Or, we read and understood you just fine and find there's nothing "shady" about Sony making a slide on the new PS4 Neo and comparing it to the original PS4.
See? A simple comparison between models - nothing "shady". And no, Sony used 2x256 for the PS3 because there were two separate memory pools; system and GPU (not developer and GPU) much like a traditional PC set-up.
and like I say, last time Sony Type something similar was on ps3 ram and we know how that turn out no one talks in X miltiplayers you dont say I have 4x2 appels isted of just saying 8 appels unles there is a reason
Umm, yes, people do...
It happens all the time. If you had 4 apples yesterday and got 4 more today; it wouldn't be uncommon to say, "I have twice as many apples today as I had yesterday."
@Legend002: still soso when you need to start dropping details in order to keep stable frametimes, not to mention the 4k monitords arent as good as 1440p ones yet, heck the first gsync ones came out this year?
@howmakewood: Of course. Nothing wrong with dropping some details to save a few hundred bucks. And 4K is way better than 1440p. I had a 1440p set up but returned it since I really saw no difference versus a standard 1080p monitor awhile back. Now 4K, that's a real upgrade.
@tormentos: you really have no idea what you're talking about do you?.. things have changed and it's time for you to realize those changes..
here's the traditional way that a game comes to Xbox One and the PC, and is the scenario you keep talking about:
EA codes Battlefield 1 for Xbox One and puts it in the console's digital store.. They also code a separate version of the game and put in on the PC via Origin, Steam, or whatever other legal channels. The two different games share no affiliation in terms of code, distribution, or access.. this game is not an exclusive to the "Xbox/Win10" platform.
Now here's the upcoming situation concerning Xbox Play Anywhere titles:
Microsoft codes Gears of War 4 once with UWP and puts it in their Windows Store.. from there it can be accessed by any Windows 10 device capable of running it.. There is only one version of the game in terms of coding, distribution, and access.. This game is an exclusive to the "Xbox/Win10" platform..
THAT'S the difference.. Sure PC hardware by nature is open and can readily accept games, apps, and programs form a variety of sources.. One of those sources is the Windows Store.. The same Windows Store that's available on all Windows 10 devices, including the Xbox One.. So a game coded once via UWP and a game that's exclusive to the Windows Store in terms of digital distribution is exactly that: EXCLUSIVE.. and the only devices that can run that game are Windows 10 devices such as Xbox consoles, desktops, laptops, tablets, smartphones, hololens, and more..
So basically, you think a game coded once, is only available in the PlayStation Store, but can be played on different versions of hardware such as the PS4 or the Neo is an exclusive to that platform right?, .. Cool, I agree.. But you should also realize that a game coded once, is only available in the Windows Store, but can be played on different versions of hardware such as the Xbox One and a desktop PC, is alsoan exclusive to that platform..
It's just that simple dude.. stop the spinning and accept the reality..
Either different versions of hardware means that a game is no longer exclusive, meaning that "Horizon isn't a PS4 exclusive because I don't need a PS4 to play it.. I can just play it on Neo. which is a different console".. .. OR, as long as a game is coded once and can be played across an ecosystem of hardware that's tied to a single account, OS, and store, then that game is exclusive to that platform".. which is it?.. you cant have it both ways ..
As it stands, any Xbox Play Anywhere title is a Windows Store exclusive that can't be downloaded and played on any other hardware other than Windows 10 devices.. the Xbox One is also a Windows 10 device.. /discussion
PS- and before you start talking about discs, developers don't code a different version of the game for digital distribution or physical distribution.. the disc is only a storage medium and the game is eventually installed and played off the HDD of the hardware in question.. So you can save that spin, Alex..
@NathanDrakeSwag: Correction, the Neo is not a PS4.. The Neo is a new console with different hardware internals that shares backwards/forwards compatibility with the PS4.. Just like the Xbox One and Project Scorpio..
But you're right, there's no reason to upgrade if you don't care about the increased performance since they both will share the same gaming library (again, just like the Xbox One and Project Scorpio)..
This is what i find pathetic and down right moronic.
How can't any PC gamer step in and correct the little rodent is beyond logic,we have some so call hermit but that one spend more time defending the xbox one than PC..lol
So a PC with a 7850 is a PC but a PC with a 680Ti is not.?
I would love to hear your pathetic damage control on this one and subsequent spin..lol
Neo is a PS4 is a stronger PS4 but a PS4 never the less,just like a PC with a 7850 and a FX6300 is a much of a PC as one with a R390X and a FX8XXX as simple as that.
"Well, no, PS4 is PS4, you know the new high-end PS4 is still PS4, so you know the lifecycle is not going to be shorter," Yoshida said.
a PC with a 7850 is a PC.. a PC with a 680Ti is a different PC than the one with the 7850.. both PCs share access to the same type of content..
a console with the PS4's specs is a PS4.. a console with the Neo's specs is a different console than the PS4.. both consoles share access to the same type of content.
Clear enough for you?..
Sony can call it whatever they want.. of course they want to call it a "PS4" and likely will so they don't piss off the 40 million PS4 owners out there and can keep their sales momentum going.. But at the end of the day, once they changed the GPU, CPU, etc, it is a different console.. period.. sure it's still a Sony product and it'll share the PlayStation Store, PSN, trophies, and etc.. but it's still a different console.. by definition, it is not a PS4.. it's a Neo..
@NathanDrakeSwag: Correction, the Neo is not a PS4.. The Neo is a new console with different hardware internals that shares backwards/forwards compatibility with the PS4.. Just like the Xbox One and Project Scorpio..
But you're right, there's no reason to upgrade if you don't care about the increased performance since they both will share the same gaming library (again, just like the Xbox One and Project Scorpio)..
This is what i find pathetic and down right moronic.
How can't any PC gamer step in and correct the little rodent is beyond logic,we have some so call hermit but that one spend more time defending the xbox one than PC..lol
So a PC with a 7850 is a PC but a PC with a 680Ti is not.?
I would love to hear your pathetic damage control on this one and subsequent spin..lol
Neo is a PS4 is a stronger PS4 but a PS4 never the less,just like a PC with a 7850 and a FX6300 is a much of a PC as one with a R390X and a FX8XXX as simple as that.
"Well, no, PS4 is PS4, you know the new high-end PS4 is still PS4, so you know the lifecycle is not going to be shorter," Yoshida said.
What do you mean "WTF haha"!? I know you're not exactly the brightest user on SW but one of the jobs of CPU's in gaming is passing rendering data onto the GPU. Pre-rendered frames are why CPU bottle necked systems struggle to achieve higher framerates. I know you likely don't own a gaming PC but you can even tweak this setting in your display drivers to achieve different performance levels.
"Derrrr console optimization...derrrr". Hasn't done anything worth mentioning this generation.
Because SWBF3 isn't a CPU intensive title? We've been over this before. Wait for DFs analysis of Battlefield 1.
It's not doing "high settings" at 4k in most games. Do you have a 4k display or a 4k capable gaming machine? No. You don't. If 2017 games are as demanding as titles such as AC:Unity or Witcher 3 there is no way in hell NEO is doing 4k high settings. Did you not read the PDF? It's doing some very odd resolutions well below 2160p.
You were equating NEO to the 480. Obviously because you were so adamant that the 480 and the NEO would be virtually identical in performance or superior as you spent half the thread trying to convince us that the clock speeds were either higher or insignificant. It was the most pathetic display of arrogance and stupidity I've ever seen on SW.
The Fury X and 980 Ti have very similar performance. You didn't know?
Yep. You got me. I'm a lemming. That's why I don't own an Xbox One. You never did show me your PC, just a crappy cropped picture of an i3 and 4gb of RAM that was probably your laptop.
Well never thought about it but you maybe right,alto i don't know what good it would do, i would need all the help in the world to convince you lemmings of how wrong you are.
@dynamitecop said:
He's an opportunist, he's uses examples of questionable development to form a point that in general doesn't conform with the rest of reality.
e.g. him using the problem riddled Hitman to show 'how little' the difference is between 3 teraflops when in every other game it's a massive difference, Doom for example with Vulkan.
Ok Hypocrite pic a game,that is how confident i am about my argument which game you want?
Tomb Raider.? The Witcher 3? Maybe SWBF3? Pic a game go ahead.
Oh wait you are riding on Vulkan the XBO doesn't use Vulkan you blind biased lemming it uses DX12 which is what Hit man use,funny isn't so basically you are hyping a API that Scorpio or XBO will not use,can you even think before you spew your usual crap.?
Since when the XBO or Scorpio will use Vulkan.? The xbox one uses DX12,Hit man is not problem riddle you buffoon it just an AMD biased game,but since we are not comparing AMD with Nvidia the game is totally valid,and before you sper more shit even more screw up was the witcher 3 which need it 300 patches to fix performance on consoles while doom is a good game is not that demanding GPU wise to drive to 60FPS which is why the PS4 does run it at 60FPS.
By the way DX12 is the equivalent of Vulkan on xbox one and scorpio,the game you just downplay fool is DX12 Hit Man,so basically you are downplaying a game which is DX12,just like SWBF3 is DX12 on xbox one as well.
Fury X 8.6 TF vs R290 4.9TF gap Flops 3700 Gflops.
Quantum Break.
Fury X 26FPS - R290 18 FPS - Gap 8FPS
Rise of the Tomb Raider.
Fury X 31 FPS - R290 24 FPS - Gap 7FPS
Fallout 4.
Fury X 39 FPS - R290 31 FPS - Gap 8 FPS
Dark Soul 3.
Fury X 38 FPS - R290 25 FPS - Gap 13 FPS
The Division.
Fury X 40 FPS - R290 29 FPS - Gap 11 FPS.
Hitman.
FuryX 38 FPS - R290 28 FPS - Gap 10FPS
SWBF3.
Fury X 41 FPS - R290 32 FPS - Gap 11 FPS.
This is how you prove your arguments,7 recent games the biggest recorded gap 13 FPS in 4k,before you start your obvious spinning and downplay,i chose 4k because Neo and scorpio will target it,this gaps are bigger in lower resolution,some may pass 20FPS but on 4k which is where the card is giving all it has,the gap is the smallest.
As you can see 3700 Glops more than double the gap between Scorpio and Neo produce in 4k from 7 to 13 FPS gaps.
Let me guess now Doom is the only well made game any other game is broke right.? by the way various of those games are DX12,also next time don't hide on Vulkan because any API improvement for Scorpio will be even more present for Neo,much like DX12 mean shit on xbox one,when the PS4 has an even better API.
lol wrong again el tormentos .... dat damage control
Pcars on pc was not even correctly coded to use multithreading ie focused on single thread to feed gpu data on cpu at that time because of DX9 base code (ignoring facts again). X1 had proper deferred multithreading from the start, Ron never stated pcars on X1 would see 40% increase yet you left out the fact that DX12 on X1 would still see an improvement when in fact you said it wont see nothing..
The developer it self oh on the page before that he claim that the DX12 gain also apply to PS4 if it was coded like it,and he even say that the small 5 to 7% on DX11.X also bring faster performance to the PS4.
@tormentos:
The 40% gain is for PC no xbox one he was ask about xbox one and he fled,and in the page before it he stated that gains of DX12 also apply to the PS4 so if the difference was 5 vs 3 now it will be 7 vs 5 because the same performance gains also apply to the PS4.
This is on the 30 to 40% gain with DX12 which you were incredibly fast to ride.
@ronvalencia said:
The question AND topic are for frame rate issues for XBO and DX12 improvements.
PC (with AMD GPU)'s improvements are more than 40 percent i.e. just switching to Windows 10 gains about 40 percent fps increase while STILL running DX11.
Yes and that is why he try to downplay what i say,by saying it is a question done on a xbox topic and about DX12,then he continue his charade claiming that on PC the gains are more than 40%,and that just switching to windows 10 increased 40% with DX11.
He try to make see like the 40% was for xbox,because it was an xbox topic,and he uses PC 40% supposed gains in windows 10 with DX11 to prove how the 40% most be for XBO because on PC it would be more. Nice try.
@04dcarraher said:
lol he's just trying too hard prove his flawed argument.... that DX12 wont do anything for X1 which is still wrong.
Pc version got the shaft, its not using DX11 MT, while the X1 is. Fact that with the next patch for the X1 will add 5-7% and then on top of that DX12 will add another "7% or more" on top of that. The guy isnt sure how much of an increase they will see.... but even a 10% increase from a 45 fps dip would allow the X1 to get nearly 50 fps instead of 45.
DX12 will clearly help the X1 in career mode in Project Cars, where handing lots a of AI and or weather gives the biggest dips. and this is a porting job coming from DX11 MT, not the ground up DX12 base which would have added more performance.
And you were there to cheering for the xbox one and DX12 as usual,so instead of being making fun of lemmings for the huge backfiring thread,you were defending the xbox one my closet lemming friend..hahahahaaa
But but but i am a hermit..lol
@cainetao11 said:
@tormentos: Dude seriously, stop adding me in your asinine long quote chains please.
A rumor from 3 years ago. What is the statute of limitations on it? When rumors of Scorpio came out it was months before being proven. It's been 3 years, and the CEO of the company has openly addressed those rumors after they came up 3 years ago . If it were Kaz, your lover, it would have been good enough to be the end of it. 3 years. You're still holding onto it when this company just announced two new consoles SKUs. It's absurd dude.
The company Ceo you mean the ones who lied all the way to E3 about power,no used games,DRM always online require.?
Or the ones who deny Kinect being drop out of the xbox one before the console was even launch.?
Ceo will claim everything is great to their last breath and to the bitter end they will hold to the everything is right charade.
Fact is even with more hardware sold in the same time frame XBO games are not selling as MS expected but is not their only market were they over estimated..lol
The context of this being rendering and things need to be properly related to how they scale, the 40% difference between the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 was a mere 530 Gigaflops or in other words 0.53 Teraflops, the 42% difference between Neo and Scorpio is 1,800 Gigaflops or in other words 1.8 Teraflops, basically an entire PlayStation 4 more powerful.
Funny because the benchmarks i posted show that 42% on Scorpio could be smaller than the actuall 40% on PS4,thanks to the fantastic diminishing returns.
Ok Stop you need to stop saying the gap is and entire PS4 that mean total shit in the great scheme of things,why because these powerful GPU have a diminish return.
You are doing exactly what i have say you were doing,.
You are taking the PS4 gap taking as fact that the PS4 can beat the XBO by say 10 15 FPS on the same resolution,and you are multiplying it by 3 so the Scorpio most be 45FPS or more faster that is moronic and stupid because i already showed you that the Fury X has 2 PS4 of performance over the R290 and still the gap you see is mostly that from 7 to 13 FPS on peak.
Take a deep breath and analyse this.
How the fu** the Fury X with 3700 Gflops more than the R290 beat it just by 15 FPS,when the PS4 has 540 Gflops more than the xbox one and can beat it by those same 5 FPS and even more.
Ask yourself how before you even hit reply.
You are downplaying every ones argument without even try to form your own,you are just saying it can't be because you say so which is down right pathetic.
@dynamitecop said:
As soon as a system has different integrated hardware and runs separate lines of code it is no longer the same system, I don't care what Sony says, I don't care what moronic forum posters say, it's a different system, Scorpio is as well.
Neo and Scorpio are not the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One.
There is no separate lines of code you buffoon,is the same game with the same code,with higher setting and higher assets exactly how it is on PC.
Now since YOU JUST CLAIM IT IS NOT THE SAME CODE I JUST KNOW YOU HAVE A LINK TO BACK IT UP RIGHT.?
No i know you don't because you pull it out of your ass as always,how the fu** you want to argue that Neo is not a PS4 when you claim to be a fu**ing PC gamer for years is beyond any logic.
The The PS4 and Neo operate exactly as PC do 1 game that adjust setting according to the hardware in question,1 game fit all exactly like PC,so by your moronic argument a PC with a 7870 is not a PC because most PC have Nvidia GPU,hell on PC you even have things like gameworks and Nvidia Physx which doesn't run on AMD hardware and still is consider the same market and those game do have different codes as you know Phyxs doesn't work on AMD.
still on that dat damage control..... if the 911mhz spec is true the Neo will never be able to supply full high or ultra settings at 4k with solid 30 fps.... How does one ignore the facts that cpu will be still a bottleneck and that it takes a 1.2 ghz rx480 to on par with 290/390 range of performance.... 911mhz makes the gpu perform a whole tier below the threshold needed for 4k 30fps gaming
Its not completely different, they upclocked the CPU and put in a stronger GPU. This isn't a major overhaul in any sense of the term. Are you going to claim there are no PS3 exclusives because of the removal of the second CPU in the redesigned PS3? Are there no 3Ds exclusives because the New 3Ds is stronger? This just in - there are no PC exclusives because everyone has different hardware! An Android exclusive game which requires certain specs is still an Android exclusive, it is not multiplatform just because there are many phone hardware options out there.
There are exclusives for kinect, which can't be played without a kinect. The updated PS4 is just that, an update, a different sku, a different model of the same console.
This is a weak, half thought up argument to take the heat off your chosen console for your chosen company's decision to make it a useless redundant piece of underpowered hardware. I'm sure you notice that right now Lemmings are alone on their claims, unless you want to convince Hermits that they are in fact Lemmings. Had this been done at launch there wouldn't be any talk of it, Lemmings are just running damage control because they bet on the wrong horse this gen.
Wow, dude thanks for owning yourself and thanks for making my entire point.. The thing that makes an Android game "exclusive" to Android is the fact that it's tied to the Android OS, it's tied to your Google account, and you can only download it from the unified Google Store.. Just in the same sense that the thing that makes an Xbox/Win10 game "exclusive" to Xbox is the fact that it's tied to the Windows 10 OS, it's tied to your Xbox Live account, and you can only download it from the unified Windows Store.. hardware options are irrelevant..
Cool, i'm glad we can agree on that.. /discussion
Yeahhh - you clearly misunderstood my comment. PS4 and PS4Neo are the 2 different "android" devices, they are both the same platform. A PC running Linux or Windows is still a PC, while an Xbox Running Windows is still an Xbox. If a game is shared over Android Devices only, it is still exclusive - they are all built in the same catagory, while a game shared over windows devices (if that is PC and Console) is multiplatform. It isn't a hard to understand, you are just trying to blur lines because your chosen system has no real purpose in the market anymore.
It happens all the time. If you had 4 apples yesterday and got 4 more today; it wouldn't be uncommon to say, "I have twice as many apples today as I had yesterday."
LMAOL you sure pick the wrong picture today buddy that 1 picture was use for EXACTLY WHAT I SAY nvidia claim 2x perf for VR do to VR needs to run from 2x positions any VR game need 2x the amount of performance
witch it's exactly what I insinuate about Sony 2.3tf to run the game and the rest for VR
Nice story, but how much is just speculation? Where did that Scorpio APU pic come from? Because the intro video didn't have the dimensions listed. Is there any reliable source to corroborate that there will not be embedded RAM? Even with an increased bandwidth to compensate, you're still having to deal with the physical distance and interface layer to move that pool off-die; complicating compatibility with the Xbox One titles that used it. I've referred to the video and there's really no indication to two different memory types being used or one of them being HBM. Where is this coming from? And what does reusing the APU for the Surface have to do with anything (which your link claims will use an Intel solution)?
Scorpio's SoC picture was from E3 presentation with corrected 3D perspective e.g. Adobe Photoshop's perspective warp tool.
Dimensions are based from common GDDR5 modules.
Microsoft has claimed Scorpio can run existing XBO games. Remaping ESRAM memory locations on GDDR5 is not a problem.
a PC with a 7850 is a PC.. a PC with a 680Ti is a different PC than the one with the 7850.. both PCs share access to the same type of content..
a console with the PS4's specs is a PS4.. a console with the Neo's specs is a different console than the PS4.. both consoles share access to the same type of content.
Clear enough for you?..
Sony can call it whatever they want.. of course they want to call it a "PS4" and likely will so they don't piss off the 40 million PS4 owners out there and can keep their sales momentum going.. But at the end of the day, once they changed the GPU, CPU, etc, it is a different console.. period.. sure it's still a Sony product and it'll share the PlayStation Store, PSN, trophies, and etc.. but it's still a different console.. by definition, it is not a PS4.. it's a Neo..
No A PC is a PC period it doesn't matter what it has inside,the code it has work a million different configurations and still is a PC.
Trying to come now and argue that a PC with a 7850 and one with a 680TI are different PC to try to have it your way,is moronic stupid and dishonest.
But what can we expect from lemms like you .? You are without doubt the biggest hypocrites this site has ever known.
Now PC with different hardware don't count as the same PC all i say is PC has no exclusives because a 7850 is a different product to a 680..
Na i can't say that actually i am not that stupid and dishonest,nor want to win an argument so badly that will dare say such bullshit.
@ronvalencia said:
@tormentos: With 4K and for certain games, both R9-290's and Fury X's 4GB VRAM are known gimp factors which can skew the results.
Your focus on pure TFLOPS = performance reasoning is flawed and it's a double flawed at 4K when memory bandwidth and memory storage plays a larger role.
Both R9-290 and R9-290X has the same 320 GB/s peak memory bandwidth.
PS4 NEO's peak memory bandwidth actually closer to RX-470 (225 GB/s) than R9-290(320 GB/s).
RX-470's estimated effective memory bandwidth, (225 GB/s x 75.78 percent efficient) x 1.36X memory compression booster = 231 GB/s
PS4 NEO's estimated effective memory bandwidth, (218 GB/s x 75.78 percent efficient) x 1.36X memory compression booster = 224.7 GB/s
Oh Lord. He wont just admit it what the fu**...
24 FPS fallout
23 FPS SWBF3
On a 3.7TF gap now what is your excuse on 1080p neither bandwidth or memory is a problem for those GPU.
13FPS in 1080 i think you are running out of excuses dude....
@Wickerman777 said:
Funny how Scorpio has changed the discussion. Prior to Scorpio's specs leaking gamers were impressed with Neo's specs, the gpu part of it anyway.
There is nothing sony can do about the spec without a delay,Neo GPU is not even that fart for Scorpio and you people simple don't pay attention to what is happening on PC in fact by the time Scorpio hit the market the R X 480 would be like $140 dollars that is a 5.83TF GPU.
Neo need to launch this year period,the gap in flops is minimal compare to the performance per flop that this GPU give on PC,watch my many examples already,only a lemming who doesn't know anything about PC would think there would be a big gap.
@04dcarraher said:
still on that dat damage control..... if the 911mhz spec is true the Neo will never be able to supply full high or ultra settings at 4k with solid 30 fps.... How does one ignore the facts that cpu will be still a bottleneck and that it takes a 1.2 ghz rx480 to on par with 970/290 range of performance.... 911mhz makes the gpu perform a whole tier below the threshold needed for 4k 30fps gaming
CPU is more of a bottleneck when you try to pull 60 not 30 really as the witcher proved,which you claimed was CPU bound and what in reality it was a screw up game.
Ultra probably not,maybe high 30FPS,but then again that is a HUGE jump from low mid at 1080 and 900p now.
The thing most lemmings are not seeing here is that even if Neo ends up sub 4k,like sony own documents claim,you will get a far superior pixel count to 1440p which is not even standard on PC for most players 1080p is,another thing is that unlike 720p on xbox one which introduce jaggies chimering and blur the image, 3520x1980 or even 3200 x 1800 you will get a clean crisp image with good quality something you didn't get on the one at 720p.
@ronvalencia: Basically the CPU only becomes an issue on very high fps levels/"low" resolutions/cpu intensive games, like you can make a difference in witcher 3 f.e by running it on 80fps+, I can have my oc'd 2600k i7 tap out on 1080p before my gpu does
With my R9-290X OC, I found my i7-2600 OC tap out with Thief Mantle e.g. perhaps PCI-E 16X version 2.0 limitations (8GB/s+8GB/s). I ditched my i7-2600 upgraded to i7-4770K.
This is a thread of the year contender. One of the Cow Lieutenants is in here using PC benchmarks to downplay the difference between Neo and Scorpio GPUs.
Why are you posting NVIDIA Gamework titles (e.g. Fallout 4), when both R9-290X and R9-Fury X has the same geometry unit and similar clock speed?
NVIDIA Gameworks gimping will not exist on Xbox One hardware.
For SWBF
Fury X's 109 fps / R9-290's 86 fps = 1.267X.
The memory bandwidth gap between Fury X and R9-290 = 1.266X (random textures) i.e. 333 / 263 = 1.266.
Again, another lesson on effective memory bandwidth.
Your argument that minimizes TFLOPS gap is a double edge sword i.e. effective memory bandwidth comes into play and NEO has less memory bandwidth than Scorpio.
Scorpio has about 42 percent more memory bandwidth than NEO and both machines has flat memory layout like PS4
all examples of 4k are with cpus much stronger than whats in neo and still the gpu tier the neo falls in with its 911mhz still cant sustain 30 average at 4k
fact is the neo is a 1080p 60fps standardized machine, doing 4k would require too many compromises
all examples of 4k are with cpus much stronger than whats in neo and still the gpu tier the neo falls in with its 911mhz still cant sustain 30 average at 4k
fact is the neo is a 1080p 60fps standardized machine, doing 4k would require too many compromises
NEO is designed for the following resolutions.
3200 x 1800 = 5,760,000 pixels
1920 x 1080 = 2,073,600 pixels
The difference is 2.7X.
Sony's claims are inline with AMD's 2.8X performance per watt claim.
My speculation... NEO's GPU is near RX-470 i.e. effective memory bandwidth limits.
Its not completely different, they upclocked the CPU and put in a stronger GPU. This isn't a major overhaul in any sense of the term. Are you going to claim there are no PS3 exclusives because of the removal of the second CPU in the redesigned PS3? Are there no 3Ds exclusives because the New 3Ds is stronger? This just in - there are no PC exclusives because everyone has different hardware! An Android exclusive game which requires certain specs is still an Android exclusive, it is not multiplatform just because there are many phone hardware options out there.
There are exclusives for kinect, which can't be played without a kinect. The updated PS4 is just that, an update, a different sku, a different model of the same console.
This is a weak, half thought up argument to take the heat off your chosen console for your chosen company's decision to make it a useless redundant piece of underpowered hardware. I'm sure you notice that right now Lemmings are alone on their claims, unless you want to convince Hermits that they are in fact Lemmings. Had this been done at launch there wouldn't be any talk of it, Lemmings are just running damage control because they bet on the wrong horse this gen.
Wow, dude thanks for owning yourself and thanks for making my entire point.. The thing that makes an Android game "exclusive" to Android is the fact that it's tied to the Android OS, it's tied to your Google account, and you can only download it from the unified Google Store.. Just in the same sense that the thing that makes an Xbox/Win10 game "exclusive" to Xbox is the fact that it's tied to the Windows 10 OS, it's tied to your Xbox Live account, and you can only download it from the unified Windows Store.. hardware options are irrelevant..
Cool, i'm glad we can agree on that.. /discussion
Yeahhh - you clearly misunderstood my comment. PS4 and PS4Neo are the 2 different "android" devices, they are both the same platform. A PC running Linux or Windows is still a PC, while an Xbox Running Windows is still an Xbox. If a game is shared over Android Devices only, it is still exclusive - they are all built in the same catagory, while a game shared over windows devices (if that is PC and Console) is multiplatform. It isn't a hard to understand, you are just trying to blur lines because your chosen system has no real purpose in the market anymore.
yea and you're trying to ignore the fact you're still proving my point..
according to you and I quote: "PS4 and PS4Neo are the 2 different "android" devices, they are both the same platform"
and by contrast: An Xbox One and a Windows 10 PC are 2 different "Windows 10" devices, they are both the same platform..
In addition, and again I quote: "If a game is shared over Android Devices only, it is still exclusive"
and by contrast: If a game is shared over Windows 10 Devices only, it is still exclusive - they are all built in the same category on Windows 10 and Xbox Play Anywhere games are only distributed digitally through the Microsoft Windows Store"
you're right, it's not hard to understand.. you seem to understand completely since you're continuing to prove my point.. and by the way, my chosen platform of "Xbox" has just increased it's potential market presence exponentially with these announcements.. if you want a $299 console to play games on your TV, there's an Xbox One there for you that you can use to play Xbox/Win10 exclusvices.. If youre a PC gamer and have a decent rig, you're already set and i'll see you online when we're playing Xbox/Win10 exclusives together via Xbox Live.. If you want to "game on the go" in addition to your home console, continue your games on a Windows 10 laptop with Xbox Play Anywhere and "buy once, play everywhere".. If youre a console gamer looking for the absolute best in terms of hardware specs, Project Scorpio has you covered in holiday 2017.. until then, all your Xbox One games will carry on to the new console..
So at what point does the Xbox platform or even the Xbox One not have a place in the market anymore?.. oh, I forgot, you must be one of those guys that thinks every console gamer would rather spend $800 on a PC build rather than just plug a $299 console into their television in order to play video games.. tell me more about how the console market is dead and no one buys consoles anymore.. i'd love to hear why a console gamer should build a PC for potentially 2 or 3 times the cost of a console or buy a PS4 that doesn't have access to any Xbox/Win10 exclusives in order to play Gears of War 4, Recore, or Forza Horizon 3 when there's a less than $299 Xbox One option available.. please, enlighten us all sir..
Honestly if your fan better try to find something to hide behind. Neo was ok when scorpio didn't exist and when some of us thought RX480 was going to show a bit better then what it is now. It seemed ok to have a new graphics architecture even a gimped one along with modest improvements to existing components. This right now is going to be lopsided. There is nothing, nothing on Neo where you can say at least is going to do this or that better. Well hope there will be a proper price difference or that somehow sony have a better comparable version. Forget just the gpu teraflop talk the gap to scorpio is too big.
@tormentos: yep, and a PS4 is a console.. consoles only have one hardware configuration (with some minor tweaks).. only a PS4 is a PS4... and Neo isn't a PS4 because it is a new console with different hardware internals to include a more powerful CPU and GPU.. Neo is a different console with additional capabilities and surely a different pricepoint.. period.. full stop.. nothing else needs to be said..
Project Scorpio isn't an Xbox One.. it's the same difference.. it's a different console that shares the same platform and ecosystem of "Xbox".. PS4 and Neo are two different consoles that share the same platform and ecosystem of "PlayStation".. you can continue to call it whatever you want, but once they upgraded the CPU and GPU plus any of the other engineering that went into making it a 4.2 teraflop machine, they made a new console dude.. it's not a PS4.. sorry.. I'm not even sure why this is such a big deal for you honestly, it doesn't change anything.. it's just a simple reality..
all examples of 4k are with cpus much stronger than whats in neo and still the gpu tier the neo falls in with its 911mhz still cant sustain 30 average at 4k
fact is the neo is a 1080p 60fps standardized machine, doing 4k would require too many compromises
Scorpio has VR Oculus consideration e.g. it has the power to run PC's Fallout 4 VR without any major refactoring.
VR Oculus' minimum CPU is Intel i5-4590 equivalent.
@howmakewood: Of course. Nothing wrong with dropping some details to save a few hundred bucks. And 4K is way better than 1440p. I had a 1440p set up but returned it since I really saw no difference versus a standard 1080p monitor awhile back. Now 4K, that's a real upgrade.
Interesting how you don't see much gain from 1080p to 1440p that's doubling the pixel count, like 1440p to 4k, obviously some DR as higher you go, but then again you said that pc games don't even support native 1080p or how was it?
@tormentos: yep, and a PS4 is a console.. consoles only have one hardware configuration (with some minor tweaks).. only a PS4 is a PS4... and Neo isn't a PS4 because it is a new console with different hardware internals to include a more powerful CPU and GPU.. Neo is a different console with additional capabilities and surely a different pricepoint.. period.. full stop.. nothing else needs to be said..
Project Scorpio isn't an Xbox One.. it's the same difference.. it's a different console that shares the same platform and ecosystem of "Xbox".. PS4 and Neo are two different consoles that share the same platform and ecosystem of "PlayStation".. you can continue to call it whatever you want, but once they upgraded the CPU and GPU plus any of the other engineering that went into making it a 4.2 teraflop machine, they made a new console dude.. it's not a PS4.. sorry.. I'm not even sure why this is such a big deal for you honestly, it doesn't change anything.. it's just a simple reality..
On AMD PC GPUs, Doom Vulkan enables AMD's GPU shader intrinsic (hit-the-metal) functions.
View
Loading Video...
Doom Vulkan + Async compute + AMD GPU shader intrinsic functions are practically game console like optimizations.
Both Xbox One and PS4 supports AMD's GPU shader intrinsic functions.
Microsoft DirectX12 + AMD's GPU intrinsic functions = Xbox One.
"Hit-the-metal" can scale from low end AMD GPUs to high end AMD GPUs.
@howmakewood: Of course. Nothing wrong with dropping some details to save a few hundred bucks. And 4K is way better than 1440p. I had a 1440p set up but returned it since I really saw no difference versus a standard 1080p monitor awhile back. Now 4K, that's a real upgrade.
Interesting how you don't see much gain from 1080p to 1440p that's doubling the pixel count, like 1440p to 4k, obviously some DR as higher you go, but then again you said that pc games don't even support native 1080p or how was it?
What modern game doesn't support 1080p? lol
4K to 1080p is night and day. 1440p to 1080p is like night and night. Obviously you never had 4K.
Why are you posting NVIDIA Gamework titles (e.g. Fallout 4), when both R9-290X and R9-Fury X has the same geometry unit and similar clock speed?
NVIDIA Gameworks gimping will not exist on Xbox One hardware.
For SWBF
Fury X's 109 fps / R9-290's 86 fps = 1.267X.
The memory bandwidth gap between Fury X and R9-290 = 1.266X (random textures) i.e. 333 / 263 = 1.266.
Again, another lesson on effective memory bandwidth.
Your argument that minimizes TFLOPS gap is a double edge sword i.e. effective memory bandwidth comes into play and NEO has less memory bandwidth than Scorpio.
Scorpio has about 42 percent more memory bandwidth than NEO and both machines has flat memory layout like PS4
Oh lord you are a hypocrite you complain about me posting so call old benchmarks,and you come and post a benchmark that does not have the R290 and that doesn´t say what quality or resolution even the test is,and that show a miserable 4FPS improvement over an the old version...
The comparison being done here is between the R290 and the Fury X not the Fury X vs the 980ti.
I am not talking about the xbox one i am talking about the R290 and FuryX which are on PC.
oh STFU at 1080p there is not fu**ing way the Fury X is bandwidth starved at any point neither is the R290,you should stop i told you before you argue shit that you should not argue for the sake of winning a fo**ing argument.
at 1080p neither the R290 or the Fury X are memory constrain or bandwidth bound,i effectively neutralized your excuse by simple moving for 4k to 1080p which even the 7770 with 72GB/s can reach the R270 at 1080p would not be memory bound or bandwidth bound on Ultra it would be Alu bound it doesn't have the power.
Yes and the PS4 has 42% less power less power require less bandwidth i guess you forgot that,is not the first time i call you for your idiotic bandwidth arguments you are the fool who believe that if you give the 7770 the bandwidth of a 7970 it would perform like it...lol
How many times i told you that bandwidth didn't matter between the PS4 and XBO.? The power the PS4 has for the bandwidth is has is more than enough to top the xbox one best effort period,no matter if it had 300Gb/s still is bound by that shitty GPU.
On 1080p neither the R290 or the Fury X will be memory or bandwidth bound at all even less Scorpio and Neo.
@GoldenElementXL said:
This is a thread of the year contender. One of the Cow Lieutenants is in here using PC benchmarks to downplay the difference between Neo and Scorpio GPUs.
Just when you think you've seen it all.
Well look at it this way,i used PC benchmarks to claim what more or less would be the gap frame wise between the PS4 and XBO before both released,i was mock by some hermits with lemmings roots and by extreme on denial lemmings as well.
They claimed i was mad,and that the difference would be from 3 to 5 frames,other from 5 to 10,i say by more than 20 in some games... Guess who was right.. Le me show you who was..
@tormentos:
The fact that PC GPU out there are a testament to what will happen says it all,to run crysis on 1080p on the 7770 as fast as the 7850 you need to drop either resolution or details this is a fact.
StormyJoe
Who says that they have to " sub 1080p have lower quality drop AA or a combination of several"? The PS4 isn't that much more powerful. All the "better" specs of the PS4 will give you is mostlikely a coupe frames per second. You are overstating the hardware advantage.
Tell me what is the most usual difference you see between PS4 and XBO tell me is not sub 1080p on XBO to keep frame parity,so i was right or wrong using the 7770 vs the 7850 to illustrate what the gap would amount to and what would cause.?
@tormentos:
WTF dude stop ignoring facts.
700Gflops is enough to have 20 FPS advantage on PS4 at the same resolution or more.:?
The 7850 has 1.76 TF the 7770 has 1.28 TF the difference between the 2 is 480 Gflops and look what difference it creates.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/549?vs=536
BF3 the difference is from 15 FPS on 1920x1200 to 18FPS in 1680x1050,look how the 7770 gos from 34 to 43 by just lowering resolution.
Stop ignoring facts,i say is not night to day,but the difference is very mark and could be as high as 20FPS if not more.
Same thread same page look below Ronvalencia who some claim to know allot...
ronvalencia
7770 will not reflect X1's GCN configuration i.e. different memory bandwidth and triangle rate.
Lesser GCNs has less SRAM based storage and any overspill may fallback to external memory.
Because some things just doesn't change @GoldenElementXL want to know why he used that DF article because it actually was showing a lie in hes favor that article used PC hardware to represent the XBO and PS4 and what the gap would most likely be.
The problem was it used a 7850 to represent the xbox one,and a 7870 XT for the PS4 which would benefit more the XBO than the PS4 because the 7850 is way over the xbox one and was bigger GPU,hell they could have use a 7790 and under clock it,but the article was done to claim small gaps,so they use ultra and high settings which again pull down the GPU performance more closes the gap and simple is not a match for what the PS4 and XBO would run as settings and you know this.
DF predicted Tomb Raider would have a 7FPS gap..
Loading Video...
They were as wrong as Ronvalencia was.
Total destruction and the PS4 commanded gaps as big as 30FPS so i was right.
Speaking to VideoGamer.com at E3, Ilvessuo said: " Obviously we have been developing this game for a while and you can see the comparisons. I would say if you know how to use the platform they are both very powerful. I don't see a benefit over the other with any of the consoles."
"The difference is small, and I don't really need to worry about it," he said, suggesting versions for Xbox One and PS4 won't be dramatically different.
"Of course, the Xbox One isnt to be counted out. We asked Guay how the Xbox One version of Watch_Dogs would be different compared to the PC and PS4 versions of the game, to which he replied that, The Xbox One is a powerful platform, as of now we do not foresee a major difference in on screen result between the PS4 and the Xbox One. Obviously since we are still working on pushing the game on these new consoles, we are still doing R&D."
----
link
"We're still very much in the R&D period, that's what I call it, because the hardware is still new," Guay answered. "It's obvious to us that its going to take a little while before we can get to the full power of those machines and harness everything. But, even now we realise that both of them have comparable power, and for us thats good, but everyday it changes almost. Were pushing it and were going to continue doing that until [Watch Dogs] ship date."
"Other information has also come to light offering up a further Orbis advantage: the Sony hardware has a surprisingly large 32 ROPs (Render Output units) up against 16 on Durango. ROPs translate pixel and texel values into the final image sent to the display: on a very rough level, the more ROPs you have, the higher the resolution you can address (hardware anti-aliasing capability is also tied into the ROPs).16 ROPs is sufficient to maintain 1080p, 32 comes across as overkill, but it could be useful for addressing stereoscopic 1080p for instance, or even 4K. However, our sources suggest that Orbis is designed principally for displays with a maximum 1080p resolution."
Carmack on next-gen console hardware: 'very close,' 'very good'
THANK YOU!!!!
I am so sick of Sony fanboys (and I am talking directly at Tormentos right now) talking out of their arses about how "better" PS4 games are going to be than XB1 games because they look at some raw statistics and all of a sudden are expert game developers.
I re-iterate what the real experts say, and cows debate me as arm-chair game developers. :roll:
One more for the road... I can't believe how right i was and how wrong ronvalencia,and him were the xbox vs PS4 gaps have shown everything from 100% gap in frames to 100+ % more pixels,and developers mostly do what i CLAIM before consoles came out that they would lower resolution on XBO to keep parity in frames,but even that has failed in some games.
So yeah i stand by those benchmarks to the bitter end if i loss i loss if i won it would be hell..hahahahaa
Hell i think some of the post on that old thread i link are relevant here to the max...lol
darkangel115
Ppl still think the X1 can match ps4's superior gpu??TheKingIAm
People think crazier things. some of the funniest rumors i've heard are elvis is alive and the PS4 is more powerful then the X1 ;)
Oh boy... But he is not a Lemming right..lol
darkangel115
the titanfall quote is from DF ;) as is the crew quote ;) DF said the game was running at 1080P and 60FPS except in 1 cut scene it dropped to 40, then said it was due to an old video that hasn't been optimized yet since the game is unfinished. we've seen several games running 1080P and 60 FPS on X1 and 0 on the PS4 we did see several games crash and die while running on the PS4 however.
Titanfall 1080p...lol on PC on XBO it ended being 792p....hahahaha
tdkmillsy
The differences between 360 and ps3 where so slim nobody cared. Same will happen with Xbox One and PS4 for multiplat games. boring graphical comparisons will show the PS4 to have a few more FPS or a slightly higher resolution at best. Exclusive developers will push both consoles and will come up with cool ways of getting more out of them. To say the PS4 is stronger is wrong. The PS4 has stronger GPU and memory bandwidth. But the Xbox One has stronger controller, stronger innovation through Kinect, stronger integration with the rest of Microsoft products and the stronger cloud with Xbox Live. If you where simply bothered about GPU and memory bandwidth why get a console at all. If I could get the OS experience with Kinect on a PC I'd buy a PC but the Xbox One offers more unique stuff that you cant get on PC or PS4. Or at least does stuff better.
Oh lord you are a hypocrite you complain about me posting so call old benchmarks,and you come and post a benchmark that does not have the R290 and that doesn´t say what quality or resolution even the test is,and that show a miserable 4FPS improvement over an the old version...
The comparison being done here is between the R290 and the Fury X not the Fury X vs the 980ti.
You're too stupid to realize my Fury X vs 980 Ti table contains both old vs new patch comparison.
The latest patch 7 enabled Async compute you stupid fool. Your table matches my table's original bars. You shut fack up.
@tormentos said:
I am not talking about the xbox one i am talking about the R290 and FuryX which are on PC.
I own both R290 and R9-290X you stupid punk.
@tormentos said:
oh STFU at 1080p there is not fu**ing way the Fury X is bandwidth starved at any point neither is the R290,you should stop i told you before you argue shit that you should not argue for the sake of winning a fo**ing argument.
I have shown you Fury X is memory bandwidth bound
For SWBF
Fury X's 109 fps / R9-290's 86 fps = 1.267X.
The memory bandwidth gap between Fury X and R9-290 = 1.266X (random textures) i.e. 333 / 263 = 1.266.
At 1920x1080 resolution
Fury X = 109 fps
R9-290 = 86 fps
The math
109 / 86 = 1.267
Again, another lesson on effective memory bandwidth.
Async compute workloads are out of phase with sync graphics command workload, hence there's unused memory bandwidth during sync graphics command workload preparation. All these workloads has to be complete within 16 ms for 60 fps or 33 ms for 30 fps.
You haven't done computer science hence you don't know shit. You shut fack up.
@tormentos said:
at 1080p neither the R290 or the Fury X are memory constrain or bandwidth bound,i effectively neutralized your excuse by simple moving for 4k to 1080p which even the 7770 with 72GB/s can reach the R270 at 1080p would not be memory bound or bandwidth bound on Ultra it would be Alu bound it doesn't have the power.
At 1920x1080 resolution
Fury X = 109 fps
R9-290 = 86 fps
The math
109 / 86 = 1.267
Again, another lesson on effective memory bandwidth. YOU LOSE.
@tormentos said:
Yes and the PS4 has 42% less power less power require less bandwidth i guess you forgot that,is not the first time i call you for your idiotic bandwidth arguments you are the fool who believe that if you give the 7770 the bandwidth of a 7970 it would perform like it...lol
As I stated
High effective memory bandwidth has to be backed by TFLOPS e.g. W5000 unable to match retail 7850 regardless of the same memory bandwidth, but W5000 is faster than 7770
High TFLOPS has to be backed by High effective memory bandwidth e.g. GTX 1080.
@tormentos said:
How many times i told you that bandwidth didn't matter between the PS4 and XBO.? The power the PS4 has for the bandwidth is has is more than enough to top the xbox one best effort period,no matter if it had 300Gb/s still is bound by that shitty GPU.
You missed my W5000 example. W5000 is unable to match retail 7850 regardless of the same memory bandwidth.
W5000 example use as the upper limit for 1.3 TFLOPS GCN. Don't put words into my mouth.
Your attempts to attribute "no matter if it had 300Gb/s still is bound by that shitty GPU" to me is a load of bullshit.
@tormentos said:
On 1080p neither the R290 or the Fury X will be memory or bandwidth bound at all even less Scorpio and Neo.
At 1920x1080 resolution
Fury X = 109 fps
R9-290 = 86 fps
The math
109 / 86 = 1.267
The memory bandwidth gap between Fury X and R9-290 = 1.266X (random textures) i.e. 333 / 263 = 1.266.
TFLOPS gap factor between R9-290 and Fury X is 1.79X
Look at that, gap factor between frame rate and effective memory bandwidth are the same.
@tormentos said:
Because some things just doesn't change @GoldenElementXL want to know why he used that DF article because it actually was showing a lie in hes favor that article used PC hardware to represent the XBO and PS4 and what the gap would most likely be.
The problem was it used a 7850 to represent the xbox one,and a 7870 XT for the PS4 which would benefit more the XBO than the PS4 because the 7850 is way over the xbox one and was bigger GPU,hell they could have use a 7790 and under clock it,but the article was done to claim small gaps,so they use ultra and high settings which again pull down the GPU performance more closes the gap and simple is not a match for what the PS4 and XBO would run as settings and you know this.
DF predicted Tomb Raider would have a 7FPS gap..
I have stated TMU/ROPS workaround wouldn't fix ALU bound issues.
Let's see
Tomb Raider Definitive Edition was release around Jan 2014...
Avalanche Studios's GDC 2014 TM-ROP workaround was dated on March 2014
Mad Max was release around Sep 2015
A true 1.4X superior machine shouldn't have results reversal and here we are with results being reversed.
My comments was made as a hermit i.e the true superior hardware e.g faster CPU, faster GPU and higher effective video memory bandwidth.
It happens all the time. If you had 4 apples yesterday and got 4 more today; it wouldn't be uncommon to say, "I have twice as many apples today as I had yesterday."
LMAOL you sure pick the wrong picture today buddy that 1 picture was use for EXACTLY WHAT I SAY nvidia claim 2x perf for VR do to VR needs to run from 2x positions any VR game need 2x the amount of performance
witch it's exactly what I insinuate about Sony 2.3tf to run the game and the rest for VR
thx for the picture
What? This picture (as well as the others) was to show that people do use times performance and that it wasn't "shady" of Sony to use it in their slide, as you claimed. Furthermore, this slide isn't to show how you need 2 times performance to use VR, it's to show the double performance and triple efficiency of the new GTX 1080 over the old Titan X card. 2.3 TFLOPS is more than half of the Neo's rating, so suggesting it needs double for VR but using that number just shows your initial error and refusal to back off a stance, no matter how futile.
Log in to comment