Andronicus
Banned
people keep saying the same shit over & over like they don't know its been stated the 360 architecture is easier to develop for....or hadn't come out a year in advance
this time its different
EDGE: "Power struggle: the real differences between PS4 and Xbox One performance"
- Thread starter Musiol
- Start date
people keep saying the same shit over & over like they don't know its been stated the 360 architecture is easier to develop for....or hadn't come out a year in advance
this time its different
Chobel
Member
LinktoDrink
Banned
I think the important part of this story is that it ultimately doesn't matter which console is more powerful, since developers are going to deliver the same product on both systems. I remember original Xbox games being held back because of PS2, and I remember PS3 games being held back because of 360. The power difference really doesn't matter. It comes down to brand choice. And if you want to pay $100 more for a camera and Halo.... then that's your choice.
eddfromtheriver
Banned
If that happens... smh... can you really go that low MS (Penello/Major)?... PATHETIC.
Manmademan
Member
Penello is in the thread, but chose not to comment. take that as you will.
personally, the high road on this sort of thing is probably best.
Guess you didn't really read the article, huh?
My deepest apologies to your inner fanboy
Cloud.
LOL.
I'm sure my 4MB/s Internet connection will add all the awesome needed..
I understand that all the PC talk in console threads can be tiring, but this is still a dumb argument.
People are counting single jaggies in released Driveclub videos, complaining over slight pop in and demanding native 1080p AND 60fps in every game.
If you need perfect IQ and a high framerate across the board there is only one option; the PC. However when this is brought up the discussion quickly sours.
Such a system would probably cost around twice that of a PS4, but it is still within reach for a lot of people that post on this forum; especially if they frequently buy console games to go with their system.
The notion that spending roughly twice that of a mass market console to build a pc is equivalent to buying three multinational corporations is so inane that its not worth commenting on further.
That isn't what this story is saying at all...
Garrett 2U
Member
dude. I'm not arguing specs.
I'm simply pointing that the article isn't portraying the xbone as weak at all and, in fact, says that the xbone could end up on top.
I wouldn't want you to feed your inner fanboy something that is actually defending the xbone when there are plenty of other places to get your fix.
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
PS3 games were held back because of 360? Heard it all now.
NoPiece
Member
Or even on a per game basis, like God of War Chains of Olympus did on PSP. But it seems extremely unlikely that it would be worth the risk.
Optical drives are usually the bottlenecks, which is why both consoles require installs. There is a reason gddr5 is used for graphics cards. How is it overkill, if there will be tangible benefits as well as a lower price point?
Right, so if this is lies why wouldn't MS sue for liable and a retraction.
Don't want to disappoint you but they won't as they know they will lose. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place because if they
lose a case like that the negative press would be massive.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
I think people are overreacting. Come launch day there will be some goal posting talking about wait till next year.
Console is shipping soon they can't change the hardware. All they can do is what Sony is doing, tweaking
Iacobellis
Junior Member
How will Xbox One end up on top? Are they going to discover another upclock a year from now?
They can delay the console and redesign the hardware.
Let's be honest, if Microsoft want to respond to the Edge article they should contact Edge, not post in a thread of GAF.
Lets be fair whatever he says will be teared to shreds like a pack of dogs, whether its fact or not, right or wrong.
LinktoDrink
Banned
Read the last paragraphs.
Indeed, despite that gulf in speed, the differences between cross platform launch window games will be negligible; with tight deadlines to meet, its more expedient for developers to deliberately create near-identical versions.
The poor [graphics] drivers have made it difficult to push either of them, and the developers arent familiar with the hardware yet, said one source. Another stated that well begin to see far greater use of each platforms unique features once were past the first wave of releases, when developers have more time and experience with each consoles quirks.
from the article, PS4 seems like it runs identical codes much better. So my assumption was based on that.
Apparently the cloud straw can still be clutched on to.
It could hurt their (potentially larger) PS4 sales if certain third party titles come out of the gate in near identical states, yet off the pace of the more graphically impressive PS4 titles.
Personally, I'm more inclined to get Killzone: SF than Battlefield 4, after hearing some not to great stuff about the latter. I realise it's not a like for like comparison, and no final judgement should be made until the games are finished. But with limited funds, I'm going to buy the best titles in their particular genre, I'll not be too pleased if a PS4 game is being held back in the name of parity.
googleplex
Member
Since when is not judging a consoles graphical abilities by launch and first generation games "goal posting"?
Manmademan
Member
Console vs. PC is not always about cost. PC has significant usability issues which put it out of discussion for many console fans.
So when discussing which version of which console game is superior, "BUY PC!" doesn't belong in the discussion, since it fails to take that into account.
you want PC related discussion, then make your own thread about it.
eddfromtheriver
Banned
Haven't you heard that the bird is the word?
Amd provide poor drivers for a chip they've been writing drivers for years for.
Strange that.
Iacobellis
Junior Member
I don't see why Garrett 2U believes in it so much. I guess Diablo III and SimCity meant nothing.
Brian, don't.
It is too late in the manufacturing process to overclock all consoles. The chips they binned that were up to spec might not be so if they try upclocking the chip. That might cause some chips to fry while others would be fine.
2 months out is too late given where they are in the production process. Unless they were extremely conservative with their clocks.
well, MS can improve drivers over time, but that doesn't mean X1 will magically be more powerful than PS4.
PS4 is the most powerful console by a fair margin, Nothing can change that.
I'm no Xbox One fan , but ... Gamecube? However, that lacked games.
Not sure why people keep bringing up "when did the more powerful console win last time" when there's a very big factor at play here this time, price. If the PS4 is significantly more powerful AND $100 cheaper, well that doesn't sound too good for MS. Guess we'll have to wait and see.
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
Those concerned enough about the difference in graphics between Ryse and Killzone are likely willing to pay more for a PC (and get more for that added cost).
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
See its already happening? lol..
I kid, but honestly you would have to not judge the xbones launch and first generation games too. Its a marathon both consoles are running.
Zuhzuhzombie!!
Member
We already know what they're gonna say.
I think 360 edram was automated, X1 esram have to be flushed manually. (take it with a grain of salt) but I read some comment regarding this issue.
Yep, because "power of the cloud". Seriously?
SONY/PS4 has clearly the stronger hardware (more hardware/GPU) the better/easier architecture and more RAM for games.
Do you really think "cloud computing" will help them to "simulate" ROPs, CU's, missing RAM, etc.? Are you kidding?
You can read in the article what's going on at the moment.
MS is trying everything to boost the specs a small bit (somehow) but "it is not significant".
SONY is already there with great tools/software. So MS won't have an "advantage" here this time.
How many threads to we need? The PS4 is stronger and the performance gap is there.
Exactly!
hellmonkey
Member
In some ways yes. But this is mostly in assets, not so much in performance. The limited size of DVD and MS freaking out about multi disks did hold back some titles (FF 13 says hi) and what the could hold as far sound tracks, languages, HD movies and stuff like that. It stands to reason that maybe even some things like extra towns or other gameplay elements were held back or cut due to this.
Im sure early in the ps360 ear, 360 games were held back a bit because of devs trying to figure the Cell. So yes, the 360 held back games in some ways, and the ps3 probably help back games in other ways.
Iacobellis
Junior Member
Exactly. Saturn (or N64) were more powerful but either suffered from a high price tag or lack of third party support. Xbox was the priciest system and Microsoft was warming up to how the industry worked. PS3 was very expensive and relied on the Cell.
The PS4 and Xbox One situation is very different than previous generations.
gundamkyoukai
Member
No they don't cause some of them don't care about PC .
The 360 was cheaper due to no hard drive or blu ray and devs were saying that the games would be better due to less hardware gymnastics needed.
Ring any bells?
I'll address your last point first.
I did not bring the PC into this discussion, I merely remarked that it is somewhat natural given how graphic focused these threads are.
Other than that I will say that if you have serious usability issues with PCs then you must have trouble functioning in modern society, given how prevalent they are everywhere.
If you were talking about another kind of issue related specifically to gaming, I would say that these are massively overstated by people who don't own a gaming PC.
I do agree that we should try not to derail this thread too much with this topic.