Wii U vs PS4 vs Xbox One FULL SPECS (January 24, 2014)

[Pemalite]

Multimedialover said:

Pemalite said:

What the hell is a permclock cycle? I've never heard that term used.

Regardless, to put performance into perspective though, Anandtech did a run down of Kabini/Jaguar and it works out that a Quad Core Kabini chip is half the speed of a Dual Core Core i3/i5 at the same clock.
So, an 8 Core 1.6ghz Jaguar CPU that's found in the consoles should be relatively similar in performance to a Dual Core 1.6Ghz Core i3/i5. (Actually it should be less, scaling beyond multiple cores isn't a linear increase, it's a theoretical scenario.)

Poor performance? You bet, the PS4 and Xbox One are identical in this regard with their respective CPU's.

As for the DDR3, it will outperform GDDR5 in general purpose tasks because of latency, it will loose out in high-bandwidth hungry tasks like graphics. - However this is where the SRAM will provide assistance.

I'm *very* dissapointed in the Xbox One's GPU, even more so than the PS4's as it's only a Radeon 7770/7790 class in terms of compute. :(

LOL. Damn tablet typing.

Meant to say PS4 4 operations per clock cycle. And Microsoft claim their CPU is doing 6 operations per clock cycle. Many tech heads on forums like Beyond3d are stating that Microsoft have actually done wonders with the CPU as its not supposed to be possible on the Jaguar/Kabini chipset. Going onto saying that makes the power of PS4 and Xbox One significantly blurred as to what is more powerful overall. They state that PS4 should have the edge in visuals but not by much thanks to DDR5 which is great for graphics. But the One should have the edge in processes like multitasking, App switcing, AI, well basically any process the CPU deals with as the extra operations per cycle and the DDR3 will help it there.

Well, from what I have read both the PS4 and Xbox One does 2 instructions per clock per hardware thread, thus best-case-scenario is 16 for both consoles, without the use of extensions or loopbacks.
Reason being is that the front-end of Jaguar is unchanged from the Bobcat architecture, it was a sacrifice of power/complexity vs performance in the end.

To put that in perspective, the first generation (Nahelem) Core i7 could do 4+1 instructions per hardware thread, but that's not going to make it twice as fast, allot more comes into play in regards to CPU design and thus performance.

Also, why isn't anyone peeved about the lack of GPU grunt this coming generation? :P