CassidyIzABeast
Member
90% difference.
1.84 TFLOPS (+40%)
57.6 GTex/s (+40%)
25.6 GPix/s (+90%)
170% difference
90% difference.
This narrative that the bone is a very capable machine is straight up laughable. The PS4 is mid-level GPU, pathetic CPU and 8GB of GDDR5. It is nothing to shout home about in terms of specs. The Bone is even more pathetic compared to this low standard.
Both of these machines are underpowered relative to what we could have gotten, both console makers have been far too conservative.
So what you are saying is, each company should mass produce a $900 console with an msrp of $400?
PS4 XBO Difference
Texture reads(gt/s)...........56........41.....36.59%
Vertex throughput(bn). .....1.6........1.7....-5.88%
Output(gp/s)..................25.6.......13.6....88.24%
Ops/cycle......................1152......768....50.00%
TF................................1.84......1.308...40.67%
So what does it all mean?
The Texture reads are the number of textures you can "fetch" in per second from a given source. Its exactly what it means. The PS4 can grab 36% more textures per second.
Vertex throughput - Conversely, because both are tied to there clock speed, the end result is, the XBO has an advantage on just how many things it can display on screen per second (note: I'm not saying how pretty those things are).
Output- This one is a little squishy, while the raw numbers would favor Sony, the real trick here is to try and output only what is required. The more useless information you can "kill" and not output at all, the better.
Couple together the ability to store data in a compressed format, a rather large ROP cache that allows for depth testing pre pixel shader work, and you make significant gains in output. It's really really hard to come up with any sort of meaningful conclusion on this one other than to say they both have more than enough grunt to do 1080p 60fps with well over 10 overdraw easily.
Op/s per cycle.......Now here's the one that you need to get you head around and where the famous "50%" more power tends to get bandied about. A few things you have to understand about a graphics pipeline, and that is that its entirely programmable. The length and complexity of those calculations is entirely up to the programmer running for both vertex and pixel (and others these days).
I wont get to much into but lets put it this way. If dev choose a rather lengthy complex calculation to run on a pixel shader, then this will favor the PS4. If not, then it wont affect either, except for the fact that the XBO is pushing more cycles per second.
The best way to thing of it is like lines of code, this is by no means a correct analogy, but its the best I can come up with....
If the programmer runs code on shader that's less than 768 "instructions", then it favor the XBO due to its higher clock rate.
If the code is larger than 768 "instructions" then it favors the PS4.
Here's the kicker though, because this code is running "per vertex" or "per texal" ie. per model or mesh, then your still tied to your vertex throughput or texture fetch rate.
One of these does allow for the PS4's greater lines of code, by allowing for more texture fetches, but on a vertex by vertex rate? Your still limited to clock speed.
The only conclusion I make from this is, that for most tasks, shadow mapping etc it's pretty much a wash outside of clock rate.
The PS4 allows for more complex code in terms of allowing more textures per model or mesh, and more complex and lengthier code "per model".
The end result will likely be a wash in terms of most assets used. Models, the number of models, "things going on" is identical. The actual texture resolution though, this favors the PS4, whether that be through the number of textures applied to a model, or simply higher res textures.
I cant help but think of the PS4 render pipeline architecture as a snake, whose eaten a rather large meal. He has this rather large belly in the middle of it. While its head and tail are sleek.
The issue being of course, if you use that overhead "space" or not.
Conclusion:Things aren't going to be "faster" you not going to see "more things" on the PS4 graphics. What you may see is higher res textures, or better texture effects possible on the PS4. While I expect the frame rate to be steady and the same on both. My gut feeling is, that extra "bump" in the snake is there for compute calculations.
Now, what Ive left out of all of this, is the extra work that either the CPU or GPU have to do on the PS4. There is no real way of conclusively discussing that as Sony hasn't been terribly forthcoming on and additional hardware specs.
But, as things stand, there's and awe-full lot the PS4 has to deal with outside of simply drawing a polygon, that will need either CPU or GPU resources, and could impact on that extra compute claculations overhead the PS4 has.
mynd (from the PSU forum) said:The 768 ops criticism is justified, its a lot more complex in real life than I explained. Because of the parallelism , in real life you really looking at this over more than simply one clock tick. I did say it was a bad analogy. Running shaders are still a serial thing, you have to calculate you vertex shaders info before you can pass it on to the pixel shader, which is reliant on the vertex shader info (even if it just screen space xyz and u.v. pass through). The whole process is going to take more than one clock tick to complete. But averaged out, its about as close as I could come up with in that analogy. I do get the feeling some on there seem to forget that these pipelines are still working on parallel data sets. We aren't simply talking "op/s" we are talking about a rather large data set of info that has to pass though the shaders, most games would pass though x,y,z,diffuse, tangent data, multiple uv data, all of this has to be swallowed, and these run though the pipeline in sets of two. You cant simply make it "go faster" by adding more ops, if you don't need those op's in whatever code your executing (a simple matrix multiplication for example).
It's amazing how some of you can truly think you know more (or better) than the people working (and engineering) for these companies. Let alone websites like ExtremeTech, that specialize in knowing about computer tech in extreme detail. The "they are absolutely wrong" statements made by some here really amuse me.
This narrative that the bone is a very capable machine is straight up laughable. The PS4 is mid-level GPU, pathetic CPU and 8GB of GDDR5. It is nothing to shout home about in terms of specs. The Bone is even more pathetic compared to this low standard.
Both of these machines are underpowered relative to what we could have gotten, both console makers have been far too conservative.
There are a lot of people on this site that understand tech as good or better than the people on these tech websites.
There are a lot of people on this site that understand tech as good or better than the people on these tech websites.
What is hUMA and why is it so important all of a sudden?
Unified memory means they use the same physical pool of memory.
hUMA means they use the same physical pool of memory, but they also use the same address space for that memory.
So in a non hUMA situation: The CPU knows a bit of data named 'Peter' and knows he lives on Pine Street. The CPU wants to introduce 'Peter' to the GPU, but the GPU can't go to Pine Street. So 'Peter' has to move to Willow Avenue, where GPU can go. Now when CPU needs 'Peter' to help him install his new car stereo, 'Peter' has to move back to Pine Street because the CPU can't go to Willow Avenue.
In a hUMA situation, if CPU wants to introduce 'Peter' to GPU, the GPU just goes to Pine Street.
That was a very good read. Thank you.
Additional:
mynd said:The 768 ops criticism is justified, its a lot more complex in real life than I explained. Because of the parallelism , in real life you really looking at this over more than simply one clock tick. I did say it was a bad analogy. Running shaders are still a serial thing, you have to calculate you vertex shaders info before you can pass it on to the pixel shader, which is reliant on the vertex shader info (even if it just screen space xyz and u.v. pass through). The whole process is going to take more than one clock tick to complete. But averaged out, its about as close as I could come up with in that analogy. I do get the feeling some on there seem to forget that these pipelines are still working on parallel data sets. We aren't simply talking "op/s" we are talking about a rather large data set of info that has to pass though the shaders, most games would pass though x,y,z,diffuse, tangent data, multiple uv data, all of this has to be swallowed, and these run though the pipeline in sets of two. You cant simply make it "go faster" by adding more ops, if you don't need those op's in whatever code your executing (a simple matrix multiplication for example).
anandtech is about the only site i believe has more knowledgeable people than neogaf.
I'm not even sure what he's getting at now.
Distilled Bull Shit (mynd) said:If the programmer runs code on shader that's less than 768 "instructions", then it favor the XBO due to its higher clock rate.
If the code is larger than 768 "instructions" then it favors the PS4.
That "mynd" guy he's quoting knows jack shit about GPU's and also a certified console warrior. I'd steer clear of quoting anything he says.
1.84 TFLOPS (+40%)
57.6 GTex/s (+40%)
25.6 GPix/s (+90%)
170% difference
That was a very good read. Thank you.
Additional:
Source here:-
http://www.psu.com/forums/showthrea...ip-Conference-XBOX-One-Silicon-(Update)/page7
I disagree entirely with the use of "a lot." There's a lot of people that know how to say something, and sound like they know what they're talking about, but usually that's highly misleading, because whenever I've shown some of it to a friend in game development to have a look at it and address the validity of the argument, they just say in as polite a way as they can, that's just not accurate, and then they go into a whole explanation for why, an explanation I obviously don't fully comprehend, but it makes sense in the moment when I'm being assisted in understanding what they're talking about. So, without insulting anybody, and it isn't my intent, no, there isn't a lot of people that understand tech as much as they appear to. They're just extremely good at sounding competent and highly proficient while doing so. And, mind you, some of these posts were the ones I actually liked or agreed with, and thought were really well put.
I clearly must not have read as many of his posts as you have, but the guy seems pretty damn neutral. Got any examples?
Well, you have to be somewhat technical to figure out which people make sense and which people don't. I should also point out that just because you are a game developer, doesn't mean you understand the hardware. If the guys coding the API did a good job, developers don't have to know much about the hardware. However, it definitely helps to understand the hardware and how the API/OS interacts with it in order to make intelligent design decisions in your code.
I agree, maybe 'a lot' was the wrong term.
Well, you have to be somewhat technical to figure out which people make sense and which people don't. I should also point out that just because you are a game developer, doesn't mean you understand the hardware. If the guys coding the API did a good job, developers don't have to know much about the hardware. However, it definitely helps to understand the hardware and how the API/OS interacts with it in order to make intelligent design decisions in your code.
I agree, maybe 'a lot' was the wrong term.
This is SenjutsuSage you're talking about.. Do not take anything he says or posts with more than a grain of salt. We're on secret sauce mk XV at this point.
Just because someone writes a whole bunch of technical jargon you don't understand doesn't it make it correct. Go do some research if you want to truly understand it for yourself.
That "mynd" guy he's quoting knows jack shit about GPU's and also a certified console warrior. I'd steer clear of quoting anything he says.
http://n4g.com/user/comments/mynd/all/1
That's funny coming from you, but I digress.
1.84 TFLOPS (+40%)
57.6 GTex/s (+40%)
25.6 GPix/s (+90%)
170% difference
I pretty much never post random unsubstantiated fluff posts and pieces from random corners of the internet and forums from known warriors to try and constantly buff up a particular team, you on the other hand have done exactly that countless times.
Damn... I can't wait until these systems are released. Those Digital Foundry Vs threads will be glorious.
Whenever I see these technical threads where the XBone is just getting bashed with all this technomombojombo I think, "well what does this mean for actually games".
Then I'm reminded...
Damn... I can't wait until these systems are released. Those Digital Foundry Vs threads will be glorious.
Wrong.
The performance difference will actually be greater than 40%.
Wont PS4 just win everytime?
I don't understand why they bring up comparisons to the Intel x79 platform.
Not only is the bandwidth on the x79 not shared with the GPU (unlike in the XB1), but they also compare it to a x79 running DDR3-1600 in quad channel mode, bar the fact that the XB1 is using higher clocked RAM and thus they should not be using DRR3-1600 for their comparison.
That "mynd" guy he's quoting knows jack shit about GPU's and also a certified console warrior. I'd steer clear of quoting anything he says.
http://n4g.com/user/comments/mynd/all/1
Isnt that guy deadmeat? Someone was saying that who that guy is from a thread where his post turned up couple month ago on b3d... If true no one should be quoting that guy. How is that guy a mod on Playstation site? lol
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=53626257&postcount=1926
Wow craziness
That "mynd" guy he's quoting knows jack shit about GPU's and also a certified console warrior. I'd steer clear of quoting anything he says.
http://n4g.com/user/comments/mynd/all/1
Wont PS4 just win everytime?
So Xbox One more efficient than we thought. But its still less powerful than a PS4?
It seems ridiculous on it's face, but it's largely a very purposeful and out of context comparison designed to make a larger point of the kind of differing goals or considerations that went into the design of the hardware. And, in that sense, mission accomplished. I'm quite sure a site such as that understands the significance of the comparison they made.
I know he probably sounds neutral to you, but here goes one example:I clearly must not have read as many of his posts as you have, but the guy seems pretty damn neutral. Got any examples?
Did the difference in ps3 vs xbox 360 power mean anything in the end? I didnt see any diference and depending on who you asked, one system was supposedly way more powerful than the other if I recall.
Did the difference in ps3 vs xbox 360 power mean anything in the end? I didnt see any diference and depending on who you asked, one system was supposedly way more powerful than the other if I recall.
I know he probably sounds neutral to you, but here goes one example:
http://n4g.com/news/650077/ign-bioshock-infinite-will-rock-on-the-ps3#c-4569828
And before you ask, yes it's the same guy from the psu forum.
First of all, it wasn't I who went ahead and posted any of that guy's stuff to somehow prove a point. Someone else did, seeming to pass it off as their own, without sourcing where it came from, and I simply pointed people to where I know that's coming from, because I remember reading it.
Separately, if by fluff posts you mean some of the stuff I've posted from people on beyond3D, then you really do have no idea what you're talking about, because some of the stuff I've posted has either come from someone that actually worked on the Xbox One audio chip personally, or I've posted stuff from a Sony First Party developer, or confirmed game developers that have actually coded for and shipped Xbox 360 or PS3 titles. I don't see where the 'fluff' is in that. And if by fluff 'piece', you mean articles from websites such as Eurogamer or Anandtech with proven track records, especially when some of that stuff has been confirmed to be accurate in one form or another, then all I can do is laugh at the fact that this bothers you.
Outside of that, I hardly ever post anything from some random corner of the internet, so I don't know who you think you're confusing me with.
And, whether you like it or not, just know that when you go around making your console warrior accusations while pretending you yourself are nothing of the sort, or somehow more knowledgeable or qualified to speak about the things that I've posted from people who are either directly hands on with the actual hardware in question, or at least have confirmed contact with people who do, just know that I'm not the person with the mentality of a warrior, it is you. Exactly as others have said, there's this amazing degree of hutzpah where people like to pretend as if they somehow know more and can speak about what's going on in these machines with greater understanding than people who are actually qualified (not saying I'm one such individual, because I'm not. Some won't even admit that much.) to do so. These folks aren't disregarding the views of armchair, wannabe engineers, nope. In many cases, actual engineers somehow don't know what they're talking about if they aren't saying what you wish to hear. Not armchair programmers, but in many cases, actual game programmers that have years of experience making videogames, and who have recent and current experience developing games, but whose opinions you classify as 'fluff.' Come on, buddy, give me a break.
Only someone such as yourself can look at some of these people, which I'm quite sure you're not entirely ignorant of, and just shrug them off as somehow not knowing what they're talking about. Hell, I've even posted stuff from Dave Baumann, of all people, that folks on here have outright suggested is meaningless or makes no sense, like the man wouldn't know what he's talking about regarding, of all things, AMD Graphics hardware. Next time look before you jump off that bridge.
Isnt that guy deadmeat? Someone was saying that who that guy is from a thread where his post turned up couple month ago on b3d... If true no one should be quoting that guy. How is that guy a mod on Playstation site? lol
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=53626257&postcount=1926
Wow craziness
First of all, it wasn't I who went ahead and posted any of that guy's stuff to somehow prove a point. Someone else did, seeming to pass it off as their own, without sourcing where it came from, and I simply pointed people to where I know that's coming from, because I remember reading it.
Separately, if by fluff posts you mean some of the stuff I've posted from people on beyond3D, then you really do have no idea what you're talking about, because some of the stuff I've posted has either come from someone that actually worked on the Xbox One audio chip personally, or I've posted stuff from a Sony First Party developer, or confirmed game developers that have actually coded for and shipped Xbox 360 or PS3 titles. I don't see where the 'fluff' is in that. And if by fluff 'piece', you mean articles from websites such as Eurogamer or Anandtech with proven track records, especially when some of that stuff has been confirmed to be accurate in one form or another, then all I can do is laugh at the fact that this bothers you.
Outside of that, I hardly ever post anything from some random corner of the internet, so I don't know who you think you're confusing me with.
And, whether you like it or not, just know that when you go around making your console warrior accusations while pretending you yourself are nothing of the sort, or somehow more knowledgeable or qualified to speak about the things that I've posted from people who are either directly hands on with the actual hardware in question, or at least have confirmed contact with people who do, just know that I'm not the person with the mentality of a warrior, it is you. Exactly as others have said, there's this amazing degree of hutzpah where people like to pretend as if they somehow know more and can speak about what's going on in these machines with greater understanding than people who are actually qualified (not saying I'm one such individual, because I'm not. Some won't even admit that much.) to do so. These folks aren't disregarding the views of armchair, wannabe engineers, nope. In many cases, actual engineers somehow don't know what they're talking about if they aren't saying what you wish to hear. Not armchair programmers, but in many cases, actual game programmers that have years of experience making videogames, and who have recent and current experience developing games, but whose opinions you classify as 'fluff.' Come on, buddy, give me a break.
Only someone such as yourself can look at some of these people, which I'm quite sure you're not entirely ignorant of, and just shrug them off as somehow not knowing what they're talking about. Hell, I've even posted stuff from Dave Baumann, of all people, that folks on here have outright suggested is meaningless or makes no sense, like the man wouldn't know what he's talking about regarding, of all things, AMD Graphics hardware. Next time look before you jump off that bridge.
First of all, it wasn't I who went ahead and posted any of that guy's stuff to somehow prove a point. Someone else did, seeming to pass it off as their own, without sourcing where it came from, and I simply pointed people to where I know that's coming from, because I remember reading it.
Separately, if by fluff posts you mean some of the stuff I've posted from people on beyond3D, then you really do have no idea what you're talking about, because some of the stuff I've posted has either come from someone that actually worked on the Xbox One audio chip personally, or I've posted stuff from a Sony First Party developer, or confirmed game developers that have actually coded for and shipped Xbox 360 or PS3 titles. I don't see where the 'fluff' is in that. And if by fluff 'piece', you mean articles from websites such as Eurogamer or Anandtech with proven track records, especially when some of that stuff has been confirmed to be accurate in one form or another, then all I can do is laugh at the fact that this bothers you.
Outside of that, I hardly ever post anything from some random corner of the internet, so I don't know who you think you're confusing me with.
And, whether you like it or not, just know that when you go around making your console warrior accusations while pretending you yourself are nothing of the sort, or somehow more knowledgeable or qualified to speak about the things that I've posted from people who are either directly hands on with the actual hardware in question, or at least have confirmed contact with people who do, just know that I'm not the person with the mentality of a warrior, it is you. Exactly as others have said, there's this amazing degree of hutzpah where people like to pretend as if they somehow know more and can speak about what's going on in these machines with greater understanding than people who are actually qualified (not saying I'm one such individual, because I'm not. Some won't even admit that much.) to do so. These folks aren't disregarding the views of armchair, wannabe engineers, nope. In many cases, actual engineers somehow don't know what they're talking about if they aren't saying what you wish to hear. Not armchair programmers, but in many cases, actual game programmers that have years of experience making videogames, and who have recent and current experience developing games, but whose opinions you classify as 'fluff.' Come on, buddy, give me a break.
Only someone such as yourself can look at some of these people, which I'm quite sure you're not entirely ignorant of, and just shrug them off as somehow not knowing what they're talking about. Hell, I've even posted stuff from Dave Baumann, of all people, that folks on here have outright suggested is meaningless or makes no sense, like the man wouldn't know what he's talking about regarding, of all things, AMD Graphics hardware. Next time look before you jump off that bridge.
*tips hat*First of all, it wasn't I who went ahead and posted any of that guy's stuff to somehow prove a point. Someone else did, seeming to pass it off as their own, without sourcing where it came from, and I simply pointed people to where I know that's coming from, because I remember reading it.
Separately, if by fluff posts you mean some of the stuff I've posted from people on beyond3D, then you really do have no idea what you're talking about, because some of the stuff I've posted has either come from someone that actually worked on the Xbox One audio chip personally, or I've posted stuff from a Sony First Party developer, or confirmed game developers that have actually coded for and shipped Xbox 360 or PS3 titles. I don't see where the 'fluff' is in that. And if by fluff 'piece', you mean articles from websites such as Eurogamer or Anandtech with proven track records, especially when some of that stuff has been confirmed to be accurate in one form or another, then all I can do is laugh at the fact that this bothers you.
Outside of that, I hardly ever post anything from some random corner of the internet, so I don't know who you think you're confusing me with.
And, whether you like it or not, just know that when you go around making your console warrior accusations while pretending you yourself are nothing of the sort, or somehow more knowledgeable or qualified to speak about the things that I've posted from people who are either directly hands on with the actual hardware in question, or at least have confirmed contact with people who do, just know that I'm not the person with the mentality of a warrior, it is you. Exactly as others have said, there's this amazing degree of hutzpah where people like to pretend as if they somehow know more and can speak about what's going on in these machines with greater understanding than people who are actually qualified (not saying I'm one such individual, because I'm not. Some won't even admit that much.) to do so. These folks aren't disregarding the views of armchair, wannabe engineers, nope. In many cases, actual engineers somehow don't know what they're talking about if they aren't saying what you wish to hear. Not armchair programmers, but in many cases, actual game programmers that have years of experience making videogames, and who have recent and current experience developing games, but whose opinions you classify as 'fluff.' Come on, buddy, give me a break.
Only someone such as yourself can look at some of these people, which I'm quite sure you're not entirely ignorant of, and just shrug them off as somehow not knowing what they're talking about. Hell, I've even posted stuff from Dave Baumann, of all people, that folks on here have outright suggested is meaningless or makes no sense, like the man wouldn't know what he's talking about regarding, of all things, AMD Graphics hardware. Next time look before you jump off that bridge.