Xbox One could be more powerful than you think

Yeah when Xbox 360 came out then we saw Gears of War while PS3 had game Liar and Haze.

PS3 is like maybe 5% more powerful than Xbox 360 yet Xbox 360 had best looking games than PS3(untill PS3 uncharted came out).

So right now we see lower res on Xbox One but maybe because they havent developed it well yet?

So maybe Xbox One is this time like Playstation 3, slow start, shitty ports but in time we see games that runs 1080p and 60fps without problems.

Yes, PS4 is more powerful than Xbox One but this dosent mean that Xbox One cant do 1080p games

By "in time" you must mean now as there are already games on the X1 that run at 1080p + 60fps. >_>

Isnt the PS4 running similar lap top crap? Oh I'm sorry it is a tick better.

But probably not

Again with this "bad devkits" non-sense.

The Xbone devkits are just fine. They require a bit more work than the PS4's dev kits, but it's not something like a coding nightmare that the PS3 was. Furthermore, the slightly more work required on the Xbone has already been mitigated on current multiplats by the much higher programmers and workhours that the Xbone ports have received compared to the PS4 ports. In regard, what you see right now is what the Xbone will achieve for the rest of this generation.

What devs mean when they say the Xbone is "hard to develop for" is that the Xbone is so bottlenecked that its full potential, despite being so limited, is lower than previously thought. This is what's causing devs issues. Devs need to partition parts of their game design on the eSRAM and the rest on the DDR3. The catch is that both the eSRAM and DDR3 are slow are f*ck, so textures, particle effects, and other graphical assets may need to be downgraded on the Xbone port while the highest graphical assets can just be dumped on the PS4's fast GDDR5 RAM.

This is highly different from the PS3 scenario, where coding was difficult. Nothing is "difficult" on the Xbone in terms of coding. It's just so weak that devs don't know how they're going to run next-gen games on it.

No chance in hell.

You'll see more 1080p titles all right and there's no doubt the Xbone will improve graphically and get some great looking exclusives but it doesn't have the advantage of more power that's tucked away under difficult to work with architecture over it's rival like the PS3 did.

It's multiplats where the problems lie. Where as last gen the PS3 improved over time to gain parity in most multiplats towards the end of the gen, you're not going to get that with the Xbone. The PS4 is always going to have that power edge and we'll see disparity in pretty much any challenging title imo and that's providing the two have similar sales like last gen. The Xbone won't be given the time for the optimisation needed if it lags in hardware or softwares sales significantly.

x360 has a 10% better graphics card than ps3, after so many years all x360 games still look 10% better

ps4 has a 80% faster graphics card than x1, in 2020 ps4 games will still look 80% better

"looking x% better"

I lol'd

Yep but it's got the ability to offload to the GPU instead and given that's more powerful that the Xbone's it's well covered if the CPU becomes the bottleneck.

Imo it's over focused on, many games aren't even optimised for most CPUs on a PC. Planetside 2 has only improved because of the work they did with the PS4 version and when i last played Rome 2 it was all over the show on the CPU performance and only used 2 cores during gameplay.

XB1 has weaker CPU, weaker GPU and its media features take a percentage of those resources too. XB1 is not only weaker but MUCH weaker than the PS4.

You can't offload tasks that perform better on the CPU to the GPU efficiently.

I'll give you a quick example: Video encoding. Throw a good multi-core CPU at that task and it'll eat through frames. Throw it at a GPU, and despite having a HECK of a lot more cores available it will perform SLOWER. It's not until you are runnign operations that would run faster on a GPU (like various effects filters on video) that the GPU starts to help rather than hinder.

Well everyone knows the PS4 is the most powerful video game console to have ever been created in the history of video games.

And that means what? THat's is more powerful than a XB1... that's it.

Obviously it was impossible to release a weaker cosnole than the last iteration after 8 years....

True but it also helps that the PS4 and Xbox One both have dedicated hardware to sound and i believe for some compression tasks? So there are probably some tasks already not on the CPU because of that. I think it's fair to that those that say the CPUs are laptop crap are only taking it at face value because they won't perform like they do in those laptops because the games are well optimised and because of the additional sound chips etc...

Either way the point stands that the PS4 will have an advantage in that area because there will be less strain on the CPU because at least some of the operations that can be offloaded. You've probably got a fair point though as i really don't know to what extent of a difference it'll make since it's not the most widely used process at the moment and it's not really going to be used until new reasons to use it become apparent e.g. the CPU becomes a bottleneck as i suggested.

Couldn't it also be the case in some circumstances that despite some operations running slower on the GPU that the CPU space needed for more important tasks makes it more optimal overall to offload to the GPU? Surely having more freedom to prioritise and dedicate resources is a strong positive.

Sure it could.

SONY gave us the most powerful video game console to have ever been created in the history of video games is what that means,.

According to the announcement of Fixstars reached the Cell processor of the Playstation a performance of 29 FPS, that is 1.2 times real-time conversion - the cell has a similar performance as the CUDA Badaboom encoder in combination with an Nvidia Geforce GTX-285. By comparison, Intel's current top-CPU, the Core i7 965 XE, does it still at 18 FPS - normal desktop CPUs even create only about 5 FPS.

Thats not always the case.

Cell was even better than an I7 encoding,and it was thanks to is parallelism,been GPU like.

Not Only Cell beat the i7 it smock it by 11 FPS.

Many task that run in the CPU like Physics with run much better on the GPU than the CPU,with a fraction of the power require on the CPU side,several other things like this can been offloaded,to give you an example physic on Killzone SF were done on the CPU,so yeah that is one more thing sony will move from the CPU and free more CPU resources.

I think the X bone is under performing as of now due to the esram, so once devs get a hold of it we will see better games.

The problem is the PS4 is much more then just 5% stronger then the X bone.

Still though I don't expect differences between the PS4 and X bone to be as huge as they are now in terms of MULTIPLATS. But in terms of exclusives the PS4 will destroy X bone in graphics.

Your probably dead on about the Xbox One/PS3 comparisons, but I'm not sure if it will finish as strongly.

sorry but optomization wont fix the resolution "problem." 720p or 900p isthe optimal resolution for next gen consoles for most games. Especially multiplats. This will not change drastically. Games might look better visually but they wont all of a sudden be at 1080p and 60fps. That is a pipe dream. More xbone games will be at 900p maybe but don't expect 1080p galore. at least not for the xbone

I would like to know about Deadlight, i see the release date is around December year 2098....Is that what it means to make Xbone better in a more futuristic way?

You're all over the place with this post, it's hard to exactly know what you're even saying.

Doesn't matter whatever point you're trying to make, the fact is the Xbox One is weaker than the PS4 in every single area. Since both machines have practically the same architecture, there is no "hidden power" to be found. The Xbox One can easily do 1080p games if devs are willing to cut down the graphcs in other areas to get 1080p at a playable framerate.

What happened in past generations does not apply to this gen. This gen we have 2 computers whose internals are built in the same way by the same company to nearly the same spec. The Playstation 4 has a more efficient memory architecture, faster ram, and a significantly more powerful GPU, and no requirement of the Kinect to drain on system resources.

It's that simple this gen.

meh chana me think xbox is vely powerful ok bossman.

Its not that simple, the architecture is different enough between them for extra power to be found in both consoles. As has been the case in all previous generations. Microsoft are backing on the upscaler for now (and if you where honest its doing a good job) and different programming techniques down the line to enable it to close the gap.

The Kinect is actually a differentiator between the two consoles. When the graphics look as close as they do now, extra ways of playing such as Kinect, Xbox Live, Smartglass and the Vita remote play will be play a bigger factor.

Translated

@tdkmillsy: It's really not that different. The differences in programming and all of that will not come close to closing the gaps that exist between the hardware.

My favorite part is how the Xbox hardware wasn't finalized until mere months before launch and the software wasn't finalized until pretty much launch day... Yet ryse was rest to go at launch. So I think I'd fair to say that launch games are not optimized for the systems which is why second wave games always look better. Tc is right in that both consults will get better looking games in the future and neither console is maxed out.

Don't forget the power of the cloud. I can't believe all the lies you lemmings fall for.

Ok and?

Really not that hard seeing how you only got a competitor.

More like who's gonna use less shitty parts contest more than anything.

Sony dropped the ball big time with the PS4 I had very high expectations... I dreamed of a 500$ subsidized by them for 200$ outperforming high-end pcs (titan class sandy brigde at least).

Instead we got... that? 6 more years of 2010's pc graphics... yay?

there is plenty of juice left in Xbox One.

Xbox One Upcoming Driver Update Should Mean Great Things, Xbox OS Team Best In The World

Xbox One starting to get scary and unreachable for Team Sony.

Xbox one more powerful ORLY

u funny

Somebody's got an itchy trigger finger..................................

It's kinda sad if you think about it, MS could have pumped so much money into the design that it could have left Sony in the console dust forever. It will go down in history as the most infamous and idiotic move MS could have made in the 'Consoulez Wharz'.

OT: The cell was well a head of its time hence being a pain in the ass to work with, but given enough time(Sony first party & Ice Team, Gabe Newell with Portal) you could do some magic with it.

XB1, I don't think there's any such similar potential. The architecture is what it is because of slow DDR3 and dampened to harbour other non-gaming functions.

Not against Intel's Quick Sync i.e. hardware extensions that was specifically designed for video encoding.

-------------

From x264 software developer on IBM CELL vs Intel Core i7 920, http://forum.doom9.org/showpost.php?p=1454286&postcount=2

Question: While it was working, however, it worked great thanks to the power of the Cell and proved to be faster than a core i7 920)

Answer: No, it wasn't. It was way, way, way slower than x264 on a core i7 with similar settings. Sure, if you put x264 on slow settings and it on fast settings, it was faster -- but that's hardly a surprise.

The Cell is a pretty slow CPU. It takes roughly 2.5 cores (out of 8 ) to do realtime 1080p H.264 decoding with a highly optimized decoder. A fast i7 can do that with about ~0.4 cores (out of 4 or 6).

-------------

CELL's SPU ISA is closer to PowerPC's Altivec than from AMD's GCN ISA. AMD GCN wavefront instructions payload is nothing like SPU's SIMD instruction payload.

AMD GCN wavefront instructions payload has four 128bit SIMD instructions while SPU's SIMD payload has one 128 bit SIMD instruction.

AMD GCN's instruction set's super-wide SIMD approach is closer to Intel Larrabee's super-wide SIMD approach. Intel AVX SIMD format can be expanded to 1024 bits wide.

AMD GCN wavefront is effectively 512 bits SIMD wide i.e. it's actually a MIMD i.e. Multiple Instructions Multiple Data.

Intel Larrabee's SIMD extension is 512 bits wide.

Intel Xeon Phi's SIMD extension is 512 bits wide.

Both AMD GCN's cache behavior is closer to X86 CPUs than SPE's manual behavior local memory storage.

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIMD

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIMD

Btw, AMD GCN is also has out-of-order hyper-threading behavior (i.e. wavefronts are processed out-of-order) while SPU doesn't have one.

AMD GCN's closest relative is Xbox 360's Xenos GPU i.e. another scalar + SIMD based GPU with 64 threads.

Xenos GPU's 48 pipelines are divided into 3 groups i.e. 16 pipelines which each pipeline has 1 scalar and 1 SIMD4.

If you do the math for SIMD side, SIMD4 x 16 = 64 stream processors (Radeon HD speak).

Funny enough, each AMD GCN CU has 64 stream processors. Xbox 360's Xenos is like AMD GCN with 3 CUs at 500Mhz.

AMD GCN is the spiritual successor to Xbox 360's Xenos. Both X1 and PS4 are basically updated/super-scaled Xbox 360.

PS; I haven't factored in AMD GCN's scalar processor within each CUs.

My favorite par is that bold part you pulled from deed deed down your a$$...

The hardware was finalized for months,Activision Mark Rubin confirmed that when they talked about Ghost on xbox one,they have the final hardware for a long time..

MS did a last minute up clock which is totally different,and can even be done now if they wanted to,if they want to rise the speed of the GPU to 1ghz now they could do it,and update and off you go,surely that will cause the system to fail under heat.

Launch games on all platforms are always rush,is not the xbox one alone,the PS3,PS2,xbox,xbox 360 DC you name it,hell Killzone SF didn't even had voice chat.

The xbox one will improve,but so will the PS4 the gap will remain for the generation,there is nothing inside the xbox one that can close that gap period.

For God sake they have he same GPU and CPU,the memory s different and superior on PS4,and the GPU while is the same line is also stronger on PS4.

On top of this MS build the unit in a way that it hogs 10% of its GPU for Kinect,snap and the UI,which make the problem of having a weaker GPU even worse.

The PS4 has the same scaler the xbox one has,since both have the same family of GPU,the PS4 one isn't been use because the PS4 is reach 1080p without upscale the xbox one doesn't,only 1 game on PS4 is not 1080p and is 900p,the rest all is 1080p,on xbox one only racing games sports and games with no demanding engines run on 1080p.

There will be nothing that closes the gap,the same techniques you can use on the xbox one you can use them on PS4,they are the same period one is just stronger,never have 2 consoles been so alike.

Those things about Kinect that you mention has nothing to do with power,Kinect is meh no one cares any more.

WTF...lol

If you really expected a damn Titan sandy bridge at least you are the most stupid moron that ever walked this forum,lest just put aside that it would cost sony a damn fortune and would even send MS crying outside of the consoles market because of the losses,a console like box with a damn Titan like GPU is impossible even more pair with a damn Sandy bridge,the TDP would require a damn PC case,sony would officially be selling you a PC in a tower case.

The funny thing is that you defend MS which actually have millions to burn,and gave you a damn consoles with ever cheaper hardware and weaker to,the power inside the xbox one is not even equivalent to a 7770,it has 100Gflops less..lol

Hahahahaahaaaaaa.....Oh dear.... hahahhaaaa

You are a fu**ing moron did you even read what you quote.?

First of all Cell only had 7 SPE not 8,the 8 one was disable for redundancy.

Second Cell doesn't have cores you idiot,it has 1 PPE and 7 SPE they are not actual core nor work exactly like core.

And 3rd this is the first time i hear some one claiming 2.5 cores as if you could divide SPE down to half of one,you either use one or you don't.

Also nice quoting people on a forum your hate for sony is so great that it make you look stupid,once again a company did test and Cell >>> and i7.....Cry all you want..lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4

LOL, SPU ISA is roughly a subset of Altivec. Your the fu**ing moron.

Also, PC's IBM CELL PCI-Express add-on-card is a full 8 SPU version. Again, your the fu**ing moron.

My supplied link's context was against that company's i7 vs CELL test.. LOL. The software programmer for x264 encoder software has labelled your company's i7 vs CELL test as BS. IBM CELL's PC commercial adventure was a failure.

PS3 SPE's IEEE-754 support is $hit i.e. not comparable to Intel SSEx.

A programmer can use half of the processor's capability LOL. Can you Fu*k off? It's clear you don't know what you are talking about.

As for my Sony hate..

I still own Sony Vaio VGN-FW45 laptop (has Radeon HD 4650M GDDR3) and still has pretty good audio circuits i.e. it's still better than old my DELL Studio XPS 1645. My Sony Vaio VGN-FW45 laptop is still operational as my audio editing machine.

A Sony laptop owner should be able to identify Sony's desktop wireless app.

My Sony Vaio VGN-FW45 laptop has an external Radeon HD 5770 eGPU solution.

I also own a Sony 46 inch 1080p HDTV.

With my Sony laptop, I spent more $$ on a Sony device than your combined PS3 and PS4 hardware. F**k off, you don't know me.

My Intel Core™ i7 Processor 3635QM would smash PS3's CELL processor i.e. four sets of 256bit wide Intel AVX SIMDs + 16 GT2 SIMDx processors (Intel HD 4000) and Intel QuickSync.

Intel HD 4000 rivals PS3 (combined 6 SPE + RSX) and Xbox 360 in gaming results.

AC Black Flag, CoD Ghosts, & BF4 were stated to run at higher resolutions on PS4 than X1. X1 isn't more powerful than anyone thinks!

It's fan boys who want to believe GDDR3 RAM & 50% less powerful GPU can perform as well as GDDR5 RAM & 150% more powerful GPU.

The Cloud they say, which is BS & used for online storage. The 32 Mb of ESRAM, which is also BS & way too insignificant to mount to a hill of beans.

How many years are going to have to pass this gen with many multiplats coming out that run at higher resolutions on PS4 than X1 before the X fans accept the fact that the PS4 is more powerful?! How about we cut the BS now Xfans & stop the insanity and the lame topics?!

Is this extra powah coming from the cloud ??

Oh look, a hidden power thread. Is it April 2013 yet?

You can claim anything you like you fu**ing troll fact is what i posted wasn't a moron on forum talking about Cell as if Cell had cores...lol

It was a company who did a test,ad yeah Cell beat an i7 period.

Is not the first time Cell use to own CPU as well in folding home,you had to bring GPU to actually beat it and i remember how you use to bring Nvidia GPU to compete with Cell..lol

Its funny that everything has to be 1080p now but the most stable 1080p 60fps is on the x1 with forza not killzone only on multiplayer and only because a lack of AI they was able to have 60fps and its not stable DF mentioned FORZA SMOOTH AS BUTTER AT 1080p 60fps KILLZONE UNSTABLE AT 60fps BOTH 1st PARTY DEVs I don't see what COWS are seeing I X1 gave you great games at every resolution and 3rd party devs will soon follow

Killer Instinct 720p great game

Ryse 900p THE GRAPHIC KING AT THE MOMENT

FORZA 1080p 60fps stable with GREAT AI cloud AI

Yall can keep telling yourselves them lies about the hardware but the truth is in the software