cookie-monster
Member
my main hope would be for better AF, but I realise that's never been a priority for console devs.
-
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.
Digital Foundry: Microsoft to unlock more GPU power for Xbox One developers
- Thread starter DaSorcerer7
- Start date
bigboss370
Member
I agree with your second situation, both games will look exactly the same and the PS4 will have more stable framerates because it is not being heavily utilized. that 'advantage' xbox brand had i don't think was ever a significant advantage, esp. when you consider some multiplats actually did better on ps3.
look, if the differences in multiplats are really significant, its over for MS. that won't happen.
Nope. I wish i would have.
1,18 vs 1,84 that is almost 60% difference that is beside ROPs more texture units more ALU for compute, memory bandwidth, less complicated to work with and so on.
Developers would need to really put work into PS4 version to make it run at Xbone level. If they will do the same they will have much better frame-rate.
Games already speaks a lot about difference. Most of PS4 games are now native 1080p with few of them trying or hitting 60FPS where Xbone games are in lower res from 720p to 900p with only forza5 being only 1080p title currently in 60FPS.
Time where the first DF articles will hit will prove it what is already proven.
FeiRR
Banned
People said the same about DRM and it did happen. The difference is: there's no 180 from the hardware you have until you make a new console in 5-6 years.
Yeah, PS3 did have it pretty damn rough early going.
Now dev is completely different than at start of this gen.
In 2005 you had your primary platform be it 360 or PS3 and you ported things from it to different platform.
Now most of AAA devs have multiplatform engines that can be easily scaled to what you are trying to achieve if hardware will meet absolute minimum.
If one platform will have more power then they will crank up either Framerate or they will bump up graphics. We are not talking here about 5 more FPS with current knowledge we are talking here about 10-20FPS more in every game. That is a lot of frametime that could mean significantly better graphic or significantly better framerate or something in middle where game will have way better frame-rate and way better graphic.
Graphical platform parity is myth. There was no platform parity in any game ever. That won't change.
You honestly think that's a large leap of a conclusion?
DigitalFoundry already did some preliminary benchmarks with similarly specced PCs (with the Xbone PC being even more powerful than the Xbone by a decent margain) and the PS4 PC was getting 20+ more FPS across the board.
TwistedMind
Neo Member
AF should be free on most cards , so I don't see why not . You can pretty much enable it on most games without any performance loss .
Man, the speculations on both sides of the fence are hilarious in this thread because we simply don't know how it will pan out with most third-party devs and we can only go off of what we know so far. Which side is doing the wishful thinking? Who knows, but we do know there's a power difference. I just find it funny that so many people are speculating while simultaneously saying someone else is just speculating for having the opposite opinion.
It's going to be an interesting generation though. And if there is a big difference in multi-platform games, then I'm sure some of the people that were there to point out every difference in PS3 ports compared to the superior 360 versions will now be downplaying those same differences for this upcoming generation while those who said they didn't care last generation will start to care this time around although that might make sense if the differences are bigger this time around due to the hardware and development differences. Obviously some games had big differences and people were made aware of them immediately and I think the same should be done here regardless of which console has the better version. As a gamer that tends to have multiple consoles and a PC, it really helps me out in the end, but to declare WHAT differences there will be between versions already is jumping the gun a little bit and it's all still speculation on what the developers do, whether they spend the extra time on the more powerful console to give it a great version and then adjust the other version or strive for parity right off the bat and leave what differences there might be, which differences they would target first, how much of a real difference it would make, etc.
Too many variables involved that make it hard to call it over already one way or the other and dismiss the other person's claim whatever it might be. I'm just going to take in whatever we learn early on but THEN realize that it might become more of an issue as cross-gen games stop and full next-gen only games become more popular that might try to push certain areas that will test these console's differences out.
You gotta laugh at the circle of life in the console wars.
It's going to be an interesting generation though. And if there is a big difference in multi-platform games, then I'm sure some of the people that were there to point out every difference in PS3 ports compared to the superior 360 versions will now be downplaying those same differences for this upcoming generation while those who said they didn't care last generation will start to care this time around although that might make sense if the differences are bigger this time around due to the hardware and development differences. Obviously some games had big differences and people were made aware of them immediately and I think the same should be done here regardless of which console has the better version. As a gamer that tends to have multiple consoles and a PC, it really helps me out in the end, but to declare WHAT differences there will be between versions already is jumping the gun a little bit and it's all still speculation on what the developers do, whether they spend the extra time on the more powerful console to give it a great version and then adjust the other version or strive for parity right off the bat and leave what differences there might be, which differences they would target first, how much of a real difference it would make, etc.
Too many variables involved that make it hard to call it over already one way or the other and dismiss the other person's claim whatever it might be. I'm just going to take in whatever we learn early on but THEN realize that it might become more of an issue as cross-gen games stop and full next-gen only games become more popular that might try to push certain areas that will test these console's differences out.
You gotta laugh at the circle of life in the console wars.
Some games like Skyrim were basically broken on PS3. Saints Row IV has a significant resolution downgrade on PS3. What are these multiplats that perform and look better on PS3?
I disagree with your assertion that the Xbox brand never had a significant advantage. OG Xbox won every head-to-head against PS2 and even had some games at 720p. 360 has won nearly every head-to-head against PS3 though not as handily as that previous gen. This upcoming gen, the spec difference and architecture difference points to another Xbox to PS2 situation except the winner/loser are reversed.
I get it, you don't think any of this will happen, but a large portion of people do. And either way, the more expensive console releasing at the same time shouldn't be so much weaker.
more like 10-20 depending how demanding game was. That is still big difference.
cookie-monster
Member
indeed, but it's been mostly absent or inadequate on the consoles. It seems like the first thing to chuck out to save memory.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Senjutsu I agree with a lot of what you say typically but thats crazy talk. Kojima's team and even PD both who have always stood out as devs that could tame crazy Kens architecture in PS2 and 3 talk about what a nightmare it was developing for both systems and thats with one of them being the most powerful console on the market. No developer wants to add the hassle of "figuring out" the best way to exploit a system when building a game has enough hurdles anyway. Even though it certainly won't be as bad as the growing pains of the PS3 it makes no sense that any dev would come to appreciate developing a game for a system that they have to grapple with not just making a game on but making it match the easier and more powerful rival console.
So, potentionally unlocking previously locked percentage which in turn means nothing, saying that there is no difference due to the console being balanced while arguing that low percentage boost is meaningful, infinite power of The Cloud. What is next, downloadable RAM?
This looks like Sony during the PS3 launch. It's almost as if they have some ex-Sony bosses there.
Sony stuck to their guns and the only thing they really fucked up on was Price....MS are doing a lot more bad stuff and they're not even coming from a position of dominance.
They were 3rd this gen. People act like the 360 was a PS1/2 situation. It was more like SNES/MD at best.
I was watching the Making of Assassin's creed at IGN http://ca.ign.com/articles/2013/10/02/inside-the-art-of-assassins-creed-4-black-flag and I noticed that they may have shown the difference between the 2 consoles, judging by the button prompts shown on the screen. IF this is he case (as it can not be 100% confirmed) holy crap what a BIG difference!!
What dedicated hardware?
Oh no... that SHAPE again....
HeLLKnight
Banned
If I want a single thing to be explained by Microsoft, should be this:
In my humble opinion, Sony followed the easy path. x86 AMD APU, decent GPU, GDDR5 unified memory, little custom design enhacements. Easy for developers. Profit.
As far as I know Microsoft engineers could followed the easy path, but they took the hard path. Why? Yes, I know the story. Sony got 8gb gddr5 last minute, and maybe Microsoft engineers were targeting 8gb from the start, so they went to a complex design to alleviate the DDR3 bandwith limitations: ESRAM, DMEs, smaller GPU because ESRAM took space... all of this making the console more complex for developers. Even with that I can't understand the architectural choices. Also for those who do not know, low latency thing in DDR3 is untruth, almost 0 real world performance difference compared with GDDR5.
Didn't MS engineers care about what was doing Sony? Even with just 4gb PS4 still should overtake X1 performance. What was the target with this approach? Next-gen console barely touching 1080p resolution in AAA titles? Diminishing returns? long term cloud faith?
I really hope the next Digital Foundry article coming this weekend digg into this.
In my humble opinion, Sony followed the easy path. x86 AMD APU, decent GPU, GDDR5 unified memory, little custom design enhacements. Easy for developers. Profit.
As far as I know Microsoft engineers could followed the easy path, but they took the hard path. Why? Yes, I know the story. Sony got 8gb gddr5 last minute, and maybe Microsoft engineers were targeting 8gb from the start, so they went to a complex design to alleviate the DDR3 bandwith limitations: ESRAM, DMEs, smaller GPU because ESRAM took space... all of this making the console more complex for developers. Even with that I can't understand the architectural choices. Also for those who do not know, low latency thing in DDR3 is untruth, almost 0 real world performance difference compared with GDDR5.
Didn't MS engineers care about what was doing Sony? Even with just 4gb PS4 still should overtake X1 performance. What was the target with this approach? Next-gen console barely touching 1080p resolution in AAA titles? Diminishing returns? long term cloud faith?
I really hope the next Digital Foundry article coming this weekend digg into this.
velociraptor
Junior Member
It's not as if the Xbone is the most powerful console either. Whether they figure out the hardware or not is not going to mitigate the large performance gap between the two consoles. It's pretty funny you mention PD actually. After all these years, they are still critical of the PS3 architecture while developing GT6.
What are the timestamps?
Colbert
Banned
Man, the speculations on both sides of the fence are hilarious in this thread because we simply don't know how it will pan out with most third-party devs and we can only go off of what we know so far. Which side is doing the wishful thinking? Who knows, but we do know there's a power difference. I just find it funny that so many people are speculating while simultaneously saying someone else is just speculating for having the opposite opinion.
It's going to be an interesting generation though. And if there is a big difference in multi-platform games, then I'm sure some of the people that were there to point out every difference in PS3 ports compared to the superior 360 versions will now be downplaying those same differences for this upcoming generation while those who said they didn't care last generation will start to care this time around although that might make sense if the differences are bigger this time around due to the hardware and development differences. Obviously some games had big differences and people were made aware of them immediately and I think the same should be done here regardless of which console has the better version. As a gamer that tends to have multiple consoles and a PC, it really helps me out in the end, but to declare WHAT differences there will be between versions already is jumping the gun a little bit and it's all still speculation on what the developers do, whether they spend the extra time on the more powerful console to give it a great version and then adjust the other version or strive for parity right off the bat and leave what differences there might be, which differences they would target first, how much of a real difference it would make, etc.
Too many variables involved that make it hard to call it over already one way or the other and dismiss the other person's claim whatever it might be. I'm just going to take in whatever we learn early on but THEN realize that it might become more of an issue as cross-gen games stop and full next-gen only games become more popular that might try to push certain areas that will test these console's differences out.
You gotta laugh at the circle of life in the console wars.
Totally agree!
Most of it has Xbox buttons but around 9:27 and 11:25 there are PS buttons.
The 2nd GPU powered by unicorn tears that MS is under NDA to talk about. Don't worry, it'll be there, you just wont know about it... ... ... Yet.
Dead Prince
Banned
question. are the button prompts not mandatory to distinguish between ps3 and ps4? ps4 prompts are different
I'm confused by it too. Or at least why they didn't go with more eSRAM with a huge (500Gb/sec+) bandwidth.
The great irony is that after all this, PS4 would be better at being the Xbone than the Xbone is. They could literally add Xbone's software features like for like over the course of the generation and still be in a better position than MS are. The sum total of all of MS's engineers wrangling is zilch. The other guys built a box that's better for what MS were aiming for basically by fluke. That must be somewhat demoralising for them.
thebigmanjosh
Member
The Xbox/PC footage starts around 3:20-3:30 and is used up until 9:20 when PS4 keys are shown. Honestly, the footage is brief and the lighting is so different that it's hard to tell any kind of difference in quality.
RamzaIsCool
The Amiga Brotherhood
wow.... the difference is pretty big, the sea looks way better on the ps4! But it could be that the lighting played a part in that difference, the two versions take place at a different time in the day. someone should make some gifs. I think we have our first direct comparison footage.A little slow today?Well, they have
Phil Harrison (Rumble -> last gen)
It maybe my eyes are going bad due to old age, but it was either the textures were much better or the Res was higher on the PS4 version, but there was a clear difference to me.
If you assume MS wanted an all-in-one box, that can lead to a push to have windows 8 (or some version of it) running for apps etc, which will have a heavy overhead on memory.
Once you're fixed on 8GB for those reasons, everything else cascades from that. No point having more CUs if you don't have ESRAM, because they wouldn't be able to be fed well enough with the DDR3 memory bandwidth.
It does actually seem like a balanced setup. It is just balanced at a lower overall power level than PS4
travisbickle
Member
krimsoncharge
Member
can we get some comparison shots plz.
GameAddict411
Member
AF on next gen will be practically free even at 16x.
RamzaIsCool
The Amiga Brotherhood
I somehow doubt they will use any current gen footage in these developer diaries. Ubisoft always uses the best versions to show off it's games. We don't even know how the current gen version of Watch Dogs looks like.
RamzaIsCool
The Amiga Brotherhood
Ewwww! Well my point still stands. I don't see Ubi market it's games with current gen versions in these types if video's. No developer in their right mind would.
Yes, devs have 8 years of experience with..
travisbickle
Member
Sorry, I changed it I meant current gen PC build, probably more along with the current gen game and they are showing it running on a PC.
HeLLKnight
Banned
If you are right about the all-in-one MS aproach over gaming, what a load of shit.
8-year life cycle Xbox 360 had a lot more sense. 10-year Xbox One? a console with 12 CUs and DDR3? no way.
The worst thing about this are the lot of multiplatform games that could be downgraded for PS4-PC because Xbox One. Maybe not today with launch titles, but in two years when developers will get the most of the hardware performance.
The XBox 360 is going to have a longer than 8 year life cycle. And just because the Xbox One is planned to have a 10 year life cycle doesn't mean that they won't launch another console before 10 years is up.
DeFiBkIlLeR
Banned
Lol..i just read an old issue of Edge with Microsoft's official spec breakdown of the 360 from 2005:
256GB of EDRAM Bandwidth.
1 TFLOP of combined performance.
..there are lies, damn lies and then there are console specs.
256GB of EDRAM Bandwidth.
1 TFLOP of combined performance.
..there are lies, damn lies and then there are console specs.
I can't believe their are still people that don't understand this.
PS3's GPU was claimed to be 2Tflops. Next gen sucks
The eDRAM bandwidth is true.
DeFiBkIlLeR
Banned
Yep..which is why all 360 titles ran at 720p 4xAA and 60fps from day one.
..you see the point I'm making?
thebigmanjosh
Member
I don't think we're going to see those kinds of limitations because of the Xbox One since they're((PS4, PC, XB1) all relatively similar hardware. I'd imagine that most games this coming gen will be developed on PC and scaled down to the different platforms respectively.
We are already seeing a push into higher system requirements with Watch Dogs and BF4 where 8 core processors, large quantities of VRAM, and newer mid-high end GPUs are recommended. In a few years, and not taking into account framerate or resolution, we could be seeing a situation where system performance lines up like this:
PC:Scalable
PS4:High-Ultra
XB1: Medum-High
My crystal shit ball is known to be faulty so I could be very wrong.
I know there was a lot of other BS, but the eDRAM is indeed 256GB/s on 360 (though I understand it only has a 32GB/s connection to the rest of the GPU or something like that).
LordOcidax
Member
Microsoft to unlock more GPU power for Xbox One developers.... I Think we are going to need this....
Marc
Member
Its insane really, I usually go with power at first then try and get the other console down the line if I can. Exception was last gen, I went with 360 first as did everyone I know and have been an Xbox fan from the start. Power wasn't so much an issue because of the PS3's crazy price. I was more than happy with my decision for the first half of current gen, then microsoft abandoned all its gamers for this Kinect junk and stopped making games. Meanwhile Sony is hitting it out of the park, game after game. I wasn't happy with Sony after things like OtherOS and treating their customers like dirt, but clearly their focus changed after the first half and are now more humble. Moved across and the first party support is night and day. Ignoring the power and all of MS's anti-consumer practices they were desperate to enact, I have no faith in MS to provide great games throughout its life. Their focus and they admit to it outright is to make a media machine, to take over the living room. So sooner or later games will take a step back, the fact their first party studios produce barely anything and rely on buying exclusivity from developers is another nail.
Then throw in the much cheaper price of PS4 and the much better value of PS Plus... well bit of a no-brainer. Most I talk to now are getting the PS4, but marketing will play its part. FIFA 14 coming with it in the UK is huge, people won't even look at the price difference and realise its still cheaper with a PS4. They see 'free game' and buy into it.
I'll host it properly for you ..
Thank you sir.
Yeah, but the truck is the PS4 and it destroyed that bike/xbone.
Yeah, but the truck is the PS4 and it destroyed that bike/xbone.
I disagree, John Connor is clearly the Xbox One in your GIF, not the bike! John freaking leader of the resistance, and overall ass-kicker Connor!
That PS4 truck gets blown up later in that scene, btw.
This is important stuff, man.
Red Mage
Member
I'd prefer an emergency first aid kit in case of another round of RRODs, myself.
Btw, you cannot spoiler pictures.