Options
"There is no way we’re giving up a 30%+ advantage to Sony."
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=80168873&postcount=708
MS's Albert Penello:
I'm just gonna like, get some popcorn and like, watch this thread.
MS's Albert Penello:
I’m not dismissing raw performance. I’m stating – as I have stated from the beginning – that the performance delta between the two platforms is not as great as the raw numbers lead the average consumer to believe. There are things about our system architecture not fully understood, and there are things about theirs as well, that bring the two systems into balance.
People DO understand that Microsoft has some of the smartest graphics programmers IN THE WORLD. We CREATED DirectX, the standard API’s that everyone programs against. So while people laude Sony for their HW skills, do you really think we don’t know how to build a system optimized for maximizing graphics for programmers? Seriously? There is no way we’re giving up a 30%+ advantage to Sony. And ANYONE who has seen both systems running could say there are great looking games on both systems. If there was really huge performance difference – it would be obvious.
I get a ton of hate for saying this – but it’s been the same EVERY generation. Sony claims more power, they did it with Cell, they did it with Emotion Engine, and they are doing it again. And, in the end, games on our system looked the same or better.
I’m not saying they haven’t built a good system – I’m merely saying that anyone who wants to die on their sword over this 30%+ power advantage are going to be fighting an uphill battle over the next 10 years…
I'm just gonna like, get some popcorn and like, watch this thread.
0
Comments
I hope it's a small box of popcorn :-)
Only kidding, i'm a MS fanboy so will be getting the XBone, i really cant see how the PS4 will be better. Their reputation with all the issues the PS3 should make people think twice when going for the PS4.
I'm confident XBone will be superior once it's fully up and running!!
We won't know for a long time yet what the difference will yield. But in case you missed it, read this opening line there. He admits the raw performance difference is there. He is admitting to the power differential, so you can finally give me some slack all you 40% haters!
What he is saying, as I was trying to tell people, is that power does not equal usage. As I said with my car analogy a Ferrari is more powerful than a Fiesta but it's how you use the car that determines the end result. If the road ahead is full of traffic (ie. a bottlenecked console) then you're not going to get there that much quicker than the Fiesta even though you've got the power to do so.
I fear though that as he says, Sony has typically come in with exotic hardware and crazy claims, but this time Sony isn't using an exotic hardware. Both consoles use the same CPU and both consoles have GPUs from the same olive tree.
To my mind, this makes differences even more notable.
Of course MS isn't going to 'give up 30%+', why do you think they have resorted to overclocking the CPU and GPU?
Enjoy your system, you'll like it.
But what PS3 issues are you talking about?
Examiner
I disagree what he is saying about The Cell, yes it was exotic architecture and third parties really couldn't get to grips with it but in time Sony's first party studios untapped it's potential and we got games like God of War and The Last of Us. The +30/40% difference in GPU performance will matter over time but likely to only Sony WWS titles, heck look how Second Son looks now.
Its Next-Gen Popcorn, it makes all the difference.
I wouldn't take much notice of Examiner, anyone can write an article for them.
There must be some special secret sauce in that GPU (and no, I don't mean another GPU which MS has cloaked from 1st party devs). We don't know yet what those GPU co-processors can do.
And one such inaccuracy is right above - the 150MHz boost, it has no bearing on the 1.23 figure of the GPU, the GPU underwent a 53MHz overclock.
Possibly the YLOD or Blu Ray laser issues.
I know the RROD issue on the 360 was bigger but Microsoft did the decent thing by extending the warranty to three years for this issue.
Looking forward to my xbox one, but jeez MS, put up or shut up!
Give it a rest, you're not a system engineer you really have no real knowledge what either of these systems are capable of outside of what we've seen so far with the demonstrated games. There's is nothing on PS4 that suggests it is more powerful let alone 40%. Fiesta and Ferraris... I mean really.
You haven't been telling us anything, we all know that there's more that goes into a console than simply GPU, these are not merely off-the-shelf parts they may share the same x86 codebase but the actual system design are quite different, with many highly custom built components and architecture, so it won't make the number difference any more obvious.
They just did explain it for the laymen. The actual interview with Albert Panello is worth a watch.
I think 2D was saying he was right about BF3 been better on PS3
I hope this doesn't start around here, its basically the digital version of shouting Fight! Fight! Fight! in the playground
I know it's only personal opinion but I agree with him, there's some great looking PS3 exclusives but I felt the 360 could hold it's own quite easily. Games like Forza Horizon still make my jaw drop with the sheer amount of tech being pushed through the system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power
I heard the PS4 is 180% more powerful....
MS might not have a 30% disadvantage, but it might be with some caveat of "you need to re-write a hell of a lot of code to make sure it runs well". With this talk of Memory Move Engines etc, I suspect that this might well be the case for *certain* things. Mind you, I'm clueless about this...not having access to the hardware or anything.
I'm sure MS have put in place a good developer kit so they can easily take advantage of all the extra features the console can do. I had a link somewhere on this too, wish I saved it.
Why are you disputing the figure? You are missing the point. The power difference is there. It is 100% indisputable. The specs show it.
You keep blurring the difference with how that power will be utilised. Which is where the car analogy comes in.
Something with less power can win the race - but it is still less powerful. Equally if the race was on another circuit it might lose by a country mile.
It depends on how the device is being used.
Here we go again, why are you on this board as this is all you talk about. That 40% power is theoretical peak performance and there are many reliant factors involved that will allow that to occur. You are ignoring ALL of the signs from those that know far more than you that the consoles will not a world apart in terms of performance. Not least by the games already demonstrated thus far. Drive Club looks a mess, even in the 1080p uncompressed direct footage, AA issues everywhere and screen tearing and frame drops ahoy. Forza (it's nearest comparison) is looking mouthwatering.
I don't have any problems with car analogies, in fact Penello's was spot on, yours was not. There's more that goes into a car that makes it fast on track than just simply a high bhp engine. That is why a less powerful Ferrari would whip a Camero arse around a circuit, and here you are comparing Fiesta's and Ferrari's... stuck in traffic jams. Be quiet please.
PS3 last gen had a notably inferior GPU, yet Chopoff will agree that devs used the more powerful Cell architecture to compensate for the lack of raw GPU power, yet according to Chopoff the Cell was highly exotic and because of that the difference this gen should be a lot more noticeable.
Then I ask you why is that not already apparent from the games that we've seen so far if that is indeed the case? What could the devs possibly be struggling with when Drive Club is in that state? Why not target 60fps with luxurious AA if it's so much more powerful than X1? It's not even open world! It's not like Evoluiton are amateurs, they created some of the best looking games on the "exotic" PS3.
Yet I would actually argue that the Cell wasn't as "exotic" and hard to work with as people claim, just that MS's devtools were a league ahead. Something Carmack himself touched upon in his latest keynote speech.
Get ready to read a lot of:
"Just wait until devs get to grip with that extra 40% and more ROPS of pure horsepower, then you'll see!"
It's right in-front of your eyes.
Uh-oh. Saying that word is as bad as saying "Candyman" five times in the mirror