150Mhz CPU boost on XBO, now in production

Status
Not open for further replies.
History will no doubt show 1.75ghz to be the Battle of Saratoga of the console warz. The turning point where MS begins it's unlikely victory over the Imperial Sony.
 
albz74 said:
In all fairness, this has been done before. Audio is least of devs's troubles for vast majority of games. It never was, will never be.
Hence, no need to put an extra super-duper chips to enhance audio, when 95% of audience receives stereo sound via TV speakers.
With PS3 and X360 no dedicated hardware existed, and main differentiation point was the storage, resulting in PS3 games supporting DTS HD etc and X360 poorer equivalents in most games. But to be honest, even X360 sound quality was more than enough.

To sum up, audio chip doesn't make any difference, sound will be good enough for both machines and audio will not steal much juice from CPU. Differentiation point lies somewhere else.
Click to expand...

No way. Plenty of 360 titles, imo, kinda had their experienced ruined by the reduced audio in games. There were times when, due to a lack of proper audio muscle, you'd have scenes in games where the character is saying something important to the storyline, but the background music is drowning all of it out, like it couldn't handle both things at a reasonable level of quality. It's more of an issue in certain games compared to others, but it was definitely a problem on the 360.

Could I do without awesome audio in games? Yes, but why should I if I don't have to? That's why I'm glad the Xbox One has this awesome audio hardware. The PS4 will be great in the audio department, so this isn't some silly shot at the PS4, but I appreciate audio being taken this seriously, and we indirectly have Kinect to thank for this kind of audio hardware being in the system lol.
 
SenjutsuSage said:
LOL they can pole vault over my head for all I care. My post history, love it or hate it, has been consistent with someone who has always maintained that the Xbox One hardware is precisely what it is, that MS wasn't secretly hiding some extra GPU somewhere, and that I felt the console was more than powerful enough to handle impressive looking next gen games with the specs exactly as presented in VGleaks. My post history is also consistent with a person who has always said, in no uncertain terms, that the PS4 was the stronger of the two consoles. Where the problem comes in is that I haven't been as down on the performance capabilities of the Xbox One as some feel I should be despite the numbers on paper, which clearly identify the PS4 as the obviously more powerful of the two machines.

I've been very consistent on such things, but I've also been quite consistent in stating, and will remain so, that anybody expecting the Xbox One to be a weak machine, will be sorely disappointed.
Click to expand...

I'm not expecting X1 to be weak at all, I'm just expecting PS4 to be 40% more capable machine.
 
SenjutsuSage said:
No way. Plenty of 360 titles were, imo, kinda had their experienced ruined by the reduced audio in games. There were times when, due to a lack of proper audio muscle, you'd have scenes in games where the character is saying important to the storyline, but the background music is drowning all of it, like it couldn't handle both things at a reasonable level of quality. It's more of an issue in certain games compared to others, but it was definitely a problem on the 360.
Click to expand...

Maybe because of bad coders. There are example of good audio design in X360 : Forza 4.
 
schennmu said:
So according to DF the X1 now has a significant CPU advantage. Dat Leadbetter.
Click to expand...

I personally don't know if I'd call it a significant advantage. It just appears to have a good deal of dedicated hardware that will free up CPU resources for other things.

For example, the PS4's GPU advantage is far more likely to show up in games compared to the Xbox One's CPU advantage, so who knows what the CPU advantage gets you ultimately. All that is known is that it certainly helps development on Xbox1.

IN&OUT said:
I'm not expecting X1 to be weak at all, I'm just expecting PS4 to be 40% more capable machine.
Click to expand...

I actually agree, but that 40% is likely going to be much harder to nail down and see than people suspect, but the PS4 will certainly be more capable. It all depends on what developers do with their games, and especially what the first parties on the PS4 do. Because I'll own a PS4, too, so I do want to see PS4 first parties really make the system sing. I think the biggest advantage that we'll actually be able to see clear as day in PS4 games compared to Xbox One games will be all the insane compute related tricks that devs have all the extra resources to pull off on the PS4. The Xbox One doesn't have that same luxury at all. For example, I can already imagine some insane looking glass breaking sequence in a PS4 first party game, where the level of detail and complexity of the individual shards of glass breaking apart just blows our minds, and whatever else devs can manage to come up with.

So, it isn't like the PS4's advantage isn't going to be there in plain sight. It certainly will be. But we could be at a point of diminishing returns of sorts where, no matter how insane a game might look, there may be another incredible looking game on the Xbox One that may just look so good that its difficult to parse those differences. It might simply just come down to, well, okay, the PS4 title has superior image quality because of higher resolution and a better AA solution, but 40% or even slightly more (I'm sure it could be more) may not translate to the types of night and day differences that some expect. The stuff that I suspect will be night and day as more PS4 first parties get to showing what they've worked on, will be those compute tricks that devs put into their games.
 
SenjutsuSage said:
I personally don't know if I'd call it a significant advantage. It just appears to have a good deal of dedicated hardware that will free up CPU resources for other things.

For example, the PS4's GPU advantage is far more likely to show up in games compared to the Xbox One's CPU advantage, so who knows what the CPU advantage gets you ultimately. All that is known is that it certainly helps development on Xbox1.
Click to expand...

Cerny emphasized that PS4 includes Audio dedicated processor to free some of the GPU/CPU tasks. X1 in the other hand has SHAPE auddio block which mainly will handle audio in games + Kinect voice tasks.

I believe shape is made primarily to handle Kinect voice commands, something PS4 doesn't need to worry about at all, that's why the benefit of shape is exaggerated.
 
albz74 said:
Step back, take a deep breath and read your posts. Or ask somebody to do it so that You can hear what they say.
Click to expand...

just calm down

theres none who talking and explain that the dsp in ps4 can do other things than compress/decompress various audio format

when this will happen u will have the right right now is just the opposite
 
SenjutsuSage said:
I personally don't know if I'd call it a significant advantage. It just appears to have a good deal of dedicated hardware that will free up CPU resources for other things.

For example, the PS4's GPU advantage is far more likely to show up in games compared to the Xbox One's CPU advantage, so who knows what the CPU advantage gets you ultimately. All that is known is that it certainly helps development on Xbox1.
Click to expand...

Well, as I said before, the PS4 will have a CPU advantage if less than one core is used for the OS. In addition, we don't know what's the PS4 CPU clock speed.
 
SenjutsuSage said:
I personally don't know if I'd call it a significant advantage. It just appears to have a good deal of dedicated hardware that will free up CPU resources for other things.

For example, the PS4's GPU advantage is far more likely to show up in games compared to the Xbox One's CPU advantage, so who knows what the CPU advantage gets you ultimately. All that is known is that it certainly helps development on Xbox1.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I don't think anybody is refuting that there is a small on paper advantage now in terms of CPU. Calling it significant seems far fetched though. This would imply that it actually manifests in a tangible real life advantage. This I don't see at the moment.

edit: Given that they even mentioned this in the release announcement today, it seems more like a way for MS to claim at least one little advantage on the spec sheet. I am sad that they didn't invest in stronger hardware instead of these weird late uplocks.
 
JaggedSac said:
Did he ever say it was insignificant?
Click to expand...

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-can-xbox-one-multi-platform-games-compete-with-ps4

It turns out that despite having 50 per cent more power in the GPU department, the in-game graphical performance of the surrogate PS4 only managed around 25 per cent faster frame rates, like-for-like in the gaming benchmarks. The interesting thing here is that the homebrew Xbox One test rig kept up with the PS4-like kit if the resolution was turned down from 1080p a smidgen, which makes me think that on the whole the two are going to be very evenly matched.
Click to expand...

Before the xb1 GPU upclock, he announced they would be very evenly matched. But now a <10% increase over assumed Specs and assumed OS reserves is Significant.

The man has lost all credibility.
 
StevieP said:
It's better if you don't ask. Just believe him. Not a third hand source of here say (ie like myself, thuway, Mortimer, etc) but a first hand source.
Click to expand...

I have that strange feeling that Sony upclocked PS4 CPU/GPU combination to 2ghz/1ghz respectively. I remember Eurogamer posting something in March about rumored upclock of PS4 CPU.
 
JaggedSac said:
Did he ever say it was insignificant?
Click to expand...

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-can-xbox-one-multi-platform-games-compete-with-ps4

To conclude, in terms of graphics tech at least, there's little doubt that the PlayStation 4 is the more capable performer of the two next-gen consoles. However, in the short term, provided Microsoft brings home the promised performance improvements to its graphics libraries, and that the ESRAM is easy to utilise, there's every reason to believe that the stark on-paper compute deficit may not be as pronounced in actual gameplay as the spec suggests. Gamescom should be a fascinating experience, and a chance to judge progress after an E3 where games on both consoles felt somewhat unoptimised.
Click to expand...
 
IN&OUT said:
Cerny emphasized that PS4 includes Audio dedicated processor to free some of the GPU/CPU tasks. X1 in the other hand has SHAPE auddio block which mainly will handle audio in games + Kinect voice tasks.

I believe shape is made primarily to handle Kinect voice commands, something PS4 doesn't need to worry about at all, that's why the benefit of shape is exaggerated.
Click to expand...

SHAPE is just one part of Xbox One audio hardware. It's not the entirety of Xbox One audio hardware. There are three more dedicated audio processors separate from SHAPE in the Xbox One. Also, a great deal of shape's resources likely to be dedicated to Xbox One games as opposed to Kinect. The majority of Kinect's audio resource allocation seems to be coming from one of the Audio Vector Processors outside of SHAPE for noise cancellation, speech recognition and probably other things.

When they refer to being able to offload more than a CPU core worth of processing power, they're actually referring to the two vector processors outside of SHAPE, if I'm not mistaken.

IN&OUT said:
I have that strange feeling that Sony upclocked PS4 CPU/GPU combination to 2ghz/1ghz respectively. I remember Eurogamer posting something in March about rumored upclock of PS4 CPU.
Click to expand...

A 1GHZ PS4 GPU wouldn't just be stronger than the Xbox One. It would be murder lol. A 2GHZ PS4 CPU would probably fry the system :P
 
SenjutsuSage said:
No way. Plenty of 360 titles, imo, kinda had their experienced ruined by the reduced audio in games. There were times when, due to a lack of proper audio muscle, you'd have scenes in games where the character is saying something important to the storyline, but the background music is drowning all of it out, like it couldn't handle both things at a reasonable level of quality. It's more of an issue in certain games compared to others, but it was definitely a problem on the 360.

Could I do without awesome audio in games? Yes, but why should I if I don't have to? That's why I'm glad the Xbox One has this awesome audio hardware. The PS4 will be great in the audio department, so this isn't some silly shot at the PS4, but I appreciate audio being taken this seriously, and we indirectly have Kinect to thank for this kind of audio hardware being in the system lol.
Click to expand...

Those are just because of bad mixes or low sample rates. Low sample rates existed on PS3/360 because of limited memory and, in the 360's case, limited disc space. The audio hardware itself in those systems had little to do with that. Memory and disc space in the new systems is plentiful.

The only way I can see the new systems improving on audio is if they actually process the audio in 3d space. That's the one that would be most CPU intensive but the question is entirely in the air whether the Xbox audio block could process that.
 
schennmu said:
So according to DF the X1 now has a significant CPU advantage. Dat Leadbetter.
Click to expand...
"Significant" just means "non trivial", so don't get too excited. The XB1 might have a 9% faster CPU, and since the XB1 CPU will not have to do much in the way of audio processing, that advantage might grow to, I don't know, maybe 20% in a game with "difficult" audio.

That's not trivial, but it's not crazy-impressive either. (The audio that the XB1 will be able to generate might be crazy-impressive on occasion, but that's not really not the same thing.)
 
Of course, it should be some upclock. I mean 1.6Ghz - that's nothing like you can put your finger on chip core, you might get freeze shock from being too cold.

I think we will get 3Ghz from both by Nov. Programming on fanspeed take time, lot deeper than HL3 code.
 
MrPresident said:
Those are just because of bad mixes or low sample rates. Low sample rates existed on PS3/360 because of limited memory and, in the 360's case, limited disc space. The audio hardware itself in those systems had little to do with that. Memory and disc space in the new systems is plentiful.

The only way I can see the new systems improving on audio is if they actually process the audio in 3d space. That's the one that would be most CPU intensive but the question is entirely in the air whether the Xbox audio block could process that.
Click to expand...

Killer Instinct is doing some pretty awesome things with Audio. And I believe it was stated by the guy that worked on the xbox one audio chip that it can do the more complex audio related stuff that you refer to, but I think that's a job for the audio vector processors, and not necessarily shape.

Gemüsepizza;80021313 said:
He doesn't work at Sony anymore. And he only did some general tech stuff for Uncharted: Golden Abyss and PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale. I guess he knows as much about both nextgen consoles as you and me.
Click to expand...

Yes, he very much does.
 
nib95 said:
Don't listen to a word Leadbetter says. A 10% cpu advantage is significant whilst a 40% gpu advantage is insignificant. Lol.
Click to expand...
Nice strawman. Who says a 40% gap isn't significant? Anyone saying that is clearly deluded and should be ignored.

I will say that taking a 40% CU advantage and equating that to a "40% better console", or "40% more frame rate", or really 40% more anything is a step too far. Ditto for "9% more CPU". It's just not that simple. The GPUs aren't the same. The CPUs may not be the same. The various co-processors aren't the same. The memory architecture is not the same. And most importantly, games won't always be able to take advantages of the hardware capabilities that either console may have. e.g. If your game is not GPU bound, having more GPU does nothing to improve that game's performance.

Of course the same is true of the CPU. If I game is not CPU-bound, having more CPU doesn't help a bit.
 
SenjutsuSage said:
A 1GHZ PS4 GPU wouldn't just be stronger than the Xbox One. It would be murder lol. A 2GHZ PS4 CPU would probably fry the system :P
Click to expand...

I know that's highly unlikely scenario since this would bring PS4 performance to 2.5+TF. but I agree that would be a very rackless thing to do unless Sony have some sort of wizardry .
 
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
82
83
rodrigolfp 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