Crytek: PS4 and Xbox 720 no match for PC


Recommended Posts

Crytek: PS4 and Xbox 720 no match for PC

crysis3_27514.jpg

Crysis 3 makers say next generation console offers still lag behind desktop computing power.

As Sony prepares what could be its PlayStation 4 announcment later this week and Microsoft's rumoured to not be far behind, Crytek boss Cevat Yerli has said they don't hold a candle to modern PCs.

Restricted by non-disclosure agreements, the Crysis maker told Eurogamer that the raw computing power of PCs will still far outpace the new consoles and that it would be "impossible" for the next PlayStation or Xbox to match desktop gaming machines.

"Without breaking NDAs that are in place, realistically, from purely a price point perspective, it is impossible," he explained.

"It's impossible to package $2000-3000 into a mainstream, let's say $500 console. I'm not saying they are $500 consoles. They may launch a console at $2000, but the consumer pricing is usually much lower than that."

Given consumer pricing and average cost of a high-spec gaming PC, which he says also requires a fridge-like amount of power to run, Yerli says the consoles wont even attempt it.

Crytek has been gearing up to release its CryEngine 3, says its next game building platform was built with the next generation of consoles in mind and that these same calculations put the Xbox 720 and PS4 well behind PCs.

"We used Moore's Law," he said. "If you predict how hardware evolves at the current speed of evolution, and then take consumer pricing evolution, already two years ago you could see, whatever launches in 2013 or 2014 or 2015, will never beat a PC again.

Source

I guess time will tell when DDR4 becomes the norm and AMD's 8000 series ships at the end of the year.

Wish Crytek would shut up, getting sick of seeing them in the news bragging about their Engine. Of course consoles are behind PCs, they also cost 1/3rd as much as a PC needed to max out games these days, not only that you don't have to upgrade a console to continue to run those games maxed out.

It doesn't really matter to me that their hardware will not match my PC, the games are optimized to max out the hardware that they do have. It usually takes a year after the consoles released for developers to start pushing a consoles potential to the limit anyway.

  • Like 3

The funny thing is that you don't get many PC exclusive games so multiplatform games are developed for the lowest common denominator which is a console, so having a $2000 PC isn't going to mean much if you are running a game meant $350-400 console spec levels.

i think the xbox and PS4 will prolly cost bout $7-800 then priced at half that amount, but last xboxs custom gpu was far better than what PC users had. This time round itll be 1 generation old tech if its using a 7xxx gpu and amd release 8xxxx before or at same time. 7970m will stick pack a punch for a fair while though. my 6870 is bout 2 years old now and can still play with the big guys at 1920x1080 with settings at max, so wont be so bad and will get some nice console ports hopefully

The funny thing is that you don't get many PC exclusive games so multiplatform games are developed for the lowest common denominator which is a console, so having a $2000 PC isn't going to mean much if you are running a game meant $350-400 console spec levels.

I don't agree, the consoles generally have far simpler textures and graphical niceness.

The funny thing is that you don't get many PC exclusive games so multiplatform games are developed for the lowest common denominator which is a console, so having a $2000 PC isn't going to mean much if you are running a game meant $350-400 console spec levels.

Even though most multiplatform games are designed around consoles the PC version is still?almost without exception?the best version. That's because PC games have some or all of the following features: higher resolution, anti-aliasing, better textures (games like Assassin's Creed 3 have textures 4x the resolution), DX11 effects (tessellation, etc), 3D-support, higher framerate (support for 120Hz), more customisability (FOV slider, etc), mod support, screenshot functionality, better control schemes (keyboard + mouse, flight sticks, etc), hardware physics and more. Consoles provide a superior user experience and better ease of use but the difference between consoles and PC is greater than any generational console leap, which makes it all the more bizarre that people defend them so much - I mean, few people would argue the PS2 is better than the PS3 because it's cheaper or that the X360 is better than the X720 for that reason.

Crysis 3 looks great at 2560x1600, anti-aliasing and max settings. The next-gen consoles won't even come close.

Hardware specs are actually LESS relevant now. The PS4 and 720 will look good enough that most people won't care about how gaming on the PC is "better". There will always be those who prefer PC gaming because of the visual differences, but then those people aren't the target audience for selling consoles anyway.

Plus, with the PS4 and 720 devs will target the specs of the machine and not the specs of machines from ten years ago.

This is why I'm happily switching to the next consoles from PC. Sick of getting games optimized for ancient crap even on PC exclusives.

I'll still have my PC, and I'll still play games on it. I just have no idea if it'll actually prove to be worth upgrading any time in the near future (and I doubt it.)

Wish Crytek would shut up, getting sick of seeing them in the news bragging about their Engine. Of course consoles are behind PCs, they also cost 1/3rd as much as a PC needed to max out games these days, not only that you don't have to upgrade a console to continue to run those games maxed out.

Give it some time and it'll be like this console cycle has been. Where improvements in visuals have stopped completely and you can still max out games effortlessly on hardware from 3-4+ years ago.

no **** Sherlock.

the purpose of a console is for it to be a living room game machine. you're not sitting in front of your tv like you are on a monitor,so the amount of detail is not necessary . its also meant to be cheaper,and very convenient.

This wasn't always the case. Consoles used to be competitive with moderately priced gaming PCs and even looked better for a year or so after they came out. This new generation of consoles is going to look worse than cheap gaming PCs on their launch day.

  • Like 1

He's really not saying anything new, the one bright spot about console gaming is the fact that it drives devs to code better and smarter because the hardware is limiting. On the pc they can just bang out some coding mess on the pc and tell you to get a newer card if it doesn't run that good for you.

This wasn't always the case. Consoles used to be competitive with moderately priced gaming PCs and even looked better for a year or so after they came out. This new generation of consoles is going to look worse than cheap gaming PCs on their launch day.

I think you are going to get a surprise.

8 Core CPU, AMD 7850/7870 GPU with 2Gb VRAM (maybe more or less because of the unified memory) is hardly a "cheap" PC.

Nothing wrong with consoles - they sell a lot. I still own a PS3 just for the sake of Heavy Rain and The Last of Us. I personally prefer 'the best of' IQ hence I own a pricey PC, but I can certainly understand that that puts me in the minority.

I think you are going to get a surprise.

8 Core CPU, AMD 7850/7870 GPU with 2Gb VRAM (maybe more or less because of the unified memory) is hardly a "cheap" PC.

Neither of the next gen consoles will have a 7800 series gpu. Not if the 1.2(xbox3)/1.8(ps4) TFlops reports are true. It'd be a 7700 series at best.

Neither of the next gen consoles will have a 7800 series gpu. Not if the 1.2(xbox3)/1.8(ps4) TFlops reports are true. It'd be a 7700 series at best.

Incorrect, current rumours are that the Orbis at least is based on 7970M (which itself comes with 20CUs but orbis has some chopped off) 14CUs with a further 4 'special purpose' ALUs, 32ROPs, 80TMUs, running 800Mhz core speed. The 7970M itself is 2.2TF, with the disabled CUs the 1.8TF number being floated about for Orbis means it has a GPU that is somewhere in the region of desktop 7850.

The Durangos 12CU GPU is more in line with 7750/7770.

This is where Steam Big Picture Mode could make things interesting.

If you have a mid-high range gaming rig (not the one Valve is 1st putting out), hook it up to your tv and use an xbox controller on the pc...

You get the best of both worlds.

The funny thing is that you don't get many PC exclusive games so multiplatform games are developed for the lowest common denominator which is a console, so having a $2000 PC isn't going to mean much if you are running a game meant $350-400 console spec levels.

Actually that's where the problem resides; we could had much better graphics with a PC exclusive and that could push graphics even further, but unfortunately games are made for the target that sells more: console gaming.

The funny thing is that you don't get many PC exclusive games so multiplatform games are developed for the lowest common denominator which is a console, so having a $2000 PC isn't going to mean much if you are running a game meant $350-400 console spec levels.

that BS, recent "ports" have better textures and the option of maxing AA and AF makes any port 100% better on PC then on console.

lets not even mention what community can do, just look at Oblivion, fallout or other games with big communities, they can makes games 1,000% better.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!