NVIDIA Interview: The Sky Isn't Falling

Makes sense.

 

Anyone who thinks consoles have better graphics are ignorant, stupid or both. For gods sake, before you go rant your hatred towards pc, try one first. A real one, not that pussy you use to see the latest facebook´s boobs. :C

 

Consoles just suffer the same fault as any other device that can not be upgraded. Where as we can buy a new gpu every few years, they're forever stuck with basically original spec, with only new revisions to reduce power consumption or other flaws.

They used to play around with ways around this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_64_accessories#Expansion_Pak

or one of my favorites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_FX

 

Exactly, and finally my bet on PC is making sense. What I really like is the freedom, if you want you don't even need a case.

 

Well Nvidia is hardly going to say any different, especially when they are AMD developed.

Not that it's not true, by the time both consoles are fully utilised PC gamers will be on 4k.

There is one thing that might causes issues though, and that is people with similar or even faster PC hardware expecting better performance or visual quality than the consoles, when the reality is that it's not that simple.

 

...yes...THE SKY IS FALLING ...."economically"........

.....and that's where.... they are going for the "consumables"......designable for.....()....

conclusion(s) in between the brackets

 

Wonder if they had a clean sweep of the new consoles, they'd be screaming about how moving into the console scene was the right decision, as the PC is deed etc...

 

When i completely agree with the article.. I still find somewhere discutable to compare console and High end PC parts.

- Most gamers on PC, dont use 550$ High end GPU coupled with High end CPU and 16GB of DDR.
- Most gamers will play with an middle class gpu ( GTX650-660, HD 7850-7870 ). Only a part called "enthusiast" will put so much money and use the High end GPU.
- Many of them will not even change their gpu each year, and upgrade only when they feel the need for it.

There is a second thing about the slides used. Even on PC we dont use as metrics the Tflops SP only. because it dont say much about how the GPU perform within a gaming environnement. ( many thing come from the API, the optimisation of the graphic engine ( game ) or come from the capacity of the hardware to do specific tasks )

Hopefully they will allways be a difference.. the same you cant compare the performance on professionnal environnement and "standard" gamingPC componnent. ( try compare a I7 4770 + GTX680 system with a Dual, Quad Xeon + Quad GPU setup ).
This said you can forget to got nice gaming performance with the Xeon based setup.


Basically if we compare a professional "workstation" system with a high end Gaming PC.. the slide will surely look the same of what they show between console Gflops, and PC Tflops.

This said, i dont even know where this discussion is coming from, Graphism on console have become at least decent, i dont see where it will have been possible for a 400$ hardware to reach level of PC.. at best they can approach a middle range pc quality, with half the frame rate and many graphism feature disabled...

 

Oooh one of my favorites!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_32X

That thing was such a pain to assemble!

 

You speak in english but you seem to speak in code.

He´s trying to communicate, what should we do?

 

It's clear what he said. Gave me a huge laugh lol

 

Only thing the consoles got going for them is they're cheap and easy to use, And a lot of people like using controllers.

 

I could probably make the argument that console games receive extra attention to optimization for their respective hardware that PC games simply do not get. Even though a console will never achieve the visuals of a high-end PC, I can imagine a scenario where a console game at low visual settings could run more efficiently than the same game and settings on a low-spec PC. Game developers only have one hardware spec to optimize their game to when building a console game. PC games are expected to have a range of quality settings, and inevitably corners get cut...

To examine the whole thing from another angle, consider the idea that consoles and their stagnation have held back the development of better graphics on PCs. Could this be due to the fact that PCs and consoles have historically had such vastly different hardware? Thats all about to change... Any fancy additions that game devs want to do for the PC version could be a simple addition rather than rewriting an entire part of the game.

So, why does nvidia say the sky isnt falling? With the low-end GPU market all but eliminated and all next gen consoles rolling with AMD, could this mean that the discreet GPU market as a whole is about to see a reduction? AMD has no problem putting themselves out of business on the low end with their SOCs. nVidia, on the other hand, burned 10 billion (physx and shield to show for it?) and I dont see any new tech that is going to keep them at the forefront of mass-market consumer graphics. I think the verdict is in on whose tech the devs want to write for next generation and it isnt green.

 

tsc... clearly nvidia doesn't know anything about CODING TO THE METAL

 

?

Yep, im this type of gamer

 

I'm surprised no one thought this, with NVIDIA, and SKY FALLING in the same sentence:
https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=amd+sky

(First result)

 

not that this was news, but somehow console gamers still don't get it..

 

demn it, y u all don't get that 8 jigabytes of gddr5 ram will eat your mere ddr3 ram? lelz
'__'

 

pc better graphics but the games are sucks compared to console