Build of the Week: Mar 02, 2025
- Tomiax
- Mar 2
- 14 min read
In last week's post, I made a joke about being a "dirty console gamer" to save money. This raises a serious question: Which is better? A console, or a custom built PC? In this post we are going to be looking at a few of the pros and cons of each approach, and then attempting to design a "console buster". A console buster is a PC design that can play games at a similar quality to current consoles while costing about the same amount. Our goal this weekend is to find out if this is possible or not.
Keep in mind that the prices listed for components are based on availability found at the time of writing the post. Prices may vary, and are based on Canadian Currency in a Canadian market. The admin of this website might earn a commission whenever links that lead to Amazon are used to make purchases, but these links do not affect the final price to the consumer. Furthermore, we will still always link to the lowest price we found. Remember to add taxes and shipping to these prices when budgeting, and consider cost-saving strategies like waiting for sale prices or finding used parts.
Which is better?
That's not a question that will be answered the same by everyone, or for every application. A massive strength of consoles is that they are absolutely purpose built, and therefore far more efficient for their intended purpose; gaming. An example of this playing out in new consoles like PS5 or Xbox X Series is the unified system architecture where the CPU, GPU, and entire system operate on the same 16 GB of shared GDDR6 RAM. Compare this to the standard layout of a custom PC where the CPU runs traditional RAM and then you get a graphics card with its own dedicated memory. You can easily get more total memory available to the custom built system than is available in the consoles, but then they have to transfer data back and forth requiring extra steps and introducing latency that doesn't exist in the console. So the memory gets used a lot more efficiently in the the console, but we can get a lot more in a custom PC. Then the only way to compensate for the latency introduced by extra data transfer in a PC that consoles don't have to deal with is to prioritize speed in the selected hardware. If we're going to start talking about selecting hardware, then we also have to talk about how hardware selection affects cost.
When you buy a console, you pay for a mass produced assembly of hardware that is custom built to do exactly what it needs to do. So, that will automatically keep costs more reasonable compared to building a top end PC out of custom hardware. Furthermore, game developers then optimize their works for the specific console(s) that will feature them. If we want to design something competitive with modern consoles, then we have to mitigate costs where we can. It would be easy enough to get lightning fast components by just buying the latest technology, but then we can easily double or triple our cost at the same time. So, one of the cons with building a PC that we don't have to worry about when console gaming is how the costs of custom hardware can be a steeper barrier to entry. It's possible to spend double the price of a new console on the latest graphics card, for example. If custom hardware for building a PC can get so expensive so fast, then why would we want a PC? For the things that consoles can't do.
Nobody is building and/or running a business, doing their homework or assignments, finishing a project, or creating content on a console. I'm sure not researching, writing out, and adding photos to this post on my Xbox, anyways. Every bit of media that hits a console is already finished, and doing anything productive or creative requires a separate computer. Therefore, if you have to do any of these other tasks, you need a computer. So, you sure can buy a console for affordable gaming, but then still have to get a laptop or a desktop for everything else anyways. Alternatively, if you know that you're going to be gaming and doing these other tasks, then you could spend a little more on a system that will game well and automatically also be able to do everything else. This is because versatility is where PCs win. In this regard, the purpose driven design of a console becomes a flaw. Yes, consoles are very efficiently designed and built for playing games, but the cost of that efficiency is lacking the ability to do a lot of other things. So if your intended applications are more diverse than just gaming and media consumption in general (since consoles have also been able to play streaming services for a while now), then we suddenly have to weigh the costs of having to payout for multiple systems against building one more expensive system. As an added bonus, a lot of the high end parts that will make a PC better for gaming will also contribute to making it better at other demanding tasks as well. In some of these additional tasks, we might quickly come up against diminishing returns. Writing out a document, for example, is not exactly the most demanding task on the PC end of things. However, the same super-expensive graphics card that will render games seamlessly will also make 3D modelling and rendering a much smoother process. Getting back to hardware now, there's also the fact that PC parts can be switched out without needing the replacement of the entire system every couple of years.
Last week I put a post up about the best future-proof PC system I could design in a day. Yes, that system was expensive, and incomplete since I was disgruntled with the state of graphics cards that week, but the concept remains: If you start with a good enough platform, then the PC can be updated to modern standards as they change by changing out single components that are on the whole less expensive than the entire system. Now, we aren't striving to design a system with this as a main priority this week because we will be building on an older platform to keep costs competitive with consoles. If, however, we could justify higher costs by either using the system for more than just gaming or because of our intent to keep it modern for a decade or more, then we could spend more on the latest platform than we did last week. More costs up front for fewer costs in future years is the tradeoff we have the option to make with a custom PC that we don't get with consoles. Just like PC hardware can be upgraded with a custom system, PC games can be upgraded with community mods.
The argument here isn't that all console games disallow mods and all PC games allow them, but the fact remains that more PC games do allow mods. I still recall the days of playing my PlayStation 2, and the use of my Gameshark to make random mods to the games I enjoyed playing. Sure, many of those mods were just straight up cheats that would ruin the competitive online play that a lot of gaming has been trending towards for decades, but some of them were also just goofy fun (like replacing my hover bike in Jet Moto 2 with a floaty dragon, for example). In many PC games, modding isn't just allowed, but actively supported by game developers. Writing out my own player AI in Age of Empires II was my first introduction to programming, and that would have never happened if all my gaming was done on consoles. Other titles with great support for community mods include, but are not limited to; The Sims (all of them), Assetto Corsa, Baldur's Gate 3, Age of Empires II: Definitive Edition, and etc.. Even games that support mods and are on both PC and Xbox, using Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim as the example, the Xbox version is sometimes more limited in what mods can be done.
Ultimately, which is better for you will come down to a matter of budget, application, preference, and game library. We haven't discussed game libraries yet, but it's worth noting that consoles (ahem PS5) will have proprietary titles not available to Xbox or PC, and some PC games won't be available on consoles (not even Xbox X). Thus, even if we succeed in designing our "console buster", the simple fact remains that there will still be times when a new console will be the better purchase (man, I miss being able to play Gran Turismo, a PlayStation only title). However, if we're going to try and design a console buster anyways, then we need an approach.
Our approach will be this: Look at the general specs and output quality of the current consoles, PS5 and Xbox X Series, and then try to match them on a budget similar to what it costs to get one of them.
Console Specs and Performance
Both Sony and Microsoft partnered with AMD in the design and build of their respective PS5 and Xbox X consoles. So, they got some similar hardware and some similar performance. I spent some time yesterday trying to get information on what that hardware is, and what the advertised performance is. The specific consoles we will look at are:
Processing Power
Both versions of the PS5 have exactly the same Central Processing Unit, and the one in the Xbox isn't very different. Both CPUs were custom designed for the consoles by AMD based on their Zen 2 architecture. Both have 8 cores, and both have built-in maximum clock speeds; 3.5 GHz in the PlayStation case, and 3.8 GHz in the Xbox. We can beat these processors, sure, but can we beat them by enough to compensate for the previously mentioned inefficiency of a PC compared to the console design while remaining in a reasonably competitive budget?
Dedicated Graphics Processing Power
Again, we find that both PlayStations are identical in their build hardware, but not in their programming this time. Meanwhile the Xbox has something a little different. The PS5s have GPUs that operate at 2.23 GHz and 10.2 TeraFLOPS. For context, each "TeraFLOP" represents a trillion computations per second. So saying that the PS5 GPU can put out 10.2 TeraFLOPS means specifically that it can perform 10.2 trillion calculations per second. For comparison, the Xbox GPU operates at 1.285 GHz and 12.155 TeraFLOPS. "Wait" I hear you exclaim, "if the PS5 GPU has a higher operating frequency, then how can the Xbox GPU have a higher TereFLOP rating?" Simple, the Xbox GPU has more CUDA cores and can therefore perform more simultaneous calculations. You can get the TeraFLOP rating of a GPU by multiplying its frequency by its CUDA cores. This will be an important concept later for seeing how the graphics card we choose for our custom build will compare to these console GPUs. However, that's just the hardware, and how efficiently a system is programmed to handle tasks will also have an impact on the final product. All of these consoles say they can run 4k display at up to 120 frames per second (depending on the game and the screen attached). All of these systems say that they support raytracing technology to get the best lighting effects in gaming environments. However, only the PS5 PRO boasts about its AI enhanced resolution to get the absolute best sharpness and clarity out of a 4k monitor with a programming technology they call "Playstation Spectral Super Resolution".
Random Access Memory
You might have noticed that in the previous section we never talked about dedicated video memory. That is because all of these console systems use a similar unified architecture style where the GPU makes use of the same RAM the CPU does. On the upside, this is part of what makes the console so efficient as a purpose built-machine. With both the CPU and GPU accessing the same RAM directly, that reduces the amount of travel data has to do from one unit to the other, thereby preventing the latency of travel that we get in a custom PC. On the downside, the 16 GB of GDDR6 that would normally be dedicated to just graphics now has to be shared with the remainder of the system. So, each demand on memory can only occupy so much of that RAM capacity at once. This means that it will be easy for us to beat the total RAM available in our custom system by having a normal 16 GB RAM set and a graphics card with additional dedicated video memory, but it also means that we loose out in efficiency of the RAM usage and will therefore need fast components to make the difference back... Good luck to us!
Storage
After reading the materials, we aren't sure what the exact read and write speeds of the storage devices in these consoles are, but we do know they are advertised as being very fast NVME SSDs. This allows for fast loading of large game files, which cuts down on loading screens in two ways. First, the data that has to be loaded before entering the game can be loaded faster. Second, less data has to be loaded up front since more can be loaded quickly on the fly during transitions. This all allows for larger, more immersive open-world environments with seamless transitions as more files are quickly loaded on the fly. The PS5 Slim and Xbox X both come with 1 TB of storage, and the PS5 PRO comes with 2 TB.
Parts List
Now that we have a better idea of what we are up against, it's time for us to pick out a parts list, and see how it compares to the current consoles in performance and cost.
Same core count and same operating frequency range as consoles
Can be boost to 4.6 GHz to leave other options behind
Zen 3 architecture is an upgrade from Zen 2 used in the consoles
Using cooler that comes in the box
Saves money
Might need an upgrade if we want to push the CPU to its limit
Priced today: $169.99 at Amazon
Supports boosting and overclocking CPU
Supports DDR4 RAM up to 4733 MHz
Has two M.2 slots
On board networking:
1 Gb/s ethernet
Wi-Fi 5
Priced today: $179.99 at Amazon
10ns first word latency, 18 CAS latency
Cost-Effective
Priced today: $37.99 at memoryexpress
Should be fast enough for our purposes
Matches the highest storage capacity of the current consoles
Priced today: $135.99 at Amazon
Overclocks to 2535 MHz
3072 CUDA cores
(2535 MHz)x(3072 CUDA cores) = 7.8 TeraFLOPs
3rd Generation of RT cores
NVIDIA DLSS 3 supported by 4th gen tensor cores
8 GB GDDR6 dedicated memory
Priced today: $429.98 at BestBuy
Full Modularity means only using the cables we need.
80+ Gold Certified means top-class power efficiency.
MSI is a well reputed brand in general
Priced today: $119.99 at Amazon
Comes with 4 pre-installed LED fans
Looks great
Amazon isn't the best price, but it rates 4.2 stars out of 5 after 228 Amazon reviews
Priced today: $69.99 at PC-Canada
Went with something cheap:
Added cost for a PC, not needed with a console
Might want something better if gaming with keyboard and mouse
We are also picking out a controller
Priced today: $25.99 at Amazon
Basic controller, will be compatible with PC
Added cost for a PC, consoles include at least one
Priced today: $29.98 at Amazon
The total sum of our spending on a system like this is $1,199.89, which is a couple hundred dollars beyond the most expensive console we looked at. Now, in either case we will need a monitor to play on. The console is meant to play through the television you supposedly already have, and honestly the PC can be run through a television as well. So we aren't including that into our cost comparison. However, there are peripherals we need as a baseline with a PC that we don't need to acquire when we get a console. Consoles really only need a controller as a baseline, and all the options we looked at included one. The PC, however, needs a mouse and keyboard as a baseline, and a custom-built system won't include those. It also won't include a controller. Fortunately, we can get all those for relatively little cost compared to the rest of the investment. That said, there are much better keyboard and mouse setups that can be purchased if budget allows.
Conclusion
We start with a table summarizing the comparison here:
So, we've done our best to design a PC that will compare to a current gaming console in final performance, and we spend about $200 more than the most expensive of these consoles doing so, but how good of a job did we do?
Similarities:
Same core count and comparable clock speeds in central processing unit
Storage type and speed approximates the devices in the consoles
Storage capacity directly matches the high end available in the consoles
Controller based gameplay is available for games where that's preferable
Similar sound quality with headphones
The primary system RAM has similar output speeds
The Consoles did it Better:
The shared RAM architecture allows more efficient communication between the CPU and GPU mitigating latency
The consoles have a better GPU setup:
All the consoles support decent graphics playing 4k @ 120 fps
The RTX 4060 is better suited to 1080p or 1440p, but might struggle with 4k approaching or over 60 fps
Aside from the shortcoming in pure processing power, the RTX 4060 does at least support similar programming features such as Ray Tracing and AI driven resolution optimization.
Better price point:
Consoles range from $580 to $960 (plus taxes) in price
The custom system requires an investment of about $1200 (plus taxes)
Already assembled:
Both systems will require logins and setups, but the consoles don't need to be physically assembled first
Our Custom Build Would do it Better:
Our CPU is actually better:
The consoles both have their CPUs hard-locked at their respective clock speeds while our CPU is overclockable
The CPU in our custom build has an architecture one generation newer than the ones in the consoles;
build architecture is one generation newer, more refined, and more densely packed, meaning...
that each core can do more simultaneous calculations, and...
therefore the same core count (8 in this case) operating at the same frequency (around 3.7 GHz) in our parts list would actually be expected to outperform the CPUs in the consoles
More RAM capacity available:
Although the unified architecture of the consoles is more efficient, 16 GB is all they get for the whole system
Our system matches that 16 GB with our main RAM set, but there is a separate 8 GB of dedicated video memory that comes with our graphics card
Therefore, there is more total space to have game assets (whether they be textures, models, physics and other game rules, or etc.) loaded in advance of needing them
So, there is some trade-off where we lose efficiency but gain raw capacity
Upgradeability over time:
Although we tried to remain budget friendly upfront, we could always improve our system over time by saving for modular components instead of wholly buying a new system every time an upgrade is needed
This benefit is somewhat mitigated, but not entirely nullified, by using a platform that is a couple generations older
Room for upgrades lie in:
Processor; the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X 3.7 GHz 12-Core Processor is also Zen 3 and fits the AM4 socket of our motherboard
RAM can go up in both capacity and speed; the G.Skill Ripjaws V 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-4400 CL18 Memory is an example of DDR 4 RAM that has a faster clock speed than the set we chose today
Storage; there is space to add a second M.2 drive if we find ourselves needing more high-speed NVME SSD storage, and it's even easier to add a bunch of 2.5" SATA 6.0 SSDs if we need storage where capacity matters more than speed
Graphics Card; we can upgrade the GPU to anything we want (such as the Asus DUAL EVO OC GeForce RTX 4070 12 GB Video Card, or even better) any time we have the budget to do so - and can find it on sale, preferably
Our custom design can competently do a number of other things more competently than consoles:
Running a unified home system
Office work, data analysis, multitasking with multiple apps open simultaneously, and etc.
Graphics rendering, 3D modeling and animation, video editing, and other media content creation
Running scientific models, analysis, and simulations
Software development, and AI training or machine learning tasks
For purely gaming purposes, consoles are more cost effective in the short term. However, the upfront cost difference has the ability to even out when you consider making small system upgrades over time to keep the system up instead of replacing the whole thing. If you need more than just gaming from your system, then the custom PC is declared the flat-out winner in the eyes of this judge!
Thank you all for reading, and I hope you found this post to be interesting, informative, and helpful!
Comments