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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Diff between PS4/XB1 > PS3/360

Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
VanceIX said:

Optimization for the x86 platform will allow devs to make great games on both consoles that look pretty much identical. It isn't like last gen where games had to be seperately optomized for the Cell and PowerPC architectures. Now it's just plug and play in terms of optimization.

Games are already seeing tons of parity now, at least much more than at the beginning of the generation. I expect that trend to grow. 

Correction, Destiny is seeing parity.

Clearly, one optimization hits 1080p 60 or at least 1080 p 30 then we're gonna see a lot more content in games, like open world or hundreds of thousands of npcs etc...

If optimization is equal and both the XB1 and PS4 hit that target, then even still the PS4 will still be able to do more.

Any Parity is pretty much manufactured at this point.

Parity is manufactured, but it exists, period.

Devs arean't going to milk every bit of power out of the PS4. Just look at last gen. The PS3 was capable of much more, but the 360 outperformed it most multiplats. Third-party games will look even more identical this gen than last.

You may see some differences in first-party games, but even then I doubt we see a striking difference like TLOU with the PS3. Hell, the One has the best looking game now with Ryse (and you yourself have said many times, it doesn't matter if it's open world or closed, but that's another topic entirely).



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

Around the Network
iceland said:
Is this another "gap is wider than you think" kind of thread? :P

More than PS3/360 for sure, I can agree with that.


I can see why you think that but no its not. Im just curious as to why some are saying this gen gap is less than last gens? 



VanceIX said:

Last gen the PS3 was a lot more powerful, just harder to optomize for than the 360.

This gen, the PS4 and One use the exact same architecture and the PS4 only has marginally better components. As devs get better at optimizing for x86 on the consoles, games will probably look much more similar either way.

Heck, the One has the best looking game currently (Ryse), and even with lower pixel counts the games look almost identical in real life.

I'd say that was about the end of the thread folks.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

VanceIX said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
VanceIX said:

Optimization for the x86 platform will allow devs to make great games on both consoles that look pretty much identical. It isn't like last gen where games had to be seperately optomized for the Cell and PowerPC architectures. Now it's just plug and play in terms of optimization.

Games are already seeing tons of parity now, at least much more than at the beginning of the generation. I expect that trend to grow. 

Correction, Destiny is seeing parity.

Clearly, one optimization hits 1080p 60 or at least 1080 p 30 then we're gonna see a lot more content in games, like open world or hundreds of thousands of npcs etc...

If optimization is equal and both the XB1 and PS4 hit that target, then even still the PS4 will still be able to do more.

Any Parity is pretty much manufactured at this point.

Parity is manufactured, but it exists, period.

Devs arean't going to milk every bit of power out of the PS4. Just look at last gen. The PS3 was capable of much more, but the 360 outperformed it most multiplats. Third-party games will look even more identical this gen than last.

You may see some differences in first-party games, but even then I doubt we see a striking difference like TLOU with the PS3. Hell, the One has the best looking game now with Ryse (and you yourself have said many times, it doesn't matter if it's open world or closed, but that's another topic entirely).

That isn't a valid excuse any more though.

Not only is the weaker hardware using the more complicated ram but these are both x86 machines.

Any parity, requires more work be done on the XB1 version by default.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

VanceIX said:

Last gen the PS3 was a lot more powerful, just harder to optomize for than the 360.

This gen, the PS4 and One use the exact same architecture and the PS4 only has marginally better components. As devs get better at optimizing for x86 on the consoles, games will probably look much more similar either way.

Heck, the One has the best looking game currently (Ryse), and even with lower pixel counts the games look almost identical in real life.

The PS4 doesn't just have marginally better components. The GPUs are similar but the PS4's has 18 cores vs the X1's 12. That's a 50% power difference in the GPU alone, the most important aspect when it comes to graphics.



No troll is too much for me to handle. I rehabilitate trolls, I train people. I am the Troll Whisperer.

Around the Network
Troll_Whisperer said:
VanceIX said:

Last gen the PS3 was a lot more powerful, just harder to optomize for than the 360.

This gen, the PS4 and One use the exact same architecture and the PS4 only has marginally better components. As devs get better at optimizing for x86 on the consoles, games will probably look much more similar either way.

Heck, the One has the best looking game currently (Ryse), and even with lower pixel counts the games look almost identical in real life.

The PS4 doesn't just have marginally better components. The GPUs are similar but the PS4's has 18 cores vs the X1's 12. That's a 50% power difference in the GPU alone, the most important aspect when it comes to graphics.

It's hardly a 50% power difference in real life performance. 

If cores made games so much better, PCs would be running circles around both the PS4 and Xbox One. The 290x has 44 CUs, does that make games 244% better IRL performance? Not really. It's all about optimization, and devs aren't going to spend extra resources making the best game possible on PS4 when they can just port the base x86 optomized game to both.

The PS3 had 8 cores compared to the 360's 3 cores in the CPU, look how that turned out. No one bothered optomizing for the PS3 anyway, unless it was a first-party exclusive like Uncharted or TLOU.

Like I said, the best looking game is currently on the One, and multiplats look much more identical than they did last gen, where 360 had an obvious advantage. 



                                                                                                               You're Gonna Carry That Weight.

Xbox One - PS4 - Wii U - PC

People just don't want to except that the power gap is just that large. And once Sony really starts pumping out the great looking exclusives (GOW 4 and Uncharted), devs are going to feel pressure to actually use the PS4's extra power. The 2:1-3:1 sales gap will also help with that decision.



VanceIX said:

Last gen the PS3 was a lot more powerful, just harder to optomize for than the 360.

This gen, the PS4 and One use the exact same architecture and the PS4 only has marginally better components. As devs get better at optimizing for x86 on the consoles, games will probably look much more similar either way.

Heck, the One has the best looking game currently (Ryse), and even with lower pixel counts the games look almost identical in real life.


There is so much wrong with this post. The PS3 wasn't a lot more powerful than the 360. The RSX was significant weaker than the 360's GPU. Most of the Cell's computational advantage over the 360's CPU had to be used to compensate for the RSX's short comings. Even then the Cell's general purpose processing abilities were worse than the 360 CPU. The 360's memory setup was also superior to the PS3's and  it had slightly more memory available for gaming. The PS3 had the edge but it games had to be built from the ground up for the architecture and the differences. Even so it had clear disadvantages in comparison to the 360.

The PS4/XB1 situation is completely differently. Both consoles have similar architectures with the PS4 having significant memory bandwith and GPU rendering advantages. Last gen, developers had to put in more time into PS3 software just to get similar results to the 360. This gen developers have to put more time into the XB1 hardware for inferior results. 

@VanceIX

Your PC comparison is apples to oranges. PC games aren't optimized to take advantage of the hardware like console games are. The games have to be made with the lowest common denominator in mind. 



Darc Requiem said:
VanceIX said:

Last gen the PS3 was a lot more powerful, just harder to optomize for than the 360.

This gen, the PS4 and One use the exact same architecture and the PS4 only has marginally better components. As devs get better at optimizing for x86 on the consoles, games will probably look much more similar either way.

Heck, the One has the best looking game currently (Ryse), and even with lower pixel counts the games look almost identical in real life.


There is so much wrong with this post. The PS3 wasn't a lot more powerful than the 360. The RSX was significant weaker than the 360's GPU. Most of the Cell's computational advantage over the 360's CPU had to be used to compensate for the RSX's short comings. Even then the Cell's general purpose processing abilities were worse than the 360 CPU. The 360's memory setup was also superior to the PS3's and  it had slightly more memory available for gaming. The PS3 had the edge but it games had to be built from the ground up for the architecture and the differences. Even so it had clear disadvantages in comparison to the 360.

The PS4/XB1 situation is completely differently. Both consoles have similar architectures with the PS4 having significant memory bandwith and GPU rendering advantages. Last gen, developers had to put in more time into PS3 software just to get similar results to the 360. This gen developers have to put more time into the XB1 hardware for inferior results. 

@VanceIX

Your PC comparison is apples to oranges. PC games aren't optimized to take advantage of the hardware like console games are. The games have to be made with the lowest common denominator in mind. 


This post hits  up my point pretty much right on the head. The gap is bigger than last gen like it or not. I believe the visual diff will widen. But on this poi t can anyone point me to an instance of a multiplat last gen having as big of a diff as we generaly see this gen on most multiplats? ( Beyonetta excluded)



VanceIX said:
Troll_Whisperer said:
VanceIX said:

Last gen the PS3 was a lot more powerful, just harder to optomize for than the 360.

This gen, the PS4 and One use the exact same architecture and the PS4 only has marginally better components. As devs get better at optimizing for x86 on the consoles, games will probably look much more similar either way.

Heck, the One has the best looking game currently (Ryse), and even with lower pixel counts the games look almost identical in real life.

The PS4 doesn't just have marginally better components. The GPUs are similar but the PS4's has 18 cores vs the X1's 12. That's a 50% power difference in the GPU alone, the most important aspect when it comes to graphics.

It's hardly a 50% power difference in real life performance. 

If cores made games so much better, PCs would be running circles around both the PS4 and Xbox One. The 290x has 44 CUs, does that make games 244% better IRL performance? Not really. It's all about optimization, and devs aren't going to spend extra resources making the best game possible on PS4 when they can just port the base x86 optomized game to both.

The PS3 had 8 cores compared to the 360's 3 cores in the CPU, look how that turned out. No one bothered optomizing for the PS3 anyway, unless it was a first-party exclusive like Uncharted or TLOU.

Like I said, the best looking game is currently on the One, and multiplats look much more identical than they did last gen, where 360 had an obvious advantage. 


If this gen isnt a 50% irl performance what was last gen like a 1 -2 %?