This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

BF4 graphics lacking on PS4

#1Ikari GendoPosted 8/23/2013 8:03:06 AM
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/08/23/gamescom-battlefield-4s-graphics-lacking-on-ps4

I don't particularly care at all since I couldn't care any less about Battlefield, and if I did, I'd be getting it on the PC anyway. However I know that some people on this board love things like this.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wdw64aHYXA
#2WeaponX1138Posted 8/23/2013 8:06:21 AM
It's a work in progress.
---
Figuring things out for yourself is practically the only freedom anyone really has nowadays. Use that freedom. STEAM ID: Silentmark1138
#3fuzzymanPosted 8/23/2013 8:09:54 AM(edited)
the problem is not the GPU, it is the CPU, it is a bottleneck at low resolutions

It would be better if they aimed for 30 FPS with no dips in full HD

I'll run a crisis benchmark if I must, just to attribute what clockspeed does during a CPU bottleneck
---
http://i.imgur.com/hOjV6w3.jpg
#4SinisterSlayPosted 8/23/2013 8:09:03 AM
Oh no, it's almost like the PS4 is just a cheap PC.
---
He who stumbles around in darkness with a stick is blind. But he who... sticks out in darkness... is... fluorescent! - Brother Silence
#5pothocketPosted 8/23/2013 8:09:03 AM
Ikari Gendo posted...
However I know that some people on this board love things like this.


It's true, they're very sensitive and need every little bit of ego stroking they can find to justify their gaming choices.
---
well I am not like your dad. I worked as a chef at TGIF-Mattson
#6godplaysSNESPosted 8/23/2013 8:13:21 AM
Nothing to be surprised about.

Launch games that are multiplats are always quick ports of the PC versions.
---
Super Mario Kart is the single best Mario Kart ever!
#7Ha_D00DPosted 8/23/2013 8:14:45 AM
SinisterSlay posted...
Oh no, it's almost like the PS4 is just a cheap PC.


Nah man, they've got 8gigs of that super fast GDDR5 ram. Don't you know that PCs simply can't compete?
---
HAF 922// i5 3570k// Hyper 212 Evo// P8Z77-V LK// Sapphire 7970 Dual-X Edition// 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws// SeaSonic 620w// Mushkin 120GB
#8Knighted DragonPosted 8/23/2013 8:15:14 AM
From: pothocket | #005
It's true, they're very sensitive and need every little bit of ego stroking they can find to justify their gaming choices.



Not sure if srs or just making fun of the walls of console fanboy topics every time Sony or Microsoft pay Epic or someone similar to say consoles are better than PC
---
Matthew 7:21
http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/2492/gyenyame.jpg
#9fuzzymanPosted 8/23/2013 8:31:07 AM(edited)
fuzzyman posted...
the problem is not the GPU, it is the CPU, it is a bottleneck at low resolutions

It would be better if they aimed for 30 FPS with no dips in full HD

I'll run a crisis benchmark if I must, just to attribute what clockspeed does during a CPU bottleneck


OK here's the test. Original Crysis in 1280x720p

AMD FX8320 tested at 4.6Ghz then at 3.6Ghz

Crossfire Radeon 6850 so there is no GPU bottleneck, in the sense that, the CPU wouldn't be fast enough anyway

Guess what happened.

64 FPS fell 10 FPS down the ladder, from 4.6 to 3.6

The consoles are clocked at 1.8 mind you, there is not a chance in hell Crysis would run on maximum settings beyond 30 FPS, on those consoles. Nope, no way.

http://i.imgur.com/ZLKXScU.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/XrWwaVn.jpg

And those were 64-bit runs, it's a Steam thing

Now there is a GPU floor, and there is a CPU requirement. I reckon the floor is roughly 2GHz for 30 FPS. Maybe higher maybe not. Crysis has a BAD floor because there is a TON of geometry, which is WELL suited to having 8 cores

There are two floors... one where GPU won't increase much because a slow CPU, or one where CPU doesn't increase at all because GPU is too slow

If console achieve 1080p@30Hz the floor will almost always be the GPU if they look at 30Hz as the benchmark. If they look at 60Hz as a benchmark it will always fall flat on its face unless the engine is very light. When you take into account how much VRAM the consoles have, they will almost NEVER go for 60Hz within 1 year. It will only be hi res, super detailed textures that the CPU can not and will not move at 60
---
http://i.imgur.com/hOjV6w3.jpg
#10pothocketPosted 8/23/2013 8:29:50 AM
Knighted Dragon posted...
From: pothocket | #005
It's true, they're very sensitive and need every little bit of ego stroking they can find to justify their gaming choices.



Not sure if srs or just making fun of the walls of console fanboy topics every time Sony or Microsoft pay Epic or someone similar to say consoles are better than PC


No, I'm making fun of gaming "journalism". This is obviously a non-story because every single generation of consoles has a first gen of games that aren't up to par with later releases that come out after devs have had some experience on the closed systems. But is that what this piece is about? Nope. The tone of the "story" reeks of PC elitism and is clearly aimed at those who share a similar mind-set.

What kind of PCs were the using earlier that he's comparing the PS4s to? The author only describes them as "supercharged". Breaking news everyone! Games look better the more money you throw at them!
---
well I am not like your dad. I worked as a chef at TGIF-Mattson