Globalisateur
Banned
Yes, certainly. The GPU can theoretically process 6.7% percent more triangles per seconds.
-
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.
Substance Engine benchmark implies PS4 CPU is faster than Xbox One's
- Thread starter Brad Grenz
- Start date
Yes, certainly. The GPU can theoretically process 6.7% percent more triangles per seconds.
They came and went, like farts in the wind.
anywho:
I was always under the impression that the Xbox one' CPU was clocked higher than the PS4, could the PS4 being faster have anything to do with the Xbox one having a lot more overhead in terms of OS and other features?
FunkyPajamas
Member
In his defense, he is a gaming_noob.
haha good one
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
So PS4 has a better RAM, better GPU and better CPU and is smaller. My god MS fucked it up.
Not surprised lol. You just have to ignore them.
They came and went, like farts in the wind.
Not surprised lol. You just have to ignore them.
How could you believe anything they say?
Albert Pennello:
"I will ask two questions of the detractors, honest questions.
1. What piece of information would you want that I could provide that would convince you there is not a huge delta in performance?
2. If it comes out after we launch that the difference between 3rd party games is maybe single-digit FPS between the two platforms, will I get an apology or concession?"
source1. What piece of information would you want that I could provide that would convince you there is not a huge delta in performance?
2. If it comes out after we launch that the difference between 3rd party games is maybe single-digit FPS between the two platforms, will I get an apology or concession?"
and
"Performance: I’m not dismissing raw performance. I’m stating – as I have stated from the beginning – that the performance delta between the two platforms is not as great as the raw numbers lead the average consumer to believe. There are things about our system architecture not fully understood, and there are things about theirs as well, that bring the two systems into balance.
People DO understand that Microsoft has some of the smartest graphics programmers IN THE WORLD. We CREATED DirectX, the standard API’s that everyone programs against. So while people laude Sony for their HW skills, do you really think we don’t know how to build a system optimized for maximizing graphics for programmers? Seriously? There is no way we’re giving up a 30%+ advantage to Sony. And ANYONE who has seen both systems running could say there are great looking games on both systems. If there was really huge performance difference – it would be obvious.
I get a ton of hate for saying this – but it’s been the same EVERY generation. Sony claims more power, they did it with Cell, they did it with Emotion Engine, and they are doing it again. And, in the end, games on our system looked the same or better.
I’m not saying they haven’t built a good system – I’m merely saying that anyone who wants to die on their sword over this 30%+ power advantage are going to be fighting an uphill battle over the next 10 years… "
sourcePeople DO understand that Microsoft has some of the smartest graphics programmers IN THE WORLD. We CREATED DirectX, the standard API’s that everyone programs against. So while people laude Sony for their HW skills, do you really think we don’t know how to build a system optimized for maximizing graphics for programmers? Seriously? There is no way we’re giving up a 30%+ advantage to Sony. And ANYONE who has seen both systems running could say there are great looking games on both systems. If there was really huge performance difference – it would be obvious.
I get a ton of hate for saying this – but it’s been the same EVERY generation. Sony claims more power, they did it with Cell, they did it with Emotion Engine, and they are doing it again. And, in the end, games on our system looked the same or better.
I’m not saying they haven’t built a good system – I’m merely saying that anyone who wants to die on their sword over this 30%+ power advantage are going to be fighting an uphill battle over the next 10 years… "
My guess as well. The 1.75GHz number was probably a result AMD came to that was very much similar to previous heat output/power draw as 1.6 and just applied it to the CPUs.
Yeah That was the impression everyone had I think
Merry Xmas Sony.
fastford58
Member
Hard to say. Sony has never dropped an official clock for the CPU, so who knows. MS dropped a number, plus a CPU clock increase, so everyone defaulted to "Xone has a more powerful CPU!".
Unsubstantiated claim, but so were a lot of things surrounding the X1.
phosphor112
Banned
Dat balance.
Both consoles have 8 cores but the CPUs are based on Jaguar architecture, which is a low-power SoC designed for notebooks, tablets, etc.
Because it's subject to change. They usually never disclose this kind of data.
Albert already suggested their CPU was faster, altho that was likely based on the information we had also knowing the Xbox CPU clock speed + not knowing the PS4's...he ran with it.
We have 2 cores for the OS from the Killzone Shadowfall pdf.
Pritchardo
Neo Member
lol both cpus aren't good to begin with
WeAreStarStuff
Member
I'm amazed some people are still so ignorant as to think clock speed is what makes a CPU.
Yeah but that was a long time ago. It strikes me as very possible that they would have got CPU utilisation down to one core in the months since February, no?
And one's even less good, by a not-insignificant margin (PS4 is around 1/6th more powerful).
It's just more and more clear, to me at least, that the xbone is less powerful that what it was meant to be on the paper. Nobody was expecting that difference in multi titles on launch. Games with unimpressive graphics are not even running in fullhd.. There is something off.
I would bet Kinect is costing more than what it should (price and/or resources).
I would bet Kinect is costing more than what it should (price and/or resources).
Infinite_Daremo
Member
All these posts and no mention of clouds? You're getting old GAF!
GameAddict411
Member
that's quite shocking lol, i wonder why nobody talked about this before? i mean the insiders on gaf.
Yes but it's still pretty disingenuous to call the PS4/XBO CPUs mobile/netbook parts when they dramatically outperform those. Sure, the CPUs are unimpressive but they're not as underpowered as that would imply.
That was from February. It could have changed since then.
ArchedThunder
Banned
No, the PS4's GPU is better than the Xbone's.
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
My AMD K6-2 computer in 1998 ran at .55 GHZ, therefore the PS4 CPU is only 3x more powerful than my PC's CPU from 15 years ago.
;p
You know, you could probably talk me into believing that "the cloud" could make up for that performance delta in certain applications. It would have to be something like an MMO or other highly CPU intensive games that require an always on internet connection. Of course, there is literally no reason the PS4 couldn't take advantage of the same technology.
GameAddict411
Member
No, the XO GPU doesn't have the necessary performance to take advantage of that "theoretical" advantage.
Prince Vultan
Banned
So all that shit I've been reading about Xbone having a "better" CPU the past few months from certain MS fans was just some more fantasy land bs born out of talk of upclocks and shit? Dayuuuum.
I'm not even gonna mock here, because those cats will never hear the end of this one probably.
I'm not even gonna mock here, because those cats will never hear the end of this one probably.
Well, I'm not really implying that myself, it is more the argument that it can't be clocked at 2ghz because of the PS4's form factor. I'm not saying it is, it could be that it has an extra core in use, but considering it is based on a low-power CPU designed for mobile devices, it might be possible.
Pritchardo
Neo Member
meh, the only time ill worry about specs is on a pc which is why ill buy multi platform games on there. if the exclusive games are great on both then specs and power doesn't matter.
14mb/s vs 12mb/s is a decent difference per second. These CPU's are better than you think or alot of people think, they may not be i7's but they do not need to be, they are DEDICATED cpu's with alot of the consoles primary workload put onto the GPU's (of which the PS4 had significant compute) 8 Cores * 2ghz = is decent (albeit 1/2 likely reserved for OS)
Last Gen 360 had a 3 Core 3.2ghz... do the math.
JonathanPower
Member
If the bench is running only on one core, we can only conclude that the PS4 CPU is clocked higher.
Did it? Games have been out for weeks now, if the Xbox had a better CPU it wasn't helping anyway. Can't really get more real than results right in front of your face.
If you meant it from a "warriors are going to lose their shit!" point of view then I apologize and you could be right.
a Master Ninja
Member
I thought the excuse was incomplete development tools, similar to the PS3 at launch.
truth fact
It doesn't say whether it's running on one core though.
You're not but a lot of people are and those comments get picked up by those that don't follow tech stuff much. I'm just trying to cut off obnoxious misinformation before it starts.
And one of the most expensive and celebrated desktop CPUs is failing to even be 100% more faster than those slow mobile CPUs.
IAmRandom31
Banned
Really?
I can upclock my I5-2400 from 3.1 to 3.9Ghz with a click of a button and it may go up .5 degrees overall.
Anyway, I was hoping this was the case. Sony should of known from the jump the CPU in this system was going to be the one weak spot. So push it as hard as absolutely possible until you began to risk the integrity of the components in the case or the longevity of the system.
I will happily accept a few degrees more temp for more performance any day of the week.
I'm amazing people are still so ignorant as to think this is any previous generation. Previous generations, system had different CPU architectures altogether. This is really the first generation where both system have virtually identical internals, with various tweaks in each. CPU wise though, both are the same. So really, the only difference is going to be clock speed and memory bandwidth.
BrokenIcarus
Member
Doesn't seem like MS will be getting a break any time soon.
GameAddict411
Member
yeah, according to these numbers the PS4 CPU(resources available to games) is roughly equivalent to 3.5 cores of that core i7 CPU used in the benchmark. that's not slow by any standards.
1 Core or 1 Quad Core (of 2)
JonathanPower
Member
Brad Grenz
Member
Well, it says 1 CPU which I think means a single core, and the performance figures for the dual core ARM processors compared to 4 core ARM chips support that conclusion.
Similar threads
- Poll