Nvidia says "PC is far superior" to any console gaming platform

By on November 29, 2013, 1:30 PM
nvidia, minecraft, playstation, wow, gaming, ps4, pc, gaming console, xbox one, world of tanks

Are you trying to decide between an Xbox One and a PS4? According to Nvidia you should just skip both consoles and grab yourself a PC. Matt Wright, consumer sales manager at Nvidia, is shaking up the console wars with some recent comments he made in an interview with MCV. According to Wright, "The PC platform is far superior to any console when it comes to gaming." This is an argument that has been made six ways to Sunday, and this isn't the first time that Nvidia has compared PCs to consoles.

The company is hopeful it can rope in some more customers who may be on the fence about what's best for them in this newest generation of gaming. Wright spoke about the company's plan during the interview: 

"We are proposing small form-factor PCs to be a viable alternative to the next-gen consoles. Enthusiast players want the ultimate games system and that is the PC. We want to make PC gaming as simple as possible and we think that it's already becoming much more relevant and appealing to casual gamers."

It seems that Nvidia has recognized that complexity is a real issue that separates PC and console gaming. Although some people may not feel it's a big deal, others certainly prefer a console for the simplicity of popping a disc in and playing. Wright went on to speak about Steam's influence on the market: 

“Steam now has more users than Xbox Live. There is a whole new generation who grew up playing on PC with titles like Minecraft or World of Tanks. There’s a huge community who love playing their games on PC.”

Consoles have been around for a long time, but I believe that Wright is talking about the most recent "generation gap," where games like Minecraft and WoW have caught the attention of adolescents. These kids will "grow up" loving PC, much like children grew up loving the NES or the Playstation. Complexity barriers won't be an issue for the generation that was adopted by PC.

As much as I enjoy consoles, and as often as I play them, there is a lot of truth to the statement that PCs offer advanced gaming. Between mods and upgrades alone, there is a lot of room for games to grow and flourish on PC, certainly more-so than the DLC packs we see on console. But there are also some key arguments that can be made for consoles, specifically on the fronts of exclusivity and price point.

One of my biggest quarrels with PC gaming is that I am unable to rent games. I use Gamefly to get most of the titles I play, and it allows me to enjoy more games, as I don't have to spend $30 - $60 on every title. Sure, Steam sales are great, but they don't offer sales on every game I want, and even at $20 a pop it still adds up over a prolonged period of time. I'll be the first to tell you that PC offers a lot more functionality over a console, although consoles appear to become more and more "PC-like" each generation, in terms of hardware. If I could rent games for PC like I do for Xbox One or PS4, I'd be much more likely to invest in a PC over anything else. 

Then there is still the argument of exclusivity. There are some games you just can't get on PC. Take for example Grand Theft Auto 5 and Dead Rising 3, two big titles that offer a lot of fun, but can only be enjoyed on a console. I am also a fan of JRPGs, and though some are starting to pop up on PC, you see most of them hitting consoles. 

I think as time progresses, the argument will become less and less about hardware superiority and more about how many exclusive games a specific platform has, or how expensive titles are to secure for a given system. I understand Nvidia's argument, and I'm not saying that they're wrong, I'm simply saying that they aren't seeing the entire picture here. 




User Comments: 52

Got something to say? Post a comment
2 people like this | wastedkill said:

Game at top is Payday and obv pc is far superior to any console even when a new "Next-Gen" console gets released its already 2-3yrs out of date...

Pc gaming has the community that mod games, improves them, makes new free DLC and guess what? You can have no restrictions to what you can do on the pc unlike console...

2 people like this | insect said:

Forgot the mention the "lifetime" of a game. My experience is that most console games you play through once and then move on. On PC I can play the same game for months because it is evolving with patches, mods, new players, multiplayer, etc. Blizzard games are particularly good at this, but also Borderlands and Valve games (I.e, TF2).

3 people like this | EEatGDL said:

Putting the same amount of money in a PC than you would on a next-gen console, you can easily have a far better experience: larger HDD (1 TB), same RAM (8 GB), good graphics (HD 7870), decent processor (FX-6300), a lot cheaper games, and you may even include a [360] controller to feel more familiar when coming from console.

My cousins want a PC this Christmas instead of a next-gen console simply because of those points, they had PS3 and 360 and they suffered a lot to get new games (they were pre-teens when they got them, now starting high school) simply because at least here are too expensive -buying 3 brand new games cost the same as buying another console. When they saw all the games I got with less than $150 USD their jaws dropped considering I could play 5 different titles for the next 12 months in average vs the 15 different titles they could gather in the last 7 years. And now showing them the Steam, Origin and Amazon sales they got all the more convinced -looking at the prices of titles such as Batman AO, Skyrim, AC IV, etc.

4 people like this | TheBigFatClown said:

Obviously NVidia would be saying this right now since none of their chips are powering these next-gen consoles. They're losing out on a lot of money because of console sales and the hype surrounding the launch of these new consoles. They gotta speak up and try and boost their sales. What they don't want people focusing on is the cost of a new PC that would be superior to a PS4 or an XBox 180. Can you purchase a PC that is superior to a next-gen console for less than the price of a next-gen console? Probably not. High end videocards can cost as much as the entire next-gen console if you got the money to burn.

@insect,

I thought the PS3 was the first console to actually offer updates on already released PS3 games through PSN Network or whatever its called these days..am I wrong?

I still agree with you, PC is and always will be my choice for games, what little I play them these days. But still lets not distort the facts for others trying to decide.

BMfan BMfan said:

Wow Nvidia is soo smart or they had help coming up with that idea.

Nvidia PLZ keep quite now,we know you have nothing to do with current gen consoles,so you

don't need to come out with stupid statements every couple of weeks.

Next year I will still be buying a new PS4 even if you came out and said that the $100 PC is better.

2 people like this | Prosercunus said:

I am currently having some overheating issues with my GTX 580 related to some driver problems and I am still saying PC gaming is a par above console gaming. I think the problem is that some people are just too afraid to jump into anything remotely complicated outside of hooking up an hdmi cable and pressing the power button.

1 person liked this | TechGamer TechGamer said:

I am currently having some overheating issues with my GTX 580 related to some driver problems and I am still saying PC gaming is a par above console gaming. I think the problem is that some people are just too afraid to jump into anything remotely complicated outside of hooking up an hdmi cable and pressing the power button.

donlt forget about the need of upgrading your pc frequent if your an enthusiast gamer you can switch your gfx card easily once per year or 2 years depends on how hard your on gaming some people just don't bother pc gaming cause of that

2 people like this | cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Can you purchase a PC that is superior to a next-gen console for less than the price of a next-gen console? Probably not. High end videocards can cost as much as the entire next-gen console if you got the money to burn.
However high-end components are not needed for making superior PC than a console. Matching performance, you may still be right about the cost. But then when a PC is built, it is not confined to only playing games either. I want all my processing needs/desires confined to only one space.

I prefer PC's because they will do it all, excluding exclusive titles. I'll let the donating fish bite that exclusive title hook. If they want their titles reaching everyone, they will make them available to all platforms.

In light of all the consoles being AMD based, nVidia should be concentrating on promoting the Steam console with nVidia gear.

donlt forget about the need of upgrading your pc frequent
Thats not a need, that is a desire to stay on top of the I play at highest settings. Don't forget you are comparing to a console, which I hear in several threads consoles are no where near PC highest settings. If you are going to compare to console, then there is no need to upgrade passed the qualifications of a console.

ikesmasher said:

I prefer PC's because they will do it all, excluding exclusive titles.

O.O

m4a4 m4a4 said:

Translation: "We don't have our cards in the next-gen consoles, so we want you to go PC and buy ours"

But seriously, this is a subjective topic. There are no clear winners. Only a graphics ***** would argue PC for better looking games. Gamers care more about gameplay...

jetkami said:

PC= Potential for your rig to grow (SLI or Crossfire)

Console= Deadin the water.

Obviously NVidia would be saying this right now since none of their chips are powering these next-gen consoles. They're losing out on a lot of money because of console sales and the hype surrounding the launch of these new consoles. They gotta speak up and try and boost their sales. What they don't want people focusing on is the cost of a new PC that would be superior to a PS4 or an XBox 180. Can you purchase a PC that is superior to a next-gen console for less than the price of a next-gen console? Probably not. High end videocards can cost as much as the entire next-gen console if you got the money to burn.

@insect,

I thought the PS3 was the first console to actually offer updates on already released PS3 games through PSN Network or whatever its called these days..am I wrong?

I still agree with you, PC is and always will be my choice for games, what little I play them these days. But still lets not distort the facts for others trying to decide.

4 people like this | Lurker101 said:

If nVidia really want to help the PC gaming market expand, they could always drop the price of their graphics cards to a sensible level.

1 person liked this | MilwaukeeMike said:

Any serious gamer knows PC gaming offers more, and they don't need nvidia to remind them. Nvidia is making noise right now about it because of what FatClowns mentioned, that Nvidia isn't making anything off console sales, and also because the only time in the generation of a console that it could be even considered to be better than a PC is within the first year or so after the console comes out.

During 2014 game developers will learn how to make great games for the XB1 and PS4 and they will probably be better than what you could get for PC, except for maybe your very top end gaming PC. But looking to 2016 and forward, PC's hardware will pull ahead again, just like it was for the last 4 years.

theBest11778 theBest11778 said:

I've played consoles games since I got an NES when I was 3 years old. I started playing PC games in the late 80s. Since then consoles and PCs have always had a place in my home. Consoles mostly for party games, and exclusives, and PCs for FPS games, and also exclusives. Before the Xbox 360 PC had a fair share of exclusive titles, but last generation pushed them to consoles to boost sales (Remember Crysis would NEVER make it to the X360 or PS3??? Right...) I found myself buying games for my Xbox, to play with friends, then paying for the same game again on Steam because if I wanted to replay the game, might as well have a nice graphics boost. This went on for awhile, until I tried going console exclusive to save some money. I'd sell my PC, then buy a new one a few months later. I couldn't do it, so I tried it one more time this time with the Xbox One. I was playing BF4 on X360, and actually enjoyed the game, so I figured getting it on XBO (for only $10 to upgrade,) was a no brainer. I could get PC like graphics, play with my friends, and it didn't cost a fortune.

My experience with the Xbox One changed all of that. The graphic quality between the X360 and XBO versions of BF4 are minimal, load times are similar, and the controller settings aren't calibrated for the higher frame rate like it was for the X360. In fact, in my opinion, the XBO version of the game was inferior to the X360's. That was my final straw. I'm currently selling my XBO (Less than a week since launch,) and bought the parts for another PC off Newegg's black Friday deals. I was so disappointed that I'm willing to take a loss with only a week of ownership, but I don't care. The PC I built costs 2x as much, but is 4x faster (TFlops.) This generation will be an amazing let down. Once PCs are gaming at 4K resolutions at 60+ FPS people who care about quality will switch quick. 4K 60FPS graphics cards for $300-$500 are only a year and 1/2 away (2 more generations.) MS thinks the XBO will last 10 years. I don't see that happening.

Sarcasm Sarcasm said:

What nvidia is also forgetting is simplicity of the average consumer. They don't know (or care) what a graphics card is. They just know that box or device plays games and movies.

Prosercunus said:

I am currently having some overheating issues with my GTX 580 related to some driver problems and I am still saying PC gaming is a par above console gaming. I think the problem is that some people are just too afraid to jump into anything remotely complicated outside of hooking up an hdmi cable and pressing the power button.

donlt forget about the need of upgrading your pc frequent if your an enthusiast gamer you can switch your gfx card easily once per year or 2 years depends on how hard your on gaming some people just don't bother pc gaming cause of that

That's only true if you are absolutely hardcore and need to have the maximum graphics on every single game. Even med-high settings on an older video card is still going to look better on true high definition compared to anything a console has to offer.

2 people like this | Chuck Cortes Chuck Cortes said:

I always enjoy people who seem to be OK with the fact that the average person's education is so low that we need gaming consoles because they are easier to use. just like the people who claim the reason Apple products are more popular is because they are easier to use. Because god forbid we would care about our education enough to want to use more complicated things which are likely to be better.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I always enjoy people who seem to be OK with the fact that the average person's education is so low that we need gaming consoles because they are easier to use. just like the people who claim the reason Apple products are more popular is because they are easier to use. Because god forbid we would care about our education enough to want to use more complicated things which are likely to be better.
I know, right! So insulting! lol

1 person liked this | amstech amstech, TechSpot Enthusiast, said:

Nvidia does sound a little sour but hidden in their comments is a good point. If console gaming is all about gameplay then how much more are you getting by upgrading from a PS3/360 to a PS4/Xbox1?

While I am sure these new consoles will have enough power to distinguish themselves graphically from their older counterparts, will it be enough to justify a console upgrade alone?

My current 360S and PS3 handle all of my multimedia needs perfectly right now...bluray, renting movies, watching netflix/hulu and buying games online. I don't care for voice commands or Kinect/Move.

And GTA5 for my PS3 looks quite good.

I think as time goes on Big M and Sony will make more and more [new] games only available on the new consoles even though the 360/PS3 could run them fine.

For example, will Microsoft will make Halo 5 a Xbox1 exclusive? Surely Sony and Microsoft won't be so quick to eliminate their own stature.

1 person liked this | AnonymousSurfer AnonymousSurfer said:

Thank you Nvidia for stating the obvious...

Guest said:

"I understand Nvidia's argument, and I'm not saying that they're wrong, I'm simply saying that they aren't seeing the entire picture here. "

No, your problem is that you take their comment completely out of context. You clearly didn't read the part that reads "Wright told MCV that Nvidia recognises the hesitance from players towards the 'complex' PC market. Wright is working for a tech company so he's clearly looking at it from a tech point of view. Give the guy some credit, of course he fully understands why people pick a console, he's just saying that it should be possible to reduce the complexity gap between PC and consoles and nothing else. As for popular titles....c'mon hey...that has nothing to with consoles, it has to with products being popular. People didn't switch to consoles years ago because of more popular titles (actually they had less popular titles), but because of plug 'n play.

hahahanoobs hahahanoobs said:

"As much as I enjoy consoles, and as often as I play them, there is a lot of truth to the statement that PCs offer advanced gaming. Between mods and upgrades alone, there is a lot of room for games to grow and flourish on PC, certainly more-so than the DLC packs we see on console. But there are also some key arguments that can be made for consoles, specifically on the fronts of exclusivity and price point."

You nailed it. I'm a PC only gamer and the whole elitist thing is stupid. No matter what you do to/on a PC, it will not equal the experience gamers get on consoles.

One thing I wouldn't mind having on PC that console gamers have, is one service that allows voice chat support in EVERY online multiplayer title with ONE friends list for all of them. I don't like having to flip flop from Skype to TS to Steam chat with friends lists for each of them. Even if would cost $60/year, I'd pay it in a heartbeat.

bob333 bob333 said:

I think the problem is that some people are just too afraid to jump into anything remotely complicated outside of hooking up an hdmi cable and pressing the power button.

not "some", but "many"

this is the same situation as Android vs iOS. iOS users are mostly those who just want a decent, working phone, that's it. While Android users are actually looking for phones in which they are able to use all the features and have the total control in their hands, I believe many Android users are more Technical than many iOS users.

Guest said:

I used to have a PC to play games, it has 500W PSU. It ate so much electricity, I felt it in my bills. Right now I work on my Mac, and frankly, I play many games on it. Still, it's not powerful enough for modern games, but why do I have to build a PC just to play games? I'm considering PS4, unless Valve comes up with something better. I do not need a huge, hot, power-eating, dust-collecting brick just to play games. I need something more compact and mobile.

hahahanoobs hahahanoobs said:

I always enjoy people who seem to be OK with the fact that the average person's education is so low that we need gaming consoles because they are easier to use.

Then no one should have a computer because it makes writing and sending letters easier.

No one should use a remote control because it's easier to change the channel.

No one should use a smartphone because it's easier to store phone numbers.

No one is forcing anyone to buy anything.

1 person liked this | cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I used to have a PC to play games, it has 500W PSU. It ate so much electricity, I felt it in my bills.
Ohhh my, hahahaha, you're killing me, hahahaha, stop, I can't take any more, hahaha

Richy2k9 said:

Hello ...

A.G.R.E.E ! ... & with SteamBox coming out to ease things up (even if I prefer to build my own)

The reasons I keep to some consoles as secondary gaming machines would be for their exclusive games ... but PC for most other games ...

cheers!

Guest said:

Do they say that a 500 dollar PC is far superior then a 500 dollar console? or that a 1500 dollar pc is far superior to a 500 dollar console? Oh yea, damn how superior those 400-500 series nvidia users feel about their system since march 2013, when the last working nvidia driver has been released, all newer drivers do is freeze, give errors, crash the system in 1000 ways. I really don't see this superiority, especially not from nvidia these days.

Khanonate said:

I bet Nvidia is saying this just because both consoles are using AMD chips. I've known since the days of AMD K5 that PC is superior specially with AI. Excuse me, while I go talk to Cortana....

PC nerd PC nerd said:

I agree.

But nVidia are just buttmad that the consoles picked AMD instead of them.

hitech0101 said:

Too little too late nvidia.

Nero7 said:

Biggest downside of PC towards Console for me is that the PC is huge and in another room than my TV. I also want to operate with a mouse and keyboard on PC and that requires a chair and desktop for me, from the couch it wouldn't work.

Finally Console is way more convenient than PC because you don't have to fiddle around with all sorts of configs and updates and hardware.

fun fact I used to like how consoles where simply: insert disc and play, with arcade titles just play while on PC you had to install games and have the CD. Now with steam its the opposite as console games now tend to require an installation.

Nero7 said:

Btw DOS PC had some phenomenal games so I really don't get why kids nowadays would start growing up loving the PC I know I loved it back then and so did I love my consoles and my handheld.

OliTheG OliTheG said:

There are a few things I find pretty funny about this post.

For £420, you are building a budget PC. If you are building a budget PC, you get an AMD graphics card, because AMD blow NVidia out of the water for price/performance.

And at that price, don't expect it to last 6 years +, playing games on high. Or even low for that matter. The X360 had the equivilant of what you could call a radeon 1870. a 3870 can't play modern games, period. A 4870 can't play any games above low.

So expect to have to buy another graphics card (minimum £100 really) over the 6 years +. And then expect the processor to be a massive bottleneck by then (A Core 2 Quad Extreme edition, circa 2006 will bottleneck any modern GPU, and that was the equivalent of Ivy Bridge E in 2006 at about £800 for the processor. If we are still following Moore's law, expect the same to hold true). And with the new processor comes a new mobo. And then DDR4 RAM on top of that to replace your DDR3.

And the ENTIRE thing stinks of butthurt from NVidia's point of view.

Guest said:

AMD got the deal and you didn't, so pls just stop you greedy pos !!!

NeurotechHD NeurotechHD said:

Consoles have nearly ruined gaming. We were stuck with the last generation of consoles for almost a decade - this completely stagnated gaming technology.

Not only that, but I have a pile of PS2 games on my shelf that I can no longer play, but I can still play most of the PC games I bought over the last 20 years and they will remain playable for the next 20.

2 people like this | Lurker101 said:

Not only that, but I have a pile of PS2 games on my shelf that I can no longer play

It's kind of your own fault for getting rid of your PS2 then.

m4a4 m4a4 said:

Consoles have nearly ruined gaming. We were stuck with the last generation of consoles for almost a decade - this completely stagnated gaming technology.

Consoles haven't ruined gaming, maybe slowed it down a bit because of old technology, but not much (only someone who believes that graphics are more important than gameplay would try arguing that). Developers like Activision and EA, who pump out rehashes and ruin games, are more to blame than consoles would ever be -_-

andy06shake said:

Comparing the Xbox One and PS4 to a gaming rig is like Comparing a bottle of Buckfast to bottle of Screaming Eagle(expensive wine). There may do the same thing but there is simply no comparison! LoL

GhostRyder GhostRyder said:

This is just another rant from NVidia being butt hurt over the fact that AMD got all the consoles graphics (2 got both processor and graphics). The thing is anyone everyone knows that PC's (well most people at least) are better than console in terms of hardware and thats why normally the PC version of a multi-plaform game looks better than its console counter parts.

But even with the ancient hardware in the PS3 and XBOX 360, look at the graphics on those from the most recent games and they still look really good in most cases because the programmers have gotten good at optimising the code to run on the hardware they know each console has. With consoles, you can guarantee each one has the exact same general hardware (Processor, GPU, etc) so you know where you can pull extra power from vs on a PC where theres a market of hundreds of different possible video cards and video card combinations that could be in each machine not to mention combining that with the wide range of processors, ram, HDD/SSD's, etc and you have to just generalize the performance of everything.

I like my consoles and my gaming rig PC's and laptops, they are have a place on the table.

NVidia could have gotten the consoles that they claim they dont care about (Even though they have the Shield...) if they could take the monocle off and put the tea cup down to realise that charging 30% more for a 5-10% performance increase is not enough to convince the most gamers/other companies. I loved NVidia for years and still do, but its at the point where I feel I cant justify the cost of their high end GPU's vs the competition.

TheBigFatClown said:

You nailed it. I'm a PC only gamer and the whole elitist thing is stupid. No matter what you do to/on a PC, it will not equal the experience gamers get on consoles.

One thing I wouldn't mind having on PC that console gamers have, is one service that allows voice chat support in EVERY online multiplayer title with ONE friends list for all of them. I don't like having to flip flop from Skype to TS to Steam chat with friends lists for each of them. Even if would cost $60/year, I'd pay it in a heartbeat.

Is Steam not very close to making your dream come true?

JC713 JC713 said:

Its true though.

cliffordcooley cliffordcooley, TechSpot Paladin, said:

It's kind of your own fault for getting rid of your PS2 then.
I can't say what @NeurotechHD would have done. If I had a console and decided to get rid of it, I would have gotten rid of the games at the same time. The shelf full of games that can no longer be played, points to a possible console failure.

penn919 said:

Consoles have nearly ruined gaming. We were stuck with the last generation of consoles for almost a decade - this completely stagnated gaming technology.

Not only that, but I have a pile of PS2 games on my shelf that I can no longer play, but I can still play most of the PC games I bought over the last 20 years and they will remain playable for the next 20.

You could simply buy a used ps2 online for like $20 or just use PCX2 emulator? You don't have to junk all your games.

gamoniac said:

Okay... So why the heck did Nvidia release the Shield console recently? Nvidia just themselves a sore loser by releasing the statements.

Guest said:

Question to all PC gamers. Can you guys play uncharted, Halo 5 or even Metal Gear. No right? It's ok. it's ok dont cry please. Point is PC can be millions times more powerful but when it does not have AAA games like these then what's the point. Btw, I use to have a gaming PC with Gtx 570, I am glad I sold it, I was getting tired of playing gta 4 with mods.

H3llion H3llion, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Okay... So why the heck did Nvidia release the Shield console recently? Nvidia just themselves a sore loser by releasing the statements.

Nvidia Shield is hardly comparable to the full sized consoles, more of a portable gaming device, aka PSP than anything else.

Guest said:

I would be assembling a gaming PC this coming summer instead of the next-gen consoles. And you know what? It isn't due to the consoles possessing inferior hardware. I am simply waiting for them to work out the kinks. The PC would simply be an emulator and rarely play PC-dedicated games. Because even if I spend (and I will) 1000$ on a gaming PC, you RARELY have worthy games for gamers that actually does care about gameplay.

Seriously, half of the PC crowd are graphic ****** that prioritizes it over gameplay that I often wonder where they get off calling themselves gamers. If you want unsurpassed graphics, play real life; you'll get mind blown.

St1ckM4n St1ckM4n said:

Some of the blatant console fanboy-ism is just too much. Like Guest above.

"Consoles have better gameplay than PC, all you care about is graphics." Please, tell me more how: Minecraft didn't re-invigorate a whole genre; 64+ player FPS matches are worse than 32 players; how a couple console-esclusive AAA games are better than the huge swathe of PC-exclusive AAA's (not counting all indies); etc. I could go on.

PC is more powerful - fact. If you have more power, you can increase graphics AND gameplay tenfold.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.