5 reasons GT6 is a PS4 game

[ProjectVRD]

If they are running the game the way Simon is saying they are, that's not really parallel processing.

True, but my point still stands, and simon was right when he said it is not really 4K. I am not sure why he thought I said it would 4K, but going on where current affordable gaming tech is then there is every chance that one PS4 would out compete 4 PS3's in any configuration. In computing terms the PS3 technology is ancient, come 2014 the current top of the range stuff like the HD7970 3GB card will cost less than £200. That one is well over ten times a powerful as the PS3 card and will not feature in the PS3, instead they will opt for something a little less powerful but also far less energy demanding as they continue to push for smaller dyes.

If people would like to know where we have come from since PS3's launch, look at the PS Vita and bear in mind there is no cooling going on there like there is in a PS3. Also, there is a mighty chip in the new iPhone 5 which is a massively modified Dual Core ARM Holdings tech. It can outperform the fastest intels that were on the consumers market just 10 years ago, and this thing is in a mobile phone and costs less than a quarter of the most expensive Intel around 2002.

So in the years since PS3 and 2005... not able to make something four times as powerful? Seems madness to assume such a thing, technology gain has never worked like that.

 

[avens]

Why would he be sadly mistaken? The PS3 is very weak compared to today's technology. The PS3's graphic card for instance is far more than ten times slower than modern graphics cards for PCs. It also has woefully low amount of memory and the Cell is no longer the beast compared to other processors... it is eclipsed by new generation i7's. And then we have the motherboard on which all the PS3 equipment sits, it is very slow at transferring data between the different components.

4 PS3s to run GT5 at more resolution while it looks the exact same. Would need 8 PS3s to run GT6 then (24 for triple screens lol), and it must cost $400 or less.

Also your 350euro laptop skyrim example is plainly wrong, or even misleading. Not 1080p (more like GT5's pseudo1080p but you know), not steady 60fps, and not the same graphics/etc quality by any means whatsoever.
I think you are underestimating GT5 and not considering the screen sizes difference (15/17 against 32/55). Or are blind and deaf.

 

[ProjectVRD]

4 PS3s to run GT5 at more resolution while it looks the exact same. Would need 8 PS3s to run GT6 then (24 for triple screens lol), and it must cost $400 or less.

Say what? You are hinging on something that nobody believes is going to happen and has already been discounted by myself and others. Not sure where the 8 PS3's thing came from.

Also your 350euro laptop skyrim example is plainly wrong, or even misleading.

It's entirely correct. The console versions are set to low resolution, with the PC's equivalent of the .ini files low detail settings and a uGrids=3 value. A Samsung 705E with a Core2Duo and a Radeon integrated chip can play Skyrim at 1080p with medium settings and comes with the standard uGrids=5 setting in the .ini file. Additionally it has additional graphical detail such as ShadowsOnTrees=1 which not only allows foreign objects to cast a shadown on the tree's... but the tree's can cast shadows on themselves, that is, the branches on a single tree casts it's own shadow over itself many times. To add to this it suffers just 5fps drop from the official HD Texture DLC by Bethesda and can handle several mods for 2k level clothing, facial and body maps. Perhaps you might want to look at a modern laptop and PC around the £350 price mark and compare side by side how it compares with a PlayStation because I am not entirely convinced you have done that.

Not 1080p (more like GT5's pseudo1080p but you know), not steady 60fps, and not the same graphics/etc quality by any means whatsoever.
I think you are underestimating GT5 and not considering the screen sizes difference (15/17 against 32/55). Or are blind and deaf.

This part I am little confused with, are you saying the laptop won't do 1080p for that game? Or you talking specifically about GT5 again? If Skyrim, then PS3 doesn't get near 60fps and at times it drops as low as 15fps and people have complained about that.

About screensizes... the Sasmung has a HDMI out, I use it on a 40" HDTV. The same as my PS3. You'll be absolutely shocked at what my gaming rig to do which today can be bought for about £700, two years ago on the same website it cost just under £2000. That is a remarkable drop in price in that timeline. There is still probably a year or two before PS4 comes out and that is likely the earliest we will see it, prices will drop further, compenents will get faster and what is possible at given prices now will become alot cheaper.

All I can say is... GT5, as far as graphics are concerned, is light years behind Project: Cars. It's not a case of me underestimating GT5, it does the best it can with out of date hardware. I am just unbiased about any platform and any game. Right now, the pre-alpha Project: Cars is far and away the leader in graphics for racing simulators while the PS3 is a long way behind current PC/Laptop technology. When PS4 comes out, it will make a big leap and like all the predecessors it will sit between the medium end and high end PCs. Then PCs, even the £350 mark ones, will catch up and overtake and the cycle continues.

Why in about 25 years is this suddenly going to change? Moore's Law is still going strong and consoles are subject to that as much as other computers.

 

[avens]

Youtube comparison or it never happened. Main reason why I don't believe it is the integrated chip, and remember fps are of the essence (nowadays I can't stand 5fps variations in 125fps games lol).
As you said, it must be a laptop (not desktop not modded) that costs 350euro (not more), with an integrated chip and running skyrim to the point it looks quality and fluidity wise better than GT5 on a single ps3. Same tv.

If you want GT6 to run at 4k then it is 4 PS3s just for the resolution (I know the example isn't 100% true but lets simplify it) + 4 more because a new gen console must be miles better than the previous ones, the PS3 was subpar to begin with and Sony always liked having the superior hardware. And lets be honest it won't sell if it costs $800, especially after the old/current gen, so the cheapest version can't cost more than $500 ($400 is a bit too low)

 

[ProjectVRD]

Youtube comparison or it never happened. Main reason why I don't believe it is the integrated chip, and remember fps are of the essence (nowadays I can't stand 5fps variations in 125fps games lol).
As you said, it must be a laptop (not desktop not modded) that costs 350euro (not more), with an integrated chip and running skyrim to the point it looks quality and fluidity wise better than GT5 on a single ps3. Same tv.

If you want GT6 to run at 4k then it is 4 PS3s just for the resolution (I know the example isn't 100% true but lets simplify it) + 4 more because a new gen console must be miles better than the previous ones, the PS3 was subpar to begin with and Sony always liked having the superior hardware. And lets be honest it won't sell if it costs $800, especially after the old/current gen, so the cheapest version can't cost more than $500 ($400 is a bit too low)

No, you want me to compare Oranges to Apples. We compare Skyrim to Skyrim, and Project: Cars to Project: Cars when it comes. You don't get to chose your comparisons to suit you when you want, you do it the right way... or no way.

You want to compare GT5 who sole effort on graphics is on a portion of screen that is no more than 25% of the total area, and yet expect to compare that to another game whose effort on outstanding grpahics fills the entire screen? Basically, you have great looking cars but the rest in GT5 is awful... wait, ok, you sure you want to go down this road now? You want to see what laptop level Skyrim looks like compared to GT5? You know... GT5 which cannot do 3D tree's? If so, we can go there.

 

[AmericanStig]

has anyone ever looked at the spectators in GT5? LOL throwback to the PS1 right there.

 

[avens]

No, you want me to compare Oranges to Apples. We compare Skyrim to Skyrim, and Project: Cars to Project: Cars when it comes. You don't get to chose your comparisons to suit you when you want, you do it the right way... or no way.

You want to compare GT5 who sole effort on graphics is on a portion of screen that is no more than 25% of the total area, and yet expect to compare that to another game whose effort on outstanding grpahics fills the entire screen? Basically, you have great looking cars but the rest in GT5 is awful... wait, ok, you sure you want to go down this road now? You want to see what laptop level Skyrim looks like compared to GT5? You know... GT5 which cannot do 3D tree's? If so, we can go there.

Well compare it with the ps3 version then. Still waiting the video, and remember it has to meet all the specifications without cheating.

 

[Mulan]

Wow, people seem to go far claiming the ps4 cant do this or that because it will be to expensive. For me 800$ is no problem, actually i count it will be around that price. I hope it will be with technology in it worth 1200$ then its actually cheap (like PS3 when blu-ray was expensive, you got lot for you money buying a ps3).
But there are ways to save money too. They could skip the internal harddrive. They could skip the blu-ray and have a 800$ super PS4.
Well, we will see what will be the truth, all i can do is calculate if they design it to last untill 2022 with current lifespanstrategy. So thats why it must be a pretty powerfull machine even compared to new PC's from 2013.
https://www.gtplanet.net/gran-turismo-tech-demo-shown-running-at-4k-resolution/
i anticipate 4k too...

 

[jabofu]

The 4k resolution (3840x2160) is not hard to achieve with a middle class graphic card on a pc. And it might be like on the PS3 that all movies have the native resolution, but games might vary with the native output. 4k sounds like a lot, but it is actually not that hardware hungry. A PS4 in 2013/2014 might be powerful enough to support this.

But it is still amazing how good the games on the PS3 are looking with hardware from 2006. So, just imagine what leap forward it would bring, if they have a playstation with 2012 hardware.

GT5 offers a really nice graphic engine under its bonnet. But many textures are washed out, the resolution is not native 1080p and it lacks in shadows and other areas. I would love to see a crystal sharp GT5 with clean edges, nice shadows and good lighting.

Don't we want GT to get to a point where you can't recognize the different to real driving graphically and physically?

 

[iRevelationz]

But it is still amazing how good the games on the PS3 are looking with hardware from 2006. So, just imagine what leap forward it would bring, if they have a playstation with 2012 hardware.

This is really interesting to think about. Look how good GT5's graphics are on 2006 technology. Just imagine what a GT would look like on a PS4 with modern hardware.

There is a recently recently screenshot of the upcoming NASCAR game.

Now this is obviously from a rendered trailer, but I look at it as foreshadowing to what we could be dealing with in-game when the new consoles are on the market.

 

[Samus]

Wow, people seem to go far claiming the ps4 cant do this or that because it will be to expensive. For me 800$ is no problem, actually i count it will be around that price. I hope it will be with technology in it worth 1200$ then its actually cheap (like PS3 when blu-ray was expensive, you got lot for you money buying a ps3).
But there are ways to save money too. They could skip the internal harddrive. They could skip the blu-ray and have a 800$ super PS4.
Well, we will see what will be the truth, all i can do is calculate if they design it to last untill 2022 with current lifespanstrategy. So thats why it must be a pretty powerfull machine even compared to new PC's from 2013.
https://www.gtplanet.net/gran-turismo-tech-demo-shown-running-at-4k-resolution/
i anticipate 4k too...

So you think the PS4 will cost $800 to us but $1200 for Sony, meaning huge losses again? You're in a dreamworld.

The 4k resolution (3840x2160) is not hard to achieve with a middle class graphic card on a pc. And it might be like on the PS3 that all movies have the native resolution, but games might vary with the native output. 4k sounds like a lot, but it is actually not that hardware hungry. A PS4 in 2013/2014 might be powerful enough to support this.

But it is still amazing how good the games on the PS3 are looking with hardware from 2006. So, just imagine what leap forward it would bring, if they have a playstation with 2012 hardware.

GT5 offers a really nice graphic engine under its bonnet. But many textures are washed out, the resolution is not native 1080p and it lacks in shadows and other areas. I would love to see a crystal sharp GT5 with clean edges, nice shadows and good lighting.

Don't we want GT to get to a point where you can't recognize the different to real driving graphically and physically?

4k not hardware hungry? 4k video might not be too much work but 4k gaming is a whole different matter, even top end PC cards today can't get close to that and the PS4 GPU isn't going to be in the same league as a 79xx series.

 

[Youngun]

So you think the PS4 will cost $800 to us but $1200 for Sony, meaning huge losses again? You're in a dreamworld.

4k not hardware hungry? 4k video might not be too much work but 4k gaming is a whole different matter, even top end PC cards today can't get close to that and the PS4 GPU isn't going to be in the same league as a 79xx series.

Hate to say this Simon but your digging yourself a hole. Sony is Pushing 4k and PD are following.
https://www.gtplanet.net/gran-turismo-tech-demo-shown-running-at-4k-resolution/
Yes this seems to be a adapted version of GT with multi ps3 but only 4, Ps4 was going to be multiply times better so PS4 with 4k gaming isnt that illogical, u may not want it but not gonna stop them making it. 4k gaming = Easy 3D 1080p 60fps Gaming too!

 

[Samus]

That isn't really 4k though, it's 4 separate PS3 putting out a 1080p picture then projected together. Getting one device to output 4k on it's own is quite different. Plus this is still GT5 with low textures upscaled. Again, not the same as true 4k gaming would be.

I'm not digging a hole and i'll put it simply, if current $500 GPUs in a PC can't do 4k gaming the PS4 has no hope.

 

[daus26]

I don't how much it'll help, but the PS4 may be running dual gpu's. One of the reason for dual gpus was to have the ability to run this 4k stuff, right?

 

[Samus]

Ok let's clear this up.

This is an AMD HD7970 GPU, close to the top of the range on todays GPU market. It retails for £320+ alone, depending on the version.

Now here are some benchmarks for Battlefield 3 running at 5760x1080 resolution with ultra settings and also compared to the comparative priced GTX 680.

Note that the top two results are SLI and Crossfire, TWO of those cards running together. Total cost = £600+. They don't even manage 60fps with AA turned on, the single cards barely manage 30fps.

That is at 5760x1080 resolution. Number of pixels total - 6,220,800.

Now 4k, if you take the 3840 x 2160 UHDTV spec and what PD are sampling GT5 at, number of pixels total = 8,294,400. That's a 33% increase in pixel density.

So in conclusion if a £330 GPU cannot manage 30fps with that resolution how on earth is a GPU much less powerful and cheaper going to manage that + a 33% increase in pixel density?

 

[Tornado]

Wow, people seem to go far claiming the ps4 cant do this or that because it will be to expensive. For me 800$ is no problem, actually i count it will be around that price. I hope it will be with technology in it worth 1200$ then its actually cheap (like PS3 when blu-ray was expensive, you got lot for you money buying a ps3).

It's nice to know that you live in a world where Sony has all of this money to flush down the toilet to repeat the gamble that they didn't even break even on when they did it with the PS3.


Oh, wait. This was all explained to you already.

Hate to say this Simon but your digging yourself a hole. Sony is Pushing 4k and PD are following.
https://www.gtplanet.net/gran-turismo-tech-demo-shown-running-at-4k-resolution/
Yes this seems to be a adapted version of GT with multi ps3 but only 4, Ps4 was going to be multiply times better so PS4 with 4k gaming isnt that illogical, u may not want it but not gonna stop them making it. 4k gaming = Easy 3D 1080p 60fps Gaming too!

Funny that you say Simon is digging himself a hole when you are the one who clearly didn't read any of the last page, where that very thing was discussed in detail.

 

[Rushton1996]

Is it a possibility that GT6 will debut on PS3 but be introduced to PS4 in 4K resolution????

 

[Foxiol]

Ding ding ding! SimonK wins. Flawless victory! lol

Note the date, year and century because i agree with SimonK about something.

He is right...and people don´t know what are they talking about...4K games...please...
Play on PC for once and you´ll find what the latest hardware can do.

 

[Samus]

Is it a possibility that GT6 will debut on PS3 but be introduced to PS4 in 4K resolution????

Please read what I just posted and then rethink that question.

Ding ding ding! SimonK wins. Flawless victory! lol

Note the date, year and century because i agree with SimonK about something.

He is right...and people don´t know what are they talking about...4K games...please...
Play on PC for once and you´ll find what the latest hardware can do.

I'm not always an ass. Sometimes I'm an ass that's right.

 

[e30 freek]

@Rushton i dont think it will mate

 

[jabofu]

It's nice to know that you live in a world where Sony has all of this money to flush down the toilet to repeat the gamble that they didn't even break even on when they did it with the PS3.

You have to take into account that the market has changed dramatically some 6-8 years ago till now. The Xbox 360 and PS3 started the HD era and the blu ray drive was a new technology standard. The consoles were very costly in production, but they are fairly cheap to make now, because of the lower hardware costs and the poor workers in China.

Blu ray drivers became extremely cheap now, because you get blu ray players for 60 - 100 €. In production the drive itself may only cost 20-30 € now. At the moment we don't see any fancy new tech that get included in the new console. For 4k resolution we only need hardware power. It will be interesting to see whit which gpu / cpu combination they will come out.

I hope that they wont charge more than 399 € for it. But Sony said just some time ago that they keep prices for the PS3 high, so that it still seem like a high end product. So, I would not be suprised if they have an initial price of 500 €. We will see.

Ok let's clear this up.

This is an AMD HD7970 GPU, close to the top of the range on todays GPU market. It retails for £320+ alone, depending on the version.

Now here are some benchmarks for Battlefield 3 running at 5760x1080 resolution with ultra settings and also compared to the comparative priced GTX 680.

Note that the top two results are SLI and Crossfire, TWO of those cards running together. Total cost = £600+. They don't even manage 60fps with AA turned on, the single cards barely manage 30fps.

That is at 5760x1080 resolution. Number of pixels total - 6,220,800.

Now 4k, if you take the 3840 x 2160 UHDTV spec and what PD are sampling GT5 at, number of pixels total = 8,294,400. That's a 33% increase in pixel density.

So in conclusion if a £330 GPU cannot manage 30fps with that resolution how on earth is a GPU much less powerful and cheaper going to manage that + a 33% increase in pixel density?

Lets see what they actually do now at this moment, if the console is not powerful enough to let the game run in native 1080p. Oh, they lower the resolution of the game and let it get upscaled by the console. Crikey!

With the jump from 1080p to 4k, antialiasing and other technoglogies to get sharper edges are getting unnecessary, because such a high resolution makes the picture extremely sharp and detailed. With my pc setup I can take advantage of downsampling. You can let the game run in a way bigger resolution than your monitor supports. So, instead of 1920x1080 you can go up to 3.840 x 2.160. The picture ends up so sharp that you wont need any antialiasing or other tricks.

The big games of next gen are probably not supporting the full 4k resolution. Currently many games have their 1080p listing on their back, even when its not true 1080p. I dont think that these false descriptions will leave with 4k.

In the end the 4k may come for movies and games like Wipeout. But many player only have 1080p tvs and probably won't upgrade to a 4k tv. So, we won't miss too much.

But if Sony is confident that the PS4 can run 4k just fine, then it will be a nice powerful console thats waiting for us.

Just imagine the crazy weather possibilities with realistic snow and rain. Maybe more cars on the track than we can wish for. Bring it on PD!

 

[daus26]

Simon K, I don't see where on that graph indicates that those top two graphics card are running in pairs. Of course, no gpu to date would be able to run 4K by itself. It would have to be at least in pairs. In the PS3's case, the gpu would have to run in quads. I think it's possible for the PS4 to run 2 really good GPUs rather than 4 gpus that the PS3 has to achieve 4k. On top of that, the CPU, especially if it's the cell, can definitely help out.

Just imagine any PC out there that can run GT5 (or any other PS3 exclusive games like UC3, KZ3 and multiplats like GTAIV, MGS: GZ, etc.) with 256mb of RAM (and 256VRAM), with the same graphics card as the PS3 (which I think is the Nvidia 7700 or something). There isn't. Where else do you think it gets its resources from other than the RAM and GPU, which neither are not even close to being great in today's standard (yet games are looking either close, as good as a decent gaming PC. Answer; cell cpu. If you think about it, the 360 has a better gpu than the PS3, but the PS3 makes up for it with the more powerful cpu (cell).

We can't compare consoles and PCs. Devs tend to optimize for consoles more than PCs. That is the advantage to console gaming.

 

[Youngun]

It's nice to know that you live in a world where Sony has all of this money to flush down the toilet to repeat the gamble that they didn't even break even on when they did it with the PS3.

Oh, wait. This was all explained to you already.

Funny that you say Simon is digging himself a hole when you are the one who clearly didn't read any of the last page, where that very thing was discussed in detail.

OK so i may have gave up reading every post but i dont see how Sony cant and should create a poweful machine. Yes GPUs cost alot for good ones now but go back a year and the top GPU then would be cheaper now. PS4 is still 18 months away give or take, and its not like there going to a site and buying each GPU at $300 now are there, they'll buy them in huge bulk at a reduced price direct from the company. Im not a big fan of 4k yet but my 3d led tv is getting old now and wouldnt mind a 4k upgrade. If it has the ability to run 4k, then it would be able to run 1080p in 3d at 60fps,. Not the 720p 3d lowFPS that most games run at.

And like said above ^^ the ps3s spec should make it unble to do what it does but it still does it well. the Sony wizards could work that tech magic to make it a work of art.

Oh and SimonK, happy 4000th post

 

[Zuku]

Some of you people like Mulan scare me. You're willing to pay $800 for a console just for 4K gaming when this thing is no more than a pipe dream at the moment?

Then it's even worse that you're telling me you're only paying for graphics with that logic it seems like you wouldn't care if GT6 or GT7 was worse than GT5(which was already bad for other reasons).

Plus you're going to end up digging Sony into another hole they can't get out of. I like gaming, but I know I don't need the crap, and at $300-800+ It's a tough sale to most consumers why you think Sony had so much trouble. It wasn't until what 2009 or 2010 that Sony start turning profits right?

SimonK just want to say I agree with you and Tornado.

 

[Dude27]

I hope they try to get rid of flickering, pixelization, Low def shadows and other special effects BEFORE they want to push the resolution.... 4k today makes NO sense at all.

 

[Samus]

Simon K, I don't see where on that graph indicates that those top two graphics card are running in pairs.

Look at the words Crossfire and SLI. That indicates they're in pairs.

Of course, no gpu to date would be able to run 4K by itself. It would have to be at least in pairs. In the PS3's case, the gpu would have to run in quads. I think it's possible for the PS4 to run 2 really good GPUs rather than 4 gpus that the PS3 has to achieve 4k. On top of that, the CPU, especially if it's the cell, can definitely help out.

Just having two GPUs isn't going to be any better than one if they're low end GPUs. Also for the last time, the PS3 GT demo isn't running at 4K powered by 4 PS3 working together. Each PS3 is running at an upscaled 1080p and the four images are then projected together to make a 4k image. Putting 4 1080p images together is very different than having one or more consoles working to output a whole 4K image. Plus as I say the 1080p picture is upscaled in the first place. It's all one big upscale.

Just imagine any PC out there that can run GT5 (or any other PS3 exclusive games like UC3, KZ3 and multiplats like GTAIV, MGS: GZ, etc.) with 256mb of RAM (and 256VRAM), with the same graphics card as the PS3 (which I think is the Nvidia 7700 or something). There isn't. Where else do you think it gets its resources from other than the RAM and GPU, which neither are not even close to being great in today's standard (yet games are looking either close, as good as a decent gaming PC. Answer; cell cpu. If you think about it, the 360 has a better gpu than the PS3, but the PS3 makes up for it with the more powerful cpu (cell).

We can't compare consoles and PCs. Devs tend to optimize for consoles more than PCs. That is the advantage to console gaming.

Optimisation and lack of an OS/other programs running helps but not to the level that you're hoping for.

 

[daus26]

Look at the words Crossfire and SLI. That indicates they're in pairs.

Oh, I see it now, although I thought they'd also double in VRAM?.. or perhaps it's just the way to show what cards are running.

Just having two GPUs isn't going to be any better than one if they're low end GPUs. Also for the last time, the PS3 GT demo isn't running at 4K powered by 4 PS3 working together. Each PS3 is running at an upscaled 1080p and the four images are then projected together to make a 4k image. Putting 4 1080p images together is very different than having one or more consoles working to output a whole 4K image. Plus as I say the 1080p picture is upscaled in the first place. It's all one big upscale.

You sound pretty sure, so I'll just take your word for it.

Optimisation and lack of an OS/other programs running helps but not to the level that you're hoping for.

I don't know, it's pretty amazing what consoles can do.

A windows 7 PC takes what?, 1-2GB of RAM doing nothing? The latest PC games are recommended at least 4GB RAM (1GBVRAM) to run optimal in HD or more, so that's about 2GB of RAM for the game to use if it needs to. It doesn't sound like efficient optimizing to me.

Now, the PS3 with only 256MB of RAM (256VRAM) probably could handle what those 4GB PCs (along with a higher end gpus and much higher VRAM) are suppose to handle. Now imagine what a 1GB RAM PS4 (or even as high as 2GB) and a much better gpu running in pairs can do?

I'm not hoping for anything btw. I'm just thinking it might not be impossible like you say.

 

[Samus]

Yes but you're forgetting that PC games run in higher res and with more detail than current console games, as we can assume next gen console games would. Displaying those textures natively in 4k is going to take a behemoth of a GPU, PC or optimised console.

Also remember the key thing I said above, those PC benchmarks were at a resolution 33% less than 4K. 33% is a big increase in resolution.

 

[daus26]

Yes but you're forgetting that PC games run in higher res and with more detail than current console games, as we can assume next gen console games would. Displaying those textures natively in 4k is going to take a behemoth of a GPU, PC or optimised console.

Also remember the key thing I said above, those PC benchmarks were at a resolution 33% less than 4K. 33% is a big increase in resolution.

I'm not forgetting that. If we're going to compare things technically, then of course PC games will always have the option to have the higher end numbers. The point is no PC on earth would be able to run GT5 at 1280X1080/60fps, with only 256RAM/VRAM and the ancient Nvidia gpu the PS3 currently have. How much is the minimum requirement do you think a PC will need to run that? Also note that GT5 goes beyond the resolution and fps (e.g. grahpics, detail, physics, lighting) as it's a very complicated, advance game, but you know that.

The difference between the two in terms of optimization is a pretty big difference in itself and that difference may exponentially increase once Windoze requires more resources and consoles increasing much more in RAM and gpu power. Whether it'll be big enough for it to run 4K may not seem likely right now, but it's not like we're trying to rotate the Earth in the opposite direction here.

Also, on an unrelated topic, is GT5 even playable in this tech demo? Or is it just a video?

 

[Samus]

I'm not forgetting that. If we're going to compare things technically, then of course PC games will always have the option to have the higher end numbers. The point is no PC on earth would be able to run GT5 at 1280X1080/60fps, with only 256RAM/VRAM and the ancient Nvidia gpu it has. How much is the minimum requirement do you think a PC will need to run that? Also note that GT5 goes beyond the resolution and fps (e.g. grahpics, detail, physics, lighting) as it's a very complicated, advance game, but you know that.

The difference between the two in terms of optimization is a pretty big difference in itself and that difference may exponentially increase once Windoze requires more resources and consoles increasing much more in RAM and gpu power. Whether it'll be big enough for it to run 4K may not seem likely right now, but it's not like we're trying to rotate the Earth in the opposite direction here.

Also, is GT5 even playable in this tech demo? Or is it just a video?

Well no but it's impossible to say of course since a PC isn't a console. Also regarding the GPU you have to bear in mind any GPU they put in is going to have to be 'old'. They can't just create the latest and greatest GPU, decide that's the spec for the console and slap it in. It has to be decided a long time before retail so it can be modified and optimised for the console. By design the GPU in a console is always going to be old when it comes out, it's just how it is.

Let's get back to reality a moment though, so far we've been talking about HD7970s at £300+ each. We can speculate whether one of those can be optimised for a console to produce 4k gaming but the PS4 is not rumoured to have an HD7970. It's rumoured to have a HD7670, a rebranded HD6670. That card is roughly three times less powerful than the HD7970. Optimisation will make it perform better than it does in a PC but good enough to hit 4k gaming? I just don't see how it's technologically possible.