Support NeoGAF

[eastcoastkody]

i would think the percentage of PC gamers playing on a big screen tv, in 4K HDR with raytracing. Is like 3 percent.

and those playing on a 17 inch screen, at 1080p with some crazy framerate is like 85 percent

 

[BlackTron]

Well I still use a GTX 1060, and I think it's perfectly reasonable to keep on using it for the essential FPS and RTS games that I like while getting a next gen system. Given the low price of the console and insane gfx card prices.

I'm in no hurry for next gen though because I'm pretty satisfied with all my gaming hardware and I still own like 30 PS4 games I haven't even played yet. When PS5 is available to buy on a whim and I feel impulsive with cash in my pocket I'll grab the system. I feel the same way about a new graphics card, I just think a console will be available for MSRP far sooner.

 

[yamaci17]

have a 3070 + 2700x and a 2.4 gb/s nvme ssd i would say nearly on-par with xbox but slower ssd than ps5. but i have my rams clocked at 3466 cl14 and have very, very tight timings. based on some benchs i did some games benefit up to %20 25 from this ram inclusion, so i dont exactly know where my cpu would land on cpu scale. probably something between a stock 3600 and 3700x or slightly above 3700x


so far in the tests i've made, i can say i get more performance compared to consoles. we shall see how things will turn out later

i will try to compare latest games performances on consoles and my pc

---
Metro Exodus EE

Consoles run this between 1080p-1620p with RT normal setting (rt lighting rendered at a quarter of actual resolution) and no RT reflections at 60 FPS

I run this with DLSS Performance at 4K with RT ultra setting (rt lighting rendered at full native resolution), RT reflections on, Hairworks/Physics on with a seamlessly locked 60 FPS. I'd say it handled the game okay. CPU created no problem. since i went a bit overboard, i could feel it dropped to mid 50s at times, and went above mid 60s at times. since i dont track fps all the time, i have no idea and it never bothered me. VRR is magic for me, thats why I love it. the reason i went overboard bcoz i wanted everything mixed up in this one. it looks too beautiful. i wanted to go all in

For this one, my PC was stronger than consoles, since RT was involved, nv is better in that area, no two ways about it

---

AC Valhalla

this one runs between 1100-1440p 60 FPS on consoles with maxed out settings
i managed to push 1527p 60 FPS with maxed out settings. CPU created no problems for this one either at reaching 60 FPS
so this one played better on my PC

i lowered volumetric clouds however and usually got between 70 80 fps

---

Pschonauts 2

this one seem to run 4k 60 fps and 1620p 120 fps on series x
i couldn't get a locked 120 fps at 1620p with maxed out settings. since i dont know the exact settings xbox/ps uses, i tweaked some settings to medium and high and managed to get 1440p + 120 fps possible. i'd say xbox runs this a bit better than 3070 if the resolution is static (i have no info on that)

---

beauty of pc gaming is that i dont necessarily run these games at 60 fps all times, it can go higher than that, and since i have a vrr screen anything between 60 and 120 looks smooth and consistent and no vsync input lag occurs. it does not mean that consoles are not capable of more, but devs usually lock to 60 and do not present an unlocked framerate option (i know, not everyone's cup of tea)



the reason i aim for higher resolution most of the time is to:

- utilize ALUs/computational power that ampere can deliver at higher resolutions

- to minimize potential cpu bottleneks at lower resolutions

- make sure gpu potential is utilized

- games look much, much better/clearer/sharper at higher res due to TAA plague

for now im very content with what i get, but vram is concerning. we shall see how that turns out in long term

 

[tusharngf]

3070 PC and 3060 laptop.. YES

 

[Swiss Tartakovsky]

I have an RTX 3070, Ryzen 5600x, and 16GB of DDR4 RAM.
You betcha my PC whoops the PS5 and Xbox Series X's booties.

 

[Dirk Benedict]

have a 3070 + 2700x and a 2.4 gb/s nvme ssd i would say nearly on-par with xbox but slower ssd than ps5. but i have my rams clocked at 3466 cl14 and have very, very tight timings. based on some benchs i did some games benefit up to %20 25 from this ram inclusion, so i dont exactly know where my cpu would land on cpu scale. probably something between a stock 3600 and 3700x or slightly above 3700x


so far in the tests i've made, i can say i get more performance compared to consoles. we shall see how things will turn out later

i will try to compare latest games performances on consoles and my pc

---
Metro Exodus EE

Consoles run this between 1080p-1620p with RT normal setting (rt lighting rendered at a quarter of actual resolution) and no RT reflections at 60 FPS

I run this with DLSS Performance at 4K with RT ultra setting (rt lighting rendered at full native resolution), RT reflections on, Hairworks/Physics on with a seamlessly locked 60 FPS. I'd say it handled the game okay. CPU created no problem. since i went a bit overboard, i could feel it dropped to mid 50s at times, and went above mid 60s at times. since i dont track fps all the time, i have no idea and it never bothered me. VRR is magic for me, thats why I love it. the reason i went overboard bcoz i wanted everything mixed up in this one. it looks too beautiful. i wanted to go all in

For this one, my PC was stronger than consoles, since RT was involved, nv is better in that area, no two ways about it

---

AC Valhalla

this one runs between 1100-1440p 60 FPS on consoles with maxed out settings
i managed to push 1527p 60 FPS with maxed out settings. CPU created no problems for this one either at reaching 60 FPS
so this one played better on my PC

i lowered volumetric clouds however and usually got between 70 80 fps

---

Pschonauts 2

this one seem to run 4k 60 fps and 1620p 120 fps on series x
i couldn't get a locked 120 fps at 1620p with maxed out settings. since i dont know the exact settings xbox/ps uses, i tweaked some settings to medium and high and managed to get 1440p + 120 fps possible. i'd say xbox runs this a bit better than 3070 if the resolution is static (i have no info on that)

---

beauty of pc gaming is that i dont necessarily run these games at 60 fps all times, it can go higher than that, and since i have a vrr screen anything between 60 and 120 looks smooth and consistent and no vsync input lag occurs. it does not mean that consoles are not capable of more, but devs usually lock to 60 and do not present an unlocked framerate option (i know, not everyone's cup of tea)



the reason i aim for higher resolution most of the time is to:

- utilize ALUs/computational power that ampere can deliver at higher resolutions

- to minimize potential cpu bottleneks at lower resolutions

- make sure gpu potential is utilized

- games look much, much better/clearer/sharper at higher res due to TAA plague

for now im very content with what i get, but vram is concerning. we shall see how that turns out in long term

Vram was the prime reason for trying to get an RTX 3090. I've failed myself for going with the Good Enough* route, but I hope I can get a '4090' under 2k, next time around. I think the compounding stress I put myself under, trying to obtain a 3090 finally got to me and my will buckled. I don't regret it as much as I used to, though. 3080 Ti eats games and PS5s.

 

[Dirk Benedict]

i5-2400 and a GTX 580.

---

 

[lachesis]

For gaming, probably not. Running 3930k at 4.2ghz OC'd, 32gb DDR3 Ram, SATA SSD and GTX 970.
It's more than time to upgrade - as I will do so probably next year or so once this whole silicon shortage is somehow gone and all. (crossing fingers, but I have my doubts)

But it does so much more than Xbox or PS5 or Switch though. In fact, it makes me money because I work with this. The other one just sucks my time and money. Gamepass subscription, 70 dollar games and hundreds of hours of playing it.

One could say that you are having more fun on PS5/XSX/Switch - but I also have fun on my PC on many different levels. As much as I'm a console gamer, if I had to pick a powerful console vs okay PC - I will just have to pick PC, 100%.

 

[Denton]

2700X (which I intend to replace with 5900X as soon as games start dropping below 60fps, so far hasn't happened), RTX 2080Ti, 16GB, Evo SSD

So I voted yes. I expect that 3 year old 2080Ti to quite possibly last me the entire gen, at the least keeping up with consoles. Of course I might replace it anyway simply because I can and might want higher fidelity in the future.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

I can play more games on my PC's so yes.

 

[Codes 208]

Roughly on par with the ps5 for me i believe? 2070 with an 2020 i7 processor, 32gb of ddr4 ram and 1.5tb of SSD (500gb of on-board NVMe and 1tb of SATA III 560mb/s)

 

[Joelenheimer]

I have a laptop that outperforms them. Not by much but it do
32gb ram
Mobile 3070 130w 8gb GDDR6
i7 10850H 8 core
1tb NVMe

 

[wOs]

I’m surprised with these results, but OK glad everybody has a pretty good Rig.

 

[lmimmfn]

Close enough but no RT, intel 6800k @4GHz, 32Gig Ram, NVidia 1080Ti ~8TB storage, 2TB SSD/Nvme with 6TB regular HD.
38" Ultrawide, gsync screen for me is where its at, no interest in PS5 yet, will probably pickup one when theres a cheap slim available, depends on the quality of exclusives until then and if theyre coming to PC.

Would never exclusively game on console due to number peripherals i have on PC, arcade stick, flight stick, steering whell + pedals, Oculus CV1 and of course the number of PC games ive accumulated since 2003.

Will update gfx card whenever prices are reasonable again and prioritize vs looking to get a PS5. Xbox console i have 0 interest with anything important released on PC anyway.

 

[Kenpachii]

i7-6700k, 16gb of ram and a GTX 1070. Nowhere near a PS5. Isn't that around PS4 level? I certainly need a complete new PC.

Absolute dumpsters the ps4.

 

[Quasicat]

Mine is a midrange gaming PC that I bought in the spring of 2011. Doesn’t play the new stuff, but it’s more than capable in the video and editing stuff I throw at it, plus it still runs the original You Don’t Know Jack, so I’m good until it dies.

 

[yurinka]

No, it's a laptop with a i7 CPU, a 1070 GPU, 16GB of RAM and and a slow (compared to consoles) SSD.

I think most people don't actually have gaming pc's that can outperform the next generation consoles.

Looking at Steam hardware usage only a tiny portion of the Steam users has a PC comparable to a next gen console

 

[manfestival]

i7 8700k
16gb 3200
6800xt
nvme

Recently upgraded from the 2080 to the 6800xt. The performance boost was super nice and actually huge.. Would definitely have not been as powerful as a ps5/xsx until that update. So yes my rig is better.

 

[mxbison]

On paper yes, 3070 with quite good RAM and NVMe's.

Given that games are usually better optimized on consoles though, the performance in games will probably be about even later this gen.

 

[CatLady]

My Series X is MUCH more powerful than my PC. When I lost interest in MMOs and PC gaming I I no longer cared about high end graphics it's an i5 with intel integrated graphics. It's capable of playing Facebook games

 

[yamaci17]

No, it's a laptop with a i7 CPU, a 1070 GPU, 16GB of RAM and and a slow (compared to consoles) SSD.


Looking at Steam hardware usage only a tiny portion of the Steam users has a PC comparable to a next gen console

it will change though, if they can manage to fix hardware stock issues

remember, 760 was near ps4. most people had 750tis 760s, mostly

1060 came 3 years later, 2x faster than the ps4, and people quickly piled up those 1050tis, 1060s, 1070s and 970s

same will happen, it is inevitable. 3060 is now nearly on par with consoles. 4060 will probably decimate/destroy/crush what ps5/xbox sx can offer. and 5060 will probably be 2.5x faster and by the time 5060 hits most gamers would be on 4050s, 4060s and etc.

the cycle happens, every time

 

[Allnamestakenlol]

What counts as a steam user, anyone know? Is it just anyone with steam installed (e.g., my grandma) or does it take other things into consideration? I've never looked at the numbers before.

 

[Buggy Loop]

Oh yes

Managed to build a whole PC during pandemic and sold my old one as it was for a nice price.

Mini ITX Corsair NR200p e-white
Corsair SF750 psu
5600X
2x16GB 3600 CL18 vengeance LPX (low lrofile
Asus ROG Strix 3080 Ti
1TB 970 evo plus (got 4TB NAS for storing)
Asrock B550 phantom gaming itx
CPU cooler Noctua NH-L12s (pretty much only B550 motherboard that has passive VRM cooling and fits this cooler)
3x Noctua NF-A12x25 & 1x NF-A12x15 (for GPU vertical connector clearance)

J-Hack 2426 module, to replace the crazy big 24 pin on motherboards for a module attached on motherboard that connects to 6 wires on PSU & can supply motherboard with another 4 wire from that module. Makes mini-ITX build very clean wire wise.

All assembled with the case panel for ventilation (not tempered glass), no RGB. Case was initially supposed to be a FormD T1, but they encountered manufacturing problems, so I got on the list for v2.0 in e-white and will probably replace this case whenever it’s released.

Somehow lucky with GPUs during pandemic, initially scored a 3060 and then switched to a 3080 Ti.

 

[brokenwatch]

I have a 3080, Ryzen 9 5900x, 32 GB RAM, NVME SSD, and a 49" ultrawide monitor. Gaming is really fun on it occasionally, but I really prefer it on my TV with my XSX because it is bigger and has HDR. I could replace the monitor, but... that's a lot of money and this one works perfectly fine for work already. Fortunately a lot of games have cross-save so I can go back and forth.

 

[Needlecrash]

Yes. RTX 3080, 32gb or DDR4 3600 RAM, AMD Ryzen 5800X. I think I'm good.

 

[MrA]

This thread should be renamed if your PC is more expensive then PS5.

my pc is a laptop that is both weaker than a ps5, but more expensive than the retail price of a digital ps5 on the second hand market, despite being 5 years old, man the gpu market it nuts right now

 

[GreatnessRD]

Yes.

Ryzen 7 3700x + 6800 XT + (2) 1TB NVME + 32GB Ram = PS5 could never

I'll still buy a PS5 when its readily available and the disk version is cheaper

 

[NeonDelta]

Yes, I have a R5 3600 and a 3070 gpu

 

[Macattk15]

Yes. Not even close. 10900k and a 3080.

I still have a PS5 for exclusives (someday) though.

 

[yamaci17]

What counts as a steam user, anyone know? Is it just anyone with steam installed (e.g., my grandma) or does it take other things into consideration? I've never looked at the numbers before.

according to steam user base a high percentage of pc users are not capable of running anything after 2017 at 720p 30 fps at very low settings

its not a representative of the actual pc gamer base, but people keep using it for discussions for some reason

i would, instead, make the calculations based on a more limited range. i would say a range starting between gtx 950/gtx 770 would be a good compromise. , because anything below them are simply not capable of running modern games with respectable framerates/resolutions (720p 30+ fps would be a good starting point)

. it is clear that no matter what happens, devs will target a higher lower end gpu by the time progresses. i've made a new percentage list before making the gtx 770 as a lower end of the limit. i'd say it works better to assess the situation. i will do a similar list for the latest hardware survey for the sake of this thread ,later!

edit:

ok so after lefting out the "other %10", and other very very low end GPUs that would not be able to push 720p low 30+ fps, and calculating the percentages again;

gtx 1060 rises to %15 from %10

i will take anything above rtx 2080 as better than ps5

so going by this, around %10 of the total pc base of capable pcs have better or on-par gpu with ps5

its still low, but surely it will go only forward, not that it means anything but its just what it is

and final note: i'll be honest, even i always built midrange systems. i managed to snag a 3070 for near-MSRP. itwas a good deal. these values are hampered because of stock issues. if the 3060/3060ti was widely available, especially the 3060ti, these numbers would be very different. i have lots of friends that wants to upgrade 3060ti because its at such a perfect price point at 400 dollars but its simply not available for that price. if these were available, im sure we would see a much, much higher percentage. but it does not change the fact, here we are.

if the 3060ti did really exist /it is a very rare card at this point/, it would easily break a total of %10 in that chart, not joking. it has the potential to be the new "1060" that everyone puts in their systems. but it simply can't due to chip crisis

 

[Merkades]

Not sure. I have a 5950x with 32gigs of CL14 @3600mhz ram with a pcie4 ssd at ~7gigs read/write. But.... Still stuck with my 1060 despite the new GPUs I wanted releasing a year ago. Probably no though, I would guess better GPU is more useful then better CPU. One day I will get a better GPU without paying double.

 

[EverydayBeast]

My first reaction.

But of course there's rigs a thousand times more powerful that consoles out there and that's ok, PC players commit to upgrading things like cooling and graphics cards.

 

[Leonidas]

My PC was more powerful than PS5 and Xbox Series X back in 2019 when I had a 2080 Ti and 8700K @ 5 GHz.

 

[yurinka]

it will change though, if they can manage to fix hardware stock issues

remember, 760 was near ps4. most people had 750tis 760s, mostly

1060 came 3 years later, 2x faster than the ps4, and people quickly piled up those 1050tis, 1060s, 1070s and 970s

same will happen, it is inevitable. 3060 is now nearly on par with consoles. 4060 will probably decimate/destroy/crush what ps5/xbox sx can offer. and 5060 will probably be 2.5x faster and by the time 5060 hits most gamers would be on 4050s, 4060s and etc.

the cycle happens, every time

Gaming PCs more powerful than current gen consoles always have been a small part of the market. But sooner or later always existed, because consoles get released every 7 years or so while PC keeps constantly evolving.

Consoles always have been so popular due to balance between horsepower and price, also had the help from extra hardware optimizations and additional optimizations in the game code, so they achieved stuff that PCs traditionally needed more powerful hardware to be at the same spot.

The current gen consoles, even if featuring custom hardware, I think it's the first one that will have a very, very similar hardware to compare. Even if PCs won't feature things like their I/O system stuff.

And well, we also have to be very careful how do we consider if a certain system is more powerful than another one. Remember that as an example, teraflops don't mean a shit when comparing PS5 vs Series X because looking at them seems Xbox is going to be way more powerful but when looking at the game performance the results are super tied and in many cases even perform better in PS5.

 

[Justin9mm]

I dunno, it's a small percentage of people in the world in that actually have a rig exceeding next gen console playing in 4K. But majority of GAF have one!?

Yeah I wanna see the receipts! lol

 

[Velius]

Ryzen 7 5800X
Gaming OC RTX 3080 Ti

There's not even a semblance of a comparison to make, I'm telling you

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

3700X, RTX 2070S, 16Gb DDR4@3733 CL16, 2TB nvme

GPU is similar to the PS5 in rasterization. But much better in ray-tracing.
But it also has DLSS, which puts it well above the PS5 in rasterization and slightly above the Series X.
CPU has higher clock speed, more L3 cache and much lower latency.

This is me too. Basically feels the same as my series X, just more stuffing around with settings, driver update and logins on PC. The real difference is going from a smaller PC monitor 4K HDR to a 65" 4K HDR TV. So much more to see and enjoy from the TV size, less competitive but more enjoyable. YMMV.

 

[ArtHands]

I think most people don't actually have gaming pc's that can outperform the next generation consoles.

If you look at the steam hardware survey then most still 1080p screens and equivalent pc hardware.

Im interested to know what neogaf members have as we're probably classed as not casual gamers but more enthusiasts.

Seems you don’t know PC gaming well, son.

1080p could be people playing on a laptop, or a old Hd monitor or they set to it to 1080p for 240hz or 360hz gaming. It says nothing about the hardware power.

Hardware survey doesn’t contain raw numbers as well. Who know, maybe a 10% could mean 10 to 15 million users. That’s more than the PS5 current install base

 

[Rickyiez]

Hey it's not hard to be more powerful than the PS5 , all you need is a GTX1070 according to someone here

As for mine , yeah it definitely obliterate the consoles . I will be waiting for next gen Ryzen for a platform overhaul

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Let's just say my laptop tried playing the Fantasy General II demo at 1080p and all graphics settings low and the game ran at maybe 20 fps.

 

[GreatnessRD]

I dunno, it's a small percentage of people in the world in that actually have a rig exceeding next gen console playing in 4K. But majority of GAF have one!?

Yeah I wanna see the receipts! lol

I scored 17 881 in Time Spy

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X, AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT x 1, 32768 MB, 64-bit Windows 10}

www.3dmark.com

Receipt

But to be honest, this is a kinda silly thread. I'm here for it just because I love seeing people's hardware setups, but it doesn't matter if you have a 1650 or a 3090. Long as you're having fun that's all that matters.

 

[GHG]

It's a dead heat right now:

Although I'm sure a lot of the "No" votes are from SonyGAF people who don't even own a gaming PC...

You're wrong on that.

Jim Ryan personally sends every member of SonyGAF funds to build a gaming PC to ensure they have no reason to ever consider buying an Xbox console.

The ones who voted no are Xbox fans who don't have a gaming PC and are yet to realise they are getting the second class Xbox experience.

Imagine dedicating your life to a platform and having to wait a year for flight sim.

 

[Comfortgel]

"Oh, I'm ok. I'll just update in a few months" - me, February 2020.

 

[rofif]

Hey it's not hard to be more powerful than the PS5 , all you need is a GTX1070 according to someone here

As for mine , yeah it definitely obliterate the consoles . I will be waiting for next gen Ryzen for a platform overhaul

98. I lost I was 99 last year

 

[PaintTinJr]

For anyone saying their PC is definitely more powerful - so ideally someone with at least 12 cores, 32GB of ram, an RTX 3090 and Samsung 980 Pro nvme and can use UE5 early access - I would love to know how long it takes that machine to recompile all the engine shaders when enabling hw RT, and what frame-rate the UE5 demo runs at - outside the editor - when moving the settings beyond the default SW lumen with global meshes. So a change in settings to enable both detail meshes and hw ray tracing.

As I mentioned in another thread, my 12 core cpu, 32GB ram, Samsung 980 Pro and modest RTX 3060 tanks frame-rate completely when HW ray tracing for shadows or/and reflections is enabled in the land of the ancient demo. Dropping fps down to 2 - 8fps - depending on screen scale and epic scalability setting - whereas at default settings it runs at 20-40fps.

Assuming an rtx 3090 was twice or three times as performant as a 3060 in UE5 - which it seems to be on paper - would a machine that expensive even run the demo at 1080@30fps (using high settings with hw ray tracing enabled)?

I'm not convinced it can, but am sure someone in this thread has a machine to convince me otherwise.

Obviously that isn't a fair question with regards to comparison to the Ps5, as the PS5 can't do full scene hw raytracing at interactive frame-rates either, but the PS5 does do some hw ray tracing for close reflections and shadows AFAIK - up to the first 5 or 10 metre of the camera - then does sw lumen using detail meshes for the majority of the scene, and then finishes the distant stuff with the cheaper default sw lumen global meshes.

Assuming I haven't mistaken the settings the PS5 can use from the Epic info, it will be interesting to see what it will cost in performance - and vram- to enable some hw ray tracing that improves on the PS5's use of hardware ray tracing - it uses in conjunction with lumen's sw ray tracing - along with the use of RTX IO decompression on the GPUs to substitute the PS5 IO complex.

To also answer the thread question: no I don't think my Pc is more powerful than a PS5 for next-gen games - unless UE5 on PC adds the ability to offload some h/w ray tracing onto some idle CPU cores.

 

[n0razi]

i5 9600K + RTX 2070

Im not sure

 

[papersleeves]

I don't think it is. I have a laptop. A ASUS Zephyrus S GX731GX bought in January of 2020. It has a core i7 9750H (6 cores / 12 threads) paired with 16gb of DDR4 2666mhz and a RTX2080 MAX-Q 90w. It's probably on par with a desktop core i5 of the same generation along with something like a RTX 2060, which I doubt is as powerful as a Series X or a PS5. Gotta say though. I've played games on this laptop that ran significantly better than their port on consoles. For example, Control.

 

[TaylorSwiftFan]

I don’t think a lot of PC gamers will vote truthfully on this one.

 

[nordique]

My PC is a 2019 razer blade stealth with MX150

So, my XSeX and PS5 are much more powerful

 

[mansoor1980]

if a PC has total 10 teraflops will it run games as well as the 10 teraflop ps5?