The real difference between the ps4 and x1

  • 112 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

Well we all know the ps4's gpu (1.84 tflops) is a bit better than a 7850 (1.76 Tflops) and the hd 7790 is overclocked in the x1. So you can easily compare them on benchmarks.

As you can see the differences are not that great. However this hd 7790 packs gddr5. The x1 packs drr3. The x1 should be able to counter this with the esram.

A game like thief has showed us that , x1 runs at 900p en ps4 at 1080 both at 30fps. So what the x1 does is lower the resolution to 900 p to get the same framerates the ps4 has BUT the x1 has reserved 10 percent of the gpu for the kinect. They now lowered that to 2 percent. So they probably can do 1000p or 960p which makes the differences small.

Maybe you haven't noticed it but the gtx 480 that hangs around the ps4's gpu, is almost 5 years old.

Having said that, both are hanging on the bottom of the gpu list and these benchmarks are a year old too. Better graphics cards are already on the market and for 300$ you have a graphics card that doubles the ps4 gpu in performance. In 2 years time this will be low end graphics.

Let's not talk about the cpu, that ps4's power was already midrange 6 years ago. These are the weakest consoles that have been released in hardware history.

Anyone who buys them , makes a bad investment when you look at hardware. Especially when you can have a full flegded pc for a 100$ more that beats the ps4 and has complete controller support and is plug & play. When you upgrade it later on (with the gpu only because the cpu will already be double the power, now!) it's gonna be like a gen of difference.

The kinect can play a big part in vr though, and you can use the console for your fighting & family games. Nintendo however is working on a new console and rumours are it's a beast.

#2 Edited by Couth_ (10061 posts) -

Nintendo however is working on a new console and rumours are it's a beast.

lol.. where are these rumors coming from

#3 Posted by iloveatlus (256 posts) -

TL;DR

PS4>Xbone

We know.

#4 Posted by lostrib (35892 posts) -

This is like the threads we used to get before the PS4/X1 release.

They sucked back then too

#5 Edited by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

@Couth_ said:

@evildead6789 said:

Nintendo however is working on a new console and rumours are it's a beast.

lol.. where are these rumors coming from

http://bgr.com/2014/01/22/nintendo-fusion-specs-home-console/

Should have 4.60 tflops, that's 2.5 times the ps4's power, with current hardware prices, this could be true. Nintendo has to do something, the wii u is giving them losses and the money and profits from the wii,ds and 3ds won't last forever. Too much competition on all sides, phones can replace handhelds easiliy when it comes to games. Why have a phone and a handheld at the same time.

Could still be worthwhile for kiddies though, but they have a chance to get back in hardcore gaming market now or leave it forever. PS4 & x1 don't bring much new to the table and those consoles will never be able to run vr in a decent manner.

#6 Posted by Couth_ (10061 posts) -

@Couth_ said:

@evildead6789 said:

Nintendo however is working on a new console and rumours are it's a beast.

lol.. where are these rumors coming from

http://bgr.com/2014/01/22/nintendo-fusion-specs-home-console/

Should have 4.60 tflops, that's 2.5 times the ps4's power, with current hardware prices, this could be true. Nintendo has to do something, the wii u is giving them losses and the money and profits from the wii,ds and 3ds won't last forever. Too much competition on all sides, phones can replace handhelds easiliy when it comes to games. Why have a phone and a handheld at the same time.

Could still be worthwhile for kiddies though, but they have a chance to get back in hardcore gaming market now or leave it forever. PS4 & x1 don't bring much new to the table and those consoles will never be able to run vr in a decent manner.

That would be impressive. I wonder how that would effect console life cycles

#7 Posted by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

@Couth_ said:

@evildead6789 said:

@Couth_ said:

@evildead6789 said:

Nintendo however is working on a new console and rumours are it's a beast.

lol.. where are these rumors coming from

http://bgr.com/2014/01/22/nintendo-fusion-specs-home-console/

Should have 4.60 tflops, that's 2.5 times the ps4's power, with current hardware prices, this could be true. Nintendo has to do something, the wii u is giving them losses and the money and profits from the wii,ds and 3ds won't last forever. Too much competition on all sides, phones can replace handhelds easiliy when it comes to games. Why have a phone and a handheld at the same time.

Could still be worthwhile for kiddies though, but they have a chance to get back in hardcore gaming market now or leave it forever. PS4 & x1 don't bring much new to the table and those consoles will never be able to run vr in a decent manner.

That would be impressive. I wonder how that would effect console life cycles

If it's successfull and it probably will imo, the ps4 & x1 will stick with their plan but with this hardware you can show off a lot of new things.

#8 Posted by I_can_haz (6551 posts) -

@lostrib said:

This is like the threads we used to get before the PS4/X1 release.

They sucked back then too

I agree.

#10 Posted by hehe101 (745 posts) -

Really curious about this Nintendo rumour although i'd be pretty mad if I bought a Wii U and they released another console.

#11 Edited by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

@hehe101 said:

Really curious about this Nintendo rumour although i'd be pretty mad if I bought a Wii U and they released another console.

What if you had a discount when you traded it in?

#12 Posted by hehe101 (745 posts) -

@evildead6789:

Not so much then lol, seems weird Nintendo coming out of the war as the powerhouse, wonder when we will get some type of confirmation.

#13 Posted by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

@hehe101 said:

@evildead6789:

Not so much then lol, seems weird Nintendo coming out of the war as the powerhouse, wonder when we will get some type of confirmation.

Yeah me too, but it would be in their best interest to keep it a secret as long as possible, for people that bought a wii u for instance.

#14 Posted by GotNugz (671 posts) -

I agree that the jump this generation is disappointing and that I hop it's only a 5 year generation. As to the topic it's hard to directly compare the two. Ps4 gpu is a bit faster than the 7850 and it has access to 5gb gddr5. X1 on the other hand uses ddr3 and the Bonaire based chip, no matter what way we slice it 32mb of esram is never going to do much. As for the Nintendo fusion rumors going around I gotta call bs on that unless they plan to release it in 2016 minimum. As it stands it would be incredibly powerful and incredibly expensive.

#15 Edited by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

@GotNugz said:

I agree that the jump this generation is disappointing and that I hop it's only a 5 year generation. As to the topic it's hard to directly compare the two. Ps4 gpu is a bit faster than the 7850 and it has access to 5gb gddr5. X1 on the other hand uses ddr3 and the Bonaire based chip, no matter what way we slice it 32mb of esram is never going to do much. As for the Nintendo fusion rumors going around I gotta call bs on that unless they plan to release it in 2016 minimum. As it stands it would be incredibly powerful and incredibly expensive.

the hd 7850 comes with gddr5 too. System memory running at gddr5 speed won't make much difference. Most hd 7850 run at higher clock speeds too, that difference will be very small.

As for the esram chip. Do realize that thief was running at 900p at 30fps and the ps4 at 1080p at 30fps. But that's with 10 percent of the x1 gpu's locked to the kinect which they reduced to 2 percent in january. The esram may only be 32 mb , but it's ultra fast, directly on the chip. If you ever had a xeon processor , you know what a couple of megabytes of cache can do on a chip. It gives the chip a lot more performance.

I really doubt there will be much differences. The x360 came with exotic chip stuff too, like unified shaders and a seperate chip for aa. Unified shaders were not a standard and no one knew if it would became a standard but it did, every gpu out there uses unified shaders today. Microsoft has always been making better consoles than the ps3 even if they were weaker, look at the x360. Don't forget, these people make windows operatings systems. I think they know what they're doing.

#16 Posted by GotNugz (671 posts) -

@evildead6789: well look I hope you're right but the numbers don't lie neither does the games. AC4, bf4, mgs ground zeros, cod, all run much better on ps4. It's also somewhat of a myth that ps3 was much stronger than x360. The 360 had a superior memory setup and more powerful gpu, while the ps3 had the awkward cell.

#17 Edited by Solid_Max13 (3544 posts) -

#18 Edited by super600 (30523 posts) -

@hehe101 said:

Really curious about this Nintendo rumour although i'd be pretty mad if I bought a Wii U and they released another console.

I don't think it's real. Nintendo wants to produce a way cheaper console than the wiiu(under <$300) for their next console). I don't think you can get components like that for that cheap when they create their new console.

#19 Edited by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

@GotNugz said:

@evildead6789: well look I hope you're right but the numbers don't lie neither does the games. AC4, bf4, mgs ground zeros, cod, all run much better on ps4. It's also somewhat of a myth that ps3 was much stronger than x360. The 360 had a superior memory setup and more powerful gpu, while the ps3 had the awkward cell.

Yeah but the ps3 with it's akward cell was bought to build supercomputers. The problem was it was too akward to make games for, allthough in the later years of the gen, sony exclusives could make better use of the hardware.

I think that won't be the case with the x1. The devs got devkit's with 10 percent of the gpu locked, since that is reduced to 2 percent it will make a difference. I don't know if the games you mentioned have gotten a bump because of this, but I doubt it.

As for the esram, even the x360 wasn't all that easy to develop for, it wasn't like a normal pc. The x1 is like a normal pc, only with the esram on chip. I think third party devs will make use of it. Don't forget that EA is also strongly connected with microsoft for this gen and like I said microsoft does make windows, they can change theire x1 os (which is a custom windows 8) to make use of the esram more easily. I also think they have the ability to integrate the cloud (ps shows it's possible). It won't be that much, but it will be something.

Apart from that, they're still both weak systems and I really hope nintendo delivers a mighty blow this gen. The duopoly has been going on for long enough and like it looks now , it could even become sony's monopoly and that would be a real bummer for gaming enthousiasts. Sony has never been a pioneer when it comes to innovation, apart from the ps1 but that was just plain luck with the cd.

#20 Posted by silversix_ (14299 posts) -

Nice """""""1080P""""""" benchmarks you got there bro

#21 Edited by tdkmillsy (1324 posts) -

ESRAM will only go so far.

900p Xbox One 1080p PS4 with similar fps will be the standard moving forward. Close enough for normal gamers not to care.

#22 Posted by casharmy (6829 posts) -

Nice """""""1080P""""""" benchmarks you got there bro

lol, this is what I noticed too. In no way does his charts reflect real world results between the two systems.

#23 Posted by lglz1337 (3450 posts) -

can't wait for another Tormentos vs Ronvalencia thread

#24 Posted by _Matt_ (8908 posts) -

Huzzah you have found another use for that gif :D

#25 Edited by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

@casharmy said:

@silversix_ said:

Nice """""""1080P""""""" benchmarks you got there bro

lol, this is what I noticed too. In no way does his charts reflect real world results between the two systems.

Why wouldn't it reflect it?

You dumb?

#26 Posted by bloodlust_101 (2689 posts) -

@evildead6789:

The REAL difference between the 2 next gen contenders:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-metal-gear-solid-ground-zeroes-face-off

Enjoy.
PS. because microsoft reduced their overhead so greatly, it means the endgame for the console will suffer if they do not have the resources to improve their os or consoles abilities. This is the same reason why PS3 didnt get party chat and ended up so sluggish in the lategame. This is a sign of desperation on Microsofts part because they must know the negatives of reducing overhead well - they are a software company afterall.

#27 Posted by Solid_Max13 (3544 posts) -

@_Matt_: hahah I love that gif :)!

#28 Edited by ZoomZoom2490 (3943 posts) -

last time I checked the 7790 doesn't use 128-bit DDR3 like the turd in X1, hhahahahahahahahha

#29 Edited by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

@evildead6789:

The REAL difference between the 2 next gen contenders:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-metal-gear-solid-ground-zeroes-face-off

Enjoy.

PS. because microsoft reduced their overhead so greatly, it means the endgame for the console will suffer if they do not have the resources to improve their os or consoles abilities. This is the same reason why PS3 didnt get party chat and ended up so sluggish in the lategame. This is a sign of desperation on Microsofts part because they must know the negatives of reducing overhead well - they are a software company afterall.

You forgot to read this in my first post. The x1 has reserved 10 percent of the gpu for the kinect. They now lowered that to 2 percent (in january 2014)

The devs from metal gear solid were working on a devkit that only use 90 percent of the x1's gpu power.

Newer games won't have this problems, the ps4 will still have the edge but it will be small. Not to mention the esram will come into play too.

They're both still slugs though.

#30 Edited by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

last time I checked the 7790 doesn't use 128-bit DDR3 like the turd in X1, hhahahahahahahahha

It hasn't got any ESram either.

#31 Edited by ReadingRainbow4 (13839 posts) -

In general we are seeing a much larger framerate disparity than what those graphs represent. Funnier still is that they state they're both running at the same resolution when we all know with the Xbone and ps4 that's rarely the case.

#32 Posted by bloodlust_101 (2689 posts) -

@bloodlust_101 said:

@evildead6789:

The REAL difference between the 2 next gen contenders:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-metal-gear-solid-ground-zeroes-face-off

Enjoy.

PS. because microsoft reduced their overhead so greatly, it means the endgame for the console will suffer if they do not have the resources to improve their os or consoles abilities. This is the same reason why PS3 didnt get party chat and ended up so sluggish in the lategame. This is a sign of desperation on Microsofts part because they must know the negatives of reducing overhead well - they are a software company afterall.

You forgot to read this in my first post. The x1 has reserved 10 percent of the gpu for the kinect. They now lowered that to 2 percent (in january 2014)

The devs from metal gear solid were working on a devkit that only use 90 percent of the x1's gpu power.

Newer games won't have this problems, the ps4 will still have the edge but it will be small. Not to mention the esram will come into play too.

They're both still slugs though.

Will an extra 8% make a game go from 720p to 1080p? No.No it will not.

And taking 8% away from the Kinect - why was it there in the first place? I assume it was for the future, and now it is gone. Combine this with the 50% reduction in cpu usage, they have really removed a chunk of futureproofing which will be needed in the mid and endgame of this generation. All you need to do is look at the current PS3 store to see what I am talking about.

We still have not seen any proper usage for Kinect [in regards to games]. Maybe Microsoft gave up on using it in an meaningful way?

#33 Edited by bloodlust_101 (2689 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@ZoomZoom2490 said:

last time I checked the 7790 doesn't use 128-bit DDR3 like the turd in X1, hhahahahahahahahha

It hasn't got any ESram either.

DDR3 + Esram is so great all companies are just lining up to include it in their graphics cards - what were they thinking all those years?!

#34 Posted by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

@bloodlust_101 said:

@evildead6789:

The REAL difference between the 2 next gen contenders:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-metal-gear-solid-ground-zeroes-face-off

Enjoy.

PS. because microsoft reduced their overhead so greatly, it means the endgame for the console will suffer if they do not have the resources to improve their os or consoles abilities. This is the same reason why PS3 didnt get party chat and ended up so sluggish in the lategame. This is a sign of desperation on Microsofts part because they must know the negatives of reducing overhead well - they are a software company afterall.

You forgot to read this in my first post. The x1 has reserved 10 percent of the gpu for the kinect. They now lowered that to 2 percent (in january 2014)

The devs from metal gear solid were working on a devkit that only use 90 percent of the x1's gpu power.

Newer games won't have this problems, the ps4 will still have the edge but it will be small. Not to mention the esram will come into play too.

They're both still slugs though.

Will an extra 8% make a game go from 720p to 1080p? No.No it will not.

And taking 8% away from the Kinect - why was it there in the first place? I assume it was for the future, and now it is gone. Combine this with the 50% reduction in cpu usage, they have really removed a chunk of futureproofing which will be needed in the mid and endgame of this generation. All you need to do is look at the current PS3 store to see what I am talking about.

We still have not seen any proper usage for Kinect [in regards to games]. Maybe Microsoft gave up on using it in an meaningful way?

I think you will be in for a real suprise with the kinect once virtual reality takes off.

And 8 percent is a lot on a gpu. Not to mention these games don't use the esram.

The x1 may be weak, but the ps4 is weak too.

#35 Posted by bloodlust_101 (2689 posts) -

I think you will be in for a real suprise with the kinect once virtual reality takes off.

And 8 percent is a lot on a gpu. Not to mention these games don't use the esram.

The x1 may be weak, but the ps4 is weak too.

In my opinion Sony should have matched the $500 price but including a much, much more powerful gpu.

Kinect virtual reality? With only 2% of the [already weak] GPU used for Kinect - which will be such a massive part of the Virtual Reality experience? HA!

#36 Posted by Krelian-co (10673 posts) -

powerful paint skills bro

#37 Posted by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

@evildead6789 said:

I think you will be in for a real suprise with the kinect once virtual reality takes off.

And 8 percent is a lot on a gpu. Not to mention these games don't use the esram.

The x1 may be weak, but the ps4 is weak too.

In my opinion Sony should have matched the $500 price but including a much, much more powerful gpu.

Kinect virtual reality? With only 2% of the [already weak] GPU used for Kinect - which will be such a massive part of the Virtual Reality experience? HA!

The kinect doesn't have to produce textures you idiot, It's a camera. The 10 percent on the gpu was reserved for multtasking with skype and movies. You probably will now have to stop your game before you watch a movie, big deal lol

#38 Posted by deniiiii21 (1261 posts) -

7790 is a 1.79tflop GPU, Xbox one has a 7770 equivalent GPU rated at 1.28tflops

#39 Posted by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

7790 is a 1.79tflop GPU, Xbox one has a 7770 equivalent GPU rated at 1.28tflops

That's without the esram

#40 Edited by deniiiii21 (1261 posts) -

Add in to consideration, that it uses whatever it does on Kinect, DDR3 memory, and ESRAM which is difficult to program for, you have a System that is between a 7750-7770 in performance.

#41 Posted by bloodlust_101 (2689 posts) -

@bloodlust_101 said:

@evildead6789 said:

I think you will be in for a real suprise with the kinect once virtual reality takes off.

And 8 percent is a lot on a gpu. Not to mention these games don't use the esram.

The x1 may be weak, but the ps4 is weak too.

In my opinion Sony should have matched the $500 price but including a much, much more powerful gpu.

Kinect virtual reality? With only 2% of the [already weak] GPU used for Kinect - which will be such a massive part of the Virtual Reality experience? HA!

The kinect doesn't have to produce textures you idiot, It's a camera. The 10 percent on the gpu was reserved for multtasking with skype and movies. You probably will now have to stop your game before you watch a movie, big deal lol

The kinect doesn't produce textures, no - instead it must use the gpu and cpu to review what it is seeing [you] and to turn it in to usable code to interact with what is on screen, combined with displaying a representation of you on screen which also requires gpu and cpu power. Why else did the 360 have such ugly looking games if they utilized Kinect?

Also, with Lems saying that the multitasking is stellar and a system selling feature - I think having to stop your game will be hard to take, even my phone doesnt require me to stop an app to multitask and it is about 3 years old.

#42 Posted by bloodlust_101 (2689 posts) -

@deniiiii21 said:

7790 is a 1.79tflop GPU, Xbox one has a 7770 equivalent GPU rated at 1.28tflops

That's without the esram

ESram increases the gpu flops? Interesting..

#43 Posted by deniiiii21 (1261 posts) -

ESRAM is memory, its not a GPU. No amount of GDDR5 will change what PS4 has as a GPU, it just wont bottleneck the GPU. PS4 still has a 7850 in it. GDDR5 will not make it a 7950.

PS4- 7850-7870

Xbox- 7750-7770

#44 Posted by deniiiii21 (1261 posts) -

Both systems are very dissapointing as far as hardware, you can say that PS4 can get by for a few years before its really left in the dust by PC's which even today outperform it by wide margins. Xbox on the other hand needs a prayer

#45 Edited by evildead6789 (7635 posts) -

ESRAM is memory, its not a GPU. No amount of GDDR5 will change what PS4 has as a GPU, it just wont bottleneck the GPU. PS4 still has a 7850 in it. GDDR5 will not make it a 7950.

PS4- 7850-7870

Xbox- 7750-7770

The difference between the gddr5 and ddr3 on a gpu does make the card a lot weaker. A hd 7850 has standard gddr5 , it doesn't come with ddr3. If it would have ddr3 it would perform like a 7790. Because the x1 gpu's has only ddr3 ram, it performs like a 7770. However , the x1 uses some special kind of tech, the esram, which will make the card very good at tiled textures.

They did something similar with the unified shaders in the x360. No graphics cards were using unified shader tech at that time, now it has become standard. Why because it improved performance immensely. If you would know a thing or two about xeon cpu's, then you would know a couple mb more on the chip does wonders. Not to mention the esram is the fastest ram you can find.

This is microsoft, they make operating systems and they're the best at it. These guys know what they're doing.

#46 Posted by deniiiii21 (1261 posts) -

Tiled textures can also be done on PS4. I didnt know ESRAM can take 1.28tf and turn it into a 1.79tf. Believe what you want if you believe its a 7790 then thats your opinion. Thanks to Kinect, MS has had to use mediocre hardware. On the positive side it is still a decent bump from 1950xtx used in the Xbox 360.

#47 Posted by bloodlust_101 (2689 posts) -

@deniiiii21 said:

ESRAM is memory, its not a GPU. No amount of GDDR5 will change what PS4 has as a GPU, it just wont bottleneck the GPU. PS4 still has a 7850 in it. GDDR5 will not make it a 7950.

PS4- 7850-7870

Xbox- 7750-7770

The difference between the gddr5 and ddr3 on a gpu does make the card a lot weaker. A hd 7850 has standard gddr5 , it doesn't come with ddr3. If it would have ddr3 it would perform like a 7790. Because the x1 gpu's has only ddr3 ram, it performs like a 7770. However , the x1 uses some special kind of tech, the esram, which will make the card very good at tiled textures.

They did something similar with the unified shaders in the x360. No graphics cards were using unified shader tech at that time, now it has become standard. Why because it improved performance immensely. If you would know a thing or two about xeon cpu's, then you would know a couple mb more on the chip does wonders. Not to mention the esram is the fastest ram you can find.

This is microsoft, they make operating systems and they're the best at it. These guys know what they're doing.

It doesn't work like that. Putting in slow ram does not all of the sudden make the card perform 1 model slower, this is not a linear power scaling bottleneck. The card is just as fast as always - it just has a bottle neck. The ESRam is used to alleviate the bottleneck cause by the *VERY SLOW* DDR3. They cheaped out and used a very small size of ESRam and are now paying the consequences.

And if they are the best at operating systems why is it that they released a poor SDK which was not ready, and poor tools for the ESRam - why is it that Crytek had to come to the rescue? Microsoft dun goofed.

#48 Posted by blackace (20591 posts) -

@lostrib said:

This is like the threads we used to get before the PS4/X1 release.

They sucked back then too

Yet another insecurity thread.

#49 Posted by ferret-gamer (17310 posts) -

@deniiiii21 said:

ESRAM is memory, its not a GPU. No amount of GDDR5 will change what PS4 has as a GPU, it just wont bottleneck the GPU. PS4 still has a 7850 in it. GDDR5 will not make it a 7950.

PS4- 7850-7870

Xbox- 7750-7770

The difference between the gddr5 and ddr3 on a gpu does make the card a lot weaker. A hd 7850 has standard gddr5 , it doesn't come with ddr3. If it would have ddr3 it would perform like a 7790. Because the x1 gpu's has only ddr3 ram, it performs like a 7770. However , the x1 uses some special kind of tech, the esram, which will make the card very good at tiled textures.

They did something similar with the unified shaders in the x360. No graphics cards were using unified shader tech at that time, now it has become standard. Why because it improved performance immensely. If you would know a thing or two about xeon cpu's, then you would know a couple mb more on the chip does wonders. Not to mention the esram is the fastest ram you can find.

This is microsoft, they make operating systems and they're the best at it. These guys know what they're doing.

You can't seriously be comparing unified shader technology to esram. Unified shaders was a significant progression in technology that graphics card manufactures were already planning on moving towards.

Esram in the xbone is a bandaid that got put on a major design bottleneck. A bottleneck that a modern gaming machine shouldn't have had in the first place.

#50 Posted by bloodlust_101 (2689 posts) -

@blackace said:

@lostrib said:

This is like the threads we used to get before the PS4/X1 release.

They sucked back then too

Yet another insecurity thread.

LOL!!