every game intro will look so realistic but the gameplay is the difference take RE1 for example the intro was real movie but the graphics are horrible comparing it to today games . so we want to see gameplay graphics .
@smallville0forever This is all in-engine and in real time. It's being processed on just about the most powerful gaming PC setup possible. If it was a real game (it's a tech demo) These would be its "gameplay graphics".
If these were how the next Gen graphics will look like, I would never be able to compare movie graphics and game graphics ever again. They would basically be the same thing.
People have we forgotten what gaming consoles are here for? They are for people who don't want to build a $500 gaming PC nor those weird nerds who cite Skyrim in-game books to prove a point. But for us game loving people who love having a cross-map kill or love killing geth with a pull of the trigger not a click of the mouse! It's for us who want Kratos to god ass! It's for people who love to play not meant to kill our wallets! (tired after give big speech) Good night and Good Mass effect!
@youmenow1 Mmm but it doesn´t care this is about graphics and that mod looks better than this. Next generation graphics should looks at least as good as Crysis with mod.
what the fuck? this is supposed 2nextgenerations of graphics? ive seen better trailers on cryengine! gimme a break. frostbite 2's bf3 trailer looks on par with this. why does the mans face look blurry when hes breaking the chain? Pitiful.
I don't really care much for graphics anyway just as long as the gameplay is solid. Graphics on consoles will never look this good unless you want to pay thousands for a console instead of hundreds.
Next gen graphics are here already. Why aren't they being utilized and why is tech being held back? Consoles. Next generation consoles still wont have the power to take on something like this Samaritan demo. Look up the 720, PS4, and Wii U specs versus what it took to run this tech demo. Vote with your wallet people... You can't even play used games on the 720...
I CANT SAY FOR THE X BOX BUT PS3 HAS THIS KIND OF GRAPHICS IN GAMES LIKE HEAVY RAIN...SO IF THIS IS WHAT NEXT GEN GAMES WILL LOOK LIKE...THIS IS SHITTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!! I WAS HOPING WAY BETTER GRAPHICS THAN THIS!
@fuckyoumthebest kid these engine isent even fucing done yet these is being runed on 720 ps4 and pcs and no ps3 has no graphics close to this ur rong buddy learn ur technology
Next gen consoles will run HD 6670 gpus... that is nowhere near enough power to have visuals like this. So consoles will need to wait 2 more generations to be able to have this kind of grafics.
@usamafreethink your gonna hate this... the 360 had an unreleased high end gpu worth 500$ they now use a 99$ ENTRY level gpu (low end) from the 6000 series,
(now have 7000 series) that cant compare to modern graphic cards...sorry microsoft,this is NOT okay
@pumpkin813 That is just a rumor. Nothing is resolute, nothing official has been announced so for you to say this is just silly. More than likely the final GPU will be far more up-to-date.
@pumpkin813 Hey man i no were you are coming form because he HD 6670 isnt that strong but the thing with consoles is there isnt anything running in the background so it can prosses so much more then a computer with a HD 6670. The xbox 360 now has a video card like a HD 3500 series with only 500 MHz on core clock and only 512 mb of ram and a computer with a HD 4250 chipset clocked at 700 MHz cant preforme even close to a xbox 360. and im not a console fan boy, im a pc fanboy :D
@pumpkin813 It wont be next-gen then. It will be reaching high on PC then and I will be seriously motherfucking pissed then. I want to see graphics like this on the next-gen consoles or im not buying one and will hate on the manufacturer forever. I mean comeon! what the fuck?!
PS3 and Xbox are capable of doing these kind of graphics..if only they had more time and push the system to the limits, there would be no use of different consoles... but id admit it, the graphics are awesome and like the idea of ps4 and stuff..it going to be expensive..but its too earlier for more consoles, and not a good time.
@chuyblanco78 You are very misinformed. The PS3 and Xbox 360 CANNOT render this level of graphics fidelity. This footage was rendered in real-time on THREE GeForce GTX580's in SLI. Tim Sweeney, the CEO and technical director of Epic Games, says that the next generation systems will need 8-10x more CPU performance, 10x higher GPU triangle and rasterizer throughput, and 20x more GPU computational throughput to be able to achieve graphics on-par with Samaritan. You can google the interview.
@sandrodream2 no, it would be way better, this is really good, but still not enough next gen. its basically a dx11 pc graphics , this demo. of course as i have said it looks good.
@xtasy2k7 And probably something better than a blue ray disk to be able to store all that information, I bet its gonna require more GBs of space and maybe more disks and swap them when you are done with half the game I think.
why they dont release new console , i mean its rly needet , the graphic from xbox and ps 3 looks shit in these days , i dont care graphic but i mean i want something neW :D
i have an alineware and a ps3 sim which i just bought yesterday and i think they are great. and will xbox 360 slim on the 20/01/2012 and today is 18/01/2012
Guys this video is fake! It's not the real gfx of jack squat. This is a benchmark test for ATI cards. Plus they wouldn't put this in a console cus that would mean better power supplies and better case cooling and would cost more money. More money that their to lazy to put in to what could have been a good product.
@sgtdan707 The demo was run on 3 Nvidia gtx580's in SLI.. The software that does the physics for the cloth only runs on Nvidia cards.
ATI's new core is good but Nvidia does have a software advantage... No middleware company has done a compute based physics system. There is no alternative software as of now that I know about.
What surprises me is that Naughty Dog maxed out PS3 graphics already and i got that from an article. The PC will always behead because the company's who make the graphic cards are always coming out with new ones....every month or week.
I know this is a video to show off the graphics of unreal engine 3 but this actually looks like a good idea for a game... i hope we will see it in the future! It looks awsome!
It's run in real time. It's a demo to show what can be done on current PC hardware. It's meant to show what Next gen consoles can look like as you play them. In game graphics.
For example a Nvidia Project Denver CPU(high end) and 1024 core Kepler or Maxwell level GPU chip could run this on a next gen console without optimizations in 2014-2015.
There really should be firm plans about next gen consoles by Q1 2013.
thats actually a pretty realistic graphic for next gen consoles right there. it is actually outdated but looks nice because of the animations and camera handling.
Computers today that are about $1000(give or take $200) can run games like this already. Consoles will always be a cheaper alternative to computers to allow for playing games at medium to low graphical settings.
@GamerFollower "Computers today that are about $1000(give or take $200) can run games like this already. "
No, they can't. Games with this exact level of graphical complexity don't exist, and a thousand dollars wouldn't even cover the cost of the GTX 580 cards used to power the PC that played this demo.
Are you serous? Games can easily look this real with direct x 11 and GTX 580 is only average at about $470. Not to mention that you could get a low clocked Intel i5 for $160 and overclock it to 4.7-5.4Ghz on water cooling. The real reason games don't look as good as they can is mostly because they are made for a Console first then ported to PC usually with SOME, but not always, graphical improvement added. Do you research before you try to tell me how much a PC costs to build.
@GamerFollower This took 3 580's running in SLI paired with an i7 to run smoothly. You have not played any game with graphics this good because there is no commercially released engine with this capability. How about do some goddamn research about the samaritan tech demo before you start waffling utter shite.
2) Bet yeah, you probably know better than the Unreal engine Dev's what it takes to get graphics like these. It's not like they're a bunch of highly trained professionals who spent months constructing the ultimate limit of current gen computing that wouldn't realistically run on any rig that cost under a few thousand dollars.
I've been building computers for over 6 years, three GTX 580s is overkill to run this, considering most CPU's bottleneck with a single current gen. GPUs without being overclocked around 4.8Ghz. Also this tech demo is almost a year old, prices have dropped sense then.
BTW I could get three GTX 470s for $850, herpderp.
@GamerFollower Seriously, stop being stupid please. The tech demo was custom tailored with the set up used in mind. (hint: it cost over 800 dollars genius). It was an extremely high powered, high cost setup being pushed to the limit of its capabilities deliberately. It also wasn't an entire game, complete with AI instructions etc. You're making utterly stupid comparisons here. (continued).
2) So no, an 800 dollar PC with a single 450 dollar 580 in it would NOT be able to run an entire game with graphics like this. Not even close.
"I could get three GTX 470s for $850"
You must be trolling or a moron. For starters, a 470 is not a match for a 580. Secondly, you just nearly blew your imaginary budget on the GFX units alone. How many top range i7's do you see for the 150 dollar remainder out of this 1000 dollar pc budget?
Your the one who said you three 470's are over $1000. I also didn't say a 470 was better than a 580, I implied that three 470s are better than two 580s. The 3rd 580 is most likely to add head room to the system. I also never said i7, I said i5 for $150 that can be overclocked.
Also you the one who is a troll, going around YouTube and searching for old comments just to start an argument, acting like you know what your talking about, even if you know nothing about the subject.
1. No, I said that 3 580's were over a thousand dollars. You then started ranting about 470's. I pointed that 3 of those wouldn't give you enough change left to build a 1000 dollar system (that you claimed could get samaritan style visuals, laughably). A 150 dollar i5 would shit its pants trying to run that tech demo. Again, you demonstrate no understanding of what it was developed for in your ignorant statements.
2) "The 3rd 580 is most likely to add head room to the system."
In other words you're making yet another bald assertion. And, AGAIN, that tech demo was engineered to make full use of the best hardware possible. So no, it wasn't for "head room". It was needed to help calculate the massive amounts of physx math and store an insane amount of texture data.
3) an i5 quad core would have to be highly overclocked to not severely bottleneck 3 GTX 470s running in SLI mode. (So add expensive third party cooling to your little thought experiment shopping list.) It would be redundant in a system featuring more than one 580 if you wanted to get enough performance to say, run the S. Tech demo properly. (continued, with helpful numbers.)
4. The Samaritan demo took a grand total of 2.5 teraFLOPS of power to run. Any idea what kind of calculation rate that is? (Hint: it's not achievable on a 150 dollar i5 and 3 gtx 470's. Not even close.)
Slotting together plug and play parts for 6 years apparently teaches you sweet FA about what defines hardware generations.
5. It also ran on...get this; 16 gigabytes of RAM.
So, with all those numbers in mind, are you STILL seriously claiming a thousand dollar rig could achieve those visuals? Get real dude, not even close.
16gb... 16 GB!!! I CAN GET FUCKING 16GB DDR3 1333 FOR $100!!!! GTFO of here, you obviously don't realize the full potential of buying lower grade components to overclock them! All you do is complain everywhere you go, thinking your the hot shit. I've reviewed you videos and you mostly complain and try to prove people wrong in the most asinine way possible.
I could see average amounts of Physx being used in this, considering a lot of this was scripted. It wouldn't need to store massive amounts of texture data when it only has to load a texture one time. If their are multiple objects with the same texture, it keeps one copy of the texture in memory to apply to the all the objects sharing the exact same texture. Also with the power of Dx11, things that are far away form the camera are have their polygons drastically reduced.
@GamerFollower "I could see average amounts of Physx being used in this"
Define "average". Also, no. Any object that moves with physical properties in that scene is being calculated in real time.
2. Stop trying to explain things I already know about textures. Did you even WATCH that video? There are a ludicrous amount of unique textures on show, and all of them obviously extremely hi-res. high res textures = ass load of texture memory.
3. You've made it painfully obvious by now that you haven't watched the actual full tech demo. (this video only shows the first, cinematic run.) In it, they do a second run of the demo, and turn off physx. The difference is instant and obvious. They also turn the viewpoint to manual control, and it's pretty obvious that there isn't exactly a lot of texture recycling going on.
For one final time: That demo took 2.5 TeraFLOPS of calculative power to run.
So, how is your suggestion of an i5 without hyperthreading and with 4 cores instead of 6 (that's what 150 dollars buys you), combined with 3 GTX 470's going to output that kind of power?
2) No, you haven't. For starters, the full GDC video isn't even available on youtube as far as I can tell, so where did you watch the "full" tech demo? (If it's the 2.54 minute video, you've only seen the primary run-through.)
Second, AGAIN, you're STILL applying current-gen reasoning. Can you even name all the physx features used in the samaritan demo? (hint, you only identified one of four genius).
3. I'm STILL WAITING for you to tell me how you plan to squeeze the 2.5 teraFLOPS of calculative power needed to run this demo out of an i5 without hyperthreading and a trio of last generation cards.
Remember, it was YOU who claimed you can get samaritan level gameplay visuals with a thousand dollar PC.
I've seen the full demo, and no, Physics is not anything that moves, that is not even close, physics is for example when a bullet hits a wooden box it calculates the path of the wooden splinters and movement of the box. If a character is running, the only thing being calculated would be some of the clothing, and sometimes the feet placement. Also, have you heard of Anisotropic filtering? high res textures are only "high res" when close enough to them to tell.
@GamerFollower I said that physx calculated anything that moved with PHYSICAL MASS.
And AGAIN, are you really suggesting that when they built a tech demo to stretch 3 of the most powerful video cards on earth with gigabytes of memory to their limit, they thought "nah, fuck it AF the fuck out of it to hide the fact its actuallty low res.".
It had high texture res AND AF. AF is also memory bandwidth intensive you fucking dullard.
2) Again, you're showing your lack of understanding of what this demo was about. (surprise surprise!).
Typically, modern games will make use of destruction physx (to a very limit degree compared to gameworld size) and maybe clothing, again, in limited fashion.
If you think the physx system being used was even slightly comparable to current-gen PC releases in terms of its extensiveness, then wow, you're pretty retarded my friend.
The high res textures are only high res when you are close enough to them because anisotropic filtering=LESS MEMORY USED and with DirectX 11 = LESS POLYGONS when farther away from a surface! YOU take NONE of these into account when you speak about this!! And YES it runs on DirectX11, stated in the tech demo, before you say bullshit of anything otherwise!
@GamerFollower I took all of those into account because I know what AF is, idiot.
Secondly, high level AF (x16) for example is actually pretty memory intensive. I personally play with it turned down on most releases for precisely that reason. So once again, a redundant point my silly little friend.
Also I KNOW my COMPUTER can RUN the UNREAL ENGINE >>3<< TECH DEMO on FULL Settings! Because I have RAN it on full settings on my computer and it went smoothly! and all I have is a GT430 and a Athlon x2 3ghz with 4gb or DDR2 ram!!! This shows that that this ENGINE will NOT be as power hungry as you say it is!!
@GamerFollower Seriously, are you actually mentally retarded?
1. The Samaritan tech demo is not unreal engine 3. It's more like Unreal 3.75. On top of this, it's then a modified version built to be as power hungry and unbelievably detailed as possible. It was specifically built to show what hardware OF THE NEXT COUPLE OF FUTURE GENERATIONS can do. So how well YOU can run the unreal 3 tech demo has...Absolutely NO relevance! Well done, idiot ! :D
I NEVER said it was unreal engnie 3!!! I said my computer could RUN unreal engine 3 tech demo perfectly without a hitch, and this is only a few steps farther. BTW, its fucking GTX not GFX, and you just made a irrelevant point! If my card sucks and can play unreal engine 3 tech demo perfectly, what does the FUCKING tell you about this engine!!! Its not power Hungry! Because they plan to release this engine this year with the ability for most computers to run it!!!!
Remember how the samaritan demo took 2.5 teraflops of power to run? Your video card has about 179 gigaFLOPS output. Your processor? about 15 if memory serves right. I used to have one. Not bad chips for their time, but I'm sure even you can see the disparity.
I seriously doubt that they would poor millions, to billions, or dollars into researching and engineering an engine that only a few peoples computers can run! that's poor business strategy!
1. Pour. not "poor". As in "you're pouring a massive amount of ignorance into your poor assertions".
2. It doesn't cost billions of dollars for a team extremely experienced with an engine to modify it. You're just being utterly stupid now.
3. The particular engine build used could feasibly be run be the NEXT generation of computers. Not the current. Devs also typically start working on "next gen" engines a good deal of time before "current gen" hardware can run them.
1. Pour. not "poor". As in "you're pouring a massive amount of ignorance into your poor assertions".
2. It doesn't cost billions of dollars for a team extremely experienced with an engine to modify it. You're just being utterly stupid now.
3. The particular engine build used could feasibly be run by the NEXT generation of computers. Not the current. Devs also typically start working on "next gen" engines a good deal of time before "current gen" hardware can run them.
You said earlier "470 x 3 is over a thousand BTW genius, herpderp."
a core i5 could not shit its pants trying to run this because it is the same architecture as the core i7, meaning its just as good as a i7 at the same clock. the only difference between a i5 and i7 is hyper threading, which isn't usable for most games, just like most games only use 2 cores, sometimes 3, rarely 4.
@GamerFollower "You said earlier "470 x 3 is over a thousand BTW genius, herpderp.""
Apparently YOU don't read. 470 is roughly the cost, in dollars, of a cheap 580. In fact, it was the number YOU gave. (and the only accurate one thus far.) So it's 470 dollars x 3. It would of helped if you'd of read the entire comment instead of quote mining it into ambiguity.
@GamerFollower "You said earlier "470 x 3 is over a thousand BTW genius, herpderp.""
Apparently YOU don't read. 470 is roughly the cost, in dollars, of a cheap 580. In fact, it was the number YOU gave. (and the only accurate one thus far.) So it's 470 dollars x 3. It would of helped if you'd of read the entire comment instead of quote mining it into ambiguity.
@GamerFollower "You said earlier "470 x 3 is over a thousand BTW genius, herpderp.""
Apparently YOU don't read. 470 is roughly the cost, in dollars, of a cheap 580. In fact, it was the number YOU gave. (and the only accurate one thus far.) So it's 470 dollars x 3. It would of helped if you'd of read the entire comment instead of quote mining it into ambiguity.
"the only difference between a i5 and i7 is hyper threading, which isn't usable for most games,"
*facepalm*
Really? Samaritan *again* wasn't "most" games. It wasn't a game. It was an engine built to take FULL advantage of the hardware at hand. And yes, that includes 6 cores and yes, hyperthreading.
You just outlined why your comparison fails without even realising it. Goddamnit, seriously, just THINK for a second with this shit please.
hmm not that impressed.. i heard it was going to be avatar like graphics.
gir4evr 6 hours ago
@gir4evr It takes hours to render a single frame in avatar. A frame in games needs to be processed in a fraction of a second. Now do the math.
RetroAdvance 14 minutes ago
my eyes had an orgasm
LegitxTomahawk 15 hours ago
how do you want to top this graphic
Alba100ful 1 day ago
@pamew You can build a 800$ PC with this card -_-
ArmbaRProductionZ 1 day ago
every game intro will look so realistic but the gameplay is the difference take RE1 for example the intro was real movie but the graphics are horrible comparing it to today games . so we want to see gameplay graphics .
smallville0forever 2 days ago
@smallville0forever This is all in-engine and in real time. It's being processed on just about the most powerful gaming PC setup possible. If it was a real game (it's a tech demo) These would be its "gameplay graphics".
pamew 1 day ago
is this really next gen graphics if so i'm not impressed. we already have games games with those kind of graphics, example: Heavy Rain
sugardaddy4032 3 days ago
@sugardaddy4032
I played heavy rain.. its not even close to this.. go check your eyes dude
usamafreethink 3 days ago 8
@sugardaddy4032 It is a pre-rendered video clip. Next Gen won't look like this.
RetroAdvance 18 minutes ago
For me the current gen graphics are fine, We need just fresh games
Siasio 3 days ago
i'd like to see a gameplay video, not a cgi scene, then ill make my judgement.
Rabastu5 3 days ago
am i the only one tht sees "the game"in thistrailer?
edpopper1 4 days ago
Comment removed
blackbook668 6 days ago
Comment removed
blackbook668 6 days ago
ok graphics and all that aside how cool was that cinematic i mean wow i hope this gets realized into a game.
wikidpat 1 week ago
If these were how the next Gen graphics will look like, I would never be able to compare movie graphics and game graphics ever again. They would basically be the same thing.
24OscarM 1 week ago
Will my gameboy color run this?
OmarHH26 1 week ago 2
A lot of games maxed out look really close to this lol so im pretty sure the 720 will be capable of this.
UltimateRemixRecords 1 week ago
tbh im not that impressed, ive seen very similar graphics before :P
joaomor10 1 week ago
the graphics look the same on the ps3 !! just look at god of war on the ps3 and castlevania etc!! no big change !!
kickass883 1 week ago
When I'm angry, I also throw cigarettes at people or robot faces.
PomPaFriCK 1 week ago
i think the game is punisher ps3 and the graphic is the same of hitman absolution noob :)
alvarosadasdasdas 1 week ago
Now that I got that off my chest to the 3... Uhhh, weird-ass-visually-impaired-dick-cheese's. I am much more happy :).
People these days... Nothing pleases them.
youmenow1 1 week ago
People have we forgotten what gaming consoles are here for? They are for people who don't want to build a $500 gaming PC nor those weird nerds who cite Skyrim in-game books to prove a point. But for us game loving people who love having a cross-map kill or love killing geth with a pull of the trigger not a click of the mouse! It's for us who want Kratos to god ass! It's for people who love to play not meant to kill our wallets! (tired after give big speech) Good night and Good Mass effect!
SirKallen 1 week ago
this doesnt look diffrent at all from 360 O_O so WTF
snipesmaster 2 weeks ago
@snipesmaster ARE YOU BLIND!!?? YOU DO REALISE THIS IS "REALTIME"?.
youmenow1 1 week ago
It doesn´t look so great.
patrick22014 2 weeks ago
@patrick22014 Oh, come on, are you kidding me?. Name a game that looks better..
youmenow1 1 week ago
@youmenow1 Crisys with ultrarealistic graphics mod.
patrick22014 1 week ago
@youmenow1 Crisys with ultrarealistic graphics mod.
patrick22014 1 week ago
@patrick22014 Yeah and that's a mod, not the vanilla game. This "IS" vanilla.
youmenow1 1 week ago
@youmenow1 Mmm but it doesn´t care this is about graphics and that mod looks better than this. Next generation graphics should looks at least as good as Crysis with mod.
patrick22014 1 week ago
what the fuck? this is supposed 2nextgenerations of graphics? ive seen better trailers on cryengine! gimme a break. frostbite 2's bf3 trailer looks on par with this. why does the mans face look blurry when hes breaking the chain? Pitiful.
fistatwar 2 weeks ago
@fistatwar Its in-game, not a trailer DERP.
youmenow1 1 week ago
I don't really care much for graphics anyway just as long as the gameplay is solid. Graphics on consoles will never look this good unless you want to pay thousands for a console instead of hundreds.
pollordubai 2 weeks ago
@pollordubai then why bother brining out a new console?
TheOverOpiniatedGuy 1 week ago
sont will have fake demoes like this when they do announce the thing more fuckin lies!
811952 2 weeks ago
so this is from upcoming game Unreal Tournament or what???
PS3MrWhite 3 weeks ago
Lame crysis looks better
PrydaV 3 weeks ago
Doesn't look next gen to me. Not impressed. Looks equal to heavy rain on Ps3.
SouthernBlack03 3 weeks ago
@SouthernBlack03 blind man detected
TheSoulja99boy 2 weeks ago
not even current GPU Hardware within reasonable limits can produce this kind of quality.
Not without massive framerate problems anyway
DeathWishSouthWales 3 weeks ago
Next gen graphics are here already. Why aren't they being utilized and why is tech being held back? Consoles. Next generation consoles still wont have the power to take on something like this Samaritan demo. Look up the 720, PS4, and Wii U specs versus what it took to run this tech demo. Vote with your wallet people... You can't even play used games on the 720...
flonga1 3 weeks ago
ps4 deus ex!!!!
tangodown101 3 weeks ago
graphics are ok but this should be a game. looks like prototype 3
KUNALGAUTAM777 3 weeks ago
I CANT SAY FOR THE X BOX BUT PS3 HAS THIS KIND OF GRAPHICS IN GAMES LIKE HEAVY RAIN...SO IF THIS IS WHAT NEXT GEN GAMES WILL LOOK LIKE...THIS IS SHITTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!! I WAS HOPING WAY BETTER GRAPHICS THAN THIS!
fuckyoumthebest 3 weeks ago
@fuckyoumthebest kid these engine isent even fucing done yet these is being runed on 720 ps4 and pcs and no ps3 has no graphics close to this ur rong buddy learn ur technology
MakaveliSgHD 3 weeks ago
and thay sayed unreal was gay
VidX100 4 weeks ago
Looked out my window today,the graphics looked awesome.
Scar666Ali 4 weeks ago 22
why is PC in the title? its been next generation for years now.. ;-P
MrCXWilliams 4 weeks ago
Umm I think next gen graphics will be better
Lomns 1 month ago
we already have better then this on PC...
TheFailureFish 1 month ago
@TheFailureFish No you don't. This is the most advanced tech demo ever built...for PC.
pamew 1 day ago
@pamew I must have been asleep when i posted that,besides the face, that's pretty next Gen
TheFailureFish 1 day ago
What is this game ?
blueninja7000 1 month ago
Next gen consoles will run HD 6670 gpus... that is nowhere near enough power to have visuals like this. So consoles will need to wait 2 more generations to be able to have this kind of grafics.
pumpkin813 1 month ago
@pumpkin813
if that rumors are true... they better not release a next gen consoles...
usamafreethink 1 month ago 2
@usamafreethink your gonna hate this... the 360 had an unreleased high end gpu worth 500$ they now use a 99$ ENTRY level gpu (low end) from the 6000 series,
(now have 7000 series) that cant compare to modern graphic cards...sorry microsoft,this is NOT okay
TheFailureFish 1 month ago
@pumpkin813 so I guess your helping them develop the consoles?
Anthonydp 1 month ago
@pumpkin813 That is just a rumor. Nothing is resolute, nothing official has been announced so for you to say this is just silly. More than likely the final GPU will be far more up-to-date.
xtasy2k7 1 month ago
@pumpkin813 Hey man i no were you are coming form because he HD 6670 isnt that strong but the thing with consoles is there isnt anything running in the background so it can prosses so much more then a computer with a HD 6670. The xbox 360 now has a video card like a HD 3500 series with only 500 MHz on core clock and only 512 mb of ram and a computer with a HD 4250 chipset clocked at 700 MHz cant preforme even close to a xbox 360. and im not a console fan boy, im a pc fanboy :D
cyrzombiekilla 4 weeks ago
@pumpkin813 oh yeah? crysis 2 runs on current generation consoles which is alot better than this shit
KUNALGAUTAM777 3 weeks ago
@pumpkin813 It wont be next-gen then. It will be reaching high on PC then and I will be seriously motherfucking pissed then. I want to see graphics like this on the next-gen consoles or im not buying one and will hate on the manufacturer forever. I mean comeon! what the fuck?!
Akuzeee 3 weeks ago
@pumpkin813 And how is a hd 6670 gonna last 5-6 years are you kidding im actually pissed right now
Akuzeee 3 weeks ago
@pumpkin813 so if this is gona take 2 gens why are they shwoing it even microsoft is because its powerd by epic games
MakaveliSgHD 3 weeks ago
@pumpkin813 Lol @ Ati graphics. Fucking fool
cowbeautiful 3 weeks ago
@pumpkin813 thats a fuckking rumor u idote
lloodyMurda 3 weeks ago
@lloodyMurda Idote? really??? And YOU'RE trying to call someone an idiot?! Fail!!
shutupwalter2149 2 weeks ago
@pumpkin813 Unfortunate, isn't it?
youmenow1 1 week ago
pc can do this now.
SpartanForgeWorld300 1 month ago
Is that Liam Neeson?
MuffinMcFluffin 1 month ago
PS3 and Xbox are capable of doing these kind of graphics..if only they had more time and push the system to the limits, there would be no use of different consoles... but id admit it, the graphics are awesome and like the idea of ps4 and stuff..it going to be expensive..but its too earlier for more consoles, and not a good time.
chuyblanco78 1 month ago
@chuyblanco78 the release time of ps4 will be announced in 2013
funnyman25able 1 month ago
Comment removed
Makrys07 1 month ago
Comment removed
Makrys07 1 month ago
@funnyman25able oh sweet! thats next year :D I bet its going to be expensive though? remember when the ps3 came out. 700$ :O
chuyblanco78 4 weeks ago
@chuyblanco78 maybe 1200$ :O
funnyman25able 4 weeks ago
@chuyblanco78 You are very misinformed. The PS3 and Xbox 360 CANNOT render this level of graphics fidelity. This footage was rendered in real-time on THREE GeForce GTX580's in SLI. Tim Sweeney, the CEO and technical director of Epic Games, says that the next generation systems will need 8-10x more CPU performance, 10x higher GPU triangle and rasterizer throughput, and 20x more GPU computational throughput to be able to achieve graphics on-par with Samaritan. You can google the interview.
xtasy2k7 1 month ago 10
@xtasy2k7 yeah i know, one of my friends told me that. I deserve to be slapped xD lol.
Thanks for correcting me though bro! :)
chuyblanco78 4 weeks ago
@xtasy2k7 do you think ps4 or xbox720 will have this kind of graphic ?
sandrodream2 1 week ago
@sandrodream2 no, it would be way better, this is really good, but still not enough next gen. its basically a dx11 pc graphics , this demo. of course as i have said it looks good.
psychonaut25 1 week ago
@xtasy2k7 link please to the interview
psychonaut25 1 week ago
@xtasy2k7 And probably something better than a blue ray disk to be able to store all that information, I bet its gonna require more GBs of space and maybe more disks and swap them when you are done with half the game I think.
NAOCIA007 1 day ago
Can't wait to see this shit in 3D
UOTCbassist 1 month ago
Crysis 2 DX11 isn't far of this today.
18T220 1 month ago
why they dont release new console , i mean its rly needet , the graphic from xbox and ps 3 looks shit in these days , i dont care graphic but i mean i want something neW :D
fotljubei 1 month ago
i have an alineware and a ps3 sim which i just bought yesterday and i think they are great. and will xbox 360 slim on the 20/01/2012 and today is 18/01/2012
wilhelmpaulus1 1 month ago
i don't know about this how about you
wilhelmpaulus1 1 month ago
what the hell is this game? any name for it?
ProShoooter 1 month ago
heart attack set it motion in 3 2 1
sub4subtoonami 1 month ago
@sgtdan707 I hope you get raped with a chainsaw.
TheAdhiboy 1 month ago
@TheAdhiboy Already doooo!
sgtdan707 1 month ago
Guys this video is fake! It's not the real gfx of jack squat. This is a benchmark test for ATI cards. Plus they wouldn't put this in a console cus that would mean better power supplies and better case cooling and would cost more money. More money that their to lazy to put in to what could have been a good product.
sgtdan707 1 month ago
@sgtdan707 It uses Nvidia cards, not ATI.
abram730 1 month ago
@abram730 Nope.avTesta
sgtdan707 1 month ago
@sgtdan707 The demo was run on 3 Nvidia gtx580's in SLI.. The software that does the physics for the cloth only runs on Nvidia cards.
ATI's new core is good but Nvidia does have a software advantage... No middleware company has done a compute based physics system. There is no alternative software as of now that I know about.
abram730 1 month ago
Lol who else is gunna run this on an old ass computer an watch it magically turn into a campfire?
RafVGTTG 1 month ago
& wii u
t377y000 1 month ago
@BustersTexas If next gen systems come in 2 parts they can be affordable.
main system and then a graphics update in 2019-2020.
As for the graphics upgrade.
Nvidia is talking about putting tech being developed with the Department of Defense in a PlayStation.
The Nvidia Echelon chip.. look it up
abram730 1 month ago
What surprises me is that Naughty Dog maxed out PS3 graphics already and i got that from an article. The PC will always behead because the company's who make the graphic cards are always coming out with new ones....every month or week.
XBOXNationTVHD 1 month ago
Now WiiU bots.. lets see your little WiiU run this with no lag xD
SUNNYRAINWIND 1 month ago
wow
3stuardo1 1 month ago
New gen consoles will look much better than this
corrus 1 month ago
Hooooooooooolyy shiiiiiiiiit watch it in 720p OMG
14DarkhaN14 1 month ago
finaly consoles are catching up to pc but then pc has next 10 years gen graphics
JJO117 1 month ago
looks like a ps3 or xbox 360 graphics to me. Not that impressive.
omgrainbow1 1 month ago
I know this is a video to show off the graphics of unreal engine 3 but this actually looks like a good idea for a game... i hope we will see it in the future! It looks awsome!
wenomz97 1 month ago
@BustersTexas you are absolutly correct!!!!!!!! sir
funarcade9999 1 month ago
WTF!? NOW IM TOP COMMENT WITH NO THUMBS!?
MastaKilla347 1 month ago
is it my computer, or does the top comment have no thumbs up?
MastaKilla347 1 month ago 7
@MastaKilla347 What is this sorcery?
Matthew0161 1 month ago
so, what is the name of the game?? looks pretty cool....is it even a game or just a video?
dogfightvj 1 month ago
@dogfightvj
It's run in real time. It's a demo to show what can be done on current PC hardware. It's meant to show what Next gen consoles can look like as you play them. In game graphics.
For example a Nvidia Project Denver CPU(high end) and 1024 core Kepler or Maxwell level GPU chip could run this on a next gen console without optimizations in 2014-2015.
There really should be firm plans about next gen consoles by Q1 2013.
Devs need time to make games.
abram730 1 month ago
but can it run crysis?
PureForloko 1 month ago
@PureForloko .....my god, really?
TheShadowWish 1 month ago
@TheShadowWish ya :D
PureForloko 1 month ago
thats actually a pretty realistic graphic for next gen consoles right there. it is actually outdated but looks nice because of the animations and camera handling.
ulkord 1 month ago
@BustersTexas what do you mean with "virtual reality system"
ulkord 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BustersTexas sony have been developing virtual reality for quite some time now
mymiddleleg1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BustersTexas sony have been developing virtual reality for quite some time now
mymiddleleg1 1 month ago
@BustersTexas sony have been developing virtual reality for quite some time now
mymiddleleg1 1 month ago
ps4 will come 2016
sonubkk 1 month ago
Computers today that are about $1000(give or take $200) can run games like this already. Consoles will always be a cheaper alternative to computers to allow for playing games at medium to low graphical settings.
GamerFollower 1 month ago
@GamerFollower medium to low....you're funny.
TheShadowWish 1 month ago
@TheShadowWish
No console can make a game look as good as this video in real time. Even Crysis 2 on a Xbox 360 looks like Crysis 2 on a PC with medium settings.
GamerFollower 1 month ago
@GamerFollower "Computers today that are about $1000(give or take $200) can run games like this already. "
No, they can't. Games with this exact level of graphical complexity don't exist, and a thousand dollars wouldn't even cover the cost of the GTX 580 cards used to power the PC that played this demo.
pamew 1 day ago
@pamew
Are you serous? Games can easily look this real with direct x 11 and GTX 580 is only average at about $470. Not to mention that you could get a low clocked Intel i5 for $160 and overclock it to 4.7-5.4Ghz on water cooling. The real reason games don't look as good as they can is mostly because they are made for a Console first then ported to PC usually with SOME, but not always, graphical improvement added. Do you research before you try to tell me how much a PC costs to build.
GamerFollower 1 day ago
@GamerFollower This took 3 580's running in SLI paired with an i7 to run smoothly. You have not played any game with graphics this good because there is no commercially released engine with this capability. How about do some goddamn research about the samaritan tech demo before you start waffling utter shite.
470 x 3 is over a thousand BTW genius, herpderp.
pamew 1 day ago
2) Bet yeah, you probably know better than the Unreal engine Dev's what it takes to get graphics like these. It's not like they're a bunch of highly trained professionals who spent months constructing the ultimate limit of current gen computing that wouldn't realistically run on any rig that cost under a few thousand dollars.
Yes, that was sarcasm by the way.
pamew 1 day ago
@pamew
I've been building computers for over 6 years, three GTX 580s is overkill to run this, considering most CPU's bottleneck with a single current gen. GPUs without being overclocked around 4.8Ghz. Also this tech demo is almost a year old, prices have dropped sense then.
BTW I could get three GTX 470s for $850, herpderp.
GamerFollower 1 day ago
@GamerFollower Seriously, stop being stupid please. The tech demo was custom tailored with the set up used in mind. (hint: it cost over 800 dollars genius). It was an extremely high powered, high cost setup being pushed to the limit of its capabilities deliberately. It also wasn't an entire game, complete with AI instructions etc. You're making utterly stupid comparisons here. (continued).
pamew 1 day ago
2) So no, an 800 dollar PC with a single 450 dollar 580 in it would NOT be able to run an entire game with graphics like this. Not even close.
"I could get three GTX 470s for $850"
You must be trolling or a moron. For starters, a 470 is not a match for a 580. Secondly, you just nearly blew your imaginary budget on the GFX units alone. How many top range i7's do you see for the 150 dollar remainder out of this 1000 dollar pc budget?
Lol, fail.
pamew 1 day ago
@pamew
Your the one who said you three 470's are over $1000. I also didn't say a 470 was better than a 580, I implied that three 470s are better than two 580s. The 3rd 580 is most likely to add head room to the system. I also never said i7, I said i5 for $150 that can be overclocked.
Also you the one who is a troll, going around YouTube and searching for old comments just to start an argument, acting like you know what your talking about, even if you know nothing about the subject.
GamerFollower 1 day ago
@GamerFollower
1. No, I said that 3 580's were over a thousand dollars. You then started ranting about 470's. I pointed that 3 of those wouldn't give you enough change left to build a 1000 dollar system (that you claimed could get samaritan style visuals, laughably). A 150 dollar i5 would shit its pants trying to run that tech demo. Again, you demonstrate no understanding of what it was developed for in your ignorant statements.
pamew 23 hours ago
2) "The 3rd 580 is most likely to add head room to the system."
In other words you're making yet another bald assertion. And, AGAIN, that tech demo was engineered to make full use of the best hardware possible. So no, it wasn't for "head room". It was needed to help calculate the massive amounts of physx math and store an insane amount of texture data.
pamew 23 hours ago
3) an i5 quad core would have to be highly overclocked to not severely bottleneck 3 GTX 470s running in SLI mode. (So add expensive third party cooling to your little thought experiment shopping list.) It would be redundant in a system featuring more than one 580 if you wanted to get enough performance to say, run the S. Tech demo properly. (continued, with helpful numbers.)
pamew 22 hours ago
4. The Samaritan demo took a grand total of 2.5 teraFLOPS of power to run. Any idea what kind of calculation rate that is? (Hint: it's not achievable on a 150 dollar i5 and 3 gtx 470's. Not even close.)
Slotting together plug and play parts for 6 years apparently teaches you sweet FA about what defines hardware generations.
pamew 22 hours ago
5. It also ran on...get this; 16 gigabytes of RAM.
So, with all those numbers in mind, are you STILL seriously claiming a thousand dollar rig could achieve those visuals? Get real dude, not even close.
pamew 22 hours ago
@pamew
16gb... 16 GB!!! I CAN GET FUCKING 16GB DDR3 1333 FOR $100!!!! GTFO of here, you obviously don't realize the full potential of buying lower grade components to overclock them! All you do is complain everywhere you go, thinking your the hot shit. I've reviewed you videos and you mostly complain and try to prove people wrong in the most asinine way possible.
GamerFollower 7 hours ago
@GamerFollower Are you aware of the horrible irony of this comment? Probably not, because you're an idiot.
pamew 7 hours ago
@pamew
I could see average amounts of Physx being used in this, considering a lot of this was scripted. It wouldn't need to store massive amounts of texture data when it only has to load a texture one time. If their are multiple objects with the same texture, it keeps one copy of the texture in memory to apply to the all the objects sharing the exact same texture. Also with the power of Dx11, things that are far away form the camera are have their polygons drastically reduced.
GamerFollower 22 hours ago
@GamerFollower "I could see average amounts of Physx being used in this"
Define "average". Also, no. Any object that moves with physical properties in that scene is being calculated in real time.
2. Stop trying to explain things I already know about textures. Did you even WATCH that video? There are a ludicrous amount of unique textures on show, and all of them obviously extremely hi-res. high res textures = ass load of texture memory.
pamew 22 hours ago
3. You've made it painfully obvious by now that you haven't watched the actual full tech demo. (this video only shows the first, cinematic run.) In it, they do a second run of the demo, and turn off physx. The difference is instant and obvious. They also turn the viewpoint to manual control, and it's pretty obvious that there isn't exactly a lot of texture recycling going on.
pamew 22 hours ago
Comment removed
pamew 22 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
4.
For one final time: That demo took 2.5 TeraFLOPS of calculative power to run.
So, how is your suggestion of an i5 without hyperthreading and with 4 cores instead of 6 (that's what 150 dollars buys you), combined with 3 GTX 470's going to output that kind of power?
Hint: It isn't.
pamew 22 hours ago
@pamew
I've seen the full tech demo, it shows nothing of turning physx off and manual camera mode.
GamerFollower 21 hours ago
2) No, you haven't. For starters, the full GDC video isn't even available on youtube as far as I can tell, so where did you watch the "full" tech demo? (If it's the 2.54 minute video, you've only seen the primary run-through.)
Second, AGAIN, you're STILL applying current-gen reasoning. Can you even name all the physx features used in the samaritan demo? (hint, you only identified one of four genius).
pamew 7 hours ago
3. I'm STILL WAITING for you to tell me how you plan to squeeze the 2.5 teraFLOPS of calculative power needed to run this demo out of an i5 without hyperthreading and a trio of last generation cards.
Remember, it was YOU who claimed you can get samaritan level gameplay visuals with a thousand dollar PC.
What's the matter? Not so sure anymore?
pamew 7 hours ago
@pamew
I've seen the full demo, and no, Physics is not anything that moves, that is not even close, physics is for example when a bullet hits a wooden box it calculates the path of the wooden splinters and movement of the box. If a character is running, the only thing being calculated would be some of the clothing, and sometimes the feet placement. Also, have you heard of Anisotropic filtering? high res textures are only "high res" when close enough to them to tell.
GamerFollower 21 hours ago
@GamerFollower I said that physx calculated anything that moved with PHYSICAL MASS.
And AGAIN, are you really suggesting that when they built a tech demo to stretch 3 of the most powerful video cards on earth with gigabytes of memory to their limit, they thought "nah, fuck it AF the fuck out of it to hide the fact its actuallty low res.".
It had high texture res AND AF. AF is also memory bandwidth intensive you fucking dullard.
pamew 7 hours ago
2) Again, you're showing your lack of understanding of what this demo was about. (surprise surprise!).
Typically, modern games will make use of destruction physx (to a very limit degree compared to gameworld size) and maybe clothing, again, in limited fashion.
If you think the physx system being used was even slightly comparable to current-gen PC releases in terms of its extensiveness, then wow, you're pretty retarded my friend.
pamew 7 hours ago
@pamew
The high res textures are only high res when you are close enough to them because anisotropic filtering=LESS MEMORY USED and with DirectX 11 = LESS POLYGONS when farther away from a surface! YOU take NONE of these into account when you speak about this!! And YES it runs on DirectX11, stated in the tech demo, before you say bullshit of anything otherwise!
GamerFollower 7 hours ago
@GamerFollower I took all of those into account because I know what AF is, idiot.
Secondly, high level AF (x16) for example is actually pretty memory intensive. I personally play with it turned down on most releases for precisely that reason. So once again, a redundant point my silly little friend.
pamew 7 hours ago
@pamew
Also I KNOW my COMPUTER can RUN the UNREAL ENGINE >>3<< TECH DEMO on FULL Settings! Because I have RAN it on full settings on my computer and it went smoothly! and all I have is a GT430 and a Athlon x2 3ghz with 4gb or DDR2 ram!!! This shows that that this ENGINE will NOT be as power hungry as you say it is!!
GamerFollower 7 hours ago
@GamerFollower Seriously, are you actually mentally retarded?
1. The Samaritan tech demo is not unreal engine 3. It's more like Unreal 3.75. On top of this, it's then a modified version built to be as power hungry and unbelievably detailed as possible. It was specifically built to show what hardware OF THE NEXT COUPLE OF FUTURE GENERATIONS can do. So how well YOU can run the unreal 3 tech demo has...Absolutely NO relevance! Well done, idiot ! :D
pamew 7 hours ago
2) Do you understand this simple point now?
So, say it with me:
This tech demo has no bearing on unreal engine 3, because it isn't running on the standard unreal engine 3.
2. This tech demo is not indicative of current generation computing because only a couple of percent of computer users could even run it.
Oh, your GFX card sucks btw, you made a horrible choice.
pamew 6 hours ago
@pamew
I NEVER said it was unreal engnie 3!!! I said my computer could RUN unreal engine 3 tech demo perfectly without a hitch, and this is only a few steps farther. BTW, its fucking GTX not GFX, and you just made a irrelevant point! If my card sucks and can play unreal engine 3 tech demo perfectly, what does the FUCKING tell you about this engine!!! Its not power Hungry! Because they plan to release this engine this year with the ability for most computers to run it!!!!
GamerFollower 6 hours ago
Oh, and here's some more of those numbers.
Remember how the samaritan demo took 2.5 teraflops of power to run? Your video card has about 179 gigaFLOPS output. Your processor? about 15 if memory serves right. I used to have one. Not bad chips for their time, but I'm sure even you can see the disparity.
pamew 6 hours ago
@pamew
I seriously doubt that they would poor millions, to billions, or dollars into researching and engineering an engine that only a few peoples computers can run! that's poor business strategy!
GamerFollower 6 hours ago
1. Pour. not "poor". As in "you're pouring a massive amount of ignorance into your poor assertions".
2. It doesn't cost billions of dollars for a team extremely experienced with an engine to modify it. You're just being utterly stupid now.
3. The particular engine build used could feasibly be run be the NEXT generation of computers. Not the current. Devs also typically start working on "next gen" engines a good deal of time before "current gen" hardware can run them.
pamew 6 hours ago
Comment removed
pamew 6 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1. Pour. not "poor". As in "you're pouring a massive amount of ignorance into your poor assertions".
2. It doesn't cost billions of dollars for a team extremely experienced with an engine to modify it. You're just being utterly stupid now.
3. The particular engine build used could feasibly be run by the NEXT generation of computers. Not the current. Devs also typically start working on "next gen" engines a good deal of time before "current gen" hardware can run them.
pamew 6 hours ago
@pamew
Do you not read your comments?
You said earlier "470 x 3 is over a thousand BTW genius, herpderp."
a core i5 could not shit its pants trying to run this because it is the same architecture as the core i7, meaning its just as good as a i7 at the same clock. the only difference between a i5 and i7 is hyper threading, which isn't usable for most games, just like most games only use 2 cores, sometimes 3, rarely 4.
GamerFollower 22 hours ago
@GamerFollower "You said earlier "470 x 3 is over a thousand BTW genius, herpderp.""
Apparently YOU don't read. 470 is roughly the cost, in dollars, of a cheap 580. In fact, it was the number YOU gave. (and the only accurate one thus far.) So it's 470 dollars x 3. It would of helped if you'd of read the entire comment instead of quote mining it into ambiguity.
pamew 22 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GamerFollower "You said earlier "470 x 3 is over a thousand BTW genius, herpderp.""
Apparently YOU don't read. 470 is roughly the cost, in dollars, of a cheap 580. In fact, it was the number YOU gave. (and the only accurate one thus far.) So it's 470 dollars x 3. It would of helped if you'd of read the entire comment instead of quote mining it into ambiguity.
pamew 22 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GamerFollower "You said earlier "470 x 3 is over a thousand BTW genius, herpderp.""
Apparently YOU don't read. 470 is roughly the cost, in dollars, of a cheap 580. In fact, it was the number YOU gave. (and the only accurate one thus far.) So it's 470 dollars x 3. It would of helped if you'd of read the entire comment instead of quote mining it into ambiguity.
pamew 22 hours ago
"the only difference between a i5 and i7 is hyper threading, which isn't usable for most games,"
*facepalm*
Really? Samaritan *again* wasn't "most" games. It wasn't a game. It was an engine built to take FULL advantage of the hardware at hand. And yes, that includes 6 cores and yes, hyperthreading.
You just outlined why your comparison fails without even realising it. Goddamnit, seriously, just THINK for a second with this shit please.
pamew 22 hours ago
This isn't game play looks like a trailer
iSilverwolf 1 month ago