The Xbox One and PS4 share similar specs, but the devil
Good article but I also ventured further and read the comments section... wow, talk about Sony-fest, lol. That's fine given that the PS4 looks like a beast of a machine. However, the amount of nerd rage at the author's conclusion is astounding. A lot of people are incredibly upset that the author would dare say that the graphical differences won't matter in the long run. While I clearly don't have the technical expertise to verify whether he's right or wrong, I am no less stunned by the shortsightedness of the commentators.
For starters, these are launch titles and they're not indicative of overall performance. That's not to say that Sony doesn't have a clear advantage, but how much of an advantage still can't be accurately determined. After all, several PS4 games are only running at 900p, but it would be foolish to take that as a benchmark of what the PS4 is capable of. On the flip side, there are still several issues that Microsoft needs to address and others that developers need to address as well.
Some developers have already stated that Microsoft's development tools are in disarray.
Developers have faced a procession of issues with Xbox One GPU performance in the run-up to launch - some that are being tackled in the short term, others that will prove more difficult to address. Microsoft's "mono driver" for the AMD GPU had been known for months to be delivering sub-par performance prior to Gamescom in August (hence disappointing Ryse and Dead Rising 3 showings at E3) and while improvements have been - and apparently continue to be - delivered, developers have been working around a moving target, unsure exactly what the power of the graphics hardware will be in the final retail box.
Microsoft needs to improve the tools that developers use before a true comparison can be made. But for developers, they also have learn to fully take advantage of eSRAM, that magical little beast that is supposed to make the XB1 a bandwidth beast. Who knows how long it will be before developers really take advantage of eSRAM or how long it will take for Microsoft to make it easier for developer to use eSRAM.
You also have to consider what cloud computing will add in 5 years. But what about offline modes? You can't rely on cloud computing then. Yeah, but what about significantly improved online modes? Multiplayer games that only exist online, for which plenty already exists for the Xbox 360. Could it be that online multiplayer has superior AI and graphical effects when compared to their offline modes? Yes, I believe that could very much be a factor in next generation games. Or perhaps developers won't bother implementing could computing. Hopefully, Microsoft didn't setup 300,000 servers for nothing.
And have we all forgotten that Microsoft has tiled resources?
tiled resources
Seriously, there are so many intangibles that no one should consider either systems launch lineup as definitive proof of their overall graphically capabilities. I suspect it's going to be 3-4 years before we can really start talking about definitives. Maybe the PS4 will win the graphics race, maybe not, but using the launch lineup is not a good starting point. There's simply too many factors like better development tools, familiarity with eSRAM, online computing and tiled resources. It seems like a lot of people are claiming 50% increases for the PS4 without even a fraction of the knowledge necessary to make an accurate comparison.
Good article but I also ventured further and read the comments section... wow, talk about Sony-fest, lol. That's fine given that the PS4 looks like a beast of a machine. However, the amount of nerd rage at the author's conclusion is astounding. A lot of people are incredibly upset that the author would dare say that the graphical differences won't matter in the long run. While I clearly don't have the technical expertise to verify whether he's right or wrong, I am no less stunned by the shortsightedness of the commentators.
For starters, these are launch titles and they're not indicative of overall performance. That's not to say that Sony doesn't have a clear advantage, but how much of an advantage still can't be accurately determined. After all, several PS4 games are only running at 900p, but it would be foolish to take that as a benchmark of what the PS4 is capable of. On the flip side, there are still several issues that Microsoft needs to address and others that developers need to address as well.
Some developers have already stated that Microsoft's development tools are in disarray.
Developers have faced a procession of issues with Xbox One GPU performance in the run-up to launch - some that are being tackled in the short term, others that will prove more difficult to address. Microsoft's "mono driver" for the AMD GPU had been known for months to be delivering sub-par performance prior to Gamescom in August (hence disappointing Ryse and Dead Rising 3 showings at E3) and while improvements have been - and apparently continue to be - delivered, developers have been working around a moving target, unsure exactly what the power of the graphics hardware will be in the final retail box.
Microsoft needs to improve the tools that developers use before a true comparison can be made. But for developers, they also have learn to fully take advantage of eSRAM, that magical little beast that is supposed to make the XB1 a bandwidth beast. Who knows how long it will be before developers really take advantage of eSRAM or how long it will take for Microsoft to make it easier for developer to use eSRAM.
You also have to consider what cloud computing will add in 5 years. But what about offline modes? You can't rely on cloud computing then. Yeah, but what about significantly improved online modes? Multiplayer games that only exist online, for which plenty already exists for the Xbox 360. Could it be that online multiplayer has superior AI and graphical effects when compared to their offline modes? Yes, I believe that could very much be a factor in next generation games. Or perhaps developers won't bother implementing could computing. Hopefully, Microsoft didn't setup 300,000 servers for nothing.
And have we all forgotten that Microsoft has tiled resources?
tiled resources
Seriously, there are so many intangibles that no one should consider either systems launch lineup as definitive proof of their overall graphically capabilities. I suspect it's going to be 3-4 years before we can really start talking about definitives. Maybe the PS4 will win the graphics race, maybe not, but using the launch lineup is not a good starting point. There's simply too many factors like better development tools, familiarity with eSRAM, online computing and tiled resources. It seems like a lot of people are claiming 50% increases for the PS4 without even a fraction of the knowledge necessary to make an accurate comparison.