PS4 and Xbox One resolution / frame rate discussion


Recommended Posts

What if its not a problem with DirectX as much as their sdk/drivers?

I mean I know everyone is giddy over Mantle as the replacement for DirectX, but is it really so terrible? But lets assume your right and DirectX is fundamentally flawed. Well then MS can't fix it and its over. Or they adopt Mantle as well and just bow out of the whole api race.

 

Because it's a connected problem, you can certainly work on your driver to minimise the driver overhead that exists, but the key is trying to avoid incurring overhead in the first place. Take a look at NVidia's talk at Steam Dev Days about this very subject.

 

Microsoft -can- fix DirectX, but to do it they're going to have to stop trying to use it as leverage to try and push OS sales (thus fragmenting the support base) and iterate faster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

June 2013

http://www.videogamer.com/xboxone/metal_gear_solid_5_the_phantom_pain/news/ps4_and_xbox_one_power_difference_is_minimal_says_kojima.html

Feb 2014

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/kojima-playstation-4-can-render-1080p-at-60fps-with-room-to-spare/1100-6417709/

Interesting where both console makers choose to drop their bags of money. Pick your poison. Better looking games vs better games period. The latter has historically proven to be the better choice.

 

What? Better looking games vs better games? It's the same game on both :unsure:

 

Either way, this topic is for discussing the technical differences, not the subjective opinions you have of them. It is also not for the purpose of posting conspiracy theories so no more "bags of money" talk please.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ends up being what you think is a "better game period".   Plenty of PS3 titles I thought looked way better story/game wise than Xbox360 games.  The latter is personal choice.

 

The minute anyone starts to argue about 'better games' is the minute everyone should walk away from the conversation since its a dead end. 

Because it's a connected problem, you can certainly work on your driver to minimise the driver overhead that exists, but the key is trying to avoid incurring overhead in the first place. Take a look at NVidia's talk at Steam Dev Days about this very subject.

 

Microsoft -can- fix DirectX, but to do it they're going to have to stop trying to use it as leverage to try and push OS sales (thus fragmenting the support base) and iterate faster.

 

I dont know if its even worth trying to fix it honestly. Since directx is flawed, maybe MS decides that its not worth fighting the battle anymore and just adopts what the majority want.

 

Either way, this topic is for discussing the technical differences, not the subjective opinions you have of them. It is also not for the purpose of posting conspiracy theories so no more "bags of money" talk please.

Conspiracies emerge due to a lack of facts to destroy them. Happens all the time on the interneet :laugh:

It wouldnt even be suggested if it wasn't for the screenshots looking as they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What? Better looking games vs better games? It's the same game on both :unsure:

better games = multiplats+exclusives.

 

Either way, this topic is for discussing the technical differences, not the subjective opinions you have of them. It is also not for the purpose of posting conspiracy theories so no more "bags of money" talk please.

did I miss a post where the topic of discussion changed to technical differences?

 

I have created and pinned this topic for you all to discuss anything and everything related to the PS4 and Xbox One resolution / FPS news and developments

Link to comment
Share on other sites

better games = multiplats+exclusives.

 

did I miss a post where the topic of discussion changed to technical differences?

 

 

You answered your own question unless you stopped reading the sentence midway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont know if its even worth trying to fix it honestly. Since directx is flawed, maybe MS decides that its not worth fighting the battle anymore and just adopts what the majority want.

 

I'm not so sure it's flawed as much as it's the product of corporate arrogance and complacency. If Microsoft changed their approach to DirectX and took it in the direction of a curated-but-open spec the end result could result in a better API in a shorter timeframe.

 

But in all likelihood any revisions they put out will probably be tied to the next Windows release, shutting out the vast majority of the market, making the new version impotent, and handing whoever wins the Mantle Vs OpenGL battle the ultimate victory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure it's flawed as much as it's the product of corporate arrogance and complacency. If Microsoft changed their approach to DirectX and took it in the direction of a curated-but-open spec the end-result could result in a better API in a shorter timeframe.

 

But in all likelihood any revisions they put out will probably be tied to the next Windows release, shutting out the vast majority of the market, making the new version impotent, and handing whoever wins the Mantle Vs OpenGL battle the ultimate victory.

Maybe. I guess if the new team under the new CEO is going to breathe some fresh air into the company and get them all working together instead of competing, we might see DirectX take a positive turn. I do think MS might be moving in the direction you suggest, not artificially tying api to one version of windows. Windows itself seems to be moving away from monolithic versions every 3 years, so maybe it will happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You answered your own question unless you stopped reading the sentence midway.

nope. pretty sure im discussing something on the recent developments on resolution of a certain game for PS4/Xbox One,which by way of topic is permitted. Unless of course, if you didn't understand my post I can clarify it for you, because you were confused when I mentioned better games. Better games meant a better games library. Better looking games means higher resolution games or better framerate. Bags of money means where these companies decide to spend. My post basically was saying, its interesting how both companies decide to spend, towards giving an edge to multiplats on their hardware, vs betterment of the games library.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nope. pretty sure im discussing something on the recent developments on resolution of a certain game for PS4/Xbox One,which by way of topic is permitted. Unless of course, if you didn't understand my post I can clarify it for you, because you were confused when I mentioned better games. Better games meant a better games library. Better looking games means higher resolution games or better framerate. Bags of money means where these companies decide to spend.

 

You are forgetting I can see the post you made in reply to firey and that is not what you were discussing, not to mention the vulgar quip you added to the end of the post.

 

So again, I will reiterate, this topic is for technical discussion, not subjective opinions on what is a good game nor for conspiracy theories of money exchanging hands in favour of better performance/patches or games as a whole.

 

Back on topic

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe. I guess if the new team under the new CEO is going to breathe some fresh air into the company and get them all working together instead of competing, we might see DirectX take a positive turn. I do think MS might be moving in the direction you suggest, not artificially tying api to one version of windows. Windows itself seems to be moving away from monolithic versions every 3 years, so maybe it will happen.

 

Moving away from monolithic releases is only half of the problem though, in fact I would say it's probably closer to 25% of it.

 

Fragmentation and platform support are the big negative factors right now, the newer you go with DirectX versions the smaller and smaller the share (and thus supported customers) base gets. Not to parrot SDD talks too heavily but Valve's OS data for markets like China are shocking (Insanely high XP usage on modern hardware), these are millions of customers you simply cannot reach with newer DirectX versions, but a driver update later and they can have the latest revisions of OpenGL their hardware supports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moving away from monolithic releases is only half of the problem though, in fact I would say it's probably closer to 25% of it.

 

Fragmentation and platform support are the big negative factors right now, the newer you go with DirectX versions the smaller and smaller the share (and thus supported customers) base gets. Not to parrot SDD talks too heavily but Valve's OS data for markets like China are shocking (Insanely high XP usage on modern hardware), these are millions of customers you simply cannot reach with newer DirectX versions, but a driver update later and they can have the latest revisions of OpenGL their hardware supports.

 

Yeah, I'm not sure how MS deals with that other than opening up DirectX in a way that allows them to build on it instead of replace it in every new version of windows.  Make it more modular I suppose. 

 

As long as the api is available for use on multiple OSes to game devs, MS can still leverage new features within the newest Windows if they want. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, didn't read through it all but as someone with both its obvious PS4 has sharper visuals. Its obvious also that all the games we have now on both are mediocre carry overs from lesser tech, yet still manage to look nice. Even the ugliest of the bunch, Dead Rising 3, is clearly beyond the capabilities of a 360 or PS3.

We are mostly experienced PC gamers here, so lets get real. One look at the console specs and you know this resolution nonsense is due to lazy or ill prepared developers pushed by panicky platform holders. There's no reason these machines can't easily handle above 1080, I mean seriously, 18 and 20 core CPUGPUs, 8GB main memory, 8GB flash assist/2GB DDR3 secondary memory? That's more than enough. Give it some time.

Things are already better than they were at the start of previous "generations".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not big on graphics, but man... if this is true, it's a HUGE difference. :/

 

XBOX 360 and X1 really makes you wonder. Yes there are differences (of course) but they are so minor.

 

PS4 so far is on a different league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

XBOX 360 and X1 really makes you wonder. Yes there are differences (of course) but they are so minor.

 

PS4 so far is on a different league.

 

 

Well if we are not seeing differences in the 360 and X1, its not the hardware at fault, we know that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, didn't read through it all but as someone with both its obvious PS4 has sharper visuals. Its obvious also that all the games we have now on both are mediocre carry overs from lesser tech, yet still manage to look nice. Even the ugliest of the bunch, Dead Rising 3, is clearly beyond the capabilities of a 360 or PS3.

We are mostly experienced PC gamers here, so lets get real. One look at the console specs and you know this resolution nonsense is due to lazy or ill prepared developers pushed by panicky platform holders. There's no reason these machines can't easily handle above 1080, I mean seriously, 18 and 20 core CPUGPUs, 8GB main memory, 8GB flash assist/2GB DDR3 secondary memory? That's more than enough. Give it some time.

Things are already better than they were at the start of previous "generations".

 

We're told the XB1 GPU is the equivalent of the AMD 7770. I have that GPU in my PC and it can run BF4 at 1080 on all High settings at an average of 50FPS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're told the XB1 GPU is the equivalent of the AMD 7770. I have that GPU in my PC and it can run BF4 at 1080 on all High settings at an average of 50FPS. 

 

 

Yeah, which is why its hard ot believe the issues are entirely related to a lack of hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CPU in these consoles isn't as good as good as the desktop CPUs most of us are running, keep that in mind. The console GPUs are probably getting taxed more due to that with having more work offloaded to them to compensate on the CPU front.

I mean you can't just say my mobile phone is better than my PC because it is quad core and my PC is dual :p My PC actually is still dual, its the lower end i-whatever from Intel which is still dual. I'll look it up just now.

Edit: i3-2100.

Then there is the memory hungry operating systems. Although those will get more efficient, MS do have a bigger task with their "three OS" system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah right so do you think having the DDR3 in there is a wiser decision because of all the media functionality whereas cus the PS4 is really only just forcing gfx down it doesnt matter to much? Do you think MS deliberately designed the system that way or because they thought the GDDR5 would be to expensive to be viable (as rumored)?

The RAM used for media stuff is seperated from the usable RAM reserved for games; and the exact same thing applies to the PS4. They too reserve 2-3 GB of RAM for the system OS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're told the XB1 GPU is the equivalent of the AMD 7770. I have that GPU in my PC and it can run BF4 at 1080 on all High settings at an average of 50FPS. 

To be fair on the PC there are a lot of overheads to consider. Mid-tier APIs on the CPU which translate the requests to the correct GPU architecture and OS overheads. Consoles are in a situation which is more like Mantle, and the performance gains there with the correct situations were massive.

 

Personally, I never see the argument between comparing parts between console and PC because they're entirely different environments to work with even with the common base architecture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CPU in these consoles isn't as good as good as the desktop CPUs most of us are running, keep that in mind. The console GPUs are probably getting taxed more due to that with having more work offloaded to them to compensate on the CPU front.

I mean you can't just say my mobile phone is better than my PC because it is quad core and my PC is dual :p My PC actually is still dual, its the lower end i-whatever from Intel which is still dual. I'll look it up just now.

Edit: i3-2100.

Then there is the memory hungry operating systems. Although those will get more efficient, MS do have a bigger task with their "three OS" system.

 

 

 

Do any tests show that the AMD 8 core cpus are a bottleneck for the gpus being used in either console?  I agree that the cpu is not as good as say a mid range intel cpu, but is it really a bottleneck on the consoles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do any tests show that the AMD 8 core cpus are a bottleneck for the gpus being used in either console?  I agree that the cpu is not as good as say a mid range intel cpu, but is it really a bottleneck on the consoles?

 

I wouldn't say bottleneck, more so a pointer that if you're going to start comparing these consoles to your PC keep in mind on your PC developers can offload more to the CPU in order to produce better results with "older" hardware. On a PC with the room, airflow and cooling options you can have a pretty beastly CPU, where as these consoles need to look for chips more suitable for laptops/mobile devices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.