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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - The wisdom of the 6Tf vs 4Tf

Let the Q1 Q2 2018 settle and we will know how it will be for mid-gen upgrades



Around the Network
caffeinade said:

11>6>4

If Xbox One x and Playstation 4 Pro are lemons, the Switch is a potato.
In my opinion: potatoes are much more interesting than lemons.

Fries are awesome!



The difference between xbox one x games and ps4 games are huge and nothing can be said to say other wise. Assassins creed looks awesome and it isn't just the resolution, but the textures too. Resolution isn't all there is to it regarding graphics.



What about the difference between 1.8 tflops and 1.3 tfrops ?



JRPGfan said:
DonFerrari said:

X1 just release smashing everyone declared expectations.

From what we have on numbers from VGC X1X sold over 400k (430k from what we can see from NPD) against the PS4Pro release of 260k (also per NPD).

This seems to tell a tale of very strong release with X1X outselling PS4Pro by almost 2x even while costing 100 USD more on release and also competing with a discounted PS4Pro at release (while PS4Pro released by itself). Also an indication that the market is valuing power and is willing to pay a premium.

So that was very wise of MS to do right?

Still, the tale of dominance from X1 seem to lose some steam when we look WW. Estimatives from leaks for X1 release put WW at 650k (roughly 2/3 of sales made in USA) with also a great showing in UK. While PS4Pro being fruit of Sony major presence WW reaches an estimation of 780k, a little 20% over X1, which of course is very smaller than the 3:1 PS4 have been doing over X1 on 2017 before holidays.

Now long term, PS4Pro have been able to represent 20% of sold PS4s since launch, will X1X prove to be a wise decision from MS and do higher marketshare?

Which was wiser? A quick upgrade based on rougly duplicating power to achieve a pixel count bump and "smooth" upres to 4k while propelling PSVR gameplay or a more refined upgrade that almost quaduplicate X1 power focused on increasing almost all aspects of the graphics but for a higher cost.

6 Tflops vs 4.2 Tflops..... small minor 0.2 but its there :p

How much does it really matter? in some games alot, in otheres almost not at all.

PS4 does the checkerboarding via buildt in hardware, that reduces how demanding it is to do (XB1X doesnt have this).

PS4 also has Half floats (so the differnce between the PS4pro VS XB1X is smaller than it looks, if games are optimised for it)

 

Case in point:   PS4pro VS XB1X  (F1 2017)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJdp3HpIACg

Both run same resolution, both checkerboarded (xb1 doesnt have hardware to help with checkerboarding).

Results? PS4 has better Shadow Quality, Better LODs (Xb1 version is missing details in reflections ect)..... PS4 runs 55-60 fps, instead of XB1x 60 fps.


"Which was wiser? A quick upgrade based on rougly duplicating power to achieve a pixel count bump and "smooth" upres to 4k while propelling PSVR gameplay or a more refined upgrade that almost quaduplicate X1 power focused on increasing almost all aspects of the graphics but for a higher cost."

In the long run? pretty sure there will be sold a boat load more PS4pros than XB1x's.

Plus PS users had it in hands, able to experiance a upg 1 year in advance.

So Im thinking that was the smarter route to go.

Well, actually several games have the X1 version being much higher level than numbers on paper would suggest.

Spindel said:

But can it play BotW or SMO?

They don't need to and off-topic.

Oneeee-Chan!!! said:

What about the difference between 1.8 tflops and 1.3 tfrops ?

dgpu secret sauce made it 0 difference.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network

Feels strange when such a hot new console is already being bundled with €100 of extras by gamestop to sell some for Christmas



Also if you ask me... a terrible idea to ship a premium console like the Xbox1X along with basically a beta of a game which chugs down as low as 4fps on the system at times... I would feel terrible if I was a clueless gamer and got home to my new system to find it ran the only game I got for it like that. Would be instant buyers remorse.

As for talking about a consoles launch week as though it's some sort of "come back" against the other systems. Wow



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

DonFerrari said:
Dante9 said:
Whatever the X1X is doing for Microsoft right now, it is very time sensitive. Once the PS5 comes out, Microsoft will be back to square one again having lost their only edge, unless they come up with something more to offer in the meantime. They really have about a year or two to do their thing.
A large crowd jumped on the Sony train this gen and now they have their friends and other perks in that ecosystem. Would they be willing to jump ship and shuffle their networks again for a temporary power advantage, knowing that the PS5 is already in the horizon? I think not, for the most part.
We'll have to see how this plays out.

If PS5 isn't much more powerful, the right price and longer presence in the market can help MS keep a foothold.

I was actually going to mention this. At 6TF, Microsoft basically cornered the competitors before the next generation even started in the first place. Jumping much higher after this yields negligible benefits to performance, and the cost will skyrocket afterwards. Attempting to go further might be costly, so Sony either needs to find a way to be better which precludes power, or risk MS starting with an already vast catalog and around a million or more users. 

They actually played a good hand this time. They did something that would ensure they remained the top dog one way or another once this generation ends... 



trasharmdsister12 said:

I think both companies took the right steps for their respective platforms. Sony being the more popular platform going into the mid gen upgrades decided to create something that was compelling for Ultra HD screens while not alienating their existing large fanbase. This also allowed them to come out with it sooner to ride the wave of their global sales success while capitalizing on their onslaught of 2017 exclusives while making PSVR more compelling as well.

Meanwhile Microsoft wanted to combat the stigma of their low powered console by creating something with a much bigger jump that they could use to market and combat the overall market mindset. And they've done that with more than just the XB1X. They phased out the original XB1 with the XB1S which had a slight bump in performance while including the ability to output decently upscaled games to 4K with HDR (which does make a great difference in visuals IMO). Anyways, they've made a big marketing push with the XB1X and have mostly succeeded in battling the narrative.

Does that mean they are going to win the gen or make a huge comeback? Far from it. They still have a lot of work to do on the content front but one problem at a time with full focus seems to be their current mantra in improving things.

So in short, I think both were good moves for their respective strategies. If you want us to compare strategies I'd say Sony's strategy is currently better for us as consumers. But that's only because everyone is still trying to figure out what MS's strategy really is. They haven't been clear about it and it could really go either way as far as who it's meant to benefit most. And before anyone comes in with the cynical "They obviously are looking out for themselves and want a strategy that benefits them," that's true of all companies. But it can still be mutually beneficial and market success is commonly linked to mutual benefit.

Well said. My thoughts exactly. The only really things keeping me from getting an Xbox One X is the unmatched level of AAA exclusives to compete with Sony or Nintendo. That and the $500 price tag. And lastly both PS4 and Pro support VR. While it's in it's infancy and developers are getting better at what they can do, that's a lot for the PlayStation brand to juggle in comparison to the competition. Not to mention working with the number of in house studios they have.



AsGryffynn said:
DonFerrari said:

If PS5 isn't much more powerful, the right price and longer presence in the market can help MS keep a foothold.

I was actually going to mention this. At 6TF, Microsoft basically cornered the competitors before the next generation even started in the first place. Jumping much higher after this yields negligible benefits to performance, and the cost will skyrocket afterwards. Attempting to go further might be costly, so Sony either needs to find a way to be better which precludes power, or risk MS starting with an already vast catalog and around a million or more users. 

They actually played a good hand this time. They did something that would ensure they remained the top dog one way or another once this generation ends... 

If that graphical power was coupled with a CPU half way capable of utilizing it, would blow the X out of the water in games like Assassins creed where you have cpu hungry scenes killing the X, stick a Ryzen 1600 in place of the Jaguar and you have a next generational Console instantly.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

6TF is such a waste with a shit CPU.
At the end of the day, it's still mostly a sub 30FPS box.
$500, what a rip off.
My opinion of course.