PDA

View Full Version : ASUS G750 JX vs PS4



FIREWORKKS
11-13-2013, 05:32 AM
What will be more powerful?
What are the pro's and con's of each device?
Discuss.

EDIT - SORRY, ALL G750's OVERALL

Flea0
11-13-2013, 11:21 AM
these comparisons are always very difficult to do. On paper, the PS4 has more raw GPU power (1.8 vs 1.3 TFLOPS) than the 770m has, but less than the 780m (2.3 TFLOPS). This indicates that the performance of the JX could be inferior to the PS4 while the JH should edge ahead.
Still, the big advantage for the PS4 is that all games will be tailored to it to have always consistent FPS while pc gamers have always been assumed to have more powerful hardware that can make up for mediocre porting efforts. Also, it's A LOT CHEAPER. People forget that often when discussing this, but there's a small caveat which I'll mention in a moment.

On the other hand, the G750 can be overclocked and the graphics settings can be tweaked to enjoy high fps while still enjoying a better graphical experience. Not everyone cares about antialiasing, especially on a 17 inch screen, so you can trade that for improved volumetric effects, for example.
Big pro of the G750, and any pc really: 100% backward compatibility up to Myst 1, console emulation capabilities and.....STEAM SALES.
You won't find 2 year old AAA games for 4$ on any console.

kingsknight
11-13-2013, 12:40 PM
Strange you asked this as I was wondering this myself. Trust me when I say the G750 will rape the ps4. Just look at the ps4 footage of bf4! I'd say the ps4 plays it at low/medium settings @ 1080 @ 30fps and my G750JW overlocked plays its at high/ultra at 1080 @ 60fps.

But this may no always be the case as the ps4 is very new so they are learning the new hardware so they will be able to push out more fps as time passes.

Tundra
11-13-2013, 04:00 PM
Strange you asked this as I was wondering this myself. Trust me when I say the G750 will rape the ps4. Just look at the ps4 footage of bf4! I'd say the ps4 plays it at low/medium settings @ 1080 @ 30fps and my G750JW overlocked plays its at high/ultra at 1080 @ 60fps.

But this may no always be the case as the ps4 is very new so they are learning the new hardware so they will be able to push out more fps as time passes.

The PS4 version is 900p at 60fps. It's probably on high. You're not getting anywhere near 60fps 1080p on average with a 765m, overclocked or not. In this case, the PS4 will edge out until you're in 780m territory.

iweber95
11-13-2013, 04:28 PM
You cannot really compare the two. The G750 has much more computing power and can handle a much wider range of programs. If you are just into gaming, I suggest that you either go with the PS4 or build a gaming desktop. The desktop will be much faster than the PS4 for about the same amount of money.

However, if you are looking for a portable pure gaming machine, just go with the PS4.

Dream
11-13-2013, 04:29 PM
I second the console emulation capability.

I use Dolphin (GC/Wii emulator) to play all of my Wii and old Gamecube games -- in *native* 1080p 9 out of 10 times (only a few games need to run in 720p to maintain frame rate). The JX CPU and GPU are masterful at emulating these games in like 4x the original resolution.

Case and point, I was playing Zelda Wind Waker (that I've owned for ~10 years) in native 1080p with AA and full widescreen months before the Wii U port released for $50.

kingsknight
11-13-2013, 05:34 PM
The PS4 version is 900p at 60fps. It's probably on high. You're not getting anywhere near 60fps 1080p on average with a 765m, overclocked or not. In this case, the PS4 will edge out until you're in 780m territory.

Sorry but you're completely wrong. I get over 60fps on my 765M. Also there is VERY little difference between 720p and 900p

kingsknight
11-13-2013, 05:39 PM
http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?39643-BF4-Frame-Rates

That's the settings I play at and it never drops below 60fps no matter what is happening @ 1080. Can easily play it with everything up at high but my frame rate drops to the low 40's when lots of action is happening.

iweber95
11-13-2013, 05:40 PM
The PS4 version is 900p at 60fps. It's probably on high. You're not getting anywhere near 60fps 1080p on average with a 765m, overclocked or not. In this case, the PS4 will edge out until you're in 780m territory.

It really depends on how high he has his AA on. With it off the ultra textures can be run just fine. However when you start to turn the AA and SAOB up then thats when you start really taxing the system

kingsknight
11-13-2013, 05:47 PM
It really depends on how high he has his AA on. With it off the ultra textures can be run just fine. However when you start to turn the AA and SAOB up then thats when you start really taxing the system

This is true but on a 17" screen that is completely pointless anyway. You can easily have AA on high and it won't effect the frame rate very much but if you have both AA and SAOB on at the same time that is when you see the system being taxed.

From the footage I have seen so far BF4 looks MUCH better on the settings I use than the PS4. If I lowered my res to 900/720 I can easily run the game on ultra/high on all the settings. The PS4 will not be running the game on any ultra settings that is for sure.


29669


These are the settings I use and it runs 60-70fps put everything up to high and you're looking at 50-60fps but drops to the low 40s in battle. The game is still pretty much in beta and the drivers are not very good at the moment so I think in a few patches I'll be able to play with everything up at high @ 60fps.

I'v maxed the settings out on the new batman game and that runs amazingly well at 60fps with v-sync on.

villiansv
11-13-2013, 05:49 PM
Don't forget exclusive titles. A Playstation is worth it for the Naughty Dog games alone (in my personal opinion).

kingsknight
11-13-2013, 05:57 PM
Don't forget exclusive titles. A Playstation is worth it for the Naughty Dog games alone (in my personal opinion).

This is true, but there is a lot less exclusive titles than there used to be. Please don't get me wrong I love that we are getting a new set of next gen consoles and they are going to be some amazing games for them. I just think that the G750 range of laptops are much more powerful gaming systems than they are.

villiansv
11-13-2013, 06:00 PM
This is true, but there is a lot less exclusive titles than there used to be. Please don't get me wrong I love that we are getting a new set of next gen consoles and they are going to be some amazing games for them. I just think that the G750 range of laptops are much more powerful gaming systems than they are.

At the moment they are. In 5 years, PS4/XB1 games will look better than what you can play on the G750. Now if you could get developers to optimize for PCs like they do for consoles... but sadly that's not going to happen.

kingsknight
11-13-2013, 06:05 PM
At the moment they are. In 5 years, PS4/XB1 games will look better than what you can play on the G750. Now if you could get developers to optimize for PCs like they do for consoles... but sadly that's not going to happen.

Couldn't agree more with you there! My last laptop was A Asus N55 with a 2gb GT555M graphics card and at the time I thought I'd be able to get at least 4 years of gaming out of it. I could still game on it now but id be running most games at 720p @ medium settings but when I first got it, it would run everything at 1080 at high settings.

iweber95
11-13-2013, 06:39 PM
Also something else, I believe that the PC gaming community is much more mature and enjoyable than the console community.

Just my opinion. : D

Flea0
11-13-2013, 06:40 PM
yeah. in 5 years, even the G750 will be sorely outdated while the PS4 will be barely "middle aged". Just look at gaming laptops from 2008. You could have a PS3, or for over $3000 the best you could look at was an 8800gtx. The 780M is about EIGHT times more powerful in benchmarks and we are currently still using it to play PS3 games.

kingsknight
11-13-2013, 06:48 PM
yeah. in 5 years, even the G750 will be sorely outdated while the PS4 will be barely "middle aged". Just look at gaming laptops from 2008. You could have a PS3, or for over $3000 the best you could look at was an 8800gtx. The 780M is about EIGHT times more powerful in benchmarks and we are currently still using it to play PS3 games.

I was saying this to my friend the other day. Even the GTX780M will feel dated in 5 years time. I remember when I got a Dell XPS with a 2.4ghz Core 2 cpu and a 7950GTX gpu in 2007. Cost me 2000 and I was convinced it would last at least 4 years of gaming at 1080. At the time the 7950GTX was THE most powerful mobile GPU on the market.

5 years later and you would have no hope playing any newer games on that old laptop.

MrRuckus
11-13-2013, 07:04 PM
Comparing a console to a laptop is really apples to oranges. Consoles have games made around their hardware and use their hardware to the fullest because the hardware never changes. PC's on the other hand they have to account for low end to high end, so they have to make a lot of adjustments available so performance can be tailored to more PC's from low end to high, because as always, the more of an audience you can please, the more money you're gonna make.

Its just sad that these days most PC games are console ports. Companies get a large amount of money from consoles, and then they port the title to PC and spend little time optimizing the title or adding the necessary configuration options so PC users can take advantage of their diverse hardware. One of the best examples I can give is GTA 4. This was a game that when ported to PC, was a horrible port and had performance issues out of the gate.

We can all only hope that this becomes a thing of the past as consoles are getting more and more PC hardware so the 2 are becoming more similar then ever before.

kingsknight
11-13-2013, 10:23 PM
this is a very true and sad fact. it is easier to make games for consoles because the hardware rarely changes so they only need one build of the game but with the PC everything is changeable so it's very hard for them to work from a base line of hardware. To be honest if games were optimized better the life cycle of CPU's/GPU's could be a lot lot longer than they are now.

I'd say in 3ish years time the GTX765M/770M will be as dated as the GT555M is now and will need upgrading. I'd love to think I wouldn't need to buy another laptop for another 5 years but I know that won't be the case. My friend spent 1400 building a top end gaming pc back in 2010ish and he has got a GTX480 and a first gen i7. That was a VERY powerful system yet he has to play battlefield at medium settings @ 720 to get 60fps.

Dream
11-13-2013, 11:22 PM
If I can get 3 years of A+ gaming and constant video editing on my JX, I'm a damn happy customer.

At the same time, maybe others posters in this thread are overestimating the tech leap of current vs. next gen consoles due to the history leading up to current gen.

Every generation jump up till the current set was a massive leap. Honestly, I don't think we're seeing the same leap now as we did between the hardware running GTA II vs. GTA III. Super Mario World vs. SM64. etc.

rajeshtechfreak
11-15-2013, 05:42 AM
How long do you guys think that a laptop will be able to play new games ?
If not on 1080p high .. atleast low settings with the lowest resolution !
How long will it be before it can't even start anything due to low version Direct X or something like that !

kingsknight
11-15-2013, 10:53 AM
My guess would be

settings in most games

1080 @ high/ultra 2 years
1080 @ medium/high 2-3 years
1080 @ low / medium 3-4 years

Depending on the new engines that come out you should be able to play most games at 720 @ low/medium settings for the next 6+ years but you will want to upgrade way before then. Hardware gens are lasting longer than they was 5 years ago due to them being so powerful now and using such little power. I think you'll be able to last the life cycle of the ps4 if you're willing to drop the settings over the years.

You'll be able to play most unreal engine games for a very long time. I saw someone playing the new splitercell game on a 8800M and it was running amazingly well I couldn't believe it looked so good. he was running at 720 at high but that still impressed me.