Report: Xbox One graphics drivers lag behind those of PS4

Microsoft has been doing its best to convince hardcore gamers that there isn't that much of a difference between the hardware performance of their Xbox One and Sony's PlayStation 4 consoles, although a new report claims there are major hardware and software gulfs between the two next-generation consoles.

Edge Online states that one of the differences is in the graphics drivers. Both Sony and Microsoft are working to optimize them before their consoles launch, but the story quotes one unnamed developer as saying that Microsoft "has been late on their drivers and that has been hurting them." Another developer said the current state of the Xbox One's graphics drivers is "horrible." The story points out that Microsoft and Sony will continue to release improved drivers to developers even after the launch of their consoles.

Even with those software differences, the hardware inside the PS4 is still superior in many ways compared to the Xbox One. The story claims that, according to their developer sources, memory reads on the PS4 are 40 to 50 percent quicker than the Xbox One. Also, the Arithmetic Logic Unit on Sony's console is supposed to be 50 per cent faster that the one on Microsoft's machine. One developer is quoted as saying, "Xbox One is weaker and it’s a pain to use its ESRAM."

It's not all bad news for the Xbox One. Another unnamed developer says Microsoft's machine outperforms the PS4 if a game uses "procedural generation or raytracing via parametric surfaces – that is, using a lot of memory writes and not much texturing or ALU." At least one developer, id Software's lead programmer John Carmack, has gone on the record as saying that the Xbox One and PS4 are very close in terms of their hardware, saying, "It's almost amazing how close they are in capabilities, how common they are. The capabilities they give are essentially the same."

The Edge Online article does say that improved graphics drivers combined with the Xbox One's cloud-based game development features could allow Microsoft's machine to outperform the PS4. However, developers don't seem keen to want to make games that target specific features of each console, such as Kinect for the Xbox One and the DualShock 4's touchpad for the PS4. One game creator says his team "rarely" use such features in their games unless there is some kind of incentive or if a game design could benefit from using such an option.

Source: Edge Online | Images via Microsoft and Sony

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

It's Friday the 13th but Microsoft says bad luck can be avoided with Office 365

Next Story

Nokia Lumia 925 now available on AT&T for $99

126 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

For me it comes down to kinect.
I like kinect games and i´m sure i will love kinect2.
Other than that, don´t care a lot if the same game looks a little bit better on a console or another.

Even if that is the case it is meaningless as there are something called system updates which will happen to improve both consoles as they fine tune everything. These will be the most complex consoles yet... expected.

This article is so full of s***, developers don't have control over the ESRAM, it's like saying that you have control over the CPU's internal memory. So saying that it's so much harder to work with the ESRAM when in fact it's transparent to a developer is total bull. Take it from a senior dev.

Debunking Version 2 in 3, 2, 1...

"Microsoft "has been late on their drivers and that has been hurting them." Another developer said the current state of the Xbox One's graphics drivers is "horrible."

The Xbox One drivers are directly based off of the existing Windows 8 drivers.

They did not have to be created from the ground up like the PS4's drivers that also had to create a full FreeBSD wrapper layer for the drivers.

So a driver that has been maturing for over six years is behind a driver that was written in the last year? Even if there are bugs in the driver, they would be very minor.


The OS architecture and driver model didn't change. Sites talk about the Xbox one using several 'OSes' which is not technically correct, as it is NT running three upper layer OS subsystems.

Mobius Enigma said,
Debunking Version 2 in 3, 2, 1...

The Xbox One drivers are directly based off of the existing Windows 8 drivers.

They did not have to be created from the ground up like the PS4's drivers that also had to create a full FreeBSD wrapper layer for the drivers.

So a driver that has been maturing for over six years is behind a driver that was written in the last year? Even if there are bugs in the driver, they would be very minor.


The OS architecture and driver model didn't change. Sites talk about the Xbox one using several 'OSes' which is not technically correct, as it is NT running three upper layer OS subsystems.

Now your all biased, being a Neowin site, but seriously. This time round ps4 has better hardware. Thats not to say that it means anything or even that it will 'win' this generation. The games make the difference, hardware just helps.

Now the ESRAM while able to peak memory bandwidth above the GDDR5, isn't as straight forward to account for. Its also 32mb, and while caching and streaming can help your only as good as your weakest link. Now clever programming and game design can help alleviate this but considering the PS4 doesnt have this issue its a big hurdle for the PS4. Now the Xbone has DDR ram, which should help the CPU department and will definately help M$ in the multi-tasking department. Considering M$ clearly made the console as an all round device this makes sense.

Its a race of different types. The ps4 is clearly the powerhouse muscle car. While the Xbone is more like a a dune buggy. They both drive but are coming from different mindset's.
I predict that while first party games will take advantage of both platforms strengths, i dont see there being much difference on the third party side. Games will be made for the lowest common demoniator whichever that may be. Slight things might be different, textures/resolution/aa but thats all. Same as this generation, only probably in the other direction.

I am a pc fanboy btw but i can appreciate the direction the PS4 is heading. I am not interested in the XBone at all, and tbh not even windows (linux). But i predict the XBone to lead sales in US, PS4 europe and asia, and then mixed elsewhere.

Btw to the driver guy. Windows drivers aren't comparable to console drivers. While the console may run the windows kernel, things are MUCH more targeted. The catalyst and geforce drivers are 'general' drivers that are designed for multiple cards. Console drivers are much more find tuned and specific to the machines. They will probably also be much lower level and possibly be included directly in the kernel. This is most likely why Sony chose FreeBSD over Linux as it doesn't have to disclose the source.

Jedipottsy said,

Now your all biased, being a Neowin site, but seriously. This time round ps4 has better hardware. Thats not to say that it means anything or even that it will 'win' this generation. The games make the difference, hardware just helps.

Now the ESRAM while able to peak memory bandwidth above the GDDR5, isn't as straight forward to account for. Its also 32mb, and while caching and streaming can help your only as good as your weakest link. Now clever programming and game design can help alleviate this but considering the PS4 doesnt have this issue its a big hurdle for the PS4. Now the Xbone has DDR ram, which should help the CPU department and will definately help M$ in the multi-tasking department. Considering M$ clearly made the console as an all round device this makes sense.

Its a race of different types. The ps4 is clearly the powerhouse muscle car. While the Xbone is more like a a dune buggy. They both drive but are coming from different mindset's.
I predict that while first party games will take advantage of both platforms strengths, i dont see there being much difference on the third party side. Games will be made for the lowest common demoniator whichever that may be. Slight things might be different, textures/resolution/aa but thats all. Same as this generation, only probably in the other direction.

I am a pc fanboy btw but i can appreciate the direction the PS4 is heading. I am not interested in the XBone at all, and tbh not even windows (linux). But i predict the XBone to lead sales in US, PS4 europe and asia, and then mixed elsewhere.

Btw to the driver guy. Windows drivers aren't comparable to console drivers. While the console may run the windows kernel, things are MUCH more targeted. The catalyst and geforce drivers are 'general' drivers that are designed for multiple cards. Console drivers are much more find tuned and specific to the machines. They will probably also be much lower level and possibly be included directly in the kernel. This is most likely why Sony chose FreeBSD over Linux as it doesn't have to disclose the source.

NT Drivers are comparable to NT Drivers PERIOD

On paper the PS3 was SIGNIFICANTLY faster than the Xbox 360, both the CPU and GPU. In reality, this did not equal faster gaming, in fact because of the older architecture of the GPU was slower.

Microsoft has made similar changes to the GPU in the Xbox One that NOBODY understands. The way RAM is handled by the CPU cores and the CPU -> GPU in the Xbox One is NEW.

The internal caching and the ESRAM of the GPU makes the Xbox One faster than the GDDR5 of the PS4. (Which is where 90% of the PS4 is faster crap comes from.) Think of the Caching MS is using as the L1 and L2 caches in a CPU, they are 'tiny' but make a MASSIVE difference.

A CPU with 1600mhz RAM with a poor L1, L2 compared to a CPU with 1333mhz RAM with a good L1, L2 CPU cache will run faster.

The Xbox One can also use the ALUs of the GPU and the Cores of the CPU more efficiently than FreeBSD can. The very nature of the WDDM of NT is to manage the GPU ALUs and the CPU Cores and keep them filled and processing data. So when the PS4 has all the CPU Cores at 100% and processes/threads are waiting, the Xbox One is capable of taking the agnostic threads and shoving them through the GPU if it is free.

The PS4 APU architecture is RAM 'unified', but the OS, FreeBSD is NOT, and has no kernel level management of GPU threads or the ability to equality use both the GPU and CPU as the threads can only go towards either the CPU or GPU as the thread was designed to run. This leaves the PS4 dependent on the hardware logic handling the threads, which is not something that can be changed or optimized.

The entire concept of the UMA technologies and even hUMA technologies are based off of Microsoft's Xbox 360 design and NT WDDM technologies.
(Go pull up AMD's hUMA slides, they talk about implementing the 'logic' in hardware as opposed to Software. The 'Software' they are talking about is Windows NT and the WDDM technologies. The idea for AMD was to offer a hardware based, but limited UMA technology for non-Windows NT OSes.)

I know this is complicated stuff, but it is just silly to assume Microsoft doesn't understand gaming or gaming hardware and would let Sony run over them on an architecture that Microsoft had a hand in designing originally. The irony is that the GPU and how the DMA/RAM bridges and the SoC technologies inside the PS4 work are based on Microsoft designs. Yet everyone is assuming that Microsoft would not understand the technology well enough to advance it and build a faster new iteration.


PS
The majority of my 'response' is not to you, but to anyone reading through this that still keeps getting hung up on rather simplistic technical details that are meaningless in how the overall systems will perform.

As I said, the whole world made this mistake with the PS3/XB360 and are here doing it again with the PS4/XB1.

Even as you stated, "This time round ps4 has better hardware," which is exactly what was said of the PS3.

Edited by Mobius Enigma, Sep 14 2013, 2:22am :

From the start PS3 had better hardware, but everyone already knew it would be harder to code for And only now they are starting to get the full power out of the PS3.
Also never helped that MS pulled a lot of (mainly American) game designers/developers to focus on their platform and end up making simple lazy ports to the PS3.

Also it is not like Sony just started developing on FreeBSD in recent years, it has been their OS for PlayStation for longer then that. So they also have years of work put into it, just like Microsoft has.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_NySJyi2pw XBO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgOhXbkmtLw PS3

Yeah, people ranting about how perfect Forza 5 looks like on the XBO, while GT6 on the PS3 looks pretty much the same graphically.

It's much more important how the developers are willing to put effort into it to draw the last drops of power from the machine. Then it is to just look at the paper speficifics or even the development kits.

Shadowzz said,
From the start PS3 had better hardware, but everyone already knew it would be harder to code for And only now they are starting to get the full power out of the PS3.
Also never helped that MS pulled a lot of (mainly American) game designers/developers to focus on their platform and end up making simple lazy ports to the PS3.

Also it is not like Sony just started developing on FreeBSD in recent years, it has been their OS for PlayStation for longer then that. So they also have years of work put into it, just like Microsoft has.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_NySJyi2pw XBO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgOhXbkmtLw PS3

Yeah, people ranting about how perfect Forza 5 looks like on the XBO, while GT6 on the PS3 looks pretty much the same graphically.

It's much more important how the developers are willing to put effort into it to draw the last drops of power from the machine. Then it is to just look at the paper speficifics or even the development kits.

The point is, they 'thought' it had better hardware, and it simply just turned out to be not true.

The PS3 CPU is maybe 5-10% faster at MOST, and the GPU is horribly underpowered in comparison.

People didn't realize the Xenon CPU was a tri-core with the ability to handle two processes per core, bringing it closer to the six-cell processor than was expected.

The GPU from the XB360 was NOT understood. Even ATI didn't understand the design model MS Engineers were using, as they later admit and why they didn't adopt the new GPU architecture until a year later after it the graphically quality and performance was demonstrable by developers and the games running on the XB360.

Sure MS development tools helped, development/compiles is what made Microsoft and something they have done well for over 35 years now. Their compilers still best AMDs and Intel's own compilers in speed and security.

To assume that things will be different now, that Sony has magically learned how to build better development tools than Microsoft is foolish, when AMD and Intel can't compete with Microsoft in compiler technologies on their own CPUS.

The FreeBSD debate has more to do with the architectural model of FreeBSD than how long Sony has used it. (It really isn't great for 'graphics' and the OS model is far more limited than most non-OS engineer realize.)

The only thing Sony has done 'better' with FreeBSD in the PS4 is they are using the AMD video drive wrapper (which bypasses most of FreeBSD). Yet, in this area alone, MS already wins, as NT can handle the GPU at a lower level with more efficiency.


Developers did try to keep parity between the PS3 and XB360 for their games. They couldn't afford to anger/alienate either group of 'fans'.

The PS3 was the 'lowest common denominator' in cross platform titles. This is why developers would use the BluRay space to throw in higher quality cut-scene and non-realtime graphics.

Developers often do this to give each set of fans a 'boast'. When they can't get the same texture quality, they give them 'motion blur' or some other advantage that the console can achieve.

0--JLowzrif said,
uh huh...more Dunning-Kruger effect, Please carry on with your rant.

If you understand Dunning-Kruger, you would realize that your posts are identifying you as a classic example. I'm sure you know this though, right?

/sad

PS3's GPU was underpowered as you say, because it was relying on its Cell cores to do some of the work. Which some games actually do use. GPU is almost meaningless if you have CPU chip that can just as easily do GPU calculations.
With many cross-platform games. they were developed initially for 360 and not PS3 and that's enough reason to see why cross-platform games looked worse on PS3 compared to 360. Time and time again it was PS3 and its exclusives raising the graphics quality bar, not the 360.

Sony was very slow to realize, brute force alone is not enough as MS showed, a good SDK is just as important. PS3 is/was a lot harder to optimize for.

If you look at developers who take the time to optimize for a PS3, they achieve much better results than on the 360. Just like the PS2 reaching its max after the PS3 was launched, the PS3 will have the same fate (remember God of War, looked PS3 worthy with its graphics but was a PS2 game).

In the end the brute power of a machine is not the only thing that matters, its also the SDK and commitment of developers for the console.
And since Sony finally jumped ship from their own (co)developed chipsets to a more standard implementation. Next generation will be very interesting.
Since X86 sucks for GPU calculations, the PS4 comes with a much stronger GPU then its previous releases in comparison.

And OS isn't much of importance when you already have direct hardware access. It just makes it easier if a kernel can manage some of the lowlevel operations. Hopefully Sony has learned and as they said, SDK's are much improved.

What's even more sad is the fact that you're wasting your time writing about stuff you don't have the faintest idea!

I just want to inform you that the people on b3d are having a good laugh with your posts, k?


/lol

0--JLowzrif said,
What's even more sad is the fact that you're wasting your time writing about stuff you don't have the faintest idea!

I just want to inform you that the people on b3d are having a good laugh with your posts, k?


/lol


So instead of breaking concepts down for the average reader, I should demonstrate my technical knowledge for your judgment, and only fully answer posts with an inane level of technical detail?

Instead of stating:
"People didn't realize the Xenon CPU was a tri-core with the ability to handle two processes per core, bringing it closer to the six-cell processor than was expected."


I should have stated:
"The industry often overlooked the SMT capabilities and did not understand the custom VMX units for each of the three Xenon PPE cores.

These overlooked advantages combined with MS SDK Compiler TLP optimizations surprised the industry by bringing the Xenon performance closer to the Sony Cell processor and its six available SPE cores."


Both of these say the same thing; however, one is far quicker to read and easier to understand for readers without a background in CPU architecture engineering.


Technical information is readily available, but extrapolating and sharing understanding is less common and far more important. (Insert relevant Einstein quote.)

/projectioncanbedangerous

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=679545

So much for the Superior Tri-core Xenon Cpu/ NOBODY understands ATI GPU lol

"The PS3 was the 'lowest common denominator' in cross platform titles. This is why developers would use the BluRay space to throw in higher quality cut-scene and non-realtime graphics.

Developers often do this to give each set of fans a 'boast'. When they can't get the same texture quality, they give them 'motion blur' or some other advantage that the console can achieve."

/KnowItallsyndrome_SeekproffesionalHElp

Debunking in 3, 2, 1...

"Xbox One is weaker and it's a pain to use its ESRAM."

This is not something a developer would directly be dealing with unless they purposely trying to circumvent or bypass the OS GPU memory management.


Wrong, we're talking consoles here. The whole point is that developers have access to all these special things to really make the most of the hardware.

Ambroos said,
Wrong, we're talking consoles here. The whole point is that developers have access to all these special things to really make the most of the hardware.

There is a difference between monitoring how the ESRAM is affecting performance and actually 'touching it'.

Developers would not and should NOT be touching it. There are the upper layer frameworks of DirectX and the lower kernel memory management of NT and the on-die logic code that handles this, not a 'game developer'.

It would be like a developer trying to handle reading/writing to the L1, L2 caches of the CPU. They couldn't do anything better than the CPU designer already did and would hinder the performance of the CPU overall.

Again, if a developer is trying to 'code for' or 'touch' the ESRAM, they are not a real developer. PERIOD.

With Microsoft's experience in the software end, I'm sure their drivers will blow Sony's out of the water when completed. It's fair to say that they're perhaps running behind, but the software knowledge between these two companies is nowhere near equal...

M_Lyons10 said,
With Microsoft's experience in the software end, I'm sure their drivers will blow Sony's out of the water when completed. It's fair to say that they're perhaps running behind, but the software knowledge between these two companies is nowhere near equal...

May be MS is experienced in software but in drivers.

Carmack was talking about capabilities, not performance. For example an nvidia 770 and 780 have the same capabilities.

Good thing Xbox One games look better than PS4. If not Xbox would be in trouble. So, technically PS4 is "on paper" superior but Xbox One is optimized and better balanced. 700 hp car has more power than a 400 hp car but if the 400 hp car is tuned and balanced properly it can win the race.

Ahh, shoddy journalism at its best... maybe it's just me, but I had never even heard of Edge Online before this 'article'. I guess getting in on the console war is the only way to generate clicks for some sites. Meh.

Here's an interesting article linked by one of the commenters on that site:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/...-one-is-better-than-the-ps4

Regardless of the article I linked, in the end, it's all going to come down to just a couple of things: which system are your friends currently on and/or which one are they going to buy, and what is your preference?

All of these articles showing this and that number or this or that OPINION isn't going to necessarily change your preference for one or the other. The way I see it, buy what makes you happy, and I'm sure several of your online friends will do the same. I know myself well enough to say that I wouldn't switch even if all of my friends did, though. I've got my system pre-ordered, and so do several of my online 'friends'.

For those that think that picking one console over the other somehow validates your level of intelligence because you speak of ALU's and ROP's and CU memory interactions, cloud processing, or offloaded operations, etc and therefore we should all just listen to you... guess what, most of us don't care. The numbers won't make me enjoy my system more or less (unless we're talking lazy developing, in which case you may have a less worthy experience ) because the systems are newer and better than what we have today. I thoroughly enjoy my 360, (I also have a PS3). Your opinion is also just that: your OPINION. Noone can decide for anyone if they'll enjoy a system more based on one set of opinions or 'facts' or something else. So some of you need to seriously stop raging about your personal preference and how you think that everyone should do what you think is best. I don't get any commission for one system selling better than the other, do you?

This is not a holy war, and will not decide the fate of humanity. Even in the end, if the numbers for one system are better than the other, I'm sure both sides will enjoy their purchases, and we'll all have a great holiday time this year playing new games for our respective platforms.

Live and let live. I'm buying an Xbox One, and I'm going to enjoy it to the fullest extent possible. I'm hoping you will too with whatever system you decide to buy.

so its not even that the ps4 its faster but also microsoft didnt optimize it very well....

things will get better and i think that no matter what multiplatform games will be the same since its almost the same hardware.

But platform exclusive i think that sony will have an edge

more proof that these unnamed sources are not actually sources,but non technical saavy defensive neogaffy blowtards. ALUs operate synchronously using the clock. 853Mhz>800Mhz,or in the case of the cpu, 1.75Ghz vs 1.6Ghz.

theyarecomingforyou said,
You must not have read the article, as the clock speed increase is mentioned - apparently it was "not significant".

the clock speed the article is talking about is the clock speed of the xbox one gpu,which was increased from 800Mhz to 853Mhz,while the ps4 graphics clock is 800Mhz. The clock speed of the CPU was increased from 1.6Ghz to 1.75Ghz.

ALUs are a web of combinatorial logic that latch the value to a flip flop,which is synchronous to the clock.

Saying the ps4 ALU is 50% faster is complete nonsense. The xbox one ALUs are faster. This discredits the whole rumor,since whatever is said makes no sense,thats not how ALUs work.

Edited by vcfan, Sep 13 2013, 10:22pm :

sorry I shouldn't say the xbox one ALUs are faster, they aren't, they just do more work because they are running at a higher clock speed.

theyarecomingforyou said,

Are you a developer with access to both systems?

what does having access to a system matter how an ALU works. an ALU doesn't have a speed. it does a job in one clock cycle. if you have 1 hz clock, its going to do your add or whatever 1 time every second. if your clock is 100Mhz,its going to do your add 100 million times a second. Xbox one clock speeds are higher. You cant and dont compare the speed of an ALU. You can compare the amount of ALUs,or the clock they are running at.

theyarecomingforyou said,
They're comparing the PERFORMANCE of the ALUs, not the speed. It really doesn't matter what speed the ALUs are for the Xbox One if they offer less performance.

even if theyre comparing the amount of ALUs, a.k.a stream processors, 50% more doesnt give a 50% advantage, which is a proven fact, because 1, they are running at a lower clock, 2 they have less bandwidth,and 3 its been proven in the gcn architecture by DF that the advantage of that many more units is average of 20% everything else being equal. with the less clock speed and bandwidth,this goes down to almost nothing. So yes,it still is a bunch of horse ****,and discredits the rumor as junk.


The PS4 has 50% more compute units than the X1, as well as much greater memory bandwidth - that much we know from the specs and is not in dispute. Whether that translates to a 50% performance difference is another matter and it certainly seems unlikely it will be anywhere near that but it's painting the same picture that we've seen countless times already, which is that the PS4 has a performance advantage over the X1.

Anyway, it's not long until the release of both consoles and I'm sure we'll see a lot more information from developers. We'll soon see for ourselves.

theyarecomingforyou said,
The PS4 has 50% more compute units than the X1, as well as much greater memory bandwidth - that much we know from the specs and is not in dispute. Whether that translates to a 50% performance difference is another matter and it certainly seems unlikely it will be anywhere near that but it's painting the same picture that we've seen countless times already, which is that the PS4 has a performance advantage over the X1.

Anyway, it's not long until the release of both consoles and I'm sure we'll see a lot more information from developers. We'll soon see for ourselves.

the bandwidth statement is not factual. Esram alone has 204gb/s alone,and the 68gb/s ddr3 ram operates independently therefore you can add them

The PS4's memory is GDDR5, which is faster than the DDR3 memory in the X1. As for the ESRAM, that's for the framebuffer and is only 32MB in size. It's all very well quoting numbers but if you don't have the context they're meaningless.

theyarecomingforyou said,
The PS4's memory is GDDR5, which is faster than the DDR3 memory in the X1. As for the ESRAM, that's for the framebuffer and is only 32MB in size. It's all very well quoting numbers but if you don't have the context they're meaningless.

Microsoft stated it isn't restricted in any matter,so no it isn't just for the framebuffer. if you read the gcn docs,you would know that the architecture of GCN takes in ALU jobs in small "tiles",while outputting the results. while inputs are being made from the esram, there are data movers that can keep the esram saturated with from the ddr3. when the ddr3 is not feeding jobs to the esram,it is free to work on other parts of the system,such as audio. reads from esram to the ALUs are 109GB/S,writes from the ALU to esram are 109GB/S,which will be happening concurrently,thats where the 218GB/S(was 204GB/S) comes from, all while the ddr3 is also doing some other work at 68GB/S. The memory system can do 286GB/S(was 272GB/S before overclock),and this is confirmed by the hardware engineers at microsoft.

you're also forgetting the cpu-gpu coherent bandwidth is 30GB/S, three times the one in the ps4 chip. for gpgpu computations,this is a huge advantage.

Edited by vcfan, Sep 14 2013, 5:23am :

vcfan said,
Microsoft stated it isn't restricted in any matter,so no it isn't just for the framebuffer. if you read the gcn docs,you would know that the architecture of GCN takes in ALU jobs in small "tiles",while outputting the results.

It's amazing how 32MB of ESRAM can invalidate all the performance advantages offered by the PS4's superior GPU and memory bandwidth.

theyarecomingforyou said,

It's amazing how 32MB of ESRAM can invalidate all the performance advantages offered by the PS4's superior GPU and memory bandwidth.

isnt it.that's the difference between using off the shelf parts and not knowing what to do with your silicon budget, and designing a custom intricate system.

theyarecomingforyou said,
I was being sarcastic. You're talking nonsense.

is it nonesense just because you want to believe its nonesense? you haven't posted a valid counterargument of why it is nonesense. here is proof

http://i.imgur.com/qxNcKVs.jpg

see the esram is split into 4 256bit wide 8MB blocks?


now look at the diagram from the xbox one sdk

http://i.imgur.com/a9SoL1I.jpg

see the 4 256bit memory lanes coming into the gpu? those are coming from the 4 8MB esram blocks.

256bit x 4 esram blocks = 1024bit
1024bit x 853Mhz = 109GB/S. Since each bit can be a read and a write simultaneously
109GB/S x 2 = 218GB/S

the ddr3s job is to keep the esram fed,and is busy doing other work so it doesn't sit idle.

if you have one ram bus like gddr5,if youre going to go work on audio, or whatever, your gpu is basically handicapped,and has to wait for its access to the ram. when youre wasting massive cycles waiting for the ram,thats bad.

You can post all the numbers you want but there's no evidence that leads to a real-world performance advantage. In fact the feedback from developers, which is what this article is about, says that the ESRAM is hard to work with and that the PS4 has the performance advantage. You can pretend that the memory bandwidth on 32MB of ESRAM can overcome the performance advantage of GDDR5 over DDR3 and the extra compute units on the PS4 all the evidence points to the contrary.

theyarecomingforyou said,
You can post all the numbers you want but there's no evidence that leads to a real-world performance advantage. In fact the feedback from developers, which is what this article is about, says that the ESRAM is hard to work with and that the PS4 has the performance advantage. You can pretend that the memory bandwidth on 32MB of ESRAM can overcome the performance advantage of GDDR5 over DDR3 and the extra compute units on the PS4 all the evidence points to the contrary.

you guys want to use numbers to crown a performance winner, yet when presented with other better numbers, its not evidence anymore? yet your numbers are evidence?and anonymous sources are? laughable. that's ok, I just don't want you guys to be really disappointed in the end. trying to ease it on you. I mean, when games like forza 5 are running at twice the resolution and framerate as other racers,and look much better(no horrible AA,driveclub *cough*),,and ryse looks better than other gameplay videos ive seen, this isn't evidence. nahhhh, its the compute units stupid.

vcfan said,
you guys want to use numbers to crown a performance winner, yet when presented with other better numbers, its not evidence anymore?

The bandwidth numbers are not being disputed, it's your interpretation of them that is.

theyarecomingforyou said,

The bandwidth numbers are not being disputed, it's your interpretation of them that is.

I got it,i got it. the sdk is wrong, the hotchip slides are fake,and Microsoft engineers are lying.

Mike Greenway said,
Unnamed developer = not credible to me.

Gaming journalists have a wide variety of contacts and many of them are willing to speak off record. These are people whose identity has been verified by the journalists. You also have to remember that Edge Online is a major publication with a reputation to protect.

It's right to be sceptical of such a report but it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

Yet another article (not you Neowin--your source) where some unnamed mystery person is quoted one word at a time, because that's totally how people talk.

I'd be more interested in what the rest of the sentence was around the word "horrible", and what question was asked that prompted it.

But clicks, I guess.

the reality is that the difference between PS4 and 360 will disappear as programmers and SDKs gain maturity. what will not get better is the gap between consoles and PCs which is only going to get larger making the whole discussion about which is more powerful at what pointless given both essentially SUCK compared to PC gaming.

neonspark said,
the reality is that the difference between PS4 and 360 will disappear as programmers and SDKs gain maturity. what will not get better is the gap between consoles and PCs which is only going to get larger making the whole discussion about which is more powerful at what pointless given both essentially SUCK compared to PC gaming.

And it is WHY we shouldn't be a guinea pigs.

Who cares? Just wait until the consoles are out and they judge on what they actually look like then. (Hint: they will probably look the same)

I'm surprised Microsofts drivers are not up the scratch yet, they are a software company above anything and the drivers/dev tools on the 360 are way better than the PS3's.

I'm sure they will improve over time but it's still surprising or even unacceptable that they're lagging Sony right now.

For all we know, the information in this article is months ago. You really cannot believe everything you read. If it is true, the first thing that the console will do is pick up an update once you turn it on and connects online.

For us, I agree. Maybe not for developers working to get games made for the XBO. Hopefully, even if this story is legit at all, these issues are taken care of so that we don't have delays.

Was pretty bad when the 360 got releases first just because the process for optimizing for the PS3 took longer.

It would be hard to believe that it will require as much effort to optimize for the X1 as it was for the PS3. I mean the X1 and PS4 aren't that different in the core hardware. They may differ in some implementation and custom bits, but the big pieces are the same vs the ps3 which had a vastly different setup from the 360.

But we will see

This article is bull****!

First, as usual, sources are only "unnamed" individuals.

Second, if there is one part that can't be very different, it is the ALU. They come from the same architecture and (until recently) were running at the same speed.

Third, the ESRAM design on the new silicon is very close to what was on the XBOX 360 except it is bigger. Therefore, chances are that it is very close to the previous one and developers are used to it.

This article is only FUD. There is no way one of these console will significantly outperform the other one at the hardware level. The next war will be fought at the OS its associated platform level.

I let you decide which company has the advantage...

Fine. Mea culpa on the syntax.

Meanwhile, it changes nothing on the actual purpose of this embedded memory. It is just faster now.

And this article remains bullsh1t.

Lord Method Man said,
Which is why the average person never appreciated the 64 bit majesty of the Atari Jaguar electronic home video game console.

We are talking about consoles here. What is this Atari Jaguar you speak of? Some character from the new Transformers movie?

AsherGZ said,

We are talking about consoles here. What is this Atari Jaguar you speak of? Some character from the new Transformers movie?

The Atari Jaguar was the state of the art in console technology in its day.

CygnusOrion said,
The average person is not going to know about these spec wars.

You apparently have been to many gaming sites recently... Sadly the kiddies are paying attention and it is like 2005 all over again, with how much faster the PS is going to be. (They were horribly disappointed in 2005/2006 and it will happen again.)

Wasn't the Jaguar just 2x 32bit CPUs and they claimed it was 64bit, but in-fact it actually wasn't..

Some people claimed that the the Jaguar wasn't actually a true 64-bit system, that it was simply two 32-bit processors working in parallel. However, Atari was pressing forward with their advertising campaign touting its 64-bit power, and an impressive number of third-party titles had been announced in development.

Cold hard fact the PS4 is more powerful and because they are both PC based devs will have no problem exploiting the difference. This isn't like last gen, you can compare the numbers now.

Just because you like Xbox or Playstation doesn't mean you have to defend them to the death and look stupid. Just enjoy whatever platform you buy.

I look forward to the games and comparisons.

That's just the thing. If you compare straight specs like PC, PS4 will seem more powerful. But that's like saying more megapixels = better image. You have to take into account the underlying features because with cloud feature and ESRAM, Xbox One leaves the PLAYSTATION in the dust.

Haha "okay".
Sony first wanted to go with a 2GB GDDR5 and 2 DDR3 setup. Memory got cheaper and they changed it to 4gb. Luckily for them the density is now low enough for them to go 8gb of GDDR5 ram.
Microsoft went with the cheaper solution and now they are seeing the results. The only reason they have the ESRAM is because DDR3 ram are not enough for modern GPU's. ESRAM is superior is speed and latency but there is so little of it that it doesn't matter. Also the ESRAM take up alot of silicon which is why the GPU isn't as beefy as the PS4 GPU.

Karanlos said,
Haha "okay".
Sony first wanted to go with a 2GB GDDR5 and 2 DDR3 setup. Memory got cheaper and they changed it to 4gb. Luckily for them the density is now low enough for them to go 8gb of GDDR5 ram.
Microsoft went with the cheaper solution and now they are seeing the results. The only reason they have the ESRAM is because DDR3 ram are not enough for modern GPU's. ESRAM is superior is speed and latency but there is so little of it that it doesn't matter. Also the ESRAM take up alot of silicon which is why the GPU isn't as beefy as the PS4 GPU.

You do know when it comes to graphics, latency is not a huge issue, but since you mentioned latency; do you know that GDDR5 has higher latency than DDR3? Apparently not.

Which brings me to this, Microsoft uses a small data stream hence the use of DDR3. As for Sony, their data stream is huge thus the use of GDDR5. DDR3 uses a smaller bandwidth, so it is better for smaller data, and it is just the opposite for GDDR5.

Now between the two, it will boils down to IMPLEMENTATION! Just because one console has higher numbers, it doesn't mean it is far more superior. Remember both of these console are pretty similar. Thus, it is not also about being cheap as well, once again, it is about IMPLEMENTATION!

Ha. Would you believe the quote from an unnamed developer or a quote from an actual named developer? Funny how all the negativity comes from unnamed sources while the named sources say the complete opposite.

Spicoli said,
And by "report" we mean "Sony Ad"

We just had a Microsoft ad yesterday, them going on about what the PS4 specs are that weren't even announced apparently. Not sure why seeing this would bother you any more than the other lol.

(or maybe the day before, my days have been blurry hahah)

I cry Foul "hardware inside the PS4 is still superior in many ways"

This is getting old... Goto a Drag Strip, he with the most Horsepower does not always get down the track first.

Or look at Android phones, they need Quad Cores to do what iPhone and Windows Phone due with 1 or 2.

Get over this argument.

Well more horsepower and better gear does help your chances of getting d own the track first. And skills don't matter when you drag race a cooper mini vs a dodge viper.

Also incomparable to phones OS or anything. On WP/android, developers can only use the API's provided. on a console, developers have direct hardware access.

Shadowzz said,

Also incomparable to phones OS or anything. On WP/android, developers can only use the API's provided. on a console, developers have direct hardware access.

That is true, but that also gives more credence to the ESRAM. Technically a graphics card can only show around 16mb of ram on screen at one time based on standard resolutions. If a developer really took the time and care to use ESRAM he would reach the highest possible results. This would require carefully planned and utilized code but ""technically"" that would be the case. For lazy developers who didn't want to utilize ESRAM you would get better results with DDR5

I like the Lazy Programmer comment, absolutely right on target. Being efficient at what you have verses throwing resources at a problem is always the best route.

Sony kind of reminds me of the Gov;t Lets throw money at a problem and hope it fixes it.

MikadoWu said,
I cry Foul "hardware inside the PS4 is still superior in many ways"

This is getting old... Goto a Drag Strip, he with the most Horsepower does not always get down the track first.

Or look at Android phones, they need Quad Cores to do what iPhone and Windows Phone due with 1 or 2.

Get over this argument.

Well this is exactly what i was thinking. Software makes a big difference. You can say well software can be patched so the ps4 has more room to get better but look at android. They have been fixing that crap for years now and it still cant perform like an iphone or wp without putting twice the specs in it. Also even if there were no differences in software anyone who has upgraded there pc several times knows that 50% supposed more power does not translate to that at all. Last time I upgraded video cards spec wise technically i should have seen 100% increase atleast and I only see 30-50%.

Also just look at pc games that run on mac as well. The same exact computer running windows will outperform the same game running on mac everytime. Like i ran portal2 on my win8 partition and it runs at over 100fps but when i load it up in mac it runs at around 70 with same settings

MikadoWu said,
I cry Foul "hardware inside the PS4 is still superior in many ways"

This is getting old... Goto a Drag Strip, he with the most Horsepower does not always get down the track first.

Or look at Android phones, they need Quad Cores to do what iPhone and Windows Phone due with 1 or 2.

Get over this argument.

lol you really are an idiot. You do know android has pretty much spanked iphone for the last 12 if not 18 months and will do for a considerable amount of time to come. They are faster, and can do a lot more!

anyway, where gaming is concerned, so long as both consoles don't have some stupid radical chips in them which are hard to code for (which neither of these consoles have) then it is down to pure horsepower.

If multi platform titles looks any better in the real world is yet to be seen.

Even if the xbox does have inferior performance, there are still valid reasons why you would pick it over the ps4.

Having a million fps on a console won't mean a lot if your favourite game is on the other one lol

glen8 said,

lol you really are an idiot. You do know android has pretty much spanked iphone for the last 12 if not 18 months and will do for a considerable amount of time to come. They are faster, and can do a lot more!

anyway, where gaming is concerned, so long as both consoles don't have some stupid radical chips in them which are hard to code for (which neither of these consoles have) then it is down to pure horsepower.

If multi platform titles looks any better in the real world is yet to be seen.

Even if the xbox does have inferior performance, there are still valid reasons why you would pick it over the ps4.

Having a million fps on a console won't mean a lot if your favourite game is on the other one lol

Yeah android has been spanking but like he said they are also running quad core proc that are more mhz and have more ram in order to do it. You will not find a android with the same specs running as fast as iphone

News alert, unnamed source has revealed that we will all turn into penguins in 2014. Please install ice and sleds in all your homes.

Oh come on now. Can't believe this has been posted, mass-produced consoles have un-finished drivers even though they've been final since E3? Okay.

virtorio said,
The box-art of the Xbox One is superior to that of the PS4.

Xbox graphic design has always been better then Sony. But that's not that important if they don't fix this issue.

Dushmany said,
Lol the packaging box goes in the bin,

just give me Amazon's "frustration free" packaging and I will be happy with it.

Shadowzz said,
Except the CPU, RAM, GPU, box, motion control, controllers, appearance, games, exclusives......

minor on paper specs (as in very limited info) comparisons are, i believe utterly stupid. That is all.

As a gamer looking to own these consoles, I think its sad that its nearly impossible to get a straight answer about these things. We have articles saying the X1 actually has comparable hardware, maybe even some advantages in particular parts of the hardware, then we have articles like the one from Edge that say the X1 is vastly inferior.

Who do you believe? Since I don't know the real info, I can't see through what might be BS or real. You could choose to believe no one and just assume what you like, or you could go with the one that matches your opinion of either console.

I really don't care for the console wars.

trooper11 said,
As a gamer looking to own these consoles, I think its sad that its nearly impossible to get a straight answer about these things. We have articles saying the X1 actually has comparable hardware, maybe even some advantages in particular parts of the hardware, then we have articles like the one from Edge that say the X1 is vastly inferior.

Who do you believe? Since I don't know the real info, I can't see through what might be BS or real. You could choose to believe no one and just assume what you like, or you could go with the one that matches your opinion of either console.

I really don't care for the console wars.

well yeah, but the article claiming that the ps4 wasnt that much better looked over these "40-50%" numbers... again, claiming there wasnt that much of a difference. But who knows i guess.... IF MICROSOFT F***KS ME OVER FOR THE 500$ IM FORKING, I WILL BE ****ED SON, PIIIISSSEEEDDD.

Why do you support them if they don't have your trust? are you previous achievements THAT important.
Buy from those that deserve it. Just think if microsoft had a monopoly in the console market all their original DRMness will be forced on you.
I really hope microsoft flops with the X1, so next time they will get their s**t together,

I'm not sure why you hope MS' fails considering they are doing everything they can to fix the problems people have brought up. In fact, it looks the X1 is going to be a great platform thanks to the feedback we all have given to MS.

If you don't like MS that's cool, but I think that if a company is going to listen and change its policies, then its ok for me to support them.

I agree, the reasoning behind me wanted this iteration of the xbox to fail is to penalise them financially. the whole 'to big to fail' thing is the scary part, as people will continue to purchase no matter what restrictions etc. are in place. e.g. EA