future proof ?970m 3gb or ps4?

Do you actually know what "indie" games are? They're simply games published by privately owned companies. I.E. they're not influenced by shareholder decisions. For example, if Activision were to get rid of their shareholders, Call of Duty would become an "indie" title.

 

LOL you wanna talk about the number of quality console exclusives this generation? Wii U wins. :laugh:

 

There are some privately owned companies like Bethesda/Zenimax that publish their own games and have enough funds to pull off AAA wide release...

 

"Indie" is a pretty lose term. I'd say it refers to self-published games made by individuals or small teams without the financial backing of a mega publisher. Tripwire is a private company but I wouldn't it an indie one. Same with Valve.

 

The definition I listed above is how my dev friend explained Indie to me, because I thought it was small teams or dev teams without a publisher behind them.

 

Any i7 within the past three generations and any top end GPU within the past three generations is easily more powerful than anything that the PS4 could hope to achieve.

The 970M is laughably more potent than the 7970M~ equivalent GPU that's in the PS4. Plus, most of the games coming out for the PS4 and whatnot are coming to PC, and nothing is stopping you from just plugging in a console controller to your new high end PC. just sayin'.

 

ROFL!!!

PS4 and XB1 can't even manage a locked 30 FPS @ 1080p while skimping on shadows and AO in the incredibly easy-to-run Alien: Isolation.

Face-Off: Alien: Isolation • Eurogamer.net

Meanwhile, on PC:

Spoiler

 

#pcmasterrace amirite

 

Yep and

 

Yup! Definitely limited by CPUs.

On the plus side, if it works well in 3D I'd like to play it. I appear to get over 60fps at all times with 1 780M, so 3D should give me the same. Mmm might have a reason for my glasses again.

 

Shouldn't be dropping the game below 30 FPS though, unless the Jaguar cores are really that weak. Alien: Isolation isn't stressful at all on any modern CPU or GPU.

 

I suppose... but similarly-strong GPUs are getting min FPSes of FAR higher than the X1/PS4. Plus, the PC was using an extreme edition 6-core CPU.

Also, the jaguar cores are netbook architecture. Maybe the engine just can't use more than 4?

 

Yeah, the test platform used by GameGPU.ru for its GPU testing is a bit insane. 8 cores/16 threads @ 4.6 GHz and quad-channel DDR4 @ 2400 MHz. But they do it for a reason--to eliminate all bottlenecks elsewhere in the system and make GPU the only factor limiting performance for most accurate results.

It would have to be the mother of all CPU bottlenecks to be crippling the consoles below 30 FPS in a non-demanding game such as Alien: Isolation. It's like the MSI GX60/70 all over again. M$ and especially $ony really screwed up the balance of their designs. Like I said earlier, if they went with a Steamroller quad-core at twice the clock speed (Kaveri CPU) instead of this Jaguar netbook/tablet crap, the systems would stay within the same power budget but they'd probably be much better off in terms of performance.

 

All hail the pc master race! Death to the Console Gaming Peasants! and / thread

 

wow , what an epic fail is this , next gen console cant handle couple extra shadows for a game that is basically a puzzle game , that is it im selling this fail station 4

 

LOL PoS4 and Xbone...love it!

 

alien isolation best optimized game of 2014 ..and it will be better with mantle support..but you cant say that playstation is a good gaming machine for that money.My 760M OC beats ps4 in some games

 

At least you can make jokes about XBone, PoS4 is just... well the name says it all

 

No need to go to the death penalty for console users.
Someone has to make up the bottom rung...

Besides, it would cut into my profit for /faceroll helmets!
(Here's your sign... and your helmet.)

 

Get a 970m, the amount of insanely good games coming to PC soon is uncanny. I think with the current benchmarks and looking at pc specs required for Dragon Age: Inquisition, 970m looks to be future proof for 2 years! + it is only 65W TDP! It seems like ultrabook HD gaming at 1080p is happening!

 

HAHA true that! To be honest, I am a console gamer for a bit... Loved playing Halo and in my college's gaming club, spent a lot of time playing that.. Its a shame that after Halo 2, Halo has never been to PC... Only reason I would ever buy a Xbox One is Halo...

 

@MaxHeap It already happens, my V5-573G (850M) can play many modern games in 1080p and high details with a good FPS rate

 

My 2 cents - Get a PS4 for now and in 2 years if you're not happy, get a new laptop. PS3 was around for 7 years before the PS4 went on sale. That's basically your timeline

 

PS4 will not last 7 years, no chance. This gen is different (weak). XB1 is even worse, I give them both 5 years. If they can not do games barely at 30fps 1080p after a year of release, then 7 years from now.... well.

 

And I give them 3 years tops. It seems there were more 1080p games at the beginning of 360/PS3 lifespan than there are now for PoS4/Xbone! :laugh:

 

They already released the next gen: PlayStation®TV | Overview

Just gonna be a little box to connect, games rendered on the Gaikai servers.

 

And Xbone offloads physics/AI calculations and some static objects (e.g. skyboxes) to M$ Azure servers thru the cloud. ROFL!!!

 

Truly PoS4 indeed.

 

LOL that is kind of funny, we were promised the age of HD back in 2005-07, and now consoles still can not do 1080p 30fps. This is this first time in history I think, that games are being held back not because of technology but because companies have lost their way, we know they should and can be better, but Sony/MS don't want to move forward and Nintendo is doing their own wacky ideas. It's too bad PC only titles don't get bigger sales, so we are all stuck in this gaming limbo, regardless if you have a console or a PC worth 4k.

Ha, a service that relies on a very good internet connection, I can't see that taking off, the whole world has to be on the same level internet wise, and that just ain't the case right now.

 

They do made nice door stops

 

The question of this thread sounds pretty absurd to me. Nothing is "future proof"
7970M seemed to be good when it released and now we suddenly need 8gb vram for badly coded games.

Really everyone should wait until AMD answer the 900M series. It "might" interesting then especially if their new cards feature HBM stacked memory modules etc. Could drive down Nvidia's prices firstly and secondly provoke them to release full Maxwell parts. I look forward to this magical time

 

They are being held back because of technology--weak sauce console hardware, that is. This is the first time in recent history that consoles have not met or surpassed the best PC hardware available at their time of release. Nintendo 64 released months before the Voodoo and had the world's fastest 3D accelerator at the time, Xbox had a Pentium III and GeForce 3, Xbox 360 had the first GPU with a unified shader architecture...

 

Depends if you have a quality HDTV, but my grpahics card is almost 3 years old still playing the latest games at ultra resolution at 1980x1080

 

Well look at this way, the PS5 and Xbox insert random name, will finally be able to do 1080p in 3-5 years time The gap between PC's and consoles will probably still be wide though. It doesn't seem like MS/Sony are going to take the risk to build a real beast. However consoles dominate the gaming market and what happens in it, but I guess next time PC/Laptops will be so far out ahead that they shouldn't have a problem running Ubisoft crappy ports etc.

 

My opinion, keep your ps4 and save up for the next nvidia card. And be happy you can play 1 million games and counting for years to come. 980m just wont cut it in 2 years for ps4 ports.

edit cut it meaning 4k or 1080p ultra...as thats the main reason to game on pc, for the graphics

 

The successor to the 980M won't 'cut it' two years from whenever it's released either. Nothing can, because PC gaming is always advancing and there is always something else just around the corner.

Sent from my Nexus 5

 

1 million games? You talking about PC, right? Because no console in history has ever had a catalog that big. Not even close. Backward compatibility #justmasterracethings.

 

yes pc. it was supposed to be a hyperbole

 

GTX 970m vs. the HD 7870 in the PS4
Nvidia GeForce GTX 970M 6GB compare AMD Radeon HD 7870 GPU
Note that the PS4's GPU is downclocked, so the difference is likely even higher.

 

Not only downclocked (800 MHz vs. 1 GHz) but also missing shaders (18 CU's/1152 cores vs. 20 CU's/1280 cores). So the theoretical performance is only about 72% of the 7870 (1.84 TFLOPS vs. 2.56 TFLOPS).

 

Yeah I thought performance was closer to 7970m stock.

It is of course weaker than the 970m but then again consoles seem to be able to do more with much less hardware wise because the developers program games specifically for the hardware which doesn't change unlike PC. This means inside the consoles this underclocked 7970m will have better longevity than the 970m

 

360 basically ran a 7800 gt and was able to run gta 5 and fc3 crysis 3 etc. a pc with same card wouldn't have a chance

Now the 980m might have a better chance and if amd bring hbm to a new card next year then the consoles will be already matched even when games are perfectly programmed for them.

 

PS4 GPU is ~85% of the 7970M. Much closer to the 7850 than to the 7970M or 7870.

7850 - 1.76 TFLOPS

PS4 - 1.84 TFLOPS

7970M - 2.176 TFLOPS

7870 - 2.56 TFLOPS

 

Nope, 360 had an ATi GPU with a unified shader architecture between R500 and R600. It was the PS3 that had the crippled 7800 GTX 256MB with halved ROP's, memory controllers, and bus, which was weaker.

 

at around 1024x720 with no anti aliasing, low settings, etc.

 

Far Cry 3
360 - 1280x704 (post AA, black border on bottom)
PS3 - 1274x702 (post AA, black borders)

Crysis 3
360 - 1152x720 (SMAA T2x)
PS3 - 1024x720 (SMAA T2x)

GTA V
360 - 1280x720 (FXAA)
PS3 - 1280x720 (FXAA)

All target 30 FPS (yeah right).

List of Rendering Resolutions - Beyond3D Forum

 

As proven by the above posts, the 970M is obviously more powerful. Buy the 970M laptop.

 

I think the its more a question of which games you prefer. As long as 30fps, paying for online, using a controller and buying expensive games doesn't bother you

 

Also sh*tty resolution and graphics, no mods, no backward compatibility...

 

Let's go further. They all use cut down 7870 chips, taking from the 7970M chip design specifically

AMD 7870 = base; 1280 cores (20 clusters) @ 1000MHz

AMD 7970M = mobile chip based off above; 1280 cores (20 clusters) @ 850MHz

PS4 = 1152 cores (18 clusters) @ 800MHz

Xbox 1 = 768 cores (12 clusters) @ 850MHz

PS4 and X1 can't overclock either, which means the mobile and desktop chips can go even further above.

If you want a more direct comparison between X1 or PS4 and a desktop chip, just take a stock 7870 benchmark, apply the percentage performance difference that Xbox 1 and PS4 are to that, then compare that benchmark to any other GPU's benchmark. I believe Xbox 1 is exactly 51% as strong as a 7870 and PS4 is exactly 72% as strong as a 7870. So you can use that as your baseline for performance. PS4 isn't THAT bad... but it isn't that good either. Xbox 1 is just pitiful.