• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

EDGE: "Power struggle: the real differences between PS4 and Xbox One performance"

Long time reader, first time poster...I'm going to preface this post by saying that I am not pulling for either platform to be a clear winner, I am going to purchase both because gaming is my hobby and both will have exclusives worth playing.
This forth coming console 'war' won't be decided on stats alone, Microsoft, for better or worse has much more they can gamble on their console winning. One of their chips that they have played which I haven't seen discussed here is the fact that Windows 8.1 and the X1 will have exclusive rights to future (directx 11.2 and beyond). I see the first few years of this cycle going like this: developers make ps3/xbox 360 versions, they make a PC version which gets ported to next gen. Here is a quote from DICE:

Frostbite 3 Supports DirectX 11.1 API – Faster GPU/CPU Performance on PCs and Xbox One

Now this is the interesting bit, DICE confirms that the Frostbite 3 engine supports DirectX 11.1 API as revealed by DSOGaming.
“We use DX11.1, there are some optimizations in it (constant buffer offsets, dynamic buffers as SRVs) that we got in to the the API that improves CPU performance in our rendering when one runs with DX11.1. This will be in BF4.”
This means that PC and Xbox One versions of Battlefield 4 would be more optimized than PlayStation 4.


The API's in the beginning will be a huge player in early next gen content regardless of power...even though there has been comments of SONY's libraries being better developed these are the same software engineers who couldn't make cross game chat in their last OS. Developers have been programming next gen(beyond ps3/360 capability) content on PC's for the last 6 years and they have been doing it with directX as the primary library.

They both have their strengths and they both have their weaknesses, they both will have gems that will most likely be titles developed exclusively for their respective console.


1) sony has their own apis, but directx is more widespread and popular. sony apis have been more efficient that directx, because directx is made with a wide range of hardware in mind. nevertheless, ps4 apis will be much easier to use than ps3. and ps4 supports directx.

2) "these are the same software engineers who couldn't make cross game chat in their last OS. " has more to do with hardware than apis.

3) ps4 has way more strengths that the xbone in terms of power.
 
According to all of them yes the esram and system with dedicated hardware chips...all combine to lead me to believe that it HAS THE POTENTIAL TO POSSIBLY be more efficient than many are expecting.
You're probably right...but there's something important to keep in mind. "More efficient" is a comparison, which impels the question "More efficient compared to what?"

Because compared to a hypothetical One without eSRAM or the dedicated processors, Microsoft's current design will indeed be far more efficient. But compared to a PS4, the eSRAM has the exact opposite effect: it makes the One less efficient. That's because developers must manage the memory architecture in ways that aren't required on Sony's machine.

This isn't purely a theoretical, on-paper claim either; we have real-world numbers that support it. Regarding the memory system, the PS4 has a max bandwidth of 176 GB/s. The Oddworld devs recently said they're actually seeing "around 172 GB/s", which is ~97% efficiency. The One has a max bandwidth of 204 GB/s, and Microsoft said certain operations can actually hit 133 GB/s, which is ~65% efficiency.

Once the dev tools are ironed out, I think we'll see some One graphics that'll really surprise cynical doubters. But that's not because One is more efficient than PS4; it's because some people's expectations are too low.
 

Klocker

Member
You're probably right...but there's something important to keep in mind. "More efficient" is a comparison, which impels the question "More efficient compared to what?"

Because compared to a hypothetical One without eSRAM or the dedicated processors, Microsoft's current design will indeed be far more efficient. But compared to a PS4, the eSRAM has the exact opposite effect: it makes the One less efficient. That's because developers must manage the memory architecture in ways that aren't required on Sony's machine.

This isn't purely a theoretical, on-paper claim either; we have real-world numbers that support it. Regarding the memory system, the PS4 has a max bandwidth of 176 GB/s. The Oddworld devs recently said they're actually seeing "around 172 GB/s", which is ~97% efficiency. The One has a max bandwidth of 204 GB/s, and Microsoft said certain operations can actually hit 133 GB/s, which is ~65% efficiency.

Once the dev tools are ironed out, I think we'll see some One graphics that'll really surprise cynical doubters. But that's not because One is more efficient than PS4; it's because some people's expectations are too low.

Quite possibly true and a reasonable assumption
 

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
Yeah, it would be.

In order for Microsoft to trick people into thinking that the consoles are equal in power they would have to bribe almost every AAA publisher. Only bribing EA and Activision while Ubisoft, 2K games, Bethesda, Square Enix, and Capcom are consistently releasing better looking ps4 versions won't trick anyone. Not only that, but the power difference will become easily apparent when Sony first party developers start getting used to the hardware.

It would be much easier and cheaper for Microsoft to let the ps4 versions of games have better AA and a higher resolution and then try to downplay that difference with broad PR statements when questioned about it. And then talk about gameplay, blockbuster experiences, and Halo when questioned about first party differences.
Tricking people isn't really that hard and they don't even have to trick everybody. They just have to trick enough to get some momentum and marketshare shifted in their favor. And they don't have to bribe every AAA publisher, just certain publishers for key titles. Functionally it would be little different than the exclusive DLC packages both they and Sony already pay for which are arguably just as ineffective, yet they both still pay for them.
 

beast786

Member
Firstly, welcome.

Secondly, post a source when you post direct quotes. Thirdly, your justification in diminishing the credibility of those devs that have stated the PS4's tools are currently more mature than the Xbox One's is that they couldn't make cross game chat in their last game? Really? Sony themselves couldn't get cross game chat to work on their system properly (stated reason being a lack of available ram), and they have some of the best talent in the industry.

I was under the impression there was a PS4 tech slide deck that showed PS4 supported DX11.2?

Edit: Perhaps I was thinking of DX11.1

HA found the source. It seems this line "This means that PC and Xbox One versions of Battlefield 4 would be more optimized than PlayStation 4. " was NOT part of the quote but added latter.. Lol I wonder why lol

GAF>Internet > GAF

http://www.dsogaming.com/news/battl...e-dx11-1-dx11-1-will-improve-cpu-performance/

Here is the exchange

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=72860391&postcount=50



as I said. DX11.1 is win8 exclusive...

dont think BF4 will utilize DX11.1 though just 11.0.

To his dice guy responded with.

We use DX11.1, there are some optimizations in it (constant buffer offsets, dynamic buffers as SRVs) that we got in to the the API that improves CPU performance in our rendering when one runs with DX11.1. This will be in BF4.


.

Lol, should have known with is " couldn't get the cross game chat working" BS
 

Razgreez

Member
Long time reader, first time poster...I'm going to preface this post by saying that I am not pulling for either platform to be a clear winner, I am going to purchase both because gaming is my hobby and both will have exclusives worth playing.
This forth coming console 'war' won't be decided on stats alone, Microsoft, for better or worse has much more they can gamble on their console winning. One of their chips that they have played which I haven't seen discussed here is the fact that Windows 8.1 and the X1 will have exclusive rights to future (directx 11.2 and beyond). I see the first few years of this cycle going like this: developers make ps3/xbox 360 versions, they make a PC version which gets ported to next gen. Here is a quote from DICE:

Frostbite 3 Supports DirectX 11.1 API – Faster GPU/CPU Performance on PCs and Xbox One

Now this is the interesting bit, DICE confirms that the Frostbite 3 engine supports DirectX 11.1 API as revealed by DSOGaming.
“We use DX11.1, there are some optimizations in it (constant buffer offsets, dynamic buffers as SRVs) that we got in to the the API that improves CPU performance in our rendering when one runs with DX11.1. This will be in BF4.”
This means that PC and Xbox One versions of Battlefield 4 would be more optimized than PlayStation 4.


The API's in the beginning will be a huge player in early next gen content regardless of power...even though there has been comments of SONY's libraries being better developed these are the same software engineers who couldn't make cross game chat in their last OS. Developers have been programming next gen(beyond ps3/360 capability) content on PC's for the last 6 years and they have been doing it with directX as the primary library.

They both have their strengths and they both have their weaknesses, they both will have gems that will most likely be titles developed exclusively for their respective console.

tumblr_mod55h9G8f1qlgh1do1_500.gif
 

daman824

Member
Tricking people isn't really that hard and they don't even have to trick everybody. They just have to trick enough to get some momentum and marketshare shifted in their favor. And they don't have to bribe every AAA publisher, just certain publishers for key titles. Functionally it would be little different than the exclusive DLC packages both they and Sony already pay for which are arguably just as ineffective, yet they both still pay for them.
They have to be able to trick the people who would notice those differences (people like us). And tricking a gamer who knows about the power difference and follows news regarding it won't be tricked into thinking the consoles are the same power wise by a small percentage of games looking the same on both consoles.
 

Kuro

Member
Actually what is it with the sudden juniors spreading misinformation in this thread? I'm a fairly new member too of course but still...
 
This is why....this is why...lol.

First post here and he's already spreading FUD. Le sigh....

So I'm not that technical but what does it mean for the PS4 exactly?

PS4 supports DX11.1 and the important parts that make up DX11.2 but not the standard itself?
 
Third party devs will develop their IP to look similar to protect their own interests, not the platform holders, and to make sure they dont alienate one side or other. Differences will be slight, mostly resolution stretches, framerate locks or other subjectives. This is done at design/preprod to develop your scenes with this is mind and use graphical effects to maximise its look/impact. Think GOW3.
The MOST important aspect is the time taken to produce your basic complete - Faster complete means more time to polish, add extras etc. Will MS have direct control? Unlikely, even at the most pro-MS studios. There are too many tech-savvy fans out there and studios need all the goodwill they can get.

Thanks man.
 

Mrbob

Member
So I'm not that technical but what does it mean for the PS4 exactly?

PS4 supports DX11.1 and the important parts that make up DX11.2 but not the standard itself?

PS4 uses its own API ( variant of OpenGL I believe ) and the GPU is equipped to handle DX11.2 effects.
 

nib95

Banned
So I'm not that technical but what does it mean for the PS4 exactly?

PS4 supports DX11.1 and the important parts that make up DX11.2 but not the standard itself?

PS4 has some sort of DX 11.2 feature set. As shown by this image from their recent development conference.

DirectX_11.2__PS4-pcgh.jpg


But they're really pushing their own shader language too, PSSL which supposedly has features and advantages over the others.
 

nm3th

Member
...snip...

The API's in the beginning will be a huge player in early next gen content regardless of power...even though there has been comments of SONY's libraries being better developed these are the same software engineers who couldn't make cross game chat in their last OS. Developers have been programming next gen(beyond ps3/360 capability) content on PC's for the last 6 years and they have been doing it with directX as the primary library.

...snip...

This is a very disingenuous remark.

The only feasible way to get cross game chat to work at an OS level is to take away resources from games that are already released. Once you allocate RAM, you can't take it back...unless you want to patch every piece of software that came out beforehand.

edit-http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-08-19-why-the-ps3-cant-do-cross-game-voice-chat
 

onQ123

Member
Actually what is it with the sudden juniors spreading misinformation in this thread? I'm a fairly new member too of course but still...

I'm guessing they are the troops that signed up after the PS4 specs was shown to be more powerful than the Xbox One & all the other stuff that was going on with the new consoles & they was on the outside looking in as the good PS4 news spread & the bad Xbox One news spread & they just wanted to get in to fight the good fight because in their minds Neogaf is filled with Sony fanboys when really that's not the case it's just that Sony happen to be doing things a lot better than MS with the new consoles so far, and since they can't fight using the truth they take any misinformation they can find & try to use it to even things up.
 

satam55

Banned
I'm guessing they are the troops that signed up after the PS4 specs was shown to be more powerful than the Xbox One & all the other stuff that was going on with the new consoles & they was on the outside looking in as the good PS4 news spread & the bad Xbox One news spread & they just wanted to get in to fight the good fight because in their minds Neogaf is filled with Sony fanboys when really that's not the case it's just that Sony happen to be doing things a lot better than MS with the new consoles so far, and since they can't fight using the truth they take any misinformation they can find & try to use it to even things up.
THIS!!!!! Notice how the juniors who spread misinformation & FUD are all Pro-Xbox.
 

nib95

Banned
I'm guessing they are the troops that signed up after the PS4 specs was shown to be more powerful than the Xbox One & all the other stuff that was going on with the new consoles & they was on the outside looking in as the good PS4 news spread & the bad Xbox One news spread & they just wanted to get in to fight the good fight because in their minds Neogaf is filled with Sony fanboys when really that's not the case it's just that Sony happen to be doing things a lot better than MS with the new consoles so far, and since they can't fight using the truth they take any misinformation they can find & try to use it to even things up.

Dude. Full stops and punctuation...
 

Hollow

Member
So I'm not that technical but what does it mean for the PS4 exactly?

PS4 supports DX11.1 and the important parts that make up DX11.2 but not the standard itself?

The GPU is capable of handling DirectX11.2+ features but the API itself isn't used by the PS4 itself.

Sony has their own API.
 
I see GopherD has spoken and when he speaks people should listen .
Still i just wanted PS4 ports not to be gimp like PS3 and thanks to the specs that won't happen plus we get few little extras .
It's SONY first party \ second party games i really looking forward to and some Japanese games since they should take advantage of the extra power .
 

IconGrist

Member
On a side note, this thread has nearly half a million views....WTH.

Yea, I'm not tech savvy at all so I tend to just read through them since I have really nothing to contribute. These threads help me understand all the tech talk a little more each time so maybe eventually?
 

Ateron

Member
I only started lurking Gaf about a year, year and a half ago so I wouldn't know but..how were things in the begining of this current gen? Were there a lot of "suspicious" juniors or is this something new?
 

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
They have to be able to trick the people who would notice those differences (people like us). And tricking a gamer who knows about the power difference and follows news regarding it won't be tricked into thinking the consoles are the same power wise by a small percentage of games looking the same on both consoles.
No, that's not who they have to trick, but it's beside the point anyway since the argument isn't about whether the strategy is effective or not but whether companies regularly engage in bad judgment that might lead to ineffective strategies . Are your really going to argue to the contrary? There's no conspiracy theory on that count.
 

Averon

Member
The reason why the recent batches of juniors seems terrible is fairly simple.

A new console generation is about to begin, so it isn't surprising that fanboyism is at an all-time high. It certainly doesn't help that there's blatant astroturfers mixed in the juniors.

So, it's a combination of fanboysim and astroturfing that makes the juniors seem so terrible recently.
 

Mrbob

Member
Third party devs will develop their IP to look similar to protect their own interests, not the platform holders, and to make sure they dont alienate one side or other. Differences will be slight, mostly resolution stretches, framerate locks or other subjectives. This is done at design/preprod to develop your scenes with this is mind and use graphical effects to maximise its look/impact. Think GOW3.
The MOST important aspect is the time taken to produce your basic complete - Faster complete means more time to polish, add extras etc. Will MS have direct control? Unlikely, even at the most pro-MS studios. There are too many tech-savvy fans out there and studios need all the goodwill they can get.


This is what should be reasonably expected. Still, a good deal for PS4 owners if the PS4 version has a locked frame rate while the XB1 version has a fluctuating frame rate.

I can see a scenario playing out where the PS4 version has a consistent frame rate with possibly higher levels of AA applied.
 
PS4 has some sort of DX 11.2 feature set. As shown by this image from their recent development conference.

DirectX_11.2__PS4-pcgh.jpg


But they're really pushing their own shader language too, PSSL which supposedly has features and advantages over the others.

Thanks that was the slide I was thinking of

So we have yet to see what that really means but Sony is clearly aware of DX11.2 and won't lose any advantages of it, it would seem

The PSSL sounds interesting as I've heard it discussed before

I suppose at the end of the day the word coming from Devs is the most telling and that's been all positive thus far
 

daman824

Member
No, that's not who they have to trick, but it's beside the point anyway since the argument isn't about whether the strategy is effective or not but whether companies regularly engage in bad judgment that might lead to ineffective strategies . Are your really going to argue to the contrary? There's no conspiracy theory on that count.
Anyone can engage in bad judgement. Does that mean we should assume that they are always using bad judgement?

Either way, Gopher has spoken. And it sounds like Microsoft isn't paying pubs to gimp ps4 multiplatforms. So I have no idea why we are still arguing.
 

onQ123

Member
Thanks that was the slide I was thinking of

So we have yet to see what that really means but Sony is clearly aware of DX11.2 and won't lose any advantages of it, it would seem

The PSSL sounds interesting as I've heard it discussed before

I suppose at the end of the day the word coming from Devs is the most telling and that's been all positive thus far


There is info about P4 PSSL in this PDF.

http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1019252/PlayStation-Shading-Language-for

I posted some of the images from the PDF in another thread

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=82256025&postcount=104
 
So I'm not that technical but what does it mean for the PS4 exactly?

PS4 supports DX11.1 and the important parts that make up DX11.2 but not the standard itself?

the ps4 primarily uses sony's proprietary apis, just like the ps3 using psgl instead of directx.

in a sense, ps4 might not use extended features of directx (considering xbox has their own proprietary directx api, or will xbone use directx that is in win8?), but then again most (if not, all) devs will be using ps4's apis instead of default directx anyway from here on out or porting them. and it'd be ridiculous to think that sony's api don't/can't have the same feature sets or directx will be the better api. it all boils down to how good the apis are and how straightforward the hardware is. bf4 pushing directx is understandable, given that they're 3rd party and releasing at launch and ps4 actually supporting dx11+ "to the metal", EmptySpace can definitely imagine frostbite engine being flexible and not being tied to dx11 alone, just as it used libgcm for ps3 instead of directx.
 
Actually what is it with the sudden juniors spreading misinformation in this thread? I'm a fairly new member too of course but still...

I know what you mean. Personally, I don't get involved in these technical conversations since I'm not well versed in them. I mainly post when I want to ask a question or know what I want to post is correct and proper.
 

vcc

Member
The API's in the beginning will be a huge player in early next gen content regardless of power...even though there has been comments of SONY's libraries being better developed these are the same software engineers who couldn't make cross game chat in their last OS. Developers have been programming next gen(beyond ps3/360 capability) content on PC's for the last 6 years and they have been doing it with directX as the primary library.

The crossgame chats was a ram split issues. They hadn't reserved enough for the OS to make it work. Either they had to trim their already bare OS features or break games that used the entire allotment.
 

beast786

Member
Again, this is another example of collective FUD. I find it no coincident that we have Albert coming here with "we invented DirectX " out of freaking no where and now junior with first post taking real quotes and fudging it with how games are optimized with Direct 11 only , hence xb1 will be better optimized.
 

Parapraxis

Member
The crossgame chats was a ram split issues. They hadn't reserved enough for the OS to make it work. Either they had to trim their already bare OS features or break games that used the entire allotment.

Ugh, I still remember how long it took to get the menu up during game when hitting the PS button, Sony went quite a ways with their OS over the PS3 life span, and they were quite aware of users wanting CGC.
They had to officially state that it just wasn't possible given the PS3's RAM allotment for the OS, which was unfortunate.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-08-19-why-the-ps3-cant-do-cross-game-voice-chat
 

beast786

Member
Ugh, I still remember how long it took to get the menu up during game when hitting the PS button, Sony went quite a ways with their OS over the PS3 life span, and they were quite aware of users wanting CGC.
They had to officially state that it just wasn't possible given the PS3's RAM allotment for the OS, which was unfortunate.

XBL for me defined this current GEN in regards to system and services. MS did so much right in early this GEN. I feel like I watch the titanic sink. the parallel of Sony mistakes on ps3 and MS with XB1 is remarkable.

XBL was one true hurdle that Sony has to over come to win core gamers in USA. PS+ has created incredible value. But the perception of XBL being bench mark still exist.
 

Averon

Member
Ugh, I still remember how long it took to get the menu up during game when hitting the PS button, Sony went quite a ways with their OS over the PS3 life span, and they were quite aware of users wanting CGC.
They had to officially state that it just wasn't possible given the PS3's RAM allotment for the OS, which was unfortunate.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-08-19-why-the-ps3-cant-do-cross-game-voice-chat

Yeah. Lack of CGC on the PS3 was a classic case of lacking foresight on Sony's part.
 

Hollow

Member

kaching

"GAF's biggest wanker"
Anyone can engage in bad judgement. Does that mean we should assume that they are always using bad judgement?

Either way, Gopher has spoken. And it sounds like Microsoft isn't paying pubs to gimp ps4 multiplatforms. So I have no idea why we are still arguing.
We're only arguing because you misinterpreted what I said in the first place. I wasn't arguing whether MS is paying anyone off, just that you don't need a conspiracy theory to account for the possibility that they (or anyone else) are.
 

beast786

Member
Kindly knock off the hive-minding / console warrior B.S., our latest batch of juniors are, shall I say, a diverse potpourri that seem to have no particular leaning in their groupthink, I can promise you that :)

not gonna lie. I had to google it ;p
 

Kaako

Felium Defensor
Kindly knock off the hive-minding / console warrior B.S., our latest batch of juniors are, shall I say, a diverse potpourri that seem to have no particular leaning in their groupthink, I can promise you that :)
Oh you fancy, huh.
 
Top Bottom