| Shinobi-san said: 30-50% is NOT a huge performance difference. But you cant deny that that difference is real and that it does exist. Its as clear as fucking day. MS can talk themselves blue in the face about how well there software does but at the end of the day that gap is there. Whether or not this relates into anything tangible to the consumer is completely up to the devs. |
Its clear on paper but if you are not coding against both platforms you really do not know exactly how much real world difference it is. I am not sure if how MS designed the X1 that the memory advange will give Sony an edge. What it does mean is that coding for the X1 compared to the PS4 will be different. GDDR has the latency so it will be interesting how that will be negated. MS has a more complex memory setup but not all game code need that kind of bandwidth so more efficient code to use the ESRAM will be required but who knows it might all equal out in the end. I am not sure if having more CUs will be a huge advantage over MS custom co-processors. We might find that for gaming, MS offloading a lot of stuff to their co-processors frees up the GPU enough to maintain close performance with the PS4.
On paper, the PS3 smoked the 360 but in reality it was a lot closer and both systems had strengths and weakness to pretty much balance out the games. Right now the difference we see for the systems is in the GPU numbers which may or may not play as big a role as people are stating in the forums and the memory setups.
There is a lot going on in the X1 setup so making a definitive statement that one system is stronger than another probalby will no be clear until developers under NDAs start to give their opinion on programming on both systems.
