[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]Are you thick? we where talking about how much of it's theoretical power the XB1 could use, not the power difference between the XB1 and Ps4delta3074

133 GB/s out of 218 GB/s. You do the math, little boy.

The eSRAM is an overglorified cache that'll be used for nothing more than a framebuffer. You know how the PS3 suffered due to its split memory bank? Yeah, it's the same concept. 32 mb is still just 32 mb. KZ: SF is using 40 mb for the frame buffer alone. Unified 8 GB GDDR5 allows for more flexibility with the developers.

Next, the fine-grain compute architecture of the PS4's GPU will allow the GPU to queue up compute tasks when the GPU isn't fully utilized. In the real-world, the GPU is never utilizing 100% of its power for graphics rendering. The large amount of ACEs will allow the PS4's GPU to accomplish GPGPU tasks with the cores it isn't using for graphics rendering, meaning its GPU will always utilize 100% of its power. The Xbox ONE, unfortunately, doesn't have this customization. The Xbox ONE's GPU will be used for graphics rendering, but as I have stated before, the GPU never utilizes 100% of its power for graphics rendering. The unused power will be used for GPGPU computing, but with only a paltry 2 ACEs, it's not going to accomplish much.

[QUOTE="Wickerman777"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]How would you know? Yes i am sure MS went with hardware they can only use 65% of the power on *rolls eyes* If you are not a game developer then shut the hell up dude or provide evidence that a game developer has actually said that about the XB 1 I am pretty sure the Ps4 will be more powerful but i won't abide people pulling percentages out of there backside dude.delta3074

The percenatages don't come out of anyone's backside: 18 CUs vs 12 CUs = 40%-50% difference. Really couldn't be anymore simple.

133 GB/s out of 218 GB/s. You do the math, little boy.

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="clone01"] I like Halo a lot. Us your opinion a gauge of fact?clone01

So did I. It's now a trash series on life support. Halo devs have been caught saying that they don't know what's wrong and that they don't know how to fix their damaged brand.

It's game over, xboners. No good games. Inferior multiplats. Crap controller that makes DS3 feel like gold. Dead online community. Overpriced.

It's like the perfect storm. Microsoft could not have been in a worse position if they even tried. :lol:

You know 343i is in trouble if they don't know how to fix their series. :lol:

Microsoft will throw $500,000,000 to make Halo 5 into a cinematic experience. They are hoping that lots of cutscenes will compensate for the lack of Halo magic. It's too bad that 343i is a mediocre talentless studio.

Only Naughty Dog is able to create a perfect mix of cinematics with great gameplay. 343i will butcher the Halo series even further. Xboners would trade Halo for Naughty Dog in a heartbeat. I know I would if I were an Xboner.

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="clone01"] Sure there are. If it has games one wants to play, there you go. You really want to get caught up in the ridiculous measuring of console capabilities? Again that's a battle that PC wins easily.clone01

Xboners will play on a cheap, madcatz clone controller that's worse than the DS3 (Yes, you read that correctly. The DS3, not the DS4). Professional critics and gamers alike (Including myself) have attested to the superiority of the DS4.

Xboners will suffer from horrendous multiplat ports. Confirmed by devs, Edge insiders, and Shensolidus.

Xboners will have no exclusive worth owning. Halo is trash now. How can a gaming company have no good game?

Again, what is on the Xbone that will redeem its inferiority?

So did I. It's now a trash series on life support. Halo devs have been caught saying that they don't know what's wrong and that they don't know how to fix their damaged brand.

It's game over, xboners. No good games. Inferior multiplats. Crap controller that makes DS3 feel like gold. Dead online community. Overpriced.

It's like the perfect storm. Microsoft could not have been in a worse position if they even tried. :lol:

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]The Xbone's inefficient architecture will allow only 50-65% of its theoretical power to be used.delta3074

Digital Foundry confirmed that the eSRAM can only use 133 GB/s out of its theoretical max of 218 GB/s.

The PS4's realworld bandwidth is 172 GB/s out of its theoretical max of 176 GB/s.

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="clone01"] Who cares? I enjoyed SMG 1 & 2, and those graphics were sd.clone01

Xboners should care...

The Xbone has a worse controller, worse specs, and no good games. Their best game Halo is now a shadow of its former self. There is nothing on Microsoft's side that redeems this POS of a console.

Xboners will play on a cheap, madcatz clone controller that's worse than the DS3 (Yes, you read that correctly. The DS3, not the DS4). Professional critics and gamers alike (Including myself) have attested to the superiority of the DS4.

Xboners will suffer from horrendous multiplat ports. Confirmed by devs, Edge insiders, and Shensolidus.

Xboners will have no exclusive worth owning. Halo is trash now. How can a gaming company have no good game?

Again, what is on the Xbone that will redeem its inferiority?

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]What? i am getting a Ps4 you moron and i already know that the Ps4 will have an edge in power, i was just pointing out that you cannot really use Graphics cards as a comparison for Console GPU's and that power is not just determined by a consoles GPU/CPU, i suggest you read through the whole conversation before coming in here making yourself look like an idiot.delta3074

From the looks of it, you seem to like defending the Xbox ONE even though you're getting the PS4. Why is that?

You talk about architectural efficiency, yet the PS4's architecture is superior to the Xbox ONE's.

Just comparing the graphics card is being highly generous to the Xbone. The PS4's architecture is highly efficient and real-world performance is 95-99% of its theoretical performance.

The Xbone's inefficient architecture will allow only 50-65% of its theoretical power to be used.

[QUOTE="AtariKidX"]

I have found the original photos and.....wow.The PS3 version looks a lot better.The XBOX version is a blur mess.

MK-Professor

strange that the youtube bar on the xbox is also blurred...
cows are unbelievable...
I can do the same look

These kind of differences are what I'd expect from the PS4 and the Xbox ONE. :)

Pretty noticeable, no?

[QUOTE="Sonysexual1"]

[QUOTE="delta3074"]how the rest of the architecture effects the performance of the console, in the early years of the Ps3 they had a problem with a bottle neck becasue they where trying to do all the Graphics on the GPU and allowing it to use the RAM allocated for the Cell, then they had the amazingly Clever idea of using the Cell to do a lot of the GPU's work so the bottleneck that occured when the GPU tried to access the CPU's memory pool was eleiminated. You can have a powerful GPU but it can either be helped or hindered by the rest of the Hardware. Example: having a high end GPU gimped by high RAM latency.delta3074

Look, I know you had a love affair with your Xbox,  but why do you feel the need to continue defending the Xbone now that you're gonna cheat on it with the PS4?

The Xbox ONE's architecture is even worse than the PS4's.

Insiders have been saying that the PS4's architecture was more efficient and that real-world performance was very close to the theoretical performance (172 GB/s Realworld bandwidth out of 176 GB/s theoretical bandwidth). It's the Xbox ONE that's having difficult reaching even 65% of its theoretical performance. The eSRAM's realworld bandwidth is 133 GB/s out of 218 GB/s theoretical bandwidth.

From the looks of it, you seem to like defending the Xbox ONE even though you're getting the PS4. Why is that?

You talk about architectural efficiency, yet the PS4's architecture is superior to the Xbox ONE's.