**XBOX ONE** Official Thread

Greboth said:
The PS4 is 50% more powerful, oh please do tell me how it is.
Click to expand...
Though I dont tend to get involved with mathematically inept, hasnt it been empirically demonstrated by BF4 at launch already?

EDIT: That premium pack seem good value

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
Last edited:
ps3ud0 said:
Though I dont tend to get involved with mathematically inept, hasnt it been empirically demonstrated by BF4 at launch already?

EDIT: That premium pack seem good value

ps3ud0 :cool:
Click to expand...
Not really. One game running at 720p and another running at 900p does not equal a 50% power difference. It does show the PS4 is more powerful, but perhaps not 50% more powerful.

I'd really rather not see another pointless power argument though. We all know the PS4 is more powerful. Can't we just leave it there and not argue about specific figures?
 
I have said this before and will say this again.

WHY O WHY do gamers NEVER EVER learn that launch window games are always un optimised BS.

Also why are they unable to use their ******* brains and work out that clearly in a perfect world neither of these consoles are going to have an issue churning out 1080p games for a long while.

This always happens everytime, The same stuff over and over.
It is so god damn retarded.

It isnt and never will be as simple as the consoles coming out and instantly hey ho both are performing at the same levels of efficency with all of the power utilised.

Look at the Wii U, If you said to most people after release that it would have multiple 1080P rendered games out within a year then they would hvae been like "lol whatever its barely more powerful than a 360, last gen lololol"
 
ps3ud0 said:
Though I dont tend to get involved with mathematically inept, hasnt it been empirically demonstrated by BF4 at launch already?

ps3ud0 :cool:
Click to expand...

Not quite sure what your point is :confused: I have no arguement (no one does) that the PS4 isn't more powerful than the Xbone. The BF4 launch confirmed what everyone already knew, the PS4 is more powerful. I agree that it is and I think anyone who tries to argue otherwise should be ignored. My point was really that PS4 fanboys seem to like to rub in the mythical 50% when in reality it is anything but that simple to calculate how much more powerful the PS4 is over the Xbone nevermind quite what difference it will cause to the look of games.
 
Davey_Pitch said:
Not really. One game running at 720p and another running at 900p does not equal a 50% power difference. It does show the PS4 is more powerful, but perhaps not 50% more powerful.

I'd really rather not see another pointless power argument though. We all know the PS4 is more powerful. Can't we just leave it there and not argue about specific figures?
Click to expand...

I still think the esRAM will play a part in the xbox's long term surprise. Its like CISC vs RISC to me, CISC is easier to program for and so early visions can be seen, but once RISC has been understood and you can use it, it becomes better.

Still determined to get it on boxing day, however if I win one from work (currys) then I will be buying it early :D
 
Eliot said:
I have said this before and will say this again.

WHY O WHY do gamers NEVER EVER learn that launch window games are always un optimised BS.

Also why are they unable to use their ******* brains and work out that clearly in a perfect world neither of these consoles are going to have an issue churning out 1080p games for a long while.

This always happens everytime, The same stuff over and over.
It is so god damn retarded.

It isnt and never will be as simple as the consoles coming out and instantly hey ho both are performing at the same levels of efficency with all of the power utilised.

Look at the Wii U, If you said to most people after release that it would have multiple 1080P rendered games out within a year then they would hvae been like "lol whatever its barely more powerful than a 360, last gen lololol"
Click to expand...

people are idiots
 
quickshot89 said:
I still think the esRAM will play a part in the xbox's long term surprise. Its like CISC vs RISC to me, CISC is easier to program for and so early visions can be seen, but once RISC has been understood and you can use it, it becomes better.

Still determined to get it on boxing day, however if I win one from work (currys) then I will be buying it early :D
Click to expand...
I agree, I think ESRAM will have a part to play, but it relies on the developers taking the time to fully understand it and figure out how best to use it. It'll take some time, but I think if used correctly it can reduce the performance gap between the 2 consoles a little bit.
 
Davey_Pitch said:
I agree, I think ESRAM will have a part to play, but it relies on the developers taking the time to fully understand it and figure out how best to use it. It'll take some time, but I think if used correctly it can reduce the performance gap between the 2 consoles a little bit.
Click to expand...

It's a complete role reversal this time around.

The PS3 with the Cell, and the Xbox One with the ESRAM, It's the same situation and will just take time to perfect the hardware.

I was unable to get my hands on a One for launch so I probably won't bother now until a few years in to its lifespan.
 
ps3ud0 said:
You absolutely sure? Id recommend you check...

ps3ud0 :cool:
Click to expand...
Oh, so you're assuming 50% more pixels = 50% more power?

If that's the case surely the PS4 is actually over twice as powerful considering Call of Duty runs at 720 on Xbox One and 1080 on Sony PS4.

Or are they equaol in power because Fifa, NBA 2K14, and NFS: Rivals run at 1080p on both consoles?

Or perhaps it's really not as straightforward as numbers would have people believe.
 
Thesnipergecko said:
It's a complete role reversal this time around.

The PS3 with the Cell, and the Xbox One with the ESRAM, It's the same situation and will just take time to perfect the hardware.

I was unable to get my hands on a One for launch so I probably won't bother now until a few years in to its lifespan.
Click to expand...
The strange thing is that the 360 had EDRAM, which is a very similar setup to what the One has, so you'd think that developers would be able to use the ESRAM fairly easily. It seems it's not that straightforward though.
 
Well just spoke to my local GAME store about swapping bundles but they are unsure of what stock allocation they will have (he thinks they had about 5 Forza bundles per store) and they have all gone, they will be calling me to book a slot a few days before to go in and pay for my console and choose a bundle if I want along with any games.

Not sure whether to take the risk and cancel my Amazon order or just stick with Amazon.
 
Resolution tells you nothing really about the actual power of the console. I am sure if IW reduced some textures, AA etc they could easily get the Ghosts to run at 1080p on the Xbone.

Though never worked our resolution differences before, how are that actually worked out as surely it depends on which one you take to be the 100%. 720p has 64% the number of pixels as 900p so 900p is 36% difference or do take is 900p is 156% of 720p so 900p is a 56% difference. Maths is failing me here as to which one is actually the correct one :(

Edit: Thinking about it some more it has to be the 56% as 900p is rendering 56% more pixels than 720p.

Johnnytoxic said:
I said good day !!
Click to expand...

Thought you were leaving? I was just too slow in my response though good to see you answer the question of where 50% comes from.
 
Last edited:
Davey_Pitch said:
Oh, so you're assuming 50% more pixels = 50% more power?

If that's the case surely the PS4 is actually over twice as powerful considering Call of Duty runs at 720 on Xbox One and 1080 on Sony PS4.

Or are they equaol in power because Fifa, NBA 2K14, and NFS: Rivals run at 1080p on both consoles?

Or perhaps it's really not as straightforward as numbers would have people believe.
Click to expand...
Actually I think I trust DICE better as more competent developers and engine makers (unless you think the other 3 are? Be interested to hear reasoning if so), all I said was that the 50% isnt magically made when you look at something like BF4. COD is an aberration and its embarrassing for the devs involved and the people that buy it...

However you want to slice it, you cant ignore that there is some substance to that particular percentage and now game performance is matching theoreticals I wouldnt think you would be so quick to disregard. No one said it would show up in every game did they? I think BF4 as a multiplat is more taxing than the launch exclusives so yeah I think it could be taken as indicative

Its a curious defence...

ps3ud0 :cool:
 
Greboth said:
Thought you were leaving? I was just too slow in my response though good to see you answer the question of where 50% comes from.
Click to expand...

The reality is, no amount of driver optimisation what the media seems to think the XB1 will need to do is going to bridge the gap from the below hardware differences. This isn't even taking into account the better RAM implementation.

Xbone: 1.18 TF GPU (12 CUs) for games
Xbone: 768 Shaders
Xbone: 48 Texture units
Xbone: 16 ROPS
Xbone: 2 ACE/ 16 queues

PS4: 1.84TF GPU ( 18 CUs) for games + 56%
PS4: 1152 Shaders +50%
PS4: 72 Texture units +50%
PS4: 32 ROPS + 100%
PS4: 8 ACE/64 queues +300%
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom