Next Gen Console Graphics - PC Comparison

[Kappa Omicron]

Hey everyone,

I'm sadly not in a good financial position to pick up any of the next gen consoles this year and I was just wondering if anyone could answer a question I have about the graphics of both Xbox One and PS4 are compared to other graphic cards we can install into our computer systems.

I switched from mainly console gaming to PC gaming around two years ago now after building my own gaming PC for quite a hefty price, but the way I saw it was, in the long run, I would be saving much more money on games because instead of buying them for £40 on a console, I could wait for Steam sales or sometimes they just are much cheaper on PC.

The graphic card I currently have installed is a GTX 560 Ti, which I'm quite happy with from what I've been able to get out of the games I've played so far this year. (most recently Witcher 2 & Tomb Raider, graphics were stunning on high). Obviously I wish I could afford a newer card, which I do plan on doing sometime in 2014 actually. But enough of that and on to my question:

I can't tell exactly how powerful the new Playstation's and Xbox's graphic cards are by what they say they're called, so could someone say what their graphic card equivalent is based on what graphic cards are available for computer systems now?

Because from what I've seen from someo f the next gen game's like Destiny etc (hoping to come on PC someday fingers crossed), I'm very impressed by their graphic quality and I'd just like to know if my GTX 560 Ti would be on par with them all, so I would be getting the same graphic quality next gen games are but on the PC. Because if my GTX 560 Ti can still keep up with the graphic quality of these next gen games, it'll make waiting until I can afford to purchase one much better since I can just get the same graphical quality on my PC with cheaper games while I wait until I can afford one of those next gen consoles to play some of their exclusives that I won't be able to get on PC.

Thank you very much for reading, and I hope someone knows what kind of graphic card specs exactly these next gen consoles are using.

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

PS4: somewhere between HD 7850 and HD 7870.

XBox One: somewhere between HD 7770 and HD 7790.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

So your current card is better then XBox One and only slightly slower then PS4.

[Jhemp12]

the gpu in the ps4 is about equal to a hd radeon 7850.

[Soulwatcher]

I seen the PS4 and trust me your not missing anything. The PS4 graphics look like a mid range PC at best. Just buy yourself a GTX760 and you will blow a PS4 out of the water.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Depends on the games u wish to get, and the resolutions, and quality u expect.
Not to mention your CPU and RAM.

Overall a GTX 560 Ti should be able to hold it's own @ approx 1440x900 or lower in most games. But above that res, and in more demanding games like BF4, NFS Rivals, WatchDogs, AC4 BlackFlag; you will want a better GPU for current/future games.

On my older system we still use around here at home for the kids to play on, given it's age and specs (AMD AM2+ Dual-Core 3Ghz, 4GB DDR3, GTX 560, Win7 x64) it can still hold it's own in most games like Metro 2033, Last Light, NFS MostWanted, BF3, AC3, FC3. But again that is not near maxed out quality settings, or HD res. Some of these games we've had to turn down to around 720/768p in order to get a smooth/stable frame-rate. But some like MostWanted and AC3, ran just fine @ 1080p with the quality settings cranked up or maxed.

While the "next-gen" consoles are nice, they will always be a gen or two behind the capabilities of PC/Mac hardware. Also you may be surprised at just how many "next-gen" games run @ 720p in order to run @ 60 FPS. While there are plenty of 1080p games on the consoles, those will generally run @ 30 FPS.


Bottom line, get something like GTX 760 or Radeon R9 280 and you should be fine til 2015 or so.

[senseidongen]

I was reading about the Xbone architecture and the Microsoft architect said something to the effect of, "We actually found in most cases that we're CPU limited". First of all, no surprises given the 1.65 GHz Jaguar CPU architecture which is actually for power saving reasons (4 cores on 2 piledriver modules would have been more powerful but more power hungry). Secondly, it illustrates that although the above people are correct in terms of core count and GFLOPS, it's not an apples and apples comparison.

Initially, I reckon you'll see better visuals from a PC with a similar GPU and better CPU (very few console launch titles even run at 1080p - most are 900p and some are still at the PS3/360 720p res), but over time as developers get better at optimising, the consoles will begin to have equal then better visuals... by which point, even more powerful GPUs will be cheaper and more prevalent in gaming PCs - that's actually already pretty much true.

One area where consoles have the advantage is in reduced OS and API overhead, but if SteamOS proves to be as light as Valve claim and Mantle becomes widely adopted/DirectX improves significantly further then this advantage will be eroded...

[LoTekRabbit]

If it was the year 2010 they'd be considered high end PC's. They can't even do 1080P @ a solid 60 frames.

Crysis 2 from 2009 on max settings looks better than whatever they have shown on the new consoles.