Here you post this crap again. The same post by Demfax on every xbox one story that exists. Way to go man your hopeless

Sony’s ICE team, Naughty Dog, and Santa Monica Studios will fully utilize PS4’s stronger hardware, so it will stay ahead in graphics performance.

Factual PS4 Hardware Advantages: +6 CUs, +540 GFlops (40% greater) or more, +16 ROPs, +6 ACEs/CQs, better GPGPU support (volatile bit and onion+ gpu cache bypass bus), better performing CPU, faster unified memory, and less OS overhead.

If they’re both running at the same resolution the Xbox version will have lower framerate, more screen tear, and/or less visual effects, or the PS4 hardware isn’t being pushed. Any game running on Xbox One can be run with better framerate/resolution/visual effects on PS4.

Anyone with technical knowledge knew PS4’s game graphics performance would be better for the entire generation as soon as the specs were official. That was well over a year ago. Apparently it’s taking some people a LONG time to come to terms with reality.

Every console or gaming device has a power budget that can be put towards resolution, framerate, or visual effects. PS4 has a higher total budget than Xbox, and good PCs have an even higher budget.

Forza 5 or Horizon 2 would run better on PS4, and Driveclub would run worse on Xbox. Quantum Break would run better on PS4, and The Order would run worse on Xbox.

Both Sony and MS have world class coders that will extract every bit of performance out of their consoles with their drivers/APIs/SDKs. The difference is PS4 simply has more powerful hardware to work with, so it will always stay ahead in graphics performance.

“PS4 is off the shelf, brute force” is a myth. PS4 has several important customizations to GPGPU compute (8 ACEs, onion+ GPU cache bypass bus, and volatile bit flag), and unified GDDR5 RAM.

PS3 was more powerful than 360, but a nightmare to code for. PS4 is both more powerful AND easier to code for. It’s a win/win for PS4.

GDDR5 is superior to DDR3+on-die ESRAM in pretty much every way in terms of actual games performance.

Even if Xbox had a far more powerful CPU and 10000GB of 10000 GB/s memory, it’s ability to render graphics is STILL limited by the weaker GPU. There’s no getting around the weaker GPU, there’s no free lunch.

DDR3+ESRAM is still a size and bandwidth bottleneck and difficult to code for. The DMA registers help transfer data between DDR3 and ESRAM, they aren’t super special sauce.

XB1 has memory size and bandwidth bottlenecks, weaker GPU and GPGPU, only 16 ROPs, and OS virtualization overhead that degrades gaming performance. Take your pick.

DDR3+ESRAM is more complex and expensive yet resulted in a less powerful system than the PS4. It’s a lose-lose from a design perspective. It was a poor design decision for gaming graphics performance.

Exclusively console 1080p 60 FPS games on PS4: MGS V, CoD Ghosts, FFXIV, Tomb Raider, MLB The Show 14, Resogun, Trials Fusion, Diablo 3, Project Cars, Metro Redux, more.

If a game runs 50+ FPS average it’s generally called “60 FPS”.

Don’t forget PS4’s +16 ROPs and better GPGPU support with 6 more ACEs, volatile bit flag, onion+ bus, fully unified GDDR5 memory instead of split ESRAM/DDR3, etc.

PS4’s large GPGPU advantage will widen as devs take advantage of it. It’s not just 2 to 8 ACEs (asynchronous compute engines), but the volatile bit flag, unified memory, and onion+ GPU to RAM cache bypass bus. Not only does PS4 have more CUs to do compute on, but it can do compute work more efficiently with less impact on rendering.

Examples of GPGPU include Resogun’s voxels, Infamous’ particle system, The Order’s soft body, cloth, and object destruction physics, and MGS’s simulated weather. To port those to Xbox devs will need to reserve already limited CUs for compute or remove those features entirely.

Digital Foundry proves that PS4 multiplat games consistently run at higher res, framerate, and/or visual quality over Xbox.

PS4 version of Watch Dogs has higher shadow quality, higher resolution, higher framerate, better depth of field, and far better ambient occlusion over Xbox.

PS4 version of Wolfenstein has higher average resolution and higher shadow quality over Xbox. The Xbox version lowers resolution down to 960×1080 to maintain 60 fps. The Xbox version of wolfenstein is 1080p if you’re staring at a wall or empty room. Otherwise it’s lower during actual gameplay.

PS4 version of Thief has higher res, framerate, and mostly higher visual effects. It’s superior in almost every way aside from trilinear filtering being traded off for parallax occlusion mapping over Xbox.

PS4 version of Trials Fusion has higher resolution and framerate over Xbox. Texture data is identical with texture streaming times dependent on hard drive speed.

PS4 version of BF4 has higher resolution, higher average framerate, and better effects over Xbox.

Some use cherry picked screenshots from where a streamed texture was 0.01 seconds from fully loading and try to use it as false proof PS4 has worse textures. This is wrong and deceptive. Hard drive speed is the main issue in texture streaming load times. Installing a SSD in PS4 decreases texture streaming times dramatically. The texture data on most multiplats is identical.

Texture data is identical between console versions. Sometimes texture streaming issues crop up in one or the other version, or even on PC. That’s generally dependent on hard drive speed. If you run a game off an SSD texture streaming issues are much less.

Texture streaming issues can also happen if you start a game before it’s fully installed to the hard drive, or if you load from a save file and some textures haven’t been loaded from the drive into RAM yet.

Texture streaming is a complex issue with multiple possible causes including drive speed, whether the footage is from a recently loaded save file where the textures haven’t been streamed into RAM yet, or whether the game hasn’t been fully installed to the HD yet.

“Sharper colors” is just the crushed blacks bug on the Xbox that can be replicated by adjusting the contrast or sharpness on your display. Oversharpening and crushed blacks are a bad thing for visual quality.

Xbox One AAA multiplats (Watch Dogs, Witcher 3, CoD: Advanced Warfare) will run 720-900p for the lifetime of the system.

PS4 could run Ryse, Forza, Dead Rising 3, or any Xbox exclusive at higher res/framerate/effects, as it has more powerful hardware.

Infamous is technically superior to Ryse in every way. 1080p, 35 fps average (according to DF), open world, next gen visual effects, cutscenes are mostly realtime, etc. Almost all of Ryse’s cutscenes are pre-rendered movies.

The Order, Uncharted 4, Driveclub, and pretty much any Naughty Dog game will trump Ryse’s visuals while running at a higher resolution and framerate.

Driveclub at E3 2014 was widely called the best looking console racing game, and impressions of The Order frequently cited that they couldn’t tell when the cutscene ended and gameplay began due to the CG-like nature of the visuals.

Ryse is a 900p, 25 fps average, QTE corridor brawler with CG movie cutscenes in comparison.

PS4 has plenty of room for optimization in terms of GPGPU, hUMA/HSA-like features, and unified memory.

Exclusively 1080p 60 FPS console games on PS4: MGS V, CoD Ghosts, FFXIV, Tomb Raider, MLB The Show 14, Resogun, Trials Fusion, Diablo 3, Project Cars, Metro Redux, TLOU Remastered, more.

The Order, Uncharted 4, Driveclub, and pretty much any Naughty Dog or Santa Monica Studios game will trump Ryse’s visuals while running at a higher resolution and framerate.

Sony’s ICE team, Naughty Dog, and Santa Monica Studios will fully utilize PS4’s stronger hardware, so it will remain ahead in graphics performance.

If devs claim Destiny is “1080p 30 fps” on both, PS4 will still have a higher average framerate and/or better visual effects (AA, shadows, particles, etc.), or PS4’s stronger hardware isn’t being pushed.

It seems most people are ignoring attempts to downplay PS4’s stronger hardware and buying PS4s anyway. Sorry.

Factual PS4 Hardware Advantages: +6 CUs, +540 GFlops (40% greater) or more, +16 ROPs, +6 ACEs/CQs, better GPGPU support (volatile bit and onion+ gpu cache bypass bus), better performing CPU, faster unified memory, and less OS overhead.

If they’re both running at the same resolution the Xbox version will have lower framerate, more screen tear, and/or less visual effects, or the PS4 hardware isn’t being pushed. Any game running on Xbox One can be run with better framerate/resolution/visual effects on PS4.

Anyone with technical knowledge knew PS4’s game graphics performance would be better for the entire generation as soon as the specs were official. That was well over a year ago. Apparently it’s taking some people a LONG time to come to terms with reality.

Every console or gaming device has a power budget that can be put towards resolution, framerate, or visual effects. PS4 has a higher total budget than Xbox, and good PCs have an even higher budget.

Forza 5 or Horizon 2 would run better on PS4, and Driveclub would run worse on Xbox. Quantum Break would run better on PS4, and The Order would run worse on Xbox.

Both Sony and MS have world class coders that will extract every bit of performance out of their consoles with their drivers/APIs/SDKs. The difference is PS4 simply has more powerful hardware to work with, so it will always stay ahead in graphics performance.

“PS4 is off the shelf, brute force” is a myth. PS4 has several important customizations to GPGPU compute (8 ACEs, onion+ GPU cache bypass bus, and volatile bit flag), and unified GDDR5 RAM.

PS3 was more powerful than 360, but a nightmare to code for. PS4 is both more powerful AND easier to code for. It’s a win/win for PS4.

GDDR5 is superior to DDR3+on-die ESRAM in pretty much every way in terms of actual games performance.

Even if Xbox had a far more powerful CPU and 10000GB of 10000 GB/s memory, it’s ability to render graphics is STILL limited by the weaker GPU. There’s no getting around the weaker GPU, there’s no free lunch.

DDR3+ESRAM is still a size and bandwidth bottleneck and difficult to code for. The DMA registers help transfer data between DDR3 and ESRAM, they aren’t super special sauce.

XB1 has memory size and bandwidth bottlenecks, weaker GPU and GPGPU, only 16 ROPs, and OS virtualization overhead that degrades gaming performance. Take your pick.

DDR3+ESRAM is more complex and expensive yet resulted in a less powerful system than the PS4. It’s a lose-lose from a design perspective. It was a poor design decision for gaming graphics performance.

Exclusively console 1080p 60 FPS games on PS4: MGS V, CoD Ghosts, FFXIV, Tomb Raider, MLB The Show 14, Resogun, Trials Fusion, Diablo 3, Project Cars, Metro Redux, more.

If a game runs 50+ FPS average it’s generally called “60 FPS”.

Don’t forget PS4’s +16 ROPs and better GPGPU support with 6 more ACEs, volatile bit flag, onion+ bus, fully unified GDDR5 memory instead of split ESRAM/DDR3, etc.

PS4’s large GPGPU advantage will widen as devs take advantage of it. It’s not just 2 to 8 ACEs (asynchronous compute engines), but the volatile bit flag, unified memory, and onion+ GPU to RAM cache bypass bus. Not only does PS4 have more CUs to do compute on, but it can do compute work more efficiently with less impact on rendering.

Examples of GPGPU include Resogun’s voxels, Infamous’ particle system, The Order’s soft body, cloth, and object destruction physics, and MGS’s simulated weather. To port those to Xbox devs will need to reserve already limited CUs for compute or remove those features entirely.

Digital Foundry proves that PS4 multiplat games consistently run at higher res, framerate, and/or visual quality over Xbox.

PS4 version of Watch Dogs has higher shadow quality, higher resolution, higher framerate, better depth of field, and far better ambient occlusion over Xbox.

PS4 version of Wolfenstein has higher average resolution and higher shadow quality over Xbox. The Xbox version lowers resolution down to 960×1080 to maintain 60 fps. The Xbox version of wolfenstein is 1080p if you’re staring at a wall or empty room. Otherwise it’s lower during actual gameplay.

PS4 version of Thief has higher res, framerate, and mostly higher visual effects. It’s superior in almost every way aside from trilinear filtering being traded off for parallax occlusion mapping over Xbox.

PS4 version of Trials Fusion has higher resolution and framerate over Xbox. Texture data is identical with texture streaming times dependent on hard drive speed.

PS4 version of BF4 has higher resolution, higher average framerate, and better effects over Xbox.

Some use cherry picked screenshots from where a streamed texture was 0.01 seconds from fully loading and try to use it as false proof PS4 has worse textures. This is wrong and deceptive. Hard drive speed is the main issue in texture streaming load times. Installing a SSD in PS4 decreases texture streaming times dramatically. The texture data on most multiplats is identical.

Texture data is identical between console versions. Sometimes texture streaming issues crop up in one or the other version, or even on PC. That’s generally dependent on hard drive speed. If you run a game off an SSD texture streaming issues are much less.

Texture streaming issues can also happen if you start a game before it’s fully installed to the hard drive, or if you load from a save file and some textures haven’t been loaded from the drive into RAM yet.

Texture streaming is a complex issue with multiple possible causes including drive speed, whether the footage is from a recently loaded save file where the textures haven’t been streamed into RAM yet, or whether the game hasn’t been fully installed to the HD yet.

“Sharper colors” is just the crushed blacks bug on the Xbox that can be replicated by adjusting the contrast or sharpness on your display. Oversharpening and crushed blacks are a bad thing for visual quality.

Xbox One AAA multiplats (Watch Dogs, Witcher 3, CoD: Advanced Warfare) will run 720-900p for the lifetime of the system.

PS4 could run Ryse, Forza, Dead Rising 3, or any Xbox exclusive at higher res/framerate/effects, as it has more powerful hardware.

Infamous is technically superior to Ryse in every way. 1080p, 35 fps average (according to DF), open world, next gen visual effects, cutscenes are mostly realtime, etc. Almost all of Ryse’s cutscenes are pre-rendered movies.

The Order, Uncharted 4, Driveclub, and pretty much any Naughty Dog game will trump Ryse’s visuals while running at a higher resolution and framerate.

Driveclub at E3 2014 was widely called the best looking console racing game, and impressions of The Order frequently cited that they couldn’t tell when the cutscene ended and gameplay began due to the CG-like nature of the visuals.

Ryse is a 900p, 25 fps average, QTE corridor brawler with CG movie cutscenes in comparison.

PS4 has plenty of room for optimization in terms of GPGPU, hUMA/HSA-like features, and unified memory.

Exclusively 1080p 60 FPS console games on PS4: MGS V, CoD Ghosts, FFXIV, Tomb Raider, MLB The Show 14, Resogun, Trials Fusion, Diablo 3, Project Cars, Metro Redux, TLOU Remastered, more.

The Order, Uncharted 4, Driveclub, and pretty much any Naughty Dog or Santa Monica Studios game will trump Ryse’s visuals while running at a higher resolution and framerate.

Sony’s ICE team, Naughty Dog, and Santa Monica Studios will fully utilize PS4’s stronger hardware, so it will remain ahead in graphics performance.

If devs claim Destiny is “1080p 30 fps” on both, PS4 will still have a higher average framerate and/or better visual effects (AA, shadows, particles, etc.), or PS4’s stronger hardware isn’t being pushed.

Quantum Break looks better than anything on or announced for PS4, including TLOU. All multiplats look and play close enough that it doesn’t matter.

I don’t know what it is with you Sony fanboys always needing to feel so superior? Yes early XB1 dev kits were not good and devs had issues with the ESRAM, but we see that going away now. Many multiplats recently have been close enough to par that it’s all good. I’d expect that to be the norm all Gen. Maybe an odd game out here or there, just like last Gen.

Quantum break won’t even come close to The Last Of Us remastered on the PS4 and the best game on the near horizon is Far Cry 4 and that will run superior in the PS4. The next Tomb Raider is a travesty because the devs took corrupt bribe to keep it off the console that would have run it the best and where all the devoted fans are that made the game such a success.

No it is not. You are deluding yourself. This is a linear corridor shooter that does not put the ESRAM bottleneck under any severe strain. Graphics can be preloaded into the slow RAM like a racer because the devs know what is around the next corner. In any case only the frame rate has parity, the resolution is gimped to 912p compared to 1080p on the PS4.

The parity problem is still there for complex games such as open world games, where nothing can be predicted and the graphics have to be rapidly loaded into RAM in real time so the GPU can render the frames.

When you claim “that’s what I see”, you are only viewing online comparison videos that have video compression, so you are not seeing the real quality coming out of the PS4. Like I said, you are deluding yourself.

Do you think there will come a time when you can buy a top spec PC and it will last 10 years without ever once needing any upgrades or a new graphic card…..and be able to play all games on max settings?

“And that’s the one point where you were right. The games back it up!”

Are you implying that my other points are wrong? 😀

“So the ESRAM has simultaneous read and write access to both the CPU/GPU and the DDR3 RAM pool. Does this magically avoid the 68GB/sec bandwidth? No. It still has to be fed from the DDR3.”

Again, no, it does not have to be fed from the DDR3. It can be accessed directly. It CAN be fed from the DDR3, but is not required. The idea is to transfer resources in and out of ESRAM at the right time from either DDR3 or CPU that are hungry for bandwidth. Developers have already gotten better at it, and will continue to get better at it.

This is a learning curve that PS4 developers do not have to deal with. Additionally, developer tools were far ahead of Xbox One at launch. Therefore, PS4 is much further along the optimization path. Yes, the PS4 will be further optimized; we’re barely in the new generation. But, the Xbox One has much more optimization potential.

“The gap can only ever remain the same. It can’t close.”

The hardware difference can never close, but do you not get that the hardware difference is NOT a major difference? The PS4 is “a bit” more powerful. Sorry if that bothers you.

“There is a huge learning curve with using compute on the PS4. It’s a technology that’s never been available in the console space before.”

Compute allows the GPU to perform CPU operations. Not sure why a developer would want to sacrifice GPU rendering in favor of CPU operations in a game, but who knows? Maybe they’ll find a good use for it.

“When that happens you get a situation like at the end of the 360PS3 era when Uncharted, LoU, and Beyond 2 Souls basically gave us a taste of the next gen whilst the 360 just stopped.”

Those games were not leaps and bounds ahead of the 360, and were certainly not next gen. (That’s why they did a remake of TLoU on PS4.) I guess you could argue a “taste” of next-gen, since it’s such a vague description, but that could easily apply to the 360 as well. Yes, games at the latter end of the 360/PS3 era were vastly improved from the earlier.

“If you like gimmicks then you like gimmicks. You must have been overjoyed with the mandatory kinnect, drm, and TVTVTV launch. I play games not gimmicks.”

😀 This statement is just cheesy. “I play games not gimmicks.” This stupid marketing rhetoric has no validity WHATSOEVER, dude. I DO like keyless entry on cars, love the feedback triggers to feel when tires are slipping in Forza, love the slick UI that Xbox One has. Not a big fan of the blue light on PS4’s controller that glares in the screen, though. Glad Sony saw that for the gimmick it was. Should I argue that because Sony included the blue light on the controller, it takes away from the PS4’s performance or ability to play games? Nah, that would be a stupid argument.

“About the only first party game that looks to be anywhere pushing the boundaries on the XB1 is Quantum Break. Compared to the tech included in Driveclub, The Order et al there’s just not much happening with the XB1.”

Do tell. Explain your expert analysis of why the “tech” in Driveclub is superior, and why all Xbox One games (except Quantum Break) can be dismissed with a wave of the hand. I suspect you have no clue what you’re talking about, but go ahead.