Forums - Gaming Discussion - Trials Fusion runs at 1080p/60 on PS4, 900p/60 on Xbox One

Cloud power



Around the Network

Dat Cloud Doe



Its great seeing comments with absolutely no addition to the conversation like these 2 ^^



Arkaign said:


No, you're making assumptions based on trying to add possible differences that COULD be there, but AREN'T there, to suit your argument.

All other things being equal (bus width, generation), GDDR5 is dominantly faster than DDR3. Saying that "Oh, DDR3 can be faster than GDDR5" is pointless, because hell, DDR1 at a hypothetical 20Ghz @ 1024-bit bus would blow everyone's brains out.

Hypotheticals that are so far from reality are basically worthless.

Fact : GDDR5 on PS4 has waaaaay more bandwidth for graphics throughput than the DDR3 setup on XB1. That's just a fact.

Even with the myriad of PC configurations, it's incredibly rare to ever see a same-gen card with DDR3 even come close to a same-gen card with GDDR5. Why is this? Simple, GDDR5 costs more, so they don't pair it with gimpy GPUs.

In the SPECIFIC case of the XB1 vs. PS4, you're dealing with the exact same gen APU and GCN architecture, yet one has a larger GPU and dramatically faster memory for video processing. End of story. No hypothetical will ever change that.

That's not marketing, that's just the chips, and how they fell, along with common sense.

The 7750 DDR3 vs. 7750 GDDR5 variants are the perfect case for it because you can compare an otherwise identical GPU core with both common types of memory. Apples to Apples, which is EXACTLY the point as guess what, the XB1 and PS4 BOTH HAVE 256-BIT MEMORY BUS! The 7750 DDR3 variant is about the fastest DDR3 GPU of all time as well.

And nobody sane would ever put DDR3 on a 512-bit bus for a GPU in a modern setup, as it's extremely expensive to make PCBs that support a bus that wide, and such a product would be too slow to justify the expense, hence : only GDDR5 is used for very wide buses now at the top tier of GPUs. DDR2 and DDR3 cards top out most commonly at 128-bit in most cases for PC GPUs, with many being as low as 64-Bit. The XB1 itself is a bit of an outlier with the 256-bit interface, which isn't really a coincidence when you consider that a standard dual-channel setup in a desktop APU (Llano, Richland, etc) is dual-channel 128-bit DDR3 (for 256-bit).


Stop taking what I have posted and twisting it out of context, I'm not a console heathen.
I said *can* and not, has, will, might, but *can*.

People automatically assume that GDDR5 is faster than DDR3, when it's not as black and white as that.
Problem these days is people grab a magical acroynm or a number and run with it to prove a point in an argument, again, it's not as black and white as that.

Fact of the matter is, Samsungs DDR3 3000mhz modules on a 512 bit bus *can* be faster than than the Playstation 4's GDDR5 on a 256bit bus.

S.T.A.G.E. said:


Sony had the PS4 console development prepared well before Microsoft. Microsoft rushed to catch them to the launch. Sony knew ahead of time about the 8GB of ram because developers were talking about how much ram it would take to run games in the next gen. The most notable person a couple years ago who spoke about 8Gb of ram precisely was Cliff Bleszinski.

Microsoft doesn't really compete, they kind of just pay people to make things for them. I understand what you're saying though. Good read.


We will just have to agree to disagree, we obviously both look at it differently. :P
But I will stand by my view as higher density memory modules simply wasn't available untill a mere several months before the PS4's launch. (Although, it would have been planned at the fabs long before that, so Sony could have had a heads-up.)

As for Microsoft paying other people to make to make things for them... Thats pretty much true for all hardware companies now with the exception for a select few now.

Essentially, most components like Ram, processors, graphics processors, drives, displays are all manufactured by a 3rd party, then assembled at a factory owned by someone like Foxconn, then shipped from China to all the destinations around the world.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Don't know if it's been posted already but the day1 patch improves the resolution of the X1 version.... from 800 to 900p... wtf Ubi?



Around the Network
4k1x3r said:
Don't know if it's been posted already but the day1 patch improves the resolution of the X1 version.... from 800 to 900p... wtf Ubi?


No love for XB1 from Ubisoft.  Hope Microsoft showcase what can be done on the console at E3. Might shame some developers to put in a bit more effort.



Judging by the Digital Foundry articles concerning Trials on the 360, the game was a technical marvel and quite demanding on the hardware to achieve it's fluid gameplay.

That means i for one am not surprised that it also takes it's toll on the new generation of hardware.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Trying to get developers to optimise XB1 versions of games will be an uphill battle, one which MS most likely wont win, just like Sony and the PS3.
Of the few games which looked better on PS3, most of them looked better because of the extra development time gained from MS's timed exclusivity deals. XB1 will not be getting that time because the only timed exclusives sony get are on games/developers which MS rejected (directly or indirectly).



fps_d0minat0r said:
 Of the few games which looked better on PS3, most of them looked better because of the extra development time gained from MS's timed exclusivity deals. 

 

Please name us the games, the details of the time exclusivity deals and what PS3 did better in these games.



walsufnir said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
 Of the few games which looked better on PS3, most of them looked better because of the extra development time gained from MS's timed exclusivity deals. 

 

Please name us the games, the details of the time exclusivity deals and what PS3 did better in these games.


Saying please isnt enough. That would take me a lot of time. Just go on google and do your own research.