But 'Significantly'? Hardly. If it was significant then games like BF4 would look and perform far and above the X1, thus far it doesnt seem to.
Yeah, it's only an issue to me if it's significant but it really doesn't seem to be no matter what small differences some people try to exaggerate. If it was purely about the more 'powerful' hardware we'd all be using PCs.
I'm waiting to see how things pan out. I've got mates who are getting both so I'll be able to test them out. I still haven't ruled out going PC first of all for next-gen. It would actually be the cheapest option for me as my PC is good enough that all I need is a decent graphics card and it's already hooked up to a TV. It all depends on the games though.
One funny thing about the Ryse scores is people are saying they will give it a go as it looks great, shows off the next gen hardware. The same people who during resoloutiongate were saying graphics aren't everything.
And before anybody says anything I don't think graphics are that important I'm just laughing at the hypocrisy
They're also the same people marking down games for the occasional frame rate drops from 60 fps when this game rarely sustains 30.
There you go, and for the record I don't care what anybody buys, and I have never told anybody what console they should have.
For someone who doesn't care you seem to make a lot of posts on the subject of buying decisions. Here's one quote from you as an example: "Gamers who chose PS over Xbox must be sitting smugly now". .
Yes its a fact that the PS4 has almost double the cores of the X1, however, the X1 cores run at around double the speed of the PS4......apparently.
But 'Significantly'? Hardly. If it was significant then games like BF4 would look and perform far and above the X1, thus far it doesnt seem to.
I dont know where all that "core" fud came from, but here's the score.
CPU
Xbox One = 8 core AMD Jaguar APU running @ 1.7ghz
PS4 = 8 core AMD Jaguar APU running @ 1.6ghz
Memory
Xbox One = 8gb DDR3 + 32mb ESRAM
PS4 = 8gb GDDR5 (Unified)
The PS4 and it's combination of faster GDDR5 memory (the kind you find in top end graphics cards) along with the unified memory design gives it a significant horsepower advantage over the Xbox One.
The Xbox One's design means that clever resource management has to be performed to utilize the 32mb of ultra quick ESRAM - this memory is used to make up for the fact the console has the slower and more conventional DDR3 memory.
Add the fact that Sony's development tools are extremely potent - something they learnt from their issues with the PS3 in it's infancy, along with the unfamiliarity that games houses are having with the Xbox One ESRAM management and you have what we see today, that the PS4 is able to produce consistently higher res graphics and technically more impressive games that the Xbox one can - at the moment.
Like the PS3, the games makers WILL get more out of the Xbox One the more they get to know the machine - but it's not just the issue of it being unfamiliar to program for - it's also the price for the console that MS expects it's customers to pay for the machine that could hold it back in the long term.
For someone who doesn't care you seem to make a lot of posts on the subject of buying decisions. Here's one quote from you as an example: "Gamers who chose PS over Xbox must be sitting smugly now". .
What is wrong with that? That's called an opinion. That is how a forum works. How is this me caring what somebody has bought? And I make that point as somebody who has not bought or preordered any next gen console. Is that the best you can do?
I dont know where all that "core" fud came from, but here's the score.
CPU
Xbox One = 8 core AMD Jaguar APU running @ 1.7ghz
PS4 = 8 core AMD Jaguar APU running @ 1.6ghz
Memory
Xbox One = 8gb DDR3 + 32mb ESRAM
PS4 = 8gb GDDR5 (Unified)
The PS4 and it's combination of faster GDDR5 memory (the kind you find in top end graphics cards) along with the unified memory design gives it a significant horsepower advantage over the Xbox One.
The Xbox One's design means that clever resource management has to be performed to utilize the 32mb of ultra quick ESRAM - this memory is used to make up for the fact the console has the slower and more conventional DDR3 memory.
Add the fact that Sony's development tools are extremely potent - something they learnt from their issues with the PS3 in it's infancy, along with the unfamiliarity that games houses are having with the Xbox One ESRAM management and you have what we see today, that the PS4 is able to produce consistently higher res graphics and technically more impressive games that the Xbox one can - at the moment.
Like the PS3, the games makers WILL get more out of the Xbox One the more they get to know the machine - but it's not just the issue of it being unfamiliar to program for - it's also the price for the console that MS expects it's customers to pay for the machine that could hold it back in the long term.
I think there's deffo a tenancy for people to overrate/overhype the next gen consoles and games to convince themselves they have made the right decision purchasing one. You don't often see these things get much criticism by people who are actually buying the products. To me the difference is not as big as I thought it'd be between next gen consoles, considering the big time gap in-between. Still good but I probably expected too much..
I dont know where all that "core" fud came from, but here's the score.
CPU
Xbox One = 8 core AMD Jaguar APU running @ 1.7ghz
PS4 = 8 core AMD Jaguar APU running @ 1.6ghz
Memory
Xbox One = 8gb DDR3 + 32mb ESRAM
PS4 = 8gb GDDR5 (Unified)
The PS4 and it's combination of faster GDDR5 memory (the kind you find in top end graphics cards) along with the unified memory design gives it a significant horsepower advantage over the Xbox One.
The Xbox One's design means that clever resource management has to be performed to utilize the 32mb of ultra quick ESRAM - this memory is used to make up for the fact the console has the slower and more conventional DDR3 memory.
Add the fact that Sony's development tools are extremely potent - something they learnt from their issues with the PS3 in it's infancy, along with the unfamiliarity that games houses are having with the Xbox One ESRAM management and you have what we see today, that the PS4 is able to produce consistently higher res graphics and technically more impressive games that the Xbox one can - at the moment.
Like the PS3, the games makers WILL get more out of the Xbox One the more they get to know the machine - but it's not just the issue of it being unfamiliar to program for - it's also the price for the console that MS expects it's customers to pay for the machine that could hold it back in the long term.
Thanks for this buddy, I read all of this originally when announced, but then somewhere along the line some previewer (at IGN i think) started bleating on about more cores etc.....Apologies for not checking my statements, Im in Telecoms/IT as well...I really should know better
Funny thing is that digital foundry discovered while running the PS4 through their "hardware gizmos" that the frame rate problem on COD is actually the PS4 hitting over 60FPS. They said it runs at a constant 60fps, occasionally drops below, but the stutter and slight tearing was the PS4 hitting 60+fps.
(Ignoring your oh so clever word play with X Bone)
Oh and correct me if Im wrong, but arent there issues with the PS4 and BF4 at the moment in terms of FPS?
I use both my X360 and my gaming PC at the moment.
Forza 5 runs at 60FPS AND 1080P, yeah, but you'd hope so considering graphically it's nothing particularly special, and certainly looks far worse than the target renders MS were pimping at E3.
Funny thing is that digital foundry discovered while running the PS4 through their "hardware gizmos" that the frame rate problem on COD is actually the PS4 hitting over 60FPS. They said it runs at a constant 60fps, occasionally drops below, but the stutter and slight tearing was the PS4 hitting 60+fps.
There doesn't seem any reported problems with the Xbox One yet.
Is the console even released yet? possibly in the Australia and New Zealand. If there are no problems I would be amazed as their are problems on PC, 360, PS3 and PS4
Is the new Kinect much better then the original or is it pretty much the same with no revolutionary changes? I've read it sees you in the dark and is more sensitive but other then that..
Comments
reply:
lol, no.
Well, no. The PS4 is significantly more powerful than the X-Box One. There isn't much debate about that.
Yes its a fact that the PS4 has almost double the cores of the X1, however, the X1 cores run at around double the speed of the PS4......apparently.
But 'Significantly'? Hardly. If it was significant then games like BF4 would look and perform far and above the X1, thus far it doesnt seem to.
What you are probably trying to refer to is that MS overclocked the GPU from 800 to 853 or whatever it was, a 6% overclock.
PS4 is also 800 - so it isn't double and you also have the fact that Kinect reserves 10% of the GPU.
No the Ps4 CPU boosts the core speed up to 2.75GHZ like the AMD APUs in current gen laptops whereas so far we only know the XB1 CPU is 1.75GHZ.
I'm waiting to see how things pan out. I've got mates who are getting both so I'll be able to test them out. I still haven't ruled out going PC first of all for next-gen. It would actually be the cheapest option for me as my PC is good enough that all I need is a decent graphics card and it's already hooked up to a TV. It all depends on the games though.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-next-gen-now-ryse-son-of-rome
There you go, and for the record I don't care what anybody buys, and I have never told anybody what console they should have.
Xbox One
FIFA 14 - 88
Battlefield 4 - 87
NBA 2K14 - 85
Need for Speed: Rivals - 84
Forza Motorsport 5 - 82 - Exclusive
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag - 82
Dead Rising 3 - 78 - Exclusive
Call of Duty: Ghosts - 78
Madden NFL 25 - 78
Killer Instinct - 73 - Exclusive - XBLA
Zoo Tycoon - 70 - Console Exclusive
Powerstar Golf - 68 - Exclusive - XBLA
Ryse: Son of Rome - 60 - Exclusive
Crimson Dragon - 55 - Exclusive - XBLA
LocoCycle - 48 - Exclusive - XBLA
NBA Live 14 - 45
Average Metascore: 72
Playstation 4
flower - 92 - Exclusive - PSN
FIFA 14 - 88
Battlefield 4 - 87
NBA 2K14 - 85
Need for Speed: Rivals - 84
Resogun - 83 - Exclusive - PSN
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag - 82
Call of Duty: Ghosts - 78
Madden NFL 25 - 78
Killzone: Shadow Fall - 73 - Exclusive
Super Motherload - 73 - Exclusive - PSN
Contrast - 64 - PSN
Knack - 56 - Exclusive
NBA Live 14 - 45
Average Metascore: 76
Forza 5 looks really good. Shame about the 14 tracks only thing though
I dont know where all that "core" fud came from, but here's the score.
CPU
Xbox One = 8 core AMD Jaguar APU running @ 1.7ghz
PS4 = 8 core AMD Jaguar APU running @ 1.6ghz
Memory
Xbox One = 8gb DDR3 + 32mb ESRAM
PS4 = 8gb GDDR5 (Unified)
The PS4 and it's combination of faster GDDR5 memory (the kind you find in top end graphics cards) along with the unified memory design gives it a significant horsepower advantage over the Xbox One.
The Xbox One's design means that clever resource management has to be performed to utilize the 32mb of ultra quick ESRAM - this memory is used to make up for the fact the console has the slower and more conventional DDR3 memory.
Add the fact that Sony's development tools are extremely potent - something they learnt from their issues with the PS3 in it's infancy, along with the unfamiliarity that games houses are having with the Xbox One ESRAM management and you have what we see today, that the PS4 is able to produce consistently higher res graphics and technically more impressive games that the Xbox one can - at the moment.
Like the PS3, the games makers WILL get more out of the Xbox One the more they get to know the machine - but it's not just the issue of it being unfamiliar to program for - it's also the price for the console that MS expects it's customers to pay for the machine that could hold it back in the long term.
Well, ignoring that it's a multi-platform game, the X-Box One version runs at 720p compared to 900p on the PS4.
Numerous other multi-platform games are running at higher resolutions and frame-rates on the PS4.
The X-Bone One just can't compete technologically. Which may be fine depending on what you're looking for in a console.
Personally sub-1080p, sub-60FPS isn't acceptable to me at all on these supposedly 'next-gen' consoles which is why I have a PC to play these games.
And also a Wii U to play games that aren't mostly brown and are actually enjoyable.
What is wrong with that? That's called an opinion. That is how a forum works. How is this me caring what somebody has bought? And I make that point as somebody who has not bought or preordered any next gen console. Is that the best you can do?
This exactly.
Thanks for this buddy, I read all of this originally when announced, but then somewhere along the line some previewer (at IGN i think) started bleating on about more cores etc.....Apologies for not checking my statements, Im in Telecoms/IT as well...I really should know better
Forza 5 runs at 60fps.
(Ignoring your oh so clever word play with X Bone)
Oh and correct me if Im wrong, but arent there issues with the PS4 and BF4 at the moment in terms of FPS?
I use both my X360 and my gaming PC at the moment.
The problems with battlefield 4 are across the board. And are very much on PC as well.
So it looks like bad programming and coding!!
Forza 5 runs at 60FPS AND 1080P, yeah, but you'd hope so considering graphically it's nothing particularly special, and certainly looks far worse than the target renders MS were pimping at E3.
COD runs like dogshit on all platforms.
Is the console even released yet? possibly in the Australia and New Zealand. If there are no problems I would be amazed as their are problems on PC, 360, PS3 and PS4