Support NeoGAF

[Horp]

There are 2 types of logic you can apply:

#1: "I personally can't see a difference between 4 specific games, therefor there is not difference."

#2: "The PS4 has a clear advantage in terms of power, and listening to developers they seem to either say they are fairly equal or that the PS4 is ahead.

Make your choice.

CPU doesn't matter that much in 3d games, GPU does.

Depending on the game type the CPU can matter a huge deal. Planetside 2 and BF-games are typical games that stress the CPU a lot. In general, big, open games with lots going on needs CPU power.
Have you noticed the new trend? Big open world games with seamless multiplayer and lots going on.
CPU WILL matter.

 

[benny_a]

Anandtech.

Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6976/...wering-xbox-one-playstation-4-kabini-temash/4

They are not comparing like for like.

I am not expecting that either. However, on a side note, people usually refer to an article from AnandTech [1] where they said that the Jaguar TDP increases by 66% if one increases clock speed from 1,5Ghz (sic) to 2,0Ghz. However, that article is slightly mistaken in that they overlooked that the APUs they were comparing also had different GPUs and different GPU clock speeds (500Mhz vs. 600Mhz).

So the impact of upclocking Jaguar by 150Mhz should not be as drastic as many people are reporting.

[1] http://www.anandtech.com/show/6976/...wering-xbox-one-playstation-4-kabini-temash/4

 

[THEaaron]

Given that mistake in the article it is still unlikely that they increase the frequency. Even if the increment of the TDP is smaller, it would still add some heat so the system.

I just can't see much tolerance there with such a small case.

 

[dead monkey uk]

1.6ghz for the jaguar is the sweet spot. Given the small case of the ps4, I personally don't think that they take that pill.

From this point on, raising the frequency one step will mean you'll have to handle the heat of two steps. That big Xbox One case is really good for taking that compromise.

I have never really understood the small case of the PS4 talk. If you think how small a laptop case is and they can include a far more powerful CPU, plus the PS4 case is one big vent.

To me the Xbox One is just a really dated design and size. MS are probably guarding against another red ring situation. I think we will see a slim Xbox One redesign quicker than this gen.

 

[tea_and_crumpets]

Well this generation I could see little difference between multiplats - in fact the 360 usually had the better version if there was one and this tended to be in terms of performance rather than visuals.

However the consoles were much closer. Next generation the disparity seems much bigger. That said, I don't see that this will transfer into that much differences on multiplats - rather the PS4 games might well have a smoother frame rate, have a bit less screen tearing etc. much the same as this generation.

I think its more in terms of exclusives that the real differences will start to emerge.

 

[Windom Earle]

I am sick of hearing two things in these threads:

- Bububut, the consumer doesn't notice the difference!11!!

- Bububut, PS3 was more powerful on paper.

1. I don't give a fuck if the general population notices or not. I can.
2. This has been argued to death, but it keeps getting brought up. PS3 was only more powerful in the CPU area and inferior in other areas. Also huge architectural difference.


Personally I will play all multiplats on PC, but PS4 is the safe bet if you are a console only gamer.

 

[TheKayle]

CPU doesn't matter that much in 3d games, GPU does.


Anandtech were wrong

games arent just and only 3d renderings

have you seen in dr3 numbers of zombies on screen?

and again im seeing ryse and im not worried about that too

 

[MaxiLive]

I think they will visually look the same with maybe a little more frame rate stability on PS4. From what I've seen it also looks like first party PS4 titles currently look a tiny bit better than that on the Xbox One (not many direct comparisons to make). Visually I can 3rd party titles being almost identical as the invest into improving one platform wouldn't be worth it for it not to be used on the other (unless Xbox/PS4 gain a massive lead in hardware sales).

I think both will look awesome though and I hope developers keep the focus on art style rather than just particle effects and atmosphere, which is probably a reason why I think the PS4 first party titles look a little better thus far We shall see what Halo brings next year I can imaging that being very pretty!

 

[Chobel]

games arent just and only 3d renderings

have you seen in dr3 numbers of zombies on screen?

and again im seeing ryse and im not worried about that too

You can't compare exclusive games, you compare multiplatform games.

 

[THEaaron]

I have never really understood the small case of the PS4 talk. If you think how small a laptop case is and they can include a far more powerful CPU, plus the PS4 case is one big vent.

To me the Xbox One is just a really dated design and size. MS are probably guarding against another red ring situation. I think we will see a slim Xbox One redesign quicker than this gen.

Yeah.. I want to believe that, too.

But those laptops don't have a GPU (Edit: intel hd chips on laptops generate way less heat) on the other side of the chip that generates the main part of the heat.

games arent just and only 3d renderings

have you seen in dr3 numbers of zombies on screen?

and again im seeing ryse and im not worried about that too

Battlefield 4 could take profit from the upclock. In terms of multiplayer, Battlefield is a VERY cpu limited game. Would love to hear a word from Dice on the upclock since BF3 scales nicely up to the biggest intel cpus.

 

[Chobel]

Depending on the game type the CPU can matter a huge deal. Planetside 2 and BF-games are typical games that stress the CPU a lot. In general, big, open games with lots going on needs CPU power.
Have you noticed the new trend? Big open world games with seamless multiplayer and lots going on.
CPU WILL matter.

Ok, Yes CPU matter, but my point is 9% better cpu won't do much difference especially with weaker GPU.

 

[TheKayle]

You can't compare exclusive games, you compare multiplatform games.

3rd party that develops multiplat have any interest to develop a different enanched version for one or other console (if they are not payed to do it!)

the difference that came out last gen was due the fact was impossible to deploy similar code seen the totally different architectures...

3rd party was too bored (and was too expansive for the time to lose on) to understand how the ps3 architecture was working ...

this time the architecture are similar and powerfull enough to have the equality that is a win win situation for every developer...

if u will have somethign u will have some fps (40% ..will mean something like 5 - 6 fps) done by the brute force of the gpu..end of the story

 

[TheKayle]

Ok, Yes CPU matter, but my point is 9% better cpu won't do much difference especially with weaker GPU.

again..the difference is at minimu 9% ...likely will be lots more

 

[Horp]

Ok, Yes CPU matter, but my point is 9% better cpu won't do much difference especially with weaker GPU.

You are absolutely right. CPU as a concept will matter, but the difference between XboxOne and PS4 CPU will not outweigh the difference in GPU power; not even close.

 

[TheKayle]

Yeah.. I want to believe that, too.

But those laptops don't have a GPU (Edit: intel hd chips on laptops generate way less heat) on the other side of the chip that generates the main part of the heat.






Battlefield 4 could take profit from the upclock. In terms of multiplayer, Battlefield is a VERY cpu limited game. Would love to hear a word from Dice on the upclock since BF3 scales nicely up to the biggest intel cpus.

people that are playing this "game" know that the differences between this two console arent just on the cpu clock....

the architecture itself ...made the xb1 cpu resource ltos more also at the same clock

i toke as example a gt ps4 version....imagine headtrackin with the cpu that need to control the ps4 eye..and maybe a spatial audio...all effected...

the xb1 cpu seem will not suffer anything of this

 

[THEaaron]

again..the difference is at minimu 9% ...likely will be lots more

Come on. Don't do that.

On the one side the really bigger GPU component won't make the difference but the way less difference on the cpu side will crank the fuck up?

Does not compute.

 

[Chobel]

again..the difference is at minimu 9% ...likely will be lots more

Nope just 9%.

 

[FeiRR]

Battlefield tlefield 4 could take profit from the upclock. In terms of multiplayer, Battlefield is a VERY cpu limited game. Would love to hear a word from Dice on the upclock since BF3 scales nicely up to the biggest intel cpus.

How exactly? If they upgrade console versions to 64 players (because of more CPU and memory resources), the only difference from PC will be graphics (IQ, framerate, resolution, effects). And that's more GPU-bound.

 

[Guymelef]

Are you sure TheKayle is not Reiko v2?

 

[THEaaron]

How exactly? If they upgrade console versions to 64 players (because of more CPU and memory resources), the only difference from PC will be graphics (IQ, framerate, resolution, effects). And that's more GPU-bound.

There are enough things you can compensate on cpu related tasks. You can start with a massive impact on LOD, sight distance and so on.

 

[Krilekk]

X1 will decide how games look next gen. The difference in power just means that X1 might have tearing when the PS4 versions will run solid 30 fps. Some devs might take the time to add more eye candy instead of just taking that 45 fps over 30 fps on X1 but most won't bother because of money. And the power difference isn't substantial enough for 60 fps on PS4 vs. 30 on X1. However with the VR rumours Sony might need that additional power for 3D modes for every game.

 

[TheKayle]

Nope just 9%.

so if the cpu need to control audio and the motion camera ....is just 9%?

you should read the thread with bkillian i think

"another thing spotted from the audio discussion was that every player with X1 have an headset with separate 3d audio stream from shape (ps4 will have mono headset so will lack this kind of audio experience), so those hundreds of full effected voices have to be 3D computed on each of 4 players; I can easily understand why an 8 core can't do the same"

the difference will start at 9% depending on the situation and likely in the aaa games with more audio resources needed..will be lots more

i know that you like to take individual advantage of the ps4 ...but isnt how the xb1 architecture work...penello explained and told us already...

 

[HeLLKnight]

X1: 1800x960 pixels, 50 fps.
PS4: 1920x1080 pixels, 60fps.

Same graphics.

No one without bionic eyes would tell de difference.

 

[dead monkey uk]

Yeah.. I want to believe that, too.

But those laptops don't have a GPU (Edit: intel hd chips on laptops generate way less heat) on the other side of the chip that generates the main part of the heat.

What do you mean don't have a GPU. A lot of laptops now include very capable GPUs that are able to easily run games at 1080P.

 

[boredandlazy]

What do you mean don't have a GPU. A lot of laptops now include very capable GPUs that are able to easily run games at 1080P.

Gaming laptops(of which I own a Clevo/Sager P370EM) are very, very loud when the cooling fans are cranking. The PS4 would get crucified if it was that loud.

 

[dalyr95]

Now they've strapped on a whole Pentium 1 166Mhz for an extra boost, I expect at least 4 Doom 1's worth of graphix improvements.

 

[Chobel]

so if the cpu need to control audio and the motion camera ....is just 9%?

you should read the thread with bkillian i think

"another thing spotted from the audio discussion was that every player with X1 have an headset with separate 3d audio stream from shape (ps4 will have mono headset so will lack this kind of audio experience), so those hundreds of full effected voices have to be 3D computed on each of 4 players; I can easily understand why an 8 core can't do the same"

the difference will start at 9% depending on the situation and likely in the aaa games with more audio resources needed..will be lots more

So 3rd partie games will use better CPU and audio in Xbox one, but they won't use the better GPU in PS4?
But you said the games will look the same in PS4 and Xbox one.

i know that you like to take individual advantage of the ps4 ...but isnt how the xb1 architecture work...penello explained and told us already...

Penello said won't see difference, And Jack Tretton and Cerny (Sony) said the PS4 will look better.
Now Are you saying that Cerny and Jack Tretton are lying?

 

[THEaaron]

What do you mean don't have a GPU. A lot of laptops now include very capable GPUs that are able to easily run games at 1080P.

But does those GPUs come close to a derivative of a 7850?

 

[TheKayle]

So 3rd partie games will use better CPU and audio in Xbox one, but they won't use the better GPU in PS4?
But you said the games will look the same in PS4 and Xbox one.

im pretty sure that games like project cars .will take cpu resources from ps4..(if is true that will come on next gen consoles)..not coz they want show something more..but .coz they need to do the same stuff on both console...

i said that u will have some fps more and maybe less things in other games

 

[MMaRsu]

In what regards? I am Joe Consumer and I am buying a system for my family. Will it really be that big of a difference to play Madden on PS4 over Xbox One...I highly doubt it.

Why is 40% more powerful such a hard thing to grasp for you?

 

[driver116]

interesting comment from Albert Penello in the other thread

People DO understand that Microsoft has some of the smartest graphics programmers IN THE WORLD. We CREATED DirectX, the standard API’s that everyone programs against. So while people laude Sony for their HW skills, do you really think we don’t know how to build a system optimized for maximizing graphics for programmers? Seriously? There is no way we’re giving up a 30%+ advantage to Sony. And ANYONE who has seen both systems running could say there are great looking games on both systems. If there was really huge performance difference – it would be obvious.

I get a ton of hate for saying this – but it’s been the same EVERY generation. Sony claims more power, they did it with Cell, they did it with Emotion Engine, and they are doing it again. And, in the end, games on our system looked the same or better.

This reeks of PR damage control with much of it been misleading and frankly a lie.

 

[TheKayle]

So 3rd partie games will use better CPU and audio in Xbox one, but they won't use the better GPU in PS4?
But you said the games will look the same in PS4 and Xbox one.



Penello said won't see difference, And Jack Tretton and Cerny (Sony) said the PS4 will look better.
Now Are you saying that Cerny and Jack Tretton are lying?

penello said that multiplats games will look the same....(and is what im thinkin too)
and also admitted that the ps4 have some edge in the graphics department..with a resoult of what?....again 4 5 fps? i dont think 3rd party developer want to put different texture or other things in a game that need to go on both console if sony dont pay them to do it.....multiplats dev.....never aimed at that.....and u can see clearly in the last gen....they need more time (=money) to develop for ps3...and most of the time they didnt...and this gave us a worst version of the same game..
this time around platforms are very similar..to develope for......theres no intereset to show differents things that cost more in production to them....and sell the same

he continued (talking directly to ppl that scream at this disparity here on gaf)..that ppl need to stop to look at the xb1 talking about individual parts coz is not how the xb1 architecture work...and if they are trusting they give 30% advantage to sony ..they are just dreaming

 

[Thorgal]

Are you sure TheKayle is not Reiko v2?

His soul has found a new vessel to occupy

 

[TheKayle]

This reeks of PR damage control with much of it been misleading and frankly a lie.

seem the games showed .by sony and ms (no difference ..or maybe ryse is the graphically most next gen..after i seen the last video of it).....i think it def isnt

 

[Splenivore]

X1: 1800x960 pixels, 50 fps.
PS4: 1920x1080 pixels, 60fps.

Same graphics.

No one without bionic eyes would tell de difference.

If Xbox One games ran at 50 fps, then they would either (1) not use v-sync or (2) have tons of duplicate frames. You don't need bionic eyes to notice horrible screen tearing or stuttery picture. There's a reason why most games target 30 fps or 60 fps -- anything in between looks pretty bad on a 60 Hz TV.

 

[ekim]

This reeks of PR damage control with much of it been misleading and frankly a lie.

As long as you can't back it up, you shouldn't come up and accuse him of lying.
What if the X1 has fixed function HW for several GPU heavy tasks and thus narrows the gap? (the Hot Chips presentation mentioned 15 special purpose processors to offload CPU and GPU)
I don't think anyone here can tell which platform will perform best without knowing all variables.

 

[benny_a]

As long as you can't back it up, you shouldn't come up and accuse him of lying.
What if the X1 has fixed function HW for several GPU heavy tasks and thus narrows the gap? (the Hot Chips presentation mentioned 15 special purpose processors to offload CPU and GPU)
I don't think anyone here can tell which platform will perform best without knowing all variables.

Please address this post from the thread:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=80173685&highlight=#post80173685

And you can certainly accuse Albert of being misleading trying to insinuate that the console difference this time is the same as with the PS3 or with the PS2/Xbox gen.
Also saying that the weaker hardware will perform better than the stronger hardware. It's a special sauce argument without the brevity.

 

[Caronte]

So PS4 isn't more powerful because a Microsoft PR guy says so.

 

[Chobel]

penello said that multiplats games will look the same....(and is what im thinkin too)
and also admitted that the ps4 have some edge in the graphics department..with a resould of what?....again 4 5 fps? i dont think 3rd party developer want to put different texture or other things in a game that need to go on both console if sony dont pay them do to it...

he continued (talking directly to ppl that scream at this disparity here on gaf)..that ppl need to stop to look at the xb1 talking about individual parts coz is not how the xb1 architecture work...and if they are trusting they give 30% advantage to sony ..they are just dreaming

He can't say that because he don't control 3rd party devs. Many devs maybe won't use all PS4 power so in those you only see better fps (5-7 fps). Too bad for Penello not all devs will do that, we know that the witcher 3 developers said they're using maximum power of consoles so naturally the PS4 version will look better.

And no matter what Xbox has, the GPU is weaker. So the game will never look batter in Xbox one (unless the developer intentionally make PS4 bad)

 

[Nerfon]

"The system as a whole has a massive chunk of hardware devoted to AV tasks, enough to make background encoding, decoding, playback, scaling, and the rest about as seamless as possible to the gamer. AV should just work and gaming should just work regardless of what the other is doing, something the PS4 should do as well but in a very different way. Then again the majority of this functionality is available in a <$100 Android box so it isn’t a standout feature if you follow tech at all.

Then there are the GPUs themselves, the Achilles heel of the XBox One. While there is nothing wrong with them per se, they are a slightly older revision than used in the PS4 but the differences are small enough to be ignorable. What does matter is that the PS4 has about 50% more units at roughly the same clocks, 1152 at ~800MHz vs 768 at 853MHz, a massive difference. Couple this with the vastly more user-friendly 8GB GDDR5 memory design and you have a clean kill for Sony on performance.

Microsoft made a really impressive SoC that is a multimedia monster with a bit of gaming ability, technically speaking it is quite impressive that they pulled it off. Not to take anything away from the hardware designers but Microsoft management simply aimed wrong. Sony made a gaming machine, Microsoft did not. Sony made a clean design for coders, Microsoft did not. Microsoft made a complex technical masterpiece that is in a no-mans land between a far <$100 Android media center and the PS4. Sony just did right for gamers and won the battle.S|A" http://semiaccurate.com/2013/09/03/xbox-ones-sound-block-is-much-more-than-audio/

 

[TheKayle]

He can't say that because he don't control 3rd party devs. Many devs maybe won't use all PS4 power so in those you only see better fps (5-7 fps). Too bad for Penello not all devs will do that, we know that the witcher 3 developers said they're using maximum power of consoles so naturally the PS4 version will look better.

And no matter what Xbox has, the GPU is weaker. So the game will never look batter in Xbox one (unless the developer intentionally make PS4 bad)

what you will do if the xb1 version of the witcher will look better ?

bad developers? moneyhatted etc etc right?

 

[ekim]

Please address this post from the thread:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=80173685&highlight=#post80173685

Well that's one way to count those processors. Can be accurate or not.

Please address this post from the thread:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=80173685&highlight=#post80173685

Also saying that the weaker hardware will perform better than the stronger hardware. It's a special sauce argument without the brevity.

But it has some legitimacy coming from the horses mouth. I'm not saying that I blindly trust him on this but it makes me think about a possible explanation.

 

[Chobel]

what you will do if the xb1 version of the witcher will look better ?

bad developers?

I'll say Xbox one is more powerful. and if PS4 version looked better what will you do?

 

[velociraptor]

games arent just and only 3d renderings

have you seen in dr3 numbers of zombies on screen?

and again im seeing ryse and im not worried about that too

Resogun is rendering 200k voxels on screen, and runs at 60FPS.

 

[wizzbang]

As a counter to that. I reserve the right to bleat on endlessly about the devs being lazy and not using the Xbox One faster CPU and eSRAM to reach platform parity.

That seems reasonable, although I was never one of those PS3 guys, I'm sure they did the best, even if it wasn't as good, it was never, ever as bad as people painted it.

 

[TheKayle]

I'll say Xbox one is more powerful. and if PS4 version looked better what will you do?

okay then

and if are the same...that maybe people ..like penello said..need to look at the entire picture and not just an individual part of the system ..okay?


ill say the same..now can we explain how much must be the difference?

are we going by math ..or 5 fps of difference will not make it big enough?

 

[benny_a]

But it has some legitimacy coming from the horses mouth. I'm not saying that I blindly trust him on this but it makes me think about a possible explanation.

That he refused to elaborate despite yourself and me asking him to explain that nugget while offering a few interpretation doesn't bode well.

It's an extraordinary claim and he does not get the benefit of the doubt after some of the arguments he has made.

 

[wizzbang]

So you guys don't think it was the Playstation customers who were justifiably pissed off at the poor ports and were airing their grievances?

In any case, turnabout on the premise of trolling is childish.

Not in the slightest, it was gloating Xbox customers, why would Playstation customers whine? They were too busy playing the damn games. Maybe, maybe some dual console owners who happened to try on both might have whined about it - but even they wouldn't have been the vehement assholes we got - because they'd just buy the 360 version for their 360 wouldn't they?

I still see comments about the virtually unplayable Bayonetta on PS3, no one seems capable of installing a patch nowadays.

 

[ekim]

That he refused to elaborate despite yourself and me asking him to explain that nugget while offering a few interpretation doesn't bode well.

It's an extraordinary claim and he does not get the benefit of the doubt after some of the arguments he has made.

Well... I know about 2 more or less undisclosed (minor) things that actually help performance - so there is some basis for my trust.

 

[ElTorro]

Well that's one way to count those processors. Can be accurate or not.

Sure, but given that they listed even the smallest details, like all the Data Move Engines separately instead of aggregating them into a single figure, it seems unlikely that they chose to not list a part that has more impact on the overall system than "Audio DMA" or "AV Out"; especially if that part would boost graphics.

But it has some legitimacy coming from the horses mouth. I'm not saying that I blindly trust him on this but it makes me think about a possible explanation.

My problem with Albert's statement is that it is incoherent ("I don't know the details of Sony's architecture." vs. "Details in architecture will level performance.") and without evidence or explanation.

If they really had some wizardry in the GPU (or somewhere else) why not explicitly talk about it? Lately, they gave out a lot of details like up-clocks or the HotChips talk, and they are certainly aware of the impact that such information has on people like us and on the general spread of good news/rumors about the XB1. That's certainly part of the reason of why they are announcing such details in the first place.

If they really had substantial special sauce in there, why not give it a catchy name and make it public? Just look at the impact of having a name for "SHAPE". Something similar for GPU customizations would be even more effective. At this point in development, that tech could not be copied by the competition anyway, that train is long gone.

If they had something special, I'd see no reason to not make it public, explain it, and give it a catchy name. However, if they hadn't something special, then the vague statements that we heard, in contrast to the detailed information in cases of real benefit, like the CPU upclock, are exactly what we would get.

Sure, everything is possible, but as outsiders we can only establish what's more probable and less probable.