Support NeoGAF

[Mung]

And as others have said, the GPU is also stronger on the ps4.

But I don't think the xbox struggles come down to these decisions.

For one, the playstation brand is simply much stronger than xbox outside the us and uk.

Edit: Yes, I acknowledge that GPU and die size are related. Still, the decision to emphasise non-gaming functions necessitated 8gb at an early stage in xbo development, which led to this problem. It wasn't simply a mistake, but a result of their priorities.

 

[KKRT00]

And as others have said, the GPU is also stronger on the ps4.

First he writes about DDR5 and then completely ignores the about 40% stronger GPU of the PS4. Should not be taken seriously and should be forgotten fast!

Only because You dont understand that both are strictly related due to limited die size.

 

[Man]

Can't patch/pay your way out of this mistake.

 

[Auto-Reply]

Yeah just recently I overheard a conversation at Gamestop about the RAM speeds, the customer was like "lol only 2133MHz? Is this 1980?".

 

[JohnnyWestlake]

What's the difference between these two memory systems? The bottom line is that the Playstation 4 is effectively more powerful than the Xbox One because of it. Microsoft will argue that the gap can be lessened with smart use of the embedded SRAM, marginally faster CPU and built-in cloud capabilities, but the truth is few if any third party developers will go to those lengths to optimize for the Xbox One.
It's easier to simply lower the game's resolution on the Xbox One and call it a day.

What, so nothing to do with the PS4's GPU being 40-50% more powerful? Yes, the difference in RAM has some effect, but whomever wrote this article should probably realise that probably the bigger contributing factor for the PS4 being effectively more powerful... is by having a GPU effectively 40-50% more powerful. Not faster RAM. Faster RAM doesn't give us more processing power.

You can't just blame all the power woes on RAM and ignore the GPU. And given GPU wasn't mentioned once, I'm not sure whoever wrote this is entirely sure what effect RAM speed actually has in a gaming machine.

 

[Lanrutcon]

Don't worry, MS will spend $$$ to breach the gap...

...just not on hardware, obviously.

 

[jelly]

I think resolution numbers don't matter much but the fact one is better than the other reaches consumers and that is enough.

 

[Rymuth]

It was not one decision but a perfect storm of many bad decisions coupled with a perfectly executed strategy on Sony's part.

 

[Oddduck]

Personally, I think Microsoft's problems are deeper than just hardware.

I think some people just lost trust in Microsoft.

- Xbox 360's red ring of death left a bad taste in people's mouths
- Consumers reading articles about DRM-gate and mandatory Kinect on Xbox One.

The cherry on top was Xbox One being priced $100 more than PS4 at launch.

Hopefully Microsoft can gain back the trust of their consumers.

 

[Occam]

Nonsense, it was several factors. Inferior hardware design was merely one among many. The sum of the notes is what makes the music.

 

[FalsettoVibe]

In the end, this will probably be looked at as the reason.

 

[Jack cw]

No. Many of those factor were long gone or even not out when X1 was launched. I bet most of average consumers didn't even know those DRM dilemma / disaster PR, etc. And the price of X1 was on par with PS4 since June. Why PS4 still takes the lead?

It is because of the power of hardware, resolution of games.

Sorry but no.
The damage was done last summer after the Xbone reveal and the DRM crap at E3. The media shitstorm, the social networks did much of the work and hurt xbox bad. There is a reason why xbone is basically dead outside of NA and UK. People had their competition and one competitor failed to deliver what they wanted. The word was spread and it hurts Microsoft until today.

And PS4 is selling not because of more pixels on the screen or buzzwords like 8GB DDR or 1,84T and all. Consoles are closed boxes and an investment for the next 5 to 8 years and this investment is done because of several factors, not only power.

The PlayStation as a brand is very powerful worldwide, PS4 benefited from Microsofts failures and Sony placed PS4 as a product worth the money, something not only hardcore gamers want, the premisse of the best multplatform titles, the entry price, and of course the word of mouth. People obviously want PS4 and that why is it selling.

 

[cheezcake]

It comes down to the decision to make the XB1 media-centric.

To have all the media functionality, OS requirements etc XB1 needed 8GB ram from the get go. GDDR5 wasn't available in that quantity at the time so they had to go with DDR3 + eSRAM to make up for it.

Sony only needed 4GB ram, in all the early dev-kits and according to the first party studio, it was planned to have 4GB GDDR5 ram. GDDR5 ram production ramped up really close to console release (a little over 1 year beforehand), this allowed them to bump it up to 8 pretty late.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

It was not one decision but a perfect storm of many bad decisions coupled with a perfectly executed strategy on Sony's part.

This is what I think. Wasn't any one thing.

 

[Caayn]

What, so nothing to do with the PS4's GPU being 40-50% more powerful? Yes, the difference in RAM has some effect, but whomever wrote this article should probably realise that probably the bigger contributing factor for the PS4 being effectively more powerful... is by having a GPU effectively 40-50% more powerful. Not faster RAM. Faster RAM doesn't give us more processing power.

You can't just blame all the power woes on RAM and ignore the GPU. And given GPU wasn't mentioned once, I'm not sure whoever wrote this is entirely sure what effect RAM speed actually has in a gaming machine.

As has been stated before by KKRT00 and a few others, the RAM set-up in the Xbox One is directly responsible for the weaker GPU. A lot of the die space is eaten up by the ESRAM, space that could've gone to the GPU itself if a different RAM set-up was used. The PS4 is a perfect example of this.

 

[Joni]

That's not entirely true as Dreamcast and other systems showed us. It's not software alone that makes for success. Software is an important parameter in this multi-dimensional vector, though.

The PlayStation 2 had Grand Theft Auto 3, Final Fantasy X, Gran Turismo 3 and Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty in less than a year. The DreamCast had a good line-p, but it is easy to see why software helped the PS2 win that year and continue to dominate from there. These four games together sold at least 35 million copies.

 

[SovanJedi]

I completely disagree. Having the absolute worst console unveiling in videogame history would be the thing that kicked them down. What good is the tech in the start-to-medium run if nobody wants to be associated with your damn machine?

 

[One4U]

Because the hole had been created in the first place and gamers are not quite as forgetful as people think.

I think pretty much every game running better on PS4 HAS had an effect, if only because lots of people that DO care have made buying choices on it, and its those people that lead the initial market and encourage their friends and relatives to do the same.

You are mainly consider the hardcore gamers, but I am saying those average consumers.

When they enter the shop to buy a console without knowing anything, what will be the question? Which is better for the same price? I bet most of store stuff will say PS4 and explain the advantage of the hardware and resolution of software on PS4. Even average consumer will not fully understand those shits, they will think "Yeah, PS4 is better and let me buy it."

 

[StuBurns]

Totally disagree. If the internals of the PS4 and XBO were reversed, sales would be practically what they are today I think.

 

[Jack cw]

The PS3 had graphically broken games and near every game was inferior.

Near every XB1 version is inferior but it doesn't and won't have broken games.

That hyperbole.
Look at the DF face offs and you see that most of the 3rd parties are basically close to identical, with PS3 even winning some of those. There are cases like Bayonetta or Skyrim, but your statement of "near every game" is factual wrong.

And devs got better, and the systems are not that far appart from a coding perspective, but let's see what happens when sales are like 3:1 in favour of PS4 and if devs really think about spending money for optimization and more games become more complex and the RAM situation plays a even bigger role.

 

[Skele7on]

you know I got mine for Halo and xbox exclusives.
I got my ps4 for cross platroms and sony exclusives.

I really couldn't care less if it's 900p or 1080p as long as the games are fun and awesome.

 

[Withnail]

Always online and mandatory Kinect during the time of Snowden/NSA scandals was definitely a factor, especially in Europe. Yes they reversed both of those decisions but it was already too late.

Attempting to throttle the used game market was also huge.. When that leaked people refused to believe it was true.

There were several bad decisions.

 

[Guile]

It kinda saddens me knowing the Xbox One hardware is so ''weak'' solely because MS was targetting TV/multimedia over gaming while designing the console. Damn you, Mattrick.

I don't see this generation having a long life span either, that would be ridiculous imo. PC gamers would have been enjoying 4K resolutions for years while these consoles would be struggling running 1080p @ 60FPS. A shame really.

 

[Griss]

Hardware isn't the reason Sony kicked their butts this whole first year, but it's probably the biggest reason that they won't be able to catch up effectively.

Once the word reaches casuals that Fifa and CoD are best on the PS4 that's pretty much the end of it. That's usually my friends' question to me, now that the prices are the same. Which does Fifa better? The PS4 will always win that argument so long as the PSN stays functional.

But it was the price and DRM scare that killed the XB1 at launch. I remember being at midnight launches for both consoles, and the amount of rumours about what kind of stuff the XB1 would and would not be able to do offline was amazing, and seriously negative for the console.

EDIT: I'm kinda glad that we'll be able to put the 'The strongest console never wins!' chestnut to bed.

 

[Auto-Reply]

As has been stated before by KKRT00 and a few others, the RAM set-up in the Xbox One is directly responsible for the weaker GPU. A lot of the die space is eaten up by the ESRAM, space that could've gone to the GPU itself if a different RAM set-up was used. The PS4 is a perfect example of this.

And why didn't they went with better hardware? Because they had a set budget to work with and that was build on the concept of an always online, kinect mandatory system.

It was this concept that is the reason for why they went with the hardware it's got build in now, they can't reverse the conceptual building stage of the XB1.

 

[SliceSabre]

I honestly would have never thought of the RAM as being the big thing that is holding the Xbox One back.

 

[One4U]

Sorry but no.
The damage was done last summer after the Xbone reveal and the DRM crap at E3. The media shitstorm, the social networks did much of the work and hurt xbox bad. There is a reason why xbone is basically dead outside of NA and UK. People had their competition and one competitor failed to deliver what they wanted. The word was spread and it hurts Microsoft until today.

And PS4 is selling not because of more pixels on the screen or buzzwords like 8GB DDR or 1,84T and all. Consoles are closed boxes and an investment for the next 5 to 8 years and this investment is done because of several factors, not only power.

The PlayStation as a brand is very powerful worldwide, PS4 benefited from Microsofts failures and placed PS4 as a product worth the money, something not only hardcore gamers want, the premisse of the best multplatform titles, the entry price, and of course the word of mouth. People obviously want PS4 and that why is it selling.

I am certain sure that even no DRM drama on X1 and X1 has the on-par hardware, Xbox One will be dead in mainland Europe because people here just prefer PLAYSTATION over XBOX.

 

[Renekton]

Given that ESRAM is on the die, won't X1 be the far bigger beneficiary on the next die shrink (Xbox Slim or whatever)?

I doubt Samsung would be so generous on the GDDR contracts with Sony. After all, discrete GPU VRAM was somewhat stagnant so price/supply may be a thing.

 

[Jack cw]

I am certain sure that even no DRM drama and on-par hardware, Xbox One will be dead in mainland Europe because people here just prefer PLAYSTATION over XBOX.

360 is evidence for this, I agree but as you see, the true power is the brand, not the few gigaflops.

 

[KKRT00]

Totally disagree. If the internals of the PS4 and XBO were reversed, sales would be practically what they are today I think.

That could be truth, but future would be much easier for Xbone if the systems were similar in power. Now, there is no way anyone with both consoles will choose Xbone version of multiplatform title for other reason than friends for MP games, which will hurt Microsoft quite a lot till the end of both consoles.

 

[One4U]

360 is evidence for this, I agree but as you see, the true power is the brand, not the few gigaflops.

I used to have the same opinion as yours, but someone told me that the brand reputation is nowhere to give PLAYSTATION such lead in Europe...

 

[danmaku]

I am certain sure that even no DRM drama on X1 and X1 has the on-par hardware, Xbox One will be dead in mainland Europe because people here just prefer PLAYSTATION over XBOX.

They do, but still the 360 gained a lot of traction here, especially in the early days when PS3 was an expensive behemoth with no games. It became a legit competitor for Sony. And now MS is back to square one.

 

[TyrantII]

Given that ESRAM is on the die, won't X1 be the far bigger beneficiary on the next die shrink (Xbox Slim or whatever)?

I doubt Samsung would be so generous on the GDDR contracts with Sony. After all, discrete GPU VRAM was somewhat stagnant so price/supply may be a thing.

A bigger die means more things to go wrong and its harder to get bigger yields. Shrinking it tends to increase issues at first, which means costs.

DDR3 RAM is being phased out for DDR4, so its very likely prices might go up there. At least there no cost reductions coming.

GDDR5 in the sizes used in PS4 just recently started production. It has no where to go but cheaper as processes are refined and demand goes up in high end videocards.

Both console seem to have been built with better cost reduction in mind, but yet again its another area the PS4 pulls ahead. Smaller die and new tech that will only get cheaper.

 

[Rymuth]

you know I got mine for Halo and xbox exclusives.
I got my ps4 for cross platroms and sony exclusives.

I really couldn't care less if it's 900p or 1080p as long as the games are fun and awesome.

What does this have to do with the topic at hand?

 

[DBT85]

You are mainly consider the hardcore gamers, but I am saying those average consumers.

When they enter the shop to buy a console without knowing anything, what will be the question? Which is better for the same price? I bet most of store stuff will say PS4 and explain the advantage of the hardware and resolution of software on PS4. Even average consumer will not fully understand those shits, they will think "Yeah, PS4 is better and let me buy it."

I'm not. The very hardcore got up in arms about the DRM, despite websites and blogs saying that we should get over it and accept it. Then it hit twitter and facebook and people who are not hardcore gamers heard about it, realised that it was shitty too, and joined in. Even after MS did enough 180s to fix all of those issues there are people that won;t trust them, and refuse to buy an Xbox as a result.

Even then, those people and the people that buy a console in the first few months are the people that people who don't yet have one ask about it, and play on it. They influence those that come after the launch period.

I've said that power and resolution are playing a part, but the DRM mess isn't forgotten.

Price played a huge part, as did the DRM mess, the social campaigns and Sony's very basic angle of "don't goof".

Given that ESRAM is on the die, won't X1 be the far bigger beneficiary on the next die shrink (Xbox Slim or whatever)?

I doubt Samsung would be so generous on the GDDR contracts with Sony. After all, discrete GPU VRAM was somewhat stagnant so price/supply may be a thing.

That's provided the ESRAM can be shrunk to the next die shrink at the same time as the GPU. Though they are on the same die they are obviously different structures. Some things can be shrunk more easily than others.

As for the GDDR5, Sony are I think the largest buyer for it and can pretty safely go to whomever and say we need x amount for the next x years. That kind of bulk must count for something.

 

[hoos30]

What? First they say that MS had terrible judgement with their memory solution, then it was fortunate for Sony they could put in 8 gb ddr5.
MS played safe and Sony risked and it went well for Sony, in my opinion. Not what the article says it was/is.

This. Click bait article. MS didn't make a "bad" decision... Sony gambled and won. There's a difference.

 

[Ashler]

In the end the platform with the best games will win just as it has been for every past generation, a shiny turd is still a turd.

Wii says hi!

 

[JimmyRustler]

360 is evidence for this, I agree but as you see, the true power is the brand, not the few gigaflops.

The 360 was everything but dead in Europe and if MS would have continued like they did in the early years of the 360 I am quite certain they'd lead in Europe as well. Brand power is something very fragile and Sony almost screwed it. They only had luck the MS fucked it up good.

 

[Final Verdict]

Weak hardware hurts, but the PS2 also had week hardware, and so did the Wii.

No, Xbox's biggest problem is perception.
The perceived graphical difference in the average consumer's mind is much greater than the actual difference.

 

[Wollveren]

I don't know. Just the other day when I bought my Xbox One I was talking to some kids who said it doesn't play used games. That's how pervasive the belief became. The average consumer cares more about missing features like being able to share or trade in games, not having to be connected online all the time, price point and Kinect which came at the height of the NSA scandal. I don't think the average person cares about 1080p vs 900p or 8gb ddr3 versus 8gb gddr5 as much as gamers or tech bloggers think.

The reason Microsoft struggled was because it was increasingly being talked about as an anti-consumer console, one that was not only $100 more than its rival but weaker in terms of specs. It was just a perfect storm of things that really did a number on them.

Exactly the same thing I saw!!! When I bought my XB1 1-2 weeks ago, I over heard a conversation between the staff and a group of 4 looking to buy a new console.

The group was pointing out that there was a used game section, but XB1 cannot share games so why did they have it. The whole DRM fiasco is the reason XB1 is not doing as great as PS4 primarily.

Not some resolution gate. Every single argument with my friend about why he won't buy XB1 is because of all the media attention during the XB1 reveal and E3.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

In the end the platform with the best games will win just as it has been for every past generation, a shiny turd is still a turd.

This is the one generation that may be the exception to the rule. I have a feeling that both the Xbox One and WiiU will both have superior libraries to the PS4 and yet the PS4 will come out on top.

 

[Canis lupus]

Specs are low because they had to keep the cost of the included Kinect in mind. Kinect was included because it was designed to be more than a game box. If MS is in for another gen it's likely they will not repeat that mistake and beef the specs as much as they can. They really care about the resolutiongate. Now imagine if the Xbone was 499 but all of it was spent on internal hardware, they didn't start revealing the console with the TV and sports stuff, never had the DRM debacle. MS wouldn't have the negative buzz, even the more price tag could work to its advantage with the early adopters (we have more FLOPs, all games are 1080p). PS4 would still had the price advantage but I reckon sales would be more equally split.

 

[TyrantII]

This. Click bait article. MS didn't make a "bad" decision... Sony gambled and won. There's a difference.

In what universe did Matrick not make an assload of not just bad, but terrible decisions?

Cause take me away to that imagination land.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

Too early and current Xbox One users will be annoyed. Why would you buy a new console after a company straight up abandons their previous one early.

The 360 was quite successful though.

 

[show me your skeleton]

haven't read the article, which makes commenting foolish, but it seems to me that the focus on multimedia, tv in particular, and the push for kinect really messed them up. it must have cost them an immense amount in r&d, profit margins and leeway on what hardware was affordable for the console itself.

 

[jelly]

This. Click bait article. MS didn't make a "bad" decision... Sony gambled and won. There's a difference.

A gamble is probably unfair, maybe just being modest or secretive when the outcome was fairly certain.

 

[Journey]

I completely disagree, DRM was and still is the major reason most of its fans had ditched the Xbox brand. Still today there are casuals that think XB1 cannot play used games. 2nd reason? The extra $100 for a peripheral that no one wanted forced down their throats.

 

[Nikodemos]

In what universe did Matrick not make an assload of not just bad, but terrible decisions?

We could say it was both. Sony pulled an "Audaces Fortuna Juvat" with their GDDR5 gamble, which got boosted by MS's bad initial strategy with the XB1.

 

[DBT85]

Specs are low because they had to keep the cost of the included Kinect in mind. Kinect was included because it was designed to be more than a game box. If MS is in for another gen it's likely they will not repeat that mistake and beef the specs as much as they can. They really care about the resolutiongate. Now imagine if the Xbone was 499 but all of it was spent on internal hardware, they didn't start revealing the console with the TV and sports stuff, never had the DRM debacle. MS wouldn't have the negative buzz, even the more price tag could work to its advantage with the early adopters (we have more FLOPs, all games are 1080p). PS4 would still had the price advantage but I reckon sales would be more equally split.

But it was priced with the extra price of the Kinect passed on to gamers.

 

[Percy]

This is the one generation that may be the exception to the rule. I have a feeling that both the Xbox One and WiiU will both have superior libraries to the PS4 and yet the PS4 will come out on top.

Wii U will top both for sure, but looking at the release schedule for 2015 I'd put Xbox One way at the bottom on the games front.