What the specs of the PS4 and Xbox 720 say about their user experiences.

Recently there has been a ton of rumors hitting the internet about the hardware specs of both the PlayStation 4( Orbis) and the Xbox 720(Durango). And while both machines are being made by AMD and will sport similar specs, let’s take a look at the differences because that is where the true story lies, and will tell us what each platform holder is focusing on.

Read Full Story >>

The story is too old to be commented.
Dylila3699d ago

the ps4 is foocused mostly on gaming for the core gamers. i cant wait to have the ps4 in my hands and i cant wait to see what it looks like, knowing the specs and launch games.

3699d ago
BadboyCivic3699d ago

I'm tired of paying for live...will we get more for our money and will PS4 online be free?

Sharius3699d ago

it alway free, and i don't see why they have to charge for online service, and the plus feature really nice, i have been the plus member 2 year in the row and i pretty sure that these free game i got from this far more what i have to pay

Divine3699d ago

Sony Won't Disappoint. That is all

ProjectVulcan3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

"PlayStation 4 is sporting a slightly better graphics core"

IF the specs are to believed, IF, then it isn't just slightly better. Xenos is slightly better than RSX. Wii U's GPU is slightly better than Xenos.

Orbis would wipe the floor with Durango in terms of GPU performance and fillrates. We are talking potentially 50 percent more raw GPU performance, and trust me, that is a gap more RAM ain't gonna make up. You can have more high res textures if you want in memory, but if you don't have the fillrate from your GPU you can't display them in the game.....A slideshow yes. But not a game.

Microsoft can have more RAM but they will only end up reserving loads of it for all the other stuff they might attempt to pull off. While Sony's machine focuses on achieving better raw performance you will certainly see it- assuming any of this is remotely true.

blackbeld3699d ago

PS4 is a killing machine!

Soon Microsoft will be out of console gaming business.
Why they are now so quiet ? Maybe they want to chicken out and looking for a take over perhaps Samsung?

delboy3699d ago

You can't compare gpu-s like that, flops means nothing, well not everything.
It's just a theoretical number of max performance, but gpu performance like to fluctuate.
Compare radeon 7970 vs gtx 680,flops vs game performance ;-)
And durango is just 30% weaker then orbis, sounds better than 50% stronger.
If you can utilize durangos gpu 100% all the time, then you will have overall better performance than on orbis gpu.
That's the whole point of DMA ms is working on.

But let's wait on actual games, and eurogamer analysis.

Tsar4ever013699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

Sony told developers they are pushing to match the nexBox in system memory/RAM for hardware parity. I don't know whether it's another 4gb of GDDR5 seems way too far fetched, so if it true, it's most likely to be 4gb of drr3, I'm sure the orbis's APU's GPU & discreet GPU are both current near top tier Graphic chips that's built around Unified Shader &(GCN) tech so both ram type chips would be fully utilized by devs & GPU's whenever needed.

And remember, these latest spec rumors are only the 3rd phase of hardware development. The final hardware specs suppose to come sometime around summertime.

Here's the ps4 with more RAM article:

Ju3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

@Vulcan...I wouldn't be so fast with that assessment. Durnago's architecture is quite smart, and might reach PS4's performance. 50% more raw performance is relative, considering - and under the assumption we have CUs in the GPUs which are identical, incl clock frequency, etc - that 4 CUs are compute units (and will have a minor impact on render performance). Which leaves us with two additional CUs on the PS4. And based on those assumption leaves it'll have at about 16% (I guess) higher raw shader (!) power.

DDR3 is the faster CPU, considering we are talking raw CPU performance, I would expect Durango to be faster, actually. But - and then we swing back to the PS4 - those 4 compute units will offset this greatly again. E.g. you get physics completely for free on the PS4. This will either eat into Durango's shader performance or CPU; pick one.

All in all, I still believe the PS4 is quicker; how much we'll see. But what's more important - IMO - it will be cheaper to build because it is the simpler setup, despite the fact it uses the more expensive RAM. And it will be easier to work with.

MS followed quite some interesting ideas which are based on Carmacks mega textures and VMEM virtualizing with HW support for tiled based rendering and texture indices in HW (in combination with the Move Engines). But I think this setup is quite complex and won't offset the GDDR5 benefits.

With that said, we might see some better performing games on Durango if devs use the CPU as their main workhorse, but the PS4 will have the edge with shader heavy code.

BTW: The mem deficit will not be compensated by slapping on 4GB DDR3...this would fundamentally change the architecture which is strongly based on an UMA design. Adding DDR3 will render this obsolete.

ProjectVulcan3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

I would be so fast Ju.

Mainly because the 'secret sauce' of Durango hardware is a myth and exaggerated horribly. Go somewhere else to understand what so called 'move' engines are trying to be, they are not some exciting thing we haven't seen before. You won't just flick a switch and make them work either. They can be advantageous sure, but not game changing literally.

They are just basic fixed function hardware additional to the machine which are already included in many designs and systems. Sure it can somewhat improve the efficiency of a machine but they are NOT programmable. They will be highly limited because of their very nature. Lets not forget the tesselator in 360s's GPU, which was fixed function and as a result of its design was fairly junk, and most devs didn't even bother their time with it.

We are talking about Orbis having potentially 50 percent more pixel shading performance, more ROPS, more TMUs (more programmable resources, more flexibility), coupled with massively more bandwidth accessible system wide. The crucial part being system extra hoops to jump through to reach a big chunk of very fast memory unlike Durango's memory architecture which is going to be too convoluted to match Orbis. Its actually a reverse here, PS3 had such a stupid memory architecture, whereas 360's was straightforward. Situation reversed, because Microsoft are desperately trying to have more memory at the expense of simplicity. It'll cost them in outright gaming performance.

Orbis also benefits similarly from certain fixed function DMA additions (for the touted compression/uncompression video capture feature) so the 'secret sauce' is more than likely actually shared by both and therefore advantageous to neither.

If the specs stay as they are I guarantee right now Orbis will significantly outperform Durango on games.

All that will matter to developers is who has the best fillrates, and who has the fastest and easiest access to system memory. Which is most flexible. The answer is Orbis in each turn.

If you don't believe me especially on the memory side, then go look at Wii U and tell me what all that extra slow memory (not just twice as much like the gap here, 4 times as much!) is doing for it in comparable games to PS3/360....

Ju3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

In the other article, you will find a link which describes the reasoning behind what we think the Durango is designed on. And going with that, the idea is a little bit more complex than "just having more memory...and what's with this dumb move engines".


If there is some truth to this (and basically everything here is based on speculation), then this is based on some very fundamental ideas to use a HW accelerated virtualization of VMEM and use low latency DDR3 ram to overcome the bandwidth issues.

Yes, it is a more complex architecture. It remains to be seen how much overhead the VMEM pager costs, etc. But the move engines are used primarily to move pages in and out of ESRAM on the fly. So, what they basically are, they are MMUs for the GPU, primarily.

ESRAM has no bandwith problems. The CPU code will be faster in DDR3 because of lower latency (especially for brnaches, etc).

But the pager costs, no doubt.

So, yes, I still believe GDDR5 is faster for pure graphics operation. It is simpler to work with and libGCM is lower overhead. It has more CUs but it has 4 CUs which might saturate the RAM and hence will only "provide minor benefits for rendering" (14+4 balance).

But, less raw CPU performance (while same core - depends on how to utilize the caches) and a faster and simpler GPU interface with 2 extra CUs.

This will be interesting. But its far closer than people think.

BTW: WiiU...I would think current engines don't utilize that machine just yet. There should be more possible, but it just doesn't sell (good enough) for developers to go the extra mile to tune for the HW. Most of the games are based on existing engines and probably ported in a rush. I would think at some time, WiiU could achieve 1.5x or 2x PS360 performance with proper optimization. And, BTW, the quality of games is +/- PS360. Some look better some don't. What that tells us about the slow RAM? That you can hold up pretty good against a faster one if done right. Same with CPU clock speed. WiiU's CPU is half as fast as 360s and yet it does about the same (see DDR vs. GDDR latency).

ProjectVulcan3698d ago (Edited 3698d ago )

Orbis will win performance wise, if the specs are right. Really it is that simple.

If the design for Durango meant they could afford a bigger die and more transistors then they would certainly be dedicated to increasing the programmable resources that they have. But the fact they have gone on to design a few fixed function units suggests they are on a tight transistor budget.

While possibly a better solution than just having it all devoted to various programmable units at their design target size, it will still not match simply considerably more raw horsepower that Orbis would offer.

I said it time and again, trick hardware can help, but only so much, and raw, SIMPLE, UNCOMPLICATED performance wins in the end. It is as much about what the devs are comfortable and happy with as it is the hardware, and Orbis will be a boon to devs like 360 was this generation.

Here devs, is a big chunk of performance you can do whatever you want with. Thats Orbis. They'll love it. It'll be the most flexible platform for high end titles. That means devs go straight to it as lead platform. That is a massive KEY aim- if you are lead platform, you are already one step ahead.

Look....what more examples do you need than the existing generation? 360 was the devs darling, and it benefitted HUGELY as a result.

Durango is not going to be able to make up such huge bandwidth or fillrate deficits no matter how many trick fixed function DME style units they shove in there and tack on, fighting for bandwidth the system can't spare anywaysss......

What Wii U tells us is that faster memory still wins against more memory, by an order of magnitude as long as the faster amount is sufficient, and 4Gb will be sufficient. Microsoft want more memory to throw a bunch of bloated OS tat in there no doubt, and they WILL pay the price in performance for that decision. I can't emphasise that enough.

Not just paying the price with a convoluted memory architecture, raw bandwidth, and apparently a bunch of CPU cores ring fenced off as well for background functions that Orbis probably has available to devs!

Its all well and good claiming Durango could have some CPU advantages here and there, when that will be wiped out if they lose a couple cores to the OS!

The gap really will be significant enough to see, no waffling about limited fixed function additions to Durango's very limited looking package can alter that.

It isn't that close by these specs. It is cut and dried for Orbis.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 3698d ago
Starfox173699d ago

The wiiu is comparable to these specs easy.

The RAM on these specs could be devkit amounts,ie the WiiU devkit is 4GB,i think the ps4 has same as WiiU and 720 has double,who cares the WiiU GPU is a Modified E6760 and that card out performed a HD4859/70 with 576gflops compared to 1.1 terraflops,so WiiU gpu is extremely powerful.

3698d ago
AngelicIceDiamond3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

According to the latest rumored specs PS4 does sound better on paper because they'll be focusing on gaming.

Does that sound familiar though? PS3 has more raw power than Xbox 360 but yet third party games perform the same (some better or worse). All that extra ram could give MS an advantage in the long run of extra resources being put into games though.

Who knows, I can't wait for PS4 and 720 either way.

adorie3699d ago

Rumors also suggest PS4 is simple to code for. This isn't the PS3, it's the PS4, the successor to a console that stood up to plenty of detriment.

delboy3699d ago

Ms culd have advantage in games that uses megatextures, Doom4 can't come soon enough.

delboy3699d ago

Durango culd have a advantage in games that uses megatextures, Doom4 can't come soon enough.

Ju3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

Megatextures will run fine on the Orbis, too. Even now some games virtualize mem on the PS3. And some stream textures from the HDD. So, MS's setup will make it easier if you do just that and load everything into RAM, but this can be solved with SW as well. And it remains to be seen if the OS will take over these tasks on the Durango, else it will still require some coding to set this up properly. Either way, nothing is for free (SW wise).

ThanatosDMC3699d ago

You're still into Doom games after that crap Doom 3?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3699d ago
Aceman183699d ago

i'll take gaming over apps, and social media stuff any day of the week.

i buy consoles for gaming not apps and useless media stuff. as long as i can use netflix, vudu, or any of the other video services and my gaming experience isnt hindered im good.

Jakens3698d ago

I want a PC that only does games.

joab7773699d ago

Its kinda funny that both systems are continuing exactly where they are leaving off. Xbox has cross game chat and more ram. Ps3 has better graphics but the ports are similar. I disagree with the author though because ps3 has proven that 1st party games can trump cross game chat. The ps3 is much stronger right now because of their investmeny in games.

With the advent of mobile phones and tablets, gamers dont need to pull up youtube etc. They do, though, want the best games. Naughty Dog, Santa Monica, media molecule, guerilla etc. will take the time to make games look better and draw ppl tk the ps4. It is already trending this way and ppl have already begun to lose faith in xbox's commitment to games. 4 player video chat wont mean much if the game u want to play is releasing on the ps4 only.

Only time will tell and it will be true that most ports will look about the same. Microsoft will continue to pay ppl to get deals on dlc etc. I just think that Microsoft could have it all if they put more emphasis on games like they once did.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3698d ago
Chaostar3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

I don't get the logic in this article.

So, let me get this straight, because Sony might have a more powerful machine multi-plat games will look worse? I think the writer has confused difficult architecture with power. The PS3 doesn't get shoddy ports because it more powerful, it gets them because its 'harder' to develop for. More power in PS4 doesn't necessarily make it difficult to work with, if anything, it should make it easier.

FXGAMESKILLEEN3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

"most multiplatform games performed better on the Xbox 360. Thanks in part, to Sony’s alien architecture and developers lack of interest in cracking it."

Did you skip that part? And I simply stated that having the best hardware may not mean better looking games on PS4 because developers appear to lean to parity between the different platforms

and nowhere in the article did i say that the PS4 would have worse looking game just prolly the same because developers code to the lowest denominator

also fixed the wii u example as that may have been a bit confusing, sorry for that

3GenGames3699d ago

The better hardware had the better games. It's not that it's an Alien Architecture. Well, that may be 5% of it, but that alien architecture has no place in computer programming without huge huge huge singular type of data processing. Games are dynamic. They're not data processors of one type of data all the time, it needs to do lots of different things fast. The Cell failed, because the vector processing architecture is NOT efficient for game programming, and it never will be. They're going AMD now, which is great! The specs so far look drastically better for PS4, but we'll have to see what is put on the market. 360 owner right now, although I may be moving to PS4 if they do it right and gaming doesn't entirely outlaw 2nd hand games and such. Online game code, no 2nd hand games, etc. will leave me not having any next gen console outside of my Linux Laptop for Steam.

Chaostar3699d ago

Ok I get what you're saying that's just how it came across. Kind of like you were expecting a repeat of the current situation just because Sonys machine will have a slight advantage in hardware. In all fairness your point could have been clearer.

adorie3699d ago

Exclusives seem to break the barrier of "lowest common denominator"

Cocozero3699d ago

The 360 will have the most innovation in immersion with the Illumiroom and Fortaleza Glasses. And the best multiplatform games due to double the ram.

3699d ago
nypifisel3699d ago

DDR3 is slow compared to DDR5, I have yet to see a game who utilize more than a couple of gigabytes of RAM, the time it takes to move data is way more important than actual space. Much of the backlash on Wii U came from the fact that the ram was DDR3, which is about half the speed of the DDR5 (the number at the end is a multiplier - 3x vs 5x)(G)DDR5 is only used in graphic cards on PCs today out of cost mostly, 8GB of DDR5 memory would be very expensive but gfxcards need the shuffling speed for big textures etc.

Starfox173699d ago

WiiU has Edram on the gpu it self.

nypifisel3699d ago


Well I'm not talking about GPU memory, I'm talking about the system memory in general.

OpenGL3698d ago

Right, the Wii U's main memory is like 1600MHz DDR3 running on a 64-bit memory bus, so it's got about half the memory bandwidth of the PS3/360.

@Starfox17 the 32MB of eDRAM is hardly relevant as it's not very large. The 360 had 10MB of eDRAM that was very fast but again the size limited its usefulness without tiling.

SlavisH23699d ago

i hate all these articles. NOW WE ARE compareing RUMORED SPECS! This is so stupid. These systems havent even been announced and we are talking about specs? lol

zebramocha3699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

@slavis their specification are not that unreasonable to make an assumption,that they could possibly be true,the vitas spec were rumored for awhile and broke a week before Sony unveiled it.

givemeshelter3699d ago

It's still rumors. Nothing is comfirmed. The funny part is look at most of the comments on this thread...most of them are reacting as if these specifications are true and not rumor. LOL

CommonSenseGamer3698d ago (Edited 3698d ago )

Rumours are one thing but the way fanboys are using them to flame attacks is just plain pathetic. I may end up getting both the next gen Sony and MS offerings like I did this gen however, the one I get first will be the one with the games I want. If the PS4 was released with a true next gen GT then I would be sold, same goes for Xbox if it came with a new Halo.

Funny thing is, fanboys will switch between the hardware and software argument when it suits their needs. This will be clearly evident when Tegra 4 devices are relreased later this year which will make devices like the Vita seem underpowered.

jay23699d ago (Edited 3699d ago )

3rd parties and STOLEN EXCLUSIVE :@:@:@:@ couldn't use Blu-ray to its fall advantage in most cases because they lost 75% of disc space. It's good to start seeing more 360 versions shipping on multiple discs.