Doesn't sound too good to be true. Epic was asking for 2.5 tflops consoles. I was expecting Sony and MS to deliver boxes in the 2 through 2.5 tflops range. PS4 is a little short of that at 1.8 but it's fairly close. So no, doesn't seem hard to believe to me. The rumored specs for Durango, however, are a little difficult to get my head around. Not because they're so good but because they're so bad. 1.2 tflops is well below what I expected.

Wouldn't be surprised. The next Xbox is looking like a massive trainwreck. 

Vari3ty

Indeed. Blame the Wii. I don't remember anyone talking about casual gamers before the Wii.

Yet their best selling games were the first ones that focused the most on horror.

Capcom logic.

TopTierHustler

That was back in the days before people were obsessed with online multiplayer.

They sure are paying a lot for it. Recently saw a cost breakdown for PS4 somewhere (Forget where) and it had the RAM costing more than the APU (CPU + GPU).

Xbox controller is my favorite for most games. The only exception is with games that use the D-pad a lot, like fighting games. If I end up getting PS4 one of the first things I'll likely do is look for a 3rd party controller that is like Xbox.

[QUOTE="Wickerman777"]

[QUOTE="Martin_G_N"]Yeah right. You mean the 32MB ESRAM that is magicly going to increase the bandwidth on 8GB of DDR3...dream on. And it's the slower DDR3 the X720 is using, not GDDR3...big difference. Since the RAM is used for graphics, speed is importent. Which is why no gaming GPU's today uses DDR3. MS is being cheap and prioritating Kinect and Apps. Sony chose GDDR5, and it is top of the line, only beaten by XDR RAM which is more expencive. Atleast the RAM won't be a bottleneck in the PS4 this time around.Martin_G_N

Have you even done any reading on this? There are MULTIPLE articles out there explaining that memory bandwidth on the next Xbox will be 170 GB/s. Do a google search and learn something. Check out digital foundry, for example.

You're right about it being DDR3, don't know why I wrote GDDR3. But anyway, The fact remains that the memory bandwidth will total 170 GB/s. Don't know what you mean by "short period." I imagine coders will access it far more than that. Some devs have already commented that they think it will work out just fine because most stuff doesn't need ultra-fast memory anyway. That which does they'll just code to run through the 32 megs of ESRAM. Is 8 gigs of GDDR5 RAM a better, albeit far more expensive, solution? Absolutely. I don't deny that for a moment. But a lot of people around here are quoting the 68 GB/s figure as though that's all there is to the story and it isn't. Sure, I'd rather have 8 gigs of GDDR5 in Xbox but the solution they've come up isn't a dealbreaker. It gives up some performance but makes a lot more sense from an economic point of view. As an Xbox fan it just ins't much of a concern to me. I believe devs will figure out how to make it work just fine. But as I've talked about a kzillion times around here the GPU rumored to be in the next Xbox disappoints me enormously. If it doesn't ship with a graphics processor better than that I probably won't get one.

[QUOTE="Wickerman777"]

[QUOTE="Martin_G_N"]There is a big speed difference between DDR3 and GDDR5. 68GB/s vs 176GB/s. And with 4GB, the PS4 would still have beaten the nextbox. Martin_G_N

For the thousandth time it's not a simple matter of GDDR3 vs GDDR5. Y'all need to stop forgetting about the custom hardware in the next Xbox that increases the bandwidth of the GDDR3. It takes it up to about 170 GB/s. That's slower but pretty darned close to GDDR5's 176 GB/s. PS4 has an advantage there but you guys are grossly exaggerating it.

Have you even done any reading on this? There are MULTIPLE articles out there explaining that memory bandwidth on the next Xbox will be 170 GB/s. Do a google search and learn something. Check out digital foundry, for example.

[QUOTE="Wickerman777"]

[QUOTE="jhonMalcovich"]

So ?

jhonMalcovich

I'm guessing that his point was that because of the highly optimized nature of consoles, the way devs can code to the metal, 1.8 tflops on a console > 1.8 tflops on PC.

I desagree, Console 1.8 TFLOPS of GPU power = PC 1.8 TFLOPS of GPU power (well mostly equal)

With the optimization, consoles usually compensate their CPU lack of power, not GPU.

General apllications on PC almost don´t consume GPU power, only CPU and RAM.

Well, whatever. I look at what Xbox 360 is able to do with its meager specs, .25 tflops, and what a PC with the same specs would do. Try to run Xbox 360 games on a PC of equal specs and it would go into a seizure.

[QUOTE="MonsieurX"][QUOTE="jhonMalcovich"]

Those 8gb of GDDR5 is just a storage for data to process, a buffer. It won´t pump up visual quality or FPS. The graphics depend on CPU and GPU. And PS4 CPU sucks and and GPU is only 1.84TFLOPS.

While my 4 year old video card, ATI 5870, is 2.72 TFLOPS. I don´t know what sort of optimizations they will be able to sqeaze out from PS4´s GPU, but the lack of processing power means "don´t expect miracles". This explains a lot why recent Killzone is locked in 30 fps.

jhonMalcovich

So ?

I'm guessing that his point was that because of the highly optimized nature of consoles, the way devs can code to the metal, 1.8 tflops on a console > 1.8 tflops on PC.