PS4's 50% More Powerful than Xbone

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#101 Posted by sailor232 (5218 posts) -

@lglz1337 said:

lol look at those spreadsheet race trying to sell a pc and still can't provide a game that looks better than the order 1886. LOL

It was a Cow that had the graph on his initial post was it not? what it's only fine for cows to put up graphs showing benchmarks now?

#102 Posted by tdkmillsy (1772 posts) -

PS4 better GPU shock horror, real world its a 180p resolution difference in some games and takes an expert to point out the difference.

#103 Posted by lglz1337 (4445 posts) -

@sailor232: was talking about the comments in this thread

#104 Posted by -RocBoys9489- (6285 posts) -

But can it run the Master Chief collection? ;0 LOL, still funny consolites are arguing over graphics power. If you want that, GET A PC! These consoles are a JOKE when it comes to graphical power!

#105 Posted by sailor232 (5218 posts) -

@lglz1337 said:

@sailor232: was talking about the comments in this thread

ok yeah. But pc > ps4> xbox one in terms of hardware power should be pretty obvious to everyone by now, these threads shouldn't exist anymore.

#106 Posted by kitty (115049 posts) -

@inb4uall said:

Here you guys are talking about popping in an extra 270X for the lulz and I could only afford one to start out with. ;__;

I'm sorries ;__;

#107 Posted by Ballroompirate (23870 posts) -

@kitty said:

@inb4uall said:

Here you guys are talking about popping in an extra 270X for the lulz and I could only afford one to start out with. ;__;

I'm sorries ;__;

eww AMD

#108 Posted by lglz1337 (4445 posts) -

@sailor232: sure, but this is a xposBone vs ps4 thread!

#109 Posted by sukraj (24202 posts) -

who cares if it is more powerful I'm still enjoying my xbox.

#110 Edited by AdrianWerner (28228 posts) -

The thing I've found much more interesting is that PS4 is pretty much exactly as powerful as Radeon HD 7850. A GPU that's over two years old..jeez :D

Wtf was Sony (and Microsoft) thinking making such underpowered consoles.

#111 Posted by AzatiS (8388 posts) -

@faizan_faizan said:

Doesn't look like 50% to me from that image.

50% more power doesnt mean 900p will end up 1800p .... that would have been like 1000% more power to do so. From 900p to go 1080p while having way more stable FPS and crispy graphics. Yes it might be 50%.

#112 Edited by DEadliNE-Zero0 (5725 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@deadline-zero0 said:

So? Multiplats are basically the same anyway. Besides a possible resolution bump. On the other hand, cows won't stfu about TLOU and how amazing it is, which is funny considering it's a 720p game.

Meanwhile, consoles continue to be outdated out of the gate.

Which mean nothing going by your hypocrite first line...

Power matter to you only when is PS4 vs PC when is PS4 vs xbox one it doesn't matter..lol

The difference is that hermits do give a fuck about it. Ense why NFS Rivals and DR3 being locked at 30 go tons of backlash. Why WD potential ultra settings downgrade caused outrage. Why games with terrible keyboard controlls get backlash. Imagine if a game didn't have a 1080p setting to look like the PS4 version?

Meanwhile on consoles, it's 2014 and you still don't have settings options or even a freaking k/m option just for single player. Devs could just transfer the layout in multiplats like they do on PC wih the xbox controller layout. But still nothing. And all you do when this happens is take it.

People who care about having great performance and/or options and choices are on PC. And let me ask you something:

Why didn't cows like you give a shit with The Last of Us? You know, the flag ship for the PS3, the "game of the generation"? It was 720p and 30fps, released last year, when 1080p has been standart for 5 to 10 years. With PC hitting 60fps for years now. So what happened?

Did cows get struck with a lightining bolt when they got their PS4's and start caring? Because 1080p/60fps didn't start with the current gen Tormentos. If Uncharted and TLOU (the games cows don't stfu about) had been on PC, they'd run at those settins.

But, since they're not and can't, all that mattered was how awesome the game was, right? Right. No wonder cows are the joke of System Wars. Didn't care about res and frame rate just 12 months about, now they keep on going about their outdated machines.

BTW, ifyou want to respond to my post like always, atleast answer my question as to why cows didn't care with TLOU.

#113 Posted by tdkmillsy (1772 posts) -

50% theoretical maximum performance in ideal conditions.

Come on guys lets get real.

#114 Posted by slimdogmilionar (754 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@faizan_faizan said:

Doesn't look like 50% to me from that image.

The PS4 being 50% more powerful can translate to XB1 being 75% the power of the PS4. Or XB1 being 3/4 the bar length of PS4. So I'd say that looks like 45-50%. Also it's funny how they included XB1 eSram performance advantage but not PS4's GPGPU performance advantage.

If they did a test with GPGPU then the PS4 would loose some of that power. GPGPU and eSRAM are two different things, what is funny is that people forget that the PS4 will loose 400 gflops to GPGPU which will put the GPU back down in the same range of the XB1 GPU. Cerny did say that the PS4 was balanced at 1.4 with the other 400 gflops going to GPGPU. XB1 does not need GPGPU because it is a balanced system and while we criticize M$ for using eSram developers still have not utilized it to it's fullest yet, which is why they keep saying it will get better as time goes by and they get more familiar with it, same as eDram on 360.

#115 Posted by kuu2 (8141 posts) -

Last Gen Sony Fan talked about specs for four years till actual games came out, looks like this Gen wont be different.

Show me 50% please.

#116 Edited by SecretPolice (23917 posts) -

Silly cows, trix are for kids. eSram, SecretSauce and Storm Cloud incoming. :P

#117 Edited by tormentos (20541 posts) -

@sailor232 said:

@casharmy said:

And just like that, all the lems remembered their nitrogen cooled, nuclear reactor powered quad core sli titan PC set up rigs that were sitting over in the bread basket, to say PC >>> PS4 power.

And when it comes to the power gap between the equally priced PS4 and xbox one uhhh I can't defend that but...PC > PS4!

lol

It's not that hard to build a pc better than the ps4. You only need a decent mid range gpu with a greater than mobile processor to already destroy the consoles. LOL.

No is not hard i did it a month ago,but is more expensive.

Hes point is that PC has no horse on this race,the xbox one and PS4 both cost $399,one is weaker one is stronger,oh and before last month is was $500 vs $399 and the cheaper one was actually the stronger,sure you can build a stronger PC but it will cost you more.

No there are no mobil processors that destroy consoles just because a cellphone CPU is clocked at 2.4 ghz doesn't mean is faster than the PS4 one,there is more to CPU than clock speed you should know that.

@inb4uall said:

You're an idiot El Tormo. Xbone and PS4 multiplats are super close most of the time. PC vs PS4 or PC vs Xbone and there is a huge gulf in multiplat fidelity and quality. You have to take into account how much of a difference there is.

Super close to you 1080p vs 720p isn't close and up to 30FPS more isn't close either that is a huge ass gap.

30FPS in Tomb Raider is as big difference as what the 7950 has over the 7770 in that same game,so we are talking here about a nice jump in performance.

@HalcyonScarlet said:

STFU tormentos you complete and utter moron. Get out of my face about this shit.

I've moved on, now maybe you should move on to your own business. Yeah I was about the consoles from SNES to the 360 when there was actually a difference between them. When I didn't need fucking digital foundry or whatever to put circles round a picture and magnify to see the differences. So yeah, I was around for the 7th gen, not sticking around for 7.5th gen though. I jumped ship now fucking live with it.

If I moved on to the PS you wouldn't be trying get on my ass about it all day.

Now get a life. Go hump Sony's other leg while they milk the living crap out of you this gen just like MS.

You are a hypocrite and you hide now on PC because your precious xbox one got beat up..lol

You are a sad lemming and every time a PS4 vs xbox one thread pop you butt in with a huge damage controls defending the xbox one,wow MS really screw up with their fans that they don't even want to admit what they are any more.

Again last gen you didn't care about PC right.? because your console of choice was getting the superior multiplatforms,even when PC was on another league since 2006,so yeah save your hypocrite PC arguments..lol

@FastRobby said:

Haha, this is solely a GPU benchmark not a total console benchmark, this says nothing...

The cows are forgetting this again:

But keep believing it's 50% more powerful, and that it's super important when everything gets offloaded to the cloud. Xbox One was build knowing these things will be offloaded, PS4 is just a last-gen PC

Yeah thank go the PS4 has 2 different bandwidth for the CPU...lol

One from system memory to CPU and one from CPU to GPU,hell the GPU has 176GB which isn't even illustrated there,is just a guide line for developers to avoid pitfalls,MS has those to for ESRAM.

And that bold part is what make you a butthurt fanboy,internet connections don't have the speed to do that period.

Microsoft's confusing Xbox One cloud message shifts to dedicated servers

"Xbox Live is the service. Dedicated servers is the benefit."

And that - finally - is how Microsoft is now referring to the cloud.

"You picked up on exactly that," Phil Harrison told me at E3 last week.

"Xbox Live is the service. Dedicated servers is the benefit. That is the reason why these games are going to be better, why the experience for multiplayer is going to be better.

The cloud doesn't address graphics bottlenecks, but here it demonstrates how much of a strain simulating destruction of a complex scene can have on the CPU

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-06-16-microsofts-confusing-xbox-one-cloud-message-shifts-to-dedicated-servers

I think you miss this article a month or so,from MS own mouth dedicated servers is the benefit,and the cloud will not address GRAPHICS BOTTLENECKS.

You have been taken the cloud is a Hoax it was call since last year and rightly so,and MS last month proved that.

The introduction of DirectX 12 for the Xbox One has raised the hopes of several developers and those who are eagerly waiting to see the console performing parallel to its industry competitor. Very little is known about how the upcoming API will properly supply the Xbox One with enough juice to boost its rankings and performance. Many video game developers and industry analysts have expressed their thoughts on the topic, with some going for the brighter side by making statements such as DirectX 12 will double Xbox One’s GPU power, and others holding on the ropes behind the lines.

Analyzing all the DirectX 12 alongside Xbox One hype, Phil Spencer, head of Microsoft’s Xbox division, decided to pour out some realistic estimation of what can be expected from the upcoming API for the company’s console. Answering fans’ question on Twitter, Phil mentioned that the DirectX 12 will obviously improve Xbox One’s performance by helping developers to create video games more easily, however, it will not bring a “massive change.”

http://wccftech.com/phil-spencer-directx-12-massive-change-xbox-expect-1st-party-studios/#ixzz386T81576

And before you even hide on DX,like i told you losers 100 times,DX12 will do sh** for the xbox one,look at how the whole message have change in the last few months,the cloud is dedicated servers mostly like i claimed,and DX12 will not bring the massive boost you blind lemmings were expecting either,and that is because the xbox one API is already like DX 12 and lower cpu over head was part of the xbox one since day 1.

Funny how the PS4 is a last gen console,yet is the xbox one the one with a barrage of 720p games,900p games as well with inferior quality and frames to their PS4 counter parts.lol

#118 Posted by skipper847 (3680 posts) -

PS4 50% stronger. I will test it by chucking both out of my window. :D

#120 Edited by tormentos (20541 posts) -

@tdkmillsy said:

PS4 better GPU shock horror, real world its a 180p resolution difference in some games and takes an expert to point out the difference.

Yeah look at sniped Elite where the difference in frame base up to 30FPS mores,that isn't a joke is a serious gap.

@-RocBoys9489- said:

But can it run the Master Chief collection? ;0 LOL, still funny consolites are arguing over graphics power. If you want that, GET A PC! These consoles are a JOKE when it comes to graphical power!

Find me a PC for $399 that beat the PS4 power wise and consolites will..lol

That like saying can the xbox one run Uncharted 4.?LOL

@sailor232 said:

@lglz1337 said:

@sailor232: was talking about the comments in this thread

ok yeah. But pc > ps4> xbox one in terms of hardware power should be pretty obvious to everyone by now, these threads shouldn't exist anymore.

Really then why every time one is made lemming enter with a huge damage control and try to imply that both console are on par.? Hell Blackace even imply that next year the xbox one could even go ahead...hahaha

@deadline-zero0 said:

The difference is that hermits do give a fuck about it. Ense why NFS Rivals and DR3 being locked at 30 go tons of backlash. Why WD potential ultra settings downgrade caused outrage. Why games with terrible keyboard controlls get backlash. Imagine if a game didn't have a 1080p setting to look like the PS4 version?

Meanwhile on consoles, it's 2014 and you still don't have settings options or even a freaking k/m option just for single player. Devs could just transfer the layout in multiplats like they do on PC wih the xbox controller layout. But still nothing. And all you do when this happens is take it.

People who care about having great performance and/or options and choices are on PC. And let me ask you something:

Why didn't cows like you give a shit with The Last of Us? You know, the flag ship for the PS3, the "game of the generation"? It was 720p and 30fps, released last year, when 1080p has been standart for 5 to 10 years. With PC hitting 60fps for years now. So what happened?

Did cows get struck with a lightining bolt when they got their PS4's and start caring? Because 1080p/60fps didn't start with the current gen Tormentos. If Uncharted and TLOU (the games cows don't stfu about) had been on PC, they'd run at those settins.

But, since they're not and can't, all that mattered was how awesome the game was, right? Right. No wonder cows are the joke of System Wars. Didn't care about res and frame rate just 12 months about, now they keep on going about their outdated machines.

BTW, ifyou want to respond to my post like always, atleast answer my question as to why cows didn't care with TLOU.

Yeah Hermit give a fu** yet only 10 or 11 million own a damn GPU stronger than the PS4 when those have been on the market since 2010,shouldn't the Hermits have all more powerful than PS4 hardware by now.?

The PS4 is probably over 9 million already when PC with stronger GPU are just a few millions away,is like selling 12 million PS4 4 years after been introduce that is a total failure,so yeah hermits care they just don't pay because apparently they care more about their wallet.

Consoles setting have never been a good option for consoles,and mouse and key board support have been on consoles since the PS3,what the fu** are you smocking.? Hell the PS3 even supported PC made mods on UT3.

5 to 10 years..hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 10 years ago few knew what 1080p was,and there was a bigger chance you saw 1920x1200 than 1080p,monitors of that age didn't have that resolution,that is something that became popular after Blu-ray and TV's supporting it arrive,hell many games didn't even support those resolutions,because of the power need it to move games on it.

TLOU is an incredible game,and the fact that you want to downplay it with that crappy spin is a joke,wii had the highest rated exclusive last gen,did i say you need graphics to have a high scoring game quote me.

The problem you have is that you blast the PS4 with PC arguments,but when is XBO vs PS4 some how graphics don't matter..lol

Wipeout was 1080p 60FPS and is a 2007 game dude..lol

You can do 1080p 60FPS is just depend what quality you chose,you say 1080p was the standard 10 years ago,the 7800GTX is 8 years old,and it could barely play games at 1080p, unless you drastically lower quality,the moment you push the graphics out of the windows go either resolution or frames.

@tdkmillsy said:

50% theoretical maximum performance in ideal conditions.

Come on guys lets get real.

Up to 30FPS more on sniper elite and tomb raider show a bigger gap than 50%.

Please quantify the difference Tomb Raider has between the xbox one and PS4 here in that screen.

The PS4 version average 50FPS with sustained peaks of 60FPS.

Now find a 20 to 30 FPS gap in that performance screen and see what the difference in power amounts to,the closes to the xbox one 7770 29FPS,now find 20FPS average gap,GTX 670 the closes gap in performance,now find a 30FPS gap,yeah 7950.

The gap in Tomb Raider on xbox one vs PS4 is as big as 7950 vs 7770,oh did i mention that this screen i posted feature the same quality across all cards,with the same effects and IQ.?

Because Tomb Raider on xbox one,has 900p cut scenes,lower quality textures,and lower quality effects vs the PS4 version,how the fu** you can't see that as big is beyond logic..lol

Guess what Sniper Elite 3 has more or less the same gap as well,you have to v-synch on xbox one to get rid of the horrible screen tearing,which lock the game at 30FPS,which mean the game again is as big as 30FPS,while the PS4 version also enjoy better effects as well,how can't you see that as big.? Maybe you need an eye exam.

@slimdogmilionar said:

If they did a test with GPGPU then the PS4 would loose some of that power. GPGPU and eSRAM are two different things, what is funny is that people forget that the PS4 will loose 400 gflops to GPGPU which will put the GPU back down in the same range of the XB1 GPU. Cerny did say that the PS4 was balanced at 1.4 with the other 400 gflops going to GPGPU. XB1 does not need GPGPU because it is a balanced system and while we criticize M$ for using eSram developers still have not utilized it to it's fullest yet, which is why they keep saying it will get better as time goes by and they get more familiar with it, same as eDram on 360.

And here we go again with that lame argument about 400Gflosp,which Cerny its self shoot down,is the hardware isn't 100% round but that doesn't mean every time GpGPU is use the PS4 most mandatory use 400Gflops.

He didn't say it was balance at 14Cu that is total bullsh** quote him with a link to him saying we balance the GPU at 14 CU,because it was MS who claim that sh**.

The xbox doesn't need GPGPU because it is balance.?

Hahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahaa

no no wait wait hahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.....

The xbox one does use GPGPU in fact that 10% Kinect crap was use for GPGPU,if you use GPGPU on xbox one it draws away from the GPU resources,what the fu** does been balance even mean,you know the term balance was introduce by MS to justify their sh** ass GPU performance,you know that the whole diminishing returns after 14 CU (which the xbox one doesn't have working either it has 12) was pure bullsh**,yeah i would love to have the diminishing returns of a r290 inside the PS4..hahaha

Balance doesn't produce GpGPU power,if an xbox game needs GpGPU it will draw it from the GPU,just like the PS4 will,it is sad that you try to imply that the PS4 will loose 400Gflosp if its does compute and then latter such a stupid thing as "" The xbox doesn't need to do GpGPU because it balance"" that is the most god awful crap i have ever read in this board,and clearly for the 100 time show you know sh** about what your talking.

GpGPU is drawn from the GPU,if an xbox one need to use GpGPU like Kinect did yeah it will be pull from the GPU like it was the case with the 10% reservation,GpGPU on xbox one isn't free and is not produce by balance..lol

ESRAM is a memory patch for bandwidth starvation,not a flop enhancer or producer,performance of the xbox one comes from its 12 CU at 853mhz,the PS4 one comes from its 18 CU at 800mhz,yeah the PS4 will always have more,enough with those silly theories.

@kuu2 said:

Last Gen Sony Fan talked about specs for four years till actual games came out, looks like this Gen wont be different.

Show me 50% please.

4 years.?

I have been playing games on PS3 since 2006 odd,maybe you live on a parallel universe where the PS3 didn't get a game for the first 4 years,hell by year 1 already i was playing Uncharted,Warhawk and several other,by 2008 MGS4 only 10 exclusive on this side between the xbox 360 and PS4,wipeout and others.

#121 Edited by ShoTTyMcNaDeS (2754 posts) -

I don't own a PS4, so I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I'm not too concerned as the PS3 seems to have done well last generation and was clearly the weaker of the two when compared with the 360! The PS2 was also considerably weaker than the XBOX but that didn't stop it from dominating the competition.

I just think that it is hilarious that about 75% of the topics the Cows create are about the theoretical power of the PS4 Vs. the XBOX ONE. But yet to date there are very few if any games that showcase this supposed advantage. As a XBOX ONE owner and XBOX backer since the beginning, I happen to think that a game like Ryse stands toe to toe with anything the PS4 has released to date. Is a game that runs at 900p on the X1 really worse than the same game that runs at 1080p on the PS4? The answer is NO!!! The only people that would even notice such a difference in visuals would be those that own both consoles, have two of the exact same HDTV and HDMI cables and had two copies of said game running side by side! Who does that??? A friggin loser that is who!!! Cows need to get a life...PERIOD!!!!!!!!

#122 Posted by slimdogmilionar (754 posts) -

@tormentos: For someone who tries to talk so smart you always end up making yourself look dumb. You are to hell bent on discrediting the XB1 that you ignore what's right in front of your face. You talk about PS4 onion and garlic bus but don't realize that the XB1 also has those. You discredit DX12 and say it will do nothing for XB1 but I guess spreading the workload between cpu cores is nothing and won't help to make the system more efficient. But we'll forget that Sony's own first party studious complaining about gpu being gimped because cpu can't keep up. You don't believe in the cloud despite other companies besides M$ starting to heavily invest in the cloud or after the Crackdown demo or the M$ recent cloud demo of the building destruction. Duh the cloud=dedicated servers but with dedicated servers like Azure you can do so much more than just host video games. http://www.cloudgine.com/

http://www.cloudgine.com/projects.html - hoax that http://unionvgf.com/index.php?threads/microsoft-catapults-geriatric-moores-law-from-certain-death.4696/ the more you guys discredit the cloud the more M$ invests in it.

Regardless that 176GBs of PS4 ram still has to be shared with the cpu even with the seperate onion and garlic bus. Now we come to this "theoretical" graph shown and we forget that when you throw GPGPU into the mix that the PS4 gpu falls into the range of the XB1 gpu 1.3 vs 1.4 tflops, the stuff that will be offloaded to gpgpu is the same things M$ will offload to the cloud. It's about more than just raw gpu power especially when the console with the more powerful gpu was built to sacrifice some of the power that they are hyping. Sony is hyping everybody with numbers but if you can't take a step back to analyze both systems then you are nothing more than a rabid fanboy.

#123 Edited by tdkmillsy (1772 posts) -

I don't know how you get away with posting your copy and paste shit.

TOMB RAIDER IS LOCKED TO 30FPS ON XBOX ONE. You complete idiot.

Sniper elite 3 both 1080p resolution and 15 fps difference not the 30fps your talking.

Is there not rules about talking out of your arse and spamming these forums.

Even the article says its theoretical maximum under ideal conditions, yet you claim its higher.

Still not got no games to play I see.

#124 Posted by tormentos (20541 posts) -
@FastRobby said:

I am a cry baby.

http://www.cloudgine.com/

I already proved my point with links and from MS own mouth..lol

@ShoTTyMcNaDeS said:

I don't own a PS4, so I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I'm not too concerned as the PS3 seems to have done well last generation and was clearly the weaker of the two when compared with the 360! The PS2 was also considerably weaker than the XBOX but that didn't stop it from dominating the competition.

I just think that it is hilarious that about 75% of the topics the Cows create are about the theoretical power of the PS4 Vs. the XBOX ONE. But yet to date there are very few if any games that showcase this supposed advantage. As a XBOX ONE owner and XBOX backer since the beginning, I happen to think that a game like Ryse stands toe to toe with anything the PS4 has released to date. Is a game that runs at 900p on the X1 really worse than the same game that runs at 1080p on the PS4? The answer is NO!!! The only people that would even notice such a difference in visuals would be those that own both consoles, have two of the exact same HDTV and HDMI cables and had two copies of said game running side by side! Who does that??? A friggin loser that is who!!! Cows need to get a life...PERIOD!!!!!!!!

The PS3 was stronger than the 360.

The PS2 arrived 20 months before the xbox or GC,so by the time they arrive it was all over and for hose 20 months the PS2 was the most powerful console beating the Dreamcast quite easy.

I find hilarious that fanboys like you compare the crappy xbox one vs the PS2,they are not alike in any way,the PS2 was the strongest consoles for 20 months,from March 2000 to November 2001,the xbox one arrived and was already weaker than a $100 cheaper console.

The xbox one didn't arrived 20 months before the PS4,in fact it arrived 1 week latter and has been dominated from the start,the PS2 had some 24 million units sold by the time the xbox and GC arrived.

You don't see the difference because you are a blind lemming,Infamous look better than Ryse while also been open world been 1080p and running over 30FPS,Ryse is heavily path guided,900p and drops into the teens frame wise.

And Drive Club my god is not even comparable to any Forza game is so great looking it isn't even fair to compare it to Forza.

#125 Edited by ShoTTyMcNaDeS (2754 posts) -

@slimdogmilionar said:

@tormentos: For someone who tries to talk so smart you always end up making yourself look dumb. You are to hell bent on discrediting the XB1 that you ignore what's right in front of your face. You talk about PS4 onion and garlic bus but don't realize that the XB1 also has those. You discredit DX12 and say it will do nothing for XB1 but I guess spreading the workload between cpu cores is nothing and won't help to make the system more efficient. But we'll forget that Sony's own first party studious complaining about gpu being gimped because cpu can't keep up. You don't believe in the cloud despite other companies besides M$ starting to heavily invest in the cloud or after the Crackdown demo or the M$ recent cloud demo of the building destruction. Duh the cloud=dedicated servers but with dedicated servers like Azure you can do so much more than just host video games. http://www.cloudgine.com/

http://www.cloudgine.com/projects.html - hoax that http://unionvgf.com/index.php?threads/microsoft-catapults-geriatric-moores-law-from-certain-death.4696/ the more you guys discredit the cloud the more M$ invests in it.

Regardless that 176GBs of PS4 ram still has to be shared with the cpu even with the seperate onion and garlic bus. Now we come to this "theoretical" graph shown and we forget that when you throw GPGPU into the mix that the PS4 gpu falls into the range of the XB1 gpu 1.3 vs 1.4 tflops, the stuff that will be offloaded to gpgpu is the same things M$ will offload to the cloud. It's about more than just raw gpu power especially when the console with the more powerful gpu was built to sacrifice some of the power that they are hyping. Sony is hyping everybody with numbers but if you can't take a step back to analyze both systems then you are nothing more than a rabid fanboy.

Dude don't try and argue with the Cows! They believe what they want to believe and that is the way it has always been! They look at all of these THEORETICAL numbers and think it is real world. We are only 9 months into this generation and all of a sudden 720p and 30fps are both trash when just a few short months ago the best games of last generation struggled to hit that mark!

How many 1080p, 60 fps games are there on the PS4 to date?? I mean Ryse is 900p and 30fps and to me looks as good as the best looking game on the PS4...KZSF which is 1080p and 30 fps if im not mistaken. I'm still not seeing this massive domination that the Cows keep screaming about! Maybe we will see it with some first party games like The Order and UC4, but I doubt any multiplat will show a significant visual advantage.

Wasn't the Cow mantra "graphics don't matter, its the gameplay that counts"??? All of a sudden the hypocrites come out from under the rocks which they live and their beliefs are completely different now. Hmmmmmm????

#127 Posted by tormentos (20541 posts) -
@tdkmillsy said:

I don't know how you get away with posting your copy and paste shit.

TOMB RAIDER IS LOCKED TO 30FPS ON XBOX ONE. You complete idiot.

Sniper elite 3 both 1080p resolution and 15 fps difference not the 30fps your talking.

Is there not rules about talking out of your arse and spamming these forums.

Even the article says its theoretical maximum under ideal conditions, yet you claim its higher.

Still not got no games to play I see.

Tomb Raider is locked to 30 where have i say other wise.?

The 7770 has 29FPS 1 frame difference you blind lemming.

Did i say Sniper Elite was lower res on xbox one.? I know is 1080p that doesn't mean they have equal quality.

And go to DF the difference is 15FPS if the game is not V-synch on xbox one,which produce a hell of allot of screen tearing reason why it got a patch that lock it into 30FPS and eliminate the screen tearing,the PS4 version actually hit 60FPS so yeah as big as 30FPS gap.

That funny because the xbox one by METACRITCS has less games than the PS4 and lower rated to,is so hard to be a lemming this gen..lol

#128 Posted by GrenadeLauncher (6256 posts) -

OP! What have you done! You've just made the lemmings' week even worse! The ESRAM was one of their few remaining straws!

#129 Posted by HalcyonScarlet (5465 posts) -
@tormentos said:

@HalcyonScarlet said:

STFU tormentos you complete and utter moron. Get out of my face about this shit.

I've moved on, now maybe you should move on to your own business. Yeah I was about the consoles from SNES to the 360 when there was actually a difference between them. When I didn't need fucking digital foundry or whatever to put circles round a picture and magnify to see the differences. So yeah, I was around for the 7th gen, not sticking around for 7.5th gen though. I jumped ship now fucking live with it.

If I moved on to the PS you wouldn't be trying get on my ass about it all day.

Now get a life. Go hump Sony's other leg while they milk the living crap out of you this gen just like MS.

You are a hypocrite and you hide now on PC because your precious xbox one got beat up..lol

You are a sad lemming and every time a PS4 vs xbox one thread pop you butt in with a huge damage controls defending the xbox one,wow MS really screw up with their fans that they don't even want to admit what they are any more.

Again last gen you didn't care about PC right.? because your console of choice was getting the superior multiplatforms,even when PC was on another league since 2006,so yeah save your hypocrite PC arguments..lol

So no one is allowed to jump ship? I'm supposed to be a nut hugging fanboy like you, even if I'm not happy with something. Do you understand how full of shit you actually sound?

You don't know what you're talking about as usual. So I'm a hypocrite for a scenario YOU invented? Are you on crack? And don't mistake attacking PS with 'defending the X1'. I've gone over to the PC, not become a cow sympathiser you moron. I jumped ship when MS dropped Kinect. I even congratulated the cows on winning this gen in that thread.

Again, you're full of shit, because multiplatform performance was never a deciding factor for me last gen, your putting all the lem/cow arguments at my door. NOT TO MENTION, I got my 360 BEFORE the PS3 came out in the UK. In fact it's not even the deciding factor this gen. Honestly Forza 5 looks good but not next gen. Drive Club is probably the truest nest gen looking game but it's only 30fps this early in, that speaks volumes to me.

I can game on ANY platform I choose. And I'm never going back to consoles as my primary gaming machine, it's a waste of money, MS and Sony have turned it into a milking contest now.

This is it, I will tell you once, I am a PC gamer now, I own an X1 and now wish it was a Wii U and I am NEVER going to stop jumping on the PS as long as you cows keep acting like assholes. Fuckin deal with it.

I'm not a hypocrite, you're an idiot, stay out of my business. I never made an oath to be a fanboy forever, it's not a football team you moron, I can jump ship if they fuck up when ever I want and that doesn't somehow mean I become a fan of the other side as well.

#130 Posted by DEadliNE-Zero0 (5725 posts) -

@tormentos: Thanks for moving teh goal post. You know the potato can't even keep up, so now cows resort to trashing the xbone because if you go against PC, you'll lose.

See, you don't really care about resolutiona dn frame rate. The people who really care, have been playing games like that for years now. I was playing Skyrim at 1080p. You're late to the part. Even Sony was advertsing 4K tv in the world cup, instead of the PS4. Funny how the company that manufactures your console advertises a resolution that very same console can't even do.

How sad. All cows liek you do is keep going on and on about how the potato is beter than the bone, but never wnat to go against PC. When years ago i remember cows bragging about more AAA games. Ironically, now that PC is ahead in that department, you switched to the GOTY argument.

Wanna play platform wars? Sure, i'm up for it. But don't try to claim ownage when you're not even trying to get first place. Like said no resolution and k/m options in 2014. UT3 and, i believe valve games, are a rare example. Still not choice after all this time.

As for price, the point remains. Just like people who truly, honestly cared for resolution moved on to PC years ago to get porper 1080p, they're moving on to 4K. Price is irrelevant, because it's about people who truly want it. i don't pretend to care for res, or trash the xb or ps for it.

BTW, when you 400 euro console gets backwars compatibilty, emulators, mods, K/M, can use any controller, setting options, ajustable frame rate, upgradeability, tons fo F2P games, RTS games, more AA/AAA, more exclusive games, more games overall, free multiplayer, better sales/discounts, better online communities (on average), and so on, then a maybe paying twice for 800 euros a PC will start to get unattractive.

Specially since doesn't even have games to play when you buy it. Also, what happens if you don't have a last gen console already to play all thos amazing last gen games? Ups. Like i said, cows are the joke of SW with their constant bitching and crying over resolution and frame rates, whiel apparently not caring for it for their exclusives.

#131 Edited by tonitorsi (8658 posts) -

@navyguy21 said:

Feel better?

Yasss.

#132 Edited by SambaLele (5543 posts) -

@freedomfreak said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

The Order and Uncharted 4 look good. Better graphics than anything shown on XB1 imo. And don't multiplats show those differences? Like Tomb Raider?

But then other multiplats do run at the same framerate and resolution. I mean, you can go on about lazy developers and all that. And that's why I said I'll wait for graphical first party powerhouses.

If there are already games that show the difference, like Tomb Raider (scottpsfan14's example, you know there are many others), then the difference is true. Actually, if there's a difference at the hardware level, that's all there is to it, games are just the expression of what that hardware can do. Some devs will spend budget into realizing that gap, some won't, and that comes down to their decisions on development.

You say you'll wait for more proof... so you can ignore the new ones as well? All varied proofs presented until now in the form of benchmarks, devs' opinions, games' performance (exclusives or multiplats), etc., derive from a difference that is factual, not dependeable of a point-of-view. Any new proof will be just as refutable as any other. Then it's all about running in circles.

Actic Edge's post is the most sensible in this thread until now:

@ActicEdge said:

Benchmarks are nice and the PS4 might be 50% stronger but it's still a meaningless stat to be completely honest. We already know PS4 games will look better than X1.

What we want is for devs to show what both consoles are capable of. We already got a hint with Ryse and Infamous.

#133 Posted by slimdogmilionar (754 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@slimdogmilionar said:

If they did a test with GPGPU then the PS4 would loose some of that power. GPGPU and eSRAM are two different things, what is funny is that people forget that the PS4 will loose 400 gflops to GPGPU which will put the GPU back down in the same range of the XB1 GPU. Cerny did say that the PS4 was balanced at 1.4 with the other 400 gflops going to GPGPU. XB1 does not need GPGPU because it is a balanced system and while we criticize M$ for using eSram developers still have not utilized it to it's fullest yet, which is why they keep saying it will get better as time goes by and they get more familiar with it, same as eDram on 360.

And here we go again with that lame argument about 400Gflosp,which Cerny its self shoot down,is the hardware isn't 100% round but that doesn't mean every time GpGPU is use the PS4 most mandatory use 400Gflops.

He didn't say it was balance at 14Cu that is total bullsh** quote him with a link to him saying we balance the GPU at 14 CU,because it was MS who claim that sh**.

The xbox doesn't need GPGPU because it is balance.?

Hahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahaa

no no wait wait hahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.....

The xbox one does use GPGPU in fact that 10% Kinect crap was use for GPGPU,if you use GPGPU on xbox one it draws away from the GPU resources,what the fu** does been balance even mean,you know the term balance was introduce by MS to justify their sh** ass GPU performance,you know that the whole diminishing returns after 14 CU (which the xbox one doesn't have working either it has 12) was pure bullsh**,yeah i would love to have the diminishing returns of a r290 inside the PS4..hahaha

Balance doesn't produce GpGPU power,if an xbox game needs GpGPU it will draw it from the GPU,just like the PS4 will,it is sad that you try to imply that the PS4 will loose 400Gflosp if its does compute and then latter such a stupid thing as "" The xbox doesn't need to do GpGPU because it balance"" that is the most god awful crap i have ever read in this board,and clearly for the 100 time show you know sh** about what your talking.

GpGPU is drawn from the GPU,if an xbox one need to use GpGPU like Kinect did yeah it will be pull from the GPU like it was the case with the 10% reservation,GpGPU on xbox one isn't free and is not produce by balance..lol

ESRAM is a memory patch for bandwidth starvation,not a flop enhancer or producer,performance of the xbox one comes from its 12 CU at 853mhz,the PS4 one comes from its 18 CU at 800mhz,yeah the PS4 will always have more,enough with those silly theories.

Digital Foundry: Going back to GPU compute for a moment, I wouldn't call it a rumour - it was more than that. There was a recommendation - a suggestion? - for 14 cores [GPU compute units] allocated to visuals and four to GPU compute...

Mark Cerny: That comes from a leak and is not any form of formal evangelisation. The point is the hardware is intentionally not 100 per cent round. It has a little bit more ALU in it than it would if you were thinking strictly about graphics. As a result of that you have an opportunity, you could say an incentivisation, to use that ALU for GPGPU. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-face-to-face-with-mark-cerny

This is not even from the article I read before when Cerny said the sweet spot for PS4 was 1.4, but more evidence that the 1.4 balance is not a rumor.

Why would Xbox need gpgpu? M$ never said anything about gpgpu and even more weren't you guys just bashing XB1 a few months ago because the PS4 uses gpgpu and the Xb doesn't. Still answer me this why would XB1 need to use gpgpu? If XB1 had a scenario where the gpu is being held back due to cpu then it would be logical to throw gpgpu in the mix, but the XB1 was built with balance in mind. There is DDR3 ram so the cpu can operate at full efficiency and eSram so the gpu can still get the same bandwith it would get from M$ using GDDR5. No gpgpu needed on Xbox it was just another tool in Sony's hype campaign because it's tech that the majority of the consumers have no idea about.

Duh balance does not equal gpgpu power, but it does equal efficiency. Sony obviously knew that the PS4 would be using gpgpu to balance out the fact that they put all of their attention to the gpu and knew the cpu would get gimped and also hold back the gpu because it can't keep up. It only makes sense that they would beef up gpu and hype GDDR5 becasue that's were M$ kicked their but last gen.

So while you are laughing in your post can you give me one reason why either console would need gpgpu? Then ask yourself which architecture would need gpgpu and why? Would you call the PS4 a balanced system? If you are half as smart as you claim to be you should feel dumb.

#134 Posted by freedomfreak (44536 posts) -
@SambaLele said:

If there are already games that show the difference, like Tomb Raider (scottpsfan14's example, you know there are many others), then the difference is true. Actually, if there's a difference at the hardware level, that's all there is to it, games are just the expression of what that hardware can do. Some devs will spend budget into realizing that gap, some won't, and that comes down to their decisions on development.

You say you'll wait for more proof... so you can ignore the new ones as well? All varied proofs presented until now in the form of benchmarks, devs' opinions, games' performance (exclusives or multiplats), etc., derive from a difference that is factual, not dependeable of a point-of-view. Any new proof will be just as refutable as any other.

But what's the point of using Tomb Raider, when there are other multiplat examples where the difference doesn't come close to a 30-60FPS difference?

And why would I ignore new proof? Xbox One doesn't have a first party graphical powerhouse out yet, so there's nothing to compare, hence why I stick to multiplats, which vary in performance with Tomb Raider sticking out.

#135 Edited by hoosier7 (4063 posts) -

@slimdogmilionar: So what you're saying is MS used a gimped GPU to maintain balance lol

There will always be points in a game where the CPU will be under load and the GPU will not, since GPGPU can free up the CPU it will either run with fewer drops during CPU heavy sequences or you will be able to handle more processes so can flat out handle more within the game.

If GPGPU is so useless why is it on comparatively for the time high end cards like the 7970 when even the worst CPU anyone with sense would pair with that GPU would be many times better than the console's CPU? Never mind once you're talking about high end CPUs.

#136 Posted by slimdogmilionar (754 posts) -

@hoosier7 said:

@slimdogmilionar: So what you're saying is MS used a gimped GPU to maintain balance lol

There will always be points in a game where the CPU will be under load and the GPU will not, since GPGPU can free up the CPU it will either run with fewer drops during CPU heavy sequences or you will be able to handle more processes so can flat out handle more within the game.

If GPGPU is so useless why is it on comparatively for the time high end cards like the 7970 when even the worst CPU anyone with sense would pair with that GPU would be many times better than the console's CPU? Never mind once you're talking about high end CPUs.

That's exactly what I'm saying M$ started with the same gpu that the PS4 did but they sacrificed some cu's to add eSram to gpu instead of using GDDR5. It makes it harder for Devs to develop until they truly get use to eSram, but M$ wanted a balance console, not to mention being a money hungry company this was the cheaper option. GPGPU is not useless I never said that at all but it makes a lot more sense to use gpgpu on PS4 than Xb1, M$ actually built the system to get the most out of each individual part despite how weak it is compared to full blown PC parts.

#137 Posted by GrenadeLauncher (6256 posts) -

Don't worry, lemmings. The cloud and DX12 will save the Xbone. Just you wait!

#138 Edited by blue_hazy_basic (28787 posts) -

So according to TC's source PS4 and XB1 were last gen tech before being launched (vs a 7870). I guess he won't argue about that anymore ...

Or is he now going to say its not just GPU's that make a machine ... Oh the quandary!

#139 Edited by tormentos (20541 posts) -

@slimdogmilionar said:

@tormentos: For someone who tries to talk so smart you always end up making yourself look dumb. You are to hell bent on discrediting the XB1 that you ignore what's right in front of your face. You talk about PS4 onion and garlic bus but don't realize that the XB1 also has those. You discredit DX12 and say it will do nothing for XB1 but I guess spreading the workload between cpu cores is nothing and won't help to make the system more efficient. But we'll forget that Sony's own first party studious complaining about gpu being gimped because cpu can't keep up. You don't believe in the cloud despite other companies besides M$ starting to heavily invest in the cloud or after the Crackdown demo or the M$ recent cloud demo of the building destruction. Duh the cloud=dedicated servers but with dedicated servers like Azure you can do so much more than just host video games. http://www.cloudgine.com/

http://www.cloudgine.com/projects.html - hoax that http://unionvgf.com/index.php?threads/microsoft-catapults-geriatric-moores-law-from-certain-death.4696/ the more you guys discredit the cloud the more M$ invests in it.

Regardless that 176GBs of PS4 ram still has to be shared with the cpu even with the seperate onion and garlic bus. Now we come to this "theoretical" graph shown and we forget that when you throw GPGPU into the mix that the PS4 gpu falls into the range of the XB1 gpu 1.3 vs 1.4 tflops, the stuff that will be offloaded to gpgpu is the same things M$ will offload to the cloud. It's about more than just raw gpu power especially when the console with the more powerful gpu was built to sacrifice some of the power that they are hyping. Sony is hyping everybody with numbers but if you can't take a step back to analyze both systems then you are nothing more than a rabid fanboy.

1-The xbox one doesn't have a Garlic and Onion Bus.

2-DX12 will not anything for xbox one,because DX12 is basically on xbox one since day 1,it was on xbox 360 for years as well,Consoles have lower CPU over head than PC,reason why the demo was done on PC to show the gains because on xbox one it would have shown non.

DX 12 is basically MS version of Mantle or LibGNM on PS4.

And i quote Phill freaking spencer talking about how DX12 will not deliver what you think it will.

Analyzing all the DirectX 12 alongside Xbox One hype, Phil Spencer, head of Microsoft’s Xbox division, decided to pour out some realistic estimation of what can be expected from the upcoming API for the company’s console. Answering fans’question on Twitter, Phil mentioned that the DirectX 12 will obviously improve Xbox One’s performance by helping developers to create video games more easily, however, it will not bring a “massive change.”

http://wccftech.com/phil-spencer-directx-12-massive-change-xbox-expect-1st-party-studios/#ixzz386T81576

Now this is from Phil Spencer him self..lol

3-Cloud is a big term which included many clouds,not all cloud are alike and what MS claimed from teh cloud was different,they talked about 40 times the power of the xbox 360 with teh cloud which is impossible to deliver over a latency riddent online connection.

Microsoft's confusing Xbox One cloud message shifts to dedicated servers

"Xbox Live is the service. Dedicated servers is the benefit."

And that - finally - is how Microsoft is now referring to the cloud.

"You picked up on exactly that," Phil Harrison told me at E3 last week.

"Xbox Live is the service. Dedicated servers is the benefit. That is the reason why these games are going to be better, why the experience for multiplayer is going to be better.

The cloud doesn't address graphics bottlenecks, but here it demonstrates how much of a strain simulating destruction of a complex scene can have on the CPU

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-06-16-microsofts-confusing-xbox-one-cloud-message-shifts-to-dedicated-servers

But but the cloud..lol

From MS own mouth.

In fact MS invest in the cloud because regarless of the xbox one failing the cloud still can be usefull for them,Office 365 use it as well as otehr MS programs as well is not just for live gaming dude,google has a cloud so does amazon and they don't have consoles.

4-Yes the 176GB/s are shared with the CPU,but there is a different buss that connect CPU and GPU directly which is 20GB/s 10/10,so yeah is not just 176GB/s which will be stupid either way the 7950 has almost 100GB/s more in bandwidth than the 660TI yet the 660TI can beat in many games.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/855?vs=860

Bandwidth without GPU power is a waste of bandwidth,the xbox one can have 250GB/s bandwidth it mean sh** when its GPU is under power,the 7770 has 72GB/s and the 7790 has 96GB/s so yeah after 100GB/s is basically meaning less what the xbox one can gain,specially when the xbox one doesn't have the 7790 full power or speed.

5-No that is something you pull from dip dip dnow your ass,the PS4 doens't go to 1.4TF if you use compute quote any developer or sony saying that.Second if a multiplatform game uses 400Gflops for compute on PS4 from where the fu** do you think the xbox one will compensate from.?

If 400Gflops are used for compute unless you want an extremely gimped xbox one version,you have to also use 400Gflops for compute on xbox one,which mean you only have 900Gflops left when the PS4 still has 1.4TF left.

You are a moron because you believe that out of air the xbox one will have parity if the PS4 use 400Gflops for compute.

If a 3rd party use 400Gflops on PS4 they need 400Gflops on xbox one,from where the fu** the developer will get those on xbox one.?

So no matter what is 1.3 vs 1,84 if you pull 400Gflosp from the PS4 you most also pull them from the xbox one,because gpgpu will pull from the GPU it self..lol

No MS can't offload 400Gflops of power over a damn cloud,which is the reason why games are superior on PS4.

The only thing we should analyse here is how sad you are and how stupid your arguments are,""The xbox one doesn't use Gpgpu because it has balance""..hahahahahaa

@FastRobby said:

Haha, sure using the Tormentos spin again, misinterpreting Microsoft as always. Keep waiting for greatness, I know it's in my living room already

No i didn't spin anything i quoted them directly lemming..lol

@slimdogmilionar said:

Digital Foundry: Going back to GPU compute for a moment, I wouldn't call it a rumour - it was more than that. There was a recommendation - a suggestion? - for 14 cores [GPU compute units] allocated to visuals and four to GPU compute...

Mark Cerny: That comes from a leak and is not any form of formal evangelisation. The point is the hardware is intentionally not 100 per cent round. It has a little bit more ALU in it than it would if you were thinking strictly about graphics. As a result of that you have an opportunity, you could say an incentivisation, to use that ALU for GPGPU. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-face-to-face-with-mark-cerny

This is not even from the article I read before when Cerny said the sweet spot for PS4 was 1.4, but more evidence that the 1.4 balance is not a rumor.

Why would Xbox need gpgpu? M$ never said anything about gpgpu and even more weren't you guys just bashing XB1 a few months ago because the PS4 uses gpgpu and the Xb doesn't. Still answer me this why would XB1 need to use gpgpu? If XB1 had a scenario where the gpu is being held back due to cpu then it would be logical to throw gpgpu in the mix, but the XB1 was built with balance in mind. There is DDR3 ram so the cpu can operate at full efficiency and eSram so the gpu can still get the same bandwith it would get from M$ using GDDR5. No gpgpu needed on Xbox it was just another tool in Sony's hype campaign because it's tech that the majority of the consumers have no idea about.

Duh balance does not equal gpgpu power, but it does equal efficiency. Sony obviously knew that the PS4 would be using gpgpu to balance out the fact that they put all of their attention to the gpu and knew the cpu would get gimped and also hold back the gpu because it can't keep up. It only makes sense that they would beef up gpu and hype GDDR5 becasue that's were M$ kicked their but last gen.

So while you are laughing in your post can you give me one reason why either console would need gpgpu? Then ask yourself which architecture would need gpgpu and why? Would you call the PS4 a balanced system? If you are half as smart as you claim to be you should feel dumb.

That is what i call owning your self with you own link,in what fu**ing part he say you most mandatory use 14CU for graphics and if you use compute you will have to use 400Gflops for it.?

All the contrary he say that ""it was from a leak and that it wasn't any form of evangelisation"" You know what that means.? it means that is not mandatory it was an example..hahaha

Also the PS4 is design to use cycles which were basically loss when you were doing another job,and use it as GpGPU as well.

You don't know what GpGPU is right.? is very clear from the way to argue.

I keep owning you latter have to work now...to be continue..

#140 Posted by blue_hazy_basic (28787 posts) -

@tormentos: Dude you need to condense your posts down. Dat wall o'text ...

#141 Posted by parkurtommo (28094 posts) -

@Chutebox said:
@freedomfreak said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

The Order and Uncharted 4 look good. Better graphics than anything shown on XB1 imo. And don't multiplats show those differences? Like Tomb Raider?

But then other multiplats do run at the same framerate and resolution. I mean, you can go on about lazy developers and all that. And that's why I said I'll wait for graphical first party powerhouses.

Infamous?

There are multiplats that look better than Infamous already. Watch Dogs for instance.

#143 Posted by parkurtommo (28094 posts) -

@farrell2k said:

Doesn't really matter because both of these toy consoles have weak ass low end laptop cpus. Bragging about a console that can barely do 1080p on games with the visual fidelity of PC on low/medium isn't really anything to brag about, especially for $400.

Low/medium? No. Right now, the PS4 is pretty much capable of running most games at the equivalent of at least high, if not maxed out. But obviously we're talking about little to no AA, possible frame dips, and I haven't even seen anyone bragging about Tesselation on consoles yet, which I think is ridiculous. Just think about what Naughty Dog could do with DX11 stuff. :O

Yeah these consoles are weak ass shit, if they can't even do anything special in their first years. They're already showing their limits. Last gen, in 2005 the launch of the 360 meant progress. Now the launch of the ps4/xbone mean absolutely nothing. I hope this gen doesn't last long, for the sake of us PC gamers who will always be affected by the capabilities of consoles.

#144 Posted by parkurtommo (28094 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@parkurtommo said:

@Chutebox said:
@freedomfreak said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

The Order and Uncharted 4 look good. Better graphics than anything shown on XB1 imo. And don't multiplats show those differences? Like Tomb Raider?

But then other multiplats do run at the same framerate and resolution. I mean, you can go on about lazy developers and all that. And that's why I said I'll wait for graphical first party powerhouses.

Infamous?

There are multiplats that look better than Infamous already. Watch Dogs for instance.

I have to respectfully disagree.

I've already read all of your arguments in the screenshot thread, you don't need to explain again. I'm not convinced. Infamous looks great, but to me Watch Dogs is just better. Maybe I'm just biased after seeing only PC screenshots of the Worsemod.

#146 Posted by parkurtommo (28094 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@parkurtommo said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@parkurtommo said:

@Chutebox said:
@freedomfreak said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

The Order and Uncharted 4 look good. Better graphics than anything shown on XB1 imo. And don't multiplats show those differences? Like Tomb Raider?

But then other multiplats do run at the same framerate and resolution. I mean, you can go on about lazy developers and all that. And that's why I said I'll wait for graphical first party powerhouses.

Infamous?

There are multiplats that look better than Infamous already. Watch Dogs for instance.

I have to respectfully disagree.

I've already read all of your arguments in the screenshot thread, you don't need to explain again. I'm not convinced. Infamous looks great, but to me Watch Dogs is just better. Maybe I'm just biased after seeing only PC screenshots of the Worsemod.

Yeah I know it's your opinion. What looks better is opinion at the end of the day. But I think Infamous just looks amazing when all the particle effects are in action. Looks insane. But hey, my opinion.

I definitely agree that Infamous has some amazing particle effects, that definitely sets it apart from Watch Dogs.

#147 Posted by 04dcarraher (20727 posts) -
@freedomfreak said:
@SambaLele said:

If there are already games that show the difference, like Tomb Raider (scottpsfan14's example, you know there are many others), then the difference is true. Actually, if there's a difference at the hardware level, that's all there is to it, games are just the expression of what that hardware can do. Some devs will spend budget into realizing that gap, some won't, and that comes down to their decisions on development.

You say you'll wait for more proof... so you can ignore the new ones as well? All varied proofs presented until now in the form of benchmarks, devs' opinions, games' performance (exclusives or multiplats), etc., derive from a difference that is factual, not dependeable of a point-of-view. Any new proof will be just as refutable as any other.

But what's the point of using Tomb Raider, when there are other multiplat examples where the difference doesn't come close to a 30-60FPS difference?

And why would I ignore new proof? Xbox One doesn't have a first party graphical powerhouse out yet, so there's nothing to compare, hence why I stick to multiplats, which vary in performance with Tomb Raider sticking out.

Also to point out TR was done by two separate unrelated dev teams for each version so we have no idea if the the bone team was upto the task. And that TressFX is very gpu intensive allowing the PS4 gpu to do more. However TR framerates on PS4 did have noticeable drops as well.

#148 Posted by Chutebox (38719 posts) -

@parkurtommo said:

@Chutebox said:
@freedomfreak said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

The Order and Uncharted 4 look good. Better graphics than anything shown on XB1 imo. And don't multiplats show those differences? Like Tomb Raider?

But then other multiplats do run at the same framerate and resolution. I mean, you can go on about lazy developers and all that. And that's why I said I'll wait for graphical first party powerhouses.

Infamous?

There are multiplats that look better than Infamous already. Watch Dogs for instance.

On consoles? Hell no

#149 Posted by Stevo_the_gamer (43332 posts) -

The author seemed to be struggling with the bastard child known as eSRAM, and how to properly account for it.

#150 Edited by 04dcarraher (20727 posts) -
@slimdogmilionar said:

Digital Foundry: Going back to GPU compute for a moment, I wouldn't call it a rumour - it was more than that. There was a recommendation - a suggestion? - for 14 cores [GPU compute units] allocated to visuals and four to GPU compute...

Mark Cerny: That comes from a leak and is not any form of formal evangelisation. The point is the hardware is intentionally not 100 per cent round. It has a little bit more ALU in it than it would if you were thinking strictly about graphics. As a result of that you have an opportunity, you could say an incentivisation, to use that ALU for GPGPU. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-face-to-face-with-mark-cerny

This is not even from the article I read before when Cerny said the sweet spot for PS4 was 1.4, but more evidence that the 1.4 balance is not a rumor.

Why would Xbox need gpgpu? M$ never said anything about gpgpu and even more weren't you guys just bashing XB1 a few months ago because the PS4 uses gpgpu and the Xb doesn't. Still answer me this why would XB1 need to use gpgpu? If XB1 had a scenario where the gpu is being held back due to cpu then it would be logical to throw gpgpu in the mix, but the XB1 was built with balance in mind. There is DDR3 ram so the cpu can operate at full efficiency and eSram so the gpu can still get the same bandwith it would get from M$ using GDDR5. No gpgpu needed on Xbox it was just another tool in Sony's hype campaign because it's tech that the majority of the consumers have no idea about.

Duh balance does not equal gpgpu power, but it does equal efficiency. Sony obviously knew that the PS4 would be using gpgpu to balance out the fact that they put all of their attention to the gpu and knew the cpu would get gimped and also hold back the gpu because it can't keep up. It only makes sense that they would beef up gpu and hype GDDR5 becasue that's were M$ kicked their but last gen.

So while you are laughing in your post can you give me one reason why either console would need gpgpu? Then ask yourself which architecture would need gpgpu and why? Would you call the PS4 a balanced system? If you are half as smart as you claim to be you should feel dumb.

The Xbox 1 can do gpgpu tasks, its not as strong as the PS4's gpu, limiting and or preventing X1 from having same quality of effects. gpgpu tasks are mostly used for advanced physics jobs or any other parallel based workloads and can do some cpu tasks as well. The reason why the X1 took out CU's for esram was because it was a memory buffer fix for the use of DDR3. MS would have gone with GDDR5 and stronger gpu if they knew GDDR5 prices and shortages wouldn't been an issue.