John Carmack: Xbox One and PS4 are "close" in hardware capabilities

id Software's head programmer John Carmack gave his opinion today about the upcoming Xbox One and PlayStation 4 consoles, at least in terms of their hardware performance, as part of his annual QuakeCon keynote address. While on paper, the PS4 would seem to have the edge on the Xbox One, Carmack believes the two consoles are actually neck-and-neck in their capabilities.

During the keynote, which was streamed live on Twitch.tv, the man who created the game engines behind Doom, Quake and the most recent id Software game Rage, stated, "It's almost amazing how close they are in capabilities, how common they are. The capabilities they give are essentially the same."

However, Carmack doesn't seem to care for Microsoft's Kinect hardware, which will be bundled with every Xbox One. He said, "I think Kinect still has some fundamental limitations with the latency and frame rate on it." He compared Kinect to Apple's one button mouse device, with Carmack saying that most people really want more than one button. He said, "Kinect is sort of like a zero button mouse with a lot of latency on it."

Speaking of Kinect, Carmack stated that some of the concerns about the Kinect as a possible tool for spying will be forgotten in the long run, much like how people have basically lived with the fact that their smartphone has a GPS locator inside. As far as the controversy over the Xbox One's now defunct DRM policies, Carmack said, "I think the witch hunt was a little bit unjustified." He feels that the game industry is moving toward that all-digital content future and when that happens " ... it will be good for us in general."

id Software is currently working on the next game in the Doom series, but there's no word on when that will be released.

Source: Twitch.tv | Image via Twitch.tv

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Brix Mini PC Review: Gigabyte's Take On Small Form Factor Computing

Next Story

Dell's mini computer ships to beta testers, challenging Chromecast

93 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

"John Carmack: Xbox One and PS4 are "close" in hardware capabilities"

at this point in time, i would believe ace ventura more when he talks through his posterior. but do carry on, neowinians. lmAo.

Asik said,
I'm sure everyone will trust your comment over John Carmack's annual keynote.

don't be ridiculous. i'm sure there are enough idiots to make him comfortable. some may come from neowin. lol.

Sigh. If only more people were as logical and understanding as he is about the DRM. This is what I have been saying all along.
"As far as the controversy over the Xbox One's now defunct DRM policies, Carmack said, "I think the witch hunt was a little bit unjustified." He feels that the game industry is moving toward that all-digital content future and when that happens " ... it will be good for us in general.""

You wont see much of a difference between one and ps4 games even when considering teh cloud. Most games will be multiplatform and will look almost exactly the same on both consoles. Investing a lot of time in features avalaible for one console only doesn't make any sense when you are building a multiplatform title. This will be a repeat of this gen. Games might look a little bit better on one platform but ultimately for most games you'll need to watch both versions side by side to realise it. Exclusive titles will be able to exploit the hardware to its full potential but at this point the skills of the artists matter more than power. It's not like one is a lot more powerful than the other. It's not the like the Wii. Technically speaking i don't expect much of a difference between the One and PS4.

Even when it is "close", ps4 is cheaper.

Xbox1 is an alternative for people that likes gear of wars of halo, outside that, ps4 looks more tempting.

That guy is a legend, it's technical skills are unbelievable, he's not a developer to talk down products just to get noted in blogs.

He's very subtle person and you have to tease information from him and read between the lines, he wasn't impressed with the PS3 and has openinly said that Rage would have problems streaming the megatextures etc..

So i believe him when he says that the two platforms are similar, i think cross platform games, engines and middleware will make them similar. Where one gains the other gains in another area.

Personally it's gonna come down to games and i don't want it to appear as a boast but i will probably end up getting all three consoles, as i did for the current generation. Each one had an exclusive which had to be played, GOW etc.. on the Xbox, Unfinished swan, tokyo jungle etc.. on the PS3 and Mario Galaxy, Zelda etc.. on the Wii

Personally i like the xbox more, i like the achievements and most importantly i prefer the controller. The rest all of the consoles sort of are the same.

We will see. The next Halo is 60 frames per second for a reason and it also happens to use server processing to offload work, which can mean speed.

It's not because I fall for marketing, but I listen to what the techs have to say and if they are claiming there is something there, then there is something there.

NOTE: Microsoft is more about tech and nerd type of stuff than communication (as you can obviously see), so if they say it's real and third parties that are making exclusive games say that it's real, then I have to believe what they say is true.

Yogurtmaster said,
We will see. The next Halo is 60 frames per second for a reason

You do realise the next Halo is not even close to be completed right?. We don't even know if they have an alpha version running.

That's right and that is why that they know that the next Halo is going to be 60 frames per second. They claimed this early and the reason why is that they are using "Cloud Processing" which offloads game functionality to the server, thus speeding up the game to 60 frames per second.

Yogurtmaster said,
That's right and that is why that they know that the next Halo is going to be 60 frames per second. They claimed this early and the reason why is that they are using "Cloud Processing" which offloads game functionality to the server, thus speeding up the game to 60 frames per second.

I can't figure out if you are joking or if you are really serious ...

I am serious. I believe that the server processing can help offload game functionality to the server thus allowing you to improve graphics or to improve the frame-rate. That is why the next Halo is going to be 60 frames per second.

Carmack is just the newest big name developer to say the same thing, that they two systems are very close. Kojima said the same thing and the guy has been knee deep in Playstation development.

It's time to stop looking at theoretical hardware numbers and guessing at differences. The new systems will be just like the PS3 and 360 before them, close. If anything I expect the PS4 to be a more realistic 10-15% better in overall performance than the XB1 which if you talk frames per second is ~5-10 frames faster. If games on both can hit 60fps then it honestly doesn't matter in the end if the PS4 can run it at 65 or 70fps if the XB1 is already at 60.

15-30% FPS difference is probably what you'll get. Developers can hide that difference by downscaling the internal resolution from 1080p to 900p, or using weaker anti-aliasing or other effects.

We're looking at 30 vs 40 FPS, not 30 vs 60. The difference is not enormous but it's there and hardcore gamers will notice. Your average gamer maybe not so much.

startscreennope said,
15-30% FPS difference is probably what you'll get. Developers can hide that difference by downscaling the internal resolution from 1080p to 900p, or using weaker anti-aliasing or other effects.

We're looking at 30 vs 40 FPS, not 30 vs 60. The difference is not enormous but it's there and hardcore gamers will notice. Your average gamer maybe not so much.

30 vs 33 actually, of course 33 will still only be displayed as 30.

startscreennope said,
15-30% FPS difference is probably what you'll get. Developers can hide that difference by downscaling the internal resolution from 1080p to 900p, or using weaker anti-aliasing or other effects.

We're looking at 30 vs 40 FPS, not 30 vs 60. The difference is not enormous but it's there and hardcore gamers will notice. Your average gamer maybe not so much.

60 is the target that developers will aim for, but if they can't match that and go with lower the difference is still not going to be that great. 15% faster than 30fps =34.5fps. It's not as big as you make it out to be, and it's not going to be 30% more even if the raw hardware difference is that high.

It doesn't matter what the game analysts decide. They just go with the flow. There are leaders and there are followers.

I am telling you guys it's not as simple as people think and I am thinking over the next few years people are going to wonder why some of their games on the PS4 are running slower or the graphics are not as clear.

I don't have $400 or $500 to spend yet, working on my business.

Ultimately, the Xbone will outsell... but I don't believe it will at the start. I think xbox owners will buy xbones and sony fans will buy theirs. Everyone has proven that the xbox has a fanbase that's younger (children), older (40+) and they like an intuitive interface with all the bells and gimmicks. It sold more when the price dropped, so don't expect anything spectacular off the start.... but, eventually, it will all end up the same as it is now, unless Nintendo quits screwing around.

Performance doesn't matter at this point, or any point. 360 was supposedly underpowered and we see how those sales are going now. The fact is, people AND ESPECIALLY KIDS, LOVE the 360. Regardless of their reasoning... they will ask their parents for a $500 console, and DAD LOVES TOYS TOO.

These reasons alone, will show you why LOGIC and PERFORMANCE does not matter in sales. Price, functionality and familiarity will reign.

It's too early to say what Microsoft will do yet on price. I will give some examples on what they could do...

1) Sell the Xbox One at a much lower price but offer 2 years of Xbox Live Gold. It's like a mobile phone contract here.

2) Sell the Xbox One as a part of a deal with other Cable and Satellite companies.

Also, you haven't figured in the tons of money Microsoft is going to throw in for marketing and advertising.

Remember, Microsoft has been very slow with information. So, we will see what happens. Since we don't have all of the facts yet then I think we need to wait until November to see what they are going to do about the price.

CygnusOrion said,
So the analysts have already decided that the PS4 is 50% more powerful than the XB1 and $99 cheaper, so game over.

And everybody agrees with analysts when it suits them, and mocks their entire path in life when it doesn't.

CygnusOrion said,
So the analysts have already decided that the PS4 is 50% more powerful than the XB1 and $99 cheaper, so game over.


33% actually, and that's just the GPU differences not counting all the other advantages the XBOX has to offload the GPU. Also 33% increased hardware power only translates to about 13-15% increased game performance, IF the OS is identical. And we all know who has the most experience making an efficient OS here.

And now we have two major game debs saying the difference in reality is nothing. And for the 100 dollars more you be 200 dollars worth ofkinec which ca be used to enhance all your games, leaning around corners, leaving over, head tracking, sound tracking, tracking controllers and on and on.

CygnusOrion said,
So the analysts have already decided that the PS4 is 50% more powerful than the XB1 and $99 cheaper, so game over.

you mean the same analysts that said xbox one is going to outsell ps4 3 to 1?

"It's not 50% it's 33%!! Don't look at the actual specs, just look at the fudged percentages!" Talk about spin and manipulation. Insanity.

Only on Neowin

You have to love these responses. First off XBONE is already going through hardware changes and will probably in the long run end up more powerful at release. Second off for those that don't understand that getting the Kinect II with the system is well worth the additional money because if you remember the Kinect I was 100+ dollars to own after already owning a 360. I just love when people complain about things that are INCLUDED at no additional cost? The XBONE is on par with inflation as being the same COST as the original 360 at release and without a Kinect period. From what I can see and NO I'm not a fan boy by any stretch and have owned every known system going back to Intellivision can only see the XBONE is the clear winner here and will be in the end. Even the 360 was the clear winner for its era.

HawkMan said,
33% actually
I can't believe people on Neowin can be making this kind of argument. This is basic math. 150 is 50% more than 100. 100 is 33% less than 150. It makes no sense to simply say there is a "33% difference" as the order of the comparison matters.

The PS4 has 50% more shaders than the Xbox One.
The Xbox One has 33% less shaders than the PS4.

Both are true.

I can't believe someone has to explain this.

Asik said,
I can't believe people on Neowin can be making this kind of argument. This is basic math. 150 is 50% more than 100. 100 is 33% less than 150. It makes no sense to simply say there is a "33% difference" as the order of the comparison matters.
Yes, it's pretty obvious he's using the smaller number as a propaganda/system war talking point. Kind of disturbing, actually.

I am going to talk Crazy talk here and it's going to look like I am insane.

I think over time the Xbox One is going to have better looking games.

Now, I am not saying this for damage control nor am I saying this as some hopeful wish. This isn't so much magic as it is science.

The API & Tool support + heavily modified hardware + Cloud Processing.

I just think that the Xbox One isn't as underpowered as some people want or hope. The final hardware should be tweaked for more power.

I happen to think over time people are going to be very surprised. On NeoGaf they are treating the XB1 like it's the same as the Wii U, they are going to be shocked when they find out that in "many cases" the XB1 titles can be better, that is if and ONLY IF, that third parties take advantage of what I posted above. Most first parties will of course.

I just don't think it's as simple as people think. People have bought into and I don't blame them of a console that has the most power locally will have the best graphics, but that wasn't true for the 360, and I don't expect it will be true for the PS4. Can I prove it? No, not yet. The paradigm is shifting and server support is going to be used in the future and it's going to go where we can't even go today.

I think you COULD be right - but mostly because of ESRAM. If you can get certain things into that insanely fast package, and then leverage the cloud for other bits as well, the “standard” graphics core gets left to do everything else. I actually think the XB1 is neater, whereas as far as I can tell, PS4 system ram can't speed things up and they don't (yet) have a cloud to offload data like the static world elements.

ZipZapRap said,
I think you COULD be right - but mostly because of ESRAM. If you can get certain things into that insanely fast package, and then leverage the cloud for other bits as well, the “standard” graphics core gets left to do everything else. I actually think the XB1 is neater, whereas as far as I can tell, PS4 system ram can't speed things up and they don't (yet) have a cloud to offload data like the static world elements.


There's also the dedicated sound card, and freeing up potentially 10-20% of the CPU from doing AI work, and who knows how much of the GPU to do part of the physics.

And remember the 33% raw power difference(yes 33 not 50), will only result in. 10-15% increased game performance for the PS4.

This means that just with the ESRAM and the dedicated sound hardware, the 360 would be able to catch up. Then there's the enigmatic move engines, which despite claims that they're just DNA registers Sony has made no claims to have the same...

ESRAM is there to help with the DDR3 RAM slower bandwidth and clear up bottlenecks. It will give X1 bandwidth parity with PS4's GDDR5, at the cost of a massive SOC.

PS4 could use offloaded processing just as well as X1, although Sony would have to invest in the servers to do so.

Playing the percentage game between 33 and 50? Oh please. By the numbers we have it's 1.24tf and 1.84tf, 18 CU vs 12 CU, 16 ROPs vs 32 ROPs, etc. All in PS4's favor.

PS4 also has a SPU that handles audio tasks, it's not done by the CPU. A "dedicated sound card"? It's a SPU, nothing fancy or special. It's larger to handle kinect audio tasks, something the PS4 has no need for.

yogurd and hawk your posts are full of tech nonsense and fudging numbers

startscreennope said,
ESRAM is there to help with the DDR3 RAM slower bandwidth and clear up bottlenecks. It will give X1 bandwidth parity with PS4's GDDR5, at the cost of a massive SOC.

PS4 could use offloaded processing just as well as X1, although Sony would have to invest in the servers to do so.

Playing the percentage game between 33 and 50? Oh please. By the numbers we have it's 1.24tf and 1.84tf, 18 CU vs 12 CU, 16 ROPs vs 32 ROPs, etc. All in PS4's favor.

PS4 also has a SPU that handles audio tasks, it's not done by the CPU. A "dedicated sound card"? It's a SPU, nothing fancy or special. It's larger to handle kinect audio tasks, something the PS4 has no need for.

yogurd and hawk your posts are full of tech nonsense and fudging numbers

Pure hardware numbers mea ****, it doesn't translate even close to direct game performance.

HawkMan said,
Pure hardware numbers mea ****, it doesn't translate even close to direct game performance.
Then talking about ESRAM, move engines, "sound cards", and other long debunked "secret sauce" silliness does? You didn't mention a thing about software performance.

startscreennope said,
Then talking about ESRAM, move engines, "sound cards", and other long debunked "secret sauce" silliness does? You didn't mention a thing about software performance.

Actually I did. Software performance in general are in MS favor anyway.

startscreennope said,
Then talking about ESRAM, move engines, "sound cards", and other long debunked "secret sauce" silliness does? You didn't mention a thing about software performance.

And when was any of that debunked, they're all on the Xbox, all relieving the APU of stuff to do, or increasing its ability to do stuff.

Considering how vocal Sony has been about telling their fans how **** everything XBOX ONE is, if the move engines where the same dma registers they have, they would have had a press conference just for that long ago.

None of that have anything do to with the pure APU performance I was talking about though. Again. Everyone knows that 33% more rendering resources DOES NOT scale up to even half that in rendering speed.

startscreennope said,
ESRAM is there to help with the DDR3 RAM slower bandwidth and clear up bottlenecks. It will give X1 bandwidth parity with PS4's GDDR5, at the cost of a massive SOC.

PS4 could use offloaded processing just as well as X1, although Sony would have to invest in the servers to do so.

Playing the percentage game between 33 and 50? Oh please. By the numbers we have it's 1.24tf and 1.84tf, 18 CU vs 12 CU, 16 ROPs vs 32 ROPs, etc. All in PS4's favor.

PS4 also has a SPU that handles audio tasks, it's not done by the CPU. A "dedicated sound card"? It's a SPU, nothing fancy or special. It's larger to handle kinect audio tasks, something the PS4 has no need for.

yogurd and hawk your posts are full of tech nonsense and fudging numbers

The ESRAM is NOT to compensate for GDDR3 bottlenecks.

If this was true, Microsoft would have went the CHEAPER route and just designed the XB1 to use GDDR5 and not INVESTED more money into a the more advanced architecture that uses ESRAM.

This is where people are starting to get crazy with this...

Moving on...

You are correct about the sound processing, it is such a tiny fraction of CPU load that it is irrelevant. People are also conflating the dedicated processing for the Kinect Sensor, which handles sound, video, tracking, etc independently of the main APU.

As a friendly suggestion from one of your posts above, do a bit more research on John Carmack, he is not a Microsoft guy, being a strong OSS proponent, and isn't even close to a yes man for Microsoft.

General Notes for everyone:
He has done a lot of 'good' work in the past that is behind some of the functionality that is being used in the PS4's FreeBSD graphical implementation.

He is also behind a lot of the technical work on OpenGL and revising the wrappers and driver model for Linux to be more conducive for gaming. He also was very outspoken AGAINST earlier versions of DirectX for many years.

If there really was a difference or if the PS4 had any edge, he would probably have said more about it and championed the potential for OSS and OpenGL as being superior.

Your speculative argument is "MS couldn't be so X as to use DDR3+ESRAM without a performance advantage", but fail to raise any technical points why it might do so. Xbox One uses DDR3, not GDDR3 - not sure why you're calling it GDDR3, you're supposed to be smart enough to know the basics like what type of RAM is in the box, right?

The ESRAM is to compensate for the DDR3 RAM by design. The more common speculation is that MS in its initial planning stages wanted 8GB from the start, and GDDR5 looked too expensive, so they chose ESRAM as a way to compensate for the DDR3 RAM. The ESRAM ended up making the SOC huge (5 bil transistors) while reducing the potential size of the GPU. In hindsight it was a poor tech decision given that GDDR5 prices are now lower.

Mobius Enigma said,

The ESRAM is NOT to compensate for GDDR3 bottlenecks.

If this was true, Microsoft would have went the CHEAPER route and just designed the XB1 to use GDDR5 and not INVESTED more money into a the more advanced architecture that uses ESRAM.

This is where people are starting to get crazy with this...

Moving on...

You are correct about the sound processing, it is such a tiny fraction of CPU load that it is irrelevant. People are also conflating the dedicated processing for the Kinect Sensor, which handles sound, video, tracking, etc independently of the main APU.

As a friendly suggestion from one of your posts above, do a bit more research on John Carmack, he is not a Microsoft guy, being a strong OSS proponent, and isn't even close to a yes man for Microsoft.

General Notes for everyone:
He has done a lot of 'good' work in the past that is behind some of the functionality that is being used in the PS4's FreeBSD graphical implementation.

He is also behind a lot of the technical work on OpenGL and revising the wrappers and driver model for Linux to be more conducive for gaming. He also was very outspoken AGAINST earlier versions of DirectX for many years.

If there really was a difference or if the PS4 had any edge, he would probably have said more about it and championed the potential for OSS and OpenGL as being superior.


Hang on, GDDR5 is the cheaper route? Are you having me on? Sony took the lazy way out and invested in GDDR5 simply for the bandwidth. Sony have ZERO hardware to compensate for the high latency of GDDR memory. This means audio processing, AI, general computing will suffer dramatically. For example, this is why the 360 had dedicated audio chips, video scaling chips. To counter for the high latency of GDDR so it didn't have to worry about the bottlenecks of high latency. The memory architecture is far more complicated in the X1 because MS have the money and resource to invest in it. Its a far cheaper option that provides some of the benefits of GDDR with eSRAM like speedier post-processing but still having the might of the 8GB of DDR and its super fast latency.

Audio processing a small fraction of the CPU? Are you kidding me again? Audio is one of the most CPU intensive features due to its real-time nature and the RAM it takes up. This is where GDDR falls flat on its face because the returning latency can't keep up with the CPU cycles and the audio buffer often falls behind and the frame tick has to sleep to compensate. Hence why you saw stuttering at E3

No matter how you word it, FreeBSD with low wrappers like OpenGL isn't as competent as a fully fledged DirectX stack on a Windows based environment. Its how games have been developed since the 90's. Especially since OpenGL isn't actively developed and the only company who are essentially updating it are AMD, and the libraries they're creating for OpenGL (Megatexturing like in DirectX 11.2) aren't included in the standard build of it.

When people say GDDR5 is fast, damn right it is, and is excellent for games. Regarding general processing, its atrocious due to its latency. Sony have no hardware to counteract those bottles necks because it would be too costly and human resource hungry.

startscreennope said,
Your speculative argument is "MS couldn't be so X as to use DDR3+ESRAM without a performance advantage", but fail to raise any technical points why it might do so. Xbox One uses DDR3, not GDDR3 - not sure why you're calling it GDDR3, you're supposed to be smart enough to know the basics like what type of RAM is in the box, right?

The ESRAM is to compensate for the DDR3 RAM by design. The more common speculation is that MS in its initial planning stages wanted 8GB from the start, and GDDR5 looked too expensive, so they chose ESRAM as a way to compensate for the DDR3 RAM. The ESRAM ended up making the SOC huge (5 bil transistors) while reducing the potential size of the GPU. In hindsight it was a poor tech decision given that GDDR5 prices are now lower.

Speaking of wild unfounded speculation...

GDDR5 "latency", more ridiculous FUD that has been debunked long ago on saner forums, where you'll get banned for trying to pull it. Over here though, not only can you go on making a massive tech ignoramus of yourself, but you can personally insult people over it and get away with it as long as it's pro-MS.

Yogurtmaster said,
I am going to talk Crazy talk here and it's going to look like I am insane.

I think over time the Xbox One is going to have better looking games.

Now, I am not saying this for damage control nor am I saying this as some hopeful wish. This isn't so much magic as it is science.

The API & Tool support + heavily modified hardware + Cloud Processing.

I just think that the Xbox One isn't as underpowered as some people want or hope. The final hardware should be tweaked for more power.

I happen to think over time people are going to be very surprised. On NeoGaf they are treating the XB1 like it's the same as the Wii U, they are going to be shocked when they find out that in "many cases" the XB1 titles can be better, that is if and ONLY IF, that third parties take advantage of what I posted above. Most first parties will of course.

I just don't think it's as simple as people think. People have bought into and I don't blame them of a console that has the most power locally will have the best graphics, but that wasn't true for the 360, and I don't expect it will be true for the PS4. Can I prove it? No, not yet. The paradigm is shifting and server support is going to be used in the future and it's going to go where we can't even go today.

I don't think anyone can say until they either see it, or see what type of a difference that extra bit of ESRAM performs. Not many people have done that, and I don't think it's easy to say without being a dev.

startscreennope said,
GDDR5 "latency", more ridiculous FUD that has been debunked long ago on saner forums, where you'll get banned for trying to pull it. Over here though, not only can you go on making a massive tech ignoramus of yourself, but you can personally insult people over it and get away with it as long as it's pro-MS.

Hahaha sure. Please back up your quotes with evidence. I could dig down into CPU cycles and the architecture of GDDR if you want. Because I make a post defending the X1's DDR choice, doesn't mean I'm a fanboy.

Yes, but for many, it's the Microsoft logo that makes the difference, and the main reason why they will purchase it.

There are still many who would buy a Kin over an Android/iPhone device... just because it's from Microsoft! For some, Microsoft if like a religion.

(I was being sarcastic). I think I'd choose the Xbox because I want more than just a gaming console. It's a pitty it doesn't have a digital TV tuner inbuilt (with PVR functionality). If it did, it would probably be all I need. My old Sony PVR has many issues - using HDMI causes the unit to freeze, and it can't record HD channels reliably. Also, transferring recordings to DVD is pretty low quality and has to be done in real-time - Sony isn't the company it used to be. I love Windows Media Center on the other hand.

68k said,
There are still many who would buy a Kin over an Android/iPhone device... just because it's from Microsoft! For some, Microsoft if like a religion.

Because Sony, Android, Apple and every other "fan" out there doesn't do such things.... and is far from hypocritical.

Shiranui said,
That's why windows phone is doing so well?

Windows phone sucks because of Microsoft's developer attitude now. You can't expect to gain ground when you jump into the game and charge people just as much to develop that other devices do, and expect them to program a new language. Not to mention, they got into the game late, and didn't even have core features that matter.. ....like VPN, that big spenders like enterprises need.

68k said,
(I was being sarcastic). I think I'd choose the Xbox because I want more than just a gaming console. It's a pitty it doesn't have a digital TV tuner inbuilt (with PVR functionality). If it did, it would probably be all I need. My old Sony PVR has many issues - using HDMI causes the unit to freeze, and it can't record HD channels reliably. Also, transferring recordings to DVD is pretty low quality and has to be done in real-time - Sony isn't the company it used to be. I love Windows Media Center on the other hand.

Maybe we will see this available from third-party accessories.

While Carmack can talk in detail about the intricacies of each console's architecture he will not draw any conclusion that would be detrimental to both short and long term reputation and economic interest of Bethesda.

Universal facts folks need to accept:

1. PS4 is more powerful. The "edge" in performance will not be apparent at launch, nor will it be grandiose in third party titles. Give PS4 a year or two, and than it will become more obvious. The vast majority of the general public will be completely unphased since the difference between true 1080p, a modified 1080p, and MSAA versus MLAA will go straight over their heads.

2. It will take time before the PS4 is truly tapped. Some very interesting hardware customizations will give it longer legs than the Xbox 1 in terms of pulling off late gen magic tricks.

3. X1 games will look fine, but stop parroting this narrative where Xbox 1 is equal in performance to PS4! It isn't, it won't be, it's not going to happen.

Kinect 2 still laggy and unresponsive compared to traditional controls? Not a good sign. MS hung its hat on Kinect and if it's not an amazing experience, the $100 extra and worse specs aren't going weigh even more heavily on the system.

Shadowzz said,
And who are you to claim that Carmack is talking out of his ass?
It's just a truism in the game dev world that you don't talk smack about a system your boss has a vested interest in selling software on. Although criticizing kinect certainly isn't going to make people rush out to buy X1s.

Yea.... lets forget he never released games for the Playstation...

Owait.

He is multi-platform. Windows, Linux, OSX, Xbox and Playstation.
But here you are claiming he only gives a damn about Xbox? hahaha

ZipZapRap said,

Of course.. you know best, not one of the, if not the, best games programmer that has ever walked the earth.

Is that supposed to be an argument, or are you just trolling?

startscreennope said,
Is that supposed to be an argument, or are you just trolling?

You make a decent argument first, and I'll follow.

ZipZapRap said,

You make a decent argument first, and I'll follow.

It's just a truism in the game dev world that you don't talk smack about a system your boss has a vested interest in selling software on. Although criticizing kinect certainly isn't going to make people rush out to buy X1s.

startscreennope said,
It's just a truism in the game dev world that you don't talk smack about a system your boss has a vested interest in selling software on. Although criticizing kinect certainly isn't going to make people rush out to buy X1s.

Then
1 - you don't know Carmack, and
2 - you've never watched a Quakecon Keynote.

If there's anyone in this industry that's refreshingly honest, it's him, and he's always been that way. Whilst he can't say everything, he won't lie to you either.

startscreennope said,
While Carmack can talk in detail about the intricacies of each console's architecture he will not draw any conclusion that would be detrimental to both short and long term reputation and economic interest of Bethesda.

Universal facts folks need to accept:

1. PS4 is more powerful. The "edge" in performance will not be apparent at launch, nor will it be grandiose in third party titles. Give PS4 a year or two, and than it will become more obvious. The vast majority of the general public will be completely unphased since the difference between true 1080p, a modified 1080p, and MSAA versus MLAA will go straight over their heads.

2. It will take time before the PS4 is truly tapped. Some very interesting hardware customizations will give it longer legs than the Xbox 1 in terms of pulling off late gen magic tricks.

3. X1 games will look fine, but stop parroting this narrative where Xbox 1 is equal in performance to PS4! It isn't, it won't be, it's not going to happen.

Kinect 2 still laggy and unresponsive compared to traditional controls? Not a good sign. MS hung its hat on Kinect and if it's not an amazing experience, the $100 extra and worse specs aren't going weigh even more heavily on the system.


You are talking as if you have both ps4 and xbox1 and know all of this. Stop saying things you don't know about yet. Its not something written on paper, they have to come out and many factors involving with performance which half of it is related to software optimization and additional features. For example ps3 had better hardware than xbox360 on paper but it wasn't capable of playing music in background while playing games and game performance was almost equal on both. So don't be a child and just wait.

startscreennope said,
While Carmack can talk in detail about the intricacies of each console's architecture he will not draw any conclusion that would be detrimental to both short and long term reputation and economic interest of Bethesda.

Universal facts folks need to accept:

1. PS4 is more powerful. The "edge" in performance will not be apparent at launch, nor will it be grandiose in third party titles. Give PS4 a year or two, and than it will become more obvious. The vast majority of the general public will be completely unphased since the difference between true 1080p, a modified 1080p, and MSAA versus MLAA will go straight over their heads.

2. It will take time before the PS4 is truly tapped. Some very interesting hardware customizations will give it longer legs than the Xbox 1 in terms of pulling off late gen magic tricks.

3. X1 games will look fine, but stop parroting this narrative where Xbox 1 is equal in performance to PS4! It isn't, it won't be, it's not going to happen.

Kinect 2 still laggy and unresponsive compared to traditional controls? Not a good sign. MS hung its hat on Kinect and if it's not an amazing experience, the $100 extra and worse specs aren't going weigh even more heavily on the system.

YES, HOWEVER.... give xbox one a couple years for developers to utilize the cloud computing capabilities. I'm really curious just to how much the cloud will be able to pump out for the xbox one. Only time will tell right now as it is all talk.

auziez said,

YES, HOWEVER.... give xbox one a couple years for developers to utilize the cloud computing capabilities. I'm really curious just to how much the cloud will be able to pump out for the xbox one. Only time will tell right now as it is all talk.

Don't buy into the PR. 'Cloud gaming' is just a buzzword and won't be a major factor in performance.

DPyro said,

Don't buy into the PR. 'Cloud gaming' is just a buzzword and won't be a major factor in performance.

I whole heartedly disagree with this comment, with all respect.

Yeah.. and how long did it take for something completely different like "CELL" architecture to be "unlocked"... and it's still not much different than what we're seeing out of the 360. Do you really think if Carmack talked smack on the 360 being SO UNDERPOWERED, as you're stating... microsoft would care enough to do.... WHAT to them?

Get real and go smoke some more crack.

We'll wait around for the PS4 to "unlock its full potential". The rest of us will be happy that they both run almost identical with less porting of games needed.

ZipZapRap said,

Then
1 - you don't know Carmack, and
2 - you've never watched a Quakecon Keynote.

If there's anyone in this industry that's refreshingly honest, it's him, and he's always been that way. Whilst he can't say everything, he won't lie to you either.

Yeah, that's why people that sell games on 360 created a documentary stating how horrible it is to work with microsoft.... but continue to sell games on microsoft.

startscreennope said,
It's just a truism in the game dev world that you don't talk smack about a system your boss has a vested interest in selling software on. Although criticizing kinect certainly isn't going to make people rush out to buy X1s.

Yeah, that's why people that sell indie games on 360 created a documentary about how horrible it is to work for microsoft.... but continue to sell games on microsoft.

Mikeffer said,

Keep scrapping the bottom of the barrel

More rotten flamebaiting and trolling in the absence of any argument. "Scraping the bottom of the barrel" is ESRAM, move engines, "sound cards", cloud graphics, and whatever other desperate straw grabbing in the face of an obvious GPU advantage. TF advantage, ROPs, CUs, clock speed, GPU compute depth queues, you name it.

mockylock said,
It'll only make a difference in massive multiplayer. Too much latency for any graphics rendering.

Also, like Sony cant implement this?
Oh btw, Sony supports streaming games, isnt that basically the same? Playing the entire game from the cloud is somehow worse then using the cloud to (slightly) improve a game?

And Carmack is a legend, well respected and always seems to be open and calm, which very few people seem to be that are in such a position.
He never really picked one platform over another and if you somehow manage to get Quake4 to work on a PS3, he isnt going to sue you or demand you not to, but ask you how you did it and possibly make it available open source/free

Edited by ShadowMajestic, Aug 2 2013, 4:46pm :

Don't see how some people are so negative and blind to the benefits of cloud processing for gaming, sure it maybe early as in, it has not really been used in the gaming environment, however back than it was not as cost effective and easy to implement than it is now, with MS setting up the infrastructure with azure. It is a push towards technology, so why you want to see it not succeed or be so negative towards it, it would only benefit the users if it is successful, not like Sony couldn't implement this feature into the PS4 later on or in any other future consoles. Though it would be more cost efficient for MS to implement since they own the azure service where as Sony would most likely outsource the cloud processing from Amazon or Azure it's self. Basically they are just setting up the foundations and will be building up on this technology, just look at where we are today in the video game industry, we went from Atari's black and white graphic days to nes 2d pixelated graphics, to 16bit snes days than to the n64, ps1, ps2, xbox and on to our current wii, xbox360, ps3 days and now the next gen is coming along. Imagine what cloud processing or even the kinect could do after a few generations combined with the hopefully improved ISP networks and speeds. This pretty much applies to any technolgy. TV's, cell/smart phones, camera's, cars, gps, assembly lines, whatever ****en else there is, they are currently the way they are now through years or even decades of pushing the technology forward from their first iterations.

Offloaded computing (aka servers) has a lot of issues. Internet infrastructure will have to improve before it's more viable, which is mostly out of MS's control.

Mikeffer said,

Arguments been made a million times but until you're smart enough to see it there';s little point in carrying on. Until then i shall just continue to have you as my play thing.

Extreme flamebaiting/trolling. Did you notice your last post taunting me was deleted?

startscreennope said,
Extreme flamebaiting/trolling. Did you notice your last post taunting me was deleted?

Yeah but frankly all you do is taunt and chat rubbish so i thought you deserved another, especially because you cry babied about it and got it deleted. Enjoy

This is basically reiterating the obvious (facts) we already know. The ps3/360 hardware is almost identical.

Caleo said,
This is basically reiterating the obvious (facts) we already know. The ps3/360 hardware is almost identical.

uh, you mean ps4/xo

Listening to him talk now. I love this guy. Shame there was no DOOM 4 news today.

Anyway, if Carmack says they're close, the armchair nutjobs on the interwebs can pipe down. Carmack just validated my opinion that the epeen on this subject is ludicrous.


His comments about Kinect don't really wash though. The Kinect recognizes open and closed hand states which effectively allows for mouse click like functionality. I can't comment on latency since no games have ever been demonstrated with it to this point. However I can say he is making the same classic mistake that mouse lovers used to say about touch screens never being able to replace the mouse on PCs. The Kinect, like touch screens is meant to augment the controller/mouse, not to replace them. Microsoft isn't positioning Kinect as the controllers replacement and they still include a controller in every box.

He also said the 360 was more powerful than PS3:

"For a game developer the 360 was a nicer platform to work on, it was a little bit more powerful, it had much better development tools" - Carmack.

I've always said this. It's GPU was atleast as good as the PS3's if not better, it's CPU cores were much better at general processing (PS3's were great for some things like crunching numbers but very poor at many other tasks), and it had system wide RAM and more of it available to devs.

But many sheeple think the PS3 is more powerful because it has a higher number of CPU's cores, and for the masses larger numbers = better.

Edited by NoClipMode, Aug 2 2013, 2:22pm :

That's the entire problem with the XBO now as well. It has a very balanced architecture with all kinds of novelties, yet everybody is staring blind at the GPU and RAM, because that is where the PS3 failed most at.