graphics - PS4 vs PC

Just wondering - why is there such a difference in graphics on PC and PS4? My PC plays PS2 perfectly on Ultra and looks very nice, draw distances are great, no rendering issues, yet on PS4 the graphics, rendering, and overall polish are noticeably worse? I played SW: battlefront on my PC and it does not play well on ULTRA, yet on PS4 it looks great - probably the best looking game out on PS4 right now.
So why is there such a major difference and are there any plans to increase the resolution on PS2 for PS4?

I'm not entirely sure about the reasons for the quality of graphics being worse on PS4, except that the hardware is just weaker. But I do believe that rendering in PS4 isn't a GPU limitation. It's a CPU limitation based on the character, object, and projectile calculations required as you add more people into a fight. Example...try sniping at a large Crown battle sometime. You really can't see very far despite knowing enemies "should" be visible from certain distances. Evidence of that fact is that you'll see rockets and projectiles enter your view, but are unable to see the source of the projectile.

Because PS2 is a heavily CPU dependent game, and console CPUs are trash tier.

I wouldnt have put it that way. But yes. Console CPUs are trash. The GPU might be fine for high settings (with a lot of tweaking and keep in mind a Console does only need 30 FPS) but the CPU is way too weak to stand a chance.

because Glorious PC Master Race
on a more serious note, PC's are always more graphically impressive because companies can pump all the graphical mojo they want into their games and some crazy folks will have the powerhouse to run it
console games are limited by the hardware of their console
ps4 for example has 8 gigs of RAM, the cpu is only running at 1.6ghz, it doesn't seem to have dedicated VRAM either
most modern PCs have 16gig+ RAM, a cpu clock of 3ghz atleast and atleast 2 gigs of VRAM

Average Gaming Rig = $1,500+
Playstation 4 = $400

Any questions?

Ironically the PS4's software is more efficient then standard PC Windows at rendering graphics, but we on the PC side can just throw tons of silicon at the problem and the PS4 cannot.

I built my computer

Cost is irrelevant. I built my PC on a budget in 2012 specifically to play planetside 2 and paid $450 (already had monitors)

Looks like the PS4 CPU is the bottleneck. I didn't realize how under-powered it was, especially considering how Battlefront can look so glossy. PS2 on PS4 Still a good game; don't get me wrong - just wish it was optimized better.

holy fak, really??

that's just... sad.

That's practically mobile computing level CPU right there.

I'm not sure how you can say "cost is irrelevant". The expression "You get what you pay for" definatley applies here. People expect a $400 gaming box to have the computing/GPU power of a gaming PC for a fraction of the price. It's just not going to happen.

As I've already stated, my $450 gaming machine (from 2012) runs PS2 on the highest settings. Granted I don't get 144FPS like an i7-based machine would, it's still more than the 30fps on my ps4. So yes, price is irrelevant, especially when the PS4 is capable of running star wars battlefront with the differences between it and a PC on ultra being minimal.

Well, PS4's CPU has 8-cores, so its quite a few steps above a mobile machine, but it does appear to be the bottleneck for this game.

Look I mean no offense, but not even in 2012 could you call a $450 PC a "gaming machine".

k. well, we'll refer to it as my "pc-i-built-in-2012-and-optimized-for-gaming machine" and it runs ps2 just fine. in fact I've been able to play everything up until star wars battlefront and fallout 4. I appreciate your input. next

What you call it is irrelevant. The fact that an equal priced PC can perform better than ps4 remains.

Equally priced? Most any decent video card is going to run you 50%+ the cost of a PS4 alone.

And he built his PC in 2012. Are we even comparing apples to apples on this?

PS4 has like 1500m maximum render distance while PC version has 2700 (on Amerish). Btw remember al that talk back then about how PS4 would look better than PC and would allow improvements of the PC graphics?

Frankly I'm honestly surprised the PS4 can run Planetside2 as well as it does. When I first heard it was coming to a console, I thought they were crazy!

more cores, but not more single thread GHz processing...

So yeah, better, but not by a landslide.

I'd FAAAAAAAR prefer a 3.0GHz quad core to a 1.3 8-core.

I've been building PCs for 18 years now and the one thing that has remained constant is the price of new-to-market technology. So while my PC in 2012 cost $450 and probably more like $800-$900 if you were to buy it in-shop with a name attached to it, that same $450 today would buy an even better PC than I built in 2012. And I'm talking parts and piecing one together. Not going to your amazon catalog and picking up an Alienware (which btw, I could build for half the price).

My point, a $2,000 "gaming machine" today is not any less expensive than a $2,000 "gaming machine" in 1999, and both would be top of the line in their own respective time period.

Either way, you completely missed the point that my $450 machine runs Planetside 2 fine, while my PS4 does not, while at the SAME TIME, my PS4 runs battlefront flawlessly, and a much higher resolution and settings than that same PC.

I've been system building for years too. But how do you even build a "gaming PC" for $450??? I wouldn't even try, too many compromises. Not enough performance.