eva01beserk said:
walsufnir said:
eva01beserk said:
walsufnir said:
You meant this thread, obviously, and evaded a direct answer to my post. Yes, there are always people who are remote to tech and think tables will change. There also people who say otherwise and they don't know what they are talking about, too. They are on both sides. Difference is that most PS4 fans are mostly wrong in why PS4 is stronger and Xbone fans are wrong by default if they say MS will close the gap :)
|
Did I really evaded your question? By not specifing it was the thread I read, wich I did read it, or by not giving you a ridiculous list of names of people oon the thread?
What is your stance on the performance gap by the way? Could you say what this one extra core means in comparison to the ps4?
|
PS4 is more powerful but the difference we saw at launch games is currently not as big because the XDK evolved fast and MS even introduced a new driver.
Adding a core will, of course, be beneficial. In which way we don't know and will also depend on the game itself. If CPU cores weren't crucial, why not remove one? 5 should be ok, I guess? Because it's only the GPU that is important, right? Wait, let's make it only 4 cores. Should be enough as the CPUs have way less GFlops than the GPU. Right?
Thing is, of course CPUs are crucial and important but we don't know how much exactly and it relies on how devs design their game.
I would give you an explanation if a 2015 game uses the additional core on a multiplatform game and I get my hands on profiling data. But I doubt many would understand it.
|
But dint I hear AC:U use this sdk? If true, dint the ps4 ended up having a better patch I hear and outperformed it in the end? and the x1 is overclocked to so the diference should be massive since they use the same processor and the x1 uses one more core.
I agree with you that cpu is important, but the war now seems to be focused on graphycs only and the ps4 canot be beat due to hardware.
|
We don't know if they used. Who said this?
