• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Digital Foundry — RTX 4070 Super vs PS5: How Much Faster/Better Are Today's Mid-Range GPUs?

Crayon

Member
The point which flew over your head is that owning a computer is more or less required to be a functional human in modern society, which is why there's ~90% household penetration. This is why these "but can you build a $500 computer to match the PS5" posts have always been idiotic. Roughly subtract the $850 ASP of a computer from your gaming rig and you're closer to the "true cost" of PC gaming.

I caught your slowball point with behind my back. If I take a mid tower for gaming built around a 4070 and subtract $950 the computer costs like -$50. Now either we are missing something here or we're really bad at math. What could it be.
 

Zathalus

Member
The comparison is pointless either way because the graphics card doesn't work without the other components. I'm not comparing a component for which I don't need other components with a complete system. Aside from that, what's surprising about a new graphics card trumping an old 2020 APU??

Yes, but then you couldn't bash and generate clicks against the PS5.

Why didn't they compare the 4070 super with the xbox?
You do realize the video is a small snippet from a much larger review of the GPU itself? There is no component cost as the only cost that is of concern is the product actually being reviewed. Nobody is watching a GPU review and then gets outraged when they have to buy a CPU as well. What point is there in mentioning the obvious?

Also, please point out where exactly the PS5 is getting bashed? Pointing out a GPU is more powerful isn't shitting on any console. Its simply a statement of fact.
 

Darsxx82

Member
Value has been the rationale for consoles from the beginning. On the flip side, you cannot buy a console that equates to a high end PC at any price. That's always been the divide. The question that I think is interesting is where do they meet. Put aside value on the console side. Put aside power on the PC side. Find the technical equivalence. They barely skimmed the surface in one video months ago with the 4060, briefly bringing in the PS5. They should have gone in depth then like they did now. And I don't know why they ignore XSX.
It's funny because when XSX was used for comparisons with PC, the first reaction of many was: "why do they use XSX and ignore PS5?, which is the console reference for devs and users in the market? . DF and its biases trying to give relevance to XSX compared to PS5"..🤗

Seriously, as I said before, I think it simply has more to do with the fact that, like it or not, PS5 is the best-known reference hardware today. Reference also from the Studios and developers. And then you have to say that it is easier to create material from a single platform than from several at the same time. Whatever it is, I still believe that the reactions of some in the thread are completely out of line.

And to be clear, I don't find this video controversial. I just find it useless.

I was not referring to you (perhaps I should have pointed it out), I was referring to several who clearly have a different yardstick for measuring dishonesty depending on what they are proposing to compare.
And, yes, as I said before, I agree with you that the comparison of PC with PS5 (the same if it were with XSX or even XSS) is redundant and without substance. Especially since you only compare performance and do not go into price.
 

Topher

Identifies as young
It's funny because when XSX was used for comparisons with PC, the first reaction of many was: "why do they use XSX and ignore PS5?, which is the console reference for devs and users in the market? . DF and its biases trying to give relevance to XSX compared to PS5"..🤗

Seriously, as I said before, I think it simply has more to do with the fact that, like it or not, PS5 is the best-known reference hardware today. Reference also from the Studios and developers. And then you have to say that it is easier to create material from a single platform than from several at the same time. Whatever it is, I still believe that the reactions of some in the thread are completely out of line.



I was not referring to you (perhaps I should have pointed it out), I was referring to several who clearly have a different yardstick for measuring dishonesty depending on what they are proposing to compare.
And, yes, as I said before, I agree with you that the comparison of PC with PS5 (the same if it were with XSX or even XSS) is redundant and without substance. Especially since you only compare performance and do not go into price.

You are probably right about why they use one console or another. And I wasn't suggesting any malice on DF's part with that. Genuinely curious.
 

Crayon

Member
Now a 600€-700€ 4070 Super is supposed to be a "mid range GPU"? wtf lol!

Calling at mid-range because of the number on it is worse than the actual price. Sure, the prices are higher, but this card will crush anything I'd throw at it. Calling in mid-range just because there's a $1,600 MSRP 4090 out there doesn't make a ton of sense. By this logic, my GPU would be sub-potato level but somehow I play everything I want on it just fine.
 

Bojji

Member
Now a 600€-700€ 4070 Super is supposed to be a "mid range GPU"? wtf lol, what a joke!

Calling at mid-range because of the number on it is worse than the actual price. Sure, the prices are higher, but this card will crush anything I'd throw at it. Calling in mid-range just because there's a $1,600 MSRP 4090 out there doesn't make a ton of sense. By this logic, my GPU would be sub-potato level but somehow I play everything I want on it just fine.

It has 58% of top dog (4090) power so in a sense it's (higher) mid range. It has far better money-performance ratio for sure.
 

KungFucius

King Snowflake
A $599 RTX 4070 super is superior than a
2020 APU??

ItS60NI.gif


Unfortunately, the graphics card doesn't work without ran, CPU, motherboard, power supply, etc.

Pretty pointless video. Oh yes, that's right, otherwise you wouldn't have been able to bash against the PS5. Why PS5 and no comparison to the xbox series x!?
It is not pointless. It's good to know how much bang for your buck you can get over a PS5. Not much, but enough. As a gamer why wouldn't you find this interesting?
 

KungFucius

King Snowflake
It has 58% of top dog (4090) power so in a sense it's (higher) mid range. It has far better money-performance ratio for sure.
4090 is old now man. They better come out with a 5090 so I can waste a month hitting F5 to try to nab one this fall.
 

rodrigolfp

Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
A $599 RTX 4070 super is superior than a
2020 APU??

ItS60NI.gif


Unfortunately, the graphics card doesn't work without ran, CPU, motherboard, power supply, etc.

Pretty pointless video. Oh yes, that's right, otherwise you wouldn't have been able to bash against the PS5. Why PS5 and no comparison to the xbox series x!?
When people will understand this is not a competition?
 
It's an interesting data point and people like me that still has a GTX 1080 or similar, we're starting to see some better price and performance, previous years have been much worse. I'm still looking to the next lineup though but mildly tempted for the first time in 5 years.
 

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
Consoles have the cheaper entry point. After that they cost more in the years of ownership, and offer an inferior experience.

PCs have a high cost of entry, but in the years of ownership you’re not paying for cloud, online, or to take part in digital sales where there’s no competition. They also aren’t just game boxes.
 

WitchHunter

Banned
Time for Sony to conjure Ken Kutaragi and let him do a D8 dice roll, and put that many new AMD APU's into the PS5 Pro. Also, make sure that the PS5 Pro's APU can be pulled out and inserted into a PC extension card, so you only have to buy a console, and you can use its APU as a graphics card in your PC. Bam, Xbox goes bankrupt.

Now a 600€-700€ 4070 Super is supposed to be a "mid range GPU"? wtf lol, what a joke!
Because people use this fucking AI thing. That's why. Stop using ChatGPT and tell everyone that AI is evil, and the prices will go down :D.

It's an interesting data point and people like me that still has a GTX 1080 or similar, we're starting to see some better price and performance, previous years have been much worse. I'm still looking to the next lineup though but mildly tempted for the first time in 5 years.
Don't give in to the urge :D. I play with a GTX 1660 SUPER. You have to sometimes restart games, or change settings from Ultra to Medium, then back, when memory becomes a bottleneck, but otherwise it's quite ok on Ultra settings. Starfield was great with 20-30 FPS. : DD And people usually cry here about 60 FPS...
 
Last edited:

ReBurn

Gold Member
Consoles have the cheaper entry point. After that they cost more in the years of ownership, and offer an inferior experience.

PCs have a high cost of entry, but in the years of ownership you’re not paying for cloud, online, or to take part in digital sales where there’s no competition. They also aren’t just game boxes.
Yeah you can also check your email on your PC
 
Not surprising, but PS5 is still superior value to most people. Next year, PS5 Pro should greatly improve the value proposition as well.
I still think PC gaming is awesome, but it's a different price category vs. consoles.
 
A $599 RTX 4070 super is superior than a
2020 APU??

ItS60NI.gif


Unfortunately, the graphics card doesn't work without ran, CPU, motherboard, power supply, etc.

Pretty pointless video. Oh yes, that's right, otherwise you wouldn't have been able to bash against the PS5. Why PS5 and no comparison to the xbox series x!?

How was this video bashing the PS5? Honestly, thanks to the slowed progression of price to performance in the GPU space, these consoles have held up well considering it is 2024. Last gen the 1060 launched at $250 three years in and was a lot more powerful than the base units, more powerful than the refresh units in most cases.

I think these videos are useful for budget PC builders who aren't necessarily looking for the very best but want to know how these configurations compare to the consoles. In this example, they are showing a system that can do 2x or a little more at the same settings, I can see that being a configuration that some might target. They don't mind the look of what the consoles are doing, but would like to take the 30fps modes to 60, etc. I agree with @ Topher Topher about the updated video of what it takes to match the consoles. That's another target I can see being realistic, someone wants a PC for other tasks and what not but also wants it to be able to game at least as well as the current consoles.
 
Last edited:

Aces High

Gold Member
This is part of the reason I just don't care about being on my PC. It's a giant money pit to keep up and get things optimized. I bought a 1080 at launch and won't ever do that again.
Only looking at hardware, PC is by far the worst platform right now.

Entry price for PC gaming has never been worse in the past 25 years.

Nvidia GPUs are ridiculously overpriced.
 

YeulEmeralda

Linux User
Then at least compare it to the lowest tier of next-gen cards = 7600 (XT) or 4060 (Ti)

Not a €700 card

But they won't do that because if the did, 2024 PC would look like MUCH worse value than the 2020 PS5

Nobody's ever built a PC for value lol. It's a hobby. We're all flushing a money down the drain here (healthier than a coke habit though).
 

Codeblew

Member
Wow a $600 graphics card (without accounting for motherboard, cpu, ssd storage, power supply, controller etc.) is more powerful than a $399 console from 2020.
 

twilo99

Member
Wow a $600 graphics card (without accounting for motherboard, cpu, ssd storage, power supply, controller etc.) is more powerful than a $399 console from 2020.

Why are 90% of games out there optimized for a $400 plastic box full of ancient hardware instead of something more modern ?
 

iHaunter

Member
The GPU alone costs $200 more than a PS5. Let alone the rest of the computer you'd need to run it without bottlenecking. Interesting comparison none the less.
 

Codeblew

Member
Why are 90% of games out there optimized for a $400 plastic box full of ancient hardware instead of something more modern ?
Not sure what that has to do with what I posted. But I can think of two reasons off of the top of my head:
1. The console gaming market is larger than the PC gaming market
2. It is easier to optimize for 1-3 static platforms than PC which can have thousands, if not millions of combinations of hardware.
 

VitoNotVito

Member
I caught your slowball point with behind my back. If I take a mid tower for gaming built around a 4070 and subtract $950 the computer costs like -$50. Now either we are missing something here or we're really bad at math. What could it be.
Yeah, you are missing something. Also not sure where did you get -50 from?

The link to the article he sent says that average selling price of the PC is 850 bucks. That's how much on average people spend to get a PC to do anything (work, watch porn or whatever). Now, if you buy a dedicated gaming PC for example for $1500 and substract $850 for it's "core value", the "gaming cost" is only $650... Capeesh?

PS. You can't watch porn on PS5 cause it doesn't even have a browser. Not to mention doing any work on it...
 
Last edited:

seanoff

Member
Why are 90% of games out there optimized for a $400 plastic box full of ancient hardware instead of something more modern ?
Which one of the millions of possible pc configs do you think they should optimize for. Which gfx card, what processor, which motherboard, what ram, which Os? That’s the thing with consoles, you have a set target, it doesn’t change, it can be optimized to death.
 
This is definitely not a "mid range" card, DF should know that the ranges have several grades themselves.
This card would be on the lower end of the high end cards, with the 4080 sitting in the middle and the 4090 at the top
 

//DEVIL//

Member
What is a better technology here.
This is definitely not a "mid range" card, DF should know that the ranges have several grades themselves.
This card would be on the lower end of the high end cards, with the 4080 sitting in the middle and the 4090 at the top
Considering the 4090 is twice as powerful as this one if not more.... It's a mid range card.

Low end cards are 4060 cards

Below that is garbage level .
 
Last edited:
Considering the 4090 is twice as powerful as this one if not more.... It's a mid range card.
I don't feel the 4090 should dictate the ranges, because it skews it too much; with its price and performance it should almost have its own special outlier grade, the kind of grade for people who eat at restaurants where the menus don't have prices.
 

Boss Mog

Member
Hearing a 600 euro GPU being called mid-range is still so fucking sad.
659€ is the cheapest I've seen it so to compare it to the PS5 which you can get for 499€ is beyond stupid since you actually need a full PC to go along with the 4070 Super. If anything this "comparison" makes the PS5 look good, not the RTX 4070.
 

//DEVIL//

Member
I don't feel the 4090 should dictate the ranges, because it skews it too much; with its price and performance it should almost have its own special outlier grade, the kind of grade for people who eat at restaurants where the menus don't have prices.
It's the only card that is sold out and very hard to get.

It is considered a high end card. Regardless of the price. With the 4080s / 7900xtx is the entry level high end cards.

Mid range cards are 4070/ 4070s and 4070 ti super.

You considering an x card is too pricey or not is a material thing based on your opinion and how much money you think is too much or not. But has nothing to do with how this generation of cards or the one before with the 3000 series are set.


Do I agree with you it's too much ? Yes. Doesn't change the fact it's a high end card lol.
 

Crayon

Member
Yeah, you are missing something. Also not sure where did you get -50 from?

The link to the article he sent says that average selling price of the PC is 850 bucks. That's how much on average people spend to get a PC to do anything (work, watch porn or whatever). Now, if you buy a dedicated gaming PC for example for $1500 and substract $850 for it's "core value", the "gaming cost" is only $650... Capeesh?

PS. You can't watch porn on PS5 cause it doesn't even have a browser. Not to mention doing any work on it...

Your equation there is so simple that it bears no resemblance to real life. It did when you had a 386 at home for work and you could slap a soundblaster and a joystick on that bitch and boom you're gaming.

You asked about porn. No, you can't look at porn on a console. But you can on everything else. That is what you are missing.

I have a Chromebook here that has a full desktop browser. Which means it has pretty much everything, these days. At least for most of us. I'm not saying this only because the desktop browser is not very expensive to get, but also because the chromebook does things that my gaming pc wouldn't do very well. Like folding in half.

If someone tells me they are looking at an $850 laptop and a PS5, and i suggest a $1350 gaming pc, what are they going to say? Probably some variation of 'no'. I doubt they are THAT far off the mark in knowing what they want. Same with someone looking for a mini to tuck under the tv, or a handheld, or a tablet. Even someone doing work on a desk might not be willing to go with a mid tower when they were intending to find a mini on a vesa mount

Literal desktops these days are not needed unless you have a decent amount of paperwork to shuffle through. For the most part they are good so you can use a keyboard and mouse and have more monitors. And even THAT does not require a tower if you aren't doing high performance gaming.

Only people leveraging gpus for work have full overlap and automatically get twice the value. For most, a gaming pc, pre built or not, involves buying hardware you otherwise wouldn't. To be extra clear: no, the other $600 or $800 in parts is not wiped away by the ability use a browser. I am a huge proponent of having a desktop browser on your TV and I usually recommend a mini PC. Because about $200 and you're there. So if you want to use your formula, I'm willing to plug $200 in there, thought I believe there may be some stick computers that will do it for even less.

This is why some of us count the cost of the whole pc. I recommend to people all the time they try playing some games on whatever laptop they have, but building around a $500 gpu is a different thing.

And it bears repeating this is not about the df comparison. The comparison is interesting. Also, a $1500 PC is absolutely worth considering for someone looking at a $500 PS5 provided they have the money. But let's not pretend it doesn't cost $1500.
 
Last edited:

Bojji

Member
I do get that sony fanboys are often butthurt by DF but what I see here is really painful.

This was just part of they graphics card review, what they wanted to is to see how not ridiculously overpriced GPU compares to console in power and result is that it's usually 2x more powerful. 6700xt or 7600xt will get you console experience for around 330 dollars.
 

Leonidas

AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
They did a similar comparison with the 4070 in the 4070 Review last year. 4070 was ~1.8x faster IIRC.

But in the real world there are many cases where the 4070 is a lot faster (can be 5x or more in instances), since many consoles games are locked down to 30-60 FPS, especially if you look at BC PS4 games, many which only maxed at 1080p and 30 FPS.

I wonder how PS5 Pro will end up. I doubt it will even beat the vanilla 4070 (though if it does I can easily upgrade to 5070 :messenger_smiling_with_eyes: )
 

Baki

Member
So a $2K PC ($1.5K if you build it yourself) outperforms the $449 PS5 by 2.2x. PC gaming is just way too expensive considering the difference in quality starts when you’re willing to pay 4x the cost of a console.
 

Leonidas

AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
So a $2K PC ($1.5K if you build it yourself) outperforms the $449 PS5 by 2.2x.
Its a lot more than 2.2x in some games, since consoles are locked to 30 or 60 FPS in many cases.
 
Last edited:

VitoNotVito

Member
Your equation there is so simple that it bears no resemblance to real life. It did when you had a 386 at home for work and you could slap a soundblaster and a joystick on that bitch and boom you're gaming.


No, you can't look at porn on a console. But you can on everything else. That is what you are missing.

I also have a Chromebook here that has a full desktop browser. Which means pretty much everything, these days. At least for most of us. I'm not just saying the desktop browser is not very expensive to get, but also because the chromebook does things that my gaming pc wouldn't do very well. Like folding.

If someone tells me they are looking at an $850 laptop and a PS5, and i suggest a $1350 gaming pc, what are they going to say? Probably some variation of 'no'. I doubt they are THAT far off the mark in knowing what they want. Same with someone looking for a mini to tuck under the tv, or a handheld, or a tablet. Even someone doing work on a desk might not be willing to go with a mid tower when they were intending to find a mini.

Literal desktops these days are not needed unless you have a decent amount of paperwork to shuffle through. For the most part they are good so you can use a keyboard and mouse and have more monitors. And even THAT does not require a tower of you aren't doing high performance gaming.

Only people leveraging gpus for work have full overlap automatically get twice the value. For most, a gaming pc prebuild or not involves buying hardware you otherwise wouldn't. To be extra clear, no the other $600 or $800 in parts is not wiped away by the ability use a browser. I am a huge proponent of having a desktop browser on your TV and I usually recommend a mini PC. Because about $200 and you're there. So if you want to use your formula, I'm willing to plug $200 in there, thought I believe there may be some stick computers that will do it for even less.

This is why some of us count the cost of the whole pc. I recommend to people all the time they try playing some games on whatever laptop they have, but building around a $500 gpu is a different thing.

And it bears repeating this is not about the df comparison. The comparison is interesting. Also, a $1500 PC is absolutely worth considering for someone looking at a $500 PS5 provided they have the money. But let's not pretend it doesn't cost $1500.
That's a very long story. Pity I didn't read it...
 

Denton

Member
The results are certainly not rocket science, I agree. Blatantly obvious. But if you found it interesting, rock on.
Without actual test, one can only guess what this "blatantly obvious" difference would be. Data is always better. This way people know what kind of performance they can expect compared to just getting PS5. Only ones who don't like seeing this are insecure sony fanboys, as this thread blatantly obviously demonstrates.
 

Senua

Gold Member
A $599 RTX 4070 super is superior than a
2020 APU??

ItS60NI.gif


Unfortunately, the graphics card doesn't work without ran, CPU, motherboard, power supply, etc.

Pretty pointless video. Oh yes, that's right, otherwise you wouldn't have been able to bash against the PS5. Why PS5 and no comparison to the xbox series x!?
Holy insecurity batman!

I do get that sony fanboys are often butthurt by DF but what I see here is really painful.

This was just part of they graphics card review, what they wanted to is to see how not ridiculously overpriced GPU compares to console in power and result is that it's usually 2x more powerful. 6700xt or 7600xt will get you console experience for around 330 dollars.
Seriously, we're all adults here but you would never have guessed it! How can you get triggered by shit that is so painfully obvious? It's like these people had no idea there were more powerful GPUS out there than the on in PS5 until this video and are now mad
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom