I keep on saying it -
"All 'Unified memory' solutions sharing main memory with the GPu are a bloody disaster for both the CPU and GPU performance, and that includes consoles. It's just a penny pinching solution, nothing more."

If there was enough bandwidth and low enough latency between Main Memory and the CPU alone, we wouldn't need THREE damned levels of cache, now would we?

To think that bullshitting and changing the name to hUMA will fix anything and we can suddenly get uncompromised performance by making the same memory service the GPU too is insane.
And both 'next-gen' consoles are crippled the same way.

Next-gen my ass.

We should start calling them "only two years behind!" Gen.

Anonymous wrote on Sep 30, 2013, 18:40:
You never know how bad the input lag will be on these LCD monitors. The one I'm currently using is reasonable and I've gotten to the point where I don't even notice it anymore.

You should check out:
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/motion_blur.htm
and http://www.blurbusters.com/faq/120hz-monitors/
Input lag usually isn't the issue, but I understand why it could be perceived that way.

I'm thinking about getting a newer asus monitor that does 120hz, but for some reason I prefer 16:10 aspect, and the ones listed are all 16:9. (MORE PIXELS :D) (also I've found that I prefer 24" monitors over larger 27-30" models, but that could just be because I use 24" monitors at home and work.)

CJ_Parker wrote on Sep 30, 2013, 21:31:
Hahaha fuck consoles... but knowing Ubi those lamers will port it to PC with 30fps hard-locked so they will probably be having the last laugh .

You mean like AC3 that runs 60fps maxed out on my mid range PC?

Hahaha fuck consoles... but knowing Ubi those lamers will port it to PC with 30fps hard-locked so they will probably be having the last laugh .

Sempai wrote on Sep 30, 2013, 20:06:
The architecture is much like a pc, only supercharged for gaming! -Mark Cerny

And don't forget about the infinite power of the cloud. Good thng, we'd be looking at 5FPS on the next gen...

The architecture is much like a pc, only supercharged for gaming! -Mark Cerny

Killzone, Black Flag, Watch Dogs, all forced down to 30fps to run at 1080p.
I've been looking forward to purchasing a PS4 & Xborked, but the more details that keep coming the less reason there is to buy.

And with Ryse now confirmed to be running at 900p along with poly's being cut in half from what we saw at the E3 demo, it's quite apparent dev's like Crytek are already having to make compromises with the hardware.

I guess i now have to consider simply buying Watch Dogs & Asscreed 4 on my 3yr old PC, which will more than likely run them both at 60fps just by sheer brute force. And will cost less to boot..

What a fuckin joke.

well if it's not a fast twitch based shooter then I'm perfectly fine with 30 fps.

Anonymous wrote on Sep 30, 2013, 14:54:
I gotta be honest with you though. Console gamers will have a better experience than I will despite the fact that my rig will produce much better graphics.

Why?

Because PC versions of games are BUGGY AS HELL!!! The last **4** games I have bought, including a Grand Theft Auto game and Assassin's Creed, have been so fucking buggy that I couldn't even play the damned game!!!!!!!!!

Well all now being PC architecture, I believe many are hoping for better ports/performance and bugs. In terms of buggy messes, I don't seem to catch many of those, A - rarely buy week 1. B - Keep up to speed on the 411 on how the game is running on a PC. Makes it pretty easy, sort of like cheating using knowledge like that.

jdreyer wrote on Sep 30, 2013, 13:11:
Survey on next-gen console purchases may spell trouble for Xbox One.

Not as bad as I would have thought: 15% XB1 to 26% PS4. Given all the bad MS press, I would have thought it to be more like 10% to 40%.

That was my take too. Sony will almost certainly win this round (unless they screw up big time) but that doesn't mean the XBone is going to be a complete dud sales-wise. A few killer apps after the system's release could very easily turn things around for MS. But I'm hoping they get utterly clobbered because they suck.

In my fantasy not only does MS lose boatloads of cash on their console, but by the time they realize that the console war is hopeless and a money drain and that PC gaming is still a ripe landscape the SteamOS has convinced most gamers to abandon Windows. Unlikely, but hey a guy can dream.

NKD wrote on Sep 30, 2013, 14:25:
Is it a problem? Like I said, doubling the framerate means significant reduction in quality and potentially resolution. Last generation even with a target of 30fps, a lot of titles didn't even run at a true 720p, let alone 1080p.

You're dealing with a $400-500 system. There are tough choices to be made as to where your computational power goes.

I'm not really impressed though, new shiny and 30 FPS. But how about that jack-wagon HellBinder tell us those new systems are going to smoke our souped up PC's? I'm not sure why he even tried that here.

It all depends on how much money I'll have available when the time comes. I might do a 4 GPU slot mobo with 2 Titans and buy a couple more in the future if the need arises with a 1080P monitor for now.

What concerns me right now is input lag. There is a very specific model from Asus that is designed for professional gaming with a special gamer mode that reduces input lag to below human perception. I have seen the comparison between this monitor and a CRT and you cannot tell the difference.

I do not know if I can get this feature in a resolution higher than 1080P. I contacted Asus support about it but they were clueless and just gave me some random high-res model that didn't say anything about a gamer mode.

It's quite depressing that I can't get competent support on this issue.

You never know how bad the input lag will be on these LCD monitors. The one I'm currently using is reasonable and I've gotten to the point where I don't even notice it anymore.

Maybe I should just take a chance and go with a random high-res Asus monitor and hope for the best.

EDIT: By the way, I just want to commend everyone for engaging in civil discourse. Many times on Youtube and Facebook some asshole starts talking shit about anything you say and it really ruins the experience.

Tumbler wrote on Sep 30, 2013, 16:43:
Definitely not buying a 180, still have a preorder in for PS4 but the closer I get to launch the less I feel like pulling the trigger. I have more than enough to play on my PS3 / PC and I'm not expecting anything to be exclusively on the consoles that I want to play.

Sigh, I like getting new toys but besides holding that ps4 controller for myself and using it at my new pc controller (if that is possible) I can't think of any reason I want to spend $400.

Plus that star citizen dog fighter should be out by December...and $400 buys me a lot of flight controls!

Don't do it. That's just the impulse side of your brain wanting an endorphin fix. Give it time to see if there are major problems. See what Sony is going to be providing for games for a while to come yet. I've certainly seen nothing that would make me buy one for launch at any rate. Give it a year or two and we'll see.

Anonymous wrote on Sep 30, 2013, 17:25:
"I'm sorry, but why on earth are you buying two GTX 690s when the R9 290X is specifically designed for 4K resolution monitors and you don't have to worry about your system being taxed?"

"The leaked benchmarks peg the Radeon R9-290X as equal or slightly faster than Nvidia’s GTX Titan"

The GTX 690 is more powerful than the R9-290x and the Titan. The only problem is I can only have two of them I think, whereas 3 or 4 R9-290X's would be superior.

Not sure what I'm going to do about this.

I think I will go with Nvidia. I have seen the inconsistent delivery of frames on Radeon cards and it looks absolutely horrible.

So I guess you're picking up one of these monitors? You could increase framerate by not turning on AA. At 3840 x 2160, I don't see how you could see a difference even on a 31" monitor.

Anonymous wrote on Sep 30, 2013, 17:25:
"I'm sorry, but why on earth are you buying two GTX 690s when the R9 290X is specifically designed for 4K resolution monitors and you don't have to worry about your system being taxed?"

"The leaked benchmarks peg the Radeon R9-290X as equal or slightly faster than Nvidia’s GTX Titan"

The GTX 690 is more powerful than the R9-290x and the Titan. The only problem is I can only have two of them I think, whereas 3 or 4 R9-290X's would be superior.

Not sure what I'm going to do about this.

I think I will go with Nvidia. I have seen the inconsistent delivery of frames on Radeon cards and it looks absolutely horrible.

Not to mention, PhysX. I realize that it's really just worthless eye candy, but it adds so much to the experience! I can't go back to ATi now. nVidia remains the top of the high-end market for a reason.

And GTX 880 is just around the corner.. ::squeee!!::

Anonymous wrote on Sep 30, 2013, 17:25:
"I'm sorry, but why on earth are you buying two GTX 690s when the R9 290X is specifically designed for 4K resolution monitors and you don't have to worry about your system being taxed?"

"The leaked benchmarks peg the Radeon R9-290X as equal or slightly faster than Nvidia’s GTX Titan"

The GTX 690 is more powerful than the R9-290x and the Titan. The only problem is I can only have two of them I think, whereas 3 or 4 R9-290X's would be superior.

Not sure what I'm going to do about this.

I think I will go with Nvidia. I have seen the inconsistent delivery of frames on Radeon cards and it looks absolutely horrible.

I think the important thing is remember that the vram gets split on the 690 (as its two gpu's SLI'd in of itself). So you'll effectively only have half of one cards working vram, which will also be the exact same while running two cards in 4way SLI. That said try to get as much vram as possible. As for the R9-290X being built for 4k resolution...ya thats a joke waiting to happen since it only has 4gb of vram.

As for this entire 60 vs 30fps, even with the PS4's hardware it would be hardpressed to maintain a constant 60fps with absolutely no dips on the latest games at 1080p. Constant 30fps is a lot easier to do and plan for.

I hate it when they do this. I remember Big Red One on the original Xbox. It was a console-only COD game and it looked like SHIT. It was built for the Playstation 2 and ran horribly.

The Xbox should have HANDLED this game but it ran horribly. The framerate was locked I believe so that it ran identically to the PS2 version.

This is beyond doubt as COD 3 came out at some point and looked FANTASTIC and ran great!

I'm sure they're limiting Watch Dogs to 30fps on the PS4 to not make it faster than XflopOne.

"I'm sorry, but why on earth are you buying two GTX 690s when the R9 290X is specifically designed for 4K resolution monitors and you don't have to worry about your system being taxed?"

"The leaked benchmarks peg the Radeon R9-290X as equal or slightly faster than Nvidia’s GTX Titan"

The GTX 690 is more powerful than the R9-290x and the Titan. The only problem is I can only have two of them I think, whereas 3 or 4 R9-290X's would be superior.

Not sure what I'm going to do about this.

I think I will go with Nvidia. I have seen the inconsistent delivery of frames on Radeon cards and it looks absolutely horrible.

Definitely not buying a 180, still have a preorder in for PS4 but the closer I get to launch the less I feel like pulling the trigger. I have more than enough to play on my PS3 / PC and I'm not expecting anything to be exclusively on the consoles that I want to play.

Sigh, I like getting new toys but besides holding that ps4 controller for myself and using it at my new pc controller (if that is possible) I can't think of any reason I want to spend $400.

Plus that star citizen dog fighter should be out by December...and $400 buys me a lot of flight controls!