Submitted by Prcko 873d ago | article

PS4 and Xbox One GPU Compared, Startling Difference Between The Two

PS4 holds a spec advantage over the Xbox One. The system has better RAM but the CPU is quite similar. So what about the GPU? (PS4, Xbox One)

« 1 2 3 »
dedicatedtogamers  +   873d ago | Well said
I think Jonathan Blow said it best regarding the PS4's advantage in hardware power.

(I'm paraphrasing his comments from Twitter)

"The difference in power is going to be more significant than people think. We're talking about one console running a game at 30 fps and the other console running the game at 60 fps".

And before anyone spouts the "it won't matter because devs will program for the lowest common denominator", that is 100% false. PS3 had a weaker GPU and a split pool of RAM, and guess what happened? A lot of multiplats looked better on 360! You can say "Devs were being lazy" all you want. It doesn't matter because even if that's true, do you think those "lazy" devs are suddenly going to be "not lazy" now? No. They'll utilize the PS4's hardware advantage because 3rd parties don't give a crap about console wars. They care about their game selling more than the OTHER 3rd party devs, so they're not going to compromise the fidelity of their game for some silly "lowest common denominator" nonsense.
#1 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(210) | Disagree(51) | Report | Reply
jimbobwahey  +   873d ago | Well said
Yeah, the huge difference in GPU power combined with Xbox One only having 5GB memory available for games compared to the PS4 having 7GB available is going to result in some major differences in multiplatform games, that will only become increasingly pronounced throughout the next console generation.

Sony designed a console for gaming whereas Microsoft designed a console for watching TV.
JBSleek  +   873d ago | Well said
That'ts a little disengineous.

I could if I Was stupid say that Sony made the PS3 for watching movies but that would only be looking at it from one side. And only choosing to see that.

They both play games and they both will do multimedia and social functions. Microsoft is hitting more home with it only does everything but if E3 was any indication of The years to come it seems MSFT could pull off gaming and TV.
MysticStrummer  +   873d ago | Well said
@JBSleek - Did the capability of watching a movie on PS3 detract from game playing in any way, even a little?

The type of RAM One uses and 3GB of it taken up by the OS do. Those things show that One's primary focus is not gaming, but multimedia and multitasking.
Darrius Cole  +   873d ago
"Microsoft is hitting more home with it only does everything"

"It only doesn't everything" was a PS3 marketing slogan.

Microsoft missed the mark badly with the Xbone. At E3 they had worse specs, a smaller first and second party game-making infrastucture, DRM, and a higher price. They have reversed the DRM with a software patch at least. (BTW, they will have to package in the box.) But they are still charging $100 more for worse specs. They still have a much smaller first and second-party game-making infrastructure.
Blachek  +   873d ago
5GB - Gaming
3GB - Operating Systems

The type of Ram leans toward graphical performance. Absolutely. I wont argue with you there... but when did 3GB become larger than 5GB? The component focus is on gaming,
FrigidDARKNESS  +   873d ago
The ps4 design does have some draw backs the GDDR5 has has latency issues and GG has stated that the 176mb per sec not all of it is accessible to devs.

the xbox one GPU has two independant bus's, one to DDR3, one to the ESRAM.
BY contrast, the PS4 has a 2 very small bus's between the CPU and GPU, and one main memory bus.

On PS4
it is onion and garlic
and it is used since 2011 if i am correct ,amd APU liano
even the name is the same
BallsEye  +   873d ago | Well said
No. Get your info straight before you repost some amateur articles. Xbox one uses hypervisor which let's devs take all 7 GB of ram for gaming if needed. Not only that but also Xbox One was built from ground up with dx 11.2 in mind. That's why fast eSRAM and modified DDR3 (it's faster than GDDR5) were used. Check out MS demo of them showing tilling, where scenes that would use 3GB of RAM, use only 16 MB of ram with that technology. Graphic quality is not just about GPU power and you people should learn already. To remind you ps3 had less raw graphic power than 360(YES, LOOK IT UP) but still pulled off games with graphics that you won't see on 360. There is much more to it!

ovnipc  +   873d ago
To Ballseye. Best post I have read. Thank you and some one know whats he its talk about. Thats correct XONE will use 7GB of ram. And with the help of the cloud will be stronger than PS4. And kinect its worth $100 more.
nnodley  +   873d ago

No the GDDR5 in the ps4 will have about the same latency as the DDR3 and esram in the X1. A bunch of people have debunked that.

And you are correct that dev won't have access to all 176GB/s but they will be able to get closer to that because it's unified and will be easier to handle. Also they are probably gonna reserve 1GB for the OS so that should take away from the 176GB/s. Unless I'm wrong about that.
loulou  +   873d ago
mystic correct me if i am wrong, but isn't 5 more than 3? and if 5 are for games, then how can the main focus be something else??

please enlighten me
Name Last Name  +   873d ago | Funny
I don't even know what you guys are talking about. I'll just sit in the corner and play some games.
DonFreezer  +   873d ago
Are you that delusional?The first Xbox had a much higher gap than the one this article cites and it still didn't have a single multi platform game looking much better.And also please shut your mouth.I have went to a graphics card shop and all of the things ps4 is said to do better wasn't even mentioned in the descriptions of the cards.Why should we care about teraflops and rops when not even pc gamers don't care about those.If they were so important why didn;t they mentioned them all those years for graphics cards.And why do you keep taking things someone said as facts when there's a ton of developers who said that performance difference could be non existent.
smokey_vols  +   873d ago | Well said

With the "help of the cloud" ya...

GuyThatMakesSense  +   873d ago

Yeah I know what you mean; Tilled Resources. MS showed it at the Developer's conference as a feature made possible with DirectX 11.2, which is exclusive to Windows 8.1 and Xbox One.

I liked that demo. Though I wouldn't use it as defense for the Xbox One since I've seen that method being used in plenty of ways in the PS3 (the lowering of unused, unseen textures and elimination of objects to lower memory consumption). So maybe the PS4 still has more memory, even with Tilled Resources in XB1.

Actually, (I may be wrong) I think that DirectX took that idea from OpenGL (PS3 and PS4 use it).
#1.1.13 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(5) | Report
BallsEye  +   873d ago

That's a completely different thing. Things like LOD and other tilling in openGL gives you VERY visible downgrade in visual quality and still consumes whole lot of RAM. Tiled Resources gives no visual downgrade at all and uses almost 200 TIMES less RAM. If it wouldn't be something new, Industry wouldn't be so excited about it.
GuyThatMakesSense  +   873d ago

Are you sure any of those numbers (200 times less ram) and noticeably worse OpenGL tiling is true? The "industry" (which very well can just be general informed public) can be easy excited for anything, even lies


Misleading marketing campaign that makes you think games will look noticeably better "if you use the latest version" of said thing, or "it can only be done by our product" lines.

I wouldn't fall for it too quickly, and neither should you. Let's see what MS has to offer instead of being convince by their sweet talk. Let us also see if Sony can do any better, as well.
BallsEye  +   873d ago

From 3000 MB to 16 MB is almost 200 times less, check out the presentation. About the excitement... if all the experts are excited, it means something for sure!
PLASTICA-MAN  +   873d ago
Also: PS4 GPU is based on GCN 2: having 8 ACE's (AMD’s new Asynchronous Compute Engines), each capable of running 8 CL's each. Tahiti and 7970/7870 have two ACEs, 2 CL's per ACUs. Surely Xbox One GPU has the same as the latter if not less.

If I make that simple the ACUs are like the SPUs in the CELL which are efficient in heavy calculations operations and Cerny confirmed that they can mimic the behaviour of the SPUs with them which gives us 64 operations compared to 4 in a ATI 7970. That's the power of a GPGPU. It is a greta idea for Sony from shifting the CELL a processor doing graphical stuff to a GPU doing CPU stuff.
GameNameFame  +   873d ago
@BallsEye Look at this and cry
its called "partialy resident texture"


It has been already done. Another xbox fanboy secret sauce. It really is pathetic. How many secret sauce, wizard jizz must we go through?

MS changes already existing Partially Resident Texture and market it as different name. Xbox fanboys go banana
#1.1.18 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(28) | Disagree(4) | Report
SniperControl  +   873d ago
Do you even know what a Hypervisor is?
It is a virtual machine environment, this allows a machine to run a number of OS or apps with in a virtual environment while not directly affecting the main OS.
MS are running there 3 ALWAYS running OS's this way. It has nothing, as you say to do with how devs allocate ram.

MS have already stated the the X1 will use 3gb for OS & 5 for games.


It is you, who needs to get his/her info straight before spouting crap in these forums.
5eriously  +   873d ago

You have balls in your eyes and they look like this

Related image(s)
starchild  +   873d ago
Yeah, the power difference is pretty big and you WILL see it in multiplatform games.

But it's very unlikely that we would see 60fps on PS4 and 30fps on Xbox One.

The PS4 has 50% more gpu performance, but to render twice the amount of frames literally takes twice the amount of gpu power so the PS4 would need to be 100% more powerful in order to run the same game that's 30fps on Xbox One at 60fps on PS4. Unless you want the PS4 version to look worse.

Instead, expect more solid framerates (closer adherence to 30fps), better anti-aliasing, a few higher precision effects, etc. It will be a noticeable difference, believe me. But a 30fps difference is very unlikely.
pixelsword  +   873d ago
What are the best looking games on either console thus far and compare those two in terms of scale, amount of effects per character, and other next-genny factors and you'll have an early winner.
allgamespc2012  +   872d ago
god, another blind fanboy that doesnt understand how technology works. first party will look better maybe on ps4, multis will look the same, do you really think the xbox one is that much weaker than ps4? you didnt watch the conference a few days ago about dx11.2 and the new tech they are using which will be in xbox one? that new tech competes with the gddr5 on ps4. Maybe you should go watch it before making such bling assumptions and being such a fanboy
#1.1.23 (Edited 872d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report
5eriously  +   871d ago
Stop sending me messages just because you are out of Bubbles, babyboy!

Stop talking crap then maybe you can get more bubbles. Ask mommy to teach you

Idiots will always be idiots
decrypt  +   873d ago
Well being a PC gamer id say MS and Sony have both been pretty hush about the GPUs. Getting any sort of technical knowledge has been almost impossible.

While one has been promoting the Cloud the other has been high on crack talking up a RAM spec thats outdated few months into the consoles life lol.

We will get to see the real differences once some PC tech site gets their hands on these consoles, rips them apart and does a real analysis on whats in these boxes, just like what happened with the Wii U.

Let me remind you guys what happened with the Wii U:


In the end it was figured out the Wii U was no where as powerful as Nintendo wanted us to believe.


not arguing PS4 will be ahead, just saying overall we probably will be in for a surprise once someone actually opens a real box.

Come to think of it both of them are using Tablet / net book CPUs. Ever equipped a PC with a mid range GPU then backed that up with a Low end CPU?

Overall the system becomes CPU limited, MS might have done the smart thing by balancing the tablet CPU with a equivalent GPU. Who knows, Sony just might find themselves in a situation where they cant take advantage of the GPU due to a weak CPU.
#1.2 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(20) | Disagree(90) | Report | Reply
CGI-Quality  +   873d ago | Well said
We've had extensive analysis' on these devices already, plenty, Digital Foundry included. The conclusion is always the same. The PS4 is ahead. No way to spin it at this point.

Edit: Disagree with fact all you want. The bottom line will not alter.

^^ The CPUs are very similar (in fact, practically the same). Not sure why you're even bringing that up.
#1.2.1 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(90) | Disagree(24) | Report
CGI-Quality  +   873d ago
What "surprise" would there be? Nothing is going to change suddenly. The main specs are known.
HammadTheBeast  +   873d ago
Decrypt, how much would a PC that can play Planetside 2 Max settings cost?
NewMonday  +   873d ago

XB1 and PS4 all have 8 core CPUs, but in the XB1 only 6 are available for developers.
Godmars290  +   873d ago
Five. The XB1 can only use five of its eight GB of RAM because the three OS its uses take up 1GB each.
Conzul  +   873d ago
Hammad just owned it.
decrypt  +   873d ago

"Decrypt, how much would a PC that can play Planetside 2 Max settings cost?"

Why do you ask? its not like any of the next consoles are confirmed to run Planetside 2 at max settings. Compare apples to apples, no point comparing a ferrari to a ford focus then complaining about price lol.

There are very reasonably priced configurations that can run Planetside 2 at very good settings.
#1.2.7 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(33) | Report
LoveSpuds  +   873d ago
"Being a PC gamer", why are you chipping in on a console discussion?
SymphonicRain  +   873d ago


Apples to apples
Godmars290  +   873d ago
So does the XB1 use 9GB of RAM with it's OS using up 3GB, has something changed about it three OSs that I don't know about, or is the Xbox camp just that bad at math?

Cause last time I checked both the PS3 and XB1 use 8GB of RAM, and 8 - 3 = 5. Not 6.
#1.2.10 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(1) | Report
brave27heart  +   873d ago

Funny, the devs themselves said it would run on max settings on PS4.

Search the playstation youtube channel for the E3 Planetside 2 interview.

Elit3Nick  +   873d ago
The Xb1 will be able to use whatever RAM that the hypervisor doesn't take, example if the hypervisor takes 0.5 gigs then it can allocate as much as 7.5 gigs for games if the game needs that much, or 7 gigs if the hypervisor uses 1 gig
rainslacker  +   873d ago

Hypervisor doesn't really work like that. It can free up resources by suspending services, but for what MS is showing it looks like most of those services are on demand. This means that quickly switching between apps/games/whatever wouldn't be near instantaneous as they are promoting.

The best analogy I can come up with is for those that are familiar with the XMB on the PS3, and yes the PS3 does use a couple hypervisors, one for it's OS, and one as a critical part of it's copy protection. When you press the PS button the game usually pauses, and then the XMB loads somewhat slowly due to many of the services needed for it to be run being suspended while in a game play state. It's also why many features aren't available while a game is running because they can't restart enough of them because a game's services can't be suspended unless each developer programmed that into their code, which they aren't likely to do.

Vita's OS also works on a hypervisor. It has almost near instantaneous switching on apps/games/whatever. However, memory available to games is constant. Memory is not freed up for game play use to such a degree, if at all. The hypervisor allows them to free up resources being used by a game however to run those other apps. This works on a mobile system because you really can't run most apps simultaneously. The ones you can, can't be suspended, which seems the case for most of the features of the X1(Browse web, watch TV, play game, Skype, etc all while playing a game).

I'm not doubting that hypervisor will be able to free up some memory for games, but this thought that it can free up another 2/3's or more of an OS's memory footprint is absurd. Particularly if you want to be able to do all these multi-tasking things that MS is making such a big deal about.
#1.2.13 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report
Epic_Troy  +   873d ago
Only one ps4 game is running at 30fps hahaha soo much power right?
Ritsujun  +   873d ago
The epic_troll.
MysticStrummer  +   873d ago
Reading comprehension can be a useful skill in today's job market.

He didn't say every game would be 60fps.
Epic_Troy  +   873d ago
Lol this site is a joke 95 percent of the game that they shown for xbone was running at 60fps.....but yet all I here is xbone is weaker but as it stands today the games on xbone performance are better then ps4 hahahahahahahaha call me a troll or whatever the truth hurts u sony fanboy

@mysticstrummer you better be a Harvard graduate or something lol
#1.3.3 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(44) | Report
Pope_Kaz_Hirai_II  +   873d ago

ALOT of xbone games will be 30fps you can take that to the bank.
silvacrest  +   873d ago
those games shown weren't even running on a xbone dev kit
nnodley   873d ago | Bad language | show
Epic_Troy  +   873d ago
Sooo he's got mad and call me epic twat lmfao

@nnodley how do you know Forza sacrifice anything????? Have u played it???? What proof do u have??? The game looks must better then drive club......like I said before u can say the ps4 is the most powerful console all u want....but tell me this why cant they get their game's running at 60 frames per second huh?????
#1.3.7 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(12) | Report
Ritsujun  +   873d ago
The epic_troy's been mad since the Xbone180 reveal and E3 conference.
Another b0t don'd by Pon Patrick.
pixelsword  +   873d ago
@ Troy:

The xbone didn't run any game; it was all on kits or something, so that's not an indicator at all; the other thing is that people were saying that the xbone's GPU was having problems even being created, so it's existence is even in question until those things are hammered out.
USA007  +   873d ago
All Xbox One games at E3 were running on high end PCs, and not the actual hardware. (PS4 did this also, but I believe some were running on dev kits)

It just means pretty much any X1 visuals of games seen are not accurate, and probably will change. Just because a high end PC can run it at 60fps, doesn't mean the X1 will
yewles1  +   873d ago
lol, people actually think PS4 games are going to automatically look better because of the similar architecture. I'm just gonna' wait for the NEW excuses devs come up with in the 8th gen... XD

GribbleGrunger  +   873d ago
They don't look similar to me.
ASH_ufo  +   873d ago
you better wait for naugty new IP...you will see, NEW best looking game
nnodley  +   873d ago
And you're linking The Order: 1886 why?
Epic_Troy  +   873d ago
Exactly my point these sony fanboys talk specs spec's spec's like their a developer or something just enjoy the game's both systems has too offer just buy both......and just forget about Nintendo they suck now lol
the_espresso_kid  +   873d ago
I saw this thread, first of all, this is a trailer, not gameplay. So there is no indication that gameplay will be letterboxed. Hysteria.
Qrphe  +   873d ago
It was a cinematic trailer.
NeoTribe  +   872d ago
Epic, funny how you all of a sudden you wanna take a diplomatic stance after getting your ass handed to you. Also, quit laughing at your own trolling, it doesnt make the bs you spew more believable, just more pathetic. Thirdly i would buy a wii u as a 2nd console waaaaay before that shitbox. Atleast nintendo has unique ips and features. Microsoft is a greedy, bloodsucking corporation.
#1.4.7 (Edited 872d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
loulou  +   873d ago
jonathan blow is now some sort of god on n4g. yet any dev that says anything positive has their credibility called into question..

bu bu but i thought that devs had to downgrade their games on ps3 to make them equal to the 360?? now i am confused. so was they downgrading? were they lazy? or is now the ps3 not as capable as the 360???????? make your mind up. ffs i have never seen someone troll as much as you

lets wait and see the confirmed specs, then the games before we start the circle jerk ey..

and no i aint mad, my ps4 is already on pre-order with killzone.

i see that all your effort and life spent on n4g writing the same stuff over and over has paid off in the bubbles department... you certainly are dedicated.
warewolfSS  +   873d ago
Me and you and a handful of other people on here are traitors to the causes buying both systems at launch huh?
KwietStorm  +   873d ago
I never heard anything about downgrading a game on PS3 to make the counterpart equal. But to this day, people who have not a clue about development say that developers were lazy on the triple. Fact is, PS3 was difficult as hell to develop on, unnecessarily difficult, and people don't want to understand that third party devs have no obligation to go above and beyond for either Sony OR Microsoft, especially when they have time constraints for their projects and a bottom line for their own company. The difference now is PS4 is a developer paradise, and it still retains the hardware power advantage. That is going to be key.
Darrius Cole  +   873d ago

Final Fantasy 13 downgraded once it became multi-plat. There were all sorts of comparison write ups over that.

The $100 cheaper price is also going to be key.
#1.5.3 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(20) | Disagree(2) | Report
hazardman  +   873d ago

Same way i feel at times when i come on. I game on both PS and Xbox and when i comment on something im a troll or my opinion is shit. Im cool with it tho, let em keep hitting disagrees all day. meanwhile im gonna get back to this blunt and work.
loulou  +   873d ago
absolutely warewolf. if you aint a hardcore sony warrior on here, you are not welcome

kwietstorm, you have never seen people write that games are being downgraded or held back so that they are equal?? seriously
#1.5.5 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(14) | Report
PSN_ZeroOnyx  +   873d ago
It is in every developers contract with M$ that the xbox copy of all 3rd party game must be comparably equal with no noticeable differences compared to other platforms. Breaking this agreement can result in M$ not allowing the game to be on xbox. And only big studios dare stand up to M$ BC M$ wants the AAA games.

therefore, M$ IS holding the industry back by not allowing 3rd party games to shine on playstation the way playstation first/second party games outshine all others.
Mystogan  +   873d ago
You're really taking something Johnatan blow said as fact?

Also we still don't know the official specs of the GPU.

This article adds nothing. Its just beating a dead horse, how did this get approved?
PFFT  +   873d ago
Sony fanboys. All they had to read was "PS4 holds a spec advantage over the Xbox One. The system has better RAM but the CPU is quite similar."
AND BOOM, article approved.

EVEN if the official specs havent been released.
Ritsujun  +   873d ago
Pfft @ pfft.
Software_Lover  +   873d ago
How does Blow even know. Im asking seriously because as I know it, he isn't even developing for the XBone is he?
HurtfulTimez  +   873d ago
yes. the witness is a timed exclusive so i guess its eventually coming to xb1
HurtfulTimez  +   873d ago
to the idiot that disagreed.


there you go.

FFS Google isnt hard to use ya know.
MysticStrummer  +   873d ago
Yes. He already announced that The Witness was using all 5GB of available RAM in the One, and was complaining about both the type of RAM and the amount available for games.
Software_Lover  +   873d ago
Ok thanks. So, let me ask you this.........

He is complaining about the type of ram available?

So is this game coming to pc or not because the pc currently uses 3 types of ram and is not in one pool.

Some gamers are still using DDR2 ram with GPU's that use GDDR5 and DDR3 ram.. Some pc gamers have DDR 3 ram with Gpu's that use GDDR5 and DDR3 ram.

So is he gonna $h!t over the entire pc architecture also?
rainslacker  +   873d ago

PC works off OS level API's so it's not comparable to consoles.

PC's also have a huge pool of virtual memory to work off of. Next gen consoles might as well. Not sure if current gen consoles have access to a similar virtual memory, or if it just allows pre-loading onto the hard drive.

I question the need to use 5GB's for the game he is developing. It seems other dev's are making much more impressive games at more than 1/4 less than that(KZ uses 1.5GB's). Most of it depends on how he's using the memory.

Blow talks a lot really. I don't think he's a hack, but at the same time he should be more considerate about his criticisms when others are doing a better job of memory management than he seems to be doing.
truthteller  +   873d ago
PS3 had better specs than X360. It was harder to develop games for PS3 than for 360 so devs just ported games from 360 to PS3. It's not he same case here though. PS4 is as easy to develop for as it was for PS1. PS4 also has a pretty big specs advantage. I can't see MS pulling this off even if they do trick people into thinking games like CoD and Titanfall are exclusives. The cloud works only for multiplayer games (no DRM in SP).
mxrider2199  +   873d ago
the ps3 if you actually compare the spec to the 360 the 360 has better specs. But the power of the cell is insane if you actually using correctly, making it able to produce more graphical power than the 360
#1.8.1 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(4) | Report
mxrider2199  +   873d ago
if you the 360 to ps3 the 360 had better specs. But the power of the cell if used correctly produced the more graphical power and all this other stuff we see today thats way better than anything on the 360
Foxgod  +   873d ago
I hate to burst your bubble but, Blow is not some computer god.
Hes an Indie developer, and as far as developers goes, they are really good with the language the program in, but as soon as it went trough the compiler they dont know much about what happens with what they programmed.

In other words, developers know a lot about software, but little about hardware, so dont just assume that Blow knows what hes talking about.

It takes years for professional developers for familiarize themselves with the hardware they worked on, theres no way that Blow got enough experience by now to compare the two consoles, especially considering he hasnt worked on the XB1 at all yet.
KwietStorm  +   873d ago
So developers are good at developing, but they don't know what they're doing. Got it.
DarkHeroZX  +   873d ago
Lol foxgod

Why did you even get out of bed this morning?
Foxgod  +   873d ago
Thats not what i summed up at all.

Dont put your words in my mouth.
#1.9.3 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(24) | Report
WeMilk   873d ago | Spam
MasterCornholio  +   873d ago


Motorola RAZR i
Pope_Kaz_Hirai_II  +   873d ago
Foxgod = Spingod
rainslacker  +   873d ago
Usually the senior programmers on a games project know quite a bit about the hardware when it comes to consoles. Console code is often written in assembly for performance. You need to understand the hardware for that, as assembly is just a way to express machine code in a readable format. Assembly takes a step by step process of how they want the code to execute on the machine. The compiler will then take that and compile it down to machine code.

I can't speak to Blow's knowledge of hardware though. I've never been terribly impressed with his ego which didn't quite match up to the game he developed. His prior and present work don't look like they were created with a home built engine, but every developer understands memory management, or at least should at the level of games he's making. However, he did study computer science, and likely knows enough about software development to understand the working principles of hardware.

However, to complain that 5GB's isn't enough is rather silly. It's more than what you'd get from a PC, and many competent developers have created amazing things with much less. Any number of PS3, PS4, Wii, Wii U, hell even PS2, PS1, and so on, have produced much more impressive games than braid, and the PS4 and X1 and Wii U will likely show off games much more impressive both visually and game play wise than The Witness seems to offer(assuming based on what I've seen).
Mystogan  +   873d ago

Coming from REAL developers not some fanboy indie developer who apparently doesn't know how to code properly if he's saying his game needs 5GB of RAM to run.
MysticStrummer  +   873d ago
Your article says PS4 is more powerful than the One, just not "a magnitude" more powerful, whatever the hell that means.
#1.10.1 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(2) | Report
devwan  +   873d ago
If UBI came out and said "yes, ps4 is clearly more powerful" there would be all kinds of trouble. They would not only be upsetting ms, but they'd have an army of xbots making petitions and boycotts for their infidel ways.

Companies like UBI, EA, Activision etc. *need* both consoles to be a huge success in order to maximise their profits. They aren't going to go out on a limb and upset half their potential customers. I was speaking with a dev on exactly this subject not 2 weeks ago.
#1.10.2 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(1) | Report
kneon  +   873d ago

I take it they were trying to say "an order of magnitude", which is clearly not the case as that would mean the PS4 is 10x more powerful than the Xb1.
Funantic1  +   873d ago
Halo for X1 is already confirmed to run 60fps.

Angeljuice  +   873d ago
What's that got to do with anything? Its also been confirmed as being developed by 3rd rate developers, but still thats beside the point.
KwietStorm  +   873d ago
Monkeysmarts  +   873d ago
And 343 sucks, so why does it matter? COD runs at 60 fps, I don't remember anyone championing it as a meaningful achievement in gaming.
wynams  +   873d ago
I could write a toilet flush simulator that ran at 60 FPS if that is your lone criteria for gaming excellence.
Xboxonefan27  +   873d ago
Thats true
NeoTribe  +   872d ago
Your point? Thats also why its not graphically appealing. You can either have better graphics or better fps... I personally cant tell the diff from 30fpt and 60 so id prefer prettier graphics over some number ill never visually see.
wishingW3L  +   873d ago
the "lowest common denominator" comment is relevant. What you're comparing is just visuals not game design. Yeah, the Xbox 360 had slightly better looking multiplats when it came to frame-rate and stuff but it still was the same game on both platforms.

Example: Developer wants to have 2 enemies attacking you at one point but one system can only render 1 enemy at a time because of the advanced AI, right? Then the more powerful system will still get only 1 enemy even though it has the power to render both at the same time like initially intended. =/
#1.12 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
devwan  +   873d ago
That's a contrived example. A more real-world and likely scenario is this:

Dev makes game. Code is 95% common to both formats. Superior hardware grunt allows game to run at 1080P/60 on one machine, inferior hardware does not and the decision is made to either render at 800P and upscale to retain 60fps or lock to 30fps to keep it somewhat smooth.

Another example:

Dev makes game. Game runs equally well on both hardware formats, but one format it not breaking a sweat and allows for much more "shiny". Dev adds extra gloss to game on superior hardware format and uses this format to promote game online and in TV advertising.

You will see both these scenarios play out multiple times over the coming years with games on ps4 vs xbox one.
Mounce  +   873d ago
I would only disagree on your part saying that a lot of multiplats looked better on the 360. Most cases of that were only because the developer in question sucked ass at coding and optimization with the PS3 hardware. Aka Bethesda, Capcom, or even Rockstar (Because we all know GTA4 and RDR were blurrier, lower resolution)

But, there were many cases that PS3 was better liiiiike say: Vanquish, The Saboteur, FF13, Arguable BF3 for PS3 rather than 360(Before PC Elitists come in and say PC SHITS ON ALL CONSOLE VERSIONS), annnd Portal 2 looks much more refined on the PS3.(and same in-before-PC, because PC will always have No limits varying on your hardware)

All the other games that just simply had 360 better were just because they came 2006-2007-2008 when Ports and Multiplatforms were slow and dreaded.
Gardenia  +   873d ago
Im not an expert but what i know is that developing for the PS4 is going to be much easier then it was for the PS3. So is it possible that changing things for one console to the other is now going to be easy as well? Lets say they first make the game for PS4 and then simply downgrade it for the Xbox, or the other way around
Mounce  +   873d ago
@Gardenia - Well, it'd not make sense for development to differ now on both consoles. They'll be made similarly with less effort needed to optimize for what would be 360/PS3. Just, the developer at that I'd say would be able to pull off more, more crisp bitmapping, better AA, better draw distance on PS4 than X1.

The only thing I'd foresee in the 'pathetic' nature of Microsoft honestly? Is if Microsoft pays developers to NOT Optimize their game on PS4, as in to say. Microsoft won't want the difference of visual quality being too noticeable and they'll try paying studios to not try to dive deeper into PS4's power and to keep at the same level that X1 'looks like'. It seems likely, seeing what kind of tactics they employ all the time just to get a sad little Edge via misinformation....
PSjesus  +   873d ago
Really exited about PS4 but also i hate to see that under powered Xbone may effect the muliplat gfx quality like they did in this gen,well at least it has blueray not 1998 dvd good job M$
gapecanpie  +   873d ago
Then why Forza 5 run at 1080p at 60fps if its gpu is so weak and looks better then drive club I might add and why killzone sf run at 1080p at 30fps???? I guess those move engines must really be helpful in offloading data.

Anyway this comparison of horse s**t is really f***ing stupid. Both systems have tablet cpus and a low end gpu even if one is 50% more better then the other its still a turd and low end. Also people that think the type of ram equal better graphics in anyway isn't to bright the only thing the type of ram mean is less pop ups and maybe a slightly faster load time.

Both systems are a huge disappointment and that's why I will be building my first ever $550 gaming PC with 40% cheaper games, free online(Sony drop the ball with this one and you just got to love the hypocrites who use to bash Xbox live because you had to pay but now have done a complete 180 because its Sony after all), and a system that is far more powerful then both consoles combine. You just can't lose with the PC.

Anyway i'll eventually get a ps4 but not until its $299 because to me that is what its actually worth.
#1.15 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(28) | Report | Reply
Epic_Troy  +   873d ago
Daaammmnnnn u couldn't have said it better.....now it's time too run sony fanboys incoming in jumps through the window lol
Hufandpuf  +   873d ago
Hicken  +   873d ago
I hope you're not really from Georgia. You make the rest of us look bad.
gapecanpie  +   871d ago

I make Georgia look bad?

Like I give a sh*t, Georgia do just fine in making it self look bad with all the hillbillies and not to mention some of the lowest test scores of any state. Georgia is one of the most crappiest states I had ever been in and that is why I left. Now how about you try and stay on topic or is that to hard for you to do with that Georgia schooling?
#1.15.4 (Edited 871d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
Syntax-Error  +   873d ago
Titan Fall runs @ 60 FPS
Guess what system that game is coming out on? 97% of the games will look the same and you will not really see a difference. The only difference will be found on exclusives
Shadowsteal  +   873d ago
Titanfall looks like COD with mechs and jet packs. The graphics look terrible for next Gen. Compare it to Killzone: Shadowfall and Battlefield 4. But at least Bf4 looks good and is 60fps. You guys are sucking titanfall d**k just because it's somewhat exclusive. Even though it will be out for PC and 360 too.
loulou  +   873d ago
shadowsteal and the idiots who agreed??

do you clowns know what engine that game is using??? i'll give you a clue, it's nearly 10yrs old...look it up

and even though graphically it wasn't special, the gameplay looked amazing.
Syntax-Error  +   873d ago
You said we are sucking it's d!ck?
Are you an idiot? The game got like 4 awards at E3. Why don't you say ALL THE CRITICS ARE SUCKING TITAN FALL'S D*CK. The fact is, the game was intense and ran beautifully. Getting in and out of the mechs worked flawlessly and the game is MP only. Which means it will have a chock full of extras. I bet you're going to be the same gump that will get all gay if it's released on PS4 5 months after the Xbox One release.
NeoTribe  +   872d ago
Titanfall is a timed exclusive.. Did you think ms was actuallh gonna obtain a fresh new ip lol... Its gonna come to ps4 down the line aswell. Even so it doesnt look that interesting. Fps, mechs, futuristic shit, blah blah blah. Xfags seem to be clinging to that one game like there lives depend on it lol.
Syntax-Error  +   872d ago
Before you get blasted, please link where you read it was a timed exclusive. If you have no proof/source then you are just speculating. They specifically asked Vince Zampella and he said it is an XBOX exclusive with no plans for PS4 as of yet. You're calling people XFAGS, but you're the one coming off like a PSFAG.

"On other platforms, Respawn has a potential problem in its future. If Titanfall becomes a successful franchise on Xbox One and PC, and the studio wants to bring it to a wider audience beyond Microsoft’s machines, there’s no frame of reference for new players." -IGN
quenomamen  +   873d ago
Lolz @ 26 disagrees, apparantly X1 fanboys dont like things like facts or math. A 30% power defecit is a pretty significant disadvantage, this is not same as a 360 vs PS3 difference you morons. Go play Crysis on gaming PC then on one with 30% less power. You'll see a difference. And NO the effin CLOUD is not gonna make it up the difference, so stop it with that marketing BS.
hellvaguy  +   873d ago
Insignificant differences in next consoles. Buy a gaming pc if you want real horsepower.
scott182  +   873d ago
as soon as games come out for PC I will upgrade, right now it's a $1,500 dust collector.
mrmarx  +   873d ago
what about the "power of the cloud" that will make the xbox 3 times more powerful lol
hellvaguy  +   873d ago
I think it was said best here: "Opinions are like a$$holes. Everyone has em, and they all stink."
NeoTribe  +   872d ago
Only difference is microsoft makes you tongue theres clean.
Sy_Wolf  +   873d ago
@BallsEye That's not what a hypervisor does at all. Saying something is "built from the ground up for DX 11.2" doesn't make it good. Severely underpowered entry level GPUs can and will be built from the ground up for DX 11.2. The cheap DDR3 and ESRAM were used because it's cheaper, not because it's better.
Elit3Nick  +   873d ago
A hypervisor manages multiple OSs by allocating resources to whatever each OS requires, if the OS for gaming requires 7 gigs, as long as the hypervisor doesn't take more than 1 gig, it can shut down the OS required for snapping and use the remaining 7 gigs for the gaming OS
N4Flamers  +   873d ago
@ elite3nick

Thought ms said that it would use 3 gigs for the os'. I dont see how you're going to have the instantaneous snapping if two of the os' are shut down. I'm just saying you're either contradicting what ms themselves said or just not aware of how they plan to use it. I remember them saying that they all ran at the same time and os' are ram hungry.
N4Flamers  +   872d ago

I felt incomplete after my last post so I found a link with some proof. X1 uses a total of 2 os' with a hypervisor to manage them and they've allocated 3 gigs of ram to these processes.

Sy_Wolf  +   872d ago
@Elit3Nick Microsoft can't use the 3GB on the OS for games because it would disable lots of the instant switching features. A hypervisor doesn't magically give you extra resources. Really all a hypervisor does is let you run more then 1 OS at the same time.
Thomaticus  +   873d ago
The question isn't whether or not the devs will optimize the game for the console given the information provided by Mr. Blow; but the question is, does Microsoft allow a multi-platform game to release on their console if the Xbox One version is somewhat different due to an optimization (which results in the PS4 version looking better)?

Just thinking about the rules that both companies put in place in regards to multi-platform releases which could affect this situation.
Tsar4ever  +   873d ago
This site seems to be a little off, the closest gpu spec to match what the ps4 does is the Radeon HD 7970m-mobile. Just go to the amd site and look at the spec area of the 7900 series. And the closest 28mn gpu is the 7970m, just scaled down a bit, from 850mhz to 800 and gcn cores from 20 to 18. This had been the more popular rumor for some time.

And another thing, don't forget about it being more than just an average mobile gpu, it also has general purpose compute tech built in it which makes it a GPGPU, for all that physics stuff nvidia gpu takes for granite, also with the unified pool of gddr5 ram to boot. Just go to youtube and look up ps4 gpu, 7970m. Theres a video by somebody called red....something. Some british euro dude explains way better than me.
#1.22 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Zephyrus_808  +   873d ago
Even if some multi-platform games were going to look better on PS3 for whatever reason, we wouldn't have seen that due to Microsoft's content parity policy or whatever, where they said they would not allow a game to be released on the 360 if it didn't look at least as it did on the PS3. Of course, devs didn't have a choice but to adhere to the policy, unless they wanted to lose 50% of potential sales. Hopefully it won't happen this gen so developers can use the PS4 to its full potential and people can actually enjoy games which haven't been held back by anything.
dedicatedtogamers  +   873d ago
" due to Microsoft's content parity policy or whatever, where they said they would not allow a game to be released on the 360 if it didn't look at least as it did on the PS3"

This policy is 100% fiction and 100% imaginary. The policy you THINK you're referring to consists simply of this:

In order to publish on Xbox Live ARCADE (specifically, Arcade) a developer was required to make sure the 360 version had all the content of the other versions. In other words, you couldn't release a game on 360 at the same time as another platform if those other versions had more content.

There are plenty of instances where a multiplat game had more content on PS3 (Batman Arkham Asylum/City, Battlefield, AssCreed) and even had better graphics on PS3 and Microsoft didn't block it from being on 360.
#1.23.1 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report
slimpickens  +   873d ago
"Even if some multi-platform games were going to look better on PS3 for whatever reason, we wouldn't have seen that due to Microsoft's content parity policy or whatever, where they said they would not allow a game to be released on the 360 if it didn't look at least as it did on the PS3."

Good Lord help us!! As convincing as Sony fanboys sound, after awhile you start to see through the BS!
showtimefolks  +   873d ago
ps4 is more powerful and better system all around and how is this news again? Not many developers will take advantage of PS4's tech so most 3rd party games will look about the same maybe some graphical/performance edge to ps4

but when it comes to exclusive games we will be blown away, xbox one is an upgrade over xbox360 by a good margin but ps4 is a whole new beast over ps3

Cd red project

and few others who will actually use the ps4 to its advantage and use xbox one to its advantage. but most 3rd party developers just want to make sure their games look identical so a part of their fanbase won't be mad
The_HarryEtTubMan  +   873d ago
That is a difference we're going to see. The question is, in what ways and to what extent? PS4 has the custom built APU similar to their A-series APUs, very interesting.

I didn't think much of Xbox Ones graphics, so I'm not surprised. MS invested their budget in a camera that can see you in the dark and 3 operating systems. Managed to use outdated ram and a bottom of the line GPU. I don't like Xbox anymore.
marjorie12close   873d ago | Spam
HOLLYWOODLAND   873d ago | Spam
cleft5  +   873d ago
Specs do matter and they favor Sony this time around. Beyond that I can't imagine it being all that easy to develop for the Xbox One that is said to have 3 Operating Systems in one. Seems unnecessarily complicated, hopefully Microsoft comes out with good software tools to make it easy to develop for the system.

I do think E3 was telling with developers running their games off of ps4 hardware and Xbox One games off of high-end PC hardware. It's too early to say how it will all turn out, but so far Sony holds an advantage technology wise. Really is a reverse of the 360/PS3 situation at launch all those years ago.
#2 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(23) | Disagree(13) | Report | Reply
CGI-Quality  +   873d ago
They favored Sony last time as well. It was just a much harder system to code for and the GPU was weaker.

Edit: @ Below: Uh, who are you talking to? I know all of that already (obviously, based on my comment). The PS3 WAS the stronger console, but it had weak links. Thus, companies focused more on the 360 in the beginning (this began to shift a bit mid-gen). However, as the exclusives proved, the PS3 was the more powerful machine. This time around, the PS4 is the most powerful machine AND easy to code for.
#2.1 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(21) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
s8anicslayer  +   873d ago
Cell was more powerful in the PS3 but the 360 had a better GPU! Read the story! Better GPU + Easier to develop for = Developer friendly thus being the lead platform for multiplat games and also being the favorable console for gamers like the 360 is current gen.
Sitdown  +   873d ago
There is still time for you to delete your first paragraph...... do it before the perception gets out.
#2.2 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(19) | Report | Reply
Mystogan  +   873d ago
It was only one game that was running on PC dude. Because it wasn't finished.

It was lococycle. Not a graphically intensive game.

Ryse And other games were clearly shown running on Xbox One. The box was visible.


Majin-vegeta  +   873d ago
yes just like BF4 was running on xbox juan...Oh wait no it wasn't.It was on running on a PC.

Hercules189  +   873d ago
Ok so i guess that they must have had a super computer hidden inside those xbox ones right. Everyone on this site seems to be running on denial.
MysticStrummer  +   873d ago
"It was only one game that was running on PC"

fossilfern  +   873d ago
Majin-vegeta is right about BF4 it was running on PC, unless the Xbox One just developed an 3,4,T,V keys and also an E key when he was going up the lift.
Majin-vegeta  +   873d ago
@Hercules are you blind or just plain out in denial??I posted proof.
Hercules189  +   873d ago
and the bf4 demo ran on comparable specs to xbox one so they are going to look comparable to the demo that we saw, probably better bcus theres still a cpl months to work on the graphics.
DarkHeroZX  +   873d ago

"and the bf4 demo ran on comparable specs to xbox one so they are going to look comparable to the demo that we saw, probably better bcus theres still a cpl months to work on the graphics"

Lol not even. MS was caught using High end Nvidia GTX 780 cards with probably a 3rd generation i7 CPU. A Nvidia GTX 780 is hardly similar.
Syntax-Error  +   873d ago
Are you for real? Since when has DICE showed Battlefield running on a console?
Hexer1021  +   873d ago
I love how the Forza link shows clear proof of running on the Xbox One, but ppl still deny it.. It's ridiculous how much hate the X1 is getting for no reason.
maniacmayhem  +   873d ago
I love it, trolls doing all and anything to discredit the games for Xbox One.

Here you go Majin, I know you're working over time but how about you take a look at this link too.

Foxgod  +   873d ago
Lets wait untilt both are out, and compare games by then.
Because if you purely go for specs, then the Xb1 and Ps4 are better then my pc as well, after all, my pc has 4 cores, and the consoles have 8, and my Pc has 6gb DDr3 and 2gbGddr5, and both consoles have 8GB unified.

And yet, my pc (I7) is twice as powerful as the next gen consoles, due to having a better architechture.
Specs alone dont mean so much anymore these days, a quadcore 2ghz phone for example doesnt perform much better then a Pentium3 800 mhz.

I believe that the setup MS choose for, is a very balanced one, where both AI and phsysics are processed quickly (thanks to the good timings of DDR3), as well as textures and other gpu related data are processed quickly too (thanks to the ESram).

i am still doubtful about how the ps4 will handle physics and AI quickly, as the ps4 doesnt have DDR3 on board.
#3 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(40) | Report | Reply
creatchee  +   873d ago
Well, at least your enemies will be pretty as they run into the wall repeatedly with drool coming out of their mouths.

I jest. Kinda.
#3.1 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
CGI-Quality  +   873d ago
Consoles and PCs function very different, though. You can't just compare them like they are one-in-the-same. And this is coming from someone who's rig is beyond twice the power of these machines.

I love it! Two disagrees and not a one of em contain a rebuttal.
#3.2 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
Mystogan  +   873d ago
As much as PSfanboys don't like to believe it.

DDR3 RAM is faster then DDR5.

The difference is DDR5 sacrifices speed for bandwidth while DDR3 sacrifices bandwidth for speed. But Microsoft made up for it by including the ESRAM making it faster and have more Bandwidth at the same time.


The X1 does 192GB/s now and PS4 does 170GB.

So the RAM is pretty much comparable.

DDR3 is more capable for games. Nobody uses DDR5 in gaming rigs its just too slow.

Also we don't know what the GPU in the X1 is capable of. The 50% power difference is pure speculation coming from the same source everytime. No dev confirmed this.
And I'm not going to believe johnatan blow. He said his game "The witness" needed 5GBs of RAM to run. That means he is very bad at coding.
#3.3 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(59) | Report | Reply
HurtfulTimez  +   873d ago | Well said
stop spreading rumours. even microsoft themselves said that the 192GB/s was just 'theoretically possible' thats microsofts own words. so stop thinking that speed is 100% fact when it isnt - yet...

also im curious as to why AMD has said NOTHING regarding the xb1 while they have nothing but praise fore the PS4



Surely they would of said something positive by now if the XB1 is going to be more powerful than the ps4 as some fanboys think.
callahan09  +   873d ago
What the hell are you talking about, nobody uses DDR5 in gaming rigs? First of all, just to clarify, you mean GDDR5, which is not the same thing as DDR5. DDR5 is a theoretical future iteration of DDR which might come out in a decade or more. We're not even up to DDR4 yet. But to say that GDDR5 is not used in gaming rigs is *ridiculous*.

Every gaming rig uses GDDR5. All of them.

The world's current top of the line GPU is the GTX Titan, which retails for over 1000 dollars.


It uses GDDR5 RAM.

All "gaming rig" GPUs utilize GDDR5 RAM.
jmac53  +   873d ago
Wow, get your facts straight. DDR3 is faster when it comes to latency and refresh. In all other areas GDDR5 blows it out of the water. Why do you think ALL the high end graphics cards these days use GDDR5. Also adding the esram and DDR3 together to get 192 gb/s just doesn't cut and is a fanboy dream.
DoesUs  +   873d ago
More bullsh!t spreading from you.

"The X1 does 192GB/s now and PS4 does 170GB."

PS4 has all memory available (after OS footprint) at 1.84GB/s not 1.70GB/s.

The XBone's DDR3 is 102/GB, but the ESRam can bump 32 meg, ....read that..32meg to the 192 region. Averaging out at around 133GB/s.

"Nobody uses DDR5 in gaming rigs its just too slow."

Like all modern GFX cards that have GDDR5?
imt558  +   873d ago
WTF are you talking about? Do you know that you write bulshit? It's not DDR5, it is GDDR5. Read the text that you linked, god damn. eSRAM can't read/write at the same time and XO can't reach 192 GB/s. It's just PR rubbish from Microsoft.

The bandwithw between XB1's GPU logic and ESRAM is 128 bytes wide at 800 MHz. It can send 128 bytes per clock in either direction. The peak BW is 102.4 GB/s, which you could spend all on reading from the ESRAM, or all 102.4 GB/s writing to the ESRAM, or split between reading and writing. If reading and writing to the ESRAM with a workload, logically the split is 51.2 GB/s. So, DOWNCLOCK did happen. About 6% or 50 MHz.

XB1's bus cannot send and receive data simultaneous in the same clock.
#3.3.5 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(3) | Report
Angeljuice  +   873d ago

Its not as simple as adding the two bandwidth totals together to get an accurate measure of bandwidth. The eSRAM has a tiny capacity so it cant magically improve the entire 8gb bandwidth, just a small fraction of it ~ 1/240th of the total RAM.
BattleTorn  +   873d ago

"Every gaming rig uses GDDR5. All of them."

Myze  +   873d ago
" The X1 does 192GB/s now and PS4 does 170GB. "

How many times does it have to be stated that you can't just add the numbers together before people realize how stupid it is?
windblowsagain  +   873d ago
Stop talking crap about GDDR5.

You haven't got a clue.

You cannot run GDDR5 on a pc motherboard, because there isn't one.

Pc's generally use DDR3, But the GPU must have GDDR5. Needed for bandwidth and speed.

Face facts PS4 has been built from the ground up for GAMING.
kenshiro100  +   873d ago
All I heard from you was 'blah, blah, blah, I have no idea what I'm talking about'.
Oner  +   873d ago
176GB/s -> 8GB


192GB/s "theoretical" (actually mostly 133) bottle necked -> only 32MB eSRAM
Ashlen  +   873d ago
Physics are most efficiently handled by the GPU in modern gaming. And all modern GPU's have GDDR 5.

You may have heard of PhysX, the leading physics solution in gaming.
#3.4 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
Foxgod  +   873d ago
Physx was designed to take some stress off the cpu by offloading some instructions to the gpu, if the gpu isnt maxed out.

These days however processors got multiple threads, and therefore dont need to offload physic to the gpu anymore.
Physx is kind of obsolete ever since multi core computing set it.
Physx 3.0 (2011) is even optimised for multi threading for crying out loud, which is a cpu thing.

And gddr5 again isnt useful for physx, it will slow your system down.

Indeed, havok is more used, and Havok happens to be CPU physics mostly.
They wanted to do a Gpgpu version of Havok, but they cancelled it, as nowadays it just aint interesting to stress a gpu with physics and AI calculations, thats what we have multi core cpu's for.
#3.4.1 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(24) | Report
creatchee  +   873d ago
"You may have heard of Havoc, the leading physics solution in gaming."

wishingW3L  +   873d ago

Just take the X360 as an example. It uses 512MB GDDR3 with only 10MB of edRam. This right here is the same line of thinking they used on the XB1. The edRam was was there to speed up the weakass GDDR3 but the amount was so low that it didn't work so most devs used the edRam for free MSAA because it was useless for anything else. Anyway, keep reading and you just might realize something....

By your logic the PS3 has the superior set-up because it had 256MB of GDDR3 for the RSX and 256B of XDR (which is a superior memory module to DDR3) for the Cell yet developers still preferred the unified memory pool of GDDR3 on the X360.

Yes, PS3 beat the X360 in memory latency by a pretty big margin but it meant crap to developers. So all your Physx examples are irrelevant.
#3.5 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Foxgod  +   873d ago
The ps3 games are not better looking at all the xbox360 games, they are about the same, its nitpicking at best.

And yes the 360 had lower specs, and yet it managed to keep up thanks to its architecture.
greenlantern2814  +   873d ago
Ps4 is gonna be great. When a company goes to the devs the sony did and ask them what they want and need then give it to them the results will be great games for years to come. I am interested to see what people are doing with the next gen systems 2 years from now.
Still on the fence about Xbox1 but not because the specs are weaker, but last time I got 2 360 and both died rrod and ms didn't fix either one. So gotta wait and see sine the Xbox1 and 360 had about the same development time table.
LoydX-mas  +   873d ago
How is it even possible to have two xbox 360 with RROD and MS didn't fix them? They had a three year RROD warranty. I know, I had two replaced(for free and a couple months free Live Gold).

Sorry, I fail to believe you.

Second, the 360 RROD has been resolved and fixed since the "Jasper" version of the last curvy 360.
warewolfSS  +   873d ago
Read his comment history.

Stealth troll
creatchee  +   873d ago
Oh I've seen people complaining about buying 8 360's because they didn't want to wait for MS to ship their box back. If you want to spend 200-400 bucks that you don't have to spend just because you can't bear waiting for a repair, then a red ring isn't your biggest problem in life.

Regardless, yes, those people are hard to believe.
greenlantern2814  +   873d ago
not at first they didnt they kept kept increasing the warranty time after the problems kept going sorry you dont know what your talking about but that is a fact the 3 year warranty didnt happen into well after launch. also not every problem was covered under the warranty and i am not the only person who has had this happen
also i know they finally fixed the problem the slims seem to have a very low failure rate.
#4.1.3 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report
LoydX-mas  +   873d ago

I bought my first 360 in November 06. The warranty WAS only 90 days, but was bumped up to one year right before I purchased it. This was a retroactive warranty from launch date. So it covered ALL 360's and sent reimbursement checks to anyone who had to pay for RROD repair.

In 2007, they bumped it to 3 year. This included new and USED 360's. They also included the E74 error in 2009.

So that means EVERY 360 was covered(new and used) until July of 2010. The ONLY exception was the new 360slim.

So if you truly had two non-slim 360s that RROD within 3 years of the date you bought it, then they WERE covered. So to say MS didn't fix them means you stretching the truth.......sorry lying.
#4.1.4 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(4) | Report
greenlantern2814  +   873d ago
dont care what you think and if you have read my comment history than you also know i had to buy 2 ps3 but the second 1 i got still works
@creatchee and @LoydX-mas
you are both saying you know nobody that had this problem. or nobody that multiple 360. i dont believe you either
LoydX-mas  +   873d ago
I went through TWO RROD! Both were within the 3 year period. MS replaced them for free within 3 weeks.

No one will deny the 360 had issues, but MS did spend about $1 billion in warranty extensions and free repairs for millions of consoles.

Since then, they seemed to have learned their lesson. I don't know a sole that has had hardware issues with the slim model.
hellvaguy  +   873d ago

Your back pedaling way too much now bro. MS gave a 3 year warranty on all rrod regardless of when u bought it.

Please make intelligent lies next time. They still wont be true coming from your filthy mouth, but at least they wont additionally be insulting to everyone.
YNWA96  +   873d ago
This article is fanboy porn...
n4rc  +   873d ago
Its all speculation at this point..

Having higher specs in one area doesn't mean better performance in the real world..

And I hope that was just a poor analogy saying they will be like 60fps vs 30fps..
quenomamen  +   873d ago
Math doesn't lie, a car with 30% less horespower is going to be slower than one without it. Maybe in your world specs arent relivant. But in the REAL world we use specs for many things from PCs, Cars, Planes, Boats, Rockets, Athletes you name it, and guess what they're pretty much spot on. Oh yea, you're correct specs dont translate into the real workd at all, nah we just use them for fun. Lol
hellvaguy  +   873d ago
Math doesn't lie, but people make things up to get hits, do. Stats don't lie, but idiots interpreting them make mistakes. Same concepts in play here.
#6.1.1 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report
Elit3Nick  +   873d ago
that's a horrible comparison, a 200hp lotus exige can easily smoke a car with twice the horsepower, in the world of cars, power/weight is more important than pure horsepower
JBSleek  +   873d ago
Are the Xbox One GPU verified that this is the one being used? There's lots of speculation so one cant be certain.
Mystogan  +   873d ago
The GPU right now is pure speculation. We don't know what its capable of.
Angeljuice  +   873d ago
It was confirmed by the Microsoft engineers in an interview after the reveal. I think they ought to know the specs, they built the thing.
KRUSSIDULL  +   873d ago
Xbox One GPU is speculation for now since nothing have been confirmed yet.
Death  +   873d ago
It's not that devs are lazy. That's ignorant at best. The issue gamers ignore is cost. Blu-ray gave developers the capacity to make games longer and/or with higher resolution textures over DVD. Did this occur? No. The reason for this is cost over ability. Developers do not have a reason to utilize maximum power when the time and money used doesn't make them money.

The difference in power between the two consoles is yet to be seen. CPU's are near identical. The ram used will be interesting to see how each affects the console over all. CPU's are very linear and GDDR5 isn't ideal for linear calculations. Awesome for GPU's, but that is half the equation. The custom GPU in the PS4 is stronger than the XboxOne if it holds true that the XboxOne uses a custom 7700 vs the PS4's custom 7800. It's a bigger difference than it seems. Once again though, the GPU is only half of what goes on. If the CPU in the PS4 is slower due to GDDR5 use, a faster GPU is needed to get the same results. Flip all of this and you see Microsofts problem using slower DDR3. How much the eSRAM helps is yet to be seen.

If these were simply PC's, then the 30/60 fps comparison might hold true. Since these are consoles though, things aren't quite so simple. It's possible both will have games that run at 60fps, with the PS4 having the ability to use higher res textures. Once again though, these are consoles running on 1080p displays which aren't nearly as good as a high res monitor. Any PC gamer knows that a good way to increase fps is to either lower texture quality or resolution.

Back to my first point, what incentive does a developer have to increase texture res and fill up a blu-ray if the costs aren't justified? Middleware and shared game engines will make games look very similar on both consoles and much better than what we have today, but costs are what hold developers back from utilizing what they have.

It's not nearly as simple as some believe.
N4G_IS_SONYS_WHORE   873d ago | Spam
greenlantern2814  +   873d ago
PC gamers: we have the best specs, goody for you.
Game devs don't put any more effort into making games for pc though so you get the same games that look a little better.
And if you buy a gaming pc that isn't a few years old your gonna pay 750$ all the way up to 4,000$. Look them up on alienware or cyberpower. And building one that can do what ps4/ Xbox1 can do if you can do that ( not everybody can) coast more than 400$. Just a few years ago many people said pc gaming was dead, it is making a come back now but consoles rule gaming just learn to live with it.
sorane  +   873d ago
They've been saying it's dieing for 20 years now. Yet it made more money than the 360 and ps3 combined last year :) You shouldn't believe everything little internet fanboys tell you......
greenlantern2814  +   873d ago
did pc gaming make more money or just pc sales because not every one who owns a pc plays games on it. and you thats what i said any ways that people have been saying it was dying didnt say it was dead
sorane  +   873d ago
PC gaming made over 20 billion last year. Think 360 and ps3 gaming made about 15 billion combined.
InTheLab  +   873d ago
Lower price and superior specs....

The author makes a good point but I have to wonder, if the PS4 is easy to code, I'd like to think that instead of making a game for the lessor of the two consoles, why wouldn't devs make the game on PS4 then port to Xbox and changes what's necessary?
GribbleGrunger  +   873d ago
Yes, this is hopefully the scenario we'll see. It all depends on which console sells the most in the short term, and I have to say it's quite clear that if Sony can ship more, they'll sell more.
LoydX-mas  +   873d ago
That is what happened at first last gen(ps3 and 360). Initially all multiplat games were ported to the PS3 from 360 since it was easier to code.

But most devs switched to PS3 first then port to 360 BECAUSE the 360 is easier to code.

It makes sense, develop the game on the hard machine first, then its smooth sailing to port to the other(less complex) machine.
sAVAge_bEaST  +   873d ago
hopefully this will happen, as it makes the most sense.
fracturedrich  +   873d ago
This will bring the trolls out of there caves.I own a ps3 and a xbox 360 and get a high amount of enjoyment from them both.I think at first both consoles will run games at a smooth 60 fps.I do not think that these consoles will last 7 years with out being updated a little bit which is testament to them both.I think that both consoles will be stronger than the other in certain areas.The 360 pad is better if you prefer driving games because the trigger presses further.I think the ps3 graphics in certain areas are a touch better because of it's very good blu ray.It comes down to personal preference,i prefer the 360 only slightly because of forza but can see why people like the ps3.I think the price will end up closer than people think,especially after xmas.
InTheLab  +   873d ago
Glad you brought up the 360 controller for racing because I 100% disagree. I ran through a whole season of Forza 3 and my trigger finger about fell off. It's too stiff and not nearly sensitive enough to properly simulate breaking and acceleration. It's not built for that.

The DS3 on the other hand has pressure sensitive everything so you don't have to hold down on the R2/L2 to accelerate or break. They are also wider for more comfort as far as long term usage goes.

Both controllers are poor substitutes for racing wheels, and the PS3 and now PS4 have superior options. I use the same wheel on PC as I do for GT but I'm sure as hell not going out to buy one of MS' proprietary wheels just to use only on their console.
hellvaguy  +   873d ago
A sore trigger finger? Wow really bro, that's from operator error.

Stop squeezing as hard as u can like your watching internet porn.
xReDeMpTiOnx  +   873d ago
Xbox fanboys really have no argument to the specs being superior or = to ps4 when what's known so far the ps4 is quite a bit more powerful.

And no the clouds won't save you they are made up of water not hardware.
YNWA96  +   873d ago
Everyone has put out well articulated comments, then you come along... You have missed the point so many times... I do not care about the terraflops, or is ESram will lubricate your GDDR5 ram... People like the games, who cares if it is easy to make it look good on PS4, but more work on X1. A lot of games will look similar, some will be better and some will be exclusive, or whatever. Great design also does not guarantee great gameplay. Just buy what makes you happy and stop drooling over micro/terraflops....
creatchee  +   873d ago

Let's look at your comment from an algebraic standpoint (and people say you'll never use algebra - HA!)...

You state that what is known is more powerful for the PS4. So you admit an unknown quantity on the XBOX One. We'll creatively call this variable X.

I'll use the value of PS4's power (again, creatively) as 4. Since you are probably one of the "50%-ers", I'll call Xbox One's KNOWN power as 2.

That leaves us with three possibilities:

2 + X = 4
2 + X > 4
2 + X < 4

HOWEVER, since the value of X is static, yet unknown, we cannot say that any of those three possibilities are correct until we know the value of X.

Summary: wait until official specs are released before you make assumptions.
Angeljuice  +   873d ago
They are already known, its just that some are in denial about them. The techs at the Xbox one reveal let slip enough info to accurately extrapolate the gpu specs. This fact is widely known but ignored by fanboys.
quenomamen  +   873d ago
You forgot to factor in teh power of da Cloud !!!!! Its like 10xx. Lolz
S2Killinit  +   873d ago
I'm so glad that the console that will support core gaming the longer and with better development studios will also have the better specifications to support better graphics for games.
xReDeMpTiOnx  +   873d ago
@mystogan once again you post faulty stuff, the whole thing with that esram is it will only get more powerful if it was maxed out which in reality it won't, it was already said that Microsoft is having heating issues with the hardware and it's most likey to be underclocked due to the heatig issues.

That article isn't the original that was released ethier, they left out the fact that of they got the normal amount of output from the esram it would be clocked at around 154gb which still puts it Lower. Xbox fanboys are going to grasp on to anything that will make them think that they will have an advantage.
nikrel  +   873d ago
" The PS4 GPU is drastically better and will probably show in multiplatform games. However, if developers use the Xbox One as a lowest common denominator and develop using its specs, then we won’t be seeing a lot of differences between the two. "

This is exactly what is going to happen and microsoft is going to claim that the power does not matter. Watch this will happen 100% quote me on it, call me patcher whatever you want it will come to be.
Funantic1  +   873d ago
When they say theoretical performance they mean estimating by looking at the specs but haven't really done any actual benchmark test. Some developers who have actually designed games for the X1 say the performance for the X1 is really 192Gb/s of bandwidth. The PS4 is supposedly only 176GB/s. No one ever considered the Microsoft's Direct3D tile resourcing during their theory. Plus they never considered how well the 32 mb ESRAM would recover bandwidth.

#16 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(9) | Report | Reply
DoesUs  +   873d ago
No developer's said that. It came from MS themselves, also...your missing much more out. only 32meg can achieve near the 192 figure. The PS4 can hit its peak with all memory (OS aside memory) Please don't spread misinformation, it smells of desperation.
Funantic1  +   873d ago
I believe the link I provided over your words. Sorry dude. You got to back up anything you say. If the PS4 games looked so much better than the X1's games we sure couldn't indecisively tell at E3. It's not like any PS4 games won any awards unlike Titanfall tho it is a time exclusive it WAS built using the Azure Cloud. Don't just throw numbers out there. I didn't. And I did say developers who designed games for the X1 because those are the only ones that can tell about the performance. Who is else could tell about the X1's actual performance...Sony?...people looking at specs on paper? Try again.
#16.1.1 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report
DoesUs  +   873d ago
Who said anything about what the games looked like at E3?

"133GB/s throughput has been achieved with alpha transparency blending operations (FP16 x4)."

Did you miss this bit from your link, which is basically DF?

I've been in this industry since 1994, please try harder.
imt558  +   872d ago
If you want, read my post above!:)
MadMen  +   873d ago
Tisk Tisk, wait for facts folks, before jumping into the swamp.
Belking  +   873d ago
lol at that article.You can't measure performance just by Gfops. Final specs haven't been revealed for xb1 yet. There is no real performance advantage. As people can see xbox-0ne has more games running at 1080p 60fps than ps4 right now. The amount of RAM available for games doesn't even matter because don't even know how to use it all yet. 4 gigs is what most games will be using for years.
#18 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
assdan  +   873d ago
The cpus are very similar, but people are forgetting that the PS4 has secondary chips (don't know why they haven't advertised this more that will take care of background tasks like downloads while the xbox one's processing power will be hampered down by it. The xbox one has theoretical performance that is a little weaker than a 7770, which is a pretty good mid range gpu. The problem is, the xbox one only has ddr3 ram, which will limit its power even more than what it looks with practical performance. Weaker cards like the 7750 are even bottlenecked by this ram. And they also have less ram available for games. So even if they use the xbox has the lowest common denominator, the ps4 will still be able to get higher resolution, or if the devs are lazy higher framerates.
Death  +   873d ago

DDR3 is "faster" for CPU calculation since it's low latency. GDDR5 is actually slower for CPU calculations which creates a bottleneck. GDDR5 is ideal for GPU's though. Neither is a "better" solution for combined ram. The eSRAM in the XboxOne will increase ram speed, but the actual performance boost isn't really measureable. The PS4 doesn't seem to have a solution that helps CPU calculations with the GDDR5.

We really do need to see the games as they run on the final hardware to determine which console has better hardware. From what I can see it is pretty much a wash since both are so similar.
imt558  +   873d ago
PS4 doesn't have any bottlenecks :

AllroundGamer  +   873d ago
Just wait, MS will release the Xbox Two after a year with the same specs as PS4 :D
maniac76  +   873d ago
Face it.ms dropt tha soap.not even witha rope toboot.who do ms think they is anyway.itsa conspiracey to let sony take back its crown for future dealings deals with sony and 4k movs etc.ms cant have it all no matter how rich.

Ps4 is gonna be badazs cray
Hercules189  +   873d ago
learn english please.
Jihaad_cpt  +   873d ago
yes like when you make a sentence start it with a capital letter please, otherwise why bother using a full stop
Prcko  +   873d ago
ps4 gonna dominate,specally exclusive games
ASH_ufo  +   873d ago
absolutely right
Pinkdolphin  +   873d ago
You guys realize this dude is using you peoples' fanboyism to make money right? If you actually clicked the article the writer put little effort into the article and basically puts two infrgraphics with already known information and a couple short paragraphs stating the obvious "ps4 is better than xbox becuase its gpu is stronger" and there is a ton of adds. But the writer knew he would get away with that because all these rabbid fanboys will still click on the link, not read the article and instead partake in the console war. Literally this article was set up for sony fanboys to boast about the better specs in turn you guys make this guy alot of cash for very very little effort. Disappointing and just shows how rundown n4g really is and surely there is more to come because all you guys have been clicking on is sensationalist crap like this with info we've known about for MONTHS.
#24 (Edited 873d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
xReDeMpTiOnx  +   873d ago
@creatchee, if you had reading comprehension you would of realized I said from what we know so far. And what we know so far is that the ps4 has superior specs.

Knowing microsofts track record as well especially with the over heatig problems they have with the x1 and the old 360 I highly doubt they will be able to draw every drop of esram and realistically that almost never happens.

Also for all you that think all those games were running on x1 at e3 ur wrong they were running on mod deified pc's
PSN_ZeroOnyx  +   873d ago
Not to mention the fact that those 5 billion transistors on the APU M$ bragged about means the APU will run EXTREMELY hot!
DaeJim  +   873d ago
And some PS4 games streamed from PC.. your point?
WickedLester  +   873d ago
I think it will be much like this generation. You won't see the differences early on but year after year, little by little, you'll see the PS4 start to pull away from the Xbone in terms of graphical performance.
WeedyOne  +   873d ago
Anyone else think its funny that the XB1 GPU is named "Bonaire"... What does that sound like to you?
Jamaicangmr  +   873d ago
Jesus just imagine what we will be getting from the PS4 in 2-3 year? Naughty dog, Polyphony Digital, Santa Monica, Guerrilla Games and Sucker Punch will make us their bitches.
Npugz7  +   873d ago
I love you PS4❤
My_Outer_Heaven  +   873d ago
PS4 is far more promising and worth the money compared to Xbone. I'm bored of the Xbox exclusives.. I will get PS4 instead. I enjoy playing my PS3 more anyway.
« 1 2 3 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Become a Vampire in MMO Dogma: Eternal Night

18m ago - Serena Nelson writes: "Vampires suck. But in a good way. Ever since Bram Stoker wrote Dracula the... | PC

Saitek Heavy Equipment Precision Control System Review | Saving Content

1h ago - Excerpt: "Saitek, one of the foremost go-to companies for PC hardware in flight sticks and other... | PC

The Five Must-Play Exclusives for Xbox One in 2016

Now - With the holidays quickly wrapping up in 2015, it is time to look to the future. 2016 is already shaping up to be massive for games, and both Sony... | Promoted post

Miko Mole launches in North America for PlayStation 4

1h ago - Indie game developer and publisher EnsenaSofts, Miko Mole has officially launched for the PS4 in... | PS4

Star Wars Battlefront Review | CoinOpTV

1h ago - Star Wars Battlefront is not the preeminent shooter that will replace Call of Duty, Battlefield o... | PC

AMD Radeon Crimson Early Preview: Is it really the next big step towards AMD's competitive comeback?

1h ago - "AMD has been slowly ramping up its software game for the last few years. No, it’s not perfect —... | PC