150Mhz CPU boost on XBO, now in production

Status
Not open for further replies.
W!CKED said:
Sony bet their money on GPGPU. Almost every modification Sony made to the hardware increases the GPGPU performance of the system.



During GDC Europe in August Sony explicitly named GPGPU as one of key features for next gen and they also said that their new PSSL will be optimized for GPGPU.
Click to expand...

meanwhile at Sony: let's look where we have an advantage over competition... oh yes aha mmmhh ok. let's use it for marketing!
 
This hopefully raises the lowest common denominator by a bit, though only by a small bit. But I'll take it.

The chain is a little stronger if the weakest link is a little stronger.
 
flyinpiranha said:
Just so I understand; when all we had were leaks and spec sheets people were able to extrapolate power and Tflops and Gflops and Xflops and make assumptions based on this. But now that the XB1 CPU is stated as clocked higher than the PS4 rumored, we're back to "it's not even final yet" and "we don't know" and "oh, you have the numbers now, care to share"?
Click to expand...

This is accurate.

We also had a lot of people making things up that were never rumoured at all trying to make their side look better.
 
flyinpiranha said:
I make a comment based on polls, told to take a class on statistics, then you tell me I should take the class because I don't think online polls should be used as a base for statistical evidence.

Can we just cut through the fucking idiotic wordplay and explain to me what the hell is meant then?
Click to expand...

In statistics you have to study random sample, in our case 500000 random people.
Online polls are not admissible because they're selective: Only the people who want to vote will vote, so not random sample.
 
PG2G said:
Something has changed, the XB1's CPU is faster than it was before. Why do you feel the need to downplay it so much? This makes up for some of the resources that were being lost to the OS (which was quite a big deal to a lot of people). I think we all know that this is not going to put the XB1 anywhere near the PS4. Don't worry, your performance crown is safe.
Click to expand...

I have read statements from developers saying that the XB1 and PS4 are very close in terms of performance, and that was before the overclock.
 
I am surprised by the whole thread. consoles are very complex systems with many parts influencing the actual performance. predicting performance by now is nearly impossible. we just don't know enough. the problem I am talking about is called emergence, perhaps some of you already heard about it.
 
Xdrive05 said:
This hopefully raises the lowest common denominator by a bit, though only by a small bit. But I'll take it.
Click to expand...

If we assume that the numbers stay the way they are known today and that PS4 and XB1 give the same percentage of CPU time to games, then the upclock does not really raise the baseline because it is asymmetric to PS4. To actually raise that baseline, given our rather oversimplified assumptions, PS4 would have to add to its CPU power or XB1 would have to further add to its GPU power.

At the moment, that additional processing power would be better spent on system services and apps, much the same way that PS4's memory improvement from 4GB to 8GB was over-proportionally spent on background tasks and future reservation.
 
DJ Lushious said:
You clearly never owned a Playstation 1, then. They were notorious for their failures. Who here remembers having to prop the system on its side to get it to read discs?
Click to expand...

They didn't all fail. My PS1 still works (last time I checked at least, it's been a couple years). My PS2 from 2001 also still works, and it's easily my most played system. Never had a disc read issue with either system.
 
Chobel said:
In statistics you have to study random sample, in our case 500000 random people.
Online polls are not admissible because they're selective: Only the people who want to vote will vote, so not random sample.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's why I said "Right after online polls are used as hard data".

It was implying that an online poll on a gamer site will not be reflective of all people who own the system. Plus using the theory of "people will bitch if something is wrong and stay silent if it's not" is a good one to go on.

I thought I was making abundantly clear that the poll, while decent for various reasons, has no influence on whatever the actual data mark is. And the use of "facts" by the original poster was incorrect.
 
flyinpiranha said:
Just so I understand; when all we had were leaks and spec sheets people were able to extrapolate power and Tflops and Gflops and Xflops and make assumptions based on this. But now that the XB1 CPU is stated as clocked higher than the PS4 rumored, we're back to "it's not even final yet" and "we don't know" and "oh, you have the numbers now, care to share"?
Click to expand...

It's because the PS4's cpu is also rumoured to be upclocked to 2ghz..
 
Clockwork5 said:
I have read statements from developers saying that the XB1 and PS4 are very close in terms of performance, and that was before the overclock.
Click to expand...

If a 40% performance advantage in the GPU puts them in 'close terms of performance' then that should tell you how little a 10% performance advantage in the CPU is going to matter.

That said, I don't believe those statements.
 
flyinpiranha said:
People think this outweighs all the PS4 positives? Mind linking me to those posts, that sounds ... off.
Click to expand...

You misunderstand. I'm talkin about the crazy overreactions to the news that makes this sound like its the greatest thing ever combined with the snarky ass comments of people going, "GAF said x, but now they are saying y! Hmmm!"
 
badb0y said:
It will have a performance difference in games that are CPU limited albeit not that big of a difference.
Click to expand...

I don't think it will even be noticeable. Cpu performance needs to be orders of magnitude bigger to be shown, and it's one of the things that is the most easy to hide.

I'm just pointing out that these whole claims of XX% performance advantage are not in any way actual performance yet, they are advantage in specifics parts of the hardware that we don't know yet how it will translate in real world performance until both machines are out.
 
I hope Sony announce at TGS PS4 cpu is running at 1.8ghz or something...these jags cpu are bottom rankers and dont consume too much power.

Maybe the PS2 devs can convince Cerny to upclock the cpu, PS2 loves my hexa core 4.5ghz Intel Cpu...not sure how the PS4 port handles.
 
flyinpiranha said:
Yes, that's why I said "Right after online polls are used as hard data".

It was implying that an online poll on a gamer site will not be reflective of all people who own the system. Plus using the theory of "people will bitch if something is wrong and stay silent if it's not" is a good one to go on.

I thought I was making abundantly clear that the poll, while decent for various reasons, has no influence on whatever the actual data mark is. And the use of "facts" by the original poster was incorrect.
Click to expand...

So that 500000 was from online poll? I thought it was survey/study. In that case I'm sorry, I misinterpret your post.
 
So unless I missed something they never actually announced officially the clock speed for the CPU. Then much like the GPU bump said, hey look at us we got a speed bump outta X. So if you never announced a base speed, who's to say it was always clocked at that speed.

It really seems like its a, hey xbox brand isn't getting enough positive coverage. Let's throw a bone out there for people to get them talking.
 
nib95 said:
It's because the PS4's cpu is also rumoured to be upclocked to 2ghz..
Click to expand...

Where is this? We had the actual data showed by a demo, I would assume that would be the "estimate" that people would stick to. But I guess latching on to the HIGHEST possible number on the web instead of what we have actually been shown is something that shouldn't be unexpected on GAF.

Chobel said:
So that 500000 was from online poll? I thought it was survey/study. In that case I'm sorry, I misinterpret your post.
Click to expand...


No worries, you just seemed a little on the offense there. From the link he posted it was some gamer site. I don't think it would be possible to do a random 360-owner poll as various stores and MS are the only ones with that data most likely.
 
longdi said:
I hope Sony announce at TGS PS4 cpu is running at 1.8ghz or something...these jags cpu are bottom rankers and dont consume too much power.

Maybe the PS2 devs can convince Cerny to upclock the cpu, PS2 loves my hexa core 4.5ghz Intel Cpu...not sure how the PS4 port handles.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure Jaguars are designed to be run at anything from 1.0 Ghz to 2.0 Ghz so it's not impossible. I wonder why Microsoft didn't go straight for 2.0 Ghz? That would have been a lot more tangible/noticeable.

EDIT: Forgot they have the ESRAM on die...
 
jaxpunk said:
So unless I missed something they never actually announced officially the clock speed for the CPU. Then much like the GPU bump said, hey look at us we got a speed bump outta X. So if you never announced a base speed, who's to say it was always clocked at that speed.
Click to expand...

I am picturing Xbox marketing people sitting in their offices and banging their heads against the walls in disbelief about how easy it is to get good publicity from little statements like these, while their "big visions for the future of gaming" just gave them shitstorm after shitstorm. "Seriously, first the dis-Kinect thing, and now 53mhz?"
 
flyinpiranha said:
Where is this? We had the actual data showed by a demo, I would assume that would be the "estimate" that people would stick to. But I guess latching on to the HIGHEST possible number on the web instead of what we have actually been shown is something that shouldn't be unexpected on GAF.




No worries, you just seemed a little on the offense there. From the link he posted it was some gamer site. I don't think it would be possible to do a random 360-owner poll as various stores and MS are the only ones with that data most likely.
Click to expand...

The official rumoured number is 1.6ghz. But a few sites and insiders alluded to a upclock. Whether this happened or not is unknown. The slide is from the Jan 2013 dev kit SoC. That was some time ago. Speed could still be 1.6ghz, or there may have been the rumoured upclock. Anyone's guess right now. Don't get why you're trying to spin it in to some sort of fanboy conspiracy.
 
ElTorro said:
If we assume that the numbers stay the way they are known today and that PS4 and XB1 give the same percentage of CPU time to games, then the upclock does not really raise the baseline because it is asymmetric to PS4. To actually raise that baseline, given our rather oversimplified assumptions, PS4 would have to add to its CPU power or XB1 would have to further add to its GPU power.

At the moment, that additional processing power would be better spent on system services and apps, much the same way that PS4's memory improvement from 4GB to 8GB was over-proportionally spent on background tasks and future reservation.
Click to expand...

I think you're right if we make those assumptions, but I don't see why they would both give the same cpu time to games when PS4 seems clearly designed to offload gaming cpu tasks to GPGPU. Xbone is more traditional in that sense, so a cpu boost for xbone would probably strengthen my metaphorical chain (the target baseline for engines for this gen).
 
I can't speak much to the architecture of these consoles, but most games these days are GPU limited. Especially considering most next gen games are going to target 1080p with some sort of shader based AA. This boost will mean more for the XBO's UI than it's full screen graphical performance. Certain types of games, like strategy/RTS or massively multiplayer games, will benefit more than others. Overall though, we're talking a fairly minimal upgrade here. There is a reason why Intel is focusing more on power saving than performance increases with each subsequent chip release. It just doesn't matter that much anymore.
 
badb0y said:
I am pretty sure Jaguars are designed to be run at anything from 1.0 Ghz to 2.0 Ghz so it's not impossible. I wonder why Microsoft didn't go straight for 2.0 Ghz? That would have been a lot more tangible/noticeable.

EDIT: Forgot they have the ESRAM on die...
Click to expand...


power supply issues and heat.

you can not up clock something if you can not spare the power to do so.
 
nib95 said:
The official rumoured number is 1.6ghz. But a few sites and insiders alluded to a upclock. Whether this happened or not is unknown. The slide is from the Jan 2013 dev kit SoC. That was some time ago. Speed could still be 1.6ghz, or there may have been the rumoured upclock. Anyone's guess right now. Don't get why you're trying to spin it in to some sort of fanboy conspiracy.
Click to expand...

You should quote rumors at least so you aren't adding to the above yourself.
 
Crisco said:
I can't speak much to the architecture of these consoles, but most games these days are GPU limited. Especially considering most next gen games are going to target 1080p with some sort of shader based AA. This boost will mean more for the XBO's UI than it's full screen graphical performance. Certain types of games, like strategy/RTS or massively multiplayer games, will benefit more than others. Overall though, we're talking a fairly minimal upgrade here. There is a reason why Intel is focusing more on power saving than performance increases with each subsequent chip release. It just doesn't matter that much anymore.
Click to expand...

That is because so many games are FPS/TPS graphic candy galore games (in single player) these days. Beyond those genres, CPUs still come into play a good amount and having too weak a CPU (say...the Wii U) can come back to haunt you.
 
nib95 said:
The official rumoured number is 1.6ghz. But a few sites and insiders alluded to a upclock. Whether this happened or not is unknown. The slide is from the Jan 2013 dev kit SoC. That was some time ago. Speed could still be 1.6ghz, or there may have been the rumoured upclock. Anyone's guess right now. Don't get why you're trying to spin it in to some sort of fanboy conspiracy.
Click to expand...

It's not a fanboy conspiracy, on every "vs" chart 1.6 was used for both. There have been rumors sure but in almost every argument the 1.6 has been used. Now the XB1 is "officially" not 1.6 everybody is "show me the receipts". It's not a fanboy conspiracy. It's an observation that I've noticed where our surmised data is no longer acceptable that the XB1 is above the 1.6 benchmark for both.

1.6 is listed here:

IGN

Toms

And many others. But I guess if somebody said 2.0, we can just say the PS4 has a higher number then, eh nib?
 
Everyone is comparing the small hardware details but I think that is an aside. As I'm looking at the consoles and the design priorities of both hardware and operating systems it appears to my somewhat untrained eyes that each companies roots are still very apparent. Microsoft is a software first company and Sony is a hardware veteran. They are both making strides in the other areas but at the end of the day the strengths of the two companies remain basically the same. The Xbox is huge because they can't design a PS4 sized console. Or they don't want to. The PS4 is more powerful because Sony is all into hardware. Same story with the crazy Cell processor - they push the hardware envelope because they can or want to. Even if its off the shelf parts I could have guessed the PS4 would pack more of a punch and have a more compact tighter construction language. And if anyone can pull off cloud and Kinect software powered tricks it's Microsoft.
 
nice little upclock there, doesn't really boost the performance that much, but every little helps.
People spinning this as meaning the xbox one is better should be ashamed of themselves.
 
Neo Zuko said:
Everyone is comparing the small hardware details but I think that is an aside. As I'm looking at the consoles and the design priorities of both hardware and operating systems it appears to my somewhat untrained eyes that each companies roots are still very apparent. Microsoft is a software first company and Sony is a hardware veteran. They are both making strides in the other areas but at the end of the day the strengths of the two companies remain basically the same. The Xbox is huge because they can't design a PS4 sized console. Or they don't want to. The PS4 is more powerful because Sony is all into hardware. Same story with the crazy Cell processor - they push the hardware envelope because they can or want to. Even if its off the shelf parts I could have guessed the PS4 would pack more of a punch. And if anyone can pull off cloud and Kinect software powered tricks it's Microsoft.
Click to expand...

You talk too much sense young Neo. You won't do well here.
 
hodgy100 said:
nice little upclock there, doesn't really boost the performance that much, but every little helps.
People spinning this as meaning the xbox one is better should be ashamed of themselves.
Click to expand...

Well, let's be honest. I don't think anybody sans maybe one crazy person in this entire thread has said as such. It's a straw man for a straw argument for a straw mob.
 
badb0y said:
Stronger than it's competitors, yes.

You going to brag about your PC now? Let me know when your PC has Halo 3,4,Reach and The Last of Us.
Click to expand...

Let us know when your PS4 has *insert long list of PC excluse titles*

See how little your comment makes sense?
 
Just to know Sony new flagship smartphone has a 2.2ghz quad core cpu...i really think 1.6ghz jags just wont kick past 2 years before it affects more ambitious games...
 
DC R1D3R said:
You talk too much sense young Neo. You won't do well here.
Click to expand...

I just hope that Sony is making the online stuff as good for a change. That would be one less reason to buy both. My wallet needs a break. But I'm sure I'll get both at one point or another. An XBOX One Halo 1-4 + Reach collection might do it. I'm going to play Destiny on my PS4 and try to forget about that prospect.
 
flyinpiranha said:
Well, let's be honest. I don't think anybody sans maybe one crazy person in this entire thread has said as such. It's a straw man for a straw argument for a straw mob.
Click to expand...

yeah thats a fair point i'll sorry for jumping to conclusions. I did read that post then rushed t post my thoughts...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

PS4 BC Boost on PS5 Pro
43
4K
TehGoomba7s replied
If you have an AMD CPU, you might want to turn on this feature in BIOS
24
25
Hyet replied
Why are the CPU clocks of Switch 2 so low in docked?
2
83
84
Buggy Loop replied
Copycat game now on console
4
128
IbizaPocholo replied
Switch 2 cpu bottleneck issues: Digital foundry
2 3 4
166
10K
Mozza replied
Top Bottom