Support NeoGAF

[bonus_sco]

Different words, same stuff... memory appears more responsive, less miss prone and overall "better" with move engines = closes the gap between DDR3 and GDDR5.
Good.

Still a lower spec GPU.

It's not a comparison to the PS4, the move engines are used to get maximum utilisation of the resources available to the Xbox.

Saving bandwidth is a side effect of spatial coherency, the main goal is to avoid pipeline stalls and maximise instruction throughput.

 

[Amir0x]

I don't think there are any graphical things going on in the cloud in Forza 5. Only the AI stuff. And that isn't using the cloud in real time.

I know that; I was responding to that guy's comment that he believes Forza 5 is offloading AI data to the CLOUD in order to allow extra "graphical effects". I mean, that's what he said. I was responding to that premise.

 

[bonus_sco]

I still don't see how this would thrash caches if the sizes of the cache lines in Jaguar and GCN are the same. The granularity just is the same.

It would depend on the algorithm. If you need linear access on the CPU and swizzled access on the GPU you won't have spacial coherency on one of the two.

 

[USC-fan]

Can somebody post the link to the thread where someone has an article/blog (can't remember which) saying not to trust EDGE and their claim that the ps4 is more powerful? I forgot to bookmark and now I can't find it.

http://misterxmedia.livejournal.com/

Just be warn nothing he post is correct. Its really a fanfic or just a troll...

 

[thunder_snail]

You'll have two addresses on the Xbox One too.

I'm not sure what the benefit of swizzling on the CPU or GPU would be on the PS4. The benefit on the Xbox is that you have dedicated hardware to do it via DMA and you can carry on doing other things while it's busy. Reading and writing the data on the CPU or GPU would likely thrash the data cache which is what you'd be trying to avoid.

Swizzling is essentially free on hardware.

http://www.opengl.org/wiki/GLSL_Optimizations

 

[stryke]

http://misterxmedia.livejournal.com/

Just be warn nothing he post is correct. Its really a fanfic or just a troll...

Why on earth would you want to bookmark that shit.

 

[EGM1966]

So after 51 pages (on my little laptop screen) what I've got as the general "theme" for the thread is that the PS4 on paper has higher specs but (alleged) lot's of clever design will result in XB1 more or less matching it or even outperforming the PS4 base specs - and apparently the PS4 has no clever design to match since the assumption seems to be the PS4 will only perform to it's published specs whereas the XB1 will somehow outperform the published specs (at least according to those arguing this).

I'm struggling with the disconnect here TBH. I'm not doubting XB1 is pretty powerful and will support lots of nice 1080p games - but I really don't see a situation where it has all the magic extra stuff to combat the PS4 being a bit more powerful again.

It's like telling me MS made a car with a 1.0 litre engine and Sony made one with 1.5 litres but Sony made their car an upright rectangle with horrible aerodynamics and MS made their car slick and low to the ground - it just doesn't make sense Sony would be that stupid. Both consoles I'm sure are designed to take as much advantage of their specs as possible and if the PS4 base specs are somewhat better then this will be apparent in game visuals, etc. to some extent (varying by title/developer no doubt).

Like I say I don't doubt the XB1 will support clever tricks/programming to get the most out of it but why wouldn't the PS4? And if the PS4 is factually a bit more powerful why wouldn't the gap always be there even after optimization?

 

[bonus_sco]

Swizzling is essentially free on hardware.

http://www.opengl.org/wiki/GLSL_Optimizations

That's a different type of swizzling, it's an overused term.

 

[CLEEK]

Why on earth would you want to bookmark that shit.

Its an amazing work of fiction, that deserves more publicity. I've only been on his site a couple of times, but what I read stuck with me for a long time. Insanity like that is hard to come by. MisterX is almost on the level of David Icke etc. It wouldn't surprise me if he believed that Sony was run by lizard people too.

 

[dragonelite]

Swizzling is essentially free on hardware.

http://www.opengl.org/wiki/GLSL_Optimizations

I think the DMA do texture swizzling where they change the layout of texel to improve access pattern.

 

[thunder_snail]

That's a different type of swizzling, it's an overused term.

What's the other type of swizzling? Swizzling is just reordering of elements in vectors.

 

[bonus_sco]

So after 51 pages (on my little laptop screen) what I've got as the general "theme" for the thread is that the PS4 on paper has higher specs but (alleged) lot's of clever design will result in XB1 more or less matching it or even outperforming the PS4 base specs - and apparently the PS4 has no clever design to match since the assumption seems to be the PS4 will only perform to it's published specs whereas the XB1 will somehow outperform the published specs (at least according to those arguing this).

I'm struggling with the disconnect here TBH. I'm not doubting XB1 is pretty powerful and will support lots of nice 1080p games - but I really don't see a situation where it has all the magic extra stuff to combat the PS4 being a bit more powerful again.

It's like telling me MS made a car with a 1.0 litre engine and Sony made one with 1.5 litres but Sony made their car an upright rectangle with horrible aerodynamics and MS made their car slick and low to the ground - it just doesn't make sense Sony would be that stupid. Both consoles I'm sure are designed to take as much advantage of their specs as possible and if the PS4 base specs are somewhat better then this will be apparent in game visuals, etc. to some extent (varying by title/developer no doubt).

Like I say I don't doubt the XB1 will support clever tricks/programming to get the most out of it but why wouldn't the PS4? And if the PS4 is factually a bit more powerful why wouldn't the gap always be there even after optimization?

I don't think there's any dispute that the PS4 will be more powerful.

It's just not clear by how much.

It might be an average case that the PS4 is 90% utilised. The Xbox One might be 80% utilised on average, it might get to 95%+ by wringing every last drop of performance. It'll be more utilised but still lesser hardware.

(These numbers are completely made up, PS4 might be just as easy/easier to maximise).

 

[Amir0x]

So after 51 pages (on my little laptop screen) what I've got as the general "theme" for the thread is that the PS4 on paper has higher specs but (alleged) lot's of clever design will result in XB1 more or less matching it or even outperforming the PS4 base specs - and apparently the PS4 has no clever design to match since the assumption seems to be the PS4 will only perform to it's published specs whereas the XB1 will somehow outperform the published specs (at least according to those arguing this).

That is definitely not the theme of this thread. The theme of this thread by the vast majority of posters is that PS4 is significantly more powerful than the XBO and that it will show itself in games over the course of the gen.

Most are mocking the claim that the XBO can do anything to overcome this or dramatically decrease the difference in power, and in fact the XBO's added complexities have been complained about by most any dev that has said anything on or off the record.

 

[EGM1966]

That is definitely not the theme of this thread. The theme of this thread by the vast majority of posters is that PS4 is significantly more powerful than the XBO and that it will show itself in games over the course of the gen.

Most are mocking the claim that the XBO can do anything to overcome this or dramatically decrease the difference in power, and in fact the XBO's added complexities have been complained about by most any dev that has said anything on or off the record.

Okay maybe just how it seemed skimming through but man - so many odd arguments going on defending XB1 though. Oh well - console warriors I guess.

 

[doemaaan]

http://misterxmedia.livejournal.com/

Just be warn nothing he post is correct. Its really a fanfic or just a troll...

Heh, thanks and I know. I just wanted to read it.

 

[Manmademan]

So after 51 pages (on my little laptop screen) what I've got as the general "theme" for the thread is that the PS4 on paper has higher specs but (alleged) lot's of clever design will result in XB1 more or less matching it or even outperforming the PS4 base specs - and apparently the PS4 has no clever design to match since the assumption seems to be the PS4 will only perform to it's published specs whereas the XB1 will somehow outperform the published specs (at least according to those arguing this).

I'm struggling with the disconnect here TBH. I'm not doubting XB1 is pretty powerful and will support lots of nice 1080p games - but I really don't see a situation where it has all the magic extra stuff to combat the PS4 being a bit more powerful again.

It's like telling me MS made a car with a 1.0 litre engine and Sony made one with 1.5 litres but Sony made their car an upright rectangle with horrible aerodynamics and MS made their car slick and low to the ground - it just doesn't make sense Sony would be that stupid. Both consoles I'm sure are designed to take as much advantage of their specs as possible and if the PS4 base specs are somewhat better then this will be apparent in game visuals, etc. to some extent (varying by title/developer no doubt).

Like I say I don't doubt the XB1 will support clever tricks/programming to get the most out of it but why wouldn't the PS4? And if the PS4 is factually a bit more powerful why wouldn't the gap always be there even after optimization?

First, change to 100 posts per page. You'll thank me later.

Second: sort of, because the ps4 advantage isn't just power, its also the more efficient design AND easier to program on top of that.

So its more like Sony having a more powerful engine AND aerodynamic design, and MS having a weaker car shaped like a square block but telling you there are laws of physics only they know about so specs don't matter.

 

[USC-fan]

Why on earth would you want to bookmark that shit.

What? Its an awesome read if you want a good laugh. Its very funny watching him meltdown after every confirm spec comes out.

 

[bonus_sco]

What's the other type of swizzling? Swizzling is just reordering of elements in vectors.

The other type is also known as tilling.

Real Time Rendering has a good chapter explaining it.

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/499272-texture-swizzling/

 

[EGM1966]

First, change to 100 posts per page. You'll thank me later.

Second: sort of, because the ps4 advantage isn't just power, its also the more efficient design AND easier to program on top of that.

So its more like Sony having a more powerful engine AND aerodynamic design, and MS having a weaker car shaped like a square block but telling you there are laws of physics only they know about so specs don't matter.

Consider yourself thanked - that is better!

 

[dragonelite]

The other type is also known as tilling.

Real Time Rendering has a good chapter explaining it.

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/499272-texture-swizzling/

Aah the holy bible of rendering

I have the book laying at the top of my too read stack.
Im now reading Game engine architecture for my minor project and X1 project i want to do next year.

 

[KAL2006]

So after 51 pages (on my little laptop screen) what I've got as the general "theme" for the thread is that the PS4 on paper has higher specs but (alleged) lot's of clever design will result in XB1 more or less matching it or even outperforming the PS4 base specs - and apparently the PS4 has no clever design to match since the assumption seems to be the PS4 will only perform to it's published specs whereas the XB1 will somehow outperform the published specs (at least according to those arguing this).

I'm struggling with the disconnect here TBH. I'm not doubting XB1 is pretty powerful and will support lots of nice 1080p games - but I really don't see a situation where it has all the magic extra stuff to combat the PS4 being a bit more powerful again.

It's like telling me MS made a car with a 1.0 litre engine and Sony made one with 1.5 litres but Sony made their car an upright rectangle with horrible aerodynamics and MS made their car slick and low to the ground - it just doesn't make sense Sony would be that stupid. Both consoles I'm sure are designed to take as much advantage of their specs as possible and if the PS4 base specs are somewhat better then this will be apparent in game visuals, etc. to some extent (varying by title/developer no doubt).

Like I say I don't doubt the XB1 will support clever tricks/programming to get the most out of it but why wouldn't the PS4? And if the PS4 is factually a bit more powerful why wouldn't the gap always be there even after optimization?

I haven't kept up with this thread since yesterday. But doesn't PS4 also have these tricks too, I actually remember Cerny saying this which is why games will look better throughout as the generation goes by.

So in conclusion
PS4 beats Xbox One is raw power
PS4 is easier to develop for than Xbox One
Both PS4 and Xbox One use special tricks to optimise performance to use full potential, this will be even clearer as the generation progesses

So no Xbox One has nothing over the PS4

 

[Chobel]

The other type is also known as tilling.

Real Time Rendering has a good chapter explaining it.

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/499272-texture-swizzling/

If you can swizzle texture offline and just load it when you need it what will be the point of using Swizzle move engine?

 

[Vizzeh]

Came accross this link, that maybe off interest, Playstation shader language and API presentation at GDC 2013 by Richard Stenson, Chris Ho , US R&D - Alot of it is known info but maybe some new info could be extrapolated from it inc DirectX 11.2+/OpenGL 4.4 feature set , With custom SCE features and the ease of PC porting etc

- http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1019252/PlayStation-Shading-Language-for
-A good video I noticed on youtube on the breakdown of some of the info http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEFEpxCjJ9w

- searched for an appropriate thread to drop this into but suspect this being about PS4 hardware would suffice.

 

[BleachAndPepsi]

So after 51 pages (on my little laptop screen) what I've got as the general "theme" for the thread is that the PS4 on paper has higher specs but (alleged) lot's of clever design will result in XB1 more or less matching it or even outperforming the PS4 base specs - and apparently the PS4 has no clever design to match since the assumption seems to be the PS4 will only perform to it's published specs whereas the XB1 will somehow outperform the published specs (at least according to those arguing this).

I'm struggling with the disconnect here TBH. I'm not doubting XB1 is pretty powerful and will support lots of nice 1080p games - but I really don't see a situation where it has all the magic extra stuff to combat the PS4 being a bit more powerful again.

It's like telling me MS made a car with a 1.0 litre engine and Sony made one with 1.5 litres but Sony made their car an upright rectangle with horrible aerodynamics and MS made their car slick and low to the ground - it just doesn't make sense Sony would be that stupid. Both consoles I'm sure are designed to take as much advantage of their specs as possible and if the PS4 base specs are somewhat better then this will be apparent in game visuals, etc. to some extent (varying by title/developer no doubt).

Like I say I don't doubt the XB1 will support clever tricks/programming to get the most out of it but why wouldn't the PS4? And if the PS4 is factually a bit more powerful why wouldn't the gap always be there even after optimization?

The only thing we know for sure is that several devs have gone on record with EDGE calling the power gap between consoles "significant" and "obvious." Microsoft has released a statement that does not deny this.

That's it. Anything else is just hypothetical masturbation.

 

[cyberheater]

I haven't kept up with this thread since yesterday. But doesn't PS4 also have these tricks too, I actually remember Cerny saying this which is why games will look better throughout as the generation goes by.

So in conclusion
PS4 beats Xbox One is raw power
PS4 is easier to develop for than Xbox One
Both PS4 and Xbox One use special tricks to optimise performance to use full potential, this will be even clearer as the generation progesses

So no Xbox One has nothing over the PS4

Faster CPU, a better audio chip to offload CPU resources and as one dev put it:-

Xbox One does, however, boast superior performance to PS4 in other ways. “Let’s say you are using procedural generation or raytracing via parametric surfaces – that is, using a lot of memory writes and not much texturing or ALU – Xbox One will be likely be faster,” said one developer.

 

[bonus_sco]

If you can swizzle texture offline and just load it when you need it what will be the point of using Swizzle move engine?

Because you might need different access patterns for optimal data cache coherency on the CPU and GPU. An array of particle positions on the GPU could be an example if the algorithm needs to know about it's neighbours in both u and v directions. On the CPU, you might just want to run through them linearly for some reason.

 

[beast786]

Faster CPU, a better audio chip to offload CPU resources and as one dev put it:-

Link?

 

[BleachAndPepsi]

Faster CPU, a better audio chip to offload CPU resources and as one dev put it:-

Those same devs also said the upclocking in the Xbone CPU "is not significant" and "does not change things that much."

And we don't know about the PS4's audio chip, so it's literally impossible to say that the Xbone's is better. It may be, but we don't know. And even if it were, big deal. It's an audio chip. Not exactly big bragging rights.

 

[Chobel]

Because you might need different access patterns for optimal data cache coherency on the CPU and GPU. An array of particle positions on the GPU could be an example if the algorithm needs to know about it's neighbours in both u and v directions. On the CPU, you might just want to run through them linearly for some reason.

Like I said: do the swizzle offline, load both the normal texture and the swizzled one.
One for CPU and the other for GPU. No need to swizzle or move any texture.

 

[thunder_snail]

The other type is also known as tilling.

Real Time Rendering has a good chapter explaining it.

http://www.gamedev.net/topic/499272-texture-swizzling/

Ah, I see. So it can benefit from texture in main ram -> move engine/tiling -> esram -> gpu. Or main ram -> move engine/tiling -> main ram -> gpu. I can see that being useful as long as the data needed can be fitted within esram along with the render target. ram->ram seems too wasteful on bandwidth though.

 

[omonimo]

Xbox One does, however, boast superior performance to PS4 in other ways. “Let’s say you are using procedural generation or raytracing via parametric surfaces – that is, using a lot of memory writes and not much texturing or ALU – Xbox One will be likely be faster,” said one developer.

Lol yeah right this is why Forza 5 use prebaked light, holy boast superior performance of the cpu.

 

[RobotRocker]

The only thing we know for sure is that several devs have gone on record with EDGE calling the power gap between consoles "significant" and "obvious." Microsoft has released a statement that does not deny this.

That's it. Anything else is just hypothetical masturbation.

And other devs have gone on public record (Like Carmack and Kojima) said "Minor differences".

And the author of that article was previously responsible for the hit FUD article "Sony will do DRM too according to Anonymous Sources". So track record isn't exactly a hit there regarding "Anonymous Sources".

So we have hearsay and an author who hasn't had a good track record already regarding anonymous sources and was spreading FUD about Sony.

What we have here is more like a clusterfuck of "He Said, She Said" with people trying to shout "NUH UH", "YAH HUH" on an article made by someone with a dodgy track record on sourcing and a non-comment from Microsoft in rebuttal.

How it even got past five pages is beyond me now.

 

[bonus_sco]

Like I said: do the swizzle offline, load both the normal texture and the swizzled one.
One for CPU and the other for GPU. No need to compute or move any texture.

If the data changes (I.e. updating particles using GPGPU) you need runtime swizzling.

 

[rjinaz]

Can somebody post the link to the thread where someone has an article/blog (can't remember which) saying not to trust EDGE and their claim that the ps4 is more powerful? I forgot to bookmark and now I can't find it.

Well there was also this article:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=677337&highlight=time

 

[$h@d0w]

If audio chips made a huge difference in 2013, every hardcore PC gamer on this board would be using dedicated PCI express sound cards in their setups to get higher FPS.

Anyone have a Sound Blaster recon3d card here? Asus Xonar?

 

[cyberheater]

Link?

Penello said it.

 

[dragonelite]

Like I said: do the swizzle offline, load both the normal texture and the swizzled one.
One for CPU and the other for GPU. No need to swizzle or move any texture.

Why would you want to waste that much performance?
With this setup you need to update the particles on the GPU and CPU.

 

[RumblePuff]

First, change to 100 posts per page. You'll thank me later.

Second: sort of, because the ps4 advantage isn't just power, its also the more efficient design AND easier to program on top of that.

So its more like Sony having a more powerful engine AND aerodynamic design, and MS having a weaker car shaped like a square block but telling you there are laws of physics only they know about so specs don't matter.

That made me chuckle.
Seems that people desperately want to believe the PS4 is way more powerful and the flip side is people desperately want to believe the xbone isn't massively behind.

One selling us a games console that does media functions and one selling us a media box that plays games.

Either way if the PS4 has more powerful hardware no amount of magic programming or drivers for the xbone will change that.

 

[Chobel]

And other devs have gone on public record (Like Carmack and Kojima) said "Minor differences".

And the author of that article was previously responsible for the hit FUD article "Sony will do DRM too according to Anonymous Sources". So track record isn't exactly a hit there regarding "Anonymous Sources".

So we have hearsay and an author who hasn't had a good track record already regarding anonymous sources and was spreading FUD about Sony.

What we have here is more like a clusterfuck of "He Said, She Said" with people trying to shout "NUH UH", "YAH HUH" on an article made by someone with a dodgy track record on sourcing and a non-comment from Microsoft in rebuttal.

How it even got past five pages is beyond me now.

So using a better GPU, 40% better, will only get you minor differences. Sony made a huge mistake by using the better GPU.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

I really can't believe we have got to that level of desperation where stating XB1's audio chip as an advantage is a defence for the XB1's lacklustre power compared to PS4.

The fact is that MS is trying to flog something for £430 that isn't worth £430. Maybe if it were 50% faster than PS4 that would be a more sensible price. But hell no it ain't worth that considering its power deficiency.

 

[Vizzeh]

Ps4 supporting DX11.2+ Is obviously a benefit Microsoft thought they had over PlayStation, but since they support it (according to that article I linked) will be great for PS4, inc features we where not sure that would be supported like tiled resources.

"Tiled Resources" allows for significant enhancement of in-game textures by making it possible to simultaneously access GPU and traditional RAM memory and create a single large buffer where large textures can be stored. This technique was demonstrated with a model of Mars which displayed a 3 GB texture using just 16 MB of GPU memory and in Graphine’s Granite Flight Simulator that showed "a remarkably detailed island with gliders constructed out of 64 megapixels.""

 

[Chobel]

If the data changes (I.e. updating particles using GPGPU) you need runtime swizzling.

Why would you want to waste that much performance?
With this setup you need to update the particles on the GPU and CPU.

Usually you don't update textures in run-time. And why would you swizzle particles?

 

[Metalmurphy]

We went from dgpu to secret sauce to upclock and now it's down to the audiochip. Just give it a rest people.

If audio chips made a huge difference in 2013, every hardcore PC gamer on this board would be using dedicated PCI express sound cards in their setups to get higher FPS.

Anyone have a Sound Blaster recon3d card here? Asus Xonar?

X-Fi representing!

 

[BleachAndPepsi]

And other devs have gone on public record (Like Carmack and Kojima) said "Minor differences".

And the author of that article was previously responsible for the hit FUD article "Sony will do DRM too according to Anonymous Sources". So track record isn't exactly a hit there regarding "Anonymous Sources".

So we have hearsay and an author who hasn't had a good track record already regarding anonymous sources and was spreading FUD about Sony.

What we have here is more like a clusterfuck of "He Said, She Said" with people trying to shout "NUH UH", "YAH HUH" on an article made by someone with a dodgy track record on sourcing and a non-comment from Microsoft in rebuttal.

How it even got past five pages is beyond me now.

I can't speak for Kojima, but Carmack has also flat out admitted he hasn't had his hands on the hardware or done any kind of testing on them. So his opinion on this is meaningless.

Devs in the know, both in the EDGE article and others who have been discussed here on GAF, have flat out said PS4 is more powerful. The former People Can Fly dev (whose name escapes me) also mentioned the 50% difference from his dev friends.

As far as the writer of the article goes, let's back off from the ad Hominem attacks. A past article he wrote where he quoted an anonymous source who repeated a rumor he or she heard is completely different from directly quoting developers who are working on these consoles. To even equate the two smacks of desperation.

Again, we have several devs from several sources saying the same thing. We have the fact that every third party game being displayed at third party booths is being displayed on PC or PS4 hardware/dev kits. And we have the fact that Microsoft's statement does not deny what the devs said. Add it up, and you've got a pretty damning statement.

 

[thunder_snail]

If audio chips made a huge difference in 2013, every hardcore PC gamer on this board would be using dedicated PCI express sound cards in their setups to get higher FPS.

Anyone have a Sound Blaster recon3d card here? Asus Xonar?

The audio chip is there for Kinect. That way, voice recognition stuff doesn't have to be taxing on the cpu. Along with other specialized processors which are designed to have the tv stuff and snap features to not affect the games that much.

For example, I'm guessing the video encode/decode must be more powerful on xbone since with snap with skype, xbone needs to encode/decode the game video (for uploading to twitch etc) and video for skype at the same time. Also there's a dedicated resizer so games and tv can be resized for the snap mode. And also a dedicated processor for av-in etc.

Basically, MS decided to spend big on the snap feature at the cost of gpu performance.
Kinda stupid if you ask me, but I'm sure some people will like it.

 

[bonus_sco]

Usually you don't update textures in run-time. And why would you swizzle particles?

Textures are just arrays of data. GPGPU is used to update arrays of data on the GPU. You'd swizzle them for optimal cache coherency for the access pattern you'd use on each processor.

 

[Chobel]

Basically, MS decided to spend big on the snap feature at the cost of gpu performance.
Kinda stupid if you ask me, but I'm sure some people will like it.

I'm not sure why anybody would like it, Xbox doesn't have a powerful GPU and yet MS decided to cripple it even more by this snap feature shit.

 

[thunder_snail]

I'm not sure why anybody would like it, Xbox doesn't have a powerful GPU and yet MS decided to cripple it even more by this snap feature shit.

Us gaffer's may not like it but more casual gamers might like to video skype while playing games. It'd be good for coop games.

 

[RobotRocker]

I can't speak for Kojima, but Carmack has also flat out admitted he hasn't had his hands on the hardware or done any kind of testing on them. So his opinion on this is meaningless.

Devs in the know, both in the EDGE article and others who have been discussed here on GAF, have flat out said PS4 is more powerful. The former People Can Fly dev (whose name escapes me) also mentioned the 50% difference from his dev friends.

As far as the writer of the article goes, let's back off from the ad Hominem attacks. A past article he wrote where he quoted an anonymous source who repeated a rumor he or she heard is completely different from directly quoting developers who are working on these consoles. To even equate the two smacks of desperation.

Again, we have several devs from several sources saying the same thing. We have the fact that every third party game being displayed at third party booths is being displayed on PC or PS4 hardware/dev kits. And we have the fact that Microsoft's statement does not deny what the devs said. Add it up, and you've got a pretty damning statement.

Bringing up the fact that an author made a similar article with anonymous sources that was FUD isn't Ad Hominem. It's questioning his credibility which is right to do. Ignoring that he made FUD articles in the past is being ignorant. I know the XBone is weaker, but when there are much different words from different developers and most of it is coming from "My friend said". I'm finding it hard to believe if we're playing telephone constantly and this article is starting to re-enforce that were just playing one long game of telephone and the final answer of the power difference will be "Purple Monkey Dishwasher".

 

[Chobel]

Textures are just arrays of data. GPGPU is used to update arrays of data on the GPU. You'd swizzle them for optimal cache coherency for the access pattern you'd use on each processor.

I understand that, Now why would you need to swizzle particles (change memory layout of particles)? for textures it's understandable.

Also if anything need to be updated between CPU and GPU then they must wait for move engine to move data, so no memory coherency.