PS4's 50% More Powerful than Xbone

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for tormentos
#301 Edited by tormentos (26634 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

The GPU is not the sole measuring stick of a console's performance, and you know it. I am not saying that the PS4's GPU is, at least on paper, 50% more powerful. I am saying that the GPU is one of many aspects to overall console performance; and using just GPU numbers to determine one console's strength over another is fallacious.

GPU =PS4

CPU = Tied

Ram = PS4

Straight Forward design = PS4

No i am using the 20 to 30 FPS + better effects Tomb Raider has on PS4,the 100%+ resolution + dynamic effects MGS5 has on PS4,the 15 to 30 FPS + better effect Sniper elite 3 has on PS4 and so on that is what i am using as measurement because that dictate a gap actually bigger than 50%.

@FastRobby said:

Infamous doesn't look better, is empty, and boring after one play, unlike Ryse.

It does look better is not empty has way more particle effect,the best AA solution ever seen on console,is 1080p and runs over 30FPS.

Ryse is not even comparable is a constricted game,when you can barely move,you are confined to extremely enclosed pathways,is 900p and still can keep up a lock 30FPS.

Be on denial lemming Infamous >>> Ryse in every way possible.

@ZombeGoast said:

In no way does it average 50fps when there are section that drops it to the low 30s.

Maybe you should learn what average is,games on PC have a minimum frame to that doesn't mean the minimum is sustained for long periods,or that the average is close to the minimum,average is where the game spend most of its time,if we go by your analogy then the game is 60FPS because quite many times it is 60FPS.

So no even the 680GTX can run it at 60FPS.? Because on this test is drops to 38 FPS,and on 1680x1050...

Average is what count and is mostly 50 and up,by your argument not even PC is there..lol

Avatar image for b4x
#302 Edited by B4X (5660 posts) -

@Suppaman100 said:

@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

Avatar image for Suppaman100
#303 Edited by Suppaman100 (5250 posts) -

@b4x said:

@Suppaman100 said:

@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

Giving up lemming? Ok

Avatar image for SambaLele
#304 Edited by SambaLele (5552 posts) -

@Wasdie:

Wasdie, first and foremost, I respect you. Your posts are usually very balanced. That doesn't mean we can't disagree, like you said yourself. I always try to separate the argument from the person who made it, and the argument itself was what I was discussing. I was pointing to what I think is a fallacy, a weak point that breaks it's structure, in this case, leading to what I think is a false conclusion. I ask you to not assume things, like that I don't know the meaning of a word I use in my posts, even if that's not all you implied with that. I was just discussing with you normally, and implying the answer to that through the discussion normally.

But I'll do as you asked and point the technical formalities of your fallacy:

Superior multiplats throughout last gen didn't stop the gap between the PS3 and 360 from closing.People don't buy game consoles for superior multiplats in the end.

Read the rest of your post #151 and you'll see that basically these 2 phrases are both the premise and the conclusion of what you meant. Then you elaborate on that conclusion taking it as a new premise. What you wrote before it is not directly related to that fallacy, but circunstancial. That quote right there is the basis of your argument.

Firstly, you committed a formal fallacy, especifically an enthymeme, an incomplete syllogism. It could lead to a valid conclusion anyway, if the suppresed 2nd premise was valid to the point of being able to be taken for granted by others (a well-known premise, or an agreed-upon/consensual premise). But it wasn't a valid one, for a number of reasons. Therefore, your conclusion is invalid. I'll elaborate.

For your syllogism to be valid you needed an specific and valid 2nd premise, that took enough common elements from the first one to allow for the inductive reasoning. For that conclusion in particular, the 2nd premise would have to be: "superior multiplats this gen can't stop the gap between the PS4 and X1 from closing".

Therefore, people don't buy game consoles for superior multiplats in the end.

Your enthymeme, is a non sequitur, and I'll explain why. You committed a false analogy (a material fallacy), simplifying the last generation, omitting essencial data and assuming other info essential to comparison, all of which are not put into effect this gen in the same way as before, thus are not a direct base of comparison. Those bases are indirect and have to be remeasured, put into perspective with a number of other factors, as I already said, like the new relevance of multiplats (since many huge third party exclusive studios went multiplat, like Bungie and Kojima Productions... there's no exclusive MGS IV this gen for the "weaker" console, that's just one example out of many, new multiplats, less exclusives, higher dev costs which demand more sales, etc.).

So this is an inadequate consideration of relevance (of multiplats) in at least one requirement for an analogy argument. There's also one more vice in this analogy, which is the number of similarities between consoles of last and current gen. The hardware strenght/price ratio is distributed between the stronger and weaker platform in a totally different way, now with the "weaker" hardware being equally priced. In regards to multiplats, like you speficied, the PS3 performed worse, but was more expensive.

Also, what you took for a "weaker" console last gen in a multiplat sense due to hardware obstacles, was able to improve the quality in that aspect through time and also experienced increased sales through the gen, which also takes credibility away from your argument. It makes a link between that evolution in performance and sales. Even though this could be a false cause, it's still enough to constitute a false analogy, because it was not taken into consideration, and not explained as to why it wouldn't be an important correlation. Also, another difference is that it was possible only because there was room for it in hardware potential. Which is not the case now as well. So the analogy is completely false in all it's objective formal logical requirements.

In this aspect it could also be called a fallacy of the converse, another formal fallacy, but this is only a curiosity because if you deconstruct it it's still because it's an enthymeme with a false analogy.

There's also the generalization fallacy about the "average consumer" which for you determinately (in a determinist manner) act in a given manner. That's dicto simpliciter to say the least. You provide no reasons to affirm what you did here, you just presume. They way you made it also could be understood as hasty generalization. In my home language, we could also call that fallacy "superficial explanation" - the average consumer just don't see the difference because they don't see the difference. Or they just don't see the difference because they are average consumers, people that usually buys consoles. It's a conclusion based on a simple classification, without entering it's merits. In the worst case, it's circular definition.

Anyway, this was supposed to be about the fallacy, not you or me.

@StormyJoe said:

@SambaLele said:

@StormyJoe said:

@SambaLele said:

Maybe, since I don't know how you understand that to be debunked. If anyone thinks there're no proofs to a specifical gap of 50%, then the argument is lack of proof, and not proof on the contrary.

The GPU is 50% more powerful. The GPU is one part of a console, not the whole thing.

So, the GPU gap is factual. But it's not enough to get a complete picture of the actual gap. Is that the proof for refutal? You affirmed that the 50% gap was debunked.

The argument you provided again is that only the GPU is not proof enough. That's not proof on the contrary. You'd be correct if you say "that may not be so, because we must look into the other parts of both consoles".

And then you'd know, after comparing other hardware aspects, both consoles shortcomings that would hinder the possibility of geting the most out of their potentials, all that coming from their theoretical potentials. Yes, the GPU is not the whole thing. But you can't debunk something based on lack of proof + looking at only one of two things being compared.

You can't make a statement of fact with improper facts, either. That's like saying "Werewolves exist because you can't prove they don't."

Werewolves are not factual, and are not an agreed upon element in this discussion. The GPU gap, on the other hand, is a fact you agreed upon. The other proofs were dismissed as not enough to prove a total gap of 50%, but you said this gap was debunked, for which there are no proofs (the ones available were dismissed right?).

The other hardware parts are there to be analysed and won't bite you, nor curse you, nor do you need silver bullets to act against them if they do. I can't see the point in your argument, it has no relation to factual hardwares that you can buy in a store.

Also, I didn't bring facts, but arguments. Logical proof if you may. To show that what you said didn't make any sense. It seems that you're tergiversating.

Avatar image for b4x
#305 Posted by B4X (5660 posts) -

@Suppaman100: You quoted the original POST and took ownage . When you said /thread

Squirm much Cow?

Avatar image for StormyJoe
#306 Posted by StormyJoe (7547 posts) -

@tormentos: Straight Forward Design? Whatever. Plus, the XB1 has esRam (which, last I read, no longer has to be manually flushed). While that does not amount to parity, it does decrease the advantage for the PS4.

And, the multiplats coming out later this year are closer to parity, not farther away. Which, btw, is exactly what your all-so-mighty NeoGAF poster CBOAT said would happen.

Avatar image for blackace
#307 Posted by blackace (23576 posts) -
@freedomfreak said:

I've yet to see that 50% though.

Yeah, the games shown so far doesn't show that it's 50% more powerful and the gap seems to be closing with every update to the XB1 SDK. DX12 and the Cloud hasn't even been fully implemented yet. Next year should be fun though.

What really hilarious is the GPU's in both the PS4 and XB1 are completely outdated now and neither system has been out for even a year yet. Seriously, both M$ and Sony should have included higher ended GPU's for their systems.

These lines from the article made me laugh. --> "So as we can see, PlayStation 4′s Pitcairn GPU is almost completely equivalent to the now obsolete HD 7850. However if you plop down a few hundred bucks more you can get nearly twice the graphical power of the PS4 very easily and that is not even counting the Dual Chip flagship Vesuvius."

Thankfully we play games and not specs. As long as the games look decent and are fun, the specs are irrelevant. Tech heads are funny.

Avatar image for StormyJoe
#308 Posted by StormyJoe (7547 posts) -

@SambaLele: I did not say the GPU gap was debunked - I said the statement "PS4 is 50% more powerful" is debunked.

Avatar image for dollmytee
#311 Posted by DollMytee (25 posts) -

Did OP even read the whole article? Wow.

Avatar image for Gue1
#312 Posted by Gue1 (12171 posts) -

@dollmytee said:

Did OP even read the whole article? Wow.

show me what you got. Another butthurt spin meltdown? XD

Avatar image for SambaLele
#314 Edited by SambaLele (5552 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@SambaLele: I did not say the GPU gap was debunked - I said the statement "PS4 is 50% more powerful" is debunked.

Exactly. Confirmed tergiversating, you're running from the discussion. Look at Tormentos, he's doing a much better job at entering that total gap discussion, without restricting himself to the GPU. You provided no proof of debunking, only discredited a proof that is only pertinent to one piece of hardware; admiting "loss" in regards to this piece of hardware. Yet you claimed total debunk of the complete gap. You still have a whole system in your front waiting for complete debunking. 2 consoles actually, because it doesn't make sense to analyse only one's potential if you want to stablish a comparison.

After all, theoretical numbers do not translate to real performance, which is an obstacle to both consoles, and which may compensate the arguments against the gap, or even help justify the gap.

Avatar image for tormentos
#315 Posted by tormentos (26634 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@tormentos: Straight Forward Design? Whatever. Plus, the XB1 has esRam (which, last I read, no longer has to be manually flushed). While that does not amount to parity, it does decrease the advantage for the PS4.

And, the multiplats coming out later this year are closer to parity, not farther away. Which, btw, is exactly what your all-so-mighty NeoGAF poster CBOAT said would happen.

GPU+CPU+ GDDR5

GPU+CPU+DDR3+ESRAM

Now pic the most straight forward of the 2.?

It has to be manually flushed,because the CPU can't never see the data while is there,stated by MS it self there is no connection between ESRAM and the CPU.

Yeah it shows look at Sniper Elite 3,both 1080p up to 30FPS on PS4,is not going to change.

@blackace said:

Yeah, the games shown so far doesn't show that it's 50% more powerful and the gap seems to be closing with every update to the XB1 SDK. DX12 and the Cloud hasn't even been fully implemented yet. Next year should be fun though.

What really hilarious is the GPU's in both the PS4 and XB1 are completely outdated now and neither system has been out for even a year yet. Seriously, both M$ and Sony should have included higher ended GPU's for their systems.

These lines from the article made me laugh. --> "So as we can see, PlayStation 4′s Pitcairn GPU is almost completely equivalent to the now obsolete HD 7850. However if you plop down a few hundred bucks more you can get nearly twice the graphical power of the PS4 very easily and that is not even counting the Dual Chip flagship Vesuvius."

Thankfully we play games and not specs. As long as the games look decent and are fun, the specs are irrelevant. Tech heads are funny.

It does shows what it doesn't show is 50% better graphics and it never will because 50% more power doesn't translate into 50% better graphics and you die hard lemmings refuse to see this.

The 7950 has more than double the power of the 7770 yet the difference in Tomb Raider is 30FPS on ultra on the same quality with the same settings,that is what miore than 100% power amount to on PC,on consoles is the same,you sad lemming are expecting something that will not happen period.

DX12 is already on xbox one and the cloud has been use since Titanfall and it mean sh** the game was 792p with drops in frames and average graphics.

@FastRobby said:

We can keep playing this game, yes, no, yes, no, but euhm nope. You haven't played Ryse, you don't know what you are talking about. It can keep up with a 30fps lock, don't come with bad reviews from November. Try to find one after patches.

I don't have to play Ryse i know how it looks,and i know how Infamous look,i know both games resolution,both games frames and which of the 2 is extremely limited in everything.

Avatar image for StormyJoe
#316 Posted by StormyJoe (7547 posts) -

@SambaLele said:

@StormyJoe said:

@SambaLele: I did not say the GPU gap was debunked - I said the statement "PS4 is 50% more powerful" is debunked.

Exactly. Confirmed tergiversating, you're running from the discussion.

I am doing nothing of the sort. I have said - even in this thread - that the GPU on the PS4 is 50% more powerful than the XB1's on paper. What I also said, and have consistently maintained, is that a 50% performance boost in GPU does not equate to a general statement "The PS4 is 50% more powerful than XBoxOne.". There are other considerations to take into account.

Avatar image for TheRealBigRich
#317 Posted by TheRealBigRich (784 posts) -

So it seems like 50% more powerful GPU equals 1080 vs 900p and possible constant 60 vs 50-60. That's pretty much it right?

Avatar image for Wasdie
#318 Edited by Wasdie (53469 posts) -

@SambaLele: If you're going to break it down like that, then sure you can find a fallacy in my argument. However this is System Wars. I'm not writing a thesis here. I've got my opinions based upon literally years of observing the video game market and I've come to my conclusions. I'm going to have certain assumptions that I cannot just cite you a reference for because I believe I've earned the right to have my own opinion based upon what I've see.

I still stand by what I say even if you find it fallacious.

Avatar image for Gue1
#319 Posted by Gue1 (12171 posts) -

@TheRealBigRich said:

So it seems like 50% more powerful GPU equals 1080 vs 900p and possible constant 60 vs 50-60. That's pretty much it right?

it depends since right now there's nothing on xbone that comes close to infamous or driveclub. But multiplat games are the same game. Is not like a multiplat dev could come up with designs that wouldn't work the same across all platforms you know. This is only common sense.

Now when Naughty Dogs and Santa Monica release their games it's when shit is gonna get real.

Avatar image for Guy_Brohski
#320 Posted by Guy_Brohski (1820 posts) -

So the Xbox One is fully 2/3 or maybe 3/4ths as good as PS4? I can live with that...

Avatar image for SambaLele
#321 Edited by SambaLele (5552 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

@SambaLele: If you're going to break it down like that, then sure you can find a fallacy in my argument. However this is System Wars. I'm not writing a thesis here. I've got my opinions based upon literally years of observing the video game market and I've come to my conclusions. I'm going to have certain assumptions that I cannot just cite you a reference for because I believe I've earned the right to have my own opinion based upon what I've see.

I still stand by what I say even if you find it fallacious.

I didn't do it like that before because there was no need to, it was already part of the discussion in another way. But after this:

@Wasdie said:

"Fallacy". Please learn what that means before throwing it out in an argument. Unless you can somehow prove that my reasoning is unfounded or illogical in any way which would undermine my argument (which you didn't), it's not a fallacy.

You have your opinion, I have mine. You can disagree with me all you want but don't be throwing out words that discredit my belief without throwing some real proof that I'm wrong my way first. Your opinion isn't better than mine because you use a word like fallacy as the start of your argument.

I wouldn't simply sit down.

I do respect your opinion, and I agree that no, my opinion is not better than yours (and vice-versa). For me it's all about understanding the other persons' opinion. Fair play, I guess.

@StormyJoe said:

@SambaLele said:

Exactly. Confirmed tergiversating, you're running from the discussion.

I am doing nothing of the sort. I have said - even in this thread - that the GPU on the PS4 is 50% more powerful than the XB1's on paper. What I also said, and have consistently maintained, is that a 50% performance boost in GPU does not equate to a general statement "The PS4 is 50% more powerful than XBoxOne.". There are other considerations to take into account.

Exactly. So how and why did you say the 50% total system gap had been debunked?

Avatar image for StormyJoe
#323 Posted by StormyJoe (7547 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@StormyJoe said:

@tormentos: Straight Forward Design? Whatever. Plus, the XB1 has esRam (which, last I read, no longer has to be manually flushed). While that does not amount to parity, it does decrease the advantage for the PS4.

And, the multiplats coming out later this year are closer to parity, not farther away. Which, btw, is exactly what your all-so-mighty NeoGAF poster CBOAT said would happen.

GPU+CPU+ GDDR5

GPU+CPU+DDR3+ESRAM

Now pic the most straight forward of the 2.?

It has to be manually flushed,because the CPU can't never see the data while is there,stated by MS it self there is no connection between ESRAM and the CPU.

Yeah it shows look at Sniper Elite 3,both 1080p up to 30FPS on PS4,is not going to change.

@blackace said:

Yeah, the games shown so far doesn't show that it's 50% more powerful and the gap seems to be closing with every update to the XB1 SDK. DX12 and the Cloud hasn't even been fully implemented yet. Next year should be fun though.

What really hilarious is the GPU's in both the PS4 and XB1 are completely outdated now and neither system has been out for even a year yet. Seriously, both M$ and Sony should have included higher ended GPU's for their systems.

These lines from the article made me laugh. --> "So as we can see, PlayStation 4′s Pitcairn GPU is almost completely equivalent to the now obsolete HD 7850. However if you plop down a few hundred bucks more you can get nearly twice the graphical power of the PS4 very easily and that is not even counting the Dual Chip flagship Vesuvius."

Thankfully we play games and not specs. As long as the games look decent and are fun, the specs are irrelevant. Tech heads are funny.

It does shows what it doesn't show is 50% better graphics and it never will because 50% more power doesn't translate into 50% better graphics and you die hard lemmings refuse to see this.

The 7950 has more than double the power of the 7770 yet the difference in Tomb Raider is 30FPS on ultra on the same quality with the same settings,that is what miore than 100% power amount to on PC,on consoles is the same,you sad lemming are expecting something that will not happen period.

DX12 is already on xbox one and the cloud has been use since Titanfall and it mean sh** the game was 792p with drops in frames and average graphics.

@FastRobby said:

We can keep playing this game, yes, no, yes, no, but euhm nope. You haven't played Ryse, you don't know what you are talking about. It can keep up with a 30fps lock, don't come with bad reviews from November. Try to find one after patches.

I don't have to play Ryse i know how it looks,and i know how Infamous look,i know both games resolution,both games frames and which of the 2 is extremely limited in everything.

Let me first say that this "resolutiongate" debate is stupid, since it's really difficult to tell the difference; and typically people like you have to result to using Digital Foundry to actually show there *is* a difference. Regardless...

Not going to change? Is that why ID said Doom 4 will be 1080p/60FPS on PS4/XB1 ? Is that why versions of Destiny on PS4/XB1 are the same? Is that why Halo 4 will be 1080p/60FPS?

Sorry, Tormentos, but the facts seems to not be in your opinion's favor...

Avatar image for StormyJoe
#324 Posted by StormyJoe (7547 posts) -

@SambaLele said:

@Wasdie said:

@SambaLele: If you're going to break it down like that, then sure you can find a fallacy in my argument. However this is System Wars. I'm not writing a thesis here. I've got my opinions based upon literally years of observing the video game market and I've come to my conclusions. I'm going to have certain assumptions that I cannot just cite you a reference for because I believe I've earned the right to have my own opinion based upon what I've see.

I still stand by what I say even if you find it fallacious.

I didn't do it like that before because there was no need to, it was already part of the discussion in another way. But after this:

@Wasdie said:

"Fallacy". Please learn what that means before throwing it out in an argument. Unless you can somehow prove that my reasoning is unfounded or illogical in any way which would undermine my argument (which you didn't), it's not a fallacy.

You have your opinion, I have mine. You can disagree with me all you want but don't be throwing out words that discredit my belief without throwing some real proof that I'm wrong my way first. Your opinion isn't better than mine because you use a word like fallacy as the start of your argument.

I wouldn't simply sit down.

I do respect your opinion, and I agree that no, my opinion is not better than yours (and vice-versa). For me it's all about understanding the other persons' opinion. Fair play, I guess.

@StormyJoe said:

@SambaLele said:

Exactly. Confirmed tergiversating, you're running from the discussion.

I am doing nothing of the sort. I have said - even in this thread - that the GPU on the PS4 is 50% more powerful than the XB1's on paper. What I also said, and have consistently maintained, is that a 50% performance boost in GPU does not equate to a general statement "The PS4 is 50% more powerful than XBoxOne.". There are other considerations to take into account.

Exactly. So how and why did you say the 50% total system gap had been debunked?

Didn't I just explain this?

There is no evidence that a "50% total system gap" is true. All any site has ever talked about is raw GPU power. 50% raw GPU power does not mean the console, as a whole, is 50% more powerful.

Avatar image for gamersjustgame
#325 Posted by GamersJustGame (323 posts) -

@Gue1: The difference is between 7790 and 7850 is small. They are comparable cards in nearly every single way. This post is so misleading its hilarious. The X1 and PS4 are using modified 7790 and 7850. The 7790 also has ESRAM so it does close the gap some. The power difference is 15% at the most.

Avatar image for SambaLele
#326 Edited by SambaLele (5552 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

Didn't I just explain this?

There is no evidence that a "50% total system gap" is true. All any site has ever talked about is raw GPU power. 50% raw GPU power does not mean the console, as a whole, is 50% more powerful.

Ok, I see we're going round in circles here.

Going right to the start again:

Debunk: expose the falseness or hollowness of (an idea or belief). Synonisms: discredit, disprove, invalidate, prove to be false, etc. Antonyms: uphold, prove, praise, etc.

By accepting the 50% gap in one piece of hardware, actually, the most important one in such a device, is actually one pass towards not debunking it, but upholding it. But I get it, that it's only a complete proof for the GPU, and an incomplete proof for the entire system. I agree with that.

So, from there on, you must provide evidences that goes against said gap on the rest, not only not accept that proof and keep the question open.

And not accepting a given proof is not proving the contrary. It's not debunking, it's only lefting the question open, unchallenged. You didn't expose the falseness, invalidated, discredited, etc. You only kept it open for future refutal, if you get your hands on new evidence.

Avatar image for ccagracing
#327 Posted by ccagracing (831 posts) -

# stats are great, 50% more power or 100% more power that the 7950 has to be taken in context. What if a bottleneck in the system only allows for a fixed result of xyz and it can't use that extra 50 or 100%. Look at an iPhone, the only way you know the 5s is quicker than the 5 is because apple told you. Would an i7 4770k load the gamespot webpage quicker than an i7 3770k! Yes but you need it to be measured in milliseconds or somebody to tell you.

The PS4 is faster than the xb1 but not by the margin "some" believe and whoever is quoting Tomb raider charts and showing that the pc can only do xyz fps at 1680*1050 v PS4 at 1080p. If tomb raider was built and coded for only an i7, 8GB ram and that 7850 graphic card and didn't have to run a full pc OS do you think the PS4 or XB1 would be near it!?

Avatar image for tormentos
#329 Posted by tormentos (26634 posts) -

@FastRobby said:

So you know nothing. You are a child when you are making an opinion about a game you haven't played. I don't have to listen to an album of "Artist x" I "know" how it sounds, I know it is x bpm, bla bla, I know shit

Oh you can claim what you want.

1080p vs 900p

30+ FPS vs sub 30FPS.

Open world vs enclosed corridor like pathways.

Better particle effects.

Better lighting.

Better AA.

This ^^^ are facts not my opinion.

@StormyJoe said:

Let me first say that this "resolutiongate" debate is stupid, since it's really difficult to tell the difference; and typically people like you have to result to using Digital Foundry to actually show there *is* a difference. Regardless...

Not going to change? Is that why ID said Doom 4 will be 1080p/60FPS on PS4/XB1 ? Is that why versions of Destiny on PS4/XB1 are the same? Is that why Halo 4 will be 1080p/60FPS?

Sorry, Tormentos, but the facts seems to not be in your opinion's favor...

Yeah thats like saying that is stupid 480p vs 720p.

Yeah Sniper Elite 3 developer say the same about their game,and it failed to be 1080p 60FPS,worse when V-synch is active like on PS4 the game on xbox one lock into 30FPS,and before you even claim the update hasn't hit Bolcato it self stated the update was coming to make the game 1080p so yeah the update happen and they use it and still fell behind,lets not forget Ryse developer claims it was 1080p,Ghost developer also claimed the same 1080p and all 3 failed.

Just because Destiny is 1080p 60FPS on both it doesn't mean there is parity,not all developers will push to get the best out,and in fact Bungie it self stated that it wanted a similar experience for all platforms,holding back the PS4 isn't parity bro.

COD as already been claim to be sub 1080p on xbox one again,so lets wait and see what happen.

@gamersjustgame said:

@Gue1: The difference is between 7790 and 7850 is small. They are comparable cards in nearly every single way. This post is so misleading its hilarious. The X1 and PS4 are using modified 7790 and 7850. The 7790 also has ESRAM so it does close the gap some. The power difference is 15% at the most.

The PS4 is over a 7850 in power the xbox one is not a full 7790 is a cut dowbn version,which has a 1.28TF count,that is basically the same power the 7770 has so is 7770 vs 7850 OC more or less.

The PS4 uses a modify 7870 not 7850,it is 7870 with 2 CU disable for yields,and 800mhz,the xbox one is a modified 7790 with 2 CU disable for yields and 853mhz.

1.28TF vs 1.84TF.

The 7790 is 1.79TF and the 7850 is 1.76TF.

ESRAM closes no gap is memory not a flop enhancer or producer,power on the 7790 come from its CU not from its memory.

No is not 15%...

Avatar image for StormyJoe
#330 Posted by StormyJoe (7547 posts) -

@SambaLele said:

@StormyJoe said:

Didn't I just explain this?

There is no evidence that a "50% total system gap" is true. All any site has ever talked about is raw GPU power. 50% raw GPU power does not mean the console, as a whole, is 50% more powerful.

Ok, I see we're going round in circles here.

Going right to the start again:

Debunk: expose the falseness or hollowness of (an idea or belief). Synonisms: discredit, disprove, invalidate, prove to be false, etc. Antonyms: uphold, prove, praise, etc.

By accepting the 50% gap in one piece of hardware, actually, the most important one in such a device, is actually one pass towards not debunking it, but upholding it. But I get it, that it's only a complete proof for the GPU, and an incomplete proof for the entire system. I agree with that.

So, from there on, you must provide evidences that goes against said gap on the rest, not only not accept that proof and keep the question open.

And not accepting a given proof is not proving the contrary. It's not debunking, it's only lefting the question open, unchallenged. You didn't expose the falseness, invalidated, discredited, etc. You only kept it open for future refutal, if you get your hands on new evidence.

We are not going around in circles at all. The GPU is one part - one - of a console. Just because Console A's GPU is 50% more powerful than console B's GPU, that does not mean saying "Console A is 50% more powerful than console B" is true. There is no evidence of that conclusion because the GPU is not the only component of a gaming machine that determines performance. Moreover, there aren't any articles that state that claim.

Therefore, saying "Console A is 50% more powerful than console B" just because of a GPU difference is false. Discredited. Debunked.

Avatar image for blackace
#331 Posted by blackace (23576 posts) -

@TheRealBigRich said:

So it seems like 50% more powerful GPU equals 1080 vs 900p and possible constant 60 vs 50-60. That's pretty much it right?

There are games that are 900P & 800P on the PS4 however and most of their games do not hold a steady 60fps. On paper it says 50% more power, but in an actual game and its performance it's more like 20-25% and even that percentage is slowly dropping. Microsoft will have another SDK update before the end of the year. I'm sure we'll see the gap close even more.

Avatar image for miiiiv
#333 Edited by miiiiv (900 posts) -
@tormentos said:

@StormyJoe said:

The GPU is not the sole measuring stick of a console's performance, and you know it. I am not saying that the PS4's GPU is, at least on paper, 50% more powerful. I am saying that the GPU is one of many aspects to overall console performance; and using just GPU numbers to determine one console's strength over another is fallacious.

GPU =PS4

CPU = Tied

Ram = PS4

Straight Forward design = PS4

No i am using the 20 to 30 FPS + better effects Tomb Raider has on PS4,the 100%+ resolution + dynamic effects MGS5 has on PS4,the 15 to 30 FPS + better effect Sniper elite 3 has on PS4 and so on that is what i am using as measurement because that dictate a gap actually bigger than 50%.

@FastRobby said:

Infamous doesn't look better, is empty, and boring after one play, unlike Ryse.

It does look better is not empty has way more particle effect,the best AA solution ever seen on console,is 1080p and runs over 30FPS.

Ryse is not even comparable is a constricted game,when you can barely move,you are confined to extremely enclosed pathways,is 900p and still can keep up a lock 30FPS.

Be on denial lemming Infamous >>> Ryse in every way possible.

@ZombeGoast said:

In no way does it average 50fps when there are section that drops it to the low 30s.

Maybe you should learn what average is,games on PC have a minimum frame to that doesn't mean the minimum is sustained for long periods,or that the average is close to the minimum,average is where the game spend most of its time,if we go by your analogy then the game is 60FPS because quite many times it is 60FPS.

So no even the 680GTX can run it at 60FPS.? Because on this test is drops to 38 FPS,and on 1680x1050...

Average is what count and is mostly 50 and up,by your argument not even PC is there..lol

Do you really think a benchmark where the hd 6970 and the gtx 580 fare better than the gtx 680 when it comes to minimum frame rate gives an accurate idea of how the gtx 680 performs? There were probably some driver issues which are likely fixed now.
And the pc version running on ultra looks much better than the ps4 version so it's not that surprising that gpus that are more powerful than the ps4 gpu can't maintain 60fps even on resolutions below 1080p and it probably runs better now than it did during that benchmark, at least on nvidia cards.
Even the hd 7870 (about 40% more powerful than the ps4 gpu) manages a minimum of 60fps at 1080p, high settings, fxaa, 8x af, which is probably somewhat comparable (somethings are better and others are worse) to the ps4 version.

Avatar image for I_can_haz
#334 Edited by I_can_haz (6511 posts) -

Tormentos is destroying lemmings' hopes and dreams. Xflop One neither has the games nor the sales (lol, last place) TLHBO.

Avatar image for Antwan3K
#335 Posted by Antwan3K (4229 posts) -

@FastRobby said:

@tormentos said:

@Antwan3K said:

I'm still waiting to see this 50% difference show up on actual TV screens while I'm playing actual retail games.. because, so far, all we have is trivial fanboy fuel from Digital Foundry.. if you ask a normal (non-fanboy) gamer who is unaware of any under-the-hood differences between the consoles to take a look at a multiplatform game like Watch Dogs, Battlefield 4, Wolfenstein, or etc on the Xbox One and then the PS4 on a 52" HDTV from a normal playing distance, he'd say that they look basically the same..

"looks basically the same" =/= "50% more powerful" in my eyes.. and honestly, I don't care about the PS4 being 50% more powerful than the Xbox One if the end results are trivial differences in visuals that I need Digital Foundry to inform me about.. if that's all the PS4 can offer, I'll stay satisfied with the "looks basically the same" graphics of the Xbox One coupled with all the additional capabilities, features, and options that it has over the PS4 in terms of multimedia, multitasking, and apps..

And you will die waiting because 50% more power doesn't translate into 50% better visuals,and that is the problems lemming like you have,again the 7950 has more than 100% more power than the 7770 yet it doesn't translate into more than 100% better graphics,it translate into 100% better performance,which the PS4 has prove to do against the xbox one.

20FPS and 30FPS advantages over the xbox one is more than 50% performance boost.

No matter what the xbox one and PS4 are gaming consoles the Ps4 runs gamers better period.

It could run games better, it has the capabilities (hardware) to run them better. Except for aliens with superb eyesight we haven't really seen much difference, sometimes in textures, but those can go both ways... Thief looked better on Xbox One for example. And if we have to believe Bungie, Destiny will look exactly the same on PS4 and Xbox One. So you might have 50% more power, it doesn't matter if you can't see it... In the future it will be completely irrelevant

Exactly.. Tormentos just basically said "you'll never see these 50% differences but we're going to keep bragging about them anyway"..

keep clinging to your microscopes gentlemen.. keep clinging.. meanwhile I'll be enjoying games that look basically the same on Xbox One but they're coupled with features, functionality, and options that aren't available on the PS4 in terms of multimedia, multitasking, and apps..

Avatar image for urbansys
#336 Posted by urbansys (234 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?

Ya your full of CRAP....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eAmBQVsN6E

Sad that some go as far as editing pictures....

Avatar image for blackace
#337 Edited by blackace (23576 posts) -

@I_can_haz said:

Tormentos is destroying lemmings' hopes and dreams. Xflop One neither has the games nor the sales (lol, last place) TLHBO.

El Tormo is the JESTER of SW. You're his dimwitted sidekick Mr. noodle. lol!!

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060318035407/muppet/images/0/01/CousinPepe.jpghttp://www.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/parenting/2007/02/18/Mrnoodlebrother230x184.jpg

Avatar image for Gue1
#338 Posted by Gue1 (12171 posts) -

@blackace said:

@I_can_haz said:

Tormentos is destroying lemmings' hopes and dreams. Xflop One neither has the games nor the sales (lol, last place) TLHBO.

El Tormo is the JESTER of SW. You're his dimwitted sidekick Mr. noodle. lol!!

but why is he a jester when all his arguments are always logical? Is it just because he's a cow? Because that's racism.

Avatar image for darkangel115
#339 Posted by darkangel115 (4449 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

@blackace said:

@I_can_haz said:

Tormentos is destroying lemmings' hopes and dreams. Xflop One neither has the games nor the sales (lol, last place) TLHBO.

El Tormo is the JESTER of SW. You're his dimwitted sidekick Mr. noodle. lol!!

but why is he a jester when all his arguments are always logical? Is it just because he's a cow? Because that's racism.

because his arguments, while can be valid if he was comparing actual PCs, leave out a lot of variables and therefore have no validity. If i told you that 1 car has 300HP and another has 140HP that means the 300HP is faster, it would be false because that isn't always the case. It leaves out many other details. He also praises the PS4 as some kind of powerhouse which it isn't (and no the X1 isn't one either) I hear all the 1080/60 arguments but those games are pretty rare. I mean KZ was 1080i and 30fps in SP, infamous had to remove dynamic lighting to hit 1080p and 30fps, DC is 1080/30, TO1886 is 800p/30 etc etc. I mean If every game on X1 was 720/30 and every game on PS4 was 1080/60 he'd have a valid argument but were not seeing that. We seen TNO be 1080/60 on both, destiny is 1080/30 on both after using the june SDK (was 900p on X1) We'll probably know more as games start to drop late this year and early next year, but in the end, all the numbers he throws around, haven't reflected much as far as real world performance.

Avatar image for SambaLele
#340 Edited by SambaLele (5552 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@SambaLele said:

@StormyJoe said:

Didn't I just explain this?

There is no evidence that a "50% total system gap" is true. All any site has ever talked about is raw GPU power. 50% raw GPU power does not mean the console, as a whole, is 50% more powerful.

Ok, I see we're going round in circles here.

Going right to the start again:

Debunk: expose the falseness or hollowness of (an idea or belief). Synonisms: discredit, disprove, invalidate, prove to be false, etc. Antonyms: uphold, prove, praise, etc.

By accepting the 50% gap in one piece of hardware, actually, the most important one in such a device, is actually one pass towards not debunking it, but upholding it. But I get it, that it's only a complete proof for the GPU, and an incomplete proof for the entire system. I agree with that.

So, from there on, you must provide evidences that goes against said gap on the rest, not only not accept that proof and keep the question open.

And not accepting a given proof is not proving the contrary. It's not debunking, it's only lefting the question open, unchallenged. You didn't expose the falseness, invalidated, discredited, etc. You only kept it open for future refutal, if you get your hands on new evidence.

We are not going around in circles at all. The GPU is one part - one - of a console. Just because Console A's GPU is 50% more powerful than console B's GPU, that does not mean saying "Console A is 50% more powerful than console B" is true. There is no evidence of that conclusion because the GPU is not the only component of a gaming machine that determines performance. Moreover, there aren't any articles that state that claim.

Therefore, saying "Console A is 50% more powerful than console B" just because of a GPU difference is false. Discredited. Debunked.

=]

Stormy, I give up. You think you provided logical proof to debunk it by saying that, I think you just avoided the proof and kept the question open. We're running in circles here. I'm dropping this discussion, but thanks for keeping the good mood.

Avatar image for tormentos
#341 Posted by tormentos (26634 posts) -

@darkangel115 said:

because his arguments, while can be valid if he was comparing actual PCs, leave out a lot of variables and therefore have no validity. If i told you that 1 car has 300HP and another has 140HP that means the 300HP is faster, it would be false because that isn't always the case. It leaves out many other details. He also praises the PS4 as some kind of powerhouse which it isn't (and no the X1 isn't one either) I hear all the 1080/60 arguments but those games are pretty rare. I mean KZ was 1080i and 30fps in SP, infamous had to remove dynamic lighting to hit 1080p and 30fps, DC is 1080/30, TO1886 is 800p/30 etc etc. I mean If every game on X1 was 720/30 and every game on PS4 was 1080/60 he'd have a valid argument but were not seeing that. We seen TNO be 1080/60 on both, destiny is 1080/30 on both after using the june SDK (was 900p on X1) We'll probably know more as games start to drop late this year and early next year, but in the end, all the numbers he throws around, haven't reflected much as far as real world performance.

The problem with your silly ass argument is that comparing a ford F150 with 400 horse power to a 160HP Honda Civic is not the same argument no matter what the Civic will always win in a race,those variables doesn't exist on consoles specially on this gen, both use GPU from the same family one is stronger period,implying that a damn 7770 can match a 7850 OC is a joke period,it will not happen,because that implies that......

A console that is at 70% can reach B consoles that it 100% by just software update.

Since this hardware are the same family if A console can increase 30% to reach B console at 100%,that also Implies that B console can increase it power to 130% or more based on that same principle.

No matter WHAT 18 CU at 800mhz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 CU at 853 there is no way around this period is irrefutable.

Sniper Elite 3 uses the June SDK and is 1080p 30FPS on xbox one with V-synch on PS4 it reach 60FPS and average like 49 FPS,which is a considerable gap,even more when the PS4 version has higher effects stated by Sniper Elite developer it self.

For the 100 time just because Bungie and some other developers chose to leave the PS4 version at the xbox one level doesn't mean parity was reach,there will never be parity.

Avatar image for Zophar87
#343 Posted by Zophar87 (4344 posts) -

@super600 said:

So gpu benchmarks determine how powerful a console is?The difference between both consoles is most likely 30%-40%.

That is still a significant amount.....

Avatar image for Zophar87
#344 Posted by Zophar87 (4344 posts) -

@hrt_rulz01 said:

Can't believe people are still talking about the power differences... it's been done to death!

You see? That's the best part; if the Xbone had a significant difference in power I'm sure you'd be all over it.

Avatar image for commander
#345 Posted by commander (14126 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.

50 percent of nothing, or next to nothing

is still nothing...

or next to nothing

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
#346 Edited by 04dcarraher (22775 posts) -

The PS4 is not truly 50% stronger. The only area it is 50% faster in is pixel fill rate, texture rate and processing power is not more then 30% faster. So in reality its around 40% overall going by base performance numbers.

The rumor of thinking ND will bypass the OS to harness more ram and processing power is funny. Ive seen some the dumb statements "they will use all 8gb". Fact is 40% of the RAM is locked off and used by the OS and its features, and two cpu cores are reserved for that as well. Sony will not allow ND to disable all features to squeeze a bit more out of the system making the console useless in many areas to everyone. Which will cause problems.... Sony has already said developers have a flexible buffer to disable "some" features that devs can request to gain back 1gb of ram half physical and the other paging file. The multitasking nature of the OS will not allow them to "bypass" the OS and all the reserved memory.

Avatar image for ninjaxams
#347 Edited by ninjaxams (7480 posts) -

don't care, i've got my halo. i've a soft spot for the ps4 as i enjoy what both companies have to offer but i would rather have a weaker system with exclusives i enjoy than a powerhouse with stuff i don't care to play.

i will say this however, i've gone nes, snes, saturn, ps1, xbox, 360, ps3, then x1 and the x1 has the absolute worst menu system i've ever seen on a console. the hell were they thinking?!

Avatar image for Ribnarak
#348 Posted by Ribnarak (2299 posts) -

do lems realize this is system wars. Ofcourse its valid for sony fans to bring in straight facts in terms of performance to compare consoles (main purpose of OWNAGE).

Remember this is system wars. Don't like the ownage, then leave?

Avatar image for MK-Professor
#349 Posted by MK-Professor (4137 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@MK-Professor said:

£230 for one HD7950 18 months before the ps4 release date, £400 for PS4 and £460 for two HD7950, as you can see slightly more expensive for significant more performance, and also 18 mounths before the ps4 release. (right now two R9 280 cost less than a PS4)

As I said my PC is not even cost more than $900 and it performs more than 4 times better than ps4 (I mean I play all my games at 2560x1440, 60fps, max settings, while PS4 1080p or 900p 30fps and not even high settings that is low-end GPU performance right there). not to mention that I use my PC primarily for other things besides gaming. If I was a console gamer I will still had to pay for one console + a mediocre PC for my work + other staff.

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/graphics-cards/amd-radeon-hd-7950-1058628/review

That card was 350 pounds in UK,2 months after it release it wasn't 230 pounds you freaking liar..

Oh and the PS4 wasn't 400 pound either you blind biased hermit,it was 349 pounds.

Go lie else where troll,like i say i already have this argument with you and already prove you wrong,your 2 cards were 700 pounds both,and that is in GPU alone is 100% higher price than the PS4 just in GPU.

Pretending PC is cheap doesn't make it.

You can go at OCUK and ask anyone how much the HD7950 cost in the summer of 2012 and you will find out that at this period most HD7950's with aftermarket coolers were between £210 and £250. And at the beginning the PS4 cost £400 in uk.

Avatar image for rrjim1
#350 Posted by rrjim1 (1378 posts) -

I'm still looking but I cant seem to find all than hidden power in my PS4. Maybe Sony forgot to put it in my PS4?