Jump to content



Photo

AnandTech: Xbox One vs. PS4 - Hardware comparison


  • Please log in to reply
311 replies to this topic

#1 Audioboxer

Audioboxer

    Hermit Arcana

  • 35,998 posts
  • Joined: 01-December 03
  • Location: UK, Scotland

Posted 22 May 2013 - 13:06

Yesterday Microsoft finally took the covers off the new Xbox, what it hopes will last for many years to come. At a high level here’s what we’re dealing with:

- 8-core AMD Jaguar CPU
- 12 CU/768 SP AMD GCN GPU
- 8GB DDR3 system memory
- 500GB HDD
- Blu-ray drive
- 2.4/5.0GHz 802.11 a/b/g/n, multiple radios with WiFi Direct support
- 4K HDMI in/out (for cable TV passthrough)
- USB 3.0
- Available later this year

Posted Image

While Microsoft was light on technical details, I believe we have enough to put together some decent analysis. Let’s get to it.


Sony gave the PS4 50% more raw shader performance, plain and simple (768 SPs @ 800MHz vs. 1152 SPs & 800MHz). We’ll have to wait and see how this hardware delta gets exposed in games over time, but the gap is definitely there. The funny thing about game consoles is that it’s usually the lowest common denominator that determines the bulk of the experience across all platforms.

On the plus side, the Xbox One should enjoy better power/thermal characteristics compared to the PlayStation 4. Even compared to the Xbox 360 we should see improvement in many use cases thanks to modern power management techniques.

Differences in the memory subsytems also gives us some insight into each approach to the next-gen consoles. Microsoft opted for embedded SRAM + DDR3, while Sony went for a very fast GDDR5 memory interface. Sony’s approach (especially when combined with a beefier GPU) is exactly what you’d build if you wanted to give game developers the fastest hardware. Microsoft’s approach on the other hand looks a little more broad. The Xbox One still gives game developers a significant performance boost over the previous generation, but also attempts to widen the audience for the console. It’s a risky strategy for sure, especially given the similarities in the underlying architectures between the Xbox One and PS4.


More @ http://www.anandtech...o-playstation-4


#2 OP Audioboxer

Audioboxer

    Hermit Arcana

  • 35,998 posts
  • Joined: 01-December 03
  • Location: UK, Scotland

Posted 22 May 2013 - 14:17

Ooops, you can't catch the tech folk out :p

Similarly, the company claimed that there was more than 200GB of bandwidth within the system. Again, the number had no context or clarification and if rumors are to be believed, it suggests some rather creative accounting: 68 GB main memory bandwidth, 102GB bandwidth to an embedded SRAM buffer for the GPU, and 30GB bandwidth between the CPU and GPU. While that does add up to 200GB, there are no two parts of the SoC that can communicate with each other at 200 GB/s. The fastest link is believed to be the GPU read performance, which can aggregate across the main memory and SRAM buffer for 170 GB total.


http://arstechnica.c...losing-nothing/

Someone on GAF pointed out it's actually less than claimed in the Xbox 360 E3 2005 PR release

Posted Image

Never knew about that!

http://majornelson.c...s3-part-1-of-4/

Omg WTF this is gold, how did MS get away with this! Sony pulled some serious BS with the prototype PS3, but I had no idea MS done some of this as well...

SUMMARY
Now that the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 specifications have been announced, it is possible to do a real world performance comparison of the two systems.

There are three critical performance aspects of a console:
? Central Processing Unit (CPU) performance.
o The Xbox 360 CPU architecture has three times the general purpose processing power of the Cell.
? Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) performance
o The Xbox 360 GPU design is more flexible and it has more processing power than the PS3 GPU.
? Memory System Bandwidth
o The memory system bandwidth in Xbox 360 exceeds the PS3′s by five times.



Xbox 360 has 278.4 GB/s of memory system bandwidth. The PS3 has less than one-fifth of Xbox 360′s (48 GB/s) of total memory system bandwidth.


One of the great things about working at Xbox is that we have some of the smartest people in the world working on the Xbox 360. When Sony came announced the PS3, along with the product specs some of our team started looking at some of the numbers to see what they mean. Floating Point, shaders, bandwidth….what does it all mean. Clearly there are some numbers and stats that mean more to gaming then others, so the team cranked out some facts for everyone to absorb. Our world class technology team looked at the numbers and claims and decided to do what everyone else does: compare them to the PS3. The difference it that these guys are uniquely qualified to do so, and can cut through the smoke and mirrors to see what the real deal is. To that end, I present this summary, which I have broken up into four parts to make it more RSS Reader friendly.

Warning: Some of this stuff may make your head hurt, but these are the facts as they stand right now. Enjoy the read:



#3 Arceles

Arceles

    Time Craymel

  • 2,101 posts
  • Joined: 28-November 09
  • Location: 4th dimmension.
  • OS: Win 7 Ultimate / Win 8.1 Pro (With Start Menu Start8, otherwise is UNUSABLE) / Android 4.1.2 Jelly Bean
  • Phone: XT890 Motorola RAZRi (x86 processor)

Posted 22 May 2013 - 14:23

If only I could install windows on a PS4... that would be my next gaming machine....

#4 vetneufuse

neufuse

    Neowinian Senior

  • 16,788 posts
  • Joined: 16-February 04

Posted 22 May 2013 - 14:27

the raw processing power of the system makes me cringe though after I look at my desktop systems raw power... dev's are going to have to come up with some highly optimized code to make good use of these systems... sure they are faster raw FLOP wise then the 360 and PS3, but compared to a Intel ivy bridge i7 system with a good quality mid range graphics card......

#5 OP Audioboxer

Audioboxer

    Hermit Arcana

  • 35,998 posts
  • Joined: 01-December 03
  • Location: UK, Scotland

Posted 22 May 2013 - 14:29

the raw processing power of the system makes me cringe though after I look at my desktop systems raw power... dev's are going to have to come up with some highly optimized code to make good use of these systems... sure they are faster raw FLOP wise then the 360 and PS3, but compared to a Intel ivy bridge i7 system with a good quality mid range graphics card......


Look at Uncharted 2/The Last of Us and the upcoming GT6 squeezed out of 512mb ram :p (even Beyond looks amazing) Next gen games will look fantastic on dedicated gaming consoles.

#6 vetneufuse

neufuse

    Neowinian Senior

  • 16,788 posts
  • Joined: 16-February 04

Posted 22 May 2013 - 14:31

Look at Uncharted 2/The Last of Us and the upcoming GT6 squeezed out of 512mb ram :p (even Beyond looks amazing) Next gen games will look fantastic on dedicated gaming consoles.


I'm not saying they wont, they can optimize stuff pretty well, I just feel underwhelmed by the processing power

#7 Crisp

Crisp

    To infinity and beyond

  • 5,450 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 10
  • Location: 127.0.0.1

Posted 22 May 2013 - 14:32

If only I could install windows on a PS4... that would be my next gaming machine....


Eh? Just build a 8 core AMD PC then.

#8 vetneufuse

neufuse

    Neowinian Senior

  • 16,788 posts
  • Joined: 16-February 04

Posted 22 May 2013 - 14:35

If only I could install windows on a PS4... that would be my next gaming machine....


Just build any current line of PC and you'd already have more power then the PS4... even with only 4 or 6 cores... the FLOPS per core is higher on most desktop chips today then in the XBOX One and PS4... and you have way more powerful graphics cards out now

#9 OP Audioboxer

Audioboxer

    Hermit Arcana

  • 35,998 posts
  • Joined: 01-December 03
  • Location: UK, Scotland

Posted 22 May 2013 - 14:37

For those that prefer Digital Foundry

In terms of the GPU hardware, hard information was difficult to come by, but one of the engineers did let slip with a significant stat - 768 operations per clock. We know that both Xbox One and PlayStation 4 are based on Radeon GCN architecture and we also know that each compute unit is capable of 64 operations per clock. So, again through a process of extrapolation from the drip-feed of hard facts, the make-up of the One's GPU is confirmed - 12 compute units each capable of 64 ops/clock gives us the 768 total revealed by Microsoft and thus, by extension, the 1.2 teraflop graphics core. So that's another tick on the Durango leaked spec that has been transposed across to the final Xbox One architecture and the proof we need that PlayStation 4's 18 CU graphics core has 50 per cent more raw power than the GPU in the new Microsoft console


Microsoft never had the luxury of this moving target. With multimedia such a core focus for its hardware, it set out to support 8GB of RAM from day one (at the time giving it a huge advantage over the early PS4 target RAM spec) and with serious volume of next-gen DDR4 unattainable in the time window, it zeroed in on supporting DDR3 and doing whatever was necessary to make that work on a console. The result is a complex architecture - 32MB of ESRAM is added to the processor die, along with "data move engines" to courier information around the system as quickly as possible with bespoke encode/decode hardware to alleviate common bottlenecks. Bottom line: if you're wondering why Xbox One has a weaker GPU than PlayStation 4, it's because both platform holders have similar silicon budgets for the main processor - Sony has used the die-space for additional compute units and ROPs (32 vs. 16 in One)


More than that, the system appears to have been designed with a very specific US focus, where cable TV boxes are the norm. What about TVs with built-in decoders, either terrestrial and satellite in nature? Not everyone wants subscription TV, so not everyone has a set-top box - but they're still enjoying a large range of digital channels and a decent amount of HD programming. Perhaps more pertinently, Microsoft appears to have invested a massive amount in accommodating live TV when the overall trend is moving towards time-shifted viewing and streaming media - something it almost completely ignored in its presentation. It's a very curious decision and a massive gamble.


Lot more @ http://www.eurogamer...alysis-xbox-one

#10 Arceles

Arceles

    Time Craymel

  • 2,101 posts
  • Joined: 28-November 09
  • Location: 4th dimmension.
  • OS: Win 7 Ultimate / Win 8.1 Pro (With Start Menu Start8, otherwise is UNUSABLE) / Android 4.1.2 Jelly Bean
  • Phone: XT890 Motorola RAZRi (x86 processor)

Posted 22 May 2013 - 14:51

Just build any current line of PC and you'd already have more power then the PS4... even with only 4 or 6 cores... the FLOPS per core is higher on most desktop chips today then in the XBOX One and PS4... and you have way more powerful graphics cards out now


For developpment purposes, i.e. opencl, the PS4 has a very nice GPU... and the memory bandwith is really nice.

#11 Cocoliso

Cocoliso

    Neowinian

  • 102 posts
  • Joined: 13-July 09

Posted 22 May 2013 - 14:54

So consoles now are actually custom PCs, lol. The new kinect is also coming to PCs as well.

#12 -T-

-T-

    Trapmaster

  • 2,571 posts
  • Joined: 03-December 01
  • Location: Western Australia & Scotland

Posted 22 May 2013 - 15:03

So just like the original Xbox vs Ps2, and Ps3 vs 360, one system has more "raw power"

Which of those were the top selling consoles again?




#13 BajiRav

BajiRav

    Neowinian Senior

  • 10,608 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 04
  • Location: Xbox, where am I?
  • OS: Windows 8.1, Windows 8
  • Phone: Lumia 920

Posted 22 May 2013 - 15:03

So consoles now are actually custom PCs, lol. The new kinect is also coming to PCs as well.

they always were?

#14 vetneufuse

neufuse

    Neowinian Senior

  • 16,788 posts
  • Joined: 16-February 04

Posted 22 May 2013 - 15:08

they always were?


not really, consoles usually had CPU's that you couldn't get in a standard PC... aka custom Power Chips, RISC chips that are custom designed like the N64, etc..... now we are moving more towards standard CPU's with a few extra on die features

#15 spudtrooper

spudtrooper

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,095 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 10
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia 920

Posted 22 May 2013 - 15:13

Engineered systems for the win. We have what, 3 resolutions to aim for. 720p, 1080p and 4k. Even if you max out at 4k resolution that is 12,746,752 pixels, the Xbox One shouldn't have any problem holding 60fps because of the effective bandwidth with the ESRAM and GDDR3 averaging out.

Has the memory actually been really confirmed one way or another? I know sony mentioned gddr5 but I don't think there was a solid commitment.

GDDR5 is very limited supply for something that needs to hit mass production.. may be a big gamble

1080p won't push GDDR3 alone.. my gddr 5 ati 4870 is slower than my gddr3 7770 in many benchmarks all though I wouldn't complain about a gddr5 in the end. if your fill rates are high enough for your highest resolution at an effective rate through the entire pipeline, what does the stat actually mean in the end?