PS4's 50% More Powerful than Xbone

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#201 Posted by freedomfreak (40971 posts) -
@scottpsfan14 said:

Well then what's your deal then? What the fuck do you want to see? You get better performance on PS4. What more can I say?

You're really making me repeat myself. I've clarified throughout this thread multiple times. Hell, we went over this 10 minutes ago, and then you decided to quote me and say the same thing again.

#202 Edited by scottpsfan14 (5588 posts) -
@freedomfreak said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

Well then what's your deal then? What the fuck do you want to see? You get better performance on PS4. What more can I say?

You're really making me repeat myself. I've clarified throughout this thread multiple times. Hell, we went over this 10 minutes ago, and then you decided to quote me and say the same thing again.

Right so you say "I don't see 50% better graphics", I explain why, and you say "that's what I said". But if you know, then why go on about it?

#203 Posted by freedomfreak (40971 posts) -
@scottpsfan14 said:

Right so you say "I don't see 50% better graphics", I explain why, and you say "that's what I said". But if you know, then why go on about it?

I was responding and clarifying to a different user about this subject. Just because I closed down my argument with you, doesn't mean everyone has to stop responding to me and vice versa.

#204 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5588 posts) -
@freedomfreak said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

Right so you say "I don't see 50% better graphics", I explain why, and you say "that's what I said". But if you know, then why go on about it?

I was responding and clarifying to a different user about this subject. Just because I closed down my argument with you, doesn't mean everyone has to stop responding to me and vice versa.

Well what ever then. Go in peace.

#205 Posted by SambaLele (5424 posts) -
@freedomfreak said:
@SambaLele said:

What is 50% more to you? It sounds like it may be impossible to please your requirements. You want a next-next-gen experience out of those 50%? It's about a big performance gap. Performing better at what both do is a lot. Having higher resolution + more stable framerate, and in the case of some games add a better AA, AF solution and even better shadow resolutions and it's what make people buy a better version of the same GPU series for a premium. Only that between the two consoles you don't have to pay a dime more.

Not impossible. I just expected more when people say 50%. Not just performance wise, but visually.

Then it's just about changing priorities on the devs' part. The resources spent on performance can mean a visual upgrade, but you won't see that coming from multiplats. What the multiplats did prove, though, is that there's room for that.

#206 Edited by freedomfreak (40971 posts) -
@SambaLele said:

Then it's just about changing priorities on the devs' part. The resources spent on performance can mean a visual upgrade, but you won't see that coming from multiplats. What the multiplats did prove, though, is that there's room for that.

Hmm.. Yes, indeed. I don't know. I just wanna see stuff like Uncharted on Ps4. I mean, proper gameplay.

#207 Edited by kinectthedots (2007 posts) -

@freedomfreak said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

Parity only really happens because Microsoft probably demand it lol. Fact is, if Xbox One can do 900p 60fps, the PS4 can do 1080p 60fps and beyond. That's the power difference at work. Also, outside 343i, Xbox doesn't have a first party studio that can exploit the hardware like Naughty Dog or SSM can. And who knows if 343 are capable of making new and interesting IP's..

I know there's a power difference. I just don't see it being 50%.

Come on Freedom, you should know it doesn't work like that. There is a such thing as diminishing returns that is even in play now with current and past gen consoles.

Most people don't see the 300%+ power gap High End PC hardware hold over current gen consoles with the same titles...but it's there none the less.

That is the way it is. You don't simple "see" the difference in power of hardware as power % increases. Unless exclusive, it's usually the fine details that comes out on top between games that a person with more powerful hardware enjoy, not a generational leap.

If you are going to put up an argument stance about not "seeing" the power difference between PS4 and XB1 then you might as well pitch the same debate about high end PC not really being upwards of 300% more powerful than current gen consoles because you can't "see" the difference.

Here is a better one...we all know how much more powerful the PS4 is than PS3 right? Or is it!

PS4 must really not be upwards of 300%+ more powerful than PS3 because I can't "see" the % power difference.

NOTE: I could use MGS:GZ, Assasince Creed IV:BF ect and the result would be the same. The argument about not seeing the power gap that is difference doesn't stand up even if you compare current gen to past consoles!

Lastly, High end PC vs last gen console

Can you see a difference here? Maybe! But can you simply see the % difference everyone KNOWS the PC has here? I doubt it, And how much more powerful was high end PC compared to PS3 by the end of the generation?

Here is the truth. The fact that you can EVEN see a difference between PS4 and XB1 proves the power difference (refer to PS4 vs PS3/ PC vs PS4 examples) because if the gap was only as small as 10 or 20% you wouldn't "see" anything at all.

#208 Posted by delta3074 (18417 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

You guys remember that statement? Well, it was all the true and now we have the cold hard facts.

http://wccftech.com/playstation-4-vs-xbox-one-vs-pc-ultimate-gpu-benchmark/

The gap is way bigger than last gen folks and by quite a large margin too.

You know there is more to a consoles powew than just the GPU right?

#209 Posted by delta3074 (18417 posts) -

@scatteh316 said:

It can actually be faster then 50% depending on what the limiting factor is, PS4 actually has twice the fill rate of Xbone so in the right scene PS4 could approach 100% faster.

Xbox 360 had twice the polygon count of the Ps3 last gen, didn't do it much good really.

#210 Posted by freedomfreak (40971 posts) -
@kinectthedots said:

The fact that you can EVEN see a difference between PS4 and XB1 proves the power difference

Which I didn't deny.

#211 Posted by peafowlplumage (33 posts) -

@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

One and done.

#212 Posted by kinectthedots (2007 posts) -

@peafowlplumage said:

@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

One and done.

It really is done, refer to my last post.

#213 Edited by tormentos (18358 posts) -

@slimdogmilionar said:

Dude you are truly dumb and biased they don't make em like you anymore. It's not that it any form of evangelisation, but he said its there for incentivisation, cherry pick much. Incentivize- to promote (something) with a particular incentive.


Lol devs would'nt need to offload computations onto xbox gpu simply becasue the system was built so that each part can work together at max efficiency, which is why M$ kept throwing around the balanced system term. See there are no secrets to PS4 architecture when you look at it you can see it's basically just one big gpu powerhouse and by using gpu compute with gddr5 Sony, didn't have to invest in extra seperate ram dedicated to keeping the cpu efficient. Which would explain also why Cerny talks about the PS4 also handling audio on the gpu side.

I don't think you know what gpgpu is or why it's not widely used in PC's just yet, except for bitcoin mining.

No you cherry pick what you liked he say it wasn't period and that it wasn't the incentive part was about doing different stuff on the hardware,in fact it was confirmed by him that all 118 CU could be use for graphics or 2 for compute it wasn't 14+4 period and that is not what he say say so yeah you are miss quoting him.

Second that link is not accurate,and neither the PS4 or xbox one are based on Piledriver,they are jaguar based cpu Piledriver architecture was drop because it was to big to use on a single soc with a 7870 like GPU,so your link is wrong.

Not only that the diagram they are basing this off was confirm to be alter just to show a connection that wasn't there,in that black like on the diagram.

Do you see that black line that goes from CPU to ESRAM.?

Yeah that was fake,MS engineers admit latter on that ESRAM has no access to the CPU,The GPU connect to CPU by a cache not a direct buss,the PS4 the connection is a direct one from GPU to CPU not to a cache,is the reason why the xbox one has something similar to HSA but is not true HSA in design it has 2 different memory pools and no CPU access to ESRAM so the CPU can't see the data all the time which mean no HSA.

There’s no CPU access here, because the CPU can’t see it, and it’s gotta get through the GPU to get to it, and we didn’t enable that.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/04/04/microsoft-explains-why-the-xbox-ones-esram-is-a-huge-win-and-helps-reaching-1080p60-fps/

MS has been nothing but lying to people,in order to trick suckers like you into biting into the xbox one,is not about power for MS,is about the selling the illusion to people that the xbox one is on part with the PS4,which they have been trying to do since their whole vision of TV TV TV failed.

Exactly which the xbox one does and the 360 did before DX12 was even think off by MS,better spreading of the work loads on CPU on consoles comes from generation ago,is not new in fact on PS3 is call Spurs search for it,it was use on PS3 to spread work load around SPE on Cell,the xbox 360 also does this,multicore programing is newer on PC than it is on consoles,it was on consoles that it took off.

Which is the reason why DX12 on xbox one will do nothing because it was already there from day 1,DX12 is simply using tool MS used on xbox 360 for years and moving them to PC,which is why now they say hey what DX12 will do is allow of to do games easier rather than DX12 will double frames or sh** like that which they try to do on PC.

Dude MS own mouth is telling you that the cloud can't address graphical bottlenecks,i have been telling lemmings that for more than 1 year,online connection don't have the speed for that period,what they can do is offload some process like some physics and baked lighting,nothing great and any game that used the cloud is doom by online,which is why you don't see developers making games with the cloud in mind,or using it,the use they give to it is dedicated server,only Titanfall did and we all know how that game look like and how unimpressive it is..

lol at the bold part.

1-If a game uses GpGPU on PS4 it will on xbox one PERIOD,balance is a whole joke on MS to trick suckers like you there is no balance,in fact the xbox one is more unbalance than the PS4 will ever be.

DDR3,ESRAM 32 only,weaker GPU vs GDDR5 1 pool + stronger GPU.

GDDR5 is ok for CPU it has about the same latency as DDR3,but if much faster,ESRAM is not on xbox one to keep the CPU more efficient,in fact the CPU has no access what so ever to ESRAM.

And audio is done on PS4 by AMD true audio which doesn't use GPU resources,what Cerny speak about ray tracing for audio is a complex process done on GPU which would require GPU time on xbox one as well if ever done.

No you don't know what GpGPU is,is using GPU power for processing,since for ever GPU are super strong ,but they are dumb as well, CPU are smart but weak,so by combining the 2 you can actually use the GPU to accelerate task freeing CPU time and using much less resources than it would take on the CPU side.

Physics for example,CPU can run physics but GPU will run them better.

@Vecna said:

@Gue1: 50% more powerful than a big fat turd equals a turd with a cherry on top. Congrats.

Which still is better than what 88 or 90% of steam have for PC..

I guess there is a truck load of people with just turds and not even with a cherry on top.

@freedomfreak said:

But why cling on to that one when there's other examples out there where it's not the case?

What makes Tomb Raider special? There have been multiplats where the difference was not that major. Hell, TR is one of the few that sticks out.

I MEAN I DON'T WANNA PULL OUT THE LAZY DEVELOPERS EXCUSE, but the TR ports were done by two different teams. There are better examples out there, sir.

Oh, and Tomb Raider is special.

BF4 720p 10FPS slower on xbox one,900p 10FPS faster on PS4.

COD Ghost 720p on xbox one 1080p on PS4

AC4 900p on xbox one,1080p on PS4 better AA as well.

Tomb Raider 1080p on both 30FPS on xbox one,up to 60 FPS on PS4 average 50FPS,better quality effects,better textures,1080p cut scenes as oppose to 900p one on xbox one.

MGS5 720p on xbox one,1080p on PS4 dynamic weather on PS4 as well missing on the xbox one version.

Sniper Elite 3 1080p on both,xbox one has huge screen tearing problems,a patch lock the game to 30FPS,on PS4 it has better quality effects,up to 60FPS 49 48 average frames per second.

There are more of this cases this are the ones that stick out the most,and is an early on the generation.

@StormyJoe said:

The GPU is one part of a console. And again, the XBox was 100% more powerful than PS2.

And arrived almost 2 years after the PS2,it didn't arrive 1 week before it..

The PS4 and xbox one arrived on November 2013,in fact the xbox landed 1 week after,the PS2 arrived on March 2000,the xbox on November 2001, 20 months after,and by the time the xbox arrived the PS2 had sold 25 million units man,is not the same situation here or close.

#214 Edited by HalcyonScarlet (4514 posts) -
@tormentos said:

@HalcyonScarlet said:

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?

Is not about jumping ship,is about been a hypocrite,PC were stronger than your precious xbox 360 all gen last gen and you didn't care and now all of the sudden PC is better as if we care about power it most be a PC what we get..lol

The same care you give to PC last gen is the same one i give to this gen lemming...lol

You're a moron.

It's not about the PC being more powerful, It's about the current gen not being powerful enough over last gen.

The games on the 360 looked 10x better than they did on the original Xbox, so I was happy with it for the first 5 years of last gen. The last 3 years the graphics looked stale to me (notice I was never in the petty PS3/360 graphics threads towards the end), but I waited it out for this gen. But the games look only 2-3x better this gen than the last. Now after 8 years, that's fucking lol. And I'm not waiting around another 8 years for the next gen. So damn right I moved on.

How is that hypocrisy?

#215 Edited by tormentos (18358 posts) -
@MK-Professor said:

Oo! look, console gamers are fighting again to determine which console have more TFlops etc LOL, but when you tell them "my PC have 450% more TFlops than PS4" they start saying it doesn't matter...

It also has 450% higher price to,we are talking here would be the equivalent of paying $700 dollars for a PC with a 7770 level GPU,or paying $600 for one with a 7850OC GPU,now be a true PC hermit for once and tell me that buying the $700 one with a 7770 make any freaking sense to you? Now forget about both been consoles,just look at both as PC.

Now the xbox one got a price drop so no that PC is $400 with a 7770,while the PS4 still is a 7850OC and still cost the same,now which PC you will pick if you have no choice but those 2.?

@Krelian-co said:

for once i agree with the clown, 50% more gpu power does not translate to 50% overall, around 20-25% which is still substantial considering they are the same price.

That is something that has confuse many lemmings,i know because i have see them actually ask why the PS4 version don't look 50% better,quantifying the power difference in GPU is not as simple as saying double the power mean double the graphics,on PC the 7950 doesn't have double the visual quality of a 7770,it just run the same setting at higher frames.

@FoxbatAlpha said:

Lol no. One component doesn't dictate the entire consoles power.

The Xbox One Archeticture is proprietary much like Cokes secret formula. It's power is only surpassed by its mystery.

The PS4 is simple using readily available components. It is old tech.

The Xbox One will only get stronger as time goes on, as we are already seeing.

Hahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.....

@freedomfreak said:

I know there's a power difference. I just don't see it being 50%.

720p to 1080p is more than 100% difference in pixels.

30FPS vs 60FPS is 100% frame difference.

50% different on graphics cards is not equivalent to 50% better graphics and that is where you people fail to see the difference,the 7950 has more than 100% more Gflops than the 7770 tell me other wise,tell me the gap in power between the 7770 and the 7950 is not more than 100%.

So what does that gap amounts to.? This test is done using the exact same setting on all those GPU,exact same settings.

The gap is 30FPS on average,between the 7770 vs the 7950 on the same exact quality, now isn't the 7950 suppose to produce games more than 100% better looking than the 7770.? It has more than 100% gap in power right.?

1.28Tf vs 2.87TF

When you people learn to quantify the power gap in frames and resolution then you will notice the gap can be even bigger than 50%,after all specially on Tomb Raider the PS4 does 60FPS at time that is the same gap exhibit by the 7950 vs the 7770,but on average is 7870 vs 7770 which is 20FPS gap the average that is more than 50% as well.

And now you people can hold tied to the 2 different team making the game excuse,fact is Tomb Raider is a DX game,and developers on PS4 would have a much tougher time making it run on PS4 than on xbox one,because the PS4 doesn't run on DX and there is more DIY code to be done on PS4 vs the xbox one.

@scottpsfan14 said:

Which is why he is saying perhaps the team that made the XB1 version are not as up to the task as the PS4 team. They obviously utilized the hardware better.

Which mean little when we know Tomb Raider is a DX game,which should port super easy to the xbox one,hell before the xbox one got its 10% GPU back this game was 1080p on XBO when MGS5 came after and was 720p on xbox one,so is easy to see that DX eased the xbox one port of this game,it runs slower on xbox one because the xbox one is weaker,the PS4 team on this game most have pass way more problems than the one making the xbox 360 version dude and is for sure.

@Wasdie said:

It's on Sony and Microsoft to make sure they back their consoles with quality exclusives, good content updates for the consoles, and a strong online network. 50% more GPU power isn't going to help if the Xbox One starts pulling out great exclusives and expanding features while Sony sits on their ass. Microsoft did that last gen, they tried to enter a cash cow period too early and it bit them in their ass.

Securing exclusives when you are losing will cost MS to much,and developers will not be up for it,look at the backlash of Titanfall,you can bet the farm that the sequel is PS4 bound,and all will MS get probably will be DLC first like COD,all of EA games have sold better on PS4,and Titanfall 2 on PS4 i am sure will do the same no matter what 2 and half million copies sold is better than just 2 million,and when 2 and half join 2 more is 4 and half million units which will sound a hell of allot better to EA than just 2 million.

MS won last gen because sony royally screwed up,late 1 year at $600 when the 360 could be got for as low as $299 i ma even surprise that they were able to catch MS,thanks of the xbox brand been so weak.

I see your point the graphical difference will not be the deciding factor,between getting one console or the other but as of now neither look to be killing each other with games,alto the PS4 has a few indies more,this threads exist because they existed last gen all gen long and all gen long the xbox 360 version of COD was consider superior for even a smaller gap than this gen.

#216 Posted by tormentos (18358 posts) -

@delta3074 said:

Xbox 360 had twice the polygon count of the Ps3 last gen, didn't do it much good really.

That is because it was more about effect than polygons,and while the Xenos had to render all by it self basically the RSX got help,anything the Xenos had to do for it self that was offloaded to Cell was a gain for the PS3,so it was a case of 2 vs 1,the Xenon was not on the same level of cell and could not do the things cell did to help the xenos it was limited.

This time both have the same CPU the xbox one is a little faster speed wise,but hold back by having a cumbersome memory system,as a benchmark proved already on the substance engine.

@HalcyonScarlet said:

You're a moron.

It's not about the PC being more powerful, It's about the current gen not being powerful enough over last gen.

The games on the 360 looked 10x better than they did on the original Xbox, so I was happy with it for the first 5 years of last gen. The last 3 years the graphics looked stale to me (notice I was never in the petty PS3/360 graphics threads towards the end), but I waited it out for this gen. But the games look only 2-3x better this gen than the last. Now after 8 years, that's fucking lol. And I'm not waiting around another 8 years for the next gen. So damn right I moved on.

How is that hypocrisy?

No gen will be powerful enough don't you freaking get it.? Tell me the xbox 360 was even close to a pair of 7900TGX on SLI.?

Man that GPU came on early 2006,by November 2006 the 8800GTX was out,on its own the 8800GTX whopped the xbox 360 and PS3 ass,now imagine dual 8800GTX on SLI,no matter what GPU the PS4 and xbox one got by next year or even the same year they would have been outdone.

The PS4 and xbox one could have launch with a R9 290,still there are stronger GPU,and even if there wasn't on PC you can hook up 2 or more R9 290 and still the PS4 and xbox one would be beat,there is no beating PC when it comes to hardware period.

No man i was there on day 1 and games like NFS for the xbox 360 barely look better than the xbox counter part,higher resolution,it wasn't day to night,in fact the first impressive game the xbox 360 got was Gears a 2006 game,most of what the 360 got on launch was portware,PDZ wasn't that impressive.

If only in the last 3 years games become stale graphically to you then you are the problem they have been looking better on PC since 2006.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-elder-scrolls-iv-oblivion-xbox-360-versus-pc/1100-6147028/

Stop been a hypocrite the only reason why you shield your self on PC now is because the PS4 eat your precious xbox one.

#217 Posted by Antwan3K (2352 posts) -

the PS3 was claimed to be 50% more powerful than the Xbox 360.. and yet life still moved on..

#218 Posted by GTSaiyanjin2 (6013 posts) -

Good post, I think the only differences this gen will be on frame rate or resolution. And the bigger differences will only show in console exclusive games.

@kinectthedots said:

@freedomfreak said:
@scottpsfan14 said:

Parity only really happens because Microsoft probably demand it lol. Fact is, if Xbox One can do 900p 60fps, the PS4 can do 1080p 60fps and beyond. That's the power difference at work. Also, outside 343i, Xbox doesn't have a first party studio that can exploit the hardware like Naughty Dog or SSM can. And who knows if 343 are capable of making new and interesting IP's..

I know there's a power difference. I just don't see it being 50%.

Come on Freedom, you should know it doesn't work like that. There is a such thing as diminishing returns that is even in play now with current and past gen consoles.

Most people don't see the 300%+ power gap High End PC hardware hold over current gen consoles with the same titles...but it's there none the less.

That is the way it is. You don't simple "see" the difference in power of hardware as power % increases. Unless exclusive, it's usually the fine details that comes out on top between games that a person with more powerful hardware enjoy, not a generational leap.

If you are going to put up an argument stance about not "seeing" the power difference between PS4 and XB1 then you might as well pitch the same debate about high end PC not really being upwards of 300% more powerful than current gen consoles because you can't "see" the difference.

Here is a better one...we all know how much more powerful the PS4 is than PS3 right? Or is it!

PS4 must really not be upwards of 300%+ more powerful than PS3 because I can't "see" the % power difference.

NOTE: I could use MGS:GZ, Assasince Creed IV:BF ect and the result would be the same. The argument about not seeing the power gap that is difference doesn't stand up even if you compare current gen to past consoles!

Lastly, High end PC vs last gen console

Can you see a difference here? Maybe! But can you simply see the % difference everyone KNOWS the PC has here? I doubt it, And how much more powerful was high end PC compared to PS3 by the end of the generation?

Here is the truth. The fact that you can EVEN see a difference between PS4 and XB1 proves the power difference (refer to PS4 vs PS3/ PC vs PS4 examples) because if the gap was only as small as 10 or 20% you wouldn't "see" anything at all.

#219 Posted by HalcyonScarlet (4514 posts) -
@tormentos said:

@HalcyonScarlet said:

You're a moron.

It's not about the PC being more powerful, It's about the current gen not being powerful enough over last gen.

The games on the 360 looked 10x better than they did on the original Xbox, so I was happy with it for the first 5 years of last gen. The last 3 years the graphics looked stale to me (notice I was never in the petty PS3/360 graphics threads towards the end), but I waited it out for this gen. But the games look only 2-3x better this gen than the last. Now after 8 years, that's fucking lol. And I'm not waiting around another 8 years for the next gen. So damn right I moved on.

How is that hypocrisy?

No gen will be powerful enough don't you freaking get it.? Tell me the xbox 360 was even close to a pair of 7900TGX on SLI.?

Man that GPU came on early 2006,by November 2006 the 8800GTX was out,on its own the 8800GTX whopped the xbox 360 and PS3 ass,now imagine dual 8800GTX on SLI,no matter what GPU the PS4 and xbox one got by next year or even the same year they would have been outdone.

The PS4 and xbox one could have launch with a R9 290,still there are stronger GPU,and even if there wasn't on PC you can hook up 2 or more R9 290 and still the PS4 and xbox one would be beat,there is no beating PC when it comes to hardware period.

No man i was there on day 1 and games like NFS for the xbox 360 barely look better than the xbox counter part,higher resolution,it wasn't day to night,in fact the first impressive game the xbox 360 got was Gears a 2006 game,most of what the 360 got on launch was portware,PDZ wasn't that impressive.

If only in the last 3 years games become stale graphically to you then you are the problem they have been looking better on PC since 2006.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-elder-scrolls-iv-oblivion-xbox-360-versus-pc/1100-6147028/

Stop been a hypocrite the only reason why you shield your self on PC now is because the PS4 eat your precious xbox one.

You still don't get it, are you slow or something? It's not about PC standards. My graphics card isn't even high end, but at least I can upgrade it when I want a year or so down the line. I'm not limited to it for the next 8 years.

To that part I bolded. Are you seriously that dense. I've already explained this isn't about the PC, and certainly not then when there was an actual graphical leap between the gens last time. You're still clinging to your made up scenario. I don't care how much more powerful the PC is, I care how weak the consoles are. There is a clear distinction there.

And the problem is, I can back up everything I've said. Because I have ALWAYS maintained my opinions.

When the consoles were unveiled, I was like 'WTF, what is APU nonsense about'. And I've always said the older gen consoles showed stuff with potential early on at least.

I then said I chose the X1, because although they were obviously weak the Kinect at least indicated the console was going to be more than just about hardware performance. But when they dropped Kinect, that's when I decided to jump ship. These consoles aren't good enough to go hardware performance. Most games look gen 7.5 especially at 60fps. And I've always maintained my arguments about how poorly the consoles perform at 60fps.

And the PS4 doesn't even look vastly better than the X1 to me. Because unlike most here, I have NEVER eaten the hype about the hardware of the X1 or PS4.

Here IS the truth; that is what you want it to be about isn't it, that's what you'd love it to be about. You're just pissed you can't gloat because instead of sticking around, I moved on. And you wish I did it because of your reason, which is why you don't want to accept what I tell you.

Well that's just pathetic. I'm not being hypocritical, you are being pathetic and petty, you want me to stick around because you want this to be about some system war, well it's not, I don't base decisions on SWs in real life.

You need to deal with this thing you have, maybe you take this place way too seriously, idk.

#220 Edited by Suppaman100 (3946 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

#221 Edited by B4X (5234 posts) -

@Suppaman100 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

The photo shop even made the X1 logo blurry / jaggy... wtf?

legit...lmfao

#222 Edited by MiiiiV (506 posts) -

@tormentos said:

It also has 450% higher price to,we are talking here would be the equivalent of paying $700 dollars for a PC with a 7770 level GPU,or paying $600 for one with a 7850OC GPU,now be a true PC hermit for once and tell me that buying the $700 one with a 7770 make any freaking sense to you? Now forget about both been consoles,just look at both as PC.

Now the xbox one got a price drop so no that PC is $400 with a 7770,while the PS4 still is a 7850OC and still cost the same,now which PC you will pick if you have no choice but those 2.?

That is something that has confuse many lemmings,i know because i have see them actually ask why the PS4 version don't look 50% better,quantifying the power difference in GPU is not as simple as saying double the power mean double the graphics,on PC the 7950 doesn't have double the visual quality of a 7770,it just run the same setting at higher frames.

Hahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.....

@freedomfreak said:

I know there's a power difference. I just don't see it being 50%.

720p to 1080p is more than 100% difference in pixels.

30FPS vs 60FPS is 100% frame difference.

50% different on graphics cards is not equivalent to 50% better graphics and that is where you people fail to see the difference,the 7950 has more than 100% more Gflops than the 7770 tell me other wise,tell me the gap in power between the 7770 and the 7950 is not more than 100%.

It's about time you stop using that old benchmark with immature drivers. A 100% more gpu power can yield about 100% more performance in gpu intensive situations when there is no cpu limitation.
Here's a more recent Tomb Raider benchmark showing that the gap between the 7950 and the 7770 actually is more than 100% when looking both at average and minimum frame rate. And it's not due to vram limitations since the gtx 560ti fares a lot better than the 7770.

There are even more examples from other benchmarks where the 7950 performs more than 100% better than the 7770, especially when looking at minimum frame rates, which reflects the most demanding parts.

#223 Edited by StormyJoe (5497 posts) -

@Suppaman100 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

I say bullshit - especially since the "XBoxOne" logo is pixelated. This is what the difference looks like.

You people are sad.

#224 Posted by CrownKingArthur (4895 posts) -

for tomb raider the ps4 comfortably wins, but it's really more like 29.98fps vs 53.36fps, than 30 vs 60.

there was no need for anyone to pixelate the xb1 logo. "it doesn't matter if you win by an inch or a mile" - William Shakespeare

#225 Edited by RoboCopISJesus (1408 posts) -

@kinectthedots said:

The fact that you can EVEN see a difference between PS4 and XB1

It's a pretty small difference. There is a bigger difference between console and pc version of games than ps4 vs xb1.

#226 Edited by StormyJoe (5497 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@delta3074 said:

Xbox 360 had twice the polygon count of the Ps3 last gen, didn't do it much good really.

That is because it was more about effect than polygons,and while the Xenos had to render all by it self basically the RSX got help,anything the Xenos had to do for it self that was offloaded to Cell was a gain for the PS3,so it was a case of 2 vs 1,the Xenon was not on the same level of cell and could not do the things cell did to help the xenos it was limited.

This time both have the same CPU the xbox one is a little faster speed wise,but hold back by having a cumbersome memory system,as a benchmark proved already on the substance engine.

@HalcyonScarlet said:

You're a moron.

It's not about the PC being more powerful, It's about the current gen not being powerful enough over last gen.

The games on the 360 looked 10x better than they did on the original Xbox, so I was happy with it for the first 5 years of last gen. The last 3 years the graphics looked stale to me (notice I was never in the petty PS3/360 graphics threads towards the end), but I waited it out for this gen. But the games look only 2-3x better this gen than the last. Now after 8 years, that's fucking lol. And I'm not waiting around another 8 years for the next gen. So damn right I moved on.

How is that hypocrisy?

No gen will be powerful enough don't you freaking get it.? Tell me the xbox 360 was even close to a pair of 7900TGX on SLI.?

Man that GPU came on early 2006,by November 2006 the 8800GTX was out,on its own the 8800GTX whopped the xbox 360 and PS3 ass,now imagine dual 8800GTX on SLI,no matter what GPU the PS4 and xbox one got by next year or even the same year they would have been outdone.

The PS4 and xbox one could have launch with a R9 290,still there are stronger GPU,and even if there wasn't on PC you can hook up 2 or more R9 290 and still the PS4 and xbox one would be beat,there is no beating PC when it comes to hardware period.

No man i was there on day 1 and games like NFS for the xbox 360 barely look better than the xbox counter part,higher resolution,it wasn't day to night,in fact the first impressive game the xbox 360 got was Gears a 2006 game,most of what the 360 got on launch was portware,PDZ wasn't that impressive.

If only in the last 3 years games become stale graphically to you then you are the problem they have been looking better on PC since 2006.

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-elder-scrolls-iv-oblivion-xbox-360-versus-pc/1100-6147028/

Stop been a hypocrite the only reason why you shield your self on PC now is because the PS4 eat your precious xbox one.

Ya know, you really sound like a dummy when you try and say there is some huge difference between PS4 and XB1 multiplats. I mean really, give it a rest - the difference is minor.

I mean, when you need Digital Foundry in order to differentiate the versions, you kind of have a self-defeating argument.

#227 Posted by Krelian-co (11203 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

I say bullshit - especially since the "XBoxOne" logo is pixelated. This is what the difference looks like.

You people are sad.

The ps4 and xbone versions got an updated model of lara, so it is possible that she actually looks a little better in consoles, everything else is the same and will look miles ahead on pc my dear lem in denial

#228 Posted by tormentos (18358 posts) -

@miiiiv said:

It's about time you stop using that old benchmark with immature drivers. A 100% more gpu power can yield about 100% more performance in gpu intensive situations when there is no cpu limitation.

Here's a more recent Tomb Raider benchmark showing that the gap between the 7950 and the 7770 actually is more than 100% when looking both at average and minimum frame rate. And it's not due to vram limitations since the gtx 560ti fares a lot better than the 7770.

There are even more examples from other benchmarks where the 7950 performs more than 100% better than the 7770, especially when looking at minimum frame rates, which reflects the most demanding parts.

That is not a more recent benchmark you blind buffoon,that benchmark is the same look at the version,1.00.716.5 the gap shown is bigger because the test you chose is on High settings the one i posted in on Ultimate settings nice way to own your self...lol

And in any case your screen didn't prove me wrong,all the contrary more than 100% power difference doesn't translate into 100% better graphics,the 560Ti is close to a 7850 in power so it should perform better than a 7770.

@StormyJoe said:

Ya know, you really sound like a dummy when you try and say there is some huge difference between PS4 and XB1 multiplats. I mean really, give it a rest - the difference is minor.

I mean, when you need Digital Foundry in order to differentiate the versions, you kind of have a self-defeating argument.

Minor my ass minor is 3 to 5 frames like you claimed which is not 20 to 30 FPS is fu**ing huge.

#229 Edited by ZoomZoom2490 (3943 posts) -

people still believe that X1 and PS4 are equal in performance? ahahahhahahahahahahahaha

this is freaking sad, I am out.

#230 Posted by MK-Professor (3828 posts) -
@tormentos said:
@MK-Professor said:

Oo! look, console gamers are fighting again to determine which console have more TFlops etc LOL, but when you tell them "my PC have 450% more TFlops than PS4" they start saying it doesn't matter...

It also has 450% higher price to,we are talking here would be the equivalent of paying $700 dollars for a PC with a 7770 level GPU,or paying $600 for one with a 7850OC GPU,now be a true PC hermit for once and tell me that buying the $700 one with a 7770 make any freaking sense to you? Now forget about both been consoles,just look at both as PC.

Now the xbox one got a price drop so no that PC is $400 with a 7770,while the PS4 still is a 7850OC and still cost the same,now which PC you will pick if you have no choice but those 2.?

My pc (in today value it definitely don't even cost more than $900 not sure where the 450% more expensive come from), and also my two HD7950 OC(450% more TFlops than PS4) back then it cost me slightly more than the PS4.

#231 Edited by MiiiiV (506 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@miiiiv said:

It's about time you stop using that old benchmark with immature drivers. A 100% more gpu power can yield about 100% more performance in gpu intensive situations when there is no cpu limitation.

Here's a more recent Tomb Raider benchmark showing that the gap between the 7950 and the 7770 actually is more than 100% when looking both at average and minimum frame rate. And it's not due to vram limitations since the gtx 560ti fares a lot better than the 7770.

There are even more examples from other benchmarks where the 7950 performs more than 100% better than the 7770, especially when looking at minimum frame rates, which reflects the most demanding parts.

That is not a more recent benchmark you blind buffoon,that benchmark is the same look at the version,1.00.716.5 the gap shown is bigger because the test you chose is on High settings the one i posted in on Ultimate settings nice way to own your self...lol

And in any case your screen didn't prove me wrong,all the contrary more than 100% power difference doesn't translate into 100% better graphics,the 560Ti is close to a 7850 in power so it should perform better than a 7770.

Well I missed that, everyone makes mistakes now and them.
But there are several more exampels when a 100% more gpu power yields 100% more performance when there is no cpu limitation.
And you are saying that more than 100% power difference doesn't translate into 100% better graphics. If you mean that one would subjectively think that the game looks twice as good, then you are right, you would probably need a lot more than 100% to achieve that.

#232 Edited by StormyJoe (5497 posts) -

@Krelian-co said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

I say bullshit - especially since the "XBoxOne" logo is pixelated. This is what the difference looks like.

You people are sad.

The ps4 and xbone versions got an updated model of lara, so it is possible that she actually looks a little better in consoles, everything else is the same and will look miles ahead on pc my dear lem in denial

First off, I was debunking an obviously manipulated photo. Secondly, I don't give a shit what you say. Instead of jumping to conclusions like an idiot, perhaps try and keep up with the posts.

#233 Edited by StormyJoe (5497 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@miiiiv said:

It's about time you stop using that old benchmark with immature drivers. A 100% more gpu power can yield about 100% more performance in gpu intensive situations when there is no cpu limitation.

Here's a more recent Tomb Raider benchmark showing that the gap between the 7950 and the 7770 actually is more than 100% when looking both at average and minimum frame rate. And it's not due to vram limitations since the gtx 560ti fares a lot better than the 7770.

There are even more examples from other benchmarks where the 7950 performs more than 100% better than the 7770, especially when looking at minimum frame rates, which reflects the most demanding parts.

That is not a more recent benchmark you blind buffoon,that benchmark is the same look at the version,1.00.716.5 the gap shown is bigger because the test you chose is on High settings the one i posted in on Ultimate settings nice way to own your self...lol

And in any case your screen didn't prove me wrong,all the contrary more than 100% power difference doesn't translate into 100% better graphics,the 560Ti is close to a 7850 in power so it should perform better than a 7770.

@StormyJoe said:

Ya know, you really sound like a dummy when you try and say there is some huge difference between PS4 and XB1 multiplats. I mean really, give it a rest - the difference is minor.

I mean, when you need Digital Foundry in order to differentiate the versions, you kind of have a self-defeating argument.

Minor my ass minor is 3 to 5 frames like you claimed which is not 20 to 30 FPS is fu**ing huge.

Blah blah blah 3 to 5 frames blah blah blah. That's all you got? A single point that I was wrong on... a year ago? LOL!!!! I guess when you are constantly proven wrong, you gotta cling to every victory you can. HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

Here's the thing - you really can't tell. Guess what? Most people can't, either. Again, when you have to use Digital Foundry to point out the differences, it's a self-defeating argument.

#234 Posted by Suppaman100 (3946 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

I say bullshit - especially since the "XBoxOne" logo is pixelated. This is what the difference looks like.

You people are sad.

You could be right, the logo of Xbone is indeed vague.

Still won't change the fact that TR runs at 60fps on PS4, the game does not on Xbone.

Thus yet more evidence that PS4 is indeed A LOT stronger than Xbone.

#235 Posted by B4X (5234 posts) -

@Suppaman100 said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

I say bullshit - especially since the "XBoxOne" logo is pixelated. This is what the difference looks like.

You people are sad.

You could be right, the logo of Xbone is indeed vague.

Still won't change the fact that TR runs at 60fps on PS4, the game does not on Xbone.

Thus yet more evidence that PS4 is indeed A LOT stronger than Xbone.

You really couldn't see that when you posted that Photoshop?

#236 Posted by Heil68 (45197 posts) -

@Suppaman100 said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

I say bullshit - especially since the "XBoxOne" logo is pixelated. This is what the difference looks like.

You people are sad.

You could be right, the logo of Xbone is indeed vague.

Still won't change the fact that TR runs at 60fps on PS4, the game does not on Xbone.

Thus yet more evidence that PS4 is indeed A LOT stronger than Xbone.

SONY wins again and thus #SDC, thank you SONY. Glad I have a PS4 to enjoy alll these superior multi plats

#237 Edited by sam890 (1108 posts) -
@tormentos said:
@MK-Professor said:

Oo! look, console gamers are fighting again to determine which console have more TFlops etc LOL, but when you tell them "my PC have 450% more TFlops than PS4" they start saying it doesn't matter...

It also has 450% higher price to,we are talking here would be the equivalent of paying $700 dollars for a PC with a 7770 level GPU,or paying $600 for one with a 7850OC GPU,now be a true PC hermit for once and tell me that buying the $700 one with a 7770 make any freaking sense to you? Now forget about both been consoles,just look at both as PC.

LOL 450% higher price ? $700 PC has a 7770 in it which one ? 7850CC what are we in 2005 ? Are you pulling facts out of your ass again ?

#238 Posted by Suppaman100 (3946 posts) -

@b4x said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

I say bullshit - especially since the "XBoxOne" logo is pixelated. This is what the difference looks like.

You people are sad.

You could be right, the logo of Xbone is indeed vague.

Still won't change the fact that TR runs at 60fps on PS4, the game does not on Xbone.

Thus yet more evidence that PS4 is indeed A LOT stronger than Xbone.

You really couldn't see that when you posted that Photoshop?

B4X making a fool out of himself once again.

I didn't post that picture genius.

#239 Posted by freedomfreak (40971 posts) -

I assume you guys are too stupid to trim down the quote chain. I mean, do the whole fanboy thing. I don't care, but trim your chains.

#240 Posted by Nike_Air (18340 posts) -
  • 50% more powerful
  • 360% more good games
  • 100% more sales
  • 500% more stability updates

#SDC

#241 Posted by B4X (5234 posts) -

@Suppaman100 said:

@b4x said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

I say bullshit - especially since the "XBoxOne" logo is pixelated. This is what the difference looks like.

You people are sad.

You could be right, the logo of Xbone is indeed vague.

Still won't change the fact that TR runs at 60fps on PS4, the game does not on Xbone.

Thus yet more evidence that PS4 is indeed A LOT stronger than Xbone.

You really couldn't see that when you posted that Photoshop?

B4X making a fool out of himself once again.

I didn't post that picture genius.

You quoted it and said /thread

Mirror says hi. /dumbass

#242 Posted by B4X (5234 posts) -

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

So you're the one that posted this picture?

Figures. Look at the X1 logo. Then read my sig ONCE AGAIN.

#243 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5588 posts) -
@b4x said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

So you're the one that posted this picture?

Figures. Look at the X1 logo. Then read my sig ONCE AGAIN.

TLHBO tho.

#244 Edited by lostrib (37721 posts) -

@b4x said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

So you're the one that posted this picture?

Figures. Look at the X1 logo. Then read my sig ONCE AGAIN.

Here's a larger version where you can obviously tell this is a fanboy comparison to poke fun at the x1

Although, there is a significant difference in frame rate as well as a difference in resolution (in some cases)

#245 Posted by Shadowchronicle (26039 posts) -

That image comparison looks like someone took the 60fps picture and saved it on the lowest setting with the file format .jpeg.

#246 Edited by lostrib (37721 posts) -

@shadowchronicle said:

That image comparison looks like someone took the 60fps picture and saved it on the lowest setting with the file format .jpeg.

I think they applied cartoony photoshop filters to it

#247 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5588 posts) -
@lostrib said:

@b4x said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

So you're the one that posted this picture?

Figures. Look at the X1 logo. Then read my sig ONCE AGAIN.

Here's a larger version where you can obviously tell this is a fanboy comparison to poke fun at the x1

Although, there is a significant difference in frame rate as well as a difference in resolution (in some cases)

Seems legit to me. IDK what you're all talking about... *backs away slowly, then sprints off*

#248 Posted by Shadowchronicle (26039 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@shadowchronicle said:

That image comparison looks like someone took the 60fps picture and saved it on the lowest setting with the file format .jpeg.

I think they applied cartoony photoshop filters to it

Yeah that's what they did. I overlooked it shiet. ;_;

#249 Posted by B4X (5234 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@b4x said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

So you're the one that posted this picture?

Figures. Look at the X1 logo. Then read my sig ONCE AGAIN.

Here's a larger version where you can obviously tell this is a fanboy comparison to poke fun at the x1

Although, there is a significant difference in frame rate as well as a difference in resolution (in some cases)

I was challenging the validity of the screen shot.

#250 Posted by Suppaman100 (3946 posts) -

@b4x said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@b4x said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@scottpsfan14 said:
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

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?

/thread

I say bullshit - especially since the "XBoxOne" logo is pixelated. This is what the difference looks like.

You people are sad.

You could be right, the logo of Xbone is indeed vague.

Still won't change the fact that TR runs at 60fps on PS4, the game does not on Xbone.

Thus yet more evidence that PS4 is indeed A LOT stronger than Xbone.

You really couldn't see that when you posted that Photoshop?

B4X making a fool out of himself once again.

I didn't post that picture genius.

You quoted it and said /thread

Mirror says hi. /dumbass

Stop digging a hole for yourself.

Let me quote you: "You really couldn't see that when you posted that Photoshop?"

As you see I did not post that picture, scottpsfan14 posted that picture, I quoted the picture.

Try again fool.

/dumbass

/thread