stuck a shtty AMD in it that is more suited for MULTIPLE MOBILE APPS....

I think games run as well as they do on the Ps4 because devs can tailor things for the 1 spec.

You can't, it's just pseudo bs.

I am getting a new rig built cheap as fk for £500 off a friend.

Anywhere else it would come to about £850-£1000

All them "cheap win" rigs are sht. A ps4 brand new goes for as low as £175 ish now as well which i find to be ghetto cheap.

I wish they would turn down settings and let the PS4 run the game better. Put everything on low, render distance to maximum, shadows off completely. Maybe then it would be playable and more people would have stuck with it.(Servers were dead 2 weeks after launch)

At least give us the options to change the settings ourselves. I would gladly turn off everything if it ran the game better. Mostly player render/popup, a whole army can appear 3 feet infront of you out of nowhere.

i just want vsync on ps4.. honestly the game hardly ever gets above 30 fps so just cap it to that and save me from that disgusting tearing :c

keep dreaming you egocentric, probably US-American PC-Gamer lol... . JK, but seriously - what people always seem to forget is that "the average Gamer PC" - otherwise known as "the PC everybody is talking about" is - surprise, surprise - actually not just and only the average of what you get presented from current sales on the NA market... . but instead it is actually really that what it's friggin name is you unbelivable breads: "the current average of PC's on which Triple-A and so called Hardcore Games are being played on - actually standing at peoples homes, but of course WORLD-FRIGGIN-WIDE"!!

and this thing was contrary to a loooot of belives about kinda like insta-superiorities, instead such an utter piece of trash that it took it a THIRD TO A HALF DECADE to even just surpass that unspeakably Under-RAM'd FramelagStation 3 back in the day! so yes - since such a big part of the PC Gamer community gave up since then and moved over to consoles, the average of "Gaming Rigs" worldwide in use ATM has surly won alot back in quality again - and combining that with that the jump in evolution of consoles seems this generation not so big again, it certainly results in that not just of course your "$1,5k+ PC's" - but also the actual worldwide average in Gaming PC's in use for that ATM having sure surpassed us on cosole already by a quite notable amount. but, sorry - your guessing of the average gaming rig being at "1500 USD plus" was way, way over the top most definitley my man!

and don't worry, i didn't mean to offend or to search for any fightings here. i'm so totally used to NA and PC Gamer egocentrism - it definitley doesn't make me angry, even if it maybe might have sounded like that to some. but regardless of how entertaining the ridiculousness of it was to me - i just couldn't let it stand like this, not this time again. cheers!

A high end PC is obviously technically on another level. This is especially true with frame rate and draw distance.

But are the graphics really significantly better on PC? From what I've seen PC ultra looks the same as PS4 and Digital foundry thought so to. What exactly about PC graphics is supposed to be better? Better AA? Better textures? More alpha effects? What? Basically go through that digital foundry article and tell me exactly where it's wrong, not just 'it peecee so it loox da bests'.

Basically what I'm saying is DBG prioritized graphics on PS4 to the detriment of performance. Actually I think that was a bad decision and the game would be better to play if they'd targeted high graphics setting rather than ultra. The frame rate I can just about live with; full geometry pop in, not so much.

The draw distance on the ultra details is so small as well that they're pointless i find.

It seems to be around 0-3 metres draw distance and gets culled by the algorithm anyway.

Its not just the graphics -- the graphics on PC are super polished while maintaining a gritty feel on PS4, but its also the live map. The PS4 map feels dead, while the PC map feels alive and active. How can something so small and unrelated to game performance be so different? The PS4 is more than capable of playing a 4 year old game

No. It doesn't run PS2 just fine. It may run it fine for you, but if you think it runs Battlefront and Fallout 4 "fine" then your standards are exceptionally low.

Basically, if you're scaling back settings to make it run, you're not running it well. Maximum or nothing.

You obviously didn't read my posts. I run PS2 on ultra and I've been able to play everything from when I built my computer (again, 2012) til recently. The first issue I've had with a game was Star Wars Battlefront and I'm unable to run it on ultra. But thanks for responding.

I did read your posts. As Dr. House says:

Right. That's why I made this thread: Because I can't run planetside 2 on my PC. THAT would make sense. Where's the ignore button on this thing?

Err.
AMD X4 860k (overclocked to ~4.4 GHz Quad Core) 70€
Cheapest Mainboard you can find (e.g. ASRock) 40€
Case with inzegrated PSU (~500W) 60€
1 TB HDD 40€
Gtx 950 150€
8 GB DDR-3 1600MHz 30€
Mouse n Keyboard Combination 30€
Adds up to about ~420€ and performs noticeably better than a PS4.
Switch the Gtx 950 for a 750 Ti and you only pay 370€.
Maybe I forgot some part, but I dont think so.
New PS4s sell for 300€, thats too cheap to buy a PC thats better. Unless you want a AMD A10 7890k, and then youre facing the same problems like the PS4 (and you get less otimization)

Any PC can "run" Planetside 2 on Ultra. But if you're being honest, it probably turns into a slideshow in any major battle.

Thank you. And that is at retail prices. With inventory at saturated levels and sales in the gutter - rebates are everywhere and discounts are available that the masses know little about. But besides that, there's no point in arguing with Intel fanboys. When they price systems, all they see are 6th gen i7s. A properly cooled box and over clocked AMD is more than enough for this game.
Since 2010, current market hardware had exceeded gaming software requirements and, only recently, has gaming software caught up with it.
If they want to throw money into new market obsoletism more power to them

.