Eh yeah I'm not worries about all of that. I have a i9 9900k @ 5Ghz all core, 64GB DDR4 3200Mhz ram clocked @ 3600mhz, NVMe 970 Pro, and a 2080ti Kingpin. Pretty sure next gen consoles aren't touching most of that. If so I'll just play it on the consoles but eh. Will be fun to see what happens either way. I'm always upgrading something so this will be just another reason why I "need" the latest and greatest.
I think the best time to upgrade next in your case is when DDR5 is established. We should also be on Intel's next-next architecture by then. And if Nvidia still supports raytracing in the 4xxx series it should be a lot faster than the 2080 Ti.
To prove my point, I'm going to post a link from a graphics comparison of Oblivion from April 2006, five months after the console's launch, between the 360 version and three PCs ( low end, mid range, high end). You both believe that the 360 at launch blew past midrange PCs and was more powerful than even expensive high-end machines. Let's see if that's true.
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion -- Xbox 360 versus PC
Trying to decide between the PC and Xbox 360 versions of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion? We're here to help you make the best choice.www.gamespot.com
It isn't. The Xbox 360 is competitive with midrange PCs of the previous year, as expected, and it falls behind against high end PCs, as expected.
My advice to everyone would be to make predictions and adjust expectations based on logic. Pricing, thermals, size, acoustics, these factors will always limit consoles against PCs. There's no getting around that.
Eh if the game is poorly optimized who knows but I wouldn't blame my CPU. I would say it's optimization. In all honesty though I don't have performance issues as is even when I play something with RTX on, and I still get 70-85+ frames at 1440p, 21:9, ultra settings. though at 4k I get 50-60 ish, unless I have Nvidia DLSS on which is trash because it kills render resolution but yeah...I don't really have performance issues.
That's is pretty much overstatement. ARM cores are still a lot slower in most of the convenient computing operations. GPUs of the mobile SOC is another story though.
And ssd/hdd's are literally one of the cheapest and easiest upgrades for pc, like, new game cheap.
PCIe 4.0 SSDs like what the PS5 is using is not cheap at all, you need to stop with these fantastical hopes and dreams.
The first and last time we had consoles clocked this high we had the red ring of death/yellow light of death respectively.
NVMe SSds are cheap provided you have the hardware to use them, they don't cost much more than SATA SSDs.
you laugh but like I said, Shadow of the Tomb Raider stutters and gets low FPS in the main hub area if you have less than their recommended requirements (i7 4770K or Ryzen 5 1600). And both those CPUs are far more powerful than all 8 Jaguar cores in PS4 Pro/Xbone X. You always have to account for overhead and increased draw calls on PC even with the benefit of DirectX 12
My launch 2006 PS3 lasted 7.5 years with no issues running constantly but ok.
No such thing as m.2 SATA ....
It's actually frequent on/off or heatup/cooldown cycles that did those consoles in sooner. It eventually cracks the lead-free solder they used from thermal expansion and contraction. Keeping them on longer actually prolongs their lifespans
This ^^
Ok.
Either that or just slap a label/warning saying "this game needs to be installed on fast NVMe drive". No need to hold a large population back just because a tiny fraction still installs games on spinning drives.
