| walsufnir said:
Again you are reading it wrong. Not irrelevant but not in any case the 40% or 50% difference people use in discussions because "facts". There is a lot in a system and the architecture that is accountable for performance while not being mentioned in the specs. |
Ok. As long as we agree its not irrelevant I mostly agree with you. Now on to what yu are saying and what I think about it.
You are actually right, there is a lot more to how a game is made besides CPU/GPU that affects its overall performance that isn't factored into most peoples argumnets. This however does not change or dispute the "fact" that those things people say...all that 30%-50% perf. dvantage they seem to suggest for the PS4; are still "facts". Without going into too much detail, a very very very straightforward simple example is just comparing the resolutions of the average XB1 game to that of the average PS4 game. 900p vs 1080p. One of those resolutions is about 30% more than the other. This is a "FACT". The problem though is where a fact like that causes issues.
When people say that the PS4 is 30-50% more powerful than the XB1. They almost come off as if saying that a game will be 30-50% better on the PS4 than it is on the XB1. This is actually true and usually the case, the real world truth is that, that "better" in question is not an obviously percieveable difference. Its not easy to just spot 30% more pixels or to spot 3 less framerate drops in a 5 minute period. All that doesn't still change that they are there though.
