Do you think your PC is powerful than the Xbox Series X?

[☄️⁧⁧Sneakydude555]

I kinda dont think mine is. its pretty old hardware. though, my pc can still play modern games nowadays

[Boxer]

Messaggio originale di RRW359:

Messaggio originale di Boxer:

Both the 360 and PS3 were outdated on launch, the PS3's CELL CPU was made in a way that made it unusable and required complete rewrites for games to work on it wich means it was trash because hidden potential is useless if devs can't use it, but hey at least that generation of consoles was the last one to deserve that name, the platforms being sold now are just cheap mini-PCs for dumb people that can't manage Windows and need an OS that is usable by a children and to be spoonfed everything.

I said the PS3 was more powerful, not easier to make better-looking/performing games.

More powerful but cannot even run simple games = trash
And you know why Sony said that the CELL CPU was better than the one in the PS4? because that console is using a custom tablet CPU lmao.

[Snow]

Messaggio originale di Boxer:

Messaggio originale di Snow:

Uhm, no? GF2 GTS had 1.6 GFLOPS and PS2 had 6.2 GFLOPS.

I think that you should google it.

Yeah, exactly what I did.
Here are that card specifications.
https://videocardz.net/nvidia-geforce2-gts-64mb/
2 years after PS2 release, GF 4 Ti 4600, still just 2.4 GFLOPS.
https://videocardz.net/nvidia-geforce4-ti-4600/
Here is an article about NVidia graphics cards.
http://gameforestii.blogspot.com/2018/02/evolution-of-nvidia-geforce-1999-2017.html
If you've got some other at least semi-reliable sources - please, do provide, else you're just making things up.

Messaggio originale di Boxer:

Consoles share system memory with the GPU, meaning that you would basically max out the ram even with minecraft considering windows 10 alone eats 4 to 6gb.

Well, more like 4.4GB with Steam, a bunch of messengers and Chrome with 13 tabs, all that plus the fact I use superfetching which also eats a bit of RAM to speed up applications launching, but yeah, I get you.
Although you should also keep in mind the fact that HD 7770 only has 1GB of VRAM, not that much of a difference between 8GB total memory and 9GB. I've played with 8GB RAM and HD 7770 for years - believe me, it's more than playable on Win10, man I've played stuff like GTAV 60FPS just fine. Low graphics tho, as I wanted to keep my HD+ res on. Oh, and by the way, desktop PCs also share system memory with the graphics card, only the difference between GDDR5 and DDR3 speeds can result in stutters.

Messaggio originale di Boxer:

the games you listed can be played on these specs (except GTA V because we never got the xbox 360 ultra downgraded release on PC), sure consoles have better optimization cause of fixed hardware but its not enough to make a big difference.

Nope, they can not. San Andreas with 32MB RAM - are you kidding? The game requires 32MB of VRAM to only let you somewhat-play 800x600 low settings, and minimum system requirements list 256MB of RAM. I can imagine it launching on 128MB, but 32MB of RAM - man, I just wish you lived nearby, I've got all kind of stuff starting with Pentium 3 that goes in slot, like not in socked, but in slot like graphics card, I'd love us to try find a way to make GTA:SA run on 32MB of RAM.
PCs also got fixed hardware. I mean, every modern PC has got x86-64 CPU with/without SMT, and RISC graphics card, with only differences being how much memory there is and how fast parts can do the thing, but they do exactly the same thing. CELL's co-processors were indeed the holy grail of potential optimisation, but we both know how it ended up in devs go "hell no" and Sony go "let's pretend you didn't see that, go check our new little weird laptop called PS4".
Most of "optimisation" these days is just tweaking settings to the point it doesn't stutter and it looks fine, as if a game runs fine on a console - it basically should run just the same on PC with a similar specs. Unless Batman, now that was ♥♥♥♥♥♥ up for sure, they didn't expect UE3 to feel such a pain streaming assets at more than 30FPS lol.

[RRW359]

Messaggio originale di Boxer:

Messaggio originale di Snow:

Then go run Devil May Cry 3 on a PC with 32MB RAM. Or GTA: San Andreas. Or run GTAV on 256MB of RAM like X360 did.
Some things you can compare directly, some - not.

the games you listed can be played on these specs (except GTA V because we never got the xbox 360 ultra downgraded release on PC), sure consoles have better optimization cause of fixed hardware but its not enough to make a big difference.

When GTA 5 came out it was for a console nearing the end of its life that had already been without a successor longer than most consoles, of course PC's were more powerful.

Messaggio originale di Boxer:

Messaggio originale di RRW359:

I said the PS3 was more powerful, not easier to make better-looking/performing games.

More powerful but cannot even run simple games = trash
And you know why Sony said that the CELL CPU was better than the one in the PS4? because that console is using a custom tablet CPU lmao.

Consoles have started off more powerful than PC's for most of their history
≠
I think consoles are *better than PC's in modern times.

*Although TBH even though PC's are better in most situations, a lot of their stated advantages aren't as pronounced as people claim. While a PC is the best option for most people, there are situations where having a console is the better choice to recommend to people, even in 2019.

[Snow]

Messaggio originale di Boxer:

Games are not playable at 30FPS lmao, after i moved to PC, even if i just have a 60hz monitor i still get a ton of motion sickness if i try to play on a console or limit a PC game to 30FPS.

That depends on of the game is designed to be played at 30. Say recently re-released Quantic Dream games actually look and feel pretty good at 30fps. More than that - they did in fact for once use "cinematic" 30fps for actual cinematic experience. Detroit: Become Human - my CPU didn't want to go 60, so I finished the game at 30 and it looked just about right, but Beyond: Two Souls - that stuff run at 60 in any scene for me, and still I ended up switching to 30 cuz animations clearly weren't designed for 60, they looked so stupid and unrealistic at 60fps.
I'm not even gonna tell about Diablo II which I am a huge fan of, you'd be surprised how people still play at 25FPS and enjoy it. So - depends on the game.

Seriously tho, 25FPS? I mean, I totally get why San Andreas in-game frame limiter is set to 25FPS - GTA are British games, they run PAL, blah blah, but Blizzard is all American, ain't it? Unless I missed something.

Messaggio originale di Boxer:

the same people that think playing shooters with a controller is competitive gameplay.

Well, there ain't that much FPS tournaments on consoles, just simple stuff like CoD, Halo, GoW. But, well, if you want to go competitive CoD on a console - sure, you can use mouse and keyboard, X1 totally lets you do that, and XPS will likely have even more mouse-compatible games. In my opinion tho, consoles are actually better for competitive gaming, as they provide the exact same experience to each and every player, from framerate and settings to input latency. Say, you go CS:GO tournament - no matter the PC, frametime will still suck, you'd have to use some third-party tool like RTSS if that is even allowed or experience eventual stutters, then you see the next guy using different settings, and the guy next to him having some weird mouse that lets him shoot faster than it should be possible by making a macro that cancels animation by switching weapons, and then some guy gets windows update right in the middle of the match, and the other one gets drivers crash, and the last guy gets BSOD, like oh my god, Windows. Then you look at Tekken 7 tournament - it's PS4, everyone knows exactly what it is, and how it works, and the best part - IT INDEED ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ WORKS. FreeBSD doesn't know how to BSOD.

Messaggio originale di Boxer:

More powerful but cannot even run simple games = trash
And you know why Sony said that the CELL CPU was better than the one in the PS4? because that console is using a custom tablet CPU lmao.

It's both Sony's fault for using such a complicated CPU and developers' fault for not even trying. Some did tho, Naughty Dog and Quantic Dream games - that's what PS3 should've been like. Actually, way more Sony's fault, morons been too overwhelmed by PS2 success to think straight.

I hope we'll keep discussing stuff, no matter where we agree and where we don't, I just enjoy talking to you. The way you're talking ♥♥♥♥ and ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ no matter if you're right or wrong - that is so me.

[36564176]

Messaggio originale di Abisha:

Messaggio originale di Vaxen:

Considering it will have Ray tracing and it's gonna be priced probably around 400 to 600, I'd say its GPU will be around the power of a 2060 SUPER at best. And because I have a 2080, yes for sure, my PC is more powerful.

and how it's gonna have Ray Tracing it's a Nvdia tech they using AMD.
so that's a no no

ray tracing isn't a nvidia technology, amd could put ray tracing in a card but that's not their focus right now, and it takes more power than they can shove into a console for 400-600$ to do raytracing, maybe it can be done in minecraft and that's what they're talking about.

[🍋 Lemonfed 🍋]

Nvidia RTX are just normal GPU with extra learning cores embedded in them to handle the raytracing calculations.

[Zireth]

Ray tracing can be done by mods in a way that almost barely impacts performance. Og skyrim ENBs are an example.

Even then, its a waste of preformance, I'd rather use 4k with two 2080tis rather than 1080p and have my performance cut in half

[36564176]

Messaggio originale di Ren:

Ray tracing can be done by mods in a way that almost barely impacts performance. Og skyrim ENBs are an example.

i did a quick search on ray tracing and it looks like performance has already improved, but ray tracing is still mostly a gimmick, costs performance to produce not very game changing results unless you're on something like minecraft, but then there's already shaders which can mostly accomplish the same thing with less performance hit. amd still has no rtx equivalent, and i doubt that they're gonna be able to put stuff enough power in the consoles to be able to brute force it. it's a gimmick, and console users will eat it up and say "you need a 1000$ graphics card for ray tracing but my xbox does it" just like how they say "my console does 4k you need a 1000$ graphics card on pc to do 4k" when they're doing upscaling to 4k which can also be done on pc

[Abisha]

Messaggio originale di disappointed:

Messaggio originale di Ren:

Ray tracing can be done by mods in a way that almost barely impacts performance. Og skyrim ENBs are an example.

i did a quick search on ray tracing and it looks like performance has already improved, but ray tracing is still mostly a gimmick, costs performance to produce not very game changing results unless you're on something like minecraft, but then there's already shaders which can mostly accomplish the same thing with less performance hit. amd still has no rtx equivalent, and i doubt that they're gonna be able to put stuff enough power in the consoles to be able to brute force it. it's a gimmick, and console users will eat it up and say "you need a 1000$ graphics card for ray tracing but my xbox does it" just like how they say "my console does 4k you need a 1000$ graphics card on pc to do 4k" when they're doing upscaling to 4k which can also be done on pc

Right....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LhcpBEWpgU

ray Tracing is the next step into evolution not 4K

[Tiberius]

Messaggio originale di Ren:

Ray tracing can be done by mods in a way that almost barely impacts performance. Og skyrim ENBs are an example.

Even then, its a waste of preformance, I'd rather use 4k with two 2080tis rather than 1080p and have my performance cut in half

It's different. Stop spreading false information

Enb doesnt magically transform screen space reflection into ray traced reflection

[Watchful Liz]

Messaggio originale di TurquoisePilled:

Oh boy, imagine Super Mario Bros in 8k.

That'd be dope son!

Maybe before I'm dead. Nintendo is not know for graphical enhancements like their competitors.

[Boxer]

tbh i cba reading a wall of text, i don't have enough time to spend in the forums anymore after i stopped being a basement dweller.

[Bastila Shan]

Messaggio originale di Boxer:

tbh i cba reading a wall of text, i don't have enough time to spend in the forums anymore after i stopped being a basement dweller.

What could be so time consuming it prevents you from reading a wall of text? Usually i dont read walls of text because of my lack of patience.

[crgzero]

Definitely, I put a lot of thought and money into this pc and saved for a good while with the intentions of getting the absolute most bang for my bucks with as little upgrading down the road as possible.

I'm positive my pc is more powerful than any flavor of Xbox current or going to be released in the next 5 years. Hell this pc is more powerful than every pc of everyone I know IRL and many folks online. I'd almost be proud of it if it weren't for the random hiccups I've had since building it,,, but at least it's not gonna redline and fail.

[Snow]

Messaggio originale di crgzero:

I'd almost be proud of it if it weren't for the random hiccups I've had since building it

Any PC will have microstutters in games unless you use CPU-level framerate limiter like RTSS, Special K or GeDoSaTo. That's how they make 30fps on consoles feel smooth.