Updated Analysis : PS4 vs Xbox One

Insiderp :"Microsoft would hope that many developers would be aiming to have a 60 fps/subHD game over a 1080p/30fps one, and thats where Xbox One could potentially achieve parity against the PS4 version of the game".

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Sammy7771795d ago

I am new user and this is my first submission

Hatsune-Miku1794d ago (Edited 1794d ago )

YOu should know that the ps4 is 50% more powerful than xbox one which is quite evident by the specs displayed in this article. On this site youll seealot of spinning when it comes to negative articles that are true and youll be labelled silly names for stating facts. Just be truthful in your posts and try to mostly state facts . Ps2 was released in yr2000 and xbox was released 2001 and was more powerful. Ps3 was released a year and a half after xbox360 with ps3 being more powerful and even with headstart for xbox360 the ps3 outsold itbeing way more expensive .

GameNameFame1794d ago

As for your "Will eSRAM come to the rescue?'" section.

The project Cars devs said esram will mitigate "some" advantage GDDR5 has.

Xbox One has weaker ram and weaker GPU. Esram only mitigate some gap on ram side.

but does not do anything in closing GPU side.

SonofGod1794d ago

Not according to the psycho Russian cult leader misterx lol, he claims there is a secret GPU hidden in the XO that one day will be revealed by Microsoft and there will be world peace and all his followers will drink kool-aid poison (probably)

UltimateMaster1794d ago (Edited 1794d ago )

Except the PS4 is aiming 1080p 60fps as much as possible.

christocolus1794d ago (Edited 1794d ago )


OMG.we all know the ps4 is more powerful, but pls stop with this 50% nonsense.. its not true dude or atleast show proof of this 50% difference. ..if anyones spinning stuff its definitly you bro.


Great article. Would like to see more submissions from you but also try articles that havent been already flogged to death on most gaming websites. Try to touch on other aspects of the industry too and as hatsune stated be truthful and factual and most especially do not allow bias or fear of fanboys cloud your judgement when doing your write ups.

Good job.


It's about 50% more powerful on paper, but probably not in real world performance for an example.

GTX 580 is rated at about 1,5TeraFLOPS and the GTX 680 is rated at about 3TeraFLOPS that is 100% difference but when comparing these cards in real world performance the difference is about around 30%

dantesparda1794d ago

@ Christocolus

Um COD Ghost says hi (125% higher res) and BF4 also says hi (56% higher res and higher average framerate). Both of those games are showing over 50% performance over the X1. AC4 also has 56% higher res along with better AA. Even games with are closer in parity, the PS4 has technical advantages, like NFS with it Bokeh DOF and HBAO, compared to the X1's technically inferior SSAO and simple blur. The NBA has better AA than the X1 version.

So the proof is already there, you just dont wanna see it/admit it.

dsswoosh1794d ago


Think you'll find the XB1 framerates are better than the PS4 in all cross platform games.

The XB1 has a constant 60 fps and rarely drops ever. It also has better frame rate latency (which means no microstuttering).

The PS4 has frame rate drops in many games and consistently fails to hit a constant 60 fps.

BF4 isnt the exceptions here.

coopman3001794d ago

Srsly anyone that just regurgitates the 50% more powerful crap obviously does not know how hardware works. There are pros and cons to how both consoles are built.

Ram is the biggest misconstrued component. Ddr3 is made to be system ram, it has low latency and can read and write at the same time. This means that ddr3 works with the cpu better, this is why the xb1 is a cpu centric console.

Gddr5 was derived from ddr3 tech specifically for use in graphics processing (hence the g in the name). It has high bandwidth but cannot read and write at the same time. This high latency causes it to not communicte with the cpu well, this is why the ps4 is a gpu centric system. This is also why the ps4 has a separrate ram pool to facilitate video recording and streaming while playing and the system ram is strictly partitioned.

The performance gap is not nearly as big as people claim, if there even is one at all when developers fully unlock the potential of these consoles.

dantesparda1793d ago


"Think you'll find the XB1 framerates are better than the PS4 in all cross platform games."

Ah ignorance is bliss, eh guy? No X1 framerates are not better across platform games, PERIOD! Only one game has a slightly higher average framerate than the Ps4 ver. and thats COD, but we are talking about more or less a 5 fps better average. But the X1 is processing 125% less pixels, so for the PS4 to be only off by such a little framerate average when its doing a 125% more pixels, speaks for itself!

Also, BF4 not only has 56% higher res than the X1 ver but it also has a better framerate. Here see for yourself

"The XB1 has a constant 60 fps and rarely drops ever. It also has better frame rate latency (which means no microstuttering)."

Once again, conplete and utter bullcrap! Ryse struggles to maintain its 30fps and even drops into the teens! While only running at 900p (a downgrade from its original targeted res of 1080p, plus the polys were also reduced from 150k to 85k and the game still struggles)

DR3 same thing, downgraded from its original 1080 target to 720p and can barely maintain its 30fps while also dropping into the teens.

So, i dont know where your getting you information from guy, but you are comepletely and utter wrong. The PS4 is outperformaing the X1 period!

dantesparda1793d ago (Edited 1793d ago )


You're even more delusional the dss and know even less about hardware than he does.
here are some facts for you.

PS4: 1.60GHz CPU?
Xbone: 1.75GHz CPU

PS4: 800MHz GPU
Xbone: 853MHz GPU

PS4: 18CU
Xbone: 12CU

Xbone: 1.31TFLOPS

PS4: 176.0GB/s
Xbone: 68.3GB/s

PS4: 1152 Shaders (cores)
Xbone: 768 Shaders (cores)

PS4: 72 Texture units
Xbone: 48 Texture units

PS4: 32 ROPS
Xbone: 16 ROPS

PS4: 8 ACE/64 queues
Xbone: 2 ACE/16 queues

PS4: 25.6GPixels/s
Xbone: 13.65GPixels/s

PS4: 57.6GTexels/s
Xbone: 40.9GTexels/s

The only area where the X1 might be better is in CPU speed and maybe in "some" RAM calcutions, but this crap about the latency is just a pathetic grasp by the X1 fanboys. The PS4 is %0% or better than the X1, do the same. This isnt different CPUs/GPUs like with the ps360, its almost the same exact chips. And where it matters most, (GPU) the PS4 has a BIG lead, FACT!

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1793d ago
1794d ago
iGAM3R-VIII1795d ago

nothing really new here, just talks about the hardware

Sammy7771795d ago

talks about esram's limitations as well as positives. An excellent article no wonder

Charybdis1794d ago (Edited 1794d ago )

Here is an more well written and in depth look from a better source into the limitations of xb1 esram.

mewhy321794d ago

Pretty good article. Brings ESRAM out of the veil that microsoft has schrouded it in.

Bennibop1794d ago (Edited 1794d ago )

Author has forgot to mention that Sony will also making performance improvements to the SDK's and new and upcoming games will push hardware even further. So the situation we are in now (Lower resolution on X1) is very unlikely to change! We just need to accept that and move on and enjoy the experiences on both machines provide!

Fishy Fingers1794d ago (Edited 1794d ago )

Cheap ass looking site with no fresh information.

Charybdis1794d ago

Seems like an old article claiming xb1 does not support an unified memory acces system hsa/huma. The numbers are also off compared to eurogamer articles.
Either way it still seems the ps4 has the overall ram advantage.

TheKayle11794d ago (Edited 1794d ago )

the bandwith of the esram is totally wrong

"The slides appear to indicate that the Xbox One's eSRAM is arranged in four segments of 8MB each, with four 256-bit read/write data paths. Peak bandwidth is indicated to be 204 GB/s"

the average is 150/160 gb/s as u can find on digital foundry

pretty much the same average of the gddr5 that have as peak 176gb/s

the cpu have access to the esram...

"Digital Foundry: And you have CPU read access to the ESRAM, right? This wasn't available on Xbox 360 eDRAM.

Nick Baker: We do but it's very slow."

so is a sort of huma...

and still

the esram can read and write simultaneously

"The big revelation was that ESRAM could actually read and write at the same time, a statement that seemingly came out of the blue. Some believed that based on the available information from the leaked whitepapers, this simply wasn't possible.

"There are four 8MB lanes, but it's not a contiguous 8MB chunk of memory within each of those lanes. Each lane, that 8MB is broken down into eight modules. This should address whether you can really have read and write bandwidth in memory simultaneously," says Baker."

""Yes you can - there are actually a lot more individual blocks that comprise the whole ESRAM so you can talk to those in parallel. Of course if you're hitting the same area over and over and over again, you don't get to spread out your bandwidth and so that's one of the reasons why in real testing you get 140-150GB/s rather than the peak 204GB/s... it's not just four chunks of 8MB memory. It's a lot more complicated than that and depending on how the pattern you get to use those simultaneously. That's what lets you do read and writes simultaneously. You do get to add the read and write bandwidth as well adding the read and write bandwidth on to the main memory. That's just one of the misconceptions we wanted to clean up."

i hope that little sites like that...before write something try to get more information possible

that article is totally misleading

ps. seem that for the ps4 we have 1.84tf......i would fix that xb1 isnt 1.3 tf...but the correct number is 1.35tf

pss on this note "eSRAM is virtually ineffective for any resolution above 720p"

he dont have any idea of what he is talkin about clearly

this put this article on the lowest lvl possible

Sammy7771794d ago (Edited 1794d ago )

again, try understanding the article rather than posting things you don't know. The 204 figure comes from writing in a birectional way -102 each segment. But you can't read/write at the same time on eSRAM. Even if you can , it is only 32mb that you have access to so the writer pointed out that it won't be sufficient for a resolution at 1080p,which is right . eSram can't hold a framebuffer larger than 32mb

also eSram doesn't have direct read/write access to CPU and this is why it is SLOW

eSRAM cannot write/read at the same time. No Ram can. ever wondered why you got banned at Neogaf .Increasing 10% speed doesnt directly correlate with a 10% performance gain. 10% is reserved for Kinect, meaning around 1.18 TF available to developers

TheKayle11794d ago (Edited 1794d ago )

is totally wrong...u can read and write at the same time as the xb1 have it divided in 8 lanes so meanwhile one lane write the other can read

again dosnt matter how much big is the esram ..32mb are enough to a 1080p buffer
the esram come in action to solve the texture trashing decade problem..
with the tiled rendering you can have better texture and smaller frame buffer

the article is misleading and wrong sorry

as you can see the only game 1080p 60fps on next gen system is forza 5

and this was a RUSHED..launch title
the ps4 have a more powerful gpu..but the resolution problems that fanboys r claiming r just bs

for that 10% ms already said that they will free up that % for who wanna use it

DoesUs1794d ago

ESRAM size is a ghastly amount, no amount of spinning numbers will change this. More hoops for XB1 devs to jump through to close the substantial gap which the PS4 holds.

Show all comments (68)
The story is too old to be commented.

Out this Month