By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - PS4 early specs 'more powerful' than Xbox 720, claims source

Khuutra on 08 January 2012
Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:


Listen, jsut because Bethesda lets themselves be tethered by the ancient console architecture, so much so that their PC games suffer for it, doesn't mean the others necessarily will. Rest assured that the Half-Life games do not depend on console architecture at all, and the best version of Battlefield won't either (just like it didn't this gen).

Look, all multiplatform games are the same game on consoles and PC. The only difference is the ability to crank up resolution, AF, AA, framerate and the occasional meaningless shadow/lighting effect. Architectire, polygons and lots of essential stuff that is the difference maker between generations are left unchanged from console to PC version.

This includes Battlefield 3 despite all the promices by DICE to take advantage of the PC, Just watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1LSRDTJryo


Yeah because that tiny-ass video is going ot tell me anything important. More, I thougth yo uwere a Battlefield fan, and you would appreciate where the difference actually exists, which is to say in multiplayer. You know, that thing where the PC vs. the consoles might as well be two completely different games.

Anyway.

This is your avatar for the next three months. I keep forgetting, but here you go. All yours.



Around the Network
zarx on 08 January 2012
Squilliam said:
zarx said:
Squilliam said:
So they know the final clock speed and enough specifications 18 months out to make a judgement like that?


Why would they need to know that to know "PlayStation 4's early technical specifications are looking "more powerful" than those of Microsoft's next-generation Xbox targets"? Nowhere is it claimed anything about final specs, thos final specs are unlikely to diverge to far from the early specs so if one is targetting higher end hardware now final specs will likely reflect that.

The architecture may not change but the specifications might. Adding more cores is easy on modern graphics hardware as it scales nicely and Microsoft was trying to decide whether or not to launch a loss leading console.

While that is true that doesn't change the fact that the article is about the situation now , they are not really making judgements about the final specs just the specs currently used as targets for next generation. And while it's true that Microsoft are likely fidling with the exact specs so are Sony and given that the article also sugests that Sony will be launching later they will have more time to scale their tech and also for manufacturing to mature on the tech meaning if the situation of Sony being more powerful is acurate that is unlikely to change by the time they are both released. 



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

HappySqurriel on 08 January 2012
Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:
Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:
Slimebeast said:

 From what we know the Wii U is at best 3 times faster than a X360,


Didn't you and I already have this conversation? You are being patently and willfully disngenuous, here. Cut it out.

We did? I honestly don't remember. And Im sorry if I previously admitted that there's a possibility for the Wii to be more than 3 times faster than a X260. Did I?


In a roundabout way. Remember? Obviously the 360 is only 3 times more powerful than the PS2 or Xbox, based on all those barely-upgraded multiplats it got early on.

Oh, now I remember. I admitted that I erroneously used the upcoming current-gen multiplatform games to the Wii U such as Assassin's Creed and Aliens Colonial Marines as an argument that the Wii U is hardly stronger than the X360. But I believe I also said that I instead was leaning on the rumors that the Wii U is using a GPU equivalent to a Radeon 4850, which is rufly 3 times stronger than the GPU in the X360.

Well, it has been suggested that it was based on the Radeon R700 which was used in graphics cards that had performance as high as 4 times what is seen by the HD consoles. Whatever chip they use will likely have been heavily customized over the past 3 years, will likely be in a system that has been designed to minimize bottlenecks, and software running on it will likely be heavily optimized to maximize performance.

While we can't know how powerful this hardware is without far more information, it is unlikely that it would be less than 4 times the processing power of the current HD console's GPUs.



Slimebeast on 08 January 2012
Khuutra said:
Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:


Listen, jsut because Bethesda lets themselves be tethered by the ancient console architecture, so much so that their PC games suffer for it, doesn't mean the others necessarily will. Rest assured that the Half-Life games do not depend on console architecture at all, and the best version of Battlefield won't either (just like it didn't this gen).

Look, all multiplatform games are the same game on consoles and PC. The only difference is the ability to crank up resolution, AF, AA, framerate and the occasional meaningless shadow/lighting effect. Architectire, polygons and lots of essential stuff that is the difference maker between generations are left unchanged from console to PC version.

This includes Battlefield 3 despite all the promices by DICE to take advantage of the PC, Just watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1LSRDTJryo


Yeah because that tiny-ass video is going ot tell me anything important. More, I thougth yo uwere a Battlefield fan, and you would appreciate where the difference actually exists, which is to say in multiplayer. You know, that thing where the PC vs. the consoles might as well be two completely different games.

Anyway.

This is your avatar for the next three months. I keep forgetting, but here you go. All yours.

Oh damn it. You hadn't forgotten. Three months?? April 8th is the day of relief then.

Yes there is a big difference in BF3, especially in multiplayer, but I think that's largely because we're so late in the gen, but even BF3 is clearly developed with consoles as the minimum common denominator, no matter what DICE  has said (lied).

 



Slimebeast on 08 January 2012
HappySqurriel said:
Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:
Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:
Slimebeast said:

 From what we know the Wii U is at best 3 times faster than a X360,


Didn't you and I already have this conversation? You are being patently and willfully disngenuous, here. Cut it out.

We did? I honestly don't remember. And Im sorry if I previously admitted that there's a possibility for the Wii to be more than 3 times faster than a X260. Did I?


In a roundabout way. Remember? Obviously the 360 is only 3 times more powerful than the PS2 or Xbox, based on all those barely-upgraded multiplats it got early on.

Oh, now I remember. I admitted that I erroneously used the upcoming current-gen multiplatform games to the Wii U such as Assassin's Creed and Aliens Colonial Marines as an argument that the Wii U is hardly stronger than the X360. But I believe I also said that I instead was leaning on the rumors that the Wii U is using a GPU equivalent to a Radeon 4850, which is rufly 3 times stronger than the GPU in the X360.

Well, it has been suggested that it was based on the Radeon R700 which was used in graphics cards that had performance as high as 4 times what is seen by the HD consoles. Whatever chip they use will likely have been heavily customized over the past 3 years, will likely be in a system that has been designed to minimize bottlenecks, and software running on it will likely be heavily optimized to maximize performance.

While we can't know how powerful this hardware is without far more information, it is unlikely that it would be less than 4 times the processing power of the current HD console's GPUs.

Your post makes a lot of sense but you just said this discussion is moronic a few posts earlier.



Around the Network
rf40928 on 08 January 2012

See my post below



Play4Fun on 08 January 2012
brendude13 said:
Play4Fun said:

I did not contradict myself.

You are uninformed because of your statement about the possibility of a N64 to Xbox gap between Wii U and and PS4/720. That's bullshit and far from the worst case scenario.  The other thing was your comment about Wii U being a DC to Xbox gap and that's  if Sony and MS were conservative.

You sound just like those annoying fanboys you meet all over the net who started gaming this gen and think that all Nintendo can do is extremely underpowered hardware like Wii despite it being obvious a Wii-like strategy is not their goal next gen. It's like pre-wii never happened and Wii is the console to judge all future Nintendo consoles by.

 

But whatever, I need to stop wasting my time on these kind of online arguments.

I'm also guessing Wii U will be underpowered compared to the other two. It's releasing earlier than the other two consoles, probably by 18 months, the fact that they called it "Wii U" is a pretty damn big giveaway that they aren't going to change their strategy or their target audience much.

Iwata stated very clearly what their strategy with Wii-U was at E3 2011.

Some people just  wath E3 for trailers and gameplay videos. They don't listen to commentary with important info it seems.

And yes, I know Wii-U will be weaker than the others.

But unlike the 'lol' Nintendo people I don't think it's going to be another Wii. I think it will be more like Wii U being a mid-end PC while PS4/720 are high end.



brendude13 on 08 January 2012
Play4Fun said:
brendude13 said:

I'm also guessing Wii U will be underpowered compared to the other two. It's releasing earlier than the other two consoles, probably by 18 months, the fact that they called it "Wii U" is a pretty damn big giveaway that they aren't going to change their strategy or their target audience much.

Iwata stated very clearly what their strategy with Wii-U was at E3 2011.

Some people just  wath E3 for trailers and gameplay videos. They don't listen to commentary with important info it seems.

I know, I watched it twice.

When I watched it Live, I didn't even know they had unveiled a new console, let alone their strategy for it, I thought it was a controller. I did watch and read interviews after that and you are right, he did mention that the Wii U is going to be a hardcore console, I don't believe him though.



oldschoolfool on 08 January 2012

I think they will reveal something this year. It's about the right time frame,I think.



rf40928 on 08 January 2012

The whole issue is ps3 cell is also more powerful then 360s but not by much and mainly thru use of optimizations.. The problem is games are written for gpu's (graphics processor) , not cpu's.. And several in depth articles have pointed out 360 has a more powerful gpu then the ps3 - despite the ps3's more powerful CPU.. And yet here they are saying the CPU is more powerful.. What about the GPU?

In short, it won't matter whether one console is a little more powerful then the other.  Why?  Because according to several articles and even comments from John Carmack - both consoles are making a large enough 'Leap' forward that the differences won't matter - just like what you see now.  People will buy the consoles for just a few games - because more and more companies don't want to make exclusives.. Next gen consoles will offer enough power that game improvements should be seen a lot more in the artificial intelligence area of gaming..