gergroy said: So.... You are upset that most spec comparisons are biased towards the ps4, so you make a spec comparison that is biased towards the x1... Yep, nothing hypocritical about that..

what's biased?  I still see these specs coming out on PS4's favor (by about 41, 41, and 88%), vs the small (7% and 9%) increases in processing.  the only thing the Xbox does is bandwidth, which is to be expected given the nature of the cloud.  

Nothing wrong with that.  both are taking different approaches, but the PS4 has more raw power.  Simple.  Done.  Nothing more to say. 

I have seen only two or three original articles that tap into these datails. They say both are powerfull, they say both are close, one could be "faster" whatever this means, one could be easier to developer and jsut that. Every other is derived from those or pure speculaion based on the early leaks.
Again, where are the games? That is simple.
They just have to show one game running at 50% more resolution or frame rate. I´m not even asking for shadows or particles effects.
People with none, what so ever, technical background are fighting to denay whatever a Microsoft engineer (the best and most well paid) has to say.
And just belive that Mark Cerny is a God, a guy that no one has heard about before february 2013.
That is rediculous.

i cant imagine the majority were thinking that.Thats a huge difference in horse power to double the fps or bw.. but with the extra power the ps4 does have, more bandwidth to main ram, lot more c.u's,a lot more texture units ect, devs will have the option to give a multi plat games either more resolution(not double),or better fps(not double). or take a multi plat game with the same exact res and fps and just add more effects,either better textures, better shading, better lighting,better post processing(or a little of each)..

i doubt devs want the majority of their bw to be tied up in a ps2 capacity(32MB) amount of esram.. i imagine lots will put the framebuffer in there.. wouldnt the framebuffer eat into a large chunk of the main rams bw if stored in main ram? plus you gotta put everything else over 32MB into main ram also(wich i would image being a number of things given the game type for next gen) main charcters,vehicles,giant set pieces, bosses,mini bosses, detailed weapone ect ect, and all these very detailed things will also eat a lot of bw,it might be very risky putting the frame buffer in main ram leaving little bw left over for the objects over 32mb.. next gen saints row big purple dildos are probably gonna be over 32mb... also,is it impossible for the ps4 to up their clocks it the future like the psp? i see a small poly advantege for xone,but whats stopping sony from upping the clocks also since they done it before,are they currently having heat issues?

You can choose what to put into main ram and what to put into esram. As for textures, you use a feature called prt (partially resident textures), using the main ram as "reservoir" (instead of the hd, like pcs are doing it) and use the esram as "playground". The crossbar switch allows you to pump some memory area from esram (and main ram) to gpu and at the same time pump memory from main ram into the other part of esram. Also you can calculate how much time you lose if you simply fill the entire esram from main ram. (Assuming you can't daisy chain dmes), this takes only about 0.6milliseconds. For a 30fps game, that is negligible. There really is very sophisticated hardware circuitry involved in the XBox One to get around the esram space limitation. The problem is, of course, if you use any esram tricks you must program and track them. Even if you use the esram as framebuffer and call it a day, I'd say you could get pretty far.

Whether Sony can up their clock, who knows? They seem to run everything on a master clock of 800MHz (doubled to 1.6GHz for cpu) and it works... If the 1.75Ghz is correct and not a mistyped 1.705Ghz, then XBox One runs cpu and crossbar clocks independantly. If Sony upped the clock to say 900MHz, they would probably get into trouble with heat in the gpu (the cpu could easily clock at 1.8-2.0GHz without thermal problems). My guess is we might see a PS4.5 in 2 years around 1.9Ghz/950Mhz clocks, once the apu goes 20nm (maybe a PS4.75 with more CUs/TMUs in the gpu).

Seriously thought this thread would have/should have been closed within 5 minutes of it being posted. I personally like how the OP just totally forgets to put full GPU specs, like ROPS, CU, etc. in the post(looks like he finally added it though, but is still missing compute units). For wanting to have a totally unbiased spec comparison it was a shitty job. PS4 is more powerful. It's that simple. No amount of spin or continued bullshit comparisons is gonna change that.

Thanks, bye now. Won't be back in here or in any other supposed unbiased spec comparison threads again.

You are misinformed, any color camera is capable of reading heart rate, so it is possible all the way down to a Dreamcast with its dream eye.

Sorry to ruin your day.

The heart rate bit is a simple publicity stunt. You won't see it in any game. It simply takes a too big image area to be reliable (that is the reason whenever ms demoes this feature, they tell ONE person to step closer to the Kinect2, if you haven't noticed that...)

TSR is not a fixed value like it used to be old old DX and early dx10 cards, you aren't limited to 1 setup per clock with culling and you no longer need to cull half of the result to obtain a draw, modern GPUs (including those in the ps4 and xone) can handle a higher number and then be supported by additions shaders or compute to alleviate performance hits by overloading TSR, you can tesselate and have a shader generate the vertexes for you without using tsr, and with compute units (something the ps4 has more of) you can handle calculation of tessellation and draws on them, neither you nor I know the exact figure for how many triangles per clock the ps4 and zone can handle but even if we assume they're the same giving the done a slight advantage, the additional computation units offset this difference and the overall result is the same.

Besides, we do not have solid numbers for the ps4 final hardware, so our estimates of them using 800mhz stem from guesswork.

To put it bluntly though, the additional triangle setup capability you are guessing on is offset by the higher spec GPU, any additional benefit is shot down.

As a final note both Sony and Microsoft could increase their GPUs to 900mhz and CPUs to 2ghz if they wanted and the hardware would still be within its operational envelope, just running a bit hotter and louder.

Okay the next person that makes this thread again. Posting BS again. Should be permabanned. I'm tired of this crap.

Oh you'll see it in plenty of games. Especially with kinect's infrared abilities the tech is very robust.

Wtf... i swear this is at least the secondthread posted by this guy of the exact same thing