Quantcast
Does Shadow of Mordor Run at 720p/30fps on Xbox One?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Does Shadow of Mordor Run at 720p/30fps on Xbox One?

zero129 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


Look up almost any spec comparison video on Youtube. The PS4 is 50% faster than the Xbone. 

I dont need to look up videos i can read specs fine but Spec sheet doesnt = Real world performance or else the PS2 would of been a beast going by its specs and the emotion engine and the PS3 should of completely destoryed the X360 when it came to graphics but none of that translated into real world.

Eh? :p

The original Xbox had an obvious advantage both on paper and in games. There is nothing about the PS2's specs that suggest it was a "beast". Regardless to Sony's fancy names for the pieces in it, the PS2 was pretty under powered. It was the weakest of all three 6th gen systems (and it showed, even despite it generally being the biggest priority system for developers).

Your PS3/360 example is even worse. The PS3 did have a decent hardware advantage over the 360 (it wasn't large, smaller than that of the Xbox and PS2 that's for sure, but it was still there), but it was an absolute nightmare to work with. That's common knowledge.

The PS4 doesn't have that issue. Not only does it have a power advantage (larger than that between the PS3 and 360), it seems to be the easier of the two to work with.

I do agree that specs don't directly equate to a real world advantage, but you're being hypocritical. You can't use that as a defense when the advantage is clear both on paper and in real world games.

It doesn't matter if the advantage is because of specs, because the X1 is tad hardware to work with or because Sony made a deal with a wizard; it's here and claiming the advantage is smaller than what both the specs and games are showing, without any sort of proof, makes you look silly



Around the Network
zero129 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


Look up almost any spec comparison video on Youtube. The PS4 is 50% faster than the Xbone. 

I dont need to look up videos i can read specs fine but Spec sheet doesnt = Real world performance or else the PS2 would of been a beast going by its specs and the emotion engine and the PS3 should of completely destoryed the X360 when it came to graphics but none of that translated into real world.

I get what you're saying but the exclusives will tell the story and lastly, the PS4 will take longer to bottleneck over time on multiplats than the Xbone. Not only is it so on paper, but it was predicted long ago and seems to be showing itself early on in the gen. Either way I like my Xbox One. Its quite fun. My PS4 will get more love when Sony's truckload of exclusives start pouring out. Takes time but anyone who has invested knows they have to wait for the titles to be finished which can take anywhere from a year to two years past launch.



ethomaz said:

zero129 said:

But didnt all them games also run at the same Framerate?

COD:G Was 720P@60FPS on X1 and 1080P@60 FPS on PS4 but here with PES we dont only see a lower res but a much lower frame rate too.

PES on Xbone runs at 60fps and that why the devs said they dropped the resolution to 720p.

Oh i thought it was running at 30 FPS on Xbox1. Well thats understandable then i guess no big deal imo.



Zekkyou said:
zero129 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


Look up almost any spec comparison video on Youtube. The PS4 is 50% faster than the Xbone. 

I dont need to look up videos i can read specs fine but Spec sheet doesnt = Real world performance or else the PS2 would of been a beast going by its specs and the emotion engine and the PS3 should of completely destoryed the X360 when it came to graphics but none of that translated into real world.

Eh? :p

The original Xbox had an obvious advantage both on paper and in games. There is nothing about the PS2's specs that suggest it was a "beast". Regardless to Sony's fancy names for the pieces in it, the PS2 was pretty under powered. It was the weakest of all three 6th gen systems (and it showed, even despite it generally being the biggest priority system for developers).

Your PS3/360 example is even worse. The PS3 did have a decent hardware advantage over the 360 (it wasn't large, smaller than that of the Xbox and PS2 that's for sure, but it was still there), but it was an absolute nightmare to work with. That's common knowledge.

The PS4 doesn't have that issue. Not only does it have a power advantage (larger than that between the PS3 and 360), it seems to be the easier of the two to work with.

I do agree that specs don't directly equate to a real world advantage, but you're being hypocritical. You can't use that as a defense when the advantage is clear both on paper and in real world games.

It doesn't matter if the advantage is because of specs, because the X1 is tad hardware to work with or because Sony made a deal with a wizard; it's here and claiming the advantage is smaller than what both the specs and games are showing, without any sort of proof, makes you look silly

I was going to say pretty much the same.
PS3 was infamously difficult to program for, which resulted in devs spending months/years just to triangualte (the time it takes to write the the code that creates the polygons on screen) instead of using those months to optimise the game, or learn how to get more out of the hardware.



On PS1 the time it took to triangulate was 1-2 months.
PS2 = 3 to 6 months.
PS3 = 6 to 12 months.
And with PS4, it is once again 1-2 months. Just like the original PS1. Giving devs that much more time to spend polishing the game instead.

So comparing it to PS3 without context is not a good comparison, as PS4 is quite the opposite of it when it comes to difficulty to program for.



So what exactly is the RAW figure in terms of power difference between X1 and PS4? I hear 40%... I hear 50%, which one is it? If a developer puts in the same effort for both platforms would it be 1080p vs 720p all the time or 1080p vs some odd number say, 812p?

 

What was the power difference between the original XBox and PS2?



It's just that simple.

Around the Network
MonstaMack said:

So what exactly is the RAW figure in terms of power difference between X1 and PS4? I hear 40%... I hear 50%, which one is it? If a developer puts in the same effort for both platforms would it be 1080p vs 720p all the time or 1080p vs some odd number say, 812p?

 

What was the power difference between the original XBox and PS2?


Depends on how intensive the game is GPU wise. But common types of games like fps and tps, 50% is easily the gap if the eye candy is jacked.



Is this confirmed?



Zekkyou said:
zero129 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


Look up almost any spec comparison video on Youtube. The PS4 is 50% faster than the Xbone. 

I dont need to look up videos i can read specs fine but Spec sheet doesnt = Real world performance or else the PS2 would of been a beast going by its specs and the emotion engine and the PS3 should of completely destoryed the X360 when it came to graphics but none of that translated into real world.

Eh? :p

The original Xbox had an obvious advantage both on paper and in games. There is nothing about the PS2's specs that suggest it was a "beast". Regardless to Sony's fancy names for the pieces in it, the PS2 was pretty under powered. It was the weakest of all three 6th gen systems (and it showed, even despite it generally being the biggest priority system for developers).

Your PS3/360 example is even worse. The PS3 did have a decent hardware advantage over the 360 (it wasn't large, smaller than that of the Xbox and PS2 that's for sure, but it was still there), but it was an absolute nightmare to work with. That's common knowledge.

The PS4 doesn't have that issue. Not only does it have a power advantage (larger than that between the PS3 and 360), it seems to be the easier of the two to work with.

I do agree that specs don't directly equate to a real world advantage, but you're being hypocritical. You can't use that as a defense when the advantage is clear both on paper and in real world games.

It doesn't matter if the advantage is because of specs, because the X1 is tad hardware to work with or because Sony made a deal with a wizard; it's here and claiming the advantage is smaller than what both the specs and games are showing, without any sort of proof, makes you look silly

Where is your proof as now you the one looking silly?.

I didnt need to proof anything as so far the is only like 2 games that show such a huge dif between the 2 and plenty more that show like a 20-30% dif in res only so where is all them real world examples you speak of??



MonstaMack said:

So what exactly is the RAW figure in terms of power difference between X1 and PS4? I hear 40%... I hear 50%, which one is it? If a developer puts in the same effort for both platforms would it be 1080p vs 720p all the time or 1080p vs some odd number say, 812p?

 

What was the power difference between the original XBox and PS2?


According to the  math it goes by the maximum amount of operations per second.  In this case its Trillions. 

Xbox One 1.31 Trillion operations a second in absolute perfect conditions.

PS4: 1.84 Trillion operations a second in absolute perfect conditions.

1.84/1.31 = ~40% raw power advantage of the PS4..

These numbers refer to the hypothetical limit of each systems GPU. It represents the  maximun output performace in terms of graphics and GPU computing. 



MonstaMack said:

So what exactly is the RAW figure in terms of power difference between X1 and PS4? I hear 40%... I hear 50%, which one is it? If a developer puts in the same effort for both platforms would it be 1080p vs 720p all the time or 1080p vs some odd number say, 812p?

 

What was the power difference between the original XBox and PS2?

It was 50% at start but before launch MS upclocked 57Mhz in GPU... so that make the GPU jump from 1.2 TFLOPS to 1.31 TFLOPS.

It is hard to tell about Xbox and PS2 because they had way too different architectures... Xbox was stronger but how much? Well it was a good gap but it is discussable... in my opinion the gap was small or close to that showed between PS4/Xbone but some guys will disagree and says it was a bit widen.

The PS4 and Xbone are easy to compare because they use 90% the same architecture... the only differences are the GDDR5, DDR3 + ESRAM, RAW POWER and clock of the components... everything else you can say they are brothers.