With some quick Newegging, I'd say you're looking at a minimum of 900. I chose the 6700xt and Ryzen 3700x as those are guaranteed to give you console performance and IQ in all games.
Current Generation Games Analysis Technical Discussion [2023] [XBSX|S, PS5, PC]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
Yes. The discussion was NXGamer, not game tech analysis. As London Geezer's post was innocuous enough and I heavily play favourites, I shall restore it and it alone, standing out of context of a best-forgotten vacuum of deleted arguing with no reference to the game he was asking about...
Happy now?
London Geezer - Leaving random posts in random B3D threads since 2002
I got it to $810 without Windows or $930 with. But I had slightly better components for similar or less cost to those above:
Ryzen 5700X
Radeon 6750XT (12GB)
16GB DDR4 3200Mhz
1TB 7000MB/s NVMe
600w 80+ Gold PSU
Mini-ATX Case
B430M WIFI enabled Mobo
Wireless Keyboard & Mouse
Honestly that's not that bad a value proposition vs the PS5 IMO. It's comfortably faster while remaining in the same ballpark (you can't really go slower without coming in under the PS5's performance or costing more than the above build so there's no point doing that) and has significantly more functionality as well as being upgradable (and hence saving money down the line) for 86% more money including Windows. Although that's vs the non-digital PS5 whereas it's 2.3x the price of the digital version which is less attractive.
You have a PC which is a very different value proposition.
davis.anthony
Veteran
For twice the price of a digital PS5 you can buy a pre-built PC from AWD-IT (In the UK) that offers double the RT performance.
And that is where you get your win, you can't build a PC for twice the cost of PS5 and get twice the raster performance but you can build a PC that's twice the price that offers at least twice the RT performance.
For double the price of a PS5 with a disk drive you can get a pre-built PC with an RTX 4070!
And that is where you get your win, you can't build a PC for twice the cost of PS5 and get twice the raster performance but you can build a PC that's twice the price that offers at least twice the RT performance.
For double the price of a PS5 with a disk drive you can get a pre-built PC with an RTX 4070!
Last edited:
I’m not sure the lost time has anything to do with the lack of creativity or technical advancement. I’m tired of people trying to use covid as an excuse for a lack of innovation. The industry use to be one that tolerated big risks but now, the publishers are risk averse. Look at what has been announced so far. We have a pretty good idea of what’s coming in the next 12 months and most of it is not impressive.
When you combine this with the unnecessarily bloated budgets brought about by developers stretching 10 hour game mechanics into 70 hour games, it’s no wonder development costs are so high. This in turn reinforces the feedback loop of risk aversion. All sports games apart from NBA 2k have yet to make meaningful updates to their engine. Big budget arcade racing games have basically disappeared. Big budget 15 hour games are basically gone and have been replaced by 40 hour slogs. Big budget RTS games have mostly disappeared and only a few remain. Cod is the only big budget non f2p fps remaining. I could go on and on.
Then look at the technology side. Most games are window dressing with very little physics or in world interaction. The graphics have barely taken a step from ps4/xb1. In fact there are new ps5 games released now that look worse than ps4 iterations of the past. The game design is so bereft of creativity barring a few developers. None of this is as a result of covid. It’s just a trend that’s been occurring for a while now.
Flappy Pannus
Veteran
Alex talks about this often, at least on DF Direct and Twitter. The primary cause is of course, GPU prices. In the past, 2 years into a console generation and midrange cards would absolutely walk all over them.
There are some rare exceptions for CPU, like with TLOU, something like a 12400 might be a bottleneck to consistently reach 60+fps, but for the most part under $200 CPU's are sufficient to keep pace. Ram is cheap. SSD storage is dirt cheap. For all the talk about inflation, which is definitely an issue - it's GPU's which are manifesting that price creep like no other PC component. The difference of course, is all those other component segments have actual competition.
Everyone knows this, this is stemming from the suggestion that Ratchet and Clank be compared to a $400-$500 PC. You cannot build a PC with new parts for $500 that can run PS5 native titles as well as a PS5. And of course, a PS5 does not have nearly the functionality of a PC, but this wasn't the contention.
Henry swagger
Newcomer
Ratchet and clank will end the ssd debate when it loards faster on pc 
... cerny forcued on the wrong thing on the ps5 it should of been 13 teraflops like the ps5 dev jit is
... cerny forcued on the wrong thing on the ps5 it should of been 13 teraflops like the ps5 dev jit isFor the low silicon cost and the benefit over the lifetime of the systems, PS5 and Series consoles were absolutely right to add in (small) custom hardware blocks for SSD decompression. It's not the awesome-sauce bonfire of conventions that we're told it is at the start of a generation ... but it is pretty cool and worthwhile. And it will be lasting benefit, I reckon.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Too many people expected WAAAY too much from fast I/O.
It's a lot of benefits, but it was never going to deliver a graphical uplift like previous generation switches.
What it does do, however is transform how games are experienced and gives the hardware more of a graphical IQ uplift than if they had spent the money on some other, more traditional part of the console. In other words, you wouldn't be able to appreciably increase GDDR memory size or GPU core counts (silicon be expensive now) for how much the new I/O subsystems in the consoles cost and the benefit they would have brought was less than what fast I/O potentially brings.
Even assuming you "could" chose to double GDDR memory instead of going for NVME SSDs combined with fast I/O silicon and API changes, imagine having to load that increased amount of GDDR memory from a mechanical HDD?
This generation was always about compromises and going after low hanging fruit. Moderate increases in graphics fidelity due to modest increases in GPU and memory. Large increases in the console experience via Fast I/O with fast I/O also contributing somewhat to graphics fidelity (just not in mind blowing traditional gen on gen console ways like some were hyperbolizing). Large increases in playable framerate and thus a SIGNIFICANTLY better gameplay experience due to the massive increase in CPU speed which again only contribute slightly to increased graphical IQ in comparison to previous console generation switches.
However, from a PC perspective the most important potential thing that this generation's focus on fast I/O brings is making developers rethink how they code games in order to take advantage of SSDs. Unfortunately, here it's diappointing with most developers still choosing to not code specifically for fast I/O. Even without DirectStorage on PC, just coding for SSDs gets a developer/game probably 80% or more of the speed increases that Fast I/O can bring to games (IE - R&C might not even need DirectStorage to match PS5s fast I/O as long as Nixxes properly adapted the code for SSD usage on PC). But instead, we have the vast majority of developers still choosing to code for SSDs and fast I/O in the same way they coded for HDDs in the past ... even for "next gen" ("current gen") only games. I could sort of understand a developer not wanting to have 2 separate I/O paths for previous gen and current gen consoles (laziness, multiple paths for rendering, CPUs, etc. used to be common in the PC space) for budgeting reasons (not necessarily laziness
), but for current gen "only" games? Bleh!Regards,
SB
well people have to keep in mind that it was always compared to the last gen of consoles by Sony/MS, and not what was available on PC, so it was an awesome advance in comparison to PS4/Xb1 for sure.
Never seen Cerny hyping like it was some magic sauce that nothing else had, all the slides were about the jump from PS4 to PS5. The internets did the overhyping.
In my opinion X1 and PS4 was underpowered for release date. XSX ans PS5 also was underpowered for release date but not so much. Xbox 360 for release date was more powerful than any PC that time with single video card. PS3 wasn't far beyond strongest PC when was released. CPU was 50 gflops at best and Nvidia 8800 was 400 gflops, PS3 was 400 gflops for Cell + RSX.
PS3 was 371.2 GFLOPS. It was thoroughly outclassed by a high end PC at its release. Everything the Cell was superior at relative to a CPU, a high end GPU thrashed it. The areas where a CPU thrashed cell, a PS3 had no answer for.
The PlayStation 3 was quickly outdated technically. I only mention all the features that came with DX10 and 11 on the PC around that time. These effects were used very little or not at all on the PlayStation 3. Only with the PlayStation 4 they were used frequently. In addition the frame rate of games like DOOM 3 was low while it ran fast on an old PC.
On the other hand the PlayStation 4 held up pretty well.
The PlayStation 5 is lagging a bit more again. Not nearly as much as the PlayStation 3 but worse than the PlayStation 4. Perhaps the PlayStation 5 came at an inopportune time. I see problems that it will be able to offer some of what is now already realized by Nvidia.
On the other hand the PlayStation 4 held up pretty well.
The PlayStation 5 is lagging a bit more again. Not nearly as much as the PlayStation 3 but worse than the PlayStation 4. Perhaps the PlayStation 5 came at an inopportune time. I see problems that it will be able to offer some of what is now already realized by Nvidia.
Last edited:
davis.anthony
Veteran
If you class the 7950GX2 as a 'single' graphics card then it took 7 months for 360 to be outclassed on the PC side.
If you don't class the 7950GX2 as a 'single' graphics card then it was nearly a nearly until PC outclassed 360 with the release of the 8800GTX.
The fast i/o stuff was definitely overhyped by internet people, but I still do not think examples from the original "Road to PS5" presentation helped contain hype in a realistic way:
Player Camera turning flushing the entire memory
"What if the SSD is so fast, that as the player is turning around, it is possible to load textures for everything behind the player in that split second."
The idea that the SSD would mean you need such low data residency sounds more like selling a dream than a realistic scenario for any game. For one, what exactly are your assets that the textures behind the player are so radically different than those in front of the player? Is each view so distinct like a mega texture from idtech 5 that you need to page that often and that much? Do you have the disk space or artist time to even make such unique objects in each view for such a game at scale? Aren't texture workflows changing to be about tiling detail, reusable trims, and virtual textures anyway? Or do you mean diffuse lighting textures? Are we just talking about a game with completely static lighting?
What about ray tracing? Surely we need the textures from behind the player view for that! Are you going to limit your performance and camera rotation speed based on the slowest component in the entire system?
That example from the original Road to PS5 presentation always irked me as it did not align the development trends we saw in games, nor was it a use case that made really much sense. Yet it was in that presentation and I think it did a lot to stoke the flames of hype rather than a more realistic take on what an SSD means.
davis.anthony
Veteran
Insomniac claimed to cull objects from memory that were not in view in Ratchet and Clank.
I guess we will just have to see how camera turns affect disk paging one PC. But considering how that game has ray tracing and real-time shadow maps, they are not literally unloading everything.
The only case I see this working is with many unique 8k textures and many unique geometry and storage space limit make this scenario impossible.
I think R&C Rift Apart, Spiderman2 offer more realistic case. I am interested by R&C Rift Apart requirement because with enough system RAM everything inside the game is possible to be used with a HDD just with very long load time.
EDIT:
Another problem but it seems from what Fabian Giesen from RAD Tools games told many multiplatform developers don't use the hardware decompressor in PS5 and Xbox Series.
I think R&C Rift Apart, Spiderman2 offer more realistic case. I am interested by R&C Rift Apart requirement because with enough system RAM everything inside the game is possible to be used with a HDD just with very long load time.
EDIT:
Another problem but it seems from what Fabian Giesen from RAD Tools games told many multiplatform developers don't use the hardware decompressor in PS5 and Xbox Series.
davis.anthony
Veteran
- Status
Similar threads
