mine said:
Norris2k said:
My main point is that virtualization and 3 OS (including windows) cost is higher than one native plain old BSD (which is a very light OS). And that's a fact.So, Sony could also give one more CPU... but ! What I consider a "high cost" is not a CPU cost, but the loss of reactivity coming from not having 2 reserved CPU anymore for OSs and apps. I'm not exactly sure if the will do OS and apps on on single core, which seems very unreactive, or be able to borrow resources from the 7 CPU, which would lower the impact.
BTW, I'm not aware of a clear CPU bottleneck on the PS4. Only Ubisoft on AC talk about that... and ends with about no difference. The GPU and memory bottleneck on the XBone is on the contrary pretty clear : most game look better and have a better resolution on the PS4.
|
| |
Of course only developers aiming for the true next-gen will talk about that. Ubisoft did bet on worlds with highly connected AIs and now they can't realize them as wanted.
If PS4 developers only polish last gen software they won't complain as they will be happy what the PS4 has to offer.
|
If we are saying that this generation fails so far to go to an higher level than graphic improvements, I agree.
If you want to say that one more core for the XBone will lead to da real true next gen experience, and that the PS4 will not be able to, I think you are wrong. First, one more weak CPU for an already highly multithreaded program is not enough to make such a big difference. Second, it's not just about AI, and other improvements would take GPU power. Last, if it's just about giving one more CPU what ever the impact is, Sony can patch anytime.
I find your post quite biased as you talk about "PS4 developers" only polishing. Most developpers are multiplatforms, it's not a PS4/Sony problem. And that so far MS first party didn't get farer into next gen than Sony's first.
