Battlefield 4 official discussion/thread. [PS4,XO,PS3,X360]

[RenegadeRocks]

Have they shown it running on a PS4 devkit yet ?

Yes, they did at gamescom, but it was a puny 8vs 8 on a small section of the map with muddy textures. The development isn't as far along on next gen consoles as we would want it to be. I would wait for impressions and footages before putting money on the ps4/Xbone versions.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

So, better to say that next gen consoles are under the recommended specs.

Which in the end doesn't mean anything as Xbox One and PS4 aren't PCs.

Fair enough. However it will be interesting to see how the console versions run and look next to a PC with around that recommended setup.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Isn't the 7850 just behind a GTX 660, and the 7870 is just above? So wouldn't the PS4 pretty much meet the recommended requirements? Of course this doesn't have much relevance in regards to a console.

A 7870 easily beats the specs of the ps4 graphics, more CUs at a much higher clock (25%).

 

[djskribbles]

I didn't say the PS4's GPU equals a 7870, I was insinuating that it's in-between a 7850 and 7870 (hence why I listed both), much like the GTX 660 is. The PS4's GPU is 1.84TFlops, and the 7850/7870 are 1.76/2.56 respectively, so the PS4's GPU would probably be pretty close to a GTX 660. Again, not that it really matters.

 

[ultragpu]

I don't know why people still put so much stock in the recommended spec from the publisher, it's never accurate and it always require a substantially beefier rig to run it at max setting at 1080p. It's entirely a PR stunt really, the more conservative Recommended spec they put out the easier to attract mass crowds who obviously have no idea of what proper rig they actually need to fully enjoy the game at its max setting.
If a 660 is all that's required according to Dice then PS4 should blitz through it without all the graphical and resolution issues reported early on.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

I don't think "recommended" is supposed to mean what you need to max it, but what should provide an experience where you don't lose too much.

 

[ultragpu]

I feel like I'm loosing a lot if it's not even 1080p and god knows what other features that may be missing.

 

[kots]

I don't know why people still put so much stock in the recommended spec from the publisher, it's never accurate and it always require a substantially beefier rig to run it at max setting at 1080p. It's entirely a PR stunt really, the more conservative Recommended spec they put out the easier to attract mass crowds who obviously have no idea of what proper rig they actually need to fully enjoy the game at its max setting.
If a 660 is all that's required according to Dice then PS4 should blitz through it without all the graphical and resolution issues reported early on.

How ? A 660 stomps the 7850 and matches the 7870 .. so how the PS4 will blitz through the game ?

 

[ultragpu]

A 7850+ inside a hUMA GDDR5 powered console does not share the same efficiency as a vanilla 7850 pc rig. Obviously I didn't mean it would become a 7970 but it should be more than enough to surpass a 660.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I feel like I'm loosing a lot if it's not even 1080p and god knows what other features that may be missing.

Then game on PC! That was always going to be the way this gen. Cross-plat titles on PC have access to 2x and more power and that'll only increase over time. Consoles are there for a different experience with a different price structure. If you game on console, you have to do so accepting the performance compromises, sometimes with a design change that makes the experience on console a little more preferable for some, such as the direct control of the console version of D3 being very different to the PC version of the same game. For a shooter like BF4, the gameplay experiences between console and PC will likely be zero, so it comes down to which platform you prefer.

 

[kots]

A 7850+ inside a hUMA GDDR5 powered console does not share the same efficiency as a vanilla 7850 pc rig. Obviously I didn't mean it would become a 7970 but it should be more than enough to surpass a 660.

Yeah , because a 7850 (or better , a 660) will be sitting alone in a pc and not be backed up by gobs of RAM and strong CPU's ... A 660 will run circles around the ps4 version (and obviously the XB1). Easily .

 

[ultragpu]

Then game on PC! That was always going to be the way this gen.

Yeah gonna get it on PC for sure this time, but still disappointed they couldn't nail it on consoles even at launch. Makes me think how BF5 and subsequent titles would fair in the future.

 

[Rangers]

Yes, they did at gamescom, but it was a puny 8vs 8 on a small section of the map with muddy textures. The development isn't as far along on next gen consoles as we would want it to be. I would wait for impressions and footages before putting money on the ps4/Xbone versions.

The console version of this seems like a disaster so far. DICE in disarray?

 

[expletive]

What about the CPU side, maybe thats where the bottlenecks are? How well does a 6 core AMD or quad intel compare to the 8 (6) jaguar cores?

 

[djskribbles]

How ? A 660 stomps the 7850 and matches the 7870 .. so how the PS4 will blitz through the game ?

I wouldn't say that it stomps the 7850 and the 7870 is a bit better in most cases. The PS4's GPU is probably pretty comparable to a GTX 660.

 

[3dilettante]

What about the CPU side, maybe thats where the bottlenecks are? How well does a 6 core AMD or quad intel compare to the 8 (6) jaguar cores?

Barring some corner cases where there are special accellerating instructions or some quirky cache effect, any modern desktop CPU from Nehalem or Thuban on should have zero problem running circles around the next-gen console CPUs.
In all fairness, that was the case for the current gen, aside from vector performance. The upcoming console CPUs don't have above-average SIMD capability or raw clock this time, so they really can't claim any sort of advantage in terms of performance.

The economics of the consoles, the silicon nodes available to them relative to Intel's now massive process lead, and the expansion in wattage available for modern gaming rigs has allowed them to leave behind the niche for an entertainment appliance.

 

[pjbliverpool]

A 7850+ inside a hUMA GDDR5 powered console does not share the same efficiency as a vanilla 7850 pc rig. Obviously I didn't mean it would become a 7970 but it should be more than enough to surpass a 660.

I'd have thought hUMA is going to be more useful for enabling low latency GPGPU operations which have the potential to in part make up for the slower CPU's as opposed to increasing overall graphics rendering performance.

So that's one reason why the PC version may require more CPU power. Another is driver/API overhead. I'd have thought at this early stage in the consoles life though (lack of low level optimisation) GPU power should be pretty comparable on specs alone. Which should put a 7870 and by extension 660 comfortably ahead.

Although RAM limitations may require some compromises from the full PC version. It'll be interesting to see if those are also compromises compared with the consoles versions, or whether the 3GB requirement is specific to PC only features, e.g. the ability to run at 1080p with 4xMSAA.

I wouldn't say that it stomps the 7850 and the 7870 is a bit better in most cases. The PS4's GPU is probably pretty comparable to a GTX 660.

The PS4 GPU is much closer to a 7850 than a 7870. In fact on balance its pretty much dead even with a 7850. PS4 has a tiny shader/texture advantage and the 7850 has a similarly tiny ROP/geometry advantage while bandwidth is a wash when you consider the CPU bandwith requirements of PS4.

 

[RenegadeRocks]

Select youtubers were pulled together by EA and were given BF4 to play and record:

PC version.

 

[djskribbles]

The PS4 GPU is much closer to a 7850 than a 7870. In fact on balance its pretty much dead even with a 7850. PS4 has a tiny shader/texture advantage and the 7850 has a similarly tiny ROP/geometry advantage while bandwidth is a wash when you consider the CPU bandwith requirements of PS4.

I understand that. I was not trying to say that the PS4's GPU is equal or is even close to a 7870 (I know it's closer to a 7850), just that it's between a 7850 and 7870 (which it technically is). I'm just using anandtech's GPU bench and I see the 7850 is not far behind the GTX 660 in most cases, and sometimes it even beats it. So the PS4's GPU having slightly more CUs, stream processors, texture units, and bandwidth, I thought it would be pretty comparable to a GTX 660.

 

[Rangers]

I understand that. I was not trying to say that the PS4's GPU is equal or is even close to a 7870 (I know it's closer to a 7850), just that it's between a 7850 and 7870 (which it technically is). I'm just using anandtech's GPU bench and I see the 7850 is not far behind the GTX 660 in most cases, and sometimes it even beats it. So the PS4's GPU having slightly more CUs, stream processors, texture units, and bandwidth, I thought it would be pretty comparable to a GTX 660.

660 is about like a 7870 in speed IIRC.

Edit: maybe a little slower, going by this