I don't want to speak for everyone, but I can say that the reason I tend to believe Sony's assertions (not without question, but I'm less likely to totally disregard) is because Sony has been pretty damn forthcoming lately. They've laid shit out. Microsoft's kept things hidden and spoken only of "power of the cloud" and "numbers don't matter." It's hard to trust a company that's going out of its way to keep shit hidden.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
DigitalFoundry: X1 memory performance improved for production console/ESRAM 192 GB/s)
- Thread starter ekim
- Start date
- Status
Magnific0giganticus
Banned
So who is Microsoft's own Cerny?
Marc Whitten is the Chief Product Officer for the Xbox One. I think that's the closest equivalent you can find.
qa_engineer
Member
I believe his name is Ben Kilgore. But I don't think he's a consumer facing part of the xbone team like Cerny is
sleeping_dragon
Banned
Xbots is using Forza 5 to defend Xbox1 now? The cars in GT6 looks on par and the lighting is mile ahead of Forza 5. GT6 has dynamic weathers and day night conditions and is on a PS3. T10 should be ashamed of themselves for launching the 5th instalments of their game on a next gen console that lack some of the features that was in their previous games which was on a weaker hardware.
No I have no idea who this guy is and anything he has said, im not into hardware numbers. Ill be glad if this comment disappoints you.
qa_engineer
Member
I wanted to write the same thing but I called a post fanboy-level meltdown so I wasn't really in a position to call someone else out.
I think it might be coming from the cloud.
He posts shit like that continuously. Not surprised to see that he finally got banned.
Everytime I see this person make a post, it says they are banned. lol
R3TRODYCE
Member
Yeah that was a bit much.
I don't feel salty towards MS, and Sony or Nintendo...
I also don't agree with every decision they make, but I don't feel compelled to go in threads for things I don't agree with (or games I don't like) theand turn up the saltiness to the 11..
Where as....
qa_engineer
Member
I have a system preference as well, and will argue points etc. but some people just take it that extra step which is just really funny to read.
That's the one thing that I'd like to have a quote / proof from a reliable source for. So far all I've heard and seen is that the systems are pretty comparable, apart from silly numbers..
LittleJohnny
Banned
Actually I truly believe that the difference between Xbox One and PS4 is being greatly overstated around here.
When looking at specs on paper, one could say that the GTX 680 is a lot more powerful than the GTX 670 and they would be right, lets look at the numbers:
GTX 670 = 2.46 Teraflops
GTX 680= 3.1 TF
Difference of 640MF. Difference between Xbox One and PS4 = 600MF
Depending on perspective, one person could say: Wow that is a significant difference, but to me it's not, in terms of what that will translate to what I see and play, it won't be that significant, especially if I'm upgrading from a Geforce 7800GT, whether I go with a 670 or 680, I'm still getting a substantial upgrade, and whether the 680 is a lot more powerful on paper, when coming for a 7800GT, going to 680 instead of 670 for an additional 600 Mflops is really not significant, the person with the 670 should be equally excited and will be playing with the same visual fidelity minus a little AA and other settings tweaks to keep the framerate on par, but nothing to make a considerable difference visually.
Probably from the shitstorm season we had ^^
José Mourinho
cocknose
This thread prompted me to delve in to an old computer architecture textbook for a read.
And coming away from it scratching my head I feel like I did before I opened it. That is I would be fairly certain that 99% of the people posting in this thread don't know the first thing about the incredibly complex discipline that is computer architecture.
Most of these arguments seem pointless.
And coming away from it scratching my head I feel like I did before I opened it. That is I would be fairly certain that 99% of the people posting in this thread don't know the first thing about the incredibly complex discipline that is computer architecture.
Most of these arguments seem pointless.
qa_engineer
Member
Folks over at beyond3d are just as confused, so no resolution will come until Microsoft decides to clear shit up. Conversely, they don't really owe us any explanations being private company and all...
GTX 670 = 2.46 TFLOP
GTX 680= 3.1 TFLOP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
absolute difference = 0.64TFLOP
relative difference = 680 is 26% more powerful than a 670
======================================
PS4 = 1,84 TFLOP
Xbox One = 1,23 TFLOP
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
absolute difference = 0,51TFLOP
relative difference = PS4 is 50% more powerful than an Xbox one
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TL;DR: Your example uses a 26% relative performance difference to explain the significance of a 50% relative performance difference between Xbox One and PS4
If you don't like silly numbers, maybe you like silly graphs that put the relative specs in perspective?
(Ignore the upper right hand corner, as it's made with the assumption of 3GB (confirmed) vs. 1GB (speculated) reserved.)
Who would a reliable source be for you be? Obviously I'm not it. Would anyone on GAF we can get hold of qualify?
reposted for new page...
GTX 670 = 2.46 TFLOP
GTX 680= 3.1 TFLOP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
absolute difference = 0.64TFLOP
relative difference = 680 is 26% more powerful than a 670
======================================
PS4 = 1,84 TFLOP
Xbox One = 1,23 TFLOP
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
absolute difference = 0,51TFLOP
relative difference = PS4 is 50% more powerful than an Xbox one
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TL;DR: Your example uses a 26% relative performance difference to explain the significance of a 50% relative performance difference between Xbox One and PS4
GTX 670 = 2.46 TFLOP
GTX 680= 3.1 TFLOP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
absolute difference = 0.64TFLOP
relative difference = 680 is 26% more powerful than a 670
======================================
PS4 = 1,84 TFLOP
Xbox One = 1,23 TFLOP
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
absolute difference = 0,51TFLOP
relative difference = PS4 is 50% more powerful than an Xbox one
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TL;DR: Your example uses a 26% relative performance difference to explain the significance of a 50% relative performance difference between Xbox One and PS4
phosphor112
Banned
You make it sound like Sony hasn't been one of the technical leaders of music hardware in the industry.
LittleJohnny
Banned
Let me explain his point with a better example
GTX 780 - 3.9 TFlops
Titan - 4.5 TFlops
0.6 TFlops difference
Xbone - 1.2 TFlops
PS4 - 1.8 TFlops
0.6TFlops difference
Techpowerup says Titan is only 7% faster with 0.6TFlops boost. So yeah, multiplats on Xbone & PS4 will be the same. Be right back, I need to buy a Nikon DSLR.
If you don't like silly numbers, maybe you like silly graphs that put the relative specs in perspective?
(Ignore the upper right hand corner, as it's made with the assumption of 3GB (confirmed) vs. 1GB (speculated) reserved.)
Who would a reliable source be for you be? Obviously I'm not it. Would anyone on GAF we can get hold of qualify?
Well thanks for the graph, but perhaps I wasn't clear in my post: all I would like to see is factual proof of better results - that's the thing I'd like to see. Numbers / graphs tend to be boring, even if they (pre)tend to be informative..
Doesn't matter if devs use some of the GPU CUs for compute on PS4. Yes that leaves 'less' for graphics but then those devs will also want to use a similar amount of compute on Xbox one, so if anything the relative differential for just graphics would be even more disparate
Eg 12 vs 18 just for graphics is a 50% improvement
Use 4CU equivalent for compute (yes I realise it would be shared across CUs but just for illustration) as suggested by some
8 vs 14 left for graphics is now a 75% improvement
Eg 12 vs 18 just for graphics is a 50% improvement
Use 4CU equivalent for compute (yes I realise it would be shared across CUs but just for illustration) as suggested by some
8 vs 14 left for graphics is now a 75% improvement
LittleJohnny
Banned
People LOOOVE using percentages because it REALLY blows up the difference.
Check this out!!
GTX 680 is 200% more powerful than GTX 580 OMG WTF BBQ! is that better? My point still stands, when coming from a Geforce 7800GT, going to a GTX 580 or 680 is still a massive upgrade and both players should be happy with the results and should both be enjoying current Gen PC status with all the bells and whistles.
Flatline
Banned
Can Crusher
Banned
Little Johny really? You are trying to argue that a gap that could be filled with the power of 2 Xbox 360's isn't going to make a difference?
Stop lying to yourself and accept reality. You are going to get a Xbox One, that's awesome man, but you have to buy it knowing that in two years time the difference in visuals between exclusives will be clearly noticeable.
Now you just have to decide whether that bugs you more than it should, or if it's simply too important and so you are just going to be playing the "lie to myself" game for years. I think it's a waste of sanity my friend.
Stop lying to yourself and accept reality. You are going to get a Xbox One, that's awesome man, but you have to buy it knowing that in two years time the difference in visuals between exclusives will be clearly noticeable.
Now you just have to decide whether that bugs you more than it should, or if it's simply too important and so you are just going to be playing the "lie to myself" game for years. I think it's a waste of sanity my friend.
Unfortunately we don't have results yet. End of 2015 it should be obvious that the PS4 is significantly stronger.
All we can go on right now are current specs and the history of computing that specs are important.
Edit: Did you just call benchmarks (numbers / graphs) on which PC players base purchase decisions on every single day pretending to be informative in your edit?
Microsoft should be like Nintendo and not talk about Specs at all or be like Sony and put out in the open.
They issue random PRs and expect every one to simply say "oh great, I will blindly accept what you say"
- Cloud = 3x Xbox one power
- Cloud will offload physics
- Cloud = 300,000 Servers = Entire world compute power of 1999
- 5 Billion transistors
- $700M cloud data center, (300,000 Server network will be built in 2015, they just got the land lease)
- Titled Textures (even though it has been in OpenGL for more than a year)
- 192 Gbps eSRAM
They want to lure early adopters. But when they ask MS "what, what did you say"... then the answer from Xbox boss is... "Don't bother specs doesn't matter"
Then every single forum erupts. It is very simple. Either be ready to answer or don't talk about specs at all.
They issue random PRs and expect every one to simply say "oh great, I will blindly accept what you say"
- Cloud = 3x Xbox one power
- Cloud will offload physics
- Cloud = 300,000 Servers = Entire world compute power of 1999
- 5 Billion transistors
- $700M cloud data center, (300,000 Server network will be built in 2015, they just got the land lease)
- Titled Textures (even though it has been in OpenGL for more than a year)
- 192 Gbps eSRAM
They want to lure early adopters. But when they ask MS "what, what did you say"... then the answer from Xbox boss is... "Don't bother specs doesn't matter"
Then every single forum erupts. It is very simple. Either be ready to answer or don't talk about specs at all.
GTX 670 has 100% of the memory bandwidth, 91% of the ROP performance, and 80% of the shader performance of GTX 680.
Xbone has 75%* of the memory bandwidth, 50% of the ROP performance, and 67% of the shader performance of PS4.
Memory banwidth:
Xbone: 133Gb/s*
PS4: 176GB/s
ROP's:
Xbone: 16 ROP's
PS4: 32 ROP's
Shader units:
Xbone: 768
PS4: 1152
* That's being generous and giving the 133GB/s bandwidth number the benefit of the doubt.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong?
iamshadowlark
Banned
Xbone has a path to its ESRAN that is faster than the PS4 unifed solution. Which I thought was always true but apparently not. PS4s memory setup is still better by a larger margin.
Or developers that clearly state that they can do a lot more with the hardware they are working with since months... as I said: reliable sources
Yes I agree with that.
Well I also heard there was an E3 with Demos, and devs that were speaking out about their projects...
Well I just called out numbers & graphs to be misleading at times, yes. In german, there is a saying "I never believe a statistic that I have not forged myself" - or to put it the other way around: the proof is in the pudding. I will shut up the instant that the pudding has been proven to be rotten ^^
FlutterPuffs
Member
I'd say just wait until the 2nd year though, let the games speak for themselves.
Anyway, of course there's some carrying virtual pitchforks and storming towards MS' gate for blood, have you guys read the shit they tried to pass off as PR lately? It was bad. I'm surprised that they kept going on even after all that backlash on DRM.
Also, don't think Sony never got it either. Here's something back in 2006.
Ars Technica said:
This is why most of us marvelled at what happened to Microsoft. It's the same situation as in 2006, only reversed.
Can Crusher
Banned
And in an open platform it consistently delivers anywhere between a 20 and 30 fps bump. You think that's small potatoes?
Imagine a game at 30 FPS fully exploiting the GTX 680 in a closed box environment. That game will have to compromise quite a lot in visual fidelity to run at 30 fps on the GTX 580. And let's not discount in this scenario the fact that the GTX 680 would have two additional GB of GDDR5. This is a really big difference.
"Both players will be happy", I mean what is this even about?! Wii U is the least powerful system and Nintendo fans still enjoy it. That has nothing to do with this.
qa_engineer
Member
effective bandwidth from APU to Main memory remains unchanged at 102.4 gbs. The 133 number is BW to ESRAM only... from what i understand.
JonathanPower
Member
Assuming that on PS4 a dev uses 14 CU for graphic and 4 for computing, when the same game will be ported to the Xbone it means you will only have 8 CUs for graphic. On top of that, the Xbone reserves 2 entire CPU cores for the OS, while the PS4 may reserve less than one core due to a much lighter OS. Thus, I think that multiplatform games will look better on PS4.
I think you're being overly generous in a thread that thrives on misinformation.
The 133GB/s even in best case scenario would only be for 32MB out of the 8224 MB pool on Xbox One. (OTOH only calling it 0.39% of the pool would be disingenuous as the eSRAM pool is important.)
It seems like you do not understand math or you'd realize that I simply explained why the example you used is grade-A fanboy "I am making stuff up as I go" bullshit...
This should be the thread ender, but unfortunately we all know that wont be the case.
- Status