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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Is 900p okay? Is Xbox One a worthy 8th gen console now?

1337 Gamer said:
If you have an issue with 900p then you must be gaming on a pc at 4k... or at least 1440p.... otherwise the difference (between 900p and 1080p)is rather small especially when scaling is present.


30 percent more,  so small difference



Around the Network
H3ADShOt3 said:
This whole generation is under powered, 1080p 60fps should've been the minimal for these machines and they also should've been capable of 4K resolution. I wasn't too happy when I saw the performance of these consoles at first but I've learned to accept it to stay a console gamer.


Yea. And they should ve come with a build in espresso deluxe machine, a detachable toaster and a hot easy babysitter with big boobs.

 

Xbox One is indeed underpowered. PS4 is up to standard, nothing less, nothing more. That standard is 1080p. And it'll be for a couple of years. Certainly beyond the lifecylce of current console gen.

The fatal mistake MS made was to inexpicably tie kinect to the X1 instead of making it optional, a concept that required to keep the overall hardware cost at a minimum. We all see the conqequences now in form of lower resolution and/or less FPS. A plattform holder always has to compromise. Back then, and in the present day. Nowadays (unfortunately) it isn't enough to just build a pure gaiming console like in the old days. That is why the base should consist of what is absolutely necessary only. 

 

John2290 said:
900p is okay in my books but topping out at 720p is not. Anything under 25fps is not okay (40fps for shooter/sports/racing). I think console owners should be allowed to adjust fps and res output via interlinked sliders, or some such thing that will do until we get 4k next gen.

Ha ha, you're an optimistic one, aren't you?



Hunting Season is done...

1337 Gamer said:
If you have an issue with 900p then you must be gaming on a pc at 4k... or at least 1440p.... otherwise the difference (between 900p and 1080p)is rather small especially when scaling is present.

That's the whole point of 1080p, that there is no more scaling present.
The difference is still rather small in the end because of other limiting factors. FXAA, temporal AA, bad AF, cheap DOF and motion blur effects all hamper the image quality. Even The order doesn't look all that sharp for 1080p due to the overly processed image.



KingofTrolls said:
iron_megalith said:

Really disappointed in the specs for this generation. But whatever. I have my PC to solve that fix.

Bloodborne, Uncharted, TLoU, Mario Kart8 and Halo 5 are sad pandas now.


Not entirely. Those are really good games. Can't complain about that aspect.

It's just that the jump for this gen to last gen fell short. I'm not really a 60fps fanatic since not all games look good with that. However I do feel that the current gen should be able to do both at 1080p while having headroom to do a little bit more to push the boundary.

Now, it feels that both hit the ceiling fast.



You should buy the console you enjoy the most. Graphics only go so far.

Look at my favorite consoles:
Genesis (weaker than SNES)
PSX (weaker than N64)
Dreamcast/PS2 (weaker than Gamecube/Xbox)
Xbox 360

As far as 1080p, The higher quality the TV and the bigger the screen, the more noticeable a sub 1080p resolution becomes.

If you enjoy the exclusives, and the competitors exclusives aren't of interest, or if you already have the competing products, go for it. If you just care about third party games then go with the PS4. I'm not a fan of the Xbox One's hardwre, or how Microsoft originally handled the Xbox One, but the Forza series alone is reason enough for me to own one. Hope that helps.



Around the Network
bdbdbd said:
captain carot said:
PS2 was more expensive than PS1 at release.
At the same time growth in power was much bigger back then. Not only for consoles but for all that computer stuff. Actually one of the reasons PC's were outdated so fast back then.

Right now PC's have the same problem. You can be happy if a new GPU generation is 50% faster then its predecessor today.

About Xbox 360 at release:
Fastest graphics card back then should have been the (rare) GeForce GTX 7800 512MB. Though you could have those as SLI system.
The Xbox 360 GPU was at least as fast as the GTX 7800.


Naturally it depends what tasks they were supposed to perform. Xenos benefited from being designed to be used only with one hardware, whereas 7800 needed to work with lots of different type of HW. The eDRAM really boosted the performance of the chip, but on a downside, the GPU suffered from slow VRAM with high latency.

I'd remember PS1 was damn expensive at it's Japanese launch.

Well, yes and no. It had the eDRAM. But basically it was a 'normal' unified shader GPU though it's the first consumer market unified shader GPU. The R600 was based on the same layout/design though with full DX10.

Xenos was more or less DirectX 9c+something. Microsoft wanting some additional features is discussable as custom design. But then it was Sony that went with a brute force CPU and added a more or less standard GPU with minor changes last minute.



There are plenty games both on PS4 and Xone which run on 1080p. If Xone needs 900p for the sake of better lightning, models, framerate, effects etc. I am totally fine with that.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

It's pretty easy.
One console is more powerful than the other, thus developers will always focus to get the best result for the stronger console. The current maximum is 1080p 60FPS. Now they usually drop the 60FPS to 30FPS on the better performing console, to add more effects, more detail, increase picture quality etc.
The other console is obviously not able to achieve the same results, so the resolution needs to be droppped.

Now the interesting part. Assuming the X1 would be more powerful than the PS4, while the PS4 still has the same amount of power as it currently has, games that used to be 1080p on PS4 would suddenly only run at 900p.
The reason is already explained above. Developers would try to establish 1080p 30FPS on X1 and the PS4 couldn't handle that.
That wouldn't make the PS4 a less worthy 8th gen console though. For the same reason the X1 isn't a less worthy 8th gen console.
Unless they're very similar in power, a difference in resolution and/or framerate will always be there.



H3ADShOt3 said:
This whole generation is under powered, 1080p 60fps should've been the minimal for these machines and they also should've been capable of 4K resolution. I wasn't too happy when I saw the performance of these consoles at first but I've learned to accept it to stay a console gamer.

How much were you willing to pay for your consoles? It costs like $600 to build a 1080p 60fps minimum PC and 4k is unrealistic on said platform (1440p at the best.) Assume that Sony/MS were willing to go for a loss and they got bulk deals, that would still mean a $500 console for a while that gives you marginally better visuals/performance. Sony definitely wouldn't have been able to afford to release another expensive console. Microsoft maybe, but what would be the point if Sony isn't? 1080p 30fps with sometimes 900p is getting what you pay for($350), unfortunately.