Well duh, cheap parts = cheap console
Typical N4G user, that thinks consoles are the only contracts that GPU vendors can have
Ever heard of supercomputing? Mobile? I could go on. Just take one look at Nvidia's share price, and AMD's, which has plummeted over the last year
The consoles are only AMD because AMD are cheap, and desperate for business. Even then, selling a few 1.6ghz parts will only make a couple of million $/£
Consoles AREN'T where the real money is ...
Does a 1.6ghz jaguar chip (old architecture, AMD already have something newer, faster and more efficient out) sound like 'light years ahead' to you? lol
They wouldn't give you prototype graphics chips simply because they're, you know, PROTOTYPES. Unless you want your ps4 to melt after a week.
What an idiot.
The only reason these people think it's a 'graphical monstrosity' is because they've been playing a PS3 for 7 years, and are finally starting to realise how bad those games looks (some were even in 540p, what a disgrace!)
The mistake they're making is thinking that this is the pinnacle, just because it's better than what they already have.
I equate it to owning a skateboard for seven years, being really happy about getting a toyota, an...
Sorry but, optical disc + hard drive = definite load times
When comparing against other consoles, fanboys will make a big deal about specs... even if the difference is negligible (i.e in this case... slightly more memory! wow like that'll make any tangible difference! lol)
But when comparing with PC, and they get absolutely destroyed, suddenly specs don't matter, it's all about the experience
I'll tell you one thing, 64 player battlefield 3 at 2560x1600 and 60fps is still the best combo of 'experi...
This will be a nice upgrade from my gtx 680, provided its £600 max.
For a second there I thought you were describing Killzone Shadow fall
Selling cheap 1.6ghz parts to console vendors won't make that much money for AMD, espcially compared to the kind of money that Nvidia makes selling supercomputer parts
It's understandable why they had to use such a powerful rig - it was alpha code!
When the game's released, and Nvidia/AMD release their drivers, I can see this running at 1080p/60fps on quite a modest setup. You won't need anything near this powerful
You need to remember this is DICE, they were hardly gonna run their demo at 3k resolution on a 7850.. lol
Well what else were they gonna say?
"The PS4, which we provide the chips for, is a pile of complete rubbish. Don't waste your money on this crap."
Honestly most the stories on here are pointless attempts to get website hits
Jeez, it's quite obvious you can't afford it, but if others can afford it, what's the problem?
People who can afford a ferrari, why should they buy a second hand toyota?
People who can afford an 8 bedroom house, why should they buy a studio apartment with half a toilet?
DICE were hardly going to showcase their new title on a console, they didn't want to embarrass themselves!
I also have both. Gaming pc with a gtx 680 and 2560x1600 screen, and a PS3/Wii U.
Though if the game's a multiplat, I'll always get it on pc.
He's right. Sony's share price is way lower today than it was five years ago
*Awaits disagrees for stating a fact*
This site is hilarious
Whenever Nvidia say something PC biased, they're wrong
Whenever GG say something PS4 biased, they're correct
The reason why I hate most the fickle people on this site, is because if Sony paid a bit more and got a chip from Nvidia, you'd be spending all your time writing comments hating on AMD about how they're weak and how Sony went with the more powerful choice in Nvidia
Nvidia profit for 2012: 581 million dollars
AMD Profit for 2012: A LOSS (!!) of 1.183 BILLION dollars
Wow, no wonder AMD were desperate to get the consoles.
Even then, whilst Nvidia are making HUGE amounts of money developing chips for supercomputers, and a good amount of money developing tegra chips, AMD are making 1.6ghz tablet cpu's for consoles. Lol
It's quite obvious to see this wasn't worth Nvidia's tim...
Even if there were 4 consoles using AMD chips, AMD's earnings still wouldn't touch Nvidia's
Console chips are very cheap parts compared to what Nvidia sells for supercomputers
AMD are in crisis (stock price has been plummeting badly since last year), they needed these contracts, and I'm glad they got them, because competition is good. But be under no illusion, Nvidia are by far still the market leader.
How am I trolling? What I said was completely factual. Loads of memory doesn't make up for a weak gpu and even weaker cpu. FACT
Months ago:
"Yeaaahh ps4 gonna be 1080p 60fps every game! It's the standard! SONY SHOULD ENFORCE IT! (lol)"
Now that we find out the PS4 is too weak to do some games in 60fps, and instead you'll get the same stuttery 30fps you've had for years:
"You know what, 60fps doesn't matter. Who can tell the difference?!"
Fanboy excuses so funny. Almost as funny as a tablet cpu
Because one is driving a car, which doesn't change, and the other is playing a computer game, which changes with almost every game
Idiot.