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

Forums - Gaming - It's not about the framerate!

kupomogli on 24 January 2014
Chris Hu said:


Nope the SNES was a lot more powerful then the Genesis.  Also you are forgetting about Mode 7 something the Genesis couldn't do.

SNES can do Mode 7, yeah.  I don't program so I don't know why the Genesis can't.  Doesn't change the specs though.  Genesis had SNES beat on CPU and GPU, SNES had Genesis beat on everything else.  Better sound, more RAM. 

The point is, the PS4 has a 50% more powerful GPU than the Xbox One, and it doesn't have the limitations the Genesis did compared to the SNES.  There's no marginal difference about it.  Within the first couple months third party developers are already proving they can get more out of the PS4. 

Saying that devs will get better with the Xbox One and games will start looking and running better.  You think devs are only going to get better at developing on the Xbox One but never get better developing on the PS4?  The difference is only going to become more noticeable as time goes on.



Around the Network
Mr Puggsly on 24 January 2014
kupomogli said:
Chris Hu said:


Nope the SNES was a lot more powerful then the Genesis.  Also you are forgetting about Mode 7 something the Genesis couldn't do.

SNES can do Mode 7, yeah.  I don't program so I don't know why the Genesis can't.  Doesn't change the specs though.  Genesis had SNES beat on CPU and GPU, SNES had Genesis beat on everything else.  Better sound, more RAM. 

The point is, the PS4 has a 50% more powerful GPU than the Xbox One, and it doesn't have the limitations the Genesis did compared to the SNES.  There's no marginal difference about it.  Within the first couple months third party developers are already proving they can get more out of the PS4. 

Saying that devs will get better with the Xbox One and games will start looking and running better.  You think devs are only going to get better at developing on the Xbox One but never get better developing on the PS4?  The difference is only going to become more noticeable as time goes on.

I wouldn't flat out say the Genesis had a better GPU, clearly the SNES had advantages. I mean the SNES could put more colors on screen at once, it could do higher resolutions, it was capable of more effects, etc. Lets not forget the SNES had more RAM to work with and that went into presentation. Ultimately, SNES regularly demonstrated more stunning visuals.

I think throughout the generation the biggest advantages we're going to see on PS4 are resolution and frame rate related. Unless PS4 gets games that are so technically demanding that they have to run at 720p and 30 fps.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Fusioncode on 24 January 2014

How the hell did this turn into an SNES vs Genesis thread? Are we back in the 90s? Alright, may as well go with it. Genesis wins because it had Sonic and Knuckles.



Sigs are dumb. And so are you!

Chris Hu on 24 January 2014
Fusioncode said:
How the hell did this turn into an SNES vs Genesis thread? Are we back in the 90s? Alright, may as well go with it. Genesis wins because it had Sonic and Knuckles.


The Genesis had some decent games but the SNES was pretty much superior in every aspect plus since it could do Mode 7 games like Teenage Muntant Ninja Turtles: Turtles in Time, Mario Kart, Star Fox, Super Castlevannia IV and any other SNES game that used Mode 7 couldn't have been done on the Genesis plus on top of it most SNES games used more colors and had better sound.  On top of that it had a vastly superior controler with a better d-pad and four extra buttons.



theprof00 on 25 January 2014
bucky1965 said:
theprof00 said:

I don't know how detractors have managed to control a debate to such a point that it no longer makes sense arguing, but it's happened. At this point, both sides are arguing whether you can see the 1080 vs 720 difference, whether fuzziness lends a more cinematic experience, and if too much AA makes things too hard to see.

It's all nonsense.

The argument was never about whether CoD had better shacks, or whether AC4 had "just the right amount of smoke", or if Lara's skin looked 'so lifelike'.

It was about the undeniable FACT of these differences within multiplats PROVES the massive power difference.

People would say, I don't see much of a difference in the resolutions. It doesn't matter what you think...it takes a massive amount of power to go from 720 to 1080. They would think that is a legitimate argument within the context of power! It's like every single new thread that pops up about this is addressing it from such a skewed perspective. And about multiplats no less, where console optimization is likely minimal at best.

Just because you don't think the visual fidelity looks much better, it doesn't mean the capabilities are equal! It doesn't mean that those little differences will be the only difference you'll ever see. Launch multiplat unoptimized ports showing PROVEN difference immediately should tell you that.

I am so tired of reading this garbage everyday. I just want these framerate threads to end. It's so incessant and mindless.

well i'll just leave it at that.

You're right it's not about frame rate, it's about fanboyism. The graphical difference is minimal in reality.

You're right graphical difference means nothing because at this level, vast differences in power mean little. At this level it takes 100x the power to show the difference that last gen saw with only 10x the power. Good thing that 100x the power means more than just graphical fidelity though, which is what this thread is all about.



Around the Network
theprof00 on 25 January 2014
Mr Puggsly said:
superhippy420 said:
I really don't understand how the Xbox One is having trouble running games at 60 FPS, when the Wii was able to run Smash Bros, Mario Kart, Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 and Donkey Kong at 60 FPS. I get they are different types of games (cartoon style vs. more realistic) but the Xbox One should have ton's of power to make it happen.


Developers are still learning how to better optimize the hardware.

Your examples aren't the most visually demanding games either. I mean BF4 and Forza 5 run at 60 fps and technically look much better than the games you mentioned.

Dude, it's over. The power resides in the ps4, by over 30%. The difference will be shown, and for many it will be way too late..because they think 1080 vs 720 is the difference. It's much more than that.



theprof00 on 25 January 2014
Lulz said:
theprof00 said:

I don't know how detractors have managed to control a debate to such a point that it no longer makes sense arguing, but it's happened. At this point, both sides are arguing whether you can see the 1080 vs 720 difference, whether fuzziness lends a more cinematic experience, and if too much AA makes things too hard to see.

It's all nonsense.

The argument was never about whether CoD had better shacks, or whether AC4 had "just the right amount of smoke", or if Lara's skin looked 'so lifelike'.

It was about the undeniable FACT of these differences within multiplats PROVES the massive power difference.

People would say, I don't see much of a difference in the resolutions. It doesn't matter what you think...it takes a massive amount of power to go from 720 to 1080. They would think that is a legitimate argument within the context of power! It's like every single new thread that pops up about this is addressing it from such a skewed perspective. And about multiplats no less, where console optimization is likely minimal at best.

Just because you don't think the visual fidelity looks much better, it doesn't mean the capabilities are equal! It doesn't mean that those little differences will be the only difference you'll ever see. Launch multiplat unoptimized ports showing PROVEN difference immediately should tell you that.

I am so tired of reading this garbage everyday. I just want these framerate threads to end. It's so incessant and mindless.

well i'll just leave it at that.

Yeah, you sure told us! You're so sick of this topic and all the threads about it that you decided to make another thread about it!!!! 

Thanks!

You sure told me, with your xbox sig featuring the only five franchises you'll see for the next 7 years.



Conina on 25 January 2014
ethomaz said:
Here a two years port for Xbox.

http://www.eurogamer.net/videos/grand-theft-auto-3-xbox-vs-playstation-2-video

It is better but...

Xbox clearly wins with bellybutton and sluttier outfit ;)

Oh, and a lot less jaggies.



ethomaz on 25 January 2014

Conina said:

Oh, and a lot less jaggies.

The DF comparision was using the Xbox 360 and PS2 backwards compatibility.

"Visuals are unaffected for the most part. 360 backwards compatibility playback should invoke 4x multi-sample anti-aliasing, but it appears that both the original game and the emulation both utilise 2x MSAA."

The game have less jaggies only running on 360 with 4xMSAA... on PS2 or Xbox it is the same with 2x MSAA.



Bliss on 25 January 2014
Anfebious said:
Yeah you are right, the power is clearly measurable. The PS4 is way more powerful and we have to spread this around the world! The more people that know about this the merrier, I'll start by telling my 6 year old brother and my dog!


eh eh funny :)

 

by the way, you are right, it's evident that PS4 is more powerful than One, more capable, and not by a small margin !

I was also curious about how the game would run on Xbox One as compared to PS4. P

Turns out, the PS4 version is indeed the superior version. After downloading it earlier this week, I fired up the game on PS4 and played the introductory sequence. My first thought was:P

"Holy shit, this looks good."

As Lara made her way along the cliff face, climbed the dangling airplane and fell down into that first wooded area, I couldn't help but notice how excellent everything looked. Man, the level of detail! The wind, loaded with leaves and debris, whipping off of the ocean! The foliage, blowing in the breeze! Mist everywhere! P

And… could it be? Is this console game running at 60 frames per second?P

The PS4 sadly doesn't offer any app like FRAPS to tell me what frame rate my games are running, and my retail PS4 has copy protection so I can't capture video on my own. But over the last few years I've become something of a frame-rate obsessive, and I was all but certainthat the game was running at 60fps, or at least close to it. 9P

Shortly thereafter, the Xbox One version was halfway downloaded, enough to fire up the game and start comparing the two. I started it and… wait a minute. It still looked great, still had all the visual bells and whistles I'd seen on the PS4 version… but it was not running at 60fps. It was noticeably more sluggish, closer to 30fps. P

Of course, by now, most people who care about this kind of thing have already heard about the framerate difference between the two versions—it was reported a few days ago on NeoGAF, among other places. Reading that, I felt vindicated: My eyes were right after all; the Xbox One version of the game doesn't run as smoothly as the PS4 version.

(Note: I had previously been under a review embargo until next week, but some retailers started selling the game early so Square Enix lifted the review embargo about an hour ago. So! Here I am telling you about it now.)P

My frame-rate obsession borders on unhealthy, so this stuff makes a difference to me. Will it matter to you? Well, it depends on how much you care about frame rate. I've already outlined why it matters to me that Assassin's Creed IV, Battlefield 4 and Call of Duty Ghosts all run at higher resolution on PS4 than on Xbox One. Jason's also weighed in on why talking about this kind of stuff is important. And hey, from our unscientific poll, it sounds like more of you guys care about frame rate than resolution. 

But your individual mileage may vary.

 

http://kotaku.com/tomb-raider-on-ps4-is-more-definitive-than-on-xbox-o-1508613136?utm_campaign=Socialflow_Kotaku_Facebook&utm_source=Kotaku_Facebook&utm_medium=Socialflow