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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Penello specifies why X1vsPS4 performance difference is overstated

Isn't this kinda getting out of control? xD There are better things to do than talk about two consoles performance without all the facts! They weren't released on the market yet!



"I've Underestimated the Horse Power from Mario Kart 8, I'll Never Doubt the WiiU's Engine Again"

Around the Network
Adinnieken said:
Ashadian said:

"The CPU contained within the PS4 is running stock speeds, 1.6ghz compared to Microsofts 1.75 after an upclock - 150mhz does not make up for the different in number of CUs, and (aptly ignored by Albert) the difference in ROP units - hence why even with the 150mhz upclock, the Xbox One is still way behind in terms of raw power - To see just how little difference 150mhz makes, go into your bios and bump your clock speed up to be 150mhz faster, you will see framerates climb barely 2fps at best - most modern CPUs clock to at least 400mhz higher than stock as an average, with some people bumping that to over 900mhz.

But seriously, before you try and tell me im wrong, he is comparing 1.6 to 1.75 and claiming its 10% faster, asside from being factually wrong (10% would be 1.76ghz), it also compares the cpus on the most basic of levels, which is a stupid thing to do, even more so given that theyre APUS - compare a 2ghz celeron to a 2ghz pentium to see why.

Last but not least adding up the ddr3 and esram speeds to get a higher number is universally seen as a retarded pr stunt by those with half a brain because theoretical peaks for different ram types DO NOT COMBINE - just like if you put two 3ghz xeons in a server, it does NOT mean that the server is now running at 6ghz, its running at 3ghz with additional cores - adding ddr3 and the tiny space allotted by esram does not work, even for "on paper" results - you cannot fill the 8gb of ddr3 with the esram fast enough without the esram being bottlednecked, esram could not be used for a large majority of game resources, where as GDDR5 can be used for just about anything at the cost of slightly higher latency."

Actually, he doesn't ignore it.  He addressed it.  Each CU gets a 6% speed increase, not simply the entire GPU with the frequency increase.  So while there are fewer CUs those CUs operate faster than the PS4's.  When 12 CUs are operating at 6% greater speed than the PS4, that equates into a 72% speed improvement.

Early in that thread (not that post) he states near 10%.  He has also stated before greater than 9%.  If we want to get specific it's 9.375%    No, he also talks on a deeper level, about how the the Xbox One's CPU also has a 30GB/s transfer rate between the CPU and memory,   A 50% speed improvement over the PS4.

You missed the part where he also specified that the eSRAM's speed was 204GB/s.  That still happens to be 16% faster than the GDDR5 memory in the PS4.  Don't assume my argument is that 32MB is the same as 8GB, but I wonder what memory speed is necessary in order for a modern GPU to adequately process a 1920x1080 image without bottlenecking or taking a performance hit.  The eSRAM is used both as a buffer for the DDR memory, as well as a cache to temporarily hold data that's needed quickly.

I think you missed the part where he got called out on all the being fud. And he got shreading for this bit of miss info too.



Legend11 said:
dsgrue3 said:
Darth Tigris said:
Xenostar said:

Thats cool if hes actually giving out information that we didnt know to correct people.

But he needs to stop talking about the performance differnce between X1 and PS4, Im sure he knows his beans about X1 but he knows fuck all about PS4 they wont have PS4 devkits, they can highlight every trick there pulling to maximize performance, but doesnt mean Sony dont have similar tricks as well to maximize there spec. 

Developers that have had there hands on both have said there is a noticable performance difference when they start developing on them.

What developers?  People keep making statements like that with no proof, yet Penello (who proofed everything he stated) keeps getting gang bullied by likely biased Gaffers.  Some call that passion, I call it what it is:  a complete lack of respect and decorum.  Shames me as a gamer.  It's why people like Cerny are staying away from gamers and forums.

He actually did not prove anything...he cited an anonymous source of some "Technical Fellow." 

He posted factually incoherent information and was rightfully called out for it. Go read the thread and quit sipping the koolaid.

As to developers confirming a performance advantage for PS4, a simple google search is all that is required. I mean, really, are you so devoted to living in the dark that you won't actively seek out information for yourself?

http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2013/07/xbox_one_developer_concedes_that_ps4_is_more_powerful

http://www.gamechup.com/war-thunder-dev-ps4-gpu-is-40-more-powerful-than-xbox-one-gpu/

http://www.edge-online.com/news/ps4-is-more-powerful-than-xbox-one-on-paper-but-microsoft-will-catch-up-says-avalanche-studios/


Nobody is arguing that there isn't a performance advantage (not even Penello), he's simply stating that the performance difference some people have been throwing around is overstated.

As for your links, the first one gives us nothing about raw numbers or how much of a performance difference there is, just that there is one, so it's basically useless.

As for the second link does the developer even have Xbox One development units?  If so could you tell us which Xbox One game he is working on as I couldn't find one and he appears to just be talking about the same stats that were published before.

Also that third link basically reinforces what Penello is saying so it makes no sense to use that one either.

I'm afraid I have to leave this quote tree infact since this person obviously cannot follow the above train.

The point of contention is in bold, but I'll paste it here so you can read it again. 

"Developers that have had there hands on both have said there is a noticable performance difference when they start developing on them."

This was the starting position of Xenostar. 

Then we have Darth Tigris following with:

"What developers?  People keep making statements like that with no proof"

This is what I'm responding to, precise metrics are completely unnecessary to this particular conversation. It's a deviation of the thread OP, perhaps attempt to understand what is being contested before chiming in with obsolete statements.

It's exceedingly tiring addressing the posts of overtly defensive fans of a certain ilk.



Somini said:
This is so funny. The guy is constantly saying how unimportant specs are and yet here you see him every other day repeating this. Typical denial signs!

You don't spend so much time on somthing that's not important. lol the comedy!!

 

Penello has been bombarded on Twitter, blogs etc... to comment on the supposed "performance differences". When he does, it gets twisted as "Oh! but he said specs don't matter! Ha Ha!" Come on now. One thing is clear, console wars is serious business for some. There's some serious hatred out there.



Mmmfishtacos said:
Adinnieken said:
Ashadian said:

"The CPU contained within the PS4 is running stock speeds, 1.6ghz compared to Microsofts 1.75 after an upclock - 150mhz does not make up for the different in number of CUs, and (aptly ignored by Albert) the difference in ROP units - hence why even with the 150mhz upclock, the Xbox One is still way behind in terms of raw power - To see just how little difference 150mhz makes, go into your bios and bump your clock speed up to be 150mhz faster, you will see framerates climb barely 2fps at best - most modern CPUs clock to at least 400mhz higher than stock as an average, with some people bumping that to over 900mhz.

But seriously, before you try and tell me im wrong, he is comparing 1.6 to 1.75 and claiming its 10% faster, asside from being factually wrong (10% would be 1.76ghz), it also compares the cpus on the most basic of levels, which is a stupid thing to do, even more so given that theyre APUS - compare a 2ghz celeron to a 2ghz pentium to see why.

Last but not least adding up the ddr3 and esram speeds to get a higher number is universally seen as a retarded pr stunt by those with half a brain because theoretical peaks for different ram types DO NOT COMBINE - just like if you put two 3ghz xeons in a server, it does NOT mean that the server is now running at 6ghz, its running at 3ghz with additional cores - adding ddr3 and the tiny space allotted by esram does not work, even for "on paper" results - you cannot fill the 8gb of ddr3 with the esram fast enough without the esram being bottlednecked, esram could not be used for a large majority of game resources, where as GDDR5 can be used for just about anything at the cost of slightly higher latency."

Actually, he doesn't ignore it.  He addressed it.  Each CU gets a 6% speed increase, not simply the entire GPU with the frequency increase.  So while there are fewer CUs those CUs operate faster than the PS4's.  When 12 CUs are operating at 6% greater speed than the PS4, that equates into a 72% speed improvement.

Early in that thread (not that post) he states near 10%.  He has also stated before greater than 9%.  If we want to get specific it's 9.375%    No, he also talks on a deeper level, about how the the Xbox One's CPU also has a 30GB/s transfer rate between the CPU and memory,   A 50% speed improvement over the PS4.

You missed the part where he also specified that the eSRAM's speed was 204GB/s.  That still happens to be 16% faster than the GDDR5 memory in the PS4.  Don't assume my argument is that 32MB is the same as 8GB, but I wonder what memory speed is necessary in order for a modern GPU to adequately process a 1920x1080 image without bottlenecking or taking a performance hit.  The eSRAM is used both as a buffer for the DDR memory, as well as a cache to temporarily hold data that's needed quickly.

I think you missed the part where he got called out on all the being fud. And he got shreading for this bit of miss info too.

Let me ask you something.  How do you know he got shredded.  Without having the knowledge if the people responding actually know what they are talking about you can easily make that mistake.  After reading a few comments its clear a lot of them do not know what they are talking about and most cannot even make a simple google search to be sure what they are saying is correct.  This is the problem with the net is that people regurgitate information from other people who do not know what they are talking about and you get number to junk.



Around the Network

Kinda feel sorry for some of the hardcore Xbox guys....you guys will probably believe all this talk by Penello. When its painfully clear to any tech novice that a lot of the stuff hes saying is PR.

Sony guys will probably automatically argue with everything he says...whether right or wrong lol.

I encourage everyone to do some research and see how these things work for yourselves and then judge the comments.

Blindly believing what someone on the internet says, whether that's a GAF user or some company executive is the worst thing you can do.

Seems like Penello's intentions are good, but i feel this wont end well for him. If he doesn't strongly back up all the statements he made he will probably get banned very soon. That will be very interesting.



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

Machiavellian said:

Let me ask you something.  How do you know he got shredded.  Without having the knowledge if the people responding actually know what they are talking about you can easily make that mistake.  After reading a few comments its clear a lot of them do not know what they are talking about and most cannot even make a simple google search to be sure what they are saying is correct.  This is the problem with the net is that people regurgitate information from other people who do not know what they are talking about and you get number to junk.

I notice your willingness to attack some of GAF posters, but are unwilling to agree with Penello.

Go ahead, don't be shy.



Legend11 said:


So you're saying that PS4 is better at dance or fitness games for example?  What about quirky indie games that take advantage of features the Xbox One has that PS4 either can't do as well or can't do at all?  Apparently one of the best HD games shown so far is Titanfall and that features graphics that while good aren't pushing the system by any means yet it's completely owning the PS4 lineup in terms of awards and media attention.

How does a game "own" a lineup? Taking a look at google and youtube, Titanfall has far less views and hits than Infamous Second Son for example. I don't know if a few more glowing reviews on gaming websites or blogs equates to greater mainstream attention. Which is obviously a factor, right?

I'm sure the game will get a massive marketing budget and garner huge interest later on, but you're jumping the gun a bit now. I'd say far less people actually know about the game right now than some of the launch titles appearing on either system. 

 



 

dsgrue3 said:

He actually did not prove anything...he cited an anonymous source of some "Technical Fellow." 

He posted factually incoherent information and was rightfully called out for it. Go read the thread and quit sipping the koolaid.

As to developers confirming a performance advantage for PS4, a simple google search is all that is required. I mean, really, are you so devoted to living in the dark that you won't actively seek out information for yourself?

http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2013/07/xbox_one_developer_concedes_that_ps4_is_more_powerful

http://www.gamechup.com/war-thunder-dev-ps4-gpu-is-40-more-powerful-than-xbox-one-gpu/

http://www.edge-online.com/news/ps4-is-more-powerful-than-xbox-one-on-paper-but-microsoft-will-catch-up-says-avalanche-studios/


Nobody is arguing that there isn't a performance advantage (not even Penello), he's simply stating that the performance difference some people have been throwing around is overstated.

As for your links, the first one gives us nothing about raw numbers or how much of a performance difference there is, just that there is one, so it's basically useless.

As for the second link does the developer even have Xbox One development units?  If so could you tell us which Xbox One game he is working on as I couldn't find one and he appears to just be talking about the same stats that were published before.

Also that third link basically reinforces what Penello is saying so it makes no sense to use that one either.

I'm afraid I have to leave this quote tree infact since this person obviously cannot follow the above train.

The point of contention is in bold, but I'll paste it here so you can read it again. 

"Developers that have had there hands on both have said there is a noticable performance difference when they start developing on them."

This was the starting position of Xenostar. 

Then we have Darth Tigris following with:

"What developers?  People keep making statements like that with no proof"

This is what I'm responding to, precise metrics are completely unnecessary to this particular conversation. It's a deviation of the thread OP, perhaps attempt to understand what is being contested before chiming in with obsolete statements.

It's exceedingly tiring addressing the posts of overtly defensive fans of a certain ilk.

So the first link was from an Xbox developers that says Sony has the better specs.  Here is a quote from that link (basically the article if you read it)

"“The facts are on paper, the PS4 has better specs, and the most that you can debate is by how much,” said the refreshingly candid employee. “What I can tell you is that I have played Forza Motorsport 5,Killer Instinct, and Ryse on the Xbox One, and they look as good as the games that I play on a high-end PC. Ryse reminded me of Darksiders II.”"

The second link is from a developer who is not making a X1 game which invalidate your bolded point.  You bolded points says developers who has worked on both X1 and PS4 games.  The developer in the second link is stating specs not first hand experience which is very clear from the article.

The third one is from another developer that pretty much validated Albert point.  Here is a quote from the article

"We asked Avalanche’s chief technical officer Linus Blomberg how the two consoles compare. “It’s difficult to say, as it’s still early days when it comes to drivers,” he told us. “With each new driver release, performance increases dramatically in some areas. The PlayStation 4 environment is definitely more mature currently, so Microsoft has some catching up to do. But I’m not too concerned about that as they traditionally have been very good in that area. The specs on paper would favour the PS4 over the Xbox One in terms of raw power, but there are many other factors involved so we’ll just have to wait and see a bit longer before making that judgment.”

If anything, the only thing you did was provide more proof of what Albert is stating instead of anything else.



Machiavellian said:
Mmmfishtacos said:
Adinnieken said:
Ashadian said:

"The CPU contained within the PS4 is running stock speeds, 1.6ghz compared to Microsofts 1.75 after an upclock - 150mhz does not make up for the different in number of CUs, and (aptly ignored by Albert) the difference in ROP units - hence why even with the 150mhz upclock, the Xbox One is still way behind in terms of raw power - To see just how little difference 150mhz makes, go into your bios and bump your clock speed up to be 150mhz faster, you will see framerates climb barely 2fps at best - most modern CPUs clock to at least 400mhz higher than stock as an average, with some people bumping that to over 900mhz.

But seriously, before you try and tell me im wrong, he is comparing 1.6 to 1.75 and claiming its 10% faster, asside from being factually wrong (10% would be 1.76ghz), it also compares the cpus on the most basic of levels, which is a stupid thing to do, even more so given that theyre APUS - compare a 2ghz celeron to a 2ghz pentium to see why.

Last but not least adding up the ddr3 and esram speeds to get a higher number is universally seen as a retarded pr stunt by those with half a brain because theoretical peaks for different ram types DO NOT COMBINE - just like if you put two 3ghz xeons in a server, it does NOT mean that the server is now running at 6ghz, its running at 3ghz with additional cores - adding ddr3 and the tiny space allotted by esram does not work, even for "on paper" results - you cannot fill the 8gb of ddr3 with the esram fast enough without the esram being bottlednecked, esram could not be used for a large majority of game resources, where as GDDR5 can be used for just about anything at the cost of slightly higher latency."

Actually, he doesn't ignore it.  He addressed it.  Each CU gets a 6% speed increase, not simply the entire GPU with the frequency increase.  So while there are fewer CUs those CUs operate faster than the PS4's.  When 12 CUs are operating at 6% greater speed than the PS4, that equates into a 72% speed improvement.

Early in that thread (not that post) he states near 10%.  He has also stated before greater than 9%.  If we want to get specific it's 9.375%    No, he also talks on a deeper level, about how the the Xbox One's CPU also has a 30GB/s transfer rate between the CPU and memory,   A 50% speed improvement over the PS4.

You missed the part where he also specified that the eSRAM's speed was 204GB/s.  That still happens to be 16% faster than the GDDR5 memory in the PS4.  Don't assume my argument is that 32MB is the same as 8GB, but I wonder what memory speed is necessary in order for a modern GPU to adequately process a 1920x1080 image without bottlenecking or taking a performance hit.  The eSRAM is used both as a buffer for the DDR memory, as well as a cache to temporarily hold data that's needed quickly.

I think you missed the part where he got called out on all the being fud. And he got shreading for this bit of miss info too.

Let me ask you something.  How do you know he got shredded.  Without having the knowledge if the people responding actually know what they are talking about you can easily make that mistake.  After reading a few comments its clear a lot of them do not know what they are talking about and most cannot even make a simple google search to be sure what they are saying is correct.  This is the problem with the net is that people regurgitate information from other people who do not know what they are talking about and you get number to junk.

Because a lot of them do know what they are talking about. And even a quick google search will tell you that the ps4 transfers 20 GB/s down the onion buss. So that alone slames his 50 percent gain.