War Thunder dev: PS4 GPU is 40% more powerful than Xbox One

By GotBored
in PlayStation

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

LaP

Posted
Posted

Sony has the raw spec edge, MS probably have the dev tool/OS edge ... will probably pan out much like the last generation only we're at a point now in performance that it may not make as much of a difference. Though Naughty Dog is sure to make me change my mind about that at some point :).

 

There's no denying multiplatform titles will mostly look and play the same on both consoles. People who can't admit that are drinking some serious kool aid (from both sides). There will be some exclusive contents thru some deals specially in the first 2 or 3 years. Devs doing so will be paid to say this exclusive content is not possible on the other platform for this and that bull**** reason. But for the most part they will be the same specially when we will be past the first years.

Grand Master

mrp04

Posted
Posted

I'm just disappointed in how weak BOTH systems are. Can't even guarantee 1080p60. The 360 and PS3 were much stronger for their time than these two systems. I have both pre-ordered but I might just go with PS4 because resolution is important to me and PS4 is more likely to give me 1080p. XB1 also costs $100 more because it forces me to buy a dumb camera.

Grand Master

MorganX

Posted
Posted

Given that the PS3 on paper was more powerful than the 360 but IMO I never saw a game that looked miles better on one console vs the other, it would seem that power doesn't have as much to do with the quality of the game as much as some may like to think.

 

Some of that is because the best looking games are optimized and exclusive to a platform. I'd have to say the best looking games, to me, were/are on the PS3. Heavenly Sword, Uncharted Series, Wipeout (could be done on XBox, just hasn't. Though I don't know it could do 60fps, 1080p). Then there's Forza and Gears which somehow look just as good, maybe a hair below. And Even Heavenly Sword for all it's beauty was not optimized and had some performance issues.

 

I still think Gears 1 is one of the best looking games still. Devs, particularly PC devs suffer from resolutionitis IMO. Too much emphasis on pixels and polygons and not enough on art, models, and textures.

Grand Master

spaceelf

Posted
Posted

Devs, particularly PC devs suffer from resolutionitis IMO. Too much emphasis on pixels and polygons and not enough on art, models, and textures.

There are technical reasons for this.  With the PC it's easier to push higher res content than more assets.

 

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/2

 

This may or may not be relevant in a few years, but I'd suspect it's holding everything back.

Grand Master

vcfan

Posted
Posted

I'm just disappointed in how weak BOTH systems are. Can't even guarantee 1080p60. The 360 and PS3 were much stronger for their time than these two systems. I have both pre-ordered but I might just go with PS4 because resolution is important to me and PS4 is more likely to give me 1080p. XB1 also costs $100 more because it forces me to buy a dumb camera.

kinda ironic that the only confirmed games that are running at 1080p60fps on real hardware are on Xbox one

Grand Master

HawkMan

Posted
Posted

And yet again, 40% more power does not translate to 40% more performance, in general closer to 15% provided the same efficiency of the software. And historically not only does MS has far better experience with this, they have historically been able to get far more performance out of the hardware thanks to more efficient software as well.

Grand Master

spaceelf

Posted
Posted

And yet again, 40% more power does not translate to 40% more performance, in general closer to 15% provided the same efficiency of the software. And historically not only does MS has far better experience with this, they have historically been able to get far more performance out of the hardware thanks to more efficient software as well.

I'm not really sold on that theory.  These boxes are x86 and should be pretty easy to get the max out of for single spec machines.

 

I'm not sold on Sony having this massive advantage either, but I can't dismiss that they do have one.

Grand Master

Ambroos

Posted
Posted

The PS4 also has hUMA, the One does not. It's an AMD technology (hardware-based) that allows the CPU and GPU to use the exact same resources in memory without having to copy them. While both consoles have unified memory there still can't be any direct memory sharing (both the CPU and GPU using data at the same address). With hUMA that is possible, so there is no longer any need to copy data in-memory, which may greatly improve graphics performance.

 

However, it requires some work in the engine, so there is no performance difference if developers don't code for hUMA. First games won't benefit from it. But you can count on it that Naughty Dog and other PS-exclusive studios will work on it and it'll produce some impressive results.

 

ExtremeTech had an interesting conclusion. While for launch titles the only difference will be the base hardware differences (shader amount and memory speed) it'll be the long-term developments that will make the differences more apparent. While Microsoft bets heavily on cloud technology Sony has pulled the hardware card, with faster and more advanced components. Both will need developers to code for them, both could make a big difference.

 

(Personally, I have more trust in Sony's more conventional approach. Cloud offloading for real-time rendering is still something I don't think is all that interesting and is limited to a pretty small subset of all the computations needed. More hardware power however is something that everything always benefits from.)

Grand Master

Showan

Posted
Posted

The PS4 also has hUMA, the One does not. It's an AMD technology (hardware-based) that allows the CPU and GPU to use the exact same resources in memory without having to copy them. While both consoles have unified memory there still can't be any direct memory sharing (both the CPU and GPU using data at the same address). With hUMA that is possible, so there is no longer any need to copy data in-memory, which may greatly improve graphics performance.

 

However, it requires some work in the engine, so there is no performance difference if developers don't code for hUMA. First games won't benefit from it. But you can count on it that Naughty Dog and other PS-exclusive studios will work on it and it'll produce some impressive results.

 

ExtremeTech had an interesting conclusion. While for launch titles the only difference will be the base hardware differences (shader amount and memory speed) it'll be the long-term developments that will make the differences more apparent. While Microsoft bets heavily on cloud technology Sony has pulled the hardware card, with faster and more advanced components. Both will need developers to code for them, both could make a big difference.

 

(Personally, I have more trust in Sony's more conventional approach. Cloud offloading for real-time rendering is still something I don't think is all that interesting and is limited to a pretty small subset of all the computations needed. More hardware power however is something that everything always benefits from.)

No huMA PS4 or XB1

http://www.pcper.com/news/General-Tech/Sony-PlayStation-4-PS4-will-NOT-utilize-AMD-hUMA-Kabini-based-SoC

Grand Master

HawkMan

Posted
Posted

 

(Personally, I have more trust in Sony's more conventional approach. Cloud offloading for real-time rendering is still something I don't think is all that interesting and is limited to a pretty small subset of all the computations needed. More hardware power however is something that everything always benefits from.)

Ummm what does that have to do with anything, and again, for the nth time, the Xbox one does cloud assisted computing, not rendering. The ps4 does cloud rendering.

Grand Master

HawkMan

Posted
Posted

I'm not really sold on that theory.  These boxes are x86 and should be pretty easy to get the max out of for single spec machines.

 

I'm not sold on Sony having this massive advantage either, but I can't dismiss that they do have one.

As I said, everything being equal, OS and hardware, except one machine having 40% raw power. It would at best offer 15 to maybe 20% more performance.

Grand Master

Ambroos

Posted
Posted

 

No, you're misreading too. AMD basically said "we shouldn't have said that and can't confirm or deny anything". Chances are the PS4 does have it as it was initially revealed, but AMD overstepped what they could say and tried to make it right again. The PS4 uses some pretty cutting-edge tech (like the GDDR5 as the only memory), has a faster/better SoC and so it's actually quite likely it does have hUMA.

Experienced

blerk

Posted
Posted

Has Xbox even got a final hardware configuration?  :D

Digital Foundry: You're demoing on PC. How's Xbox One coming along?

Drew McCoy: It's great. We have dev kits, tons of them. We have as many people seeing it as possible as often as possible. There are currently no visual rendering effects that aren't on Xbox One versus PC or vice-versa. Performance is always something we're going to be working on right up until we ship. I mean, the hardware's not done yet, the software's not done - our software's not done. There's tons of optimisation to do.

 

 

But on this game - I haven't really looked at it so I don't know - have the devs said anything about the console version game being exclusively for PS4? Just looking at the Wikipedia page I've sorta assumed that it will come to Xbox at some point purely because the game is also on Windows - therefore the devs will have experience coding for a variety of systems, including higher/mid-range rigs equivalent to XB1. 

 

However if it's for PS4 and higher spec PC's only (as opposed to a financial deal with Sony) then I think that his comments have some more significance other than just a general comment on a fact that we all know. 

Grand Master

astropheed Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

The higher end system will usually just be developed to the lowest common denominator. Ultimately, it doesn't matter which is more powerful as developers (unless exclusive devs) will make their engines for the least capable system and port it to the more capable one.

 

Graphics don't matter, not at this point; you won't be able to tell the difference. What matters are the games, what your friends own and availability. I know the 'Console Wars' will rage on, but I assure you it's a made up war in the heads of young people with no idea what truly matters.

 

If you want the best system: ask what your friends want, get the overall consensus and buy that system. This will be the best system for you.

Veteran

Melfster

Posted
Posted

No, you're misreading too. AMD basically said "we shouldn't have said that and can't confirm or deny anything". Chances are the PS4 does have it as it was initially revealed, but AMD overstepped what they could say and tried to make it right again. The PS4 uses some pretty cutting-edge tech (like the GDDR5 as the only memory), has a faster/better SoC and so it's actually quite likely it does have hUMA.

 

 

I really doubt this will the PS4. PC that have this will not be until late 2014.

Grand Master

Ambroos

Posted
Posted

 

No, you're misreading too. AMD basically said "we shouldn't have said that and can't confirm or deny anything". Chances are the PS4 does have it as it was initially revealed, but AMD overstepped what they could say and tried to make it right again. The PS4 uses some pretty cutting-edge tech (like the GDDR5 as the only memory), has a faster/better SoC and so it's actually quite likely it does have hUMA.

 

 

I really doubt this will the PS4. PC that have this will not be until late 2014.

 

 

 

Even the writer of the article that said AMD retracted their statement ended with this:

"I personally feel that its more likely the original statement from AMD (that the PS4 will have the edge with a hUMA design) will turn out to be the truth in the long run..."

 

Believe what you want but I'm going to go with the PS4 having hUMA. Sony and Microsoft most likely got access to tech from AMD that isn't used in PC's yet. It's much harder to put something like hUMA in a PC since you need OS and software support, which is a long process. Consoles don't have that issue since they can be designed around a SoC.

Grand Master

vcfan

Posted
Posted

Even the writer of the article that said AMD retracted their statement ended with this:

"I personally feel that its more likely the original statement from AMD (that the PS4 will have the edge with a hUMA design) will turn out to be the truth in the long run..."

 

Believe what you want but I'm going to go with the PS4 having hUMA. Sony and Microsoft most likely got access to tech from AMD that isn't used in PC's yet. It's much harder to put something like hUMA in a PC since you need OS and software support, which is a long process. Consoles don't have that issue since they can be designed around a SoC.

 

correct. the verge confirms both consoles use it

 

 

That might sound suspiciously vague, but we spoke to AMD and it's actually true. The AMD chips inside the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One take advantage of something called Heterogeneous Unified Memory Access (HUMA), Good for gaming, good for AMDwhich allows both the CPU and GPU to share the same memory pool instead of having to copy data from one before the other can use it. Diana likened it to driving to the corner store to pick up some milk, instead of driving from San Francisco to Los Angeles. It's one of AMD's proposed Heterogeneous System Architecture (HSA) techniques to make the many discrete processors in a system work in tandem to more efficiently share loads.

 

http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/21/4452488/amd-sparks-x86-transition-for-next-gen-game-consoles

Grand Master

spaceelf

Posted
Posted

With all this back and forth I'm not taking anyones word on who has it and who doesn't.  Without a lot more info it's just marketing.

Grand Master

vcfan

Posted
Posted

With all this back and forth I'm not taking anyones word on who has it and who doesn't.  Without a lot more info it's just marketing.

right,could be a bunch of bs. i shouldnt have said the verge confirms, rather, the verge says.

 

there are little details known in the grand scheme of things. we may never know the real actual specs and customizations,and how they work. let the games speak for themselves,its only a few more months.

Grand Master

trooper11

Posted
Posted

This back and forth further illustrates how tough it is to really discuss the hardware in great detail.

 

 

The reason its so easy to bring up the 40% gpu number is because we know the specific info for both gpus.  Talking about the different ram systems, or the specific features of the cpus is much less about facts and more about assumptions or opinions.  That's where you get into 'waste of time' territory. 

 

Neither Sony or MS seem eager to break down every little feature in order for us to talk about this stuff with great detail.  Even if we knew every little feature, there is still the reality of execution.

 

I'll remind everyone that this gen brought us the PS3 and 360, two consoles that had some similarities, but also debated differences.  The PS3 was considered to have the more power cpu and the 360 had the more powerful gpu.  There was also a question about how each console handled ram.  Even with the more power gpu of the 360, there have been exclusive PS3 games that many would say 'look better' than any 360 game. 

 

The moral of the story is that you shouldn't worry too much about all of these fine details.  You should look to the final content/features produced and buy one or both consoles based on that.

Mentor

JonnyLH

Posted
Posted

Blanket statement made on TFLOPs, not as newsworthy as one of us guys making the same remark.

 

The proof is in the pudding and I haven't seen any pudding which is worth my while on the PS4. The only game so-far which looks pretty is Killzone, but no thanks to 15-20fps drops.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing