Xbox One vs. PS4

[FearL0rd]

I didn't. There wasn't this much disparity on the last gen

CELL (PlayStation 3)

- PowerPC-base Core (PPE) @3.2GHz
- 1 VMX vector unit per core
- 512KB L2 cache
- 7x Synergistic Processing Elements (SPE) @3.2 GHz

- 7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
- 7 x 256KB SRAM per SPE (1.75MB Total)
- 1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy
- 217.6 GFLOPS





XENON (Xbox 360)

- Custom IBM PowerPC-based CPU
- 3 symmetrical cores running @3.2 GHz each
- 2 threads per Core (6 threads Total)- 1 VMX-128 vector unit per core (3 total)
- 128 VMX-128 registers per hardware thread
- 1 MB L2 cache

- 9.6 Billion Dot Product Operations per Second
- 115.2 GFLOPS

 

[jonnaver]

Apples and oranges, they were using 2 entirely different configurations last gen. This gen they aren't, except that MS decided to go weaker.

 

[jonnaver]

Lol. I just double checked some of your comparison shots and found out they were captures of cinematics, which are prerendered separately on a computer, not gameplay footage. Lol. This misterX you worship is a real joker

 

[link68759]

CELL (PlayStation 3)

- PowerPC-base Core (PPE) @3.2GHz
- 1 VMX vector unit per core
- 512KB L2 cache
- 7x Synergistic Processing Elements (SPE) @3.2 GHz

- 7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
- 7 x 256KB SRAM per SPE (1.75MB Total)
- 1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy
- 217.6 GFLOPS





XENON (Xbox 360)

- Custom IBM PowerPC-based CPU
- 3 symmetrical cores running @3.2 GHz each
- 2 threads per Core (6 threads Total)- 1 VMX-128 vector unit per core (3 total)
- 128 VMX-128 registers per hardware thread
- 1 MB L2 cache

- 9.6 Billion Dot Product Operations per Second
- 115.2 GFLOPS

One omission here is that the PS3's processor is less efficient at most of the operations that make up gaming, so all the extra power just makes it on par with the 360.

 

[Jas00555]

Lmao I knew it. I suspected you're following that Misterxmedia guy from those pictures but now I know.

You do realize he's been debunked as a clown and a scammer by pretty much every respectable gaming community right?

I don't know who misterxmedia is, but I just took a few screenshots and have to agree with Fearlord that Sony does lie at E3. There's no use denying it.

From the Uncharted Gameplay trailer

From E3

 

[noobchief]

I'm a fan of Xbox, I supported the Xbox One and not the PS4. But after trying out my friends Xbox One, I was utterly disappointed. I feel like my Xbox 360 S was even better. Heck even a my Surface Pro 3 is even better, so in the future I will not buy any more consoles. Done, PS4 and Xbox One just lost a future customer. So I'm actually depressed too, because the previous Gen consoles are even better than the new Gen consoles.

 

[FearL0rd]

I'm a fan of Xbox, I supported the Xbox One and not the PS4. But after trying out my friends Xbox One, I was utterly disappointed. I feel like my Xbox 360 S was even better. Heck even a my Surface Pro 3 is even better, so in the future I will not buy any more consoles. Done, PS4 and Xbox One just lost a future customer. So I'm actually depressed too, because the previous Gen consoles are even better than the new Gen consoles.

They should had kept PowerPC tech

 

[jonnaver]

I'm a fan of Xbox, I supported the Xbox One and not the PS4. But after trying out my friends Xbox One, I was utterly disappointed. I feel like my Xbox 360 S was even better. Heck even a my Surface Pro 3 is even better, so in the future I will not buy any more consoles. Done, PS4 and Xbox One just lost a future customer. So I'm actually depressed too, because the previous Gen consoles are even better than the new Gen consoles.

I would be with you here but the whole reason I switched to console gaming is because I'm at the point now where I'd rather game in my home theater in front of my 60" while using a tiny controller and sitting with a pint on a reclining theater couch with built in cupholders.
I've heard pretty much every argument PC gamers have in their arsenal of how I could do this with a PC and I don't buy any of them. I've seen the setups and they all look untidy and jury rigged.
And I mean honestly... The amount of great graphical quality you get on even last generation to now is still extremely impressive on either system for 400 bucks. I don't mind dropping the money, considering the cost of my home theater alone dwarfs any gaming PC. I just prefer the simple ease of consoles now.

 

[Crasstoe]

Cross plat games run better on Xbox despite the extra power, just look at the bug fest that is AC Unity.

 

[link68759]

I would be with you here but the whole reason I switched to console gaming is because I'm at the point now where I'd rather game in my home theater in front of my 60" while using a tiny controller and sitting with a pint on a reclining theater couch with built in cupholders.
I've heard pretty much every argument PC gamers have in their arsenal of how I could do this with a PC and I don't buy any of them. I've seen the setups and they all look untidy and jury rigged.
And I mean honestly... The amount of great graphical quality you get on even last generation to now is still extremely impressive on either system for 400 bucks. I don't mind dropping the money, considering the cost of my home theater alone dwarfs any gaming PC. I just prefer the simple ease of consoles now.

Except the "simple ease of consoles" died with the gamecube/ps2 generation

 

[FearL0rd]

Except the "simple ease of consoles" died with the gamecube/ps2 generation

Samething with our PC... Needs a upgrade every 2 years

 

[link68759]

Samething with our PC... Needs a upgrade every 2 years

No more than a console would. It's not like PC hardware magically slows down as it ages while console hardware remains constant.

 

[jonnaver]

No more than a console would. It's not like PC hardware magically slows down as it ages while console hardware remains constant.

More like every 3-4 years for consoles. Secondly, console game devs always develop for the consoles capabilities so that's a moot point. Lastly upgrading a console every 4 years costs less than keeping a gaming PC current.

 

[link68759]

More like every 3-4 years for consoles. Secondly, console game devs always develop for the consoles capabilities so that's a moot point. Lastly upgrading a console every 4 years costs less than keeping a gaming PC current.

2/3 objectively false, though I will admit you need to do a lot of research and put a lot of effort in to optimize a cost/longevity PC build. Whereas a console is just bought and done.


The fact that most games are built to run on consoles basically guarantees that you can just build a PC marginally better than a console for about the same cost and not upgrade it until the next console generation.


Also this entire conversion completely ignores the indie market and some big name releases that are still plain enough that they could be run on a PC from several years ago. And there are THOUSANDS of old games to play too, it's not like you're bound and gagged on new releases.

Edit-
And I don't HAVE to keep upgrading my PC, I can stop whenever I want!
No one can keep pace with current generation PC parts without spending thousands a year- but that doesn't mean you're unable to play the latest games. PC exclusive titles generally do a good job of supporting the oldest hardware possible (looks like crap but you can play) and it's usually a good 6 years before you can't play games on the low-middle graphical settings. Longer if you overclock.
If you choose to not upgrade for 6+ years then yeah, you'll eventually fall behind the PC game curve, but does that make your investment up until now a waste? No, especially considering the build is likely going to be much better than current Gen consoles... So the downside of not keeping any pace with new hardware is your rig will only play games x% faster and prettier than consoles instead of 1.5*x%! ::sad face::
And honestly there aren't that many big budget PC exclusive games lately so there's not really a curve to keep up with. The most interesting new releases are indie and those generally don't require much power to play... So all you need to do is aim a bit higher than current Gen consoles (not hard or even expensive to do) and you'll be fine.

 

[coip]

I don't HAVE to keep upgrading my PC, I can stop whenever I want!

Stop and your PC will become unable to play new games in 4-5 years, whereas the Xbox One will be able to play new Xbox One games 10 years from now. That's the point.

 

[link68759]

Stop and your PC will become unable to play new games in 4-5 years, whereas the Xbox One will be able to play new Xbox One games 10 years from now. That's the point.

Did you not read any of my post or do you just delight in bringing constructive conversions to a full stop?

 

[FearL0rd]

Crysis 1 was release in 2007
Crysis 3 was release in 2013

I played all of them in my X360 but I could not play the 2013 game using the same 2007 $350 computer

 

[link68759]

Crysis 1 was release in 2007
Crysis 3 was release in 2013

I played all of them in my X360 but I could not play the 2013 game using the same 2007 $350 computer

PC Crysis is a special case, but fair point. However, depending in what hardware you have (there really are an infinite amount of ifs, ands and buts with PC gaming) this would not be the case. For example, does that $350 computer have an integrated GPU? If so, it would hardly be qualified to run any game from any time- at best it would last you one year (although integrated graphics has improved greatly in recent years).

It would generally be wiser to spend a bit more than $350 if you intend to play games, but from the reference frame of a gamer, you're getting a platform that does not discriminate against older titles. That X1 or PS4 won't be playing any games not specifically made for them. At the end of the day, different strokes for different folks- any assertion that consoles are objectively cheaper/better "for gaming" is just not true. Maybe if you want to exclusively play new releases (though with modern games as they are, I don't know why you would...)

 

[jonnaver]

PC Crysis is an extreme case but it's not a special case. You can't use a PC for recent releases without upgrading as long as you can with a console. That's what we're all saying to you. You simply don't believe us.

 

[link68759]

PC Crysis is an extreme case but it's not a special case. You can't use a PC for recent releases without upgrading as long as you can with a console. That's what we're all saying to you. You simply don't believe us.

As a PC gamer on his third build, my experiences conflict with your false perceptions. It is you who does not believe me... (also the owner of 8+ consoles because exclusivity is a terrible thing)


Crysis is both extreme and special- that series has traditionally pushed the boundaries of current PC technology. When Crysis 1 came out, it was often joked that the developers made it for some hypothetical future computer from the sky, because no one could run it without lowering the settings.


For consoles they removed all the fancy visuals so it could run. Which is entirely possible to do on PC too, but your position seems to be that "if it doesn't run at default settings it doesn't run at all!"


I also don't appreciate how I elaborated at length, and your response is simply, "your word choice for an entirely inconsequential part of the post was wrong, and you're wrong but I won't bother to qualify that or address anything that you've said!"


Discussions?! How do they work?


Hhhh. I just popped in to jest at how the "simplicity" of consoles dies a little more every year as they adopt some of the attributes of PC in the worst ways they can. Y'all were way too defensive and dragged me into a stupid "we're going to close our ears and repeat our opinions at you"- sorry it took me this long to realize it wasn't an actual discussion.


/me leaves