Face-Off: Crysis 3


6 years ago

@null Well, the console industry is where the major money is at. Heck it amazing these older console can even handle the engine at 20fps.

Gameplay wise the game is just plain bad. A.I is alot worse then Crysis2, and far worse then Crysis1.

It's more open ended in it's maps but not nearly as much as Crysis1's.

And it's surely not open ended like Far Cry 3, which as good an engine(since it's pushing only one large map), but more importantly, it's gameplay is far better.

I'm not sure about 'the most powerfull pc's' argument, as a gtx660 can probably run it maxed out 1080/30.

You can easily build a pc with a solid cpu and a gtx660 for under $1000. That's low end, when talking a pc gaming desktop.

If you want 1080/60 then you'll need a gtx680 oc'ed to get say 50+ fps, and that would only run $1250 or so

Trust me, that is still low end.

High end is a GTX690/gtx 680 sli(or a 3-gtx680, sli setup) config, or the new 'Titan' gpu pushing an output on a $1000 ISP 2500*1440p monitor. (that's pushing almost double the pixels as a 1080p monitor as is close to the res. of the 4K HDTV's set to arrive in some 5-10 yrs)

Now that's high end.
0 0


6 years ago

[edited as i worded it wrong]

@Amon_Amarth Yes, every gamer has a perferance for what graphics they think are great. For ex. Dishonored has amazing artistic work, and while the engine is nothing special or 'high end', the game looks great because of the artwork.

For Unreal Engine 4, it depends what NVidia releases for the next lineup(ie..7XX lineup) as i usually upgrade a full yr. after a new console launch, as the new engine's take at least one full yr. to see them implemented into even a few games.

Any solid I7 or I5 will be able to push an SLI config or a higher end 7XX GPU, to deliver 1080p/60fps.

Currently you'll need a solid I5 or I7 as a cpu, and more importantly a gtx680 or higher to run what is expected UE4 to be, in 1080/60, but gut feeling some graphical sliders will have gto be lowered to do so.

So as of right now, i'd say high end gtx690($1000 gpu) or Titan, or a sli gtx670 setup($800) oc'ed for lower end, will run the UE4 at 1080p/60 maxed out.

(and just forget more then 2X MSAA as that will turn frame rates in half)

For instance i'm using a 1st gen I7(stock 2.8
0 0


6 years ago

@Amon_Amarth Good points. However i don't agree, with your PS4 statement. It's a really nice console, specs wise, but will not have specs better then pc gamers have now, if they are running just an I7 cpu and a gtx670gtx690 gpu. And yeah pc's still use DDR5 Ram for the system Ram, but every pc gamer knows how it's mostly about a great gpu that runs the game, and every one has DDR5 Ram.

I'll have a PS4(and the next Xbox) this fall, but even with a 1st gen I7 and a gtx670(with 4GB of DDR5 vRam), i'm sure my pc will outperform both consoles.

I just hope these new consoles can achieve 60fps..maxed visuals for current high end engines like Crysis 3/Far Cry 3..ect.

I'm getting that now on my pc, which is far from great, and i'm sure many pc gamers have better rigs. Heck, some run their games in 1440p as well.

But i'm a console gamer at heart, so i'll still take 1080p and 30fps for upcoming Unreal engine 4 games.
(i'll just make sure my pc gpu is upgraded to run those at 60fps in the next couple yrs)

btw: My older gtx560ti has the same DDR5 as the PS4. It's not current or overpriced for sure.
2 1


6 years ago

In having a pc rig running nearly every game(i got Cyrsis 3-pc, but never opened it. Not sure if i'll keep/return it) maxed out 1080/60, i also know on these aging consoles..the diffeernce is not say Xbox1Xbox360 type.

Maybe it will be once the new consoles are released with the specs being far more higher(8GB Ram..a modern gpu, dx 11..ect).

But even with say Far Cry 3, while the console versions looked low res/muddy to view, and ran at only 20fps or so, it was the lack of DX11 effects that really made a big difference. Water effects in games like Just Cause 2 and Far Cry are impossible on these old consoles, and that is the biggest difference, graphics wise.

My gut feeling is that this next gen, we won't see a huge leap up as in the past, but ratter just high end visuals at full 1080p.

Hopefully i'm wrong..
0 0

Spec Analysis: PlayStation 4


6 years ago

@Yautja_Warrior As a multi platform user with a pc that runs nearly every game maxed at 1080p and 60fps, i can assure you 1080p/60 is huge.

And i believe with the right optimization, we'll see 1080p/60 for all current engines, as well as some UE4 games, except with lower video settings.

I used to think 1080p maxed settings in 30fps was ideal, until i got a gtx670, and my eyes opened up, bigtme.
0 1


6 years ago

Games like Watchdogs, GTA:V(even on these aging consoles), Infamous are why i play games and buy platforms, be it new consoles or a new pc gpu.

Games like Killzone,COD and Halo are just more of the SOS.

Hopefully Watchdogs is a PS4 launch game and hopefully Rockstar releases a version of GTA:V for the PS4, even if it's a delayed release.
0 0


6 years ago

Actually looking at the 7850 benchmarks[below[, in 1920*1200 in BF3 it gets 50fps with FSAA on high. So at 1920*1080 it should handle 1080p/60fps easily on a fixed platform.

Just put in 7850 into the gpu benchmark, and you;ll see the numbers.

Also, realize MSAA will cut your fps in half, so i while i see current high end graphic games(except Far Cry 3 and especially Crysis 3) run at 108p/60fps, i don't see them using MSAA as well, as that will even cripple a gtx680 for sub 60fps rates.

In a nutshell:

Current gen1080p/60fps/FSAA high

UE4(and add in Crysis3) games, 1080p/30fps/fsaa high

That's not shabby for a $500 console is it?
1 0


6 years ago

@Yautja_Warrior I'm not sure why some disagree with you, but your dead on correct.
I have a I7/9GB DDR3 Ram, 4GB vram gtx670 and get 60fps in everything but Crysis 3.
But still, i can live with 1080p/30fps on my big screen, and maybe save some pc upgrades doing so.

Also pc gamers need to understand the newer consoles will really push the industry..pc included.
2 0


6 years ago

First off as a multi platform owner(with a decent pc that runs BF3 at 60-80 fps 1080p, maxed) and as more of an Xbox fan then Sony, let me say this.

Great job Sony!.

I'm all over that PS4 as it's all you can ask for in a console casing. Just go look at the X51 from Alienware, and that has the same performance and it retails for $1100, for the 8GBRam/1.5vRam gtx660 config.

A $500 console for the price of what a $1100 pc delivers? Not bad Sony!

MS is clueless the past few yrs with the casual love affair with it's Kinnect.

Thankfully Sony cares about the mature/more hardcore gamer :)

btw: I'm rxpecting 1080p/60fps[no 4XFSAA] for say BF3 as the gpu specs look alot like the AMD 7850.

Here's the review:,21.html

And another bunch of benchmarks as well.

It seems the PS4's gpu is a modified 7850.

No doubt, if the rumor here is right about the gpu performance/compute units..ect, we will see BF3/Crysis 2 games in 1080p/60fps and UE4 games in 1080p/30fps.

Nice job Sony.
2 0

Dishonored's new story-based DLC The Other Side of the Coin spotted


6 years ago

Dishonored is overrated. That''s a fact.


You don't force one type of gameplay(stealth/all non lethal) without having enough gameplay elements to supplement it.

And if you don't go all/mostly all on-lethal, you get the bad ending.

So where's the in betweeen? There is none.

It's a good game, but it has flaws for sure.

You want a great game? Deus Ex, the original. That had gameplay elements and better map design, and it's a game 13 yrs old.

And shall i mention HL2, possibly the greatest FPS ever created?

btw: And i love the aspect of non just needs to be done correctly.
0 4

Tech Analysis: Killzone: Shadow Fall demo


6 years ago

@El_MUERkO You cannot tell a developer what fps to run at.

What Sony can do is give the gamer the option to control settings, even if it's just to enable or disable 4X or 8X MSAA FSAA.

(ie..I get 1080p/60fps in Far Cry 3, maxed out everything but MSAA off. It actually looks sharper as well. When i enable 8X FSAA it drops to 30fps, and when i enable 4X it drops to 35-40.]
1 0


6 years ago

Here's is the equal of what seems to be inside the PS4. (amd 7850)

Take notice at the BF3 benchmarks in 1920*1200p, as far as FSAA on high(50fps) and MSAA on 4X.(33fps)

[Note that's 1200p, so you can increase the fps about 5-10% or so higher when dropped to 1080p]

I think we'll see more 1080p/60fps games with little FSAA, compared to 1080p/30fps with higher.

As a pc gamer, i can assure you will demand 1080p/60fps over 1080p/30fps, and unlike 720p, in 1080p the need for high quality FSAA is diminished.
1 0


6 years ago

Anyone whom is a pc gamer will back this up:

To enable MSAA over just FSAA in high, will cut your frame rate in half.

And to be honest, i never use it(I7/gtx670gpu..pc config) as it makes the overall IQ blurry. Instead the use of FXAA has little drop in performance and simular quality FSAA.

I badly hope most PS4 games run at 1080p/60fps..and i'll take lesser then max settings, as nothing is the equal of 60fps, gameplay wise.
2 0

Sony announces PlayStation 4, shows DualShock 4 controller


6 years ago

@cloudskipa There has not been huge upgrades in graphics, even in the pc side, since really 07 or so.

The X360 added in the HDR lighting, which was huge for graphic realism. Also the jump to dx9 was huge in 2005'.{started in 04' on the pc, late 05 on 360]

But since, on the pc side, all we seen was dx9dx10dx11. And DX10 was nothing special.

Otheriwse it's beem higher frame rates/higher clock cpu clock speeds, and high resolutions.

Since really Half Life2 in 2004', the jump up graphically has not been so huge for a 9 yr gap.

Im 2004', Half Life 2 was impossible on the Xbox1. But what game was not possible(even at the low settings and 720p) for these aging consoles?

Even Crysis3 was possible. It's looks ugly compared to a solid pc rig, but it's was possible. As was Far Cry 3 and BF3..ect.

This next gen of consoles will last 8-10 yrs, bank on that. (add in 4K HDTV's are 7+ yrs away as well)

And as much as i love pc gaming, with HDTV's staying at 1080p, you'll see a wider gap of console sales compared to pc sales, once these new console arrive.

Heck, i built a new pc($1100) and added in $700 worth of gpu's in a 2+ yr span, as i saw the X360/PS3 getting outdated in 2010. My pc rig would still outdo the new consoles by a bit, but i prefer console gaming.

Unless i'm modding a game like GTA:IV, that
4 3


6 years ago

@Amon_Amarth Rockstar had GTA:V in development for 4-5 yrs now, coding on these, now outdated consoles.

As much as i'd love to see a GTA:V version hit eithier new console, i doubt we'll see it.

However, maybe we;ll see it some 6-8 months later, as both consoles are alot like 'pc's in a box', so it should be easy to release the new console port along with the pc port.

I sure hope so..heck, GTA:V is my most wanted title.
5 0


6 years ago

@Amon_Amarth No doubt, and while vRam is huge, so is system Ram, as going from the initial 4GB to 8GB, makes the PS4 alot more future proof.

Also, usually you divide the system Ram, half for system/half for vRam, and for the developers 7 or 7.5GB(after the OS) of unified Ram, gives alot for freedom for developers to make bigger maps/bigger worlds/more npc's on screen..ect

My one hope for tonight was to see Sony go with 6GB or 8GB of Ram, and they went with 8GB, of the higher speed Ram as well.

I'm really impressed.
Usually Sony goes low end on Ram, but this time is different.
5 1


6 years ago

@Nextgen_king Well no $500 console will match a higher end But these new consoles don't need to, as long as they deliver max settings in 1080p..hopefully at 60fps. But then again, console users got used to 30fps in 720p(or sub720p) this past gen.

As long as the PS4 runs the UE4 at 30fps in 1080p, then that's really all you can expect.

It's not like we'll see affordable 4K tv's in the near future, right?

Heck, to put together a pc with the specs of a PS4, you're currently looking at about $800-$1000, easily.
(ie..see the Alienware X51 selling for over $1000 with near the same specs)

And what pc uses DDR5 Ram for system Ram? Only the latest gpu's uses DD5.

Most console games don't care about 30 or 60fps, they do care about 1080p and better visuals, and as long as top graphic engines like UE4 run at a solid 30fps in 1080p, that's as much as a living Room enviroment calls for.
3 0


6 years ago

@Amon_Amarth But the PS3 got a major boost in sales from it's BR plsyer as well. Please don't forget this.

The PS4 is so much easier for developers and the Ram ammount is far better and much better thought out, unlike the PS3's.

The PS4, unlike the PS3 and PS3, will match the expectations, specs wise.

Sony nailed it this time.
7 1


6 years ago

@Amon_Amarth The more vRam is key to everything, as mods for say Skyrim run up to 3 or 4GB, in 1080p.

Having 8GB total..saying at least 7GB is free for games, that's at least 3.5GB free for vRam, which as a pc gamer, i can assure you, for more then enough.

GPU vRam and performance is everything, as i'm using a 2010 1st gen. I7 in my pc, but combined with a gtx670 with 4GB of vRam, i run Far Cry 3 at 60fps..maxed everything, in 1080p.

GPU performance and ammount of VRam and a solid cpu is the ticket to a great infrastructure. And 8GB of DD5 Ram is very high end for a console.
4 1


6 years ago

Iv'e been more of an XBox fan since it's launch in 01', even though i still bought the PS2/PS3 at launch.

And while specifics were not talked about tonight(ie.. exact type of gpu, size of HDD..ect)

What WAS confirmed, impressed me in how i see Sony is not opting for gimmicks(ie MS and Nintendo) and while they showed the depth of field stuff motion with the contoller and a bit of Move, i think that's more of a throw in, then something they will devote the hardware to.

What was confirmed was the 8GB of DDR5 unified Ram. If MS does indeed go with the slower DDR3 8GB Ram and it's 3GB of Ram devoted to Kinect 2.0(why?), then Sony will OWN this upcoming console generation, and MS it, as they have taken to the casual market..unlike how the original Xbox started.

Add in avatars that blend in socially with real pics/faces..unlike the cartonn Wii like avatars of the Xbox360, and it's so obvious Sony is opting for the more mature/harcore console gamer.

Great job Sony!, and that's coming from a gamer whom always was disappointed in the PS consoles, since the PS2.

Hopefully Sony online infastructure is the match or exceeds Live, because the PS4 will be better next gen. console, and that's a fact.(if rumors are indeed true on the Durango)

More Ram after the OS, faster DDR5 Ram, a faster GPU and a more mature UI. Add in 1st party developers that MS never could match anyway.

Thanks Sony, i'm glad one compnany cares about the hardcore gamer.
14 3

PlayStation 4 Press Conference Live Report


6 years ago

Imagine a GTA:V announcment that it's arriving on the PS4 for launch?

That alone will sell the system all by itself.
0 0


6 years ago

This is the first time i'm opting for a Sony console over a MS console since..well the PS1(over the Saturn).

I'll own both, but with Bbetter/faster infastructure the the Durango, as well as no Kinect like gimmick, and no silly Wii like avatars, the PS4 is the more mature console.
Hopefully it's online network is the equal compared to Live, as if it is, other then Halo and maybe Gears, i'm really down on how MS is now the new 'Wii' with it's Kinect and cartoon avatars.
Thanks Sony...amazing spec
0 0


6 years ago


Unlike the PS2 amd PS3, Sony is going higher end on internal Ran,

As a longtime Xvox fan, while i'm gettiing both consoles, it's the PS4 that will be my $1 consle.Finally Sony delivers!.

MS needs to make up from the Kinect obsession, as for me, it seems like they care more about the casuals then the hardcore.

Now if only i can get more used to the DS as i got so used to the 360 controller.

Amyway..THANK YOU , Sony for a top notch console, without any major gimmicks.

0 0

Durango Kinect 2.0 specs leak


6 years ago

"Significant OS resources are kept aside in order to run Kinect across multiple applications that operate simultaneously,"

How much so? The specs are currently at 8GB total Ram, so how much is this GIMMICK going to take from overall system resources?

I picked up the original Xbox(
1 0

Face-Off: Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance


6 years ago

Due to Sony 1)opting for BR storage over more total internal Ram & 2) going with the harder to code for Cell cpu, it has taken 4+ yrs since launch for the PS3 to win some H2H's.

There is no better 'aging' console, both have pro's/con's, as so far, Crysis 3 looks better on the 360. (i have all versions, but the pc blows the both to shreds, as it should with it's gtx670 gpu.)

Thankfully Sony is opting for more friendly(to 3rd party developers) hardware in it's PS4.

btw: Let's save the H2H's for the PS4 vs 'Next' Xbox, please? This is old news, 360 vs PS3. lol

fwiw: All 1st party games look better, and they should, they know each console pro's much more then 3rd party developers. It's just Sony has more[and better] 1st party developers so it's why games like God of War, the Uncharted series..ect, looks stunning. But after seeing how Halo4(and the Forza and Gears series) was coded, it shows what was indeed possible if MS had the wisdom to put more money into development of it's 1st party, rather then the Kinect.
2 1

Supercomputing in consumer form: Nvidia's new GTX Titan graphics card


6 years ago

@Suarez07 I would, but I do, as in game on a 1080p Plasma, mostly in 2D however. (the 3d kinda got to be too eye straining for me).
I wish i can push myself to the dark side, but i tried to game for a couple yrs on my 23" 3D 1080p monitor up close, and it just lacks the experience of the bigger screen. Even my smaller Plasma 3D( 40" ) is a bigger experience then 23" or 27".

Still, like you noted, you saw no 3D 1440p 3D monitor when you looked it up, and where i looked, i did'nt as well.

I still need that option available to me, especially if i'm going to drop $900 on a new 27" 1440p monitor.

And one last thing, there is nothing that seems more 'real' then playing GTA:IV in 1st person(using the FP mod and ENB for near photo real quality), in 3D.

When Niko is on a highrise and looking down, in FP and in 3D, it's as 'virtual real' as it gets.

Some OOTB games cannot get 3D done right, but that FP mod was seemless in it's 3D quality.

So i cannot push him to the 'dark side' as i'm loving the other side myself, and in the same boat as him.

But i can see how teasing it is to go from 1080p to 1440p, 2D wise.
2 1


6 years ago

@ATARI I'm not sure why you upgraded from the 590? Was there a feature you needed from the 690 such as adaptive vsync?
And why run you're games at only 1080p? I can see if you're running you're games to your big screen(like i do), but if i put $1000 into a gtx690, for sure i'd pick up a 27" 1440p or higher monitor.
Don't the higher 1440p or higher monitors handle 3D? (i never looked up on this, but i will as i game in 3D as well)'re, with that 690 you can max out Crysis 3 in 60fps for sure and in 3D i gather 30-40fps?

Like you said, "There was not a single game I couldn't max out even at 1080p 3D on the 590"

You said it best, so just ENJOY that gtx690, you're one lucky guy.

Personlly i went with the gtx670 because on my 55" Plasma, in 3D it won't go higher then 30fps. (
0 1


6 years ago

Wow, so those whom burned $1000 on a GTX690 in the past 8 months or an 2/3/4 SLI setup of GTX670/680's, must be feeling feeling 'elite' now, ha?

I have one GTX670 inside my pc and i get 60fps in every game but Crysis 3 and the original Cryisis1 beta(55fps), in 1080p.

Please..please riddle me, on why any pc gamer would burn so much money for a 3 or 4 SLI gtx 680 setup or the new Titan gpu, unless they plan to A)Play in 2560*1600 or B)Actually think that frame rates over 60 are noticable in gameplay/to the human eye.

Going from 3060fps is a must, we all know this, but over 60fps is overkill.

Personally, i run my pc games to my Panasonic Plasma 55" 3D HDTV, and while max resolution is only 1920*1080, i'll take it's better quality 3D and black levels over ANY tiny pc monitor.(ie...27" IPS monitors that run up to $1000)

All that money on a 'Titan' gpu, only to stare/play on a 27" monitor, i just don't grab that logic.

Now, when we see the large screen 4K HDTV's at an afforable range, then i can see buring money on this gpu..or even an sli config of 2 or 3.

btw: "Crysis 3 at nearly 40FPS" I would think the worlds best gpu can handle Crysis 3 in that resolution at 60fps? Obviously Crytek has poor coding.

FWIW: I'll wait on a version of the Titan to be released at a power wattage a bit lower and for a sub $500 price range. But still only Crysis 3 is where i don't get 60fps at 1080p, when other engines(ie UE4 games) are released, then i'll be grabbing a version of the 'Titan' gpu. But certainly not now.
1 2

Witcher 3 dev says Skyrim's story and quests were "generic"


6 years ago

Iv'e been playing GTA:IV since launch(5 yrs ago) and with the pc mods, sure has helped alot in terms of more immersion(ie..a fully playable FP view).

But in NO other sandbox game has the storyline been so memorable to me. The side characters were top notch, even Niko's online dates were a riot.

The storyline and characters and how mature the script was..ect, just was so much head and shoulders over Skyrim/Fallout 3..ect.

I do wish GTA:V would combine both the rpg elements of those games with the amazing Rockstar storyline/characters, as that would bring the best of both worlds.

And while i really enjoy Skyrim and Fallout 3..and Oblivion, only in Fallout 3 did the storyline feel like it was quality.

So while many gamers love sandbox games for the silly sidegquests that have no affect on the storyline, i'd like to see everything in a sandbox game linked into the storyline.

And enough with the annoying 'kill 100 pigeons or find 100 relics' of these games, as i'm not sure why things like that are added.

And the same goes for Far Cry 3, which for me, was THE best open world game since GTA:IV, because the storyline/characters and gameplay(
0 0

Crysis 3 developer Crytek on why it's impossible for next-gen consoles to match the power of gaming PCs


6 years ago

@mikolajholowko Thanks and likewise, thanks for the solid/intelligent replies and insight.

About Apple/Ipad, i just don't get It may be a replacement for a laptop, but it does far less. It's display is stunning, i'd admit that and it's teasing, but not $600 teasing. lol

I guess the causuals just love simplicity?, and that's what Android's OS/Ipad is all about.

About FC3, my NVidia drivers are up to date..always, HDD has 0%-1% max fragmation, as i optimize my pc to the max. I think it may be my cpu is getting outdated, as it's a 1st gen. quad I7. (running at 3Ghz). But then again, i had mods in GTA:IV that max out the npc ammounts, and i still get an average of 45fps in 1080p..maxed everything.

I do my own GTA:IV modding(ENB wise) so i know something may be bottlenecking it, but not to the point of insane dips from 6030fps. That's just bad coding, as i have well too many games run at a silky smooth 55 or 60fps, with little/no dips below 50. And iv'e read the Nvidia forums where sli configs of 670's/680' or owners of a gtx690, were saying the same thing as well. Heck, it may just be an NVidia driver issue?

About Halo, without a doubt, when you funded with 100's of millions to quality control it, especially with the new studio taking over for Bungie, they made it a pririoty to make it look/play as well as possible. For a 7 yr old console, that was one amazing graphical engine, which says alot about console optimizing.

Sleeping Dogs was done on a much lower budget, and be it was designed afor being unlocked..then locked, was the reason, i'm not sure. One thing i do know, is the the pc version ran at a silky 60fps and had non of those issues.

Later all, i have family duties now and wife is bugging
0 0


6 years ago

@airforceone I grew up playing some Pong like console and having the first home pc ver, the Timex 2K. lol..It had only 2K and a membrane keyboard and no color. Then i bought most every console since and every home and pc comp. since(except

Corridor fps are so old school, but they make for a few good hrs of stress relief for me, after all these yrs.(and hundreds of fps)

But you bring up a great point, as i look back to games in the 80's like 'Elite' or almost every new ip, being so refreshing, gameplay wise. Adventure gaming was common place as well.
Even landmark game engines like Origin's own 'Wing Commander 1'(1991) required a 386sx and that ran about $1500 or so. However it not only me away graphics wise, it did so gameplay wise.

Even recently back to the original Deus Ex, which was miles ahead of DE:HR in every facet, including better maps.

Add to that the original GTA:III and how innovative that was, BF 1942, Planetside, System Shock 1 &2 ..ect

And i still think back to the winter of 2004', when the epic(in scope) GTA:SA arrived as well as HL2..even Halo2 was solid, all while i was looking forward to the 'hype' of the Xbox360.

I'm more excited about GTA:V on these aging consoles, then Crysis 3 or the next consoles.

Larger open worlds, more detailed worlds to go with them, much better a.i, and innovative gameplay, and some new ip's, is what i'm mostly looking forward to.

If Mr. Yerli thinks i'm upgrading to sli 670's or more for Crysis 3, just another linear fps..with a pretty face, then he's insane.
2 0


6 years ago

@mikolajholowko Great points about the input lag factored in, as i never thought about it in that way. Thanks for the insight.

Having said that, there is no excuse for say ie Far Cry 3 to have silky smooth frame rates at 60fps, then just drop off the charts to 30-35 or 45 in villages. That's just poor coding. And i got rig of the post fx to 'none' as it was not only a major fps hit, but also the IQ looked alot less sharp.

About Halo 4 and it's input lag, while i fully agree with you..and appreciate the added insight, when compared to say 'Sleeping Dogs'[X360 version], which is another low input game, that game just had unbearable stuttering at 30fps.

Heck there is often times of micro stuttering in Far Cry 3-pc as well, which is really is unacceptable. (still one hell of an amazing game, btw)

And i fully agree as well about the new consoles. We will see the occasional COD type in 60fps, or a mid-low level graphic engine (ie Dishonored) running at 60fps for sure as well as UE3 games, but for sure not Crysis 3 and likewise UE4 games, as those will be lucky to be running at capped 30fps, with no dips into the 20's.

Like i noted in an earlier post, if Apple can sell millions of IPads with each new 'generation' at the $600-$800 range, i don't see why MS or Sony won't go that route as well.

Yes the economy is bad, but it's not bad enough when Ipads are flying off the shelves or big screen hdtv's or even high priced mobile devices/phones, as well.
0 0


6 years ago

Question for every one her that plans on buying one/both of the new consoles:

Would you pay $700 or $800 for a new Sony/MS console that say had an sli config(ie 7970M gpu's), where you know for sure it would not only every current game in 1080p/60, but also run UE4 games at 50-60fps, maxed out settings in 1080p?

You know price cuts would occcur through the yrs, as well as make these upcoming consoles alot more future proof.

After all, every yr a new IPad is rolled out in that price range, and customers are buying those in droves.

So would you spend that much?
0 0


6 years ago

@mikolajholowko Very solid points. I'm expecting the current higher generation engine's(BF3/Crysis 2/Far Cry3..ect) to be approaching 60fps or close to it, in 1080p. No doubt very high settings..possibly ultra, if optimized really well.

Games like Dishonored/Deus Ex-HR..whom don't have the taxing graphic engines, i see those at a locked 60fps.

For UE4 games, there is no way it approaches 60fps, and i see it as a locked 30fps, just like this past gen. was for the UE3.(on the aging consoles)

In going from a gtx560ti to a gtx670, i got spoiled going from 30fps to 60fps, and never realized how huge playing at 60fps really is.

Now i don't expect these newer consoles to handle even Crysis 3 at higher then 30fps, let alone UE4 games, but what i do hope for, is for a locked 30fps, such as Halo 4 had.

Halo4 has a near lock solid 30fps, that makes it play *nearly* as smooth as many 60fps games. I'm not sure how they did it, but it was one of the few times playing at 30fps did not get me sick.

This is one aspect consoles do extremely well, is to optimise code, so there are no crazy dips from say 60fps to 35 or 30fps. I get those in Far Cry 3-pc, where it's silky smooth at 60fps, then just drops like a rock to 35 or even 30fps in villages. I'm using a $400+ gtx670 gpu, and that should never happen.

And it's why i stay a multi-platform owner and don't put too much into my pc(ie..sli it for 1440p gaming), as i demand better quality graphics(ie..UE4) in 1080p first, then i'll have a need to up my pc, to play in 1440p.

Ideally a higher speced console from eithier MS or Sony, would have been the ideal situation. Heck, the Ipad sells at $600-$800 every yr, and still consumers keep buying the newer version.

[rant mode]
1 0


6 years ago

@Cjail The GPU's are much alike, but with some differences. Both are based off the 7970M gpu with (rumor) the Orbis having more 18 CE's compared to Durango's 12. Also the speed of the unified Ram in the Orbis DDR5 makes for a much quicker 'pipeline'. However, there is no way to implement 8GB of that DDR5, so it looks like 4GB is what the Orbis will have. The Durango has more Ram..but more dedicated to other 'apps', but even so from the dozen reports i have, it seems like 3.5GB after the OS for the Orbis and 5 or 5.5GB for the Durango.

Both have bottlenecks. with the Orbis having the better performance but lesser Ram. Think about games like GTA:V or VI where the world is getting spooled off the HDD and into Ram. The Durango has more inside Ram to use..on the fly, while the Orbis has to spool more off the HDD, but once it's inside the Orbis, it's throughput is alot faster.

Overall: Both consoles will perform very close to each other, and we still don't have solid facts on exact specs.

btw: I do like the gpu extra's of the Orbis but this may be offset by the 32MB eDram of the Durango.

Eithier way, both consoles have alot in common, much more then this past gen.
1 2


6 years ago

@Cjail I have no respect for Mr. Yerli, as a couple yrs back he's boasting how great his CryEngine 2 is, and how it works so great on the consoles. (and it did, as the 360 version was very impressive).

But then he flips around and says And i'm sure when giving his console interview, he'll state differently.

But maybe he should talk only when he puts out an engine that does not take a gtx690 to max out at 60fps. It's a linear fps and it takes a $1000 gpu to max out?

So of course he's going to say a sli rig(or 3 or 4 sli rig) is unmatched, heck he needs that to run his new engine.

About the pc rigs and being so far superior to the upcoming consoles:

Of course any 2/3/4 sli rig will run circles around the newer consoles, but the price cost will, much more so. (care to burn $1600 in a four gtx670 setup, that may be outdated when the 7XX series arrives this spring? Heck, what nutcase will be buring $1600-$2000 on a 4 sli gpu only upgrade, that will only be 'current' for one year?)

Actually, the gpu inside both new consoles is very impressive, considering the low power it takes up as well as the benchmarks it has shown.

Is it the match of a $400 gtx 680($500 gpu) or 670($400 gpu), lol..of course not, but it comes very close to the gtx660, of which runs $200 by itself.

With optimising the engines to run with that gpu, and if both consoles indeed are using it, it's a major win for the developers and a major win not just for console-only gamers, but for pc gamers, since so many developers code around the consoles and add a graphics 'wrapper' for the pc port.

To be honest, even if i had the money to burn, i'm not sure if i'd waste it on a 3-4 sli config. It's not like yrs back when in 2004' you needed a solid pc to run HL2, or way back in 98' when HL1/Unreal 1/Rainbow 6(the original) all arrived, and the pc was the only platform that could remotely handle it.
2 2


6 years ago

@Th3HaGMan Actually from what i remember the benchmarks of the 660(not ti) were, both actually are very close in terms of performance.(many sites do benchmarks differently)

Is the X51 worth the extra $$? Well for sure, it's not the better, bang-for-the-buck. It is expandable, meaning you can throw in a simular size/wattage gpu in the future.

But for sure it's not worth the extra $$ over the sub $500 next-gen consoles.

Actually i have my eyes on that X51, if only they upped the p.s. wattage so i can put my gtx670 inside it. (then i can go smaller on my desktop profile)

I'm used to 60fps, so i'm holding off seeing what the newer X51 has, until the new X51/and nvidia gpu's arrive.
0 2


6 years ago

@ATARI Here's is exactly what will be inside the new console, both of them:,3345.html

Here is a pc that has the form factor of what the new console are sure to be alot like:

You can only fit a gtx660 inside that Dell X51. Why? The 670 and 680 use too much watts for the external p.s. (actually you can fit a gtx660ti inside it, but that's another story)

Both the new consoles will be using that amd 7970M gpu. Why? It uses low wattage. And we all don't need any more Xbox 360 launch RROD, do we? lol

Add in a 8 core cpu, BR drive, Ram..ect, and you have enough power to supply for.

However that gpu is very..very impressive for a mobile gpu. It does run BF3 at 45-50fps in ultra and 1080p. So on a fixed console with that gpu, i can see where it's optimised to reach close to 60fps.

Now i'm both a pc and console gamer, and i do prefer console gaming(gun to my head..for the new consoles at least), but 'perfectly' running UE4, means to run it maxed out at 60fps or higher.

I highly doubt this is possible on that mobile gpu, but i do see where it can handle it at 30fps, maxed or close to it.

For you..and me(maybe) that would be good enough, but if i had the $$, lol., i'd be putting together a 3-4 sli rig, playing an UE4 game in 1440p at 60fps, on a 27" ips monitor, as well.

To each their own, right? ;)
1 1


6 years ago

@hdeezie80 You and me and many other here are tech savvy enough to do that, but not that average person. Do you really think many consumers will buy a solid pc to do everything? Heck, they would be lucky to connect the hdmi cable into their big
The average person demands simplicity. So if you think they will be booting up a pc early in the morning, just to have a young child watch a show on Netflix, that's just not happening. lol.
When Windows has the ability to accept remote control input or use of a xbox like controller for everything, then maybe...maybe, that one day may happen.
Many people are just not tech savvy at all, especially around a pc.
1 0


6 years ago

@Cjail While the next gen of consoles, spec wise falls in the current low-mid range of pc's, it's not like any developer is coding for a 'fixed' pc platform having a gtx680 inside it. These engine's are scaled. It's still just a graphics 'wrapper' over the console version. It may look stunning..and far beyond the console version, but it was still developed knowing it had to run on a Xbox360/Ps3, as well.
Just look at Crysis 1 and how non linear the maps were, compared to Cryisis 2. Crysis 1 was develoed solely for the pc, and higher end pc at that.

So when these developers get their hands on the next consoles, with the lowest specs being an 8 core cpu/7xxx m gpu/4-8GB of Ram..ect, then we will see games using the Unreal Engine 4 as a norm.

I love the pc, but what always holds me back from going 3 gpu/1440p ips-27" monitor crazy in upgrades, is one thing.

The lack of specific games designed solely for the pc. If that was true now, we would see UE4 in a bunch of new pc games.

It's one thing to have the hardware that's next gen..or spec heavy(ie..3 or 4 gtx680's), it's another to actually develop solely for a high end gaming rig.
0 0


6 years ago

@jabberwoky I fully understand your point, and it's very valid. Also nobody is 'right', it's just opinion really.
A decade ago i had to go console only, as i had my newborn to watch over. So time was at a premiem, and no way was i dealing with a pc, especially when at that time no top quality gamepads were supported and where you needed to rewrire the vga output into s-video and then componentthen hdmi.
But now with the pc-360 controller and all gpu having hdmi out, and others like Steam, it's alot more like the console experience then it's ever been.
Having said that, i grew up on playing games needing to mess with Dos to get them to work, so these days it's a breeze.
However, i'm still a console gamer at heart, as may times i don't wish to mess with settings, such as Far Cry 3 had with it's annoying 'blur' in it's post fx settings.
Console games work 100% of the time with no crashing. A few weeks back i was lucky to have a few hrs to play Dishonored, and each time i loaded up a save, i got booted back to Win7's desktop. The next day it worked fine

But that's the pc, it will never be the ideal plug and play, but it sure is getting alot closer then in the past.

And that's why i enjoy both console and pc gaming, as there are times where i wish to max out my game..perfect the visuals(pc), and times i just want to just game(console) with no hassles.

It's just once i got used to 1080[ and 60fps, it's just painfull to go back to [current] console gaming.

Hopefully these new consoles deliver on 1080p/60fps as the norm.
7 0


6 years ago

@jabberwoky I have all platforms, and trust me, side by side is a huge difference. It's not a bit better..but far far better.
Just try the Crysis 3 beta on eithier console compared to the pc maxed, and it's almost like looking at a XboxXbox 360 leap up.
Look at Far Cry 3 as well, which on the pc, a 660ti/670/680 runs at 50/60/60+fps in 1080p and looks stunning. While on the consoles..uhh, it's just ugly, and runs at only 20fps.
9 1


6 years ago

@Cjail Much Thanks.

He stated “What we’re doing on high-end PCs is going to be representative of the future consumer gaming experience and it’s going to be awesome. It’s going to be a substantial leap over the current generation.”

I gather he is referring the UE4 and if these newer consoles can handle that, even if only at 30fps, it's indeed a huge leap over the current/past? generation of consoles.

And i can see that, where the UE4 runs at 30fps and the current engines like UE3 or BF3/Far Cry 3..ect run at 60fps.

Crysis 3 however, i just don't see running higher then 30fps.
1 1


6 years ago

@Bananazniper Judging from benchmarks, these new consoles should handle(barely) 60fps for BF3.(They Benchmarked 40fps for BF3 in a pc 'setting', but optimsed for a fixed platform i can see them reaching 60fps...or close to it)
Also i'm sure 64 player+ mp will be commonplace on the next consoles. But for BF4? I doubt these will handle it at 60fps..i can maybe see 30fps, with max settings. Maybe..
2 0


6 years ago

@Cjail No. IF you have the link, please post it. TIA.
I'd love to read what he has to say.
0 0


6 years ago

@Th3HaGMan Right now the closest pc that also looks alot like a console, is the Alienware X51, which has a gtx660 inside it. That sells now for just over $1000.(8GB model)
For anyone to think Ms or Sony can put a gtx680 like gpu inside the much smaller console casing without having massive overheating, is just not thinking correctly.
1 1


6 years ago

@arcam I stand corrected, i meant AAA games, and of course billion franchises such as Halo. Heck even Rockstar turned it's back on the pc with RDR, and releasing every GTA game since GTA:III, console exclusive, for a 6-8 month timespan. And still there is no word on when GTA:V will arrive on the pc.
(but i have to admit, the screenshots look stunning so far. If those are indeed from these outdated consoles, then you can just imagine the the potential of the next gen of consoles.
2 1


6 years ago

@Cjail Did he actually say he wanted that much Ram in the new consoles? lol
The new Xbox is slated to have 8GB..unified, so you're looking at up to 4GB+ to use for Vram. But at 1080p, that is simply overkill.

And besides the amazing mods for Skyrim, what pc game demands more then 1.5GB of VRam? None.

Even the ENB enhanced GTA:IV mod uses only 1.3GB-1.5GB of vRam, maxed in 1080p.

The PS4 is supposed to have 2.2GB of dedicated vRam, and even that is more then enough for 1080p.

With these aging, 512MB total Ram, consoles, able to handle BF3/Crysis 2/Far Cry 3..ect(abit it at ugly low settings in 720p or sub720p), i would think 4GB or 8GB for the next consoles is enough, especially vRam wise, in 1080p.
4 2


6 years ago

Back in 2005, when the Xbox 360 launched, large screen 720p panels were the highest selling panel, but the 1080p panels were being phased in as well. You could tell 1080p(as many would call it 'full HD') was where the future would hold as commonplace.

1080p is now the standard for large screens as we all know, and only much smaller pc monitors(ie 27") can we get up to 2560*1440 resolution, which is nearly double the pixel count as 1080p. Those monitors are sweet, but until the 4K HDTV's arrive and are afforable, in what yr. are we looking at? 2020?

I went console only in 2001 as i have a family..and i had a newborn, as it was cheaper/easier to game, with the little time i had free.

But in 2010 i had more time, and had a 1080p Plasma(50" at that time) and the 360/Ps3's low quality visuals at 720p just seemed like it was getting outdated, very quickly.

So i built a new pc, I7 cpu..9GB Ram and a gtx460, and was able to max out most games in 1080p at 30fps.

I knew that would get me through until the next Xbox and PS4, which i was sure would handle 1080p/60fps. (with maxed settings, or close to it)

Now i'm not the only console gamer to have done this, as others could not wait for the 'next gen' to start, so they bought a solid pc rig to get them by, so they could play cross platform games in visual settings, instead of 720p or sub720p.

But that won't be the case this time around, at least not until the big screen 4K HDTV's arrive, which won't be until at least 2020 or so. (as in afforable and mainstream).

Also, there are few exclusives, outside of mmo's and rts's that the pc gets. There is nothing like the billion $ selling Halo series, nor is there Uncharted, and how many countless games are eithier console(Red Dead Redemption being one huge title, comes to mind) only or get delayed on the pc?

This is a console driven industry, and while it's frustrating for me and others whom have a good pc, it's just the way it is, and it will grow even more at a distance from pc gaming this upcoming 'next' gen.

Add to it, how the mobile devices are selling like hotcakes as well.

So of course, these new consoles are very inferior, tech wise, to a $2000+ current pc rig, but given what these should be able to handle, 1080p/60fps, that is all that is needed for this upcoming generation, for the majority of gamers.
2 1


6 years ago

@wayn3h I can sli'ing 2 670's, but 3 or 4? Seriously?

The only purpose i see in that is if i go with a 2560 x 1440 27" LED panel, but going from a 60" Plasma to a 27" is something i wish to do.
2 1
Previous 1 / 2