Ah, Klocker drive by trolling as usual I wouldn't pay him any attention.
-
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.
EuroGamer: More details on the BALANCE of XB1
- Thread starter artist
- Start date
Ah, Klocker drive by trolling as usual I wouldn't pay him any attention.
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
It'd be nice to see the reasoning behind posts like these. It's cool to think what you want, but being willfully blind to opposing opinions (of which there are many) and repeating the same phrases doesn't mean that you're right. It certainly shouldn't give you the confidence to discount the opinions of the several developers and myriad technically inclined GAFers so casually.
Is there a reason you don't want to actually discuss the power gap? Instead of offering any kind of rationalization for your stance, you just keep quoting the few people who are still following the narrative that a 40+% FLOP difference means nothing. If you have any basis for your claims, I'm all ears. Do you think it's at all possible that the people who claim there will be a difference (including game developers) could not only know what they're talking about, but also have actual reasons for believing what they do?
Your beliefs are, of course, your own. But that doesn't mean that they aren't completely wrong. Your posts in this thread read like uninformed console warrior BS. Keep up the good fight, though. I'm sure that every insistence of parity decreases the performance delta bit by bit. Hell, next month maybe the Xbox One will be stronger! /s
Do keep repeating this till you fall asleep?
Someone has to run MS PR on the forums when penello and nelson go to bed.
Unknown One
Member
Xbox fans sure change the argument to fit their favor. As a PS3 owner this generation I've seen a whole bunch of 360 games being better than PS3 version because it ran smoother and looked better. A lot of the major games ran at a lower resolution on the PS3 compared to the 360 counterpart. Now all of the sudden both version are equal. What a revisionist.
boredandlazy
Member
I would almost be inclined to say, that there's an imbalance between the two situations.
shinra-bansho
Member
Oh we're back to, "look what happened with the PS3 and Cell."
malboroking
Banned
Why do you keep doing this? You have to realize nobody takes you serious.
Must resist sales joke .....resist!
Very different situation, but I covered the differences in an earlier thread here. Pretty sure Klocker posted the same thing there too lol.
nib95 said:
AstroNut325
Member
I honestly think a lot of members of Neogaf are setting themselves up for disappointment for the launch game comparisons. All the studios are bending over backwards to make the launch day deadline. It won't be a good rubric to analyze power differences. Late 2014 titles... all bets are off and the gloves are off.
All in all I hope we see framerate differences, resolution differences, and other visual differences in favor of the PS4. But I just don't have much confidence when it comes to launch games.
All in all I hope we see framerate differences, resolution differences, and other visual differences in favor of the PS4. But I just don't have much confidence when it comes to launch games.
I agree. I've always stated that I don't think the differences at launch are going to be substantial, most probably negligible at best. Launch titles are rarely a good indication of anything, but post lunch it's going to be a different landscape altogether. Several devs have actually said the same thing, that it would take a bit of time for the differences between the consoles to really be made use of.
Gopher and a guy from Dice said it doesn't really even make sense for third parties to push multi platform games to be much better on the PS4, but I guess we'll have to wait and see. All depends on how easily PS4 versions of games can include extra bells and whistles, but at minimum you're looking at guaranteed better versions of all multi platform titles post launch.
eddfromtheriver
Banned
Pretty much... i see the tiger avatar and don't even bother reading his post... i just skip to the next one...
boredandlazy
Member
Pity though. As it's just going to give Penello and Co. ammunition for their current arguments.
Yea i already knew about the architectural differences, i was just curious. It seems the memory system in the ps3 definitely hurt it.
As for xb1 do we know the real world numbers for its esram? Because first i heard 109gb, then i hear over 200gb, but then its now 130-140gb lol. So which is it?
According to DF, real world numbers for Esram are currently around 130 GB/s (but I think they may have got those figures from Microsoft as well). According to Microsoft most recently, the real world numbers are 140 GB/s to 150 GB/s. Not sure what the real world bandwidth numbers are for their DDR3 ram. In comparison, the latest real world numbers for the PS4's bandwidth were 172 GB/s (out of a total 176 GB/s).
AstroNut325
Member
Why does this matter? Do you stand to gain something if Penello and Co. are proven wrong? Do you have some sort of allegiance to Sony? I can understand the argument concerning games and game quality but simply hoping for advantages to shame individuals is really... inane and somewhat immature.
SwiftDeath
Member
But what would the real world numbers for the Esram even mean?
It's not automated so how much coding do you have to do to get the 130 - 140 gb/s?
Is that the average real world bandwidth or the peak real world number?
As far as I can tell the PS4 is rather straightforward to utilize the memory architecture of
So the high bandwidth numbers (170 - 172 have been quoted by devs but not sure I believe that) will likely be available most of the time if needed
i honestly have no idea how the usage on the Esram will work out
MaulerX
Member
ethomaz
Banned
lol ekim
Nice to know... DF will do another article talking about the ROPs on Xbone... and maybe another PS4 article (they stopped to talk about it).
shinra-bansho
Member
This has been cited a couple of times, but I really don't think that the dev in question was talking about a measured achieved real-world bandwidth.
Yeah, I'm assuming they were either misquoted or simply misspoke. That being said, I assume the real-world performance is still very good.
SwiftDeath
Member
That was my take on it as well
I read it like the dev may have meant the theoretical peak and just misquoted it (172 instead of 176)
I see. Correct me if im wrong but one of the main purposes of the esram is to store frame buffers? Well if i remember correctly from the killzone sf technical slide they stated they were already using 39MB in frame buffers and thats a "Launch Title".
I wonder if the small pool of esram can be a potential bottleneck.
boredandlazy
Member
You know what would have been better than flying off the handle making assumptions and putting words in other people's mouths? Simply asking me to clarify what I meant.
What I'm hoping is that if the first round of multiplats showed a difference these stupid circular arguments could stop. These threads aren't 40-50 pages because new stuff is being discussed every day.
eddfromtheriver
Banned
Eh... that Leadbetter fella has single handedly brought down DF's credibility level in my eyes...
Starbuck2907
Member
Specialized hardware offloads work from the CPU on Xbox One. Most dropped frames are a result of overworked CPU, not GPU.
Hence, with the special hardware offloading work and up-clock making there be less burden on the CPU, the Xbox One crew seems to suggest that the Xbox One will have more stable, or better frame rates than the PS4.
Am I seeing the beginnings of a framerate (Xbox One) vs resolution (PS4) battle here??
Hence, with the special hardware offloading work and up-clock making there be less burden on the CPU, the Xbox One crew seems to suggest that the Xbox One will have more stable, or better frame rates than the PS4.
Am I seeing the beginnings of a framerate (Xbox One) vs resolution (PS4) battle here??
Night Angel
Member
No. You're seeing master PR spin. And it's working.
Until we have the CPU reservation of the PS4 ( and I suspect it to be 2 cores) we can't really answer this type of question.
Chobel
Member
Citation needed.
I want a study or technical argument, not what MS technical fellow said.
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
Hopefully the MS advantage online will somewhat negate the graphical advantage of Sony, though that would only be for certain games.
Any ideas when we can start to get real comparisons between the two systems?
Any ideas when we can start to get real comparisons between the two systems?
What online advantage?. Legitimately curious.
Klocker still fighting that good fight. One of the last remaining staunch supporters teetering on the edge.
There were discernible differences this gen even with wildly different architectures and similar specs. This time around they are the exact same architecture with one being 50% more powerful.
Keep trying to reassure yourself though. Even the vast majority of Xbone fans have just given up on it. Or--you could go chill with Misterxmedia and crew on their weirdo blog.
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
Azure + the advantage they already have.
What advantage they already have? And Azure is not necessarily an Xbox One orientated venture nor designed specifically for the console either. Anyone can use Azure, including you or I, or even Sony.
They still charge developers for hosting on it, just a discounted (unknown) rate. Respawn have it free because it's probably part of the money hatted agreement.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...one-cloud-following-a-lot-of-confusion-online
What's this advantage they already have?
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
They have written the ability to use Azure into their SDK though. Makes it very easy for developers to use. Sony don't have that so going on the actual information we have as opposed to assuming or guessing, MS have a definite advantage.
Chobel
Member
Well that's really smart move.
Now the biggest question: can a developer use dedicated servers for the Xbox One version and no dedicated servers for PS4 version?
power 100+ms away will not help augment many graphics algorithms.
Whiteshirt
Member
The whole cloud processing thing is fundamentally stupid. For things like NVIDIA's GPU clusters, it makes sense because professional clients need stuff to be rendered quickly but can't afford or justify a stupid amount of workstation class GPUs. Same with Adobe's cloud service where instead of upgrading your Adobe software and paying thousands per workstation, you just pay an yearly fee. That's how professional cloud services work and that's how people justify their costs.
But for gaming? Why the hell invest into the cloud, where a large population can barely use it or won't have stable enough internet to enjoy it, when you can just invest in a more powerful console in the first place? For dedicated servers sure I agree, Microsoft's cloud cluster will be useful for this but to boost performance (from the sounds of things, this is what you're claiming)? I don't think so.
If you're talking about dedicated servers, well Sony is charging for online gaming and dumping cash into online infrastructure. Of course they're going to offer cloud and dedicated servers in some capacity. I fully expect that initially Microsoft will offer better services but dedicated servers aren't called "Azure" and only "Azure". This sort of thing isn't new. we've had dedicated servers since forever and this sort of cloud isn't new either.
But for gaming? Why the hell invest into the cloud, where a large population can barely use it or won't have stable enough internet to enjoy it, when you can just invest in a more powerful console in the first place? For dedicated servers sure I agree, Microsoft's cloud cluster will be useful for this but to boost performance (from the sounds of things, this is what you're claiming)? I don't think so.
If you're talking about dedicated servers, well Sony is charging for online gaming and dumping cash into online infrastructure. Of course they're going to offer cloud and dedicated servers in some capacity. I fully expect that initially Microsoft will offer better services but dedicated servers aren't called "Azure" and only "Azure". This sort of thing isn't new. we've had dedicated servers since forever and this sort of cloud isn't new either.
It's getting tiresome isn't it. The main issues last gen were the memory pool and cell. It was a double whammy on devs and you could even argue exclusives show that the PS3 was the more powerful but hey.
This time round any complexities appear to lay with the weaker machine so I expect at least last gen in reverse at launch and then the gap to grow.
Of course there may be something we don't fully understand, but logic at this stage suggests this will be the case.
It's also odd that several XBO games have seem minor downgrades to hit performance (Ryse a good example) conversely we see DC Devs are trying to push their game further.
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
We will find out soon enough. I expect there will be an advantage regardless, it might not show at launch but once the developers get used to using the tools we should see it as the generation goes on.
I never mentioned graphics. There is more to games than graphics.
Night Angel
Member
Logic doesn't matter in the console warz.
But I agree. Everything points to Sony having a major advantage in terms of graphical horsepower next gen. Sure, the XBO has a few things going for it in terms of features/online (potentially, anyway), but this is a specs thread. Online infrastructure doesn't seem to be relevant to the discussion.
I'm getting both (don't ban me, bro), but I have little doubt that my multiplatform gaming will be happening on my PS4/PC (depending on where my friends are doing their gaming).
Sword Of Doom
Member
You clearly weren't on the short end of the stick this gen
graywolf323
Member
wonder how long it'll be after he comes back until he gets banned again
Garrett 2U
Member
Depends on the nature of the dedicated servers. If they are being used because a local box wouldn't have enough resources, then probably not (Battlefield). If they would be just be used to make the online experience better, then yes.
shinra-bansho
Member
ElTorro's gif about things going in loops in these threads was so on the mark.
Anyway, it may be pointing out the obvious, but the logistical problem I see with relying on any remote computing for games, even for realistic uses (and not pie in the sky infinite bazigaflops graphics) is the reliance on there being an internet connection.
Maybe, I'm just getting old and cranky but as a mostly single player gamer, it's not a trend I like.
Garrett 2U
Member
Yep but it's just something we're going to have to get used to this gen. As we've seen so far, most next gen games are connected experiences. And I'd bet most AAA games will continue to trend that way.
ElTorro's gif about things going in loops in these threads was so on the mark.
Anyway, it may be pointing out the obvious, but the logistical problem I see with relying on any remote computing for games, even for realistic uses (and not pie in the sky infinite bazigaflops graphics) is the reliance on there being an internet connection.
deputyspade
Member
Oh, they're not doing a PS4 article, they're too busy spreading Microsoft's PR FUD to do that. We'll get another xbone article with MS technical fellows spouting their fuzzy math around.
BrainZEROX
Member
Sounds obvious but they could use Azure for PS4 too.
Yes, or any other service provider's dedicated servers, but at full market rates.
Similar threads
- Poll