[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]Thats only the ESRAM , i asked how that factored in to the whole console(ie NOT just the ESRAM), you did not answer my question,and what the hell does that have to do with the fact the other guy got what we where both talking about out of context, you are VERY strange dude.delta3074

The eSRAM is an overglorified cache that'll be used for nothing more than a framebuffer. You know how the PS3 suffered due to its split memory bank? Yeah, it's the same concept. 32 mb is still just 32 mb. KZ: SF is using 40 mb for the frame buffer alone. Unified 8 GB GDDR5 allows for more flexibility with the developers.

Next, the fine-grain compute architecture of the PS4's GPU will allow the GPU to queue up compute tasks when the GPU isn't fully utilized. In the real-world, the GPU is never utilizing 100% of its power for graphics rendering. The large amount of ACEs will allow the PS4's GPU to accomplish GPGPU tasks with the cores it isn't using for graphics rendering, meaning its GPU will always utilize 100% of its power. The Xbox ONE, unfortunately, doesn't have this customization. The Xbox ONE's GPU will be used for graphics rendering, but as I have stated before, the GPU never utilizes 100% of its power for graphics rendering. The unused power will be used for GPGPU computing, but with only a paltry 2 ACEs, it's not going to accomplish much.

Why can't you just admit that Mark Cerny, the smartest man alive, was able to design a console that is more powerful and far more efficient than Microsoft's entire engineering team?

[QUOTE="Shensolidus"][QUOTE="kbanna"] Your a developer here on system wars? If thats true then Kudos to you. Few questions. Can you elaborate on X1's 15 special processors and what role they play in the system? Do they indeed reduce bottlenecks by handling some of the heavy lifting for the main GPU and CPU? My last question is that extra 8 g of flash. Does it add a total of 16 gb overall total memory or can it not be used in that manner? Is it specifically for the OS and if so does that free up the normal 8gb to be used specifically for gaming? Thanks for any insights. kbanna

Microsoft will have an advantage in forcing devs to make their games graphically similar. No one wants to piss off Microsoft.

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="bayboydray"]It was the same thing with PS3!! why cant you dumbasses see that?? PS3 had all this power but developers couldn't do shit with it...PS4 is so powerful but cant run a basic ass racing that looks just like Forza Horizon at 60 FPS?? Why is that?? what good is power when you cant use that power? XB1 is powerful enough to do wtf developers need to do to make a great looking game...When PS4 can use all of its power then it will be the better console...when PS4 has some good games then it will be the better console...PS4 aint shit right now, I don't know why im getting both lolGuy_Brohski

1) Drive Club is anything but basic. If you want basic, take Forza 5. Drive Club is the most advanced racing game on consoles.

2) PS4 games already look better than the Xbox ONE games. Xbox ONE games are 720p linear trash with crap graphics.

3_ At least all PS4 games run at 1080p.

1. Driveclub may have day/night cycle, but it also has arcadey physics, no god rays, 30fps (possibly less than 1080p when considering the aliasing especially in cockpit), barely any other cars on screen. Every preview I've seen has praised FM5, and basically every Driveclub preview has a general feeling of "meh" by the previewers.

2. Forza 5, and Ryse (LOL @ the QTE gameplay) actually look good if you would take off your fanboy goggles for a second.

3. BF4 on PS4 is only 720p or slightly better, and no one has confirmed all other PS4 games as being full HD, so what the hell are you talking about?

Forza 5 runs smooth in full HD, something the PS4 launch titles lack.

1) Drive Club also has dynamic lighting, global illumination, dynamic weather system, dynamic environments, realistic car damage. God Rays aren't resource intensive and aren't realistic. DC is aiming to look like a realistic driving game, unlike Cartoonza 5.

DC is confirmed to be 1080p. Aliasing due to no AA in demos. Custom AA will be in the final version.

2) Forza 5 looks good like how Super Mario Galaxy looks good from an artistic standpoint. It's just not technically impressive.

3) BF4 is running higher than 720p on the PS4. Optimization will bring it up to 1080p.

Resogun runs at 1080p, 60 FPS without any optimization. It's also more technically impressive than Prebakedza 5. 200,000 voxels all with their own physics and lighting calculations. Even DF admitted the Xbox ONE wouldn't be powerful enough to render the game as it is.

[QUOTE="Opus_Rea-333"]

1 car on screen, cars that drive like they are on the ice, shit low poly car models that you can even count the edges ,30fps confirmed and ugly jaggies,.. guess the game

 

***hint Drive Club**

Guy_Brohski

E3 build. Stop talking about old builds. The newer builds crap all over Forza 5.

It was the same thing with PS3!! why cant you dumbasses see that?? PS3 had all this power but developers couldn't do shit with it...PS4 is so powerful but cant run a basic ass racing that looks just like Forza Horizon at 60 FPS?? Why is that?? what good is power when you cant use that power? XB1 is powerful enough to do wtf developers need to do to make a great looking game...When PS4 can use all of its power then it will be the better console...when PS4 has some good games then it will be the better console...PS4 aint shit right now, I don't know why im getting both lolbayboydray

1) Drive Club is anything but basic. If you want basic, take Forza 5. Drive Club is the most advanced racing game on consoles.

2) PS4 games already look better than the Xbox ONE games. Xbox ONE games are 720p linear trash with crap graphics.

3_ At least all PS4 games run at 1080p.

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="Shensolidus"]

Both games look good, and obviously your judgement is going to be swayed by the console you're going to be picking up. Having said that, the latest Driveclub video from their Chile track looks worlds better than anything i've seen out of Forza 5. It's very, very impressive stuff. A bunch of people I work with saw it yesterday and couldn't believe it either.

After seeing the game looking like that, I actually don't mind it isn't running at 60.... specfically because it looks as good as it does. A game like Forza, which is aimed towards simulation racing, has gameplay that requires that level of smoothness far more than Driveclub, and that is perfectly okay. 

Locked framerate and resolution can be an indicator of a console's strength, but it is relative to what else the game is rendering. Driveclub is rendering MUCH more on screen at any given one time, with no dips in performance. If you're a Forza fanboy or an Xbone fan, more power to ya. I think you'll be having a ton of fun with that game. 

Shensolidus

Hey, I have a question.

Do you happen to know the realworld bandwidth of the PS4's GDDR5 RAM? How does it compare to the Xbone's eSRAM + DDR3 RAM realworld bandwidth?

PS4's RAM situation is far more ideal and streamlined than the Xbox One's configuration. The biggest difference is automation - dumping your code on both consoles completely unoptimized for either and hitting run results in the PS4 hitting around 150 gb/s and higher like clockwork.

The Xbox One however, results in most of the code running off of the DDR3 pool by default. ESRAM has no automation or API, it has to be custom written for each and every application that runs it. It's a huge pain in the ass that could've been alleviated had most devs been given some basic memory management system MS had written to help get an idea of how to properly utilize it. And it isn't like ESRAM is utilized in most forms of memory configuration (or even seldom), so we have no other pieces of reference material to go off of.

Interesting. Do you think Microsoft is going to force graphical parity on multiplats? Or what about publishers? I'm sure they don't want to humiliate Microsoft by making a poor port.

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="percech"] You have the worst reading comprehension ever, buddy. How can someone be that dumb? I said I have not seen such 50% superiority in any of the games. They speak for themselves. Do you know what aesthetically pleasing to the eyes mean? I can't believe I'm wasting my time with someone who actually thinks they know what they're talking...what's even worse you're putting words in my mouth to further develop your bullshit.percech

KI - 720p

Titanfall - Sub-1080p. Last-gen graphics

Forza 5 - Baked environments. Last-gen graphics. Looks like a cartoon.

RYSE - Linear game. Baked environments. Cutscene at the beginning to trick people into thinking it was rendering the scene in real time. :lol:

Dear Rising 3 - No confirmation on resolution. Probably running at 720p. Sub-30 FPS. Last-gen graphics.

Compare that with the PS4:

- All games confirmed to be running at 1080p with the exception of BF4.

- Particle effects are vastly superior on KZ: SF, Infamous: SS and other games.

- Fully dynamic environments.

- Superior dynamic effects compared to prebaked last-gen effects on Xbox ONE games.

It's a fact graphically Forza looks better judging by all the best graphics awards it received and judging by the fact that nobody who played DC was equally as impressed. Oh and i can't go into the other games you mentioned because I haven't read enough about them and I'm almost certain you are skewing facts and basically lying out of your ass. :)

1080p, 60 FPS games on the PS4:

- Blacklight Retribution

- KZ: SF

- Resogun

- Deep Down

- Warframe

1080p, 60 FPS games on the Xbox ONE:

- Last-gen graphics Forza 5

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="percech"] Bullshit, you simply mentioned why PS4 is superior basing it on DC and I simply replied that I don't see it in any of the games so far. I haven't seen anything superior. Putting words in my mouth just because you're failing at winning an argument, how old are you? You're so full of shit, can't even back up your own claims. Either that, or you just have poor reading comprehension.

 

EDIT: Oh and stop being dumb and actually come up with better remarks than posting horribly blurred out direct feed screens.

percech

No, I didn't. I claimed that Forza 5 could be run on the PS3 and 360 with a slight graphical downgrade. I said Forza 5 isn't technically impressive (Which it isn't). Strangely, you agreed a few posts later, so why are we having an argument?

Maybe you should go back a few pages to refresh your memory. I've heard people with low IQs have bad memory. :lol:

KI - 720p

Titanfall - Sub-1080p. Last-gen graphics

Forza 5 - Baked environments. Last-gen graphics. Looks like a cartoon.

RYSE - Linear game. Baked environments. Cutscene at the beginning to trick people into thinking it was rendering the scene in real time. :lol:

Dear Rising 3 - No confirmation on resolution. Probably running at 720p. Sub-30 FPS. Last-gen graphics.

Compare that with the PS4:

- All games confirmed to be running at 1080p with the exception of BF4.

- Particle effects are vastly superior on KZ: SF, Infamous: SS and other games.

- Fully dynamic environments.

- Superior dynamic effects compared to prebaked last-gen effects on Xbox ONE games.

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="percech"] I'm claiming that Forza 5 is aesthetically superior. I never claimed it was technically better. Cars look superior in every way in Forza and believe it or not, that is actually important in a racer...I would also mention FPS is one of the most important aspects of a proper racer and look at that, DC falls flat in that category as well. :)percech

In response to my question about why you're using Forza 5 to prove why you think the Xbone has superior graphics, you replied, "I don't need to do anything. The games speak for themselves." They prove Drive Club is more technically impressive. So instead of debating about how much power fully dynamic environments require (Which is probably more than Forza 5 requires in its entirety), you flip-flop and say you were takling about aesthetics, not technical prowess.

You constantly flip-flop on your claims to convince yourself that Forza 5 doesn't look like ass.

EDIT: Oh and stop being dumb and actually come up with better remarks than posting horribly blurred out direct feed screens.

No, I didn't. I claimed that Forza 5 could be run on the PS3 and 360 with a slight graphical downgrade. I said Forza 5 isn't technically impressive (Which it isn't). Strangely, you agreed a few posts later, so why are we having an argument?

Maybe you should go back a few pages to refresh your memory. I've heard people with low IQs have bad memory. :lol:

[QUOTE="Shensolidus"]

Both games look good, and obviously your judgement is going to be swayed by the console you're going to be picking up. Having said that, the latest Driveclub video from their Chile track looks worlds better than anything i've seen out of Forza 5. It's very, very impressive stuff. A bunch of people I work with saw it yesterday and couldn't believe it either.

After seeing the game looking like that, I actually don't mind it isn't running at 60.... specfically because it looks as good as it does. A game like Forza, which is aimed towards simulation racing, has gameplay that requires that level of smoothness far more than Driveclub, and that is perfectly okay. 

Locked framerate and resolution can be an indicator of a console's strength, but it is relative to what else the game is rendering. Driveclub is rendering MUCH more on screen at any given one time, with no dips in performance. If you're a Forza fanboy or an Xbone fan, more power to ya. I think you'll be having a ton of fun with that game. 

Tighaman

Look at all that prebaked environment. Looks like a cartoon. :cool: