@FastRobby said:
First part, well you keep saying it doesn't need constant refreshing, as I've already mentioned, that is not true, proof it or otherwise stop saying it.
Why do you think Microsoft went for on always on device? Not just for DRM, but also so almost every owner of the Xbox One would have access to Microsofts cloud, all the time. As you keep mentioning bandwidth and latency, you clearly don't understand what they want to do. These calculations arrive faster than PS Now video/audio, so who will have the most problems with lag you think?
Second part, no one said anything about graphical bottle necks. As you could have seen at GDC, it frees the CPU of calculations. PS4 will have the GPU do work of the CPU, in the end, PS4 will stay behind, because they can't keep up CPU wise.
And that's the part you keep missing apparently. Xbox One will offload most of the CPU to the cloud, PS4 can't do this. Xbox One will have more dynamic, more lively worlds to play in, when PS4 wants this, they have to offload it to the GPU, and this will lower all it's graphical power.
Dude anything that need constant refreshing mean that it has to be render in fractions of seconds,it has to be refresh for every single frame,a typical game on consoles consist of 30FPS Frames per second.
That mean for each frame change that result most be there,is the reason why GPU use such high bandwidth.
So if you want to load 100 MB of data over and over again in 30 frames,that mean you connection need to deliver 100 mb 30 times over 1 second,your internet connection will not DO IT.
Answer me this why the hell do you think ESRAM is on xbox one.?
Simple question why do you think MS is using ESRAM on xbox one.
Yeah it is because 68Gb/s from the DDR3 memory pool isn't fast enough to handle the load between CPU and GPU,so ESRAM is basically a middle man which speed up the data so that the GPU doesn't starve,once you understand this process you will understand why i say things that need constant refreshing can't be done over a network,a 1 second delay is enough to cause the game to freeze.
MS went online need it to verify that your actual game was legal,reason why it was 24 hours check up and not constant all the time check ups.
The calculation as fast as you connection can deliver them even a 50MB connection it total bullsh** compare to what a CPU can use on a single second,which is up to 68GB/s,and that is the CPU the GPU require even faster one.
If you have a 50 MB connection,and your connection can download 1Gb of data in 3 minutes,it would take your connection 528 minutes to stream from the server what the PS4 bass over its bandwidth in 1 second.
Your connection will take 8 hours to stream from the cloud to the PS4 what PS4 can process in 1 freaking second man,is impossible to do it,which is the reason why only things that don't need constant refresh can be done,streaming even 30 MB over a fast connection can take several seconds,oh and i am going by 50MB connection which aren't the standard in any way.
PSN now is a video stream video stream don't need 50MB a second connection,a 10 MB one for 720p is fine,which is the reason PSN now can be deliver,PSN now works like Onlive and Gaikay,on PSN now what happen is that the servers process the game and stream a video of the game been render on a farm,the cloud MS use offload process is not the same in any way.
That is a sad notion that the PS4 CPU will fall behind,what MS can offload from the cloud will not be enough to do anything and the PS4 CPU isn't a bottle neck for the GPU in any way,so basically you are assuming things that will not happen.
The xbox can't offload most of the CPU to the cloud sad lemming,your connection CANT HANDLE IT.
Is like having Dumptruck motor on top of a freaking bicycle,that sad is your connection is total and utter sh** compare to what a CPU pass over DDR3 on PC or even the xbox one,even the PS4 CPU which uses like 20 to 30GB/s it endless times more than what your connection can handle,now before you say any more sh** take this challenge.
Download on your connection 1GB and tell me how much it takes,after it finish take a picture of the window showing it was done it will tell you how much it took.
When your done take that time and multiple it by 145 times.
The total time it gives you is what your connection will take in time to download what the xbox one process with ESRAM in a freaking second,maybe that way you can begin to understand why it can do sh** even for the CPU what can be offloaded is little oh and anything offloaded most me pretty small to it arrives the fastest and to avoid putting the offload in direct competition with the assets you need for online play as well.
@evildead6789 said:
you're taking everything out of context just to be a fanboy troll. That same article mentions
"Outside of the more aggressive dynamic framebuffer on the Xbox One, there's little to separate it from the PS4 game. Shadow quality is slightly better on the PS4, but the artwork, effects and lighting are all basically identical. The PS4 holds up the closest in delivering a native 1080p experience at 60fps, so benefits from slightly more consistent image quality. As such, once again it's the PS4 release that is our preferred console choice. However, the differences between the two consoles are minor and Wolfenstein is really a worthwhile purchase no matter which one of these systems you own."
This is also the only article that you could find that's so lenient towards the ps4, and still they're talking about minor differences. I think the video speaks for itself.
Hardly a reason to buy a ps4 in my book, if you want superior image quality, buy a pc.
No digital foundry like always is trying to be neutral,..
""PlayStation 4 had managed to trump its Microsoft rival.""
Same article..lol
@FastRobby said:
He does that ALL the time, that's classic childish, fanboy behavior.
Oh please don't talk about childish behavior on a thread where you are defending at broken back and blinding something that has fail to be proven,Cloud.
Titanfall uses the cloud it offload CPU process it look average and is 792 with frame drops into the mid 30's the cloud is proven to do sh** for graphics.
Now i have Titanfall as prove that it fail to deliver what do you have to prove the cloud work,and i hope is not the damn building demo,done by MS because that is nothing and could be easily as fake as the kinect presentation the faked many times during E3.
@blackace said:
@Shewgenja said:
The secret sauce has been denied, according to The Witcher 3 developers. Where is your god now?
I think there will be more then just DX12 that will make the difference. This developer hasn't seen what's coming in the next 3-8 months from now. They'll be singing a different tune by this time next year.
His game doesn't come out for like 6 to 8 months what the fu** man,so now the Witcher developer doesn't know because he denies your secret sauce,get this DX12 is already on xbox one it has been since launch,and both the Witcher developer and Phill Spencer him self have stated already that DX12 what will do it make it easy to make games for the xbox one,it will not bring the so call performance boost you were lead to believe first.
You know why MS now is lowering the tune in respect to the cloud and DX12,because they know that the time for hype is over,the PS4 is leading and few people fell for the promises,they know it will not deliver so better drop it now so that people next year don't remember it.
@FastRobby said:
It hasn't been debunked... Witcher 3 developers, who aren't using DX12 are saying one thing, then you've got Battlefield Hardline developers saying the other... You've got a known PS fanboy trying to debunk it with lies over and over again, and then you've got industrie experts from Intel, AMD, Nvidia, saying it's amazing. Well well, who should I believe, the one fanboy on GS forum, or the vice president of AMD, hmm, so hard to choose from...
@daious It's not just low-level, at the moment CPU from Xbox One isn't being used properly, you can't completely multitask and divide all task over all cores.
And you have Phill Spencer telling it to your face..
Xbox One chief warns gamers not to expect dramatic improvements from DirectX 12
On Monday, Xbox head Phil Spencer appeared to dump cold water on the idea that DX12 would make a major difference for the console, writing: “It will help developers on XBOX One. It’s not going to be a massive change but will unlock more capability for devs.”
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/184768-head-of-xbox-warns-gamers-not-to-expect-dramatic-improvements-from-dx12
Maybe you will listen to Phill Spencer...
You know why it will not be a big change.?
Because DX12 work by lowering CPU over head which on console isn't a freaking problem to begin with,have you hear about low level and optimization on consoles.? Yeah that is DX12 for PC,which is what Mantle did before MS which is late like always,DX12 will not do much for the xbox one because is made to solver a freaking problem on PC that doesn't exist on consoles.
Oh and anything the xbox one can do by API the PS4 can do it as well everything,so if the xbox one improve by a technique so will the PS4,and sony has a team dedicated for that Ice team and they are great in what they do,just check out TLOU on PS3.
@evildead6789 said:
yeah it's because the witcher devs are too lazy to implement the esram and dx12 like they should, that this is true for every game.
All games use ESRAM on xbox one you silly fanboy..lol
Log in to comment