Support NeoGAF

dr3upmushroom · May 22, 2013

diffusionx said:
There's really no doubt that the PS4 is significantly more powerful - a larger gap than we all thought a year or two ago.

The question is, will developers take advantage of it? Sony's studios will. What about everybody else?

Since the architecture both systems use are similar, I imagine most games will be Xbox lead, and it should be easy to slap a higher resolution, AA, etc. onto the PS4 version.

Or, since both are similar to PC hardware, it could be that Xbox games run at the equivalent of medium/ high graphics settings while PS4 is high/ ultra.

Sirolf · May 22, 2013

bes.gen said:
has this been linked or what.

Ouch..What a trainwreck..

Durante · May 22, 2013

1-D_FTW said:
Read the article. This has nothing to do with Kinect. It's because they were creating a multi-media box and targetted 8GB RAM. They didn't think there was anyway that would be possible with DDR5. So they had to go with slower RAM and that meant they allocated a bunch of the die to ESRAM and data move engines instead. Since Sony and MS are both targetting around 100 watts for their budget (and smartly so), this is where the discrepancy came from. MS bet they'd be quite a bit slower, but would have a 8GB vs 2GB RAM edge. This gamble failed when larger DDR5 modules became available to Sony.

I still don't buy that story. I cannot believe that MS engineers somehow expected it to be impossible to get at least 4 GB GDDR5 into a console in 2013 -- they aren't GAF posters.

8 GB was more uncertain, but I'm sure they didn't expect to be restricted to 2 GB because of GDDR5 densities.

DBT85 · May 22, 2013

kittens said:
It sucks that the PS4 is going to be weighed down by the X1 all this gen.

Why do you say this? Plenty of multiplats looked better on xbox than PS2 and those had different tech inside.

This time out the basic CPU and GPU are using the same design with some tweaks, it should be (relatively) easy for a developer to make a game to 100% for the PS4 and then turn shit down for the XBONE.

shinra-bansho · May 22, 2013

The_Lump said:
Man, the 26 people who will be able to afford a ps4 at launch will sure be lording it over the XBox fans

Jokes aside, what do we reckon the price difference will be, if any, between the two?

Would you rather have:

- Excessive powah for more £/$
- Less powah for less £/$?

Bearing in mind the actual practical difference between the the projected TFLOPpage?

Silicon budget is supposedly similar. Better RAM vs Kinect in every box. I imagine they'll be similar.

bes.gen said:
has this been linked or what.

Sounds promising...

KKRT00 · May 22, 2013

netBuff said:
If the real-world difference is actually this big: 720p to 1080p is a massive difference, and should be pretty equal to 30 vs. 60 FPS in terms of processing requirements.

No, its not equal to 60fps. 60fps does require more than double performance in some cases..

RoboPlato · May 22, 2013

KKRT00 said:
No, its not equal to 60fps. 60fps does require more than double the performance in some cases..

Same with 720p to 1080p. It requires 2.25x the processing power.

Gemüsepizza · May 22, 2013

1440x900 would be 2/3 of 1920x1080, maybe some games will use those resolutions.

Vesper73 · May 22, 2013

So all things being equal, (almost never the case), if a game runs at 40fps on Xbox One, it will run at 60fps on PS4. That is huge...

coldfoot · May 22, 2013

KKRT00 said:
No, its not equal to 60fps. 60fps does require more than double the performance in some cases..

True, but a 30fps game could be nominally capable of running at 40fps on the Xbone and capped at 30fps. Such a game could be made to run 60fps on the PS4.
Actually this raises an interesting question. Would you prefer a rock solid 30 or variable 45-60?

SuperEpicGuy · May 22, 2013

The_Lump said:
Man, the 26 people who will be able to afford a ps4 at launch will sure be lording it over the XBox fans

Jokes aside, what do we reckon the price difference will be, if any, between the two?

Would you rather have:

- Excessive powah for more £/$
- Less powah for less £/$?

Bearing in mind the actual practical difference between the the projected TFLOPpage?

With stupid kinect in it and the mandatory fee if you want online I don't see it being much cheaper than the ps4.

coldfoot said:
True, but a 30fps game could be nominally capable of running at 40fps on the Xbone and capped at 30fps. Such a game could be made to run 60fps on the PS4.
Actually this raises an interesting question. Would you prefer a rock solid 30 or variable 45-60?

Variable but as long as it doesn't drop to below 45.

longdi · May 22, 2013

60 vs 30..wow!!
how did microsoft allow this to pass during the development?

BigDug13 · May 22, 2013

Current gen games on PC look far superior to their console counterparts. PS4 is very similar to PC architecture now, and next gen games will still be ported to PC with more graphics bells and whistles so it stands to reason that a more powerful PS4 will still look superior on multiplatform games when compared to inferior spec'd consoles.

KKRT00 · May 22, 2013

RoboPlato said:
Same with 720p to 1080p. It requires 2.25x the processing power.

Pixel rendering, its not the same, there are tons of stuff in rendering that are independent of framebuffer resolution.

Arkham · May 22, 2013

Vesper73 said:
So all things being equal, if a game runs at 40fps on Xbox One, it will run at 60fps on PS4. That is huge...

Makes sense, since 40fps is 33% less than 60fps.

(runs away)

RoboPlato · May 22, 2013

Gemüsepizza;58590601 said:
1440x900 would be 2/3 of 1920x1080, maybe some games will use those resolutions.

This is what I expect as well, especially with the supposed scaler chips in the XBO.

Vesper73 · May 22, 2013

Arkham said:
Makes sense, since 40fps is 33% less than 60fps.

(runs away)

39.6 fps vs 60 fps

You can either: 60 * 0.66 or 40 * 1.5, take your pick.

gofreak · May 22, 2013

StuBurns said:
Double the framerate? There's no way the fillrate advantage is that high, is there?

There's twice the ROPs in PS4 i.e. twice the theoretical fillrate, if they're both clocked the same.

In terms of bandwidth, Durango's GPU is capped at 102GB/s write bandwidth according to VGLeaks.

But framerate doesn't necessarily depend solely on fillrate.

1-D_FTW · May 22, 2013

Durante said:
I still don't buy that story. I cannot believe that MS engineers somehow expected it to be impossible to get at least 4 GB GDDR5 into a console in 2013 -- they aren't GAF posters.

8 GB was more uncertain, but I'm sure they didn't expect to be restricted to 2 GB because of GDDR5 densities.

Fair enough. But even if 4GB just seemed expensive, that wouldn't have been nearly acceptable if they wanted to reserve 3GB for the OS (WTF. I guess it really does run Windows). Maybe I'm just too cynical of MS' thought process, but that seems like a valid concern that would drive them the way they did.

Elios83 · May 22, 2013

longdi said:
60 vs 30..wow!!
how did microsoft allow this to pass during the development?

Effectively the PS4 GPU has not just 50% more compute units but also twice the ROPs, so twice the fill rate.
So maybe 60fps vs 30fps by default is more a theoretical thing but there's not doubt that PS4 games will have better frame rates by default.
Developers can use that margin in different ways.
Yoshida although clearly biased said recently that they deisgned PS4 so that they would get the edge in multiplatform games.

Durante · May 22, 2013

I think double the framerate is unrealistic in most cases, simply because of the more or less equivalent CPU.

CassidyIzABeast · May 22, 2013

netBuff said:
I fully expect multiplatform titles to take advantage of the extra power: We've had plenty of superior Xbox ports during the Playstation 2s reign, and that was with a much smaller power differential and for a console with a comparatively miniscule market share. They may not use the 50% increase to its fullest extent, but it will allow for some breathing room in terms of image quality or resolution.

360 and PS3 are very similar, but even that tiny edge the 360 often has (less so in recent times) still leads to situation where the perceived performance difference is massive (think of the difference with Black Ops 2 PS3 vs. Xbox 360 alone, for example - or even Far Cry 3)

If next generation lasts as long as this one did then the extra horses will definitely start to become more prevalent. Haven't heard any 10 year life cycle promises out of either camp this go round so who knows. I think it will be a while before we get to that point especially with the start of next gen being so cross gen heavy. Depending on sales we might not see devs fully cross over into next gen until well after that same time came in this current gen.

Jac_Solar · May 22, 2013

Ol No Bones said:
I am interested if this cloud stuff is just rhetoric or if their might be something to this in the long run. I am curious if the system can truly evolve over time in substantial ways towards gaming experiences.

The cloud will most certainly evolve over time -- the streaming will work more efficiently, so the games you stream will look better, feel more responsive, etc. The gaming system/console itself won't improve, but the software for the streaming will. But isn't cloud gaming on PS4 as well?

StuBurns · May 22, 2013

gofreak said:
There's twice the ROPs in PS4 i.e. twice the theoretical fillrate, if they're both clocked the same.

In terms of bandwidth, Durango's GPU is capped at 102GB/s write bandwidth according to VGLeaks.

But framerate doesn't necessarily depend solely on fillrate.

Very impressive. Maybe it's true.

As an aside, I really hope The Witness is 60fps. Those puzzles will be much nicer if they're very smooth.

gofreak · May 22, 2013

Durante said:
I think double the framerate is unrealistic in most cases, simply because of the more or less equivalent CPU.

Yeah, regarding framerate, it doesn't matter what your GPU is doing if your CPU needs 30ms per frame, and I think a lot of games will.

However you could invest the excess on the GPU side into other things in that case...resolution bumps might be easier, be they to the main framebuffer or other render targets, for example. Stuff that could turn a 60fps game on one platform into a 30fps game on another, even if the CPU is at 16ms...

sleeping_dragon · May 22, 2013

Ushae said:
Like it did last gen? Good deduction there bro.

Yes. Xbox came last.

coldfoot · May 22, 2013

I think the most common difference between the two will be resolution instead of framerate, since it's a big jump from 30->60 compared to a jump from 1600x900 to 1920x1080. Also having 2x the ROPS and more bandwidth will also help resolution.

Durante · May 22, 2013

Yeah, as I said earlier I'd expect something like 1440x1080 vs. 1920x1080 or IQ differences in AA/AF to be common.

-COOLIO- · May 22, 2013

The_Lump said:
Man, the 26 people who will be able to afford a ps4 at launch will sure be lording it over the XBox fans

Jokes aside, what do we reckon the price difference will be, if any, between the two?

Would you rather have:

- Excessive powah for more £/$
- Less powah for less £/$?

Bearing in mind the actual practical difference between the the projected TFLOPpage?

Nice choice of wording with excessive. My personal preference would be for the ps4 to have even a little more power and sell at 500 but for a mass market perspective, I think they're hitting the right note.

Prine · May 22, 2013

Jmanunknown · May 22, 2013

Jac_Solar said:
The cloud will most certainly evolve over time -- the streaming will work more efficiently, so the games you stream will look better, feel more responsive, etc. The gaming system/console itself won't improve, but the software for the streaming will. But isn't cloud gaming on PS4 as well?

That is the reason they bought gaikai for cloud gaming.

Vesper73 · May 22, 2013

Durante said:
Yeah, as I said earlier I'd expect something like 1440x1080 vs. 1920x1080 or IQ differences in AA/AF to be common.

I think this is about right. Multiplats will be created at 1080p, (with the same amount of geometry and effects), but the Xbox One version will have a lower res frame buffer.

Apath · May 22, 2013

When it rains, it pours.

badcrumble · May 22, 2013

60fps vs 30fps? So the Xbox One will get an entire generation's worth of the equivalent of the Bayonetta PS3 port?

bigboss370 · May 22, 2013

PlayStation 4's 18 CU graphics core has 50 per cent more raw power than the GPU in the new Microsoft console

Wishmaster92 · May 22, 2013

cyberheater said:
What about the secret sauce we've all heard so much about. Was that just plain bull?

It's called "cloud fluff"

HokieJoe · May 22, 2013

Yep. This go round is a different ball of wax. Sony trumped MS's easier development path when they booted the Cell in favor of a more traditional PC architecture. There is nothing magical here. PC architecture and the accompanying developer tools won't be 'scratch-built' like they were with the PS3.

Advantage PS4...Better hardware + commensurate development environment.

Elios83 said:
50% more powerful GPU coupled with a better and faster memory system is not something that won't have an impact especially considering that both consoles are based on the same architecture. This is not something theoretical that is up to developers to use if they're able to harness it, it's concrete as when you have a PC and you decide to upgrade your card and memory bandwidth. You'll immediatly get better performance.
On PS4 you'll get higher frame rates by default, which can be used by developers to increase resolution, improve IQ or simply add more effects.
Of course it won't change the game night and day, but it's enough to ensure that most multiplatform games will run better on PS4.
Then it's on to the exclusives to make the hardware really shine.

coldfoot · May 22, 2013

Durante said:
Yeah, as I said earlier I'd expect something like 1440x1080 vs. 1920x1080 or IQ differences in AA/AF to be common.

I'd also add a more stable framerate. A game might drop to 20 fps in heavy action scenes in the Xbone, but will stay at 28-30 in the PS4.

andycapps · May 22, 2013

dr3upmushroom said:
Since the architecture both systems use are similar, I imagine most games will be Xbox lead, and it should be easy to slap a higher resolution, AA, etc. onto the PS4 version.

Or, since both are similar to PC hardware, it could be that Xbox games run at the equivalent of medium/ high graphics settings while PS4 is high/ ultra.

This was exactly what I was thinking. Thanks

jordan0386 · May 22, 2013

For ten years, you guys told MS graphics dont matter.

StuBurns · May 22, 2013

jordan0386 said:
For ten years, you guys told MS graphics dont matter.

Matter for what? Winning? They don't.

onQ123 · May 22, 2013

fluffydelusions said:
Those DF face offs will be pretty pointless now? Though I suspect multiplats will look the same pretty much now

No the difference is going to be a lot bigger.

H_Prestige · May 22, 2013

Xplatformer said:
There isn't a huge difference between 360 and PS3 multiplats, but it's still a slight advantage that comes up a LOT.

It's a feather in the 360s cap.

It's about to be a PS4 feather.

The 360 had a 50% stronger GPU and more than twice the memory bandwidth?

Should be a much bigger feather in this case.

brain_stew · May 22, 2013

Every single multiplatform will look/perform better on PS4 than Xbox One. You're buying a fundamentally gimped vision of next generation gaming if you buy an Xbox One. If you play anything other than Microsoft's exclusive titles then there isn't a decision to be made, the PS4 is fundamentally the better platform for gaming.

Shai-Tan · May 22, 2013

DF and Verge are both a bit clueless about the TV functionality. HDMI-CEC should be in almost all recent cable boxes (and many people are lazy and renting their box which means they could probably upgrade for free if not). The IR blaster is just a last resort.

Jinfash · May 22, 2013

I've missed most of yesterday's hooplah, but what's the word on their CPU? Is it an 8 core jaguar, identical to the PS4's, or has it been (heavily) modified to have more gain?

brain_stew said:
Every single multiplatform will look/perform better on PS4 than Xbox One. You're buying a fundamentally gimped vision of next generation gaming if you buy an Xbox One. If you play anything other than Microsoft's exclusive titles then there isn't a decision to be made, the PS4 is fundamentally the better platform for gaming.

What if MS cockblocks better multiplatforms with moneyhats though?!

"Here's some cash to not overwork yourselves."

Durante · May 22, 2013

Jinfash said:
I've missed most of yesterday's hooplah, but what's the word on their CPU? Is it an 8 core jaguar, identical to the PS4's, or has it been (heavily) modified to have more gain?

They didn't talk about it, so it's safe to assume the leaks are right and it's more or less identical.

Jinfash · May 22, 2013

Durante said:
They didn't talk about it, so it's safe to assume the leaks are right and it's more or less identical.

True. The fact it wasn't highlighted or boasted is pretty damning as well.

Shai-Tan · May 22, 2013

They didn't release details so DF just assumed it's the same as rumors with the clock speed unconfirmed and interpolated some details about the gpu from disparate sources.

crazygambit · May 22, 2013

Raydeen said:
With the law of diminishing returns, the Xbox One doesn't have to be as powerful. Developers code for the lowest common denominator up. Where was Cell's amazing power advantage for PS3? Nowhere to be seen in apart from Naughty Dog's games. If MS use their cash on exclusives to lock out PS4 and launch at a decent undercut in price, say £50 / $100 cheaper, bye bye PS4.

You have a point there. The Cell was difficult to develop for and required specific development to be taken advantage of. Here we have 2 very similar architectures, so it's a different situation. Developers will be able to tap into the additional power very easily, so even if they target the XboxOne, the PS4 port should have a few easy advantages.

As for price I think both will retail for about the same. The XboxOne BOM might be cheaper, but Kinect is certainly more expensive than the PSEye so it might end up being a wash. This is not counting rumored subsidized prices on getting a Live contract for a few years. I fully expect both to launch at $449-$499.

Support NeoGAF

DF: Xbone Specs/Tech Analysis: GPU 33% less powerful than PS4

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

I'd be in the dick

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

The Amiga Brotherhood

I'd be in the dick

Member

GAF's Bob Woodward

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

GAF's Bob Woodward

Banned

Banned

Member

The Everyman

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

needs 2 extra inches

Member

needs 2 extra inches

Banned

Member

Similar threads