the 24% was 24% better frame rate, so yeah you will notice, its going to be the difference between tearing on games and not tearing, or if locked, 60 and 30 fps, not on all third party games but on a great deal of them yes.

So unless devs try to add more effects on PS4 to even out the frame rate between the two consoles, you are going to notice big differences in frame rates, much bigger than in the current gen, just as you would with 2 similar spec'ed PCs.

Carmack was talking about similarity in architecture, and work flow there is going to be no tearing up the rule book for devs this time.

Again these are 2 identical PCs next gen but one has a faster graphics card with faster graphics memory, you really have to be burying your head if you dont think there is going to be a visual difference in frame rate on multiplat games.

You have a very weird meaning of "very good article".

Actually no one will notice.  Just like last gen no noticed if the 360 or PS3 played a 3rd party game better.  You want to know why, because people will buy a game for the system they have and if it plays it smooth enough they probably will not care if the game is running 60FPS, 40 or 30.  Some games will be cap so it will not make a difference. 

Also, people seem to dismiss the advantage of optimazation.  Sony and MS will have a chance to make the best driver layer for their hardware and who is able to get the most out of the hardware will benefit from such work.  Its really to early to say how much the PS4 will benefit from having more CUs as even Sony Cerny says do not expect to see an advantage in that space for quite some time.

Please don't spread BS if you don't know what you are talking about.

You are right about PS360 having more component differences, but what does that have to do with a difference in power? That's like saying a steam powered car and an electric car have almost the same top speed, therefor two gas cars must have the exact same top speed.

Luckily for us the two systems being so similar makes it pretty straight forward to see how large the gap is and which system is stronger. With previous gens each system had its strengths and weaknesses. PS3 had a super powerful CPU but it was a bitch to tap that performance. On top of that it had split RAM. The 360 had a great GPU and a single pool of RAM but its CPU had nothing on the theoretical power of the CELL. Each system had its relative strengths and weaknesses.

With Xbox One vs PS4 there is none of that. Same CPUs, same GPU architectures, same single pools of RAM, and a lot of the same part manufacturers. The only difference that isn't a black and white number is DDR3 + ESRAM vs GDDR5. This is the ONLY* power difference that is even close to being debatable. Everything else is PS4 is better, PS4 is better, PS4 is the same, PS4 is better**...

Of course there is the debate on how much better the PS4 will be in real world examples, but it will be bigger than the PS360 difference I can guarantee you that. If you care for some bet about this, just PM me. We can discuss specifics.

*Xbox One is believed to have a less taxing audio chip than PS4. It's also debatable yet most people ignore it since its effects on system performance are minimal.

**Xbox One has more transistors and a higher GPU clock than PS4, but those numbers are meaningless on their own.

The main difference you will hear in the future about these two consoles are rasteriszation capabilities when multiplatform will come out. 16 rops vs 32 is a big a deal. Everybody is talking about gflops, ram and whatnot but in real world when you are able to input faster cause of the bandwidth and output twice as fast (x2 rasterizer) it will be the main practical thing that sets them apart.

People really need to stop using this 24% figure. It's from a BS article by Leadbetter. An article that was the final straw that got Digital Foundry banned on Gaf. He used a slightly better GPU than the PS4 has to represent the PS4 and a much better GPU than the Xbox One has to represent it. He than used the same speed RAM in both. So yea, a flawed comparison from the beginning, one that favors the Xbox One. The actual difference is going to be larger than 24%.

Here is the deal for me. It has nothing to do with GPU, CPU or RAM.

One console is created by gamers and for gamers. The other console is created by corporate suits who want to spy on you by remotely activating the Kinect camera and/or microphone to do "consumer research" on your living room.

Personally, I have an Xbox 360 Slim. I see very little reason to get an Xbone. I see all the reasons to convert over to a PS4: 1. No violation of privacy rights, 2. Technically superior console, and 3. A set of games (Uncharted, Killzone, and on) that I missed out on as an Xbox 360 gamer.

I admit that I was dead wrong. I was a pro-Microsoft gamer as some viral marketers here. Yet, I realized that Microsoft never had my best interests at heart. They never cared for my gaming interests. They saw me as information to acquire and sell to the highest advertising bidder.

Well, I wised up. Sad to say that it may be a year or more before I can afford to buy a PS4, Xbone or Wii-U. I am going to play it smart, wait it out (want to see if there is another red rings of death), and buy-in around holiday 2014.

That's one very uninformed "journalist"...2.75GHz is not PS4's CPU speed, and DF GPU comparison is laughing stock, completely disregarding difference in ROPs between PS4 and XOne. Not that most multiplats will look hugely different, but difference is bigger than that random 24% Leadbetter came up with.

Agreed. The PS4 still has a 40% advantage in just GPU compute scenarios (Give or take!)
It also has a 33% Texture mapping unit advantage and twice the Render output pipelines, that's going to show a difference, anyone who disputes that would be silly.

Comparing the bandwidth however, is essentially pointless.
Firstly, we have no idea what kind of impact the 32Mb of eSRAM is going to make in the long haul, it does increase development time and cost.

Plus, because the Xbox One has a slower GPU, it's bandwidth demands are also less than the PS4.

I would have liked more CPU and GPU grunt under the hood for both consoles, but I'm picky like that, we have to "endure" these machines for years and they will look long in the tooth in a few years.

I agree if you buy 1 console you more than likely will be happy enough with the performance of games on it. But people were arguing that performance might be identical and it just wont be. 

Cerny was refering to GPGPU when he was talking about people taking full advantage of what it can do, not just using the CU's in general.