We knew the spec many months before its launch and gained insights on its core design from its system architect, but only now can we see the physical layout of PlayStation 4 Pro's central processor. The key takeaway? Add some memory controllers plus an extra four AMD Radeon compute units and the basic layout of the Pro's chip is very similar indeed to the physical make-up of the Scorpio Engine found within Microsoft's Xbox One X. Putting the two chips side by side reveals just how close today's consoles are, and how innovative design choices and more memory pushed Microsoft's hardware ahead of its rival.
We've been eagerly awaiting the PC version of Final Fantasy 15 for some time. It's the chance to see Square-Enix's stunning Luminous Studio engine freed from the constraints of console hardware. Enhanced versions of those visuals running at 4K resolution or a locked 60fps? The potential here is mouthwatering, but the question is just what hardware will be required to push beyond the standards set by PS4 Pro and Xbox One X - and how optimal the PC port is. A PC benchmarking tool was released at the beginning of the month, and first impressions based on mainstream hardware are sobering.
Last year we made the case that Wii U ports for Switch are a very good thing - a chance to bulk up the library of Nintendo's new hybrid console with an array of quality games that never quite got the exposure they deserved. We wrote that piece based on Platinum Games' teasing of Bayonetta ports and six months on those games are now in our hands.
Is this the answer to the current graphics card shortage and the sky-high cost of RAM? Or perhaps a genuine alternative to the way we own and upgrade our gaming PC hardware? Today, after a successful rollout in its home territory, French company Blade revealed that its Shadow cloud gaming system is coming to the UK, offering what it says is the equivalent of a £1,500 PC at prices starting at £27 per month for unlimited usage.
Homebrew PlayStation 4 development on older consoles is finally happening, which has in turn led to the arrival of pirated software and a way to run more of the PS2 game library on Sony's modern console.
It's been described as one of the most serious PC security issues we've ever seen. Headlines have been dominated by the news that there's a serious flaw in the hardware design of Intel microprocessors, going back over 20 years and covering millions upon millions of CPUs still in use today. If your gaming PC is based around an Intel processor, it's vulnerable to the recently revealed 'Meltdown' exploit. Side by side with Meltdown is another serious security problem, dubbed 'Spectre' - which has the potential to affect your PC, smartphone or tablet, regardless of whether or not it has Intel technology at its core.
Nvidia has revealed a new range of ultra high-end, 65-inch gaming monitors designed for the living room, dubbed BFGDs - or Big Format Game Displays.
Intel has revealed full specifications and product details for its upcoming Core i7 G products shipping with Radeon RX Vega graphics - the fruits of an unprecedented collaboration between Chipzilla and its arch-rival, AMD. A total of five different SKUs are in the offing, with spec and power differentials that target a range of notebook segments and the desktop market. At the heart of each product is a quad-core Intel processor paired with RX Vega M graphics offering between 2.6 to 3.7 teraflops of peak GPU power, combined with 4GB of HBM2 memory.
One week on from its controversial launch, the Xbox One version of PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds has been patched, featuring a range of bugfixes and what the patch notes describe as a 'first pass' at visual and performance improvements, along with 'slightly improved' anti-aliasing. So what's actually changed? From our perspective, this patch is definitely a case of two steps forward, one step back.
PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds on Xbox One continues to throw up some fascinating discoveries, including the inclusion of a PC-style settings screen that displays resolution and graphics options. The menu itself is non-functional, but suggests that the base Xbox One version of the game runs at 1080p on PC's very low settings. Meanwhile, accessing the same menu on Xbox One X gives a different outlook, with 4K resolution and medium settings dialled in. But is this an accurate representation of the game's visual make-up? We decided to find out.
PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds is - without question - the biggest game in the world right now, so Microsoft's current console exclusivity for the title is obviously a big deal. Equally without question is that the PC game is notorious for its work-in-progress visuals and wobbly performance. With that in mind, some might say that it's somewhat miraculous that any playable version of PUBG is possible on a console right now. From another perspective though, what's clear is that the current build of the game is a long way short of the standards expected from a polished console release.
Since the arrival of the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, games have skewed towards multi-platform projects, but could it be that we are now moving into a period of multi-generational development? After all, we now have developers targeting console hardware with graphics power at the base Xbox One's 1.3 teraflops, right the way up to Xbox One X's 6TF, with a brace of PlayStations sandwiched in between. Techniques and technologies have emerged to help bridge the gap - and a knock-on effect is potentially improved performance and image quality on the games consoles of tomorrow.
One of the most memorable of E3 reveals also happens to be one of the greatest technological achievements of the current-gen era. Two-and-a-half years ago, Phil Spencer took to the stage at Los Angeles' Galen Centre to showcase the original Xbox 360 version of Mass Effect running on Xbox One hardware. Following an impressive early access period, the backwards compatibility program rolled out in full force, and hundreds of Xbox 360 titles are now available to play on Xbox One, with a clutch of enhanced 4K games now available for Xbox One X. So how was this all achieved? How does back-compat actually work?
Just a couple of weeks after the launch of AMD's mainstream-friendly Radeon RX 480, Nvidia enters the fray with its own pitch to the more value-orientated gamer. The new GeForce GTX 1060 is pricier than both of the Radeon RX 480 SKUs - and it loses two gigs of VRAM compared to AMD's 8GB offering. However, Nvidia hopes that the extra power on offer makes the difference, promising GTX 980-level performance. Two years ago, that would have set you back £430/$550. Today, thanks to GTX 1060, it's £240/$250. That's a highly attractive proposition but the question is, does the product fully deliver?
On a platform with near infinite levels of configurability, just how do you demonstrate whether a new GPU really has the power to deliver a quality, native 4K experience at 60 frames per second? In our testing with the new GTX 1080 Ti, we established a very simple test criteria: if the new card's performance at ultra HD matches up to the 1080p prowess of GTX 970 at the same settings, we have a winner. We're perhaps one generational step away from a complete match, but Nvidia's new GPU king gets astonishingly close. In some cases, it's actually even faster - a remarkable turnout bearing in mind the 4x increase in pixel-count.
Nvidia's Pascal architecture continues its top-down steamrolling of the graphics product stack, with the arrival of the first of two more budget-orientated parts - GTX 1050 Ti and GTX 1050. It's the first card we're looking at today, highlighting the debut of the fully enabled version of Nvidia's GP107 processor, offering performance significantly ahead of PlayStation 4 and paired with a useful 4GB of GDDR5. GTX 1050 Ti can get you to 1080p60 in most titles with careful tweaking, but really this class of GPU is all about matching ballpark console performance with improved visuals and more consistent frame-rates.
We've already taken a look at the excellent Radeon RX Vega 56, the cut-down version of the full-fat graphics card reviewed here today - and it's a winner. A couple of outliers aside, it's as fast as Nvidia's GTX 1070 or significantly faster and it easily overclocks to push further ahead. It's AMD at its best - competitive, disruptive and adding value - but the same can't quite be said for the RX Vega 64. It's a good product overall and it's competitive enough with Nvidia, but it offers no knockout blow - in the here and now, at least.
Years in development, the new Radeon RX Vega line is finally arriving - AMD's return to the higher-end of GPU performance after concentrating its efforts more on the mainstream and budget sectors of the market. There's no shortage of cutting-edge tech here: the Vega processor utilises 12.5 billion transistors on a very large 486mm2 area of silicon, the chip paired with two 4GB stacks of cutting-edge HBM2 memory. It's a bigger chip than Nvidia's GTX 1080 Ti and it has more memory bandwidth - however, the top-end RX Vega 64 offers performance more in line with GTX 1080, while the cut-down RX Vega 56 reviewed here is clearly aimed to compete with the GTX 1070. It does this job rather well.
AMD call it Polaris refined, but to all intents and purposes, RX 570 and RX 580 are indeed upclocked versions of their predecessors. There's the same complement of 32 and 36 compute units respectively, power efficiency is diminished in the quest for higher frequencies and by extension, the emphasis this time is on increased performance. And to be frank, that's fine with us - just don't go into a 570/580 purchase thinking you're getting the new AMD Vega technology, because you're not.
So here's a thought. Buy a Core i5 or Core i7 processor for gaming and the bottom line is this: on the majority of titles out there, its resources are highly underutilised. The GPU is the primary bottleneck during gaming, sometimes leaving your CPU with a significant amount of untapped overhead. So the question is this: can you spend less on your CPU and still get a great experience? And more to the point, what processor can keep your graphics card fed with data while offering exceptional value? We put our money where our mouth is and spent £63 on a Pentium G4560 - and it's something special. It truly is the new budget CPU king. Indeed, since we bought it, we've even seen it on pre-order for as low as £57.
The beauty of building a PC is that a diversity of parts allows users to construct a computer specifically designed to best serve their particular needs. AMD's Ryzen 7 1800X may not have taken Intel's crown for gaming, but the price vs performance ratio for just about everything else propels the fledgling line of processors well into contention. The Ryzen 7 1800X we recently reviewed isn't the only new AMD eight-core chip you can buy: cheaper 1700X and 1700 processors are available, and that is where the value really becomes difficult to ignore.
The rumours are true. Intel's new Coffee Lake-S represents the biggest generational leap we've seen since the classic Sandy Bridge second-gen Core line, launched way back in 2011. The Core i5 2500K and i7 2600K were the stuff of legend - processors so good, many still use them today, convinced that Intel's iterative approach to CPU upgrades didn't justify replacing a solid platform. Coffee Lake-S has much in common with those classic processors: there's a big gen-on-gen upgrade, an immediately noticeable improvement to performance in all areas and excellent overclocking. The key to Coffee Lake's power is simple: a refined process technology allows for overall faster clocks, while the move from four to six cores in both i5 and i7 offers a massive increase to processing power.
Since the release of the Core i5 2500K in January 2011, Intel's mainstream quad-core processor line has been the default choice for those looking to put together a capable gaming PC. The i5 is always fast out of the box and overclocking can keep your platform competitive for anything up to five or even six years. But the return of AMD has already proven disruptive in other areas of the x86 market and the Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X are simply irresistible products: Core i5 is no longer the 'go to' CPU line for gamers - there is now genuine, potent competition. And to cut straight to the chase, given the choice between a 7600K or the cheaper Ryzen 5 1600, it's the AMD product we'd choose.
Intel's Coffee Lake-S flagship, the Core i7 8700K is - in our view - the fastest gaming CPU that money can buy right now, but what if you don't have £350/$350 to spend on a new processor? The new i5 line looks almost as exciting, bringing six physical cores to the mid-range market for the first time. The 8600K continues Intel's tradition of cutting hyper-threading and reducing clocks while leaving overclocking as an option, shaving off £100/$100 in the process. However, just as intriguing is the i5 8400 - a £180/$190 hexacore offering that offers remarkable value.
The 3GB version of Nvidia's GTX 1060 is a curious product. Is it actually a GTX 1060 at all? The cutbacks made to this product aren't just memory-based in nature. In addition to chopping down the full-fat product's memory allocation, we also see a drop in available processing cores. The full complement of 1280 shaders drops to 1152 - and most of the time, this tends to be accompanied by a change in name. GTX 1050 Ti any one? Scratch that, it's taken, GTX 1060 LE perhaps?
One year on from the release of the PlayStation 4 Pro, the fortunes of Sony's 'supercharged' console have varied. While titles like Gran Turismo Sport and Horizon Zero Dawn have demonstrated just how well console titles can scale to 4K HDR displays, too many games are delivering lacklustre results that only offer a smaller, more incremental upgrade over the base PS4 experience. Now it's Microsoft's turn, with the new Xbox One X offering more of a brute force approach to tackling the 4K challenge.
Is three gigs of VRAM enough for top-tier 1080p60 gameplay?
Is three gigs of VRAM enough for top-tier 1080p60 gameplay?
Is three gigs of VRAM enough for top-tier 1080p60 gameplay?
As the Xbox One X game patches have come rolling in, it's been mostly good news for Microsoft and its new console. It's perhaps not been the 'true 4K' showcase many were hoping for and techniques like dynamic resolution are deployed to scale up current-gen 900p and 1080p games to better suit 4K displays. But the presentations have been convincing and the upgrade palpable - which made Titanfall 2's initial sub-par presentation so disappointing. Based on the findings of our report, Respawn Entertainment spent several days retooling the code and a new title update arrived at the tail-end of last week.