r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
r3tr0gam3r1337 said:
i couldn't be bothered to read through all the comments, i was just laughing at the stupidity from jega.
the games are being primarily developed for the PS4 as that is the console who has the biggest user base, just like last gen the 360 was the primary console for development as it had the biggest user base (in terms of HD gaming, the wii had the biggest instal base but it wasn't HD among other things).
the XB1 will not receive a hardware upgrade as that will render all games currently released unplayable as they have been developed for the current hardware inside the XB1 also any future games would not work on older XB1's meaning current XB1 owners would be forced to upgrade their console, Microsoft are not that stupid to make such a daft move hence why the HD-DVD add-on for the 360 was not used for games.
other things could have soured this thread is pretty much like expecting a repeat from the 7th gen when the PS3 eventually overtook the 360, much like the PS3 the XB1 on paper looks to be the better spec but much like the PS3 developers are having a hard time with the XB1 which is why the PS4 has the better versions (multiplats etc), it is easier to develop for much like the last gen where the 360 was easier to develop for and the hardware in both console's is effectively the same, both have APU's developed by AMD both have AMD GPU's and yes both will have some variant of the direct X API. |
6/10, post almost seemed convincing.
That bolded statement is incorrect however. The XB1 is not the new PS3, just like the PS4 is not the new 360.
That's just wish fufillment.
mine said:
Oh. The PS4 has GDDR5
Has anybody noticed that there is NO computer up to date which uses ONLY GDDR - even not those machines where "money doesn't count" ?
So - WHY is that? DOES GDDR HAS SOME SERIOUS DISADVANTAGES?
Yes. Because it is a special type of RAM TAILORED for GPUs - big latency but you can read and write at once.
DDR RAM is made for CPUs - low latency and you can read OR write at once.
Now lets investigate further why GDDR only is a bad idea on a CPU like AMDs Jaguar - those cores were designed with netbooks in mind. Of course they have doubled the number of cores to a total of eight so its raw compute power doesn't look that bad - this year...
But AMDs Jaguar lack a L3 cache and its L2 cache isn't that big too. If a core has a cache miss chances are big that the core has to wait longer for data on a PS4 than on the Xbox One. Thats where RAM latency comes into play.
CPUs favor small chunks of data and they need them fast.
GPUs need big chunks of data in parallel but they can wait a bit longer...
This might be the reason why Killzone fails to deliver true 1080p in Multiplayer: if the network code destroys to often the caches the cores have to wait and so these parts can't be as optimized as the single player code...
People are tempted to overlook such technical details and favour a simplified "expensive is better". But as already written - if this would be the case ALL high end servers (POWER, Sparc) would ship with GDDR instead of DDR . The opposite is the truth: DDR is better for CPUs and GDDR is best for GPUs. And to "glue" both together it's best to use something ultra-fast like EDRAM or ESRAM. |
4/10, Nice effort but lack of fact checking is annoying.
PS4 has 256mb of ddr3 for system task such as background data and networking.
It doensn't only use GDDR5.
KZ:SF is 1080p native, they just used temporal relocation to increase the frame rate.
|
i didn't say the XB1 was the new PS3 what i was trying to put across was that it currently sits in a similar possition as the PS3 did back in 2007, on paper the PS3 had better spec but the reality was that the 360 performed better and was easier for game deves to work on plus it had the bigger user base, now do you see what i was trying to say?
|
Dude,the PS4 just have better spec and performed better than XBOX One,
so your theory just...doens't make sense.
