| eyeofcore said: Yet my post is not hilarious because your post is hilarious since there is only 50% gap and that is small, it is not like 100% also there is no such leaps anymore like it was with Super Nintendo to Nintendo 64 or from PlayStation 1 to PlayStation 2 or from Xbox to Xbox 360. Your claim that it will never have performance of PlayStation 4 is laughable, remember when Xbox 360 was always ahead and there were Xbox fans saying that PlayStation 3 can't catch up yet it did and outperform... So... Yea. First of all PlayStation 4 uses GDDR5 memory as primary and only memory so it is easier to program for it compared to Xbox One that has two memory types, DDR3 that does what it is suppose to do and eSRAM as VRAM that is cheaper and faster than GDDR5, but harder to work with and that is reason why games on Xbox One has couple of multi plats that are 720p and not 900p or 1080p. Xbox One has 32MB of eSRAM that is ultra fast and it only needs 16MB to achieve 1080p in single pass and rest can be used for AA's and other things. As time goes on, developers will learn to handle eSRAM like they learned how to handle eDRAM in Xbox 360. |
I'll leave a big LOL here. If only the developers learn how to use it. They say 32Mb is not enough, whereas in reality even 32MB is too much and you can use the rest for AA! Damn if that is not a powerful console I don't know what is.
Developers know how to use esram. The reason the resolutions are lower compared to PS4 is its GPU is weaker, much weaker. The system is bandwidth starved. 32Mb esram is ridiculously small. 64 MB would be a better but that would increase the size and costs. Esram is not a magical sauce that makes everything bettter, it is a help to increase the low bandwidth. Of course the amount is much less than ideal.
I'd like to think these are joke posts, I really do. Though every other day a new contender arrives.
