Codeblew
Member
And that won't be happening based on the raw specs we have. The power simply isn't there for that kind of difference.
360 isn't twice as powerful as PS3 yet it happened that way last gen.
And that won't be happening based on the raw specs we have. The power simply isn't there for that kind of difference.
Gemüsepizza;48338598 said:What should I prove? I just said, that I don't believe such comments, when they are clearly in conflict with leaked / official specs. I think if someone has to prove something, it should be the people claiming there won't be any big differences, despite those specs.
But the mandate is a real thing, and if there's a good chance the PS4 versions are considerably better than the 720's you can bet your ass Microsoft will wave that bat in a threatening fashion.
His point is valid. It's a very sly tactic that would prevent any multiplat dev from making the most of the PS4, effectively eliminating any technical advantage.
I dunno man, you seem to be sugar coating it a bit for Xbox. Not only are the leaked specs on paper notably worse than PS4, but we aren't even taking into account what resources the OS/Kinect are eating up yet.
Sure didn't stop FFXIII or LA Noire looking better on the PS3, FFXIII considerably so in fact.I really hope this isn't the case. If I am following this line of thought correctly, you guys are saying multi-plats will flat out ignore the possible ps4 advantage.....
There is no sugar coating there. The durango is 33% less gpu FLOPS, 50% less ROP, and 33% less TMU. According to bgassasin, the durango has twice the cpu FLOPS of the ps4. The ps4 will need to be at least 100% more powerful than the durango in raw specs to have a notable advantage. It will need to be at least 100% more powerful in other to render at twice the framerate eg 30fps vs 60 fps, that isn't going to happen. It will need to be more than 125% more powerful with the bandwidth to boot in other to render at more than twice the resolution eg 720p vs 1080p, that isn't going to happen either. What will probably happen is some effects might run at higher precision on ps4 than on durango or it might be missing from the durango build, or the ps4 might have a more steady framerate, or the durango might have a slightly lower resolution etc. Things like that. And this are all based on theoritical performance/specs.
I was just doing a hypothetical, but your reply has shown that it's not feasible and not even worth discussing.You're saying 4 times that amount? That is literally impossible to do.
In a closed environment like the PS4 in combination with the low level native openGL support, Devs can optimize their rendering and memory management without any overhead. (I doubt multiplats will make 100% use of this potential)
How so, please explain.It confirms it, no?
Doesn't matter how strong ps4 is. Xbox makes it a prerequisite to release game at the same quality for both platforms otherwise they won't let studios publish their games on the system. It doesn't matter if durango does 30 fps and orbis can do 240 fps (lol pachter). They will come out the same to the naked eye.
Doesn't matter how strong ps4 is. Xbox makes it a prerequisite to release game at the same quality for both platforms otherwise they won't let studios publish their games on the system. It doesn't matter if durango does 30 fps and orbis can do 240 fps (lol pachter). They will come out the same to the naked eye.
Doesn't matter how strong ps4 is. Xbox makes it a prerequisite to release game at the same quality for both platforms otherwise they won't let studios publish their games on the system. It doesn't matter if durango does 30 fps and orbis can do 240 fps (lol pachter). They will come out the same to the naked eye.
I really hope this isn't the case. If I am following this line of thought correctly, you guys are saying multi-plats will flat out ignore the possible ps4 advantage.....
Can you imagine Microsoft saying no to EA (or any other major publisher) because one of their internal teams has a few extra wizz-bangs on the PS4 version of a multiplat? Not a chance.
Indie's and smaller publishers are easier to bully though.
Yes, this is what worries me the most. The only slight difference here is that 1st party devs are going to stretch that gap even wider and I doubt that 3rd party devs are going to like that. Some devs will think 'to hell with it' and actually code PS4 to the metal this time around. But that is entirely down to how well the PS4 does out of the gate IMO... it is worrisome though.
His info is real. It's not confirmed until Microsoft announces it publicly. It's semantics really.
I thought everyone keeps saying the cpu performance isn't that "big" of a deal anymore. So if that's the case, who cares if the cpu on Durango is twice as powerful? I thought it was all about the gpu this generation with (I hate using it) GPGPU and such...
I really hope this isn't the case. If I am following this line of thought correctly, you guys are saying multi-plats will flat out ignore the possible ps4 advantage.....
Some people talk utter fucking nonsense.
"Titles for Xbox 360 must ship at least simultaneously with other video game platform, and must have at least feature and content parity on-disc with the other video game platform versions in all regions where the title is available. If these conditions are not met, Microsoft reserves the right to not allow the content to be released on Xbox 360."
Mandates are real, but that particular one isn't really true.
Even though it's old, you can read MS's 2009 TCR for 360 here (Google webcache)
In the beginning there WAS a mandate that all 360 games had to be 720p 4xMSAA. MS dropped it to keep visual parity between PS3/360.
In the beginning there WAS a mandate that all 360 games had to be 720p 4xMSAA. MS dropped it to keep visual parity between PS3/360.
Sigh. Well I am tired. We shall see when they start showing games. The upcoming MS Conference and e3 should be a good indication of what things are going to be.
Gemüsepizza;48338052 said:The comment from llhere was probably just him being diplomatic / or he couldn't really say anything because of a NDA. Afaik he isn't even a graphics programmer. The specs tell a completely different story. And the EDGE article was afair very vague regarding a difference in graphic fidelity/performance.
You believe this? Oh boy.
Which part the 720p 4xMSAA? Absolutely, I have a friend who worked for Ruffian (now works for Cisco) for about 9 months and talked about it. In the beginning the mandate was very real, but just as quickly most development companies ignored it, because there was too much of a visual sacrifice to reach such a target. The reduction in visual fidelity to reach 720p with 4xMSAA would most definitely put a 360 game at odds visually with a PS3 games.
Some people talk utter fucking nonsense.
More likely they dropped it because, as you say, developers were ignoring it; heck even first party studios were ignoring it. It was a stupid mandate anyway because the EDRAM just wasn't big enough to fit in that frame buffer, not without tilling anyway.
Well MS and AMD engineers care enough to do so. I am sure they are not dumb. I can even speculate on why they are increasing the cpu performance but I would rather not because you can as well say who cares after I state it so why bother.....
Most definitely, but I'd imagine if they strictly enforced it, they would have dropped it anyway. Not screams inferior like your verison of X game running at 720p, but having less effects present. Because let's face it the average gamer doesn't notice the difference between 720p native and upscaled (as this generation has painfully proven).
Can you imagine Microsoft saying no to EA (or any other major publisher) because one of their internal teams has a few extra wizz-bangs on the PS4 version of a multiplat? Not a chance.
Indie's and smaller publishers are easier to bully though.
Well MS and AMD engineers care enough to do so. I am sure they are not dumb. I can even speculate on why they are increasing the cpu performance but I would rather not because you can as well say who cares after I state it so why bother.....
Gemüsepizza;48338052 said:The PS4 having 300% more ACEs, 100% more ROPs, 50% more CUs and 200+% of X3's memory bandwidth does sound like a pretty good reason to me.
The comment from llhere was probably just him being diplomatic / or he couldn't really say anything because of a NDA. Afaik he isn't even a graphics programmer. The specs tell a completely different story. And the EDGE article was afair very vague regarding a difference in graphic fidelity/performance.
The bandwidth for both consoles still have to be shared with game code, physics, animation, sound, etc. It's not a PC, which doesn't have to share its vram with other game code.
unified ram is great for both consoles and would be great on pc too.
Considering people claim they can't see the jump shown from PS3 to PS4 I'm inclined to believe you. Still doesn't mean the difference isn't there.anyone seriously expecting PS4 to have graphics noticeably better to most people's eye (as in wow that looks like a different level of graphics) are going to be SORELY mistaken this gen.
A few games here and there perhaps will highlight some strengths but I am certain MS designed this system to make up for the OMGGDDR5 and most games will be nearly indistinguishable again this gen
Crisis averted
My thoughts aswell.
MS and Sony NEED publishers, otherwise they have no product. They have a console without software. MS would not turn away games from third parties (which they rely on more than Sony) over a few graphical differences.
anyone seriously expecting PS4 to have graphics noticeably better to most people's eye (as in wow that looks like a different level of graphics) are going to be SORELY mistaken this gen.
A few games here and there perhaps will highlight some strengths but I am certain MS designed this system to make up for the OMGGDDR5 and most games will be nearly indistinguishable again this gen
Crisis averted
anyone seriously expecting PS4 to have graphics noticeably better to most people's eye (as in wow that looks like a different level of graphics) are going to be SORELY mistaken this gen.
A few games here and there perhaps will highlight some strengths but I am certain MS designed this system to make up for the OMGGDDR5 and most games will be nearly indistinguishable again this gen
Crisis averted
You can already get APU based laptops.
People still seriously think this after all that we know now? Or?I'm not saying this is going to happen, because the difference between the PS4 and 720 won't be that big.
But imagine if BF4 PS4 runs at 60FPS while on Durango it runs at only 30FPS.
That kind of difference would be prejudicial not only to MS but to EA/Dice as well since there would be a considerable difference between both versions.
It would create direct problems for everyone, except Sony. And even Sony would still be affected indirectly.
That is why most publishers are hoping for a minimum difference in performance.
As thruway said times and times again the difference won't be that big.
If the Durango was not comparable to the PS4 it would be better (from a publisher point of view) if it was closer to the WiiU than if it was on category between both of then.
A clear, three tiered generation would be a nightmare for everyone. PS4 >>> Durango >>> WiiU.
Game development would suffer.
This is why the WiiU is going to suffer, because it is on a different tier than the PS4 and Durango. If hardware makers introduced yet another intermediary tier things would be even worse.
Of course Microsoft has designed the console to mitigate the lack of bandwidth that DDR3 brings. The question is whether it is enough?
That poster got it wrong, it's content, not quality. But still not far-fetched.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112562-Microsoft-Doesnt-Want-Sonys-Sloppy-Seconds
I predict it'll be like this gen, one version will have (worse) framerate drops and/or less resolution and/or missing effects. And in several cases people will notice and it will affect sales.
Some people talk utter fucking nonsense.
You think I don't know that? It has more influence over smaller devs than anything (which are a lot of potential devs...) but I was simply stating a fact.
And yet tons of games do have extra content on PS3. AC3 is one, a bunch of EA and Ubisoft games have exclusive content on PS3. MGR is a good recent example. MS isn't going to tell a publisher like Ubisoft, "You can't release your AAA game on our system, which we know is going to sell 5M copies."
anyone seriously expecting PS4 to have graphics noticeably better to most people's eye (as in wow that looks like a different level of graphics) are going to be SORELY mistaken this gen.
A few games here and there perhaps will highlight some strengths but I am certain MS designed this system to make up for the OMGGDDR5 and most games will be nearly indistinguishable again this gen
Crisis averted
vs a rumored 200GLOPs CPU that might be helped by a 1.2TFLOP
if all the specs we have now is what's what's going to be in the final hardware this will be a way bigger difference than the PS3 & Xbox 360.
we are looking at
maybe 6 -7GB of ram for games vs maybe 5 - 6GB of ram for games,
176GB/s main ram bandwidth vs 68GB/s main ram bandwidth with 32MB of 100GB/s ESRAM
1.84 TFLOP GPU vs 1.2 TFLOP GPU.
100GFLOPs CPU that can be helped by a 1.8 TFLOP GPGPU that's enhanced for computing vs a rumored 200GLOPs CPU that might be helped by a 1.2TFLOP
PS4 is said to have less than 1 CPU core reserved for the OS & XBOX Next is said to have 2 CPU cores reserved for the OS so that's 12.5GFLOPS for the PS4 OS & 50GFLOPS for the Xbox Next OS.
this is all speculations from the info that we do have so nothing is set in stones but this look like a way bigger differences than PS3 & Xbox 360.
the only place where PS4 & Xbox Next are closer in specs than the PS3 & Xbox 360 is the fact that both will be using Blu-ray this time.