Leonidas
AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
Its too bad PS5 Pro can't fix all the PS4 and PS5 games that will exist with no PS5 Pro version.
-
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?
- Thread starter Thick Thighs Save Lives
- Start date
- Analysis
Sybrix
Gold Member
I dont get these types of comparison videos.
You need a MOBO, CPU, RAM, Case, Keyboard & Mouse, SDD, PSU, CPU Cooler to make that 4070 work............... sure it outperforms the PS5, but you need to drop at least $1200 for a working machine, as opposed to the price of a PS5.
Don't get me wrong, im PCMR all the way, love my PC, but i don't bullshit and say that i didn't spend near $2000 on my rig (monitor included).
You need a MOBO, CPU, RAM, Case, Keyboard & Mouse, SDD, PSU, CPU Cooler to make that 4070 work............... sure it outperforms the PS5, but you need to drop at least $1200 for a working machine, as opposed to the price of a PS5.
Don't get me wrong, im PCMR all the way, love my PC, but i don't bullshit and say that i didn't spend near $2000 on my rig (monitor included).
Last edited:
Little Mac
Gold Member
Ah yes. The good ol' "Lets compare a just released $600 graphics card to a 3 year old, $450 game console" discussion.
Senua
Gold Member
"RTX 4070 Super vs PS5: How Much Faster/Better Are Today's Mid-Range GPUs?"
That's the point, it's in the title. Technology has evolved since 2020 while consoles remain static. It's a look at how the "midrange" has now doubled performance of the PS5. It's really basic stuff.
I still don't understand how this video triggers people
daninthemix
Member
I mean, it's a relevant point of comparison for the people the video is aimed at - potential buyers of the 4070 Super. They want to know what performance they can expect.Ah yes. The good ol' "Lets compare a just released $600 graphics card to a 3 year old, $450 game console" discussion.
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
midnightAI
Member
demigod
Member
Hilarious coming from a guy with only a 3080.
Senua
Gold Member
My 3080 is pretty much double the power of your PS5 GPU, again why are you so insecure little man.
demigod
Member
You can talk to me when you beat my 4090.
Senua
Gold Member
Lmao I didn't realise we were on /v/. Fair play if you have a 4090 i'm jealous. But I'm not even sure how me owning a 3080 has anything to do with this argument in the first place
demigod
Member
Because this comparison is stupid and pointless. We know the ps5 is weaker already. There’s really no need to make 10 videos of it. And DF never compares pc gpu to xbox. They are just trying to make the ps5 look inferior to pc and not put xbox in there.
existensmaximum
Member
At least in my country, the RTX 4070 Super alone is a fair bit more expensive than the PS5 so..
MisterXDTV
Member
with VAT it's over €700 in Europe
Last edited:
Senua
Gold Member
This reeks of persecution complex. Xbox just doesn't matter as much, the PS5 is the lead platform the vast majority of time and is the most relevant console. It's actually a compliment to the PS5 they used that instead of the Xbox.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Ah yes. The good ol' "Lets compare a just released $600 graphics card to a 3 year old, $450 game console" discussion.
I know LOL.
Especially as you can't just throw that GPU in any old PC and get the same performance. You need an appropriately modern board and CPU, which in the UK aren't especially cheap.
A friend of mine bought his son a gaming PC for Christmas, and even after shopping carefully for the best deal he could find ended up paying around £1000 (so $1250 USD) for it, and even at more than double the cost of a console its still low-to-mid spec by modern standards. Very usable system, ticking all the boxes for playing modern titles in terms of ram/vram and storage with an eye for future expansion, but as a pre-built its likely far from optimally configured.
Now you could argue that had he built and setup it himself he would've gotten more for the same outlay, but as a working Dad that'd require a lot more time and effort than he could comfortably spare for a single present for one of his kids.
Point I'm making is that the cost is effectively much higher than is presented by enthusiast sites for a lot of people.
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
Fair enough, I guess. Not going to get into the "fanboy" talk. I come from the perspective of having a PC gaming rig with a 4080 as well as owning a PS5 so perhaps what seems "blatantly obvious" to me isn't so obvious to others. So like I said, if others see value in this, rock on. I just don't see it myself. Are there a bunch of folks truly trying to make a decision between a PS5 and a 4070 Super? Could be this is useful for whoever that is, I suppose.
Last edited:
Little Mac
Gold Member
Fair point I guess but wouldn't a better comparison though be of another dedicated gpu? Playing the same software? With the same auxiliary components?
It's like comparing an engine of a 2024 Ferrari ... just the engine ... to a 2020 Honda Civic and saying the Ferrari engine, when installed into the rest of the Ferrari, has the potential to be 3 times faster than the Civic. Isn't it a silly comparison/discussion?
I guess if pc gamers interested in the 4070 Super are somehow curious how the gpu fairs against Sony PS5 Exclusives (?), Digital Foundry has them covered.
Last edited:
Dr.D00p
Member
Why does everything have to have a point?
Can't it just be worth it to satisfy the curiosity some of us have with all kinds of performance metrics when it comes to graphics technology.
Fabieter
Member
Pretty sure it would bottlekneck the 4070ti so thats not likely but it also makes the comparison pointless if a game is cpu bound.
yamaci17
Member
this is not even bringing DLSS into play. 1440p dlss quality and fsr quality is altogether different experiences. but sadly there's no way to calculate/determine exactly by how better pixel treatment you get with DLSS over FSR/other upscaler solutions
in my experiences 1440p/4K dlss performance often has better image stability, clarity and almost artifact free compared to 1440p/4K fsr quality. in return it practically gives you more performance headroom than you can imagine. 4K DLSS performance often looks better than native 1440p even for games that are designed for it (last of us part 1):
actually 4k dlss ultra performance (720p input) looks better than 1080p native too
1440p based upscaling just does not work well outside of DLSS in my experience. only DLSS can make a decent outcome from 700-1000p internal resolutions. rest just gets broken.
in my experiences 1440p/4K dlss performance often has better image stability, clarity and almost artifact free compared to 1440p/4K fsr quality. in return it practically gives you more performance headroom than you can imagine. 4K DLSS performance often looks better than native 1440p even for games that are designed for it (last of us part 1):
actually 4k dlss ultra performance (720p input) looks better than 1080p native too
1440p based upscaling just does not work well outside of DLSS in my experience. only DLSS can make a decent outcome from 700-1000p internal resolutions. rest just gets broken.
AnotherOne
Member
Alot of fragile hurt feelings in here 
daninthemix
Member
It's a baseline for the kind of gaming performance most modern gamers experience, therefore it makes eminent sense.
Aces High
Gold Member
They're a bunch of die-hard PC fanboys.
Alex from DF is one of the worst PC/Nvidia fanboys out there.
I've been using PC as my main gaming platform for the past 25 years, but this stupid "my toy is better than yours" bullshit is pure cringe.
Topher
Identifies as young
Alot of fragile hurt feelings in here
Eh....comments like this and the ones needing to make this about "sony fanboys" tell me there really is very little interest in the "data" here for these folks. This really is just a toy fight for some, isn't it?
Last edited:
Senua
Gold Member
Imagine taking from this video that Richard is showing his "toys are better than yours". Introspection is needed me thinks
SportsFan581
Member
It's mystifying to me how a comparison like this could be that triggering. And it doesn't matter what the PC costs, someone buying a PC for gaming is aware that the cost will be higher. They may have other needs for the PC however, and the cost of a potato PC + a PS5 may well be higher than upgrading the potato to reach PS5 performance levels. Or like in this case you might want to play those fidelity modes at 60fps, or you could push further and try and get those fidelity modes at 120fps, etc.
Dr.D00p
Member
1. Because its the market dominant platform.
2. Because the PS5 is just a PC in a boutique case
3. DF knows a PS5 NeoGAF fan boy dies a liitle bit inside, every time they post a video
Only 2 of those 3 are known to be fact.
Topher
Identifies as young
How is PS5 a "baseline" here?
Last edited:
Rocco Schiavone
Member
The Problem is that the card costs more than a complete PS5 and doesn't work without components like ram/motherboard/power supply, CPU.
Second problem It's obvious that a 2020 APU is weaker than a newly released graphics card.(Do I need a video for this??)
The third thing why is the ps5 being compared with a graphics card and not the xbox series x?? Probably brings more clicks right??
Bojji
Member
Its more to illustrate what you can get for 600 dollars right now compared to console experience that is locked to what developer think is good for you.
You can't really match ps5 when it comes for price to performance but you can build yourself pc with:
7600 204$
Rx 6700xt 329$
16gb of ram 50$
MB 100$
500w PS 60$
1tb ssd 70$
Case 40$
=853$ plus few bucks for mouse and keyboard
And you will get slightly better performance (much better cpu so maybe more than that) with unlimited (enchanced!) BC and ton of other options not available on consoles.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I’ve got a tablet for creating art, but yeah you can check your email.
winjer
Member
But what DF is proposing is a GPU that costs more than a PS5.
The rest of the system is even more expensive.
It's a ridiculous and stupid comparison.
Reizo Ryuu
Member
High end restaurants tend to be "fully booked" for years yes.
DryvBy
Gold Member
Sadly that's a fact. The last 10 years I've lost my desire to be a PC gamer mostly because of the cost of parts. It sucks because I miss modding things into a disaster.
Bojji
Member
But they didn't do any specific video for it, it was just one of the parts of 4070S review to show people interested in this card what they can expect compared to console experience. I see nothing ridiculous about that.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Fuck me. Anyone triggered by these videos is pathetic.
Ever thought there might be someone out there wanting to compare these things? Crazy, isn't it?
How about if someone's on the fence and never bought a pc before and wants to know how a pc with a 4070 compares to a ps5 before investing.
I can't believe these videos trigger some people.
Pcs are more powerful than consoles and cost more. It's facts, it's not some attack on your precious console.
Plus, DF can't win. They were getting attacked for not using ps5s in comparisons and now they are being attacked for comparing pc hardware against ps5.
Ever thought there might be someone out there wanting to compare these things? Crazy, isn't it?
How about if someone's on the fence and never bought a pc before and wants to know how a pc with a 4070 compares to a ps5 before investing.
I can't believe these videos trigger some people.
Pcs are more powerful than consoles and cost more. It's facts, it's not some attack on your precious console.
Plus, DF can't win. They were getting attacked for not using ps5s in comparisons and now they are being attacked for comparing pc hardware against ps5.
yamaci17
Member
it is also funny how people in this thread completely disregards how good of a path tracing experience can 4070 and above can deliver (even at high framerates)
the latency Rich finds a bit disappointing (90-100 ms with frame gen enabled with path tracing at 1440p dlss) is something console games have at upwards of 125 ms easily even with their performance modes (IIRC gow ragnarok).
if a game to run at 1080p 30 fps with path tracing on consoles, I'm sure most ray tracing dismissive folks would lose their minds and talk about how great their console is and how pushing the boundaries is worth for 30 FPS. you can get 30 fps-40 fps console like experience out of 3.5 years old 3070-3080 in relation to path tracing. that's a feature that altogether you cannot even get on console. like, you cannot even put a price on that. how much console would cost if it were to push those kind of capabilities back in 2020? the reason it is so cheap because it relies on compromises.
this is why this video, out of context, does not do any RTX GPU justice really. go watch the actual video and try to gain some perspective. you might not care about path tracing/ray tracing and that's okay. in that case these GPUs are not meant for you. 6700xt exists at a much reasonable price without any of that ray tracing stuff and gets you much efficient raster performance above PS5 with much better prices.
NVIDIA prices their GPUs at this point by their merits outside of rasterization too. I don't defend their price gouging but you cannot act like these cards at this point exist solely for rasterization. You may not care for it but I do and many others do. Can PS5 do path tracing in any capacity like 4070 or heck, 3070 can? Then can I claim 3070 or 4070 is infinitely more valuable than PS5 because of that? For me it actually is. See, perspective matters a lot. That part of the video is just to show rasterization side of things. nothing more, nothing less. if you get a 4070 super for its rasterization power alone, you're doing something really wrong with your money indeed.
the latency Rich finds a bit disappointing (90-100 ms with frame gen enabled with path tracing at 1440p dlss) is something console games have at upwards of 125 ms easily even with their performance modes (IIRC gow ragnarok).
if a game to run at 1080p 30 fps with path tracing on consoles, I'm sure most ray tracing dismissive folks would lose their minds and talk about how great their console is and how pushing the boundaries is worth for 30 FPS. you can get 30 fps-40 fps console like experience out of 3.5 years old 3070-3080 in relation to path tracing. that's a feature that altogether you cannot even get on console. like, you cannot even put a price on that. how much console would cost if it were to push those kind of capabilities back in 2020? the reason it is so cheap because it relies on compromises.
this is why this video, out of context, does not do any RTX GPU justice really. go watch the actual video and try to gain some perspective. you might not care about path tracing/ray tracing and that's okay. in that case these GPUs are not meant for you. 6700xt exists at a much reasonable price without any of that ray tracing stuff and gets you much efficient raster performance above PS5 with much better prices.
NVIDIA prices their GPUs at this point by their merits outside of rasterization too. I don't defend their price gouging but you cannot act like these cards at this point exist solely for rasterization. You may not care for it but I do and many others do. Can PS5 do path tracing in any capacity like 4070 or heck, 3070 can? Then can I claim 3070 or 4070 is infinitely more valuable than PS5 because of that? For me it actually is. See, perspective matters a lot. That part of the video is just to show rasterization side of things. nothing more, nothing less. if you get a 4070 super for its rasterization power alone, you're doing something really wrong with your money indeed.
Last edited:
winjer
Member
I've been reading GPU reviews for 25 years and never did I see a professional reviewer do a GPU review, comparing it to a console.
Much less, a comparison of a GPU that alone, costs more than a console.
What DF did here is completely idiotic and unprofessional.
Rich states in the video, the trajectory of release indicates that the PS5 is often the main platform focused on by devs and the Xbox Series X/S are based around that.
Topher
Identifies as young
lol....says the guy who was just as dismissive of this video as anyone?
Last edited:
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
I don't think anyone's "triggered", just a collective shrug about whom this comparison is for.
Don't you think that there's a problem when there's no reason to watch the video because the premise lacks relevance and utility.
RoboFu
One of the green rats
Ah yes. The good ol' "Lets compare a just released $600 graphics card to a 3 year old, $450 game console" discussion.
It's good for keeping expectations down really.
Bojji
Member
Why? Its just benchmark, you can buy GPU on par with ps5 for much less than that.
Compared to other hardware reviewers DF know how to set games so tests can be comparable to console performance. That's why they do it.
Comparison with series X would show similar results.
yamaci17
Member
relevancy is to check if you're getting scammed in power relations
DF do these comparisons mainly to see if there's anything amiss and if so by how much. in the review video you can see 4070 super is above 2x over ps5 in most titles, and it is not the case in last of us part 1. they do these comparisons so that in the future they can see how PS5 API matured and how well 4070 super aged/will age. 4 years later they may do it again and find about 4070 super is not 2x but 1.5x in average in the games of 2026 as opposed to the games of 2024.
that is the main purpose of these comparisons. not to say "we think 4070 super is powerful and this is the proof".
they did similar comparisons pitting 750ti and such against PS4. they also revisited some of these benchmarks and found out 750ti aged horribly. they did tests pitting 1060 against ps4 all the time to see how well Pascal managed over the years against consoles. it is good to make such remarks so that in future you can go back and see how things have changed.
because they will change. it is inevitable. whether for the good, bad or stagnant; performance relations will change. and there's really no harm in it to analyze it this way.
Last edited: