Are you going to be able to sleep at night knowing it's inferior?
Does it really matter?
If you like the IP's Microsoft offer you will enjoy the console.
I love my Wii U and its far inferior graphically to Xbone but I couldn't give a toss
fighter said:
*sigh* |
You can't seriously try and argue that the Xbox one has 270 GB/s peak bandwidth. That is ridiculous. The reason why MS is using SRAM in the first place is to make up for the lack of bandwidth in DDR3.
None of this is so clear cut though. But you absolutely can not be adding up numbers as you please. Digital foundry got that one completely wrong in their article.
If you read the Anandtech article it gives a much more accurate description of the situation : http://www.anandtech.com/show/6972/xbox-one-hardware-compared-to-playstation-4/3
And apart from that I know a little bit about how these things work and you do not add up the numbers.
Alby_da_Wolf said:
|
LOL Adding imaginary numbers on to more imaginary numbers O_O
I think people have been having problems understanding the core question in this thread.
"We don´t have any prove that PS4 is that more powerfull than the Xone", anyway every bit of real information we have sugests otherwise.
However I´m sick and tired of seing people here say "I have no doubt the PS4 is stronger", "I belive Sony", "Cerny is my God"...
Well, for months people gave a certain that the PS4 uses all 8 CPU cores for gaming plus 7 GB of RAM. That was a complet desolusion.
It´s just blind faith, Sony´s fanboys are being indoutrinated.
Stop adding bandwidth numbers on X1 RAM that are on different channels please, it really doesn't work that way......
| IHateLife said: Stop adding bandwidth numbers on X1 RAM that are on different channels please, it really doesn't work that way...... |
In the ideal and perfect situation, you add both memory channels, Yes, it´s perfect feaseble.
We just dont´know how close to ideal the avarage memory usage will behave in the real world.
Pemalite said:
|
MS does not allow coding to the metel. At least this was the fact for the 360. I doubt MS will allow coding to the metal for the X1. MS APIs for their console do allow for some very close to the metal access but its still controlled. One of MS advantages is that their are a tools and library maker and they are building off of their existing infrastructure. A lot of memory work can be offset by good tools, libraries and development environment. Its going to be the driver layer that will be the key as MS needs to etch out the most performance possible for their API.
| Machiavellian said: MS does not allow coding to the metel. At least this was the fact for the 360. I doubt MS will allow coding to the metal for the X1. MS APIs for their console do allow for some very close to the metal access but its still controlled. One of MS advantages is that their are a tools and library maker and they are building off of their existing infrastructure. A lot of memory work can be offset by good tools, libraries and development environment. Its going to be the driver layer that will be the key as MS needs to etch out the most performance possible for their API. |
For indie devs, that's true, they don't.
But a developer like 343 is allowed to code to the metal.
www.youtube.com/@Pemalite
Dark_Feanor said:
We just dont´know how close to ideal the avarage memory usage will behave in the real world. |
No, you can't do that precisely because they are on different channels as they need to communicate from the DDR3 to the eSRAM and that bandwidth cap is 68GB/s if the move engine can max the potential of the bandwidth, you are in reality looking at an updated 360 where it has more embedded RAM to work with, so devs would have more frame buffer to brute force higher res. There are serveral ways to use the RAM configuration, but adding them together for form higher bandwidth is NOT one of them. THERE IS NO MAGIC. X1's GPU doesn't need super high bandwidth to start with, it's not as powerful as the GPU in the PS4 anyways, it's how they decided to balance it.
| fallen said: I'd just ask, where is the proof? We know the, alleged (because they aren't fully confirmed in Microsoft's case) specs. But there is simply no developer (at least one proven to be working on both PS4 and XB1 software) who has come out and said PS4 is more powerful, and no multiplatform game comparison that can prove it. Period. That's where we're at. But the most intriguing thing to me, is this article: http://www.videogamer.com/ps4/need_for_speed_rivals/news/need_for_speed_rivals_may_look_a_little_better_on_one_next-gen_console_than_the_other.html containing this qoute “What we’re seeing with the consoles are actually that they are a little bit more powerful than we thought for a really long time – especially one of them, but I’m not going to tell you which one," Nilsson told VideoGamer.com at Gamescom earlier today. Now everybody assumes he means PS4, but are we so sure? In fact I'd argue to say one console is "more powerful than we thought" suggests it's actually the Xbox, since the thinking is PS4 is easily the more powerful console. It's easiest to imagine they thought the Xbox was kind of weak all along based on the specs, and then where shocked when it turned out more powerful than they expected. We also have carmack who said the consoles are "very close". Which also doesn't make sense on the specs. Next we have many recent knews that PS4 seems to be struggling. It was revealed PS4 BF3 is 720P (later they say more rthan 720p, with final resolution yet undecided) and IGN saying PS4 BF4 doesn't look good graphically. Granted, PS4 struggling does not mean Xbox is strong, but it IS rather odd Xbox has seemingly avoided these types of problems. And another thing is all the 60 FPS games planned on Xbox. There are legitimate technical reasons Xbox could be more powerful. Disregarding the cloud, I'd say there's main three factors: -Xbox GPU could be based on AMD's upcoming Volcanic Islands GPU tech while PS4 would be based on older GCN tech (if this is true, we may find out at the Hot Chips conference literally in a couple days, as there is a presentation about Xbox silicon scheduled). Perhaps this could lead to greater efficiency making flops comparison meaningless. -The ESRAM could make the GPU more efficient by reducing shader data latency (this one is hard to prove, it's basically just conjecture) -The peak bandwith advantage. It's not often discussed, but at it's peak Xbox one can draw (according to Digital Foundry at least) up to 192 GB/s from ESRAM and 68GB/s from DDR. A total of massive 270 GB/s peak bandwidth. All that to feed a GPU supposed to be 30% weaker than PS4's, so it means the bandwidth per FLOP advantage is even greater. Oh, I'm aware 4A games recently stated PS4 was more powerful, pretty much first developer to do so. However, I have strong doubt they even have an Xbox One dev kit, which would mean they are just going on media reports themselves. So if you say "oh it's obvious PS4 is more powerful" or what have you. I'd say to you right now, we simply have no proof of that, we have some evidence, but it's not indusputable at all. If and when we get proof, I'll accept it. And no, I dont accept your fanboy goggles statement that Shadowfall is clearly 1000X better looking than any Xbox game as proof... |
Based on the specs, the PS4's gpu is a little stronger than a 7850, and the xbox one's is a little weaker, or a little stronger than a 7770. That's a definite power boost. Then the PS4 has more ram (by all accounts, it has at least half a gig more), The ram IS faster, it has multiple processors to handle background tasks, and basically everything you could think of on the PS4's gpu is double that of an xbox one's besides raw power, which is about 50%. So yes, no matter how you cut it, the ps4 is stronger than the xbox one. All of those stupid rumore about ram incease have been debunked BY MICROSOFT. The specs are finallized, if they weren't Microsoft would have a MASSIVE shortage of consoles come novemeber. Also, it's kind of annoying that you say no developer has come out and said that either is more powerful, then a few sentences later you say 4A games has, but they don't count. 3rd parties never talk about which console is more powerful because they want to remain impartial. EA won't say they're more powerful because they've cut a 100,000,000 dollar deal will MS. Actually, based on your logic, I would be a little scared about why EA hasn't come out and said the xbox one is more powerful. Also, your es ram argument means nothing, there is almost none of it. Did you know that a gig of ram isn't actually 1000mb, it's 1024. So that little 32 is barely more than what most people write off as nothing. the ESram takes up .3% of the total system ram. Also your volcanic island argument means nothing. Did you know that performance for GFLOP is actually better on tahiti than Volcanic island? The 7790 puts out 128 GFLOPS, and the 7850 puts 110GFLOPs. People who know anything about computer parts know that the 7850 is stronger.
EDIT
I messed up the outputs on GFLOPS, oops. The 7850 puts out 1761 and the 7790 puts out 1792. That means my argument still stands, but I have no clue why I posted those very off numbers.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
Unless those extra 10GB/s are given by the... 
