Edge : PS4 is 50 percent faster

Status
Not open for further replies.
So many "unnamed sources", yet "named" sources say they are equal. Weird.
 
Well, we basically know Sony's specs when they were leaked along with X1's. MS seems to be doing A LOT of clean up work as specs, features, and policies are leaked, they're running behind mopping a mess up or placing a 'Don't look behind this curtain' sign up. One minute their people are saying, "Specs don't mean everything," and the next, "We invented DirectX," and spouting off specs left and right. Sony doesn't seem to be trying to cover up anything, while MS are reacting like they're covering up a bloody crime scene.

What nonsense. That's not what Panello was ever saying. He said that looking only at specs on paper and ignoring crucial context isn't helpful for estimating or predicting real world performance comparisons. He then got attacked for not talking up specific specs so he did that at GAF, whereupon he was attacked for doing exactly what was asked of him because GAF didn't like the facts he posted as they contrasted with the popular (uninformed) views there. He then made the point about DX which is a strong point to make. MS didn't cover anything up. They just wanted to wait until all the specs were final before discussing their nuances at events like HotChips. Like most fools online, you are confusing their marketing priorities with their engineering priorities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: illiniguy
how do you know GT7 will have cars from GT6 lol? it might surprise you to know not all cars in Forza 5 are re modeled, just cars that needed it.. again how do you know naughty dog is using a ps3 engine for ps4? maybe you mean it's an updated naughty dog engine.. which is normal since almost everyone uses updated engines for their new games, and lastly we only seen a teaser for Black Tusk's new game.. we have no idea how good it will look.

That was the entire point of making the GT6 cars the way they did, with rly high fidelity so it can be scaled for PS3/PS4. And Naughty Dog said they are using the PS3 engine with tweaks. As for Black Tusk, they have some extremely talented ppl there in terms of both art direction and technical gurus. Hence my point about them in the context of graphics output.
 
What nonsense. That's not what Panello was ever saying. He said that looking only at specs on paper and ignoring crucial context isn't helpful for estimating or predicting real world performance comparisons. He then got attacked for not talking up specific specs so he did that at GAF, whereupon he was attacked for doing exactly what was asked of him because GAF didn't like the facts he posted as they contrasted with the popular (uninformed) views there. He then made the point about DX which is a strong point to make. MS didn't cover anything up. They just wanted to wait until all the specs were final before discussing their nuances at events like HotChips. Like most fools online, you are confusing their marketing priorities with their engineering priorities.


Exactly the point I was trying to make on other boards... he is saying you gotta look at the whole picture here. Sure certain parts may be faster on paper, but on a whole how will the system perform? That is what all these armchair techies aren't getting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mcmasters
Exactly the point I was trying to make on other boards... he is saying you gotta look at the whole picture here. Sure certain parts may be faster on paper, but on a whole how will the system perform? That is what all these armchair techies aren't getting.

Bingo. MS moved all sorts of typical operations off the processors to helper hardware. It's not a direct 1:1 numbers game at that point. Where will the audio processing take place on PS4? The CPU? Ok, where does that leave AI and physics and whatnot? AI, physics, and audio have to processed somewhere. Sony's intent was to use 4 CU's for that kinda compute heavy stuff. MS's was to build fixed hardware for the audio so the CPU is free to do the rest as usual. The comparisons are FAR more nuanced than simply comparing 12 to 18 CU's, especially since they aren't clocked the same and don't have to do the same operations in general. But 18 vs 12 is simpler, so the baffoons online eat that up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: illiniguy
Bingo. MS moved all sorts of typical operations off the processors to helper hardware. It's not a direct 1:1 numbers game at that point. Where will the audio processing take place on PS4? The CPU? Ok, where does that leave AI and physics and whatnot? AI, physics, and audio have to processed somewhere. Sony's intent was to use 4 CU's for that kinda compute heavy stuff. MS's was to build fixed hardware for the audio so the CPU is free to do the rest as usual. The comparisons are FAR more nuanced than simply comparing 12 to 18 CU's, especially since they aren't clocked the same and don't have to do the same operations in general. But 18 vs 12 is simpler, so the baffoons online eat that up.

and that's what has some of the net so nervous... on paper, certain aspects are heavily swaying the PS4 their way... but, what happens when the 1st party games start coming in and guess what? They are on par with the PS4? I have a feeling there are going to be quite a few people shouting "what about the tflops?"
 
Also, just read a thread on Beyond3d that mentioned the audio processor. The XB1 has a beefer audio processor for Kinect voice recognition. Obviously, the PS4 doesn't need that so there is no need to use GPU resources for audio. So all of that talk of the PS4 needing 400 gflops for audio is absolute bunk.

and that's what has some of the net so nervous... on paper, certain aspects are heavily swaying the PS4 their way... but, what happens when the 1st party games start coming in and guess what? They are on par with the PS4? I have a feeling there are going to be quite a few people shouting "what about the tflops?"

Lol, you guys just aren't making any sense with this. The biggest problem with the PS4 BY FAR is the fact that the most popular games will be running p2p multiplayer. That's a death sentence right there if the Bro gamers start seeing a clear difference in COD/BF4 etc. etc.

As far the graphics are concerned, if a game is running at 900p on the XB1 most bros won't care, but the forum guys will.
 
Also, just read a thread on Beyond3d that mentioned the audio processor. The XB1 has a beefer audio processor for Kinect voice recognition. Obviously, the PS4 doesn't need that so there is no need to use GPU resources for audio. So all of that talk of the PS4 needing 400 gflops for audio is absolute bunk.

Not saying you are wrong, but on Eye enabled games that DO use the voice recognition, something will have to be there for processing. I think the XB1 just has it since the system is designed specifically for audio input control, whereas Sony could cut cost by not putting in an audio processor for optional voice control.

just my 2 cents
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeorgeSoros
Lol, you guys just aren't making any sense with this. The biggest problem with the PS4 BY FAR is the fact that the most popular games will be running p2p multiplayer. That's a death sentence right there if the Bro gamers start seeing a clear difference in COD/BF4 etc. etc.
.

Doesn't BF4 use EA's dedicated servers no matter what platform? Things like COD though using dedicated servers on X1 is huge, if PS4 doesn't then I could see more of the heavy MP players want to go dedicated vs p2p
 
Microsoft did everything in order to hide their specs, while Sony laid all theirs out for everyone to see. It's obvious as to why.

Sony's showing the Specs. MS is showing the box and the games. Same as it ever was... same as it ever was...

...this is not my beautiful wife!
 
Also, just read a thread on Beyond3d that mentioned the audio processor. The XB1 has a beefer audio processor for Kinect voice recognition. Obviously, the PS4 doesn't need that so there is no need to use GPU resources for audio. So all of that talk of the PS4 needing 400 gflops for audio is absolute bunk.



Lol, you guys just aren't making any sense with this. The biggest problem with the PS4 BY FAR is the fact that the most popular games will be running p2p multiplayer. That's a death sentence right there if the Bro gamers start seeing a clear difference in COD/BF4 etc. etc.

As far the graphics are concerned, if a game is running at 900p on the XB1 most bros won't care, but the forum guys will.

Running MP games P2P means you have to scale back physics and whatnot for those titles. You know that right? And don't forget the display planes in X1. Games with 720p backgrounds and 1080p foregrounds won't look any different even in close up side by sides with full native 1080p games on other platforms since backgrounds are inherently lower fidelity to begin with (on purpose).

And no, the MEC in X1 is for Kinect. SHAPE and the other 3 processors in the audio array aren't. They handle the synthesizing of complex audio in-game. The PS4 will need to use some computing resources from *somewhere* to calculate and produce synthesized audio. You don't get that for free and it can be a HUGE burden on CPU resources without it.
 
Not saying you are wrong, but on Eye enabled games that DO use the voice recognition, something will have to be there for processing.
Sony killed that when they removed it from the standard box to keep the price down. so much money spent on developing the new pad with the blue light and then took away the thing that used it.
 
What nonsense. That's not what Panello was ever saying. He said that looking only at specs on paper and ignoring crucial context isn't helpful for estimating or predicting real world performance comparisons. He then got attacked for not talking up specific specs so he did that at GAF, whereupon he was attacked for doing exactly what was asked of him because GAF didn't like the facts he posted as they contrasted with the popular (uninformed) views there. He then made the point about DX which is a strong point to make. MS didn't cover anything up. They just wanted to wait until all the specs were final before discussing their nuances at events like HotChips. Like most fools online, you are confusing their marketing priorities with their engineering priorities.

I'm actually getting an X1 first because the PS4 has nothing that I want within the first 6 months, so I'm not exactly being a Sony spec fanboy. My problem is that Albert said that specs don't matter and that nothing Sony showed in their launch games shows that the PS4 is better than the X1. As soon as the SDF went off on him about future games and what games will look like 3-4 years from now, he got defensive and started posting specs about latency and bottlenecks. But we shouldn't confuse consoles based on specs. LOL and let's not bring Major Nelson into this.
 
I'm actually getting an X1 first because the PS4 has nothing that I want within the first 6 months, so I'm not exactly being a Sony spec fanboy. My problem is that Albert said that specs don't matter and that nothing Sony showed in their launch games shows that the PS4 is better than the X1. As soon as the SDF went off on him about future games and what games will look like 3-4 years from now, he got defensive and started posting specs about latency and bottlenecks. But we shouldn't confuse consoles based on specs. LOL and let's not bring Major Nelson into this.

1) What you are getting in what order is unimportant. It's no less stupid than imagining that owning console X means you can't possibly be a fanboy of console Y. Doesn't substitute for an actual point.

2) Albert never got defensive. He made his comments about how riddled with ignorance the specs debate was months ago. His recent comments bear out his point back then too. The latest info we have puts X1 as higher bandwidth than PS4 and the more we hear about these machines the more on par they look. The software on the dev kits makes a big difference and there are things on X1 that these armchair silicon engineers are eagerly ignoring in their rush to judgment. There's a BIG difference between Albert getting attacked by morons at GAF who actually believe 'technical fellow' is a made up term and Albert 'getting defensive'.

3) Who is talking about Major Nelson? What? And to reiterate...he didn't say we can't compare specs. He said looking only at a subset of specs doesn't tell you the whole story and that actual games do the talking for them. GAF is gonna be mighty embarrassed (Arstechnica too) when MS's engineers do the rounds of interviews or whatever Panello has planned for them.
 
L
Bingo. MS moved all sorts of typical operations off the processors to helper hardware. It's not a direct 1:1 numbers game at that point. Where will the audio processing take place on PS4? The CPU? Ok, where does that leave AI and physics and whatnot? AI, physics, and audio have to processed somewhere. Sony's intent was to use 4 CU's for that kinda compute heavy stuff. MS's was to build fixed hardware for the audio so the CPU is free to do the rest as usual. The comparisons are FAR more nuanced than simply comparing 12 to 18 CU's, especially since they aren't clocked the same and don't have to do the same operations in general. But 18 vs 12 is simpler, so the baffoons online eat that up.
Lol
 
Running MP games P2P means you have to scale back physics and whatnot for those titles. You know that right? And don't forget the display planes in X1. Games with 720p backgrounds and 1080p foregrounds won't look any different even in close up side by sides with full native 1080p games on other platforms since backgrounds are inherently lower fidelity to begin with (on purpose).

And no, the MEC in X1 is for Kinect. SHAPE and the other 3 processors in the audio array aren't. They handle the synthesizing of complex audio in-game. The PS4 will need to use some computing resources from *somewhere* to calculate and produce synthesized audio. You don't get that for free and it can be a HUGE burden on CPU resources without it.

Yes, SHAPE and the other stuff are not related to Kinect. They are specialized processors for creating audio. Case in point: some audio on 360 would take up at least a core (sometimes more) of the CPU. Specific example: Forza games, with very sophisticated audio for the engines and such. That's not encoding/decoding (like what the PS4 audio chips are doing), that's hardcore CPU usage to simulate audio. I would be the audio on games like Halo 4 and BF3 would have taken about a core or so as well. On XB1, that stuff is offloaded to SHAPE&friends. That's not an insignificant amount of processing that the main CPU doesn't have to worry about.
 
L
Also, just read a thread on Beyond3d that mentioned the audio processor. The XB1 has a beefer audio processor for Kinect voice recognition. Obviously, the PS4 doesn't need that so there is no need to use GPU resources for audio. So all of that talk of the PS4 needing 400 gflops for audio is absolute bunk.



Lol, you guys just aren't making any sense with this. The biggest problem with the PS4 BY FAR is the fact that the most popular games will be running p2p multiplayer. That's a death sentence right there if the Bro gamers start seeing a clear difference in COD/BF4 etc. etc.

As far the graphics are concerned, if a game is running at 900p on the XB1 most bros won't care, but the forum guys will.
Lol all 24 or more player games will use dedicated servers... Quit giving false info.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.