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

The beast is back. $375 PCS4.

#141ShubPosted 11/18/2013 6:50:33 AM(edited)
Rigby_Raccoon posted...
Shub posted...
Stop. Just stop. You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

I was talking about this board TC picked out. Learn to read before you make a complete ass out of yourself.


This is what you said:

Rigby_Raccoon posted...
2. Micro ATX boards, especially ones this cheap, are garbage. They've got less slots, can't handle faster CPUs/GPUs, have 10/100 instead of 10/100/1000 speeds, they come DOA, they're unreliable.


It couldn't be more clear that you were talking about Micro ATX boards in general, although you did make a special mention about that ECS board in the build being discussed here. Poor damage control, don't try again.
---
-What is best in life?
-To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of the women.
#142DarkZV2Beta(Topic Creator)Posted 11/18/2013 8:16:52 AM
Zerabp posted...
DarkZV2Beta posted...
ITP: common sense = speculation!
Know why there's conflicting reports? Because no one wants to be on Sony's bad side for telling it like it is. Happens all the time.

Necessity isn't even a part of this discussion. The functionality of 8+2gb with 0.5-1gb reserved vs the functionality of 8gb with 2-3gb reserved is. 5gb just isn't as much as 9gb.


It's by no means common sense especially after using and operating the OS and using common sense to come to the conclusion that there is no way it uses 3gigs of RAM. The conflicting reports are all anonymous meaning no one would be put on Sony's bad or good side. They are there because some devs are more knowledgeable than others and no how to use it to their advantage. Once you've got the chance to take the OS for a spin you will realize pretty quickly that it uses at most 2 gigs of RAM (again my guess is that during share functions etc it's between 1 and 2, and most likely under 1 or just over 1 during normal operation).

Also it's not 8+ 2 Gigs as the "+2" is only accessible to the GPU itself. With the lower Banwidth DDR3 needing to be used by the OS and any other number of background applications you are running (Firewalls, Antivirus etc) that cuts way down on what is available to be used for gaming Applications which is why the neccesity of the PS4 to do those things comes into play. The smaller amount of faster RAM in the PS4, because of the way it's OS works, out performs the larger amount of slower RAM in your original build.

I have a feeling you know all this and are just being a troll to console only gamers, because why not? Well in this case the why not is because for once a console is competitive and arguably a better price than a PC with similar specs. This is a huge step in the right direction for consoles and should be supported.


Memory footprints are not plain for the consumer to see, nor is reserved memory necessarily being used. They could have 2.8gb reserved for high resolution pictures of cats and you wouldn't even know. What we do know is that that memory isn't strictly reserved for games, like most of the memory in a console is. We also know Sony is being wordy about it, trying to avoid talking about how it actually works, when they're quite noisy whenever they have something to brag about.
Common sense. This isn't rocket science.
The reason these conflicting reports are anonymous is exactly because they don't want to get on Sony's bad side. Sony doesn't want them talking about it, so they remain anonymous. Common sense.

8+2 is 8+2. That memory doesn't vanish. It's used for graphics processing, just like the ~5gb on PS4 needs to be used for graphics processing as well.
Also, game logic does not benefit from high bandwidth. Neither do system tasks. On top of that, the build listed has a dedicated 256bit GDDR5 graphics pool for memory operations, which isn't going to be bogged down by system tasks and game logic. In fact, sans a few special cases where the GPU performs game-logic related tasks like interactive physics, the 8+2 configuration is better.
Background tasks haven't made a significant impact on performance since 2000 or so. It's not like you're encoding video while playing games.
---
Even people have toenails. Of course PCs have toenails. -claytonbuckley
#143ShebeskiiPosted 11/18/2013 8:54:32 AM(edited)
Zerabp posted...
DarkZV2Beta posted...
ITP: common sense = speculation!
Know why there's conflicting reports? Because no one wants to be on Sony's bad side for telling it like it is. Happens all the time.

Necessity isn't even a part of this discussion. The functionality of 8+2gb with 0.5-1gb reserved vs the functionality of 8gb with 2-3gb reserved is. 5gb just isn't as much as 9gb.


It's by no means common sense especially after using and operating the OS and using common sense to come to the conclusion that there is no way it uses 3gigs of RAM. The conflicting reports are all anonymous meaning no one would be put on Sony's bad or good side. They are there because some devs are more knowledgeable than others and no how to use it to their advantage. Once you've got the chance to take the OS for a spin you will realize pretty quickly that it uses at most 2 gigs of RAM (again my guess is that during share functions etc it's between 1 and 2, and most likely under 1 or just over 1 during normal operation).

Also it's not 8+ 2 Gigs as the "+2" is only accessible to the GPU itself. With the lower Banwidth DDR3 needing to be used by the OS and any other number of background applications you are running (Firewalls, Antivirus etc) that cuts way down on what is available to be used for gaming Applications which is why the neccesity of the PS4 to do those things comes into play. The smaller amount of faster RAM in the PS4, because of the way it's OS works, out performs the larger amount of slower RAM in your original build.

I have a feeling you know all this and are just being a troll to console only gamers, because why not? Well in this case the why not is because for once a console is competitive and arguably a better price than a PC with similar specs. This is a huge step in the right direction for consoles and should be supported.


Windows 7 and beyond barely uses 1GB if you need the rest for software.

The smaller amount of faster RAM isn't 100% positive. Non gaming functions are non gaming functions, and GDDR5 is not a clear winner here. We don't know how the OS works. Sony isn't known for their hardware OR software design. They're completely middle of the road in their expertise. It's actually quite reasonable to hear 2-3GB reserved for the OS given Sony has exactly how much experience making a smooth, fluid OS? Have you seen the PS4 in action on PSN? The thing CHUGS. It chugs like a budget PC from 6 years ago. Though, a lot of that chug is probably due to the CPU and it's low clock speed and per core performance.

I think you're clearly overestimating the ability of GDDR5 outside of gaming and what it does for the system on a whole.

There are PCs 3 times the power of the PS4 with DDR3 + GDDR5. It's a slight inefficiency for gaming for greater efficiency outside of gaming, and it is completely offset by more power.

The way the PS4 chugs does NOT give me or anyone else the impression that GDDR5 is purely positive over a DDR3 + GDDR5 combo for what the PS4 is doing. It's simply cheaper to do it that way and has more positives than the Xbox One's DDR3 + ESRAM setup.

The Xbox One may actually provide a superior multi-media setup given the RAM setup. But it'll probably just come down to Microsoft being better software developers.
---
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. - Christopher Hitchens
#144xcmon3yx2Posted 11/18/2013 9:12:28 AM
an equally powerful pc will not stand toe to toe with a ps4, which has set defined hardware, that devs can squeeze every little bit of performance out
---
http://www.youtube.com/user/xcmon3yx777,(3DS FC: 5257-9927-9011), (Steam: xcmon3yx2), (XBL: HakudoshiV77360), (WoW: xcmon3yx2#1204)
#145DarkZV2Beta(Topic Creator)Posted 11/18/2013 9:22:16 AM
xcmon3yx2 posted...
an equally powerful pc will not stand toe to toe with a ps4, which has set defined hardware, that devs can squeeze every little bit of performance out


We're not comparing an equally powered PC, though. We're comparing a much faster PC that costs less and will get the same performance in gaming.
---
Even people have toenails. Of course PCs have toenails. -claytonbuckley
#146BogePosted 11/18/2013 11:49:19 AM
ATARIJAWA posted...
Boge posted...
I'd love to see a Call of Duty, Battlefield 4, or Assassin's Creed 4 benchmark on this system with settings the same as what the PS4 runs at.


That system would at least equal ps4's settings. May even run some higher. It will run bf4 in 1080p which the ps4 can't do.


With the same texture quality? I'd like to see it. I'm not saying it can't. I do have my doubts though. If it could, that would be pretty freaking awesome for PC gaming.
---
Don't lie to someone who trusts you.
Don't trust someone who lies to you.
#147ATARIJAWAPosted 11/18/2013 12:43:21 PM
Boge posted...
ATARIJAWA posted...
Boge posted...
I'd love to see a Call of Duty, Battlefield 4, or Assassin's Creed 4 benchmark on this system with settings the same as what the PS4 runs at.


That system would at least equal ps4's settings. May even run some higher. It will run bf4 in 1080p which the ps4 can't do.


With the same texture quality? I'd like to see it. I'm not saying it can't. I do have my doubts though. If it could, that would be pretty freaking awesome for PC gaming.


That card has more shaders and is more powerful. Again, for people thinking the Ps4 has some wonderchip in it, it has a freaking laptop gpu in it. It's about equal to a 560 ti, Its equivalent to a lower-mid range modern graphics card.
---
Gamefaqs game rating system : 10 = Best Game Ever. 8-9. Crushing dissapointment. Below 8 :Total Garbage. This is getting ridiculous. people agreeing so far 105
#148DarkZV2Beta(Topic Creator)Posted 11/18/2013 1:41:47 PM
Boge posted...
ATARIJAWA posted...
Boge posted...
I'd love to see a Call of Duty, Battlefield 4, or Assassin's Creed 4 benchmark on this system with settings the same as what the PS4 runs at.


That system would at least equal ps4's settings. May even run some higher. It will run bf4 in 1080p which the ps4 can't do.


With the same texture quality? I'd like to see it. I'm not saying it can't. I do have my doubts though. If it could, that would be pretty freaking awesome for PC gaming.


Better texture quality. 7850 has better texture sampling performance than PS4.
---
Even people have toenails. Of course PCs have toenails. -claytonbuckley
#149BogePosted 11/18/2013 3:07:49 PM
I know the 7850 is a more powerful GPU than the PS4 does. But are you guys considering optimization? That does play a major role in the performance of console games. Just because the PC hardware is more powerful doesn't mean all that power can be used. That's why I'd actually like to see a benchmark.

Can someone with a similar system do that? Set one, or all of those games in the same settings they are on the PS4 and run a benchmark?
---
Don't lie to someone who trusts you.
Don't trust someone who lies to you.
#150Snuckie7Posted 11/18/2013 3:12:10 PM
Boge posted...
I know the 7850 is a more powerful GPU than the PS4 does. But are you guys considering optimization? That does play a major role in the performance of console games. Just because the PC hardware is more powerful doesn't mean all that power can be used. That's why I'd actually like to see a benchmark.

Can someone with a similar system do that? Set one, or all of those games in the same settings they are on the PS4 and run a benchmark?


It's easy enough looking up benchmarks online. Battlefield 4 for instance, high settings @ 1050p should be pretty comparable to the PS4's ~high settings @ 900p.

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/734/bench/High_168.png
---
Intel Core i7 3820 | EVGA X79 SLI K2 | MSI 7950 Twin Frozr III | Samsung / 840 120GB / 8GB RAM | 1TB WD Caviar Blue | Corsair / 550D / H70 | Silencer MKIII 600W