News Article

Nvidia Isn't Particularly Impressed with the PlayStation 4

Posted by Sammy Barker

Graphics company suggests that the console's already out of date

At the start of this generation, Sony worked closely with Nvidia to create the PlayStation 3’s graphics chip. However, for the PlayStation 4, the manufacturer has switched sides, placing its allegiance with AMD instead. The change appears to have peeved the Santa Clara-based technology company, who is going out of its way to make disparaging remarks about the next generation platform in the media.

"Compared to gaming PCs, the PS4 specs are in the neighbourhood of a low-end CPU, and a low to mid-range GPU side," said Nvidia's senior vice president of content and development Tony Tamasi in an interview with TechRadar. "If the PS4 ships in December as Sony indicated, it will only offer about half the performance of a GTX680 GPU, which launched [...] more than a year and a half ago."

Tamasi didn’t stop there, though. Later in the interview he went onto criticise consoles in general, pointing out that they don’t boast the same upgrade options as a PC. "What you get today in terms of performance is what you're stuck with five to ten years down the road,” he continued. “PCs don't have these problems.”

As a result, Tamasi believes that this will lead to a noticeable difference between PC and next generation console visuals down the line. "If history predicts the future, then these next generation consoles, while being more powerful than the current ones, will very quickly end up more than an order of magnitude behind the PC,” he said.

Earlier in the week, Tamasi insinuated that Nvidia had turned down development contracts with platform holders like Sony in order to pursue other areas of its business. "I'm sure there was a negotiation that went on," he told GameSpot. “We came to the conclusion that we didn't want to do the business at the price those guys were willing to pay."


User Comments (24)



CrazyOtto said:

PS4 looks like a cool console, I just want to know about more games coming to it.



NathanUC said:

Of course Nvidia would say that about a competing card manufacturer. Until PC games can become optimized like console games though, PC gaming will always be decades behind consoles given equal specs.



CrazyOtto said:

Also, PCs are almost always ahead of consoles. But the fact that PS3 and 360 were weaker than the PC didn't stop the PS3 and 360 from being sucessful. Hell, the Wii outsold both of those.

EDIT: My second comment got ninja'd



Paranoimia said:

Sounds like someone has a bug up his butt.

The lack of any need to update every six months is exactly why I switched to console gaming from PC.



get2sammyb said:

I don't think Tamasi says anything out of place in this interview — he's right, the PS4 will be out of date compared to top-of-the-range PCs when it launches, and it will eventually get outpaced. I just thought his comments came across particularly... pointed.



hYdeks said:

you should always purchase a system cause of the games, graphics aren't everything



Savino said:

Yeah...everybody needs a 5000 bucks machine to play nvidia demos.....

Because, you know, we arent on this for the games, only for techdemos!!!



InsertNameHere said:

Yeah, because the games themselves don't matter, all that matters are specs, graphics and frame rates.



BlueProxy said:

Well on that note, even a PC is outdated by the time they hit the store, or soon after. Technology just moves too fast. Still, those are just specs for the most part. What he's saying is basically null.

  • Does the PS4 produce sick, smooth running graphics, CHECK
  • Is it a power house for it's generation, CHECK
  • Does it give devs insane flexibility to create whatever they want, CHECK
  • Will there be kick-ars, fun, unique indy and AAA titles, DOUBLE-CHECK

Thats whats important, not comparing it to a PC. That's why it's called a console.



hamispink said:

He doesn't say anything that isn't true, but he incidentally defines what is great about console gaming, and why it is so popular compared to PC gaming. Most people don't want to constantly upgrade their hardware just to get the best looking games, they just want to play the games. And of course, there is always the high price.

I'm of the opinion that at this point, the high end graphics card business is a huge scam. a mid-range computer can play any game on the market today at a steady frame rate, so what's the point? The computer may cost $600-$800 dollars (built), but it's better than paying the price of a new console for just a graphics card to play prettier crisis.



Zombie_Barioth said:

Captain obvious much? Most of the things he says are pretty obvious but is he seriously comparing the PS4 to a GPU that costs as much as the console itself? Most mainstream consumers don't even upgrade their PCs every five or so years either, the only people who bother upgrading are gamers or those who use their PC for more demanding tasks.

In my opinion the only time PCs are the better deal is if your just upgrading a few parts since chances are theres a mid-range GPU that will do just fine.



sackninja said:

Well of course it's going to be out of date. You know what nvidia's top graphic card is going to be soon. 1000 dollars. You could probably buy two ps4's for the price of just a graphic's card. Yeah I think it's going to be out of date.



Munkyknuts said:

I really dont care how my consoles stack up against gaming pc's, i like most people dont want to spend 1000's on a high end gaming set up. The graphics of my ps3 have suited me just fine up until now, and so will the ps4. As others have already commented graphics are not everything.



Ginkgo said:

What is missing in this article is an understanding that the whole point of consoles is that they are consistent (and hence can't be upgraded). This means that you can just buy a game and it works (with a very few notable exceptions).

In the PC world, sure you can have a better machine, but you have to spend a lot more money and update more regularly, and because every PC is different, it is impossible for them to test with every hardware combination. There are lots more issues.

Consoles just work and because they are optimised for games, you actually need a much more powerful PC hardware to just get parity.

At the end of the day it is a balance. Ease and affordability (console) over the latest and greatest (PC). I would argue that current gen is now too far behind PCs that PC gaming is becoming attractive again, but by Christmas that will have reverted. Only a very small % of PC owners would have hardware more powerful than the PS4 (or 720), and it will remain that way for the next 3-4 years when the tide will turn again.



Slapshot said:

Is it going to be out-of-date by PC standards? Of course it is, but to say that it isn't comparable to the GTX680 is a bit of a stretch.



FullbringIchigo said:

in other words Nvidia are shouting off because they were too expensive for Sony to use so Sony decided to use AMD instead who were cheaper (and from what i heard so has Microsoft with the Nextbox)



AceSpadeS said:

That argument isn't as true now as it was before. If you have a competent PC by modern standards for gaming, you can safely assume that any game you buy and slap into it for the next 5 years or so will run, and run well, when adjusted to the specs of your computer. You don't need to upgrade constantly to enjoy the newest games.

Also, in terms of raw gaming power, most people with gaming PCs today will find that their PCs are still more powerful than the PS4 come release date. It's a powerful system to be sure, but it doesn't just go and kill the mid-high end PC gaming market.



Ps4all said:

The thing is,(and Sony ran into this with the ps3), that game developers who make cross platform games are going to make them to the specifications of the least powerful system.that's why skyrim,cod etc don't look any better on ps3 vs xbox. No developer is going to spend a ton of money making a high end version gof a game for someone with a $3,000.00 gaming pc to pirate when they can make it for the console (mostly pirate free) and port the same game to pc.



Solatorobo said:

PCs are a whole different beast to consoles when it comes to games. Some games are better on PC (FPSes, RTSes, etc.) While other games are better on console (Fighting games, Platformers etc.) I don't really see why people are comparing them, mostly because PC's continually evolve while consoles stay the same before jumping up in power a fair bit for their next console.



Hetsumani said:

Yes, we know consoles are not as powerful as gaming PCs, but the Wii has sold over 99 million units, the PS3 77 million, te XBOX360 76 million, thats adds up to 252 million gaming consoles this generation alone. I really doubt there are this many gaming PCs out there.



craigun said:

Well, I wonder what Tamasi thinks of the WiiU then. Talk about underpowered in 3 to 4 years!!



Reverend_Skeeve said:

I'm with you guys...the reason I abandoned PC gaming and went console was because I didn't want to upgrade my rig every few month. I just want to pop in my game and play. Until very recently, graphics on consoles were good enough for my taste...Crysis 2 on XBox 360 looks gorgeous...and I don't see the point (for me) to spend thousands to get slightly better graphics on PC (or even lots better)...I think that money is better spent in games.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...