-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Substance Engine benchmark implies PS4 CPU is faster than Xbox One's
- Thread starter Brad Grenz
- Start date
PM a Mod then.
MidgarBlowedUp
Member
Oh yeah? Well Xbone has the upscaling-jaggyficationator turbo. Top that Sony.
Yep, Call of Halo 4 was a travesty. Halo has been MS's flagship title ever since the OG Xbox, and MS relied on Halo, Gears, and Forza to carry them through last gen. Halo is going to continue to be bastardized by 343i, Gears is finished, and Forza is riddled with money grubbing microtransactions. The only appealing game on XBone that isn't available on PS4 is Titanfall, but for people like myself with a competent PC, that doesn't even matter.What 343 did to Halo makes me sad...
Top 20 cards:
Intel HD Graphics 4000
Intel HD Graphics 3000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti
Intel HD Graphics 2000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650
Intel Ironlake (Mobile)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450
ATI Radeon HD 5770
ATI Radeon HD 7850
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce 9600
NVIDIA GeForce 9800
NVIDIA GeForce GT 630
Mobile Intel 4 Series Express
ATI Radeon HD 7770
GTX660 is about equal to PS4 (1.88TF vs 1.84TF), whereas the 660Ti and 670 are faster. The rest are slower. Then there is console optimization so the GTX660 is out, which leaves only 2 cards.
I think sony may remove the wireless functions from DS4 and require you to use a proprietary cable that is only 1m long, that way your sat so close to your TV it automatically looks like there are tons of jaggies.
It's the perfect counter-move.
How do mobiles run 4 core processors clocked at 2.2ghz without active cooling????
Dark Octave
Banned
This post makes me feel good to have a 660ti, for now anyway.
Windows has no more overhead than OS X. If anything, it has less overhead.
As one of the contributors to the 9800 popularity, That card gives me 30fps on Guildwars 2, can't complain about that. The mythical PC stomping on consoles because they all have 780's etc is precisely that, a myth.
Non desktop has less than 4 cores. Why would they make example of i7 from low power notebook?
And in steam stats You dont look at mobile gpu. Why would You?
---------
Sure, but proving console power relevance by comparing it to notebook or even laptop is also a myth.
SneakyStephan
Banned
haha, ok that is funny as hell
Only one they had available maybe. Until its shown what was used it could be any i7 be it mobile or desktop, and from any generation. It's all very vague.
I like the turbo part. Even that got a slight upclock.
Who knows maybe it's from a mobile workstation. Maybe it's a really early i7. No one really knows.
The first mobile GPU on Steam stats (besides the underpowered Intel stuff) is Nvidia 540M at 26th place. So it looks like you're the one who doesn't know how to read.
could it be due to secret sauce.?
But when MS announced the CPU speed bump they make it sound like that they have gone ahead of the competitor specs. So believing that PS4 CPU is also running at 1.75 GHz is a bit difficuilt for me.
But other possibility is even more hard to believe that Sony was well ahead of MS when they announced the speed of 1.75 GHz, and the MS CPU speed bump only helped them to reduce the difference a bit..
I will surely like to know the truth if anyone is aware of it..
Just a note, TFLOPs ratings, especially as measured differently between ATI/AMD and NVIDIA, are not the only determining factor of game performance. The GTX 660 is more of a competitor to the 7870 than the PS4's 7850-level GPU (though in reality falls a bit below the 7870, but still well above a 7850). The new rig I just built for my brother has a GTX 660 and I've been testing it. It produces results superior to what the PS4's been doing in multiplats. I suppose the 3570K as opposed to a Jaguar helps too.
BruiserBear
Banned
This needs to be said more often.
GTX 460 here: this is something I think every time I see those exchanges, and it's annoying to see come up as often as it does. Well put.
jim-jam bongs
Member
How in the Jesus titty-fucking Christ did this manage to turn into coldfoot vs PC gaming round 739?
a Master Ninja
Member
Even with Matt's comment
I'm still unclear from the discussion in this thread if the PS4's CPU is simply superior hardware or if games just don't have full access to the Xbox One's CPU and that is the root of it's inferiority.
He just can't help himself.
Benchmarks generally thrash the CPU, not withhold processing due to random potential OS overheads. We probably wont know more information unless they release it, but you expect since they benchmarked ipad, i7 x1, ps4 etc then its a fair test. Thats usually how these work.
jim-jam bongs
Member
I don't think anyone is clear. Less reserved cores or higher clocks or ?
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
Drive by posts to the effect of crap CPUs don't help any, just subverts to a PC argument.
That isn't really the point though. Value proposition of
Although the title of the thread is in relation to the comparison of two hardware components, the actual source includes more than just the PS4 and XB1 cpu. Although it isn't noted the core count, generation, or clockspeed of the i7, it still does handily beat both those two. Whether it is a minimal improvement or not is up to the user, and I know that NeoGAF loves it's hyperbole, but it's not technically off topic. It's not any better or worse than the multitude of "LOL XBONE" drive-by responses in this thread, complete with images and gifs.
Yeah, sure lol.
High end graphics company that is making performance tests, is using lowest end i7 notebooks as an example for highest end spectrum of their test...
Those desktop Steam players that game on Intel HD Graphics or GT 630, or GT 450 ...
Sword Of Doom
Member
It is interesting and I would like to know but in the end does it really matter why? What's important is the resources available for gaming and the PS4 is clearly ahead
Yeah the Steam survey doesn't really give a representative picture, and it's as you say based on peoples second systems too like laptops. I'd find it very hard to imagine the second most popular resolution, 1366x768, being all that popular with desktop users either. It's all very skewed.
andromeduck
Member
so basically it has only been about a month and already every single point in that post by albert has proven to be utter bullshit or misdirection
simplythebest
Banned
with 1.21 "jigawatts" of electrical power to operate
OldAsUrSock
Banned
There is also this easy thing called overclocking.
Do you have any evidence on what kind of i7 it is? .
Still doesn't change the fact that you said I don't know how to read and were dead wrong. If you have any statistical evidence that contradicts the steam survey, present it. Otherwise you're full of bullshit.
Unless you have some data on overclocking, it is irrelevant.
ARM doesn't get anywhere as hot as x86, bor does it get similar performance.
FranXico
Member
OFFIS
Member
And SLI & Crossfire and upgradeable components, computers get more powerfull while consoles stay same as when released.
andromeduck
Member
they don't
mobile SoC's throttle very aggressively so we almost never see extended periods in max clock
their architecture is also much simpler and power efficient than x86 at the cost of per clock performance so a 2.2 GHz A15 is more comparable to a 1.6 atom than regular desktop/laptop processors
B_Boss
Member
Relative to......?
SneakyStephan
Banned
equivalent to a 2010 i3 dual core = ass
Does it really matter? Inferior is inferior still that's not what I would call big news as we all knew PS4 was more powerful console. I hope at least some people will learn not to listen to PR talk anymore.
Let's see. GTX 670 1.41%, HD 7850 1.27%, GTX 680 1.01%,HD 7870 0.89%,HD 7950 0.85%. From the whole list, about 5,5% of the gpus are definitely better than the console gpus. Not counting the gpus that are in "Other" category. If we compare that to the amount of active steam users, that makes about 3,5 million gpu's. But like said, the steam survey does not give that accurate picture.
Any mainstream gaming CPU?
...I would assume.
But hey everything is relative. Some could say the A6 or ARM cores of the Tegra 4 are "ass" as well. "lol phone gaming" and all that.
FunkyPajamas
Member
Only because of the suspend/resume. It takes longer if it's a cold boot.
It's a joke post, relax
Coldfoot can't let his secret desire to join PC gamers go and just enjoy the experience consoles can give.
No, it illustrates that your data set doesn't fit the purpose of your hypothesis. You have excluded the variance of samples that are laptop or desktop based, those who use multiple monitior environments, overclockers, crossfire supported, sli supported, and power saving populations. You then further disregard the 36% using other cards, a larger population than any of those you have included.
Similar threads
- Poll