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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Whats more powerful, PS4 vs Xbox One + cloud + 10% June SDK + DX12? - Your opinion?

 

Which console is more powerful?

PS4 Standalone 565 90.11%
 
Xbox One w/ Cloud + 10% June SDK + DX12 62 9.89%
 
Total:627
Shinobi-san on 18 June 2014
starcraft said:
An already small real-world performance gap will get smaller.

But more powerful hardware is still more powerful hardware!

This is another misconception i see on our forums...

If the gap between PS4 and X1 is small then how would you describe the gap between PS3 and 360?

There are some games on X1 that is running at HALF the resolution than on PS4...thats pretty crazy.

At the end of the day Sony has ~30 - 50% more gpu physically with near linear scaling. That is anything but a "small real-world performance gap". Quite literally its the difference between buying a low ranged gpu to a mid ranged gpu. Theres approximately $50 - $100 retail difference between the gpu's in these consoles.



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|

Around the Network
daredevil.shark on 18 June 2014
fireburn95 said:

Your opinion?

So far, (w/o SDK and DX12) we know pretty much PS4 is the more powerful/faster machine?

Do you think the addition of the three extra factors will allow xbox one to overtake ps4 in the graphics department?

Titanfall Offsetted AI to the cloud, allowing for a greater resolution. This was before the 10% extra space was freed up, and obviously DX12 is not out yet.

But when DX12 is out, and likely takes advantage of the extra 10% plus better optimisation, can they actually push their teramafloppy thingy?

Edit: For what it's worth I only really want to know your opinion, I voted PS4


Shhhhh. Dont tell anyone. Let me tell you a secret. A big secret. PS4 can also use cloud power.



starcraft on 18 June 2014
Shinobi-san said:
starcraft said:
An already small real-world performance gap will get smaller.

But more powerful hardware is still more powerful hardware!

This is another misconception i see on our forums...

If the gap between PS4 and X1 is small then how would you describe the gap between PS3 and 360?

There are some games on X1 that is running at HALF the resolution than on PS4...thats pretty crazy.

At the end of the day Sony has ~30 - 50% more gpu physically with near linear scaling. That is anything but a "small real-world performance gap". Quite literally its the difference between buying a low ranged gpu to a mid ranged gpu. Theres approximately $50 - $100 retail difference between the gpu's in these consoles.

Its not a misconception at all.  Real-world directly implies visually perceptable.

And there is a barely visuably perceptible difference between these two consoles when measured by any reasonable person that isn't approaching them wiht a fine-tooth comb and an agenda.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Zekkyou on 18 June 2014
Shinobi-san said:
starcraft said:
An already small real-world performance gap will get smaller.

But more powerful hardware is still more powerful hardware!

This is another misconception i see on our forums...

If the gap between PS4 and X1 is small then how would you describe the gap between PS3 and 360?

There are some games on X1 that is running at HALF the resolution than on PS4...thats pretty crazy.

At the end of the day Sony has ~30 - 50% more gpu physically with near linear scaling. That is anything but a "small real-world performance gap". Quite literally its the difference between buying a low ranged gpu to a mid ranged gpu. Theres approximately $50 - $100 retail difference between the gpu's in these consoles.

When we see huge differences on the scale of 720p vs 1080p (125%) it's more to do with the X1 being more difficult to work with rather than the power difference. The PS4's extra power does of course make it even easier to work with compared to the X1, but it's not directly responsible for that entire difference.

That said you are right, the gap between the two is significant. It will rarley result in huge multi plat differences (generally just a higher res, better AA/AO etc), but it will be a big asset to Sony's 1st parties. Already has been in-fact.

To be honest Sony got lucky. Cerny's goal seems to have been to create the most developer friendly console rather than the most powerful. MS essentially handed them the latter on a silver plate the day they chose to bundle the Kinect.



Turkish on 18 June 2014
fireburn95 said:

Your opinion?

So far, (w/o SDK and DX12) we know pretty much PS4 is the more powerful/faster machine?

Do you think the addition of the three extra factors will allow xbox one to overtake ps4 in the graphics department?

Titanfall Offsetted AI to the cloud, allowing for a greater resolution. This was before the 10% extra space was freed up, and obviously DX12 is not out yet.

But when DX12 is out, and likely takes advantage of the extra 10% plus better optimisation, can they actually push their teramafloppy thingy?

Edit: For what it's worth I only really want to know your opinion, I voted PS4


Are you seriously asking this question? The xbone gpu is 1.30TFLOP, Kinect used 10 percent so it was even lower than 1.30TFLOP. PS4 is 1.84TFLOP

You even math?



Around the Network
Shinobi-san on 18 June 2014
starcraft said:
Shinobi-san said:
starcraft said:
An already small real-world performance gap will get smaller.

But more powerful hardware is still more powerful hardware!

This is another misconception i see on our forums...

If the gap between PS4 and X1 is small then how would you describe the gap between PS3 and 360?

There are some games on X1 that is running at HALF the resolution than on PS4...thats pretty crazy.

At the end of the day Sony has ~30 - 50% more gpu physically with near linear scaling. That is anything but a "small real-world performance gap". Quite literally its the difference between buying a low ranged gpu to a mid ranged gpu. Theres approximately $50 - $100 retail difference between the gpu's in these consoles.

Its not a misconception at all.  Real-world directly implies visually perceptable.

And there is a barely visuably perceptible difference between these two consoles when measured by any reasonable person that isn't approaching them wiht a fine-tooth comb and an agenda.

It is absolutely a misconception. Real-world performance directly implies to what is measurable not what is "visually perceivable". We are speaking about system peformance here not peoples opinions. System performance is measurable.



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|

Shinobi-san on 18 June 2014
Zekkyou said:
Shinobi-san said:
starcraft said:
An already small real-world performance gap will get smaller.

But more powerful hardware is still more powerful hardware!

This is another misconception i see on our forums...

If the gap between PS4 and X1 is small then how would you describe the gap between PS3 and 360?

There are some games on X1 that is running at HALF the resolution than on PS4...thats pretty crazy.

At the end of the day Sony has ~30 - 50% more gpu physically with near linear scaling. That is anything but a "small real-world performance gap". Quite literally its the difference between buying a low ranged gpu to a mid ranged gpu. Theres approximately $50 - $100 retail difference between the gpu's in these consoles.

When we see huge differences on the scale of 720p vs 1080p (125%) it's more to do with the X1 being more difficult to work with rather than the power difference. The PS4's extra power does of course make it even easier to work with compared to the X1, but it's not directly responsible for that entire difference.

That said you are right, the gap between the two is significant. It will rarley result in huge multi plat differences (generally just a higher res, better AA/AO etc), but it will be a big asset to Sony's 1st parties. Already has been in-fact.

To be honest Sony got lucky. Cerny's goal seems to have been to create the most developer friendly console rather than the most powerful. MS essentially handed them the latter on a silver plate the day they chose to bundle the Kinect.

Absolutely i agree. But those differences are still there and are measurable. Its pretty tough to determine how familiar a dev is with the architecture...those type of questions we will never have a concrete answer to.

But yes, the bigger differences we've already seen, i would say is because X1 has initially been harder to develop for. However, just because we going to have games that are on parity soon (i hope) doesnt accurately indicate the real world performance either.



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|

Zekkyou on 18 June 2014
starcraft said:

Its not a misconception at all.  Real-world directly implies visually perceptable.

And there is a barely visuably perceptible difference between these two consoles when measured by any reasonable person that isn't approaching them wiht a fine-tooth comb and an agenda.

I think you're confusing real world performance with perception. For example the perceived difference between 900p and 1080p is seen as pretty small to many people, but the performance difference between the two is pretty huge (44%). If the 1080p version was scaled down to 900p, and those resources dedicated to better in-game visuals (rather than easy trades like AA/AO), the difference would be pretty significant (obviously :p).

It would be true to say that the perceived difference is currently fairly small, depending how sensitive you are to clarity/jaggies (with infamous being the only game on either console to excel both visually and in image quality), but as our sample size of exclusive titles increases the difference should become progressively more obvious.

I expect it will grow pretty consistently for the gen, before shrinking a bit towards the end (since the X1 will likely take longer to fully optimize, unless MS pour a load of money into it).



RenCutypoison on 18 June 2014
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
fireburn95 said:

Titanfall Offsetted AI to the cloud, allowing for a greater resolution. This was before the 10% extra space was freed up, and obviously DX12 is not out yet.

AI is not even CPU intensive let alone GPU intensive.


*Basic AI



Chark on 18 June 2014

PlayStation now will let the ps4 play ps3 games therefore giving ps4 THE CELL therefore all the powers.



Before the PS3 everyone was nice to me :(