RazorDragon said:
AnthonyW86 said:
RazorDragon said:
Both use the same low-end Atom-class CPU, same amount of RAM, just a different GPU. Expect lower polygon counts on the Xbox One, maybe lower framerates, and that's it, I doubt anyone will be able to see major graphical differences in multiplatforms because the amount of polygons these newer GPUs can drive is insane.
|
Jaguar is not Atom-class, it's much improved over Bobcat. It's floating point unit is twice as fast and most importantly each core has it's own cache instead of shared cache. It's also 20%-25% faster per core. Performancewise it's probablycloser to AMD's Bulldoser desktop line.
And for people that think the difference in power isn't big:
Nintendo Gamecube: 8 Gflops
Nintendo Wii: 11 Gflops
Difference: 37,5%
Xbox One: 1,24 Tflops
Playstation 4 1,84 Tflops
Difference: 48%
|
Jaguar is Atom-class, and Atom processors have also improved in performance during the last few years. Bobcat processors were slower than Atom processors during that time, Jaguar architecture certainly improved CPU performance but Intel Atom cores also improved in performance since Diamondville.
Anyway, I never said the difference in performance wasn't big and I believe it is. I just don't believe this performance difference is enough to show significant graphical differences.
|
Significant is relative. But since both Consoles seem to be identical in the architecture every single Multiplatgame WILL look better on PS4. Might be better AA 1080p vs 900p more stable framerate and so on. It will be obvious for some people. Others might not even notice. PS4 could have fancier effects too or more complex Physics through gpgpu without compromising graphical fidelity.
It will not be a huge difference but it will be visible.
But what REALLY worries me. Xbox One has a 5 Billion Transistor Chip @ 40nm. Thats bigger than a Geforce Titan chip. Thats why the Console is so huge and will eat up alot of energy and produce alot of heat. Its crazy, actually its baffling. MS needs that ESRAM real bad I suppose.
Sony has a 28nm APU MUCH MUCH smaller. The PS4 will need less power and be overall smaller than the Xbox One yet still more powerful. Despite that GDDR5, a gigantic APU will easily make up for the DDR3 advantage the Xbox would have had in power and heat.
The more I read about the Xbox one the more I feel that MS had to sacrifice alot for low latency embedded ram, I wonder if that has something to do with Kinect and its needs for ultra oow latency.
There is NO price advantage either the costs for GDDR5 or a 600mm2+ APU will be similar. The PS4 has a 3 Billion Transistor Chip. Way less Silicon at a manufacturing process one GPU generation ahead of Wii U and Xbox one ! The difference between Wii U and Xbox one is that the Xbox one has an obscenly huge Chip inside. And the 32 MB Esram are taking away half of that chip.
There is no doubt for me after reading various things about the Xbox One that the PS4 is the better Gaming Hardware. MS cleary designed the Xbox with OS stuff in mind not classic gaming.
Edit: Looks like some Sites report 28nm others 40nm. Well 40nm is pretty unrealistic. But still its 3 Billion vs 5 Billion chip. Xbox has no price heat size advantage either way. 40nm would just put it seriously behind PS4 in those points.
