Blast from the past:
DF: Orbis(PS4) vs Durango (X1) Specs analysis
Notice how Rich tried his hardest to mitigate the obvious power advantage of PS4.
So does the GPU difference translate into as large an advantage as it sounds?
VGleaks' Orbis spec, again derived from platform holder documentation, suggests that four of these CUs are reserved for Compute functions, conceivably bringing the PlayStation's raw advantage down from 50 per cent to just over 16. However, while Compute is often used for elements like physics calculations, there's nothing to stop coders hiving off specific graphics features to this hardware - Just Cause 2, for example, used NVIDIA's own Compute solution, CUDA, for enhanced water effects, while a core element of Battlefield 3 - the deferred shading solution that power its beautiful lighting - is handled via DirectX 11 Compute shader code.
Apparently more ROPs in PS4 in overkill and not needed, 16 in Xone is sufficient for 1080p gaming Lol
Other information has also come to light offering up a further Orbis advantage: the Sony hardware has a surprisingly large 32 ROPs (Render Output units) up against 16 on Durango. ROPs translate pixel and texel values into the final image sent to the display: on a very rough level, the more ROPs you have, the higher the resolution you can address (hardware anti-aliasing capability is also tied into the ROPs). 16 ROPs is sufficient to maintain 1080p, 32 comes across as overkill, but it could be useful for addressing stereoscopic 1080p for instance, or even 4K.
Teraflops difference is moot .
There's an argument that suggests that comparing Durango and Orbis on these terms is not realistic; that the platform holders have far more control over the design of the silicon than the raw specs suggest; that they can be adapted with manufacturer-specific 'secret sauce' customisations. The raw teraflop measurements being mooted - 1.23TF for Durango and 1.84TF for Orbis - have been dismissed as meaningless, and to a certain extent that is true.
Xbox Secret customisations
But here we do see some intriguing enhancements that are Durango-specific. Its 'Data Move Engines' carry out hardware compression as well as decompression (and support for JPEG too - perhaps to handle Kinect camera streams), while there is also support for
texture swizzling. However, the main takeaway here is that core elements of the Move Engine functionality are apparently designed to extract the best performance from a RAM set-up that is much more complex (and slower) than its Orbis equivalent.
Pffff, Games doesn't need ultra fast bandwidth on PS4, if they did there is Esram!!!
However, while the disadvantages are obvious, this is not to say that the situation is anything like a complete disaster for Durango development. Speaking to game makers, the impression we come away with is that not every feature in a game actually requires ultra-fast memory. Systems will be developed on the DDR3, and if memory throughput becomes an issue, those features will be ported over to the ESRAM where there's enough bandwidth to provide the raw performance if needed.
The magic of DirectX lol.
Also mitigating the difference to a certain extent is the fact that Durango operates under an enhanced version of DirectX 11 - dubbed internally DirectX 11.x. It's highly likely that crucial rendering functions will automatically be optimised by Microsoft for use with the ESRAM.
He even added both DDR3 and Eram bandwidth together for it to match GDDR5 on PS4
Man, It was fun browsing that thread, hopefully you can get as much enjoyment of it as I did....until we get a legit leak for PS5 .