By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Will the PS4 represent 50% better performance than the X1

ethomaz said:

First they need to show any game running on actual Xbone hardware with the same level of inFAMOUS and The Division that are running in PS4 hardware.

For now Xbone is in disadvantage.

The exception is Forza 5 that looks better than DriveClub... the late one looks way unfinished to November release.


Most titles at E3 including Forza were running on X1 hardware and as you said it out-performed DriveClub that is a PS4 exclusive. MGS 5 looked amazing too. We'll have to wait until a dev gets their hands on them both and really pushes them till near breaking point later this gen.



Around the Network
jake_the_fake1 said:
PlaystaionGamer said:
5GB GDDR 3 Ram Vs. 8GB GDDR5 Ram..
yes in the long run you will see a difference.


PS4 OS is rumoured to take 1GB, so it'll be 7GB for games....personally I see the PS4 OS taking 2GB ram, then over time Sony can releasing ram just like they've done with the PS3.

I wonder if this will make the slightest difference to the consumer but to the developer. The added memory means developers can use less compressed textures, which makes developing more a matter of "mash compile."

Honestly, I don't think we'll be comparing "graphics" this generation as opposed to a developer's chosen art-style. Our eyes probably can't discern any significant difference between "systems." Even with the Wii U, when people are posting screenshots my eye sees style, not a polygon count. I can see how power was still relevent(ish) during the PS3/360 generation, but that was basically because of the overusage of the Unreal 3 engine...which I still think is kinda ugly.

This time? I am much more worried about launch XB1's having RROD issues again than any late-life "weak by comparison" problems.



Zappykins said:
Machiavellian said:

I was reading the article from Eurogamer on the PS4 games and I have to say that there probably will not be a big difference between the PS4 and the X1.  If you compare the games that were running on PS4 hardware and games running on X1, it would be hard to state any realy performance advantage from the PS4.  In fact a lot of their games suffered issues and dropped frames to 20FPS   I believe in the long run, the seperation between the 2 consoles will always be the developers working on the projects then any actual hardware advantage.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-hands-on-with-playstation-4

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-hands-on-with-xbox-one

While I will confirm Sony has the better GPU, they messed up again.  GDDR5 RAM is great for graphics, it should make nice pretty pictures – But unfortunately, it comes at a cost - huge latency.

I'm not talking about twice as bad, or even 5 times, but 7-10 times as much latency as DDR3 memory.  It will cripple all the other advantages they put in it – like the wider bus width, speed, etc.  It’s really a shame.  It will effect everything thing that isn’t just a picture (AI, Game play, etc.)

It reminds me of a business person making a decision that doesn’t understand the consequences.  Like the people that messed up the cell, or the person that stopped the first Kinect from having it’s own processor.

The best estimates I have seen is that, because of these blunders, for most games the PS4 will run just a little bit behind the Xbox One.  Hence, what you are finding with the lower rate.

Did they now? The latency is nowhere near where your suggesting at all. Maybe about 20-25% max. You also forget the advantages of the unified GDDR5? Both CPU and GPU can access it at the same time. Once the developers get their heads round this was the machine fly. No need to send information back and forth between memories.Everything the GPU needs from the CPU, it can access. Everything the CPU needs from the GPU, it also can access. There is NO need for it to copy data from the main ram to a different pool of RAM. That along with the huge bandwidth advantage, will put it ahead of the X1.



Stinky said:
A fair chunk of the xbox' spec is still publically unkown. Such as the architecture and performance of the custom blitters and ESRAM. The xbox also seems to offload a fair chunk of OS function to the ARM subsystem. I thought the PS4 was rumoured to have an ARM subsystem as well, but I've read rumours on Digital Foundry that there are actual main CPU cores allocated for OS.

So the proof will be in the pudding, as they say. But the xbox appears to be no slouch if E3 demos are anything to go by.

So what do you think the liverpool chip is in the PS4?



THe internet has concluded that PS4 is the more powerful system. Whether we will see this in 3rd parties is dependant on whether there is clause imposed by MS where developers must make X1 games identical to ps4 games. Otherwise the 50% power advantage will obviously be utilised by devs, whether it will hugely visible or something we screen grabs to prove is something yet to be determined.

Honestly though I've seen PC games switch between low to medium and medium to high setting with only subtle differences, its not always bleedingly obvious. Sometimes, subtle texture differences which you won't notice unless you go and scrutinise a specific object.



Around the Network
Ashadian said:
Zappykins said:
Machiavellian said:

I was reading the article from Eurogamer on the PS4 games and I have to say that there probably will not be a big difference between the PS4 and the X1.  If you compare the games that were running on PS4 hardware and games running on X1, it would be hard to state any realy performance advantage from the PS4.  In fact a lot of their games suffered issues and dropped frames to 20FPS   I believe in the long run, the seperation between the 2 consoles will always be the developers working on the projects then any actual hardware advantage.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-hands-on-with-playstation-4

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-hands-on-with-xbox-one

While I will confirm Sony has the better GPU, they messed up again.  GDDR5 RAM is great for graphics, it should make nice pretty pictures – But unfortunately, it comes at a cost - huge latency.

I'm not talking about twice as bad, or even 5 times, but 7-10 times as much latency as DDR3 memory.  It will cripple all the other advantages they put in it – like the wider bus width, speed, etc.  It’s really a shame.  It will effect everything thing that isn’t just a picture (AI, Game play, etc.)

It reminds me of a business person making a decision that doesn’t understand the consequences.  Like the people that messed up the cell, or the person that stopped the first Kinect from having it’s own processor.

The best estimates I have seen is that, because of these blunders, for most games the PS4 will run just a little bit behind the Xbox One.  Hence, what you are finding with the lower rate.

Did they now? The latency is nowhere near where your suggesting at all. Maybe about 20-25% max. You also forget the advantages of the unified GDDR5? Both CPU and GPU can access it at the same time. Once the developers get their heads round this was the machine fly. No need to send information back and forth between memories.Everything the GPU needs from the CPU, it can access. Everything the CPU needs from the GPU, it also can access. There is NO need for it to copy data from the main ram to a different pool of RAM. That along with the huge bandwidth advantage, will put it ahead of the X1.

latency will still play a big role in the CPU getting the information it needs fast enough for it to perform its calculations.  The CPU works on smaller sets of data so it crunches those pretty fast but if its dealing with latency issues with the ram, it will have an effect.  No matter how fast one part is, the complete system will always be hampered by its slowest component.



This discussion takes place every console cycle. People were talking about the Cell procesor and how much more powerfull the PS3 was then the Xbox 360. In the end the games looked the same on both consoles. When it comes to 3rd party franchises the only difference you will see this cycle just like every other cycle is Kinect (Love it or hate it) support on Xbox 1 vs None on he PS4. They will look identical. As for 1st party you will be pressed to see any real differences and it will be hard to tell since you can't compare them side by side. Other then direct hardware comparisons its possible Xbox publishers will use the MS advantage in cloud computing to drive some new innovative technologies like they were talking about Forza where your car continues to compete in other races using you style of driving while your not playing but even that remains to be seen.

I'm old enough to remember Xbox vs PS2 and Xbox 360 vs PS3 and even though one console had the real advanatage over the other in most cases you never would have know.

I will get both eventually but I'm getting Xbox One first because I like the Kinect. Get what you like and be happy we have a choice.

John



Ashadian said:
DirtyP2002 said:

There will be some exclusive games on PS4 that will look (significantly) better than games on the Xbox One. But only forum-geeks like us will care and it will be less than 10 games in total over the next 5 years.

That does not mean that Xbox One games will look bad. Just like this gen with games like Gears of War or Halo 4. I can tell you that Halo 5 (if it is named like that) will look googeous. Heck, Ryse, Battlefield, Forza look awesome already.

Acutally I think Wii U games look great as well. Look at the Zelda tech demo, or X. Those are good looking games, period.

 

The difference between PS4 and Xbox One will be as big as PS3 and Xbox 360 or even less.

This time there will be a bigger diffrence. PS4 has the faster and better ram. Will have a smaller and lighter OS footprint allowing at least an extra 1gb of ram over X1. The GPU has 18 compute units instead of 12.  So the PS4 will have a an at least 30% advantage but that will increase when developers start truly leveraging the machines power.  As for the PS4 games shown at E3 they were all running on PS4 hardware unlike some on X1 were probably the PC versions. The Only X1 game that impressed was Forza 5. Drive Club was an early build. I think they deliberately showed a pre alpha 35% one. There is no way they can only be at 35% complete with about 4 months of development left. They probably holding back a later build for Gamescom and other titles for TGS

It could just that Evolution studios are not that experienced when it comes to Driving sims. The forza team are specialist, they've spent a whole generation working within this specific field and optimising engines to create the best driving sim (ish) game they can. Evo studios however have spent the last 7 years making Motostorm titles which are not about glossy carss, but instead desctuction and huge open racing environments. Possibly this why Driveclub doesn't quite compete with Forza.



Wow, everyone claiming that a device A is x% more or less powerful than device B has no clue about how technology works. You could make a numbered claim for a synthetical benchmark. For instance that a device can render in a specific situation more polygons than the other device. But the next benchmark can bring results that are completely different. Different devices have usually a different focus, on which aspect they focus. So such claims are pretty much pointless.

Even more, as no one of us really has access to the hardware and these 'hard numbers' are completely speculation. Crack all the devices, run a SPEC-benchmark on all compared devices and we talk again. About that different compilers influence the results on a SPEC-benchmark.

In the end, the discussion is even more pointless, as consoles are never bought for power. They are bought for games. So we could discuss, which game looks how good on which console. So far completely pointless, as both aren't released. Pointless even then, as this will not only influenced by raw power of the machines, but also by the effort put into the development of the game. and even more pointless, because better looking games make not better games.

So the best would be to discuss the games we like and which platform supports us with the best games we want to play. Depending on personal preferences I think all next-gen-platforms have something good to offer.

TL;DR: You can't play with raw power alone.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]

teigaga said:
Ashadian said:
DirtyP2002 said:

There will be some exclusive games on PS4 that will look (significantly) better than games on the Xbox One. But only forum-geeks like us will care and it will be less than 10 games in total over the next 5 years.

That does not mean that Xbox One games will look bad. Just like this gen with games like Gears of War or Halo 4. I can tell you that Halo 5 (if it is named like that) will look googeous. Heck, Ryse, Battlefield, Forza look awesome already.

Acutally I think Wii U games look great as well. Look at the Zelda tech demo, or X. Those are good looking games, period.

 

The difference between PS4 and Xbox One will be as big as PS3 and Xbox 360 or even less.

This time there will be a bigger diffrence. PS4 has the faster and better ram. Will have a smaller and lighter OS footprint allowing at least an extra 1gb of ram over X1. The GPU has 18 compute units instead of 12.  So the PS4 will have a an at least 30% advantage but that will increase when developers start truly leveraging the machines power.  As for the PS4 games shown at E3 they were all running on PS4 hardware unlike some on X1 were probably the PC versions. The Only X1 game that impressed was Forza 5. Drive Club was an early build. I think they deliberately showed a pre alpha 35% one. There is no way they can only be at 35% complete with about 4 months of development left. They probably holding back a later build for Gamescom and other titles for TGS

It could just that Evolution studios are not that experienced when it comes to Driving sims. The forza team are specialist, they've spent a whole generation working within this specific field and optimising engines to create the best driving sim (ish) game they can. Evo studios however have spent the last 7 years making Motostorm titles which are not about glossy carss, but instead desctuction and huge open racing environments. Possibly this why Driveclub doesn't quite compete with Forza.

You do know the group that is making drive club also made the Motorstorm games.  They hve been making driving games since the stuio was formed and I believe most were sims.  If they are not use to making driving games by this time then I believe we can discount DriveClub being anything worth while.  Also only being 35% complete at this stage seems pretty far behind to make a release in November.