More than likely a CPU bottleneck as there isn't that much difference between the X and Pro in that department.
Microsoft really balanced their hardware wrong, no dev is gonna spend more time optimising for a platform with no users and by optimise I mean rewrite parts of the code.
Not only that you have to take into account Microsoft forcing devs to use DirectX then whatever they are using on the PS4, if MS let devs do what they like I bet it would be faster.
Lmao.... I remember when the Q6600 came out and everyone instantly thought mutlti-threading would become massive....... and here we are 10+ years later and it's still not got any real traction in terms of adoption.
What? I don't know what planet you've been living on, but quad cores became quite interesting quite fast. Look at games like gta IV and battlefield series. GTA IV was 2008.
I was living on Earth........ There was the odd exception but generally and when working out the ratio of games released VS games that could use more then 2 threads it was obvious that dual core was still the way to go....
Original GTA4 review from 2008..... Dual cores don't seem to be doing such a bad job to me.
nice job on cherry picking benchmarks, quad cores are significantly better at gta IV, allthough you don't have to a genius to see the same trend in your graph. dual cores were not the way to go, if you could afford it, you bought a quad core.
@commander: WTF has RDR2 got to do with any of this? I also thought you had sold your PS4.
well pc gamers have to wait for monster hunter, while we can play it now, if pc gamers start to play monster hunter, we will be able to play rdr2. At least that was my reasoning at first, now I see that monster hunter on the pc is due for autumn 2018. Have fun waiting.
I had a ps4 for a couple of months, I'm an xbox dude remember.
well pc gamers have to wait for monster hunter, while we can play it now, if pc gamers start to play monster hunter, we will be able to play rdr2. At least that was my reasoning at first, now I see that monster hunter on the pc is due for autumn 2018. Have fun waiting.
I had a ps4 for a couple of months, I'm an xbox dude remember.
We're in no rush. Plenty of games to keep us busy. As long as the port is good I'll wait until 2030 if I need to.
And no I don't. Don't you have an Xbox and a PC now? Kinda redundant.
well pc gamers have to wait for monster hunter, while we can play it now, if pc gamers start to play monster hunter, we will be able to play rdr2. At least that was my reasoning at first, now I see that monster hunter on the pc is due for autumn 2018. Have fun waiting.
I had a ps4 for a couple of months, I'm an xbox dude remember.
We're in no rush. Plenty of games to keep us busy. As long as the port is good I'll wait until 2030 if I need to.
And no I don't. Don't you have an Xbox and a PC now? Kinda redundant.
Well I rather not wait, not to mention I rather play with my friends on the xbox.
why would that be redundant, the multiplayer platform is different from the pc. Stop chewing on the same old bone, the pc vs console discussion is only viable when you're comparing single player games and even then the price is totally different. I only use my pc for vr, it's in a seperate area in my house.
This last few months cows have been shitting on checkerboarded claiming native is better.
the Pro is not running native, the X1X is.. so where does that argument fall now?
I am more baffled by the idea that the current framerates of consoles are now unplayable. This notion seem to have become the norm the moment the One X graced itself on the market. Now all consoles are shit.
Lmao.... I remember when the Q6600 came out and everyone instantly thought mutlti-threading would become massive....... and here we are 10+ years later and it's still not got any real traction in terms of adoption.
What? I don't know what planet you've been living on, but quad cores became quite interesting quite fast. Look at games like gta IV and battlefield series. GTA IV was 2008.
I was living on Earth........ There was the odd exception but generally and when working out the ratio of games released VS games that could use more then 2 threads it was obvious that dual core was still the way to go....
Original GTA4 review from 2008..... Dual cores don't seem to be doing such a bad job to me.
nice job on cherry picking benchmarks, quad cores are significantly better at gta IV, allthough you don't have to a genius to see the same trend in your graph. dual cores were not the way to go, if you could afford it, you bought a quad core.
Nice job on cherry picking new architectures........
It's been OVER 10 YEARS since the Q6600...... read it again, let it sink in.. .........10 YEARS....... and we're still a point where quad cores are still, generally, the better gaming chips and all that is needed.
This last few months cows have been shitting on checkerboarded claiming native is better.
the Pro is not running native, the X1X is.. so where does that argument fall now?
From the Digital Foundry article
Xbox One X, however, resolves at 1728p, a clear 4x boost to the base hardware's 864p,
with the same reconstruction-style artefacts seen on base hardware
The argument falls with people learning to read and listen to all the information that is given to them...... clearly something you have not done.
Native rendering wouldn't have reconstruction artefacts now would it.....
If you read or listen well you would have known that they don't know how the image is being constructed/rendered and they were very clear in stating that and that the PS4 Pro uses checkerboard and the One X doesn't. Native rendering can have artifacts because the occurrence of artifacts is dependent on the render pipeline.
It really sucks that gaming has become all about the graphical technology than the game.
nice job on cherry picking benchmarks, quad cores are significantly better at gta IV, allthough you don't have to a genius to see the same trend in your graph. dual cores were not the way to go, if you could afford it, you bought a quad core.
Nice job on cherry picking new architectures........
It's been OVER 10 YEARS since the Q6600...... read it again, let it sink in.. .........10 YEARS....... and we're still a point where quad cores are still, generally, the better gaming chips and all that is needed.
what architectures, it just points out the difference between quad cores and dual cores at the same ghz. Both intel and amd are in there.
What does it matter it's been 10 years since the q6600 and quad cores are not the best gaming chip today, coffee lake is a nice example of that.
well pc gamers have to wait for monster hunter, while we can play it now, if pc gamers start to play monster hunter, we will be able to play rdr2. At least that was my reasoning at first, now I see that monster hunter on the pc is due for autumn 2018. Have fun waiting.
I had a ps4 for a couple of months, I'm an xbox dude remember.
We're in no rush. Plenty of games to keep us busy. As long as the port is good I'll wait until 2030 if I need to.
And no I don't. Don't you have an Xbox and a PC now? Kinda redundant.
Well I rather not wait, not to mention I rather play with my friends on the xbox.
why would that be redundant, the multiplayer platform is different from the pc. Stop chewing on the same old bone, the pc vs console discussion is only viable when you're comparing single player games and even then the price is totally different. I only use my pc for vr, it's in a seperate area in my house.
@Xplode_games: I bought the game on the Pro last night. Im playing on a 65 inch 4k screen and the artifacts outside of distant vines is pretty much non existent. You would need to be about 2 feet away from a 65inch screen to notice it. But since were dealing with system wars hyperbole its nice to play in res mode on the pro and still have some foilage.
That's great, I'm glad you're enjoying the game. But you should know it absolutely looks better on the X1X. You will never know that because you don't have that version.
The good news is that you don't know what you're missing. The bad news is that you don't know what you're missing.
@Xplode_games: Except ive seen it on the X. Guess what ? It looks slightly worse... in all honesty it comes down to nitpicking though and the biggest advantage of the PS4 version is the community.
I know BassMan and he's perfectly comfortable with 60fps. Please quote him laughing at 60fps. Even if he did, he obviously games at 144fps only in older games seeing even a 1080 Ti won't reach 140fps at 3440x1440p in recent games. Likewise, the 7700K won't be a bottleneck for these old games either.
His CPU doesn't bottleneck his GPU. That's completely false. Unless his target frame rate is like 200fps in CS:GO, the 7700K won't be a problem. The 1080 Ti will choke way before it.
And dude, the 7700K outperforms the 1800X to this day and you're calling it garbage. WTF is that? Yeah in 3-4 years from now it might start to outdo the 7700K but as it stands, it's still slower and since your predictions are shit and we're not in 2020, saying purchasing a 7700K in 2017 is a bad choice makes you a fool. You pick based on your needs and the 7700K slaughters currently and for the foreseeable future. Even in the future it won't be a bottleneck for 60fps and by the time it becomes one, it'll be so outdated it won't even matter.
You called the 7700K garbage and that it will bottleneck a 1080 Ti and that is false. Please provide evidence for your claims or GTFO.
Now with FUTURE GAMES that will be highly threaded, what happens to the only thing you were holding onto?
Lmao.... I remember when the Q6600 came out and everyone instantly thought mutlti-threading would become massive....... and here we are 10+ years later and it's still not got any real traction in terms of adoption.
What? I don't know what planet you've been living on, but quad cores became quite interesting quite fast. Look at games like gta IV and battlefield series. GTA IV was 2008.
I was living on Earth........ There was the odd exception but generally and when working out the ratio of games released VS games that could use more then 2 threads it was obvious that dual core was still the way to go....
Original GTA4 review from 2008..... Dual cores don't seem to be doing such a bad job to me.
Did you really not learn anything from back then? The dual core was insignificantly faster than the Q6600 in games but a lot worse in multithreaded apps and of course all future apps that would be more heavily threaded. The only reason people bought the E 8500 and 8400 was because they were much cheaper and in gaming at the time just as good as the quad core.
Very soon after everyone moved to quad and they even pretended to never advocate for dual and single core processors. I expect this will be the same with you. After claiming the 4 core 8 thread 7700k is great for gaming, you will pretend you were along for the ride all along with the 8 core 16 thread and better highly threaded CPUs of the day.
Did you really not learn anything from back then? The dual core was insignificantly faster than the Q6600 in games but a lot worse in multithreaded apps and of course all future apps that would be more heavily threaded. The only reason people bought the E 8500 and 8400 was because they were much cheaper and in gaming at the time just as good as the quad core.
Very soon after everyone moved to quad and they even pretended to never advocate for dual and single core processors. I expect this will be the same with you. After claiming the 4 core 8 thread 7700k is great for gaming, you will pretend you were along for the ride all along with the 8 core 16 thread and better highly threaded CPUs of the day.
Feel free to bump this thread in 5 years from now. For now you're wrong and very much so. The 7700K is very good for gaming and certainly isn't garbage. Else you better start calling the X1X a piece of shit. If not you're an hypocrite but we already knew that.
This last few months cows have been shitting on checkerboarded claiming native is better.
the Pro is not running native, the X1X is.. so where does that argument fall now?
From the Digital Foundry article
Xbox One X, however, resolves at 1728p, a clear 4x boost to the base hardware's 864p,
with the same reconstruction-style artefacts seen on base hardware
The argument falls with people learning to read and listen to all the information that is given to them...... clearly something you have not done.
Native rendering wouldn't have reconstruction artefacts now would it.....
If you read or listen well you would have known that they don't know how the image is being constructed/rendered and they were very clear in stating that and that the PS4 Pro uses checkerboard and the One X doesn't. Native rendering can have artifacts because the occurrence of artifacts is dependent on the render pipeline.
It really sucks that gaming has become all about the graphical technology than the game.
They also state iirc that the shapes of the artefacts aren't typical CB style..... Or was that another video...
well pc gamers have to wait for monster hunter, while we can play it now, if pc gamers start to play monster hunter, we will be able to play rdr2. At least that was my reasoning at first, now I see that monster hunter on the pc is due for autumn 2018. Have fun waiting.
I had a ps4 for a couple of months, I'm an xbox dude remember.
We're in no rush. Plenty of games to keep us busy. As long as the port is good I'll wait until 2030 if I need to.
And no I don't. Don't you have an Xbox and a PC now? Kinda redundant.
@Xplode_games: Except ive seen it on the X. Guess what ? It looks slightly worse... in all honesty it comes down to nitpicking though and the biggest advantage of the PS4 version is the community.
It's fine to choose the PS4 for the community, just don't say you are choosing it for the graphics. That can't be the case.
@Xplode_games: Well it does look better. Slightly more artifacting that you wont notice and more detail that you will notice. Not to mention it runs better on the Pro in the resolution mode.
@Xplode_games: Well it does look better. Slightly more artifacting that you wont notice and more detail that you will notice. Not to mention it runs better on the Pro in the resolution mode.
But visually speaking they look extremly close.
Enjoy playing with your friends. I'm sure you made the right decision.
@Xplode_games: Except ive seen it on the X. Guess what ? It looks slightly worse... in all honesty it comes down to nitpicking though and the biggest advantage of the PS4 version is the community.
You've seen it side by side? Because no way in hell are you going to tell a difference any other way.
@kingtito: I did actually. And in all honesty your right the difference was minimal on both sides. I did think the pro looked slightly better but it makes you realize the insane hyperbole here in SW.
Those cores though... A lot of cores doesn't mean shit unless the cores are strong like in the 8700K.
Clock for clock they trade blows.... Ryzen just sucks because it's overclock ceiling is 4 to 4.1Ghz compared to Intels 5 to 5.2Ghz.... 20%+ performance advantage for Intel from clock speed alone when factoring overclocking.
Hoping that Ryzen refresh increases this clock speed ceiling as that will make things very interesting.
Log in to comment