PS4 and Xbox One resolution / frame rate discussion

[GotBored]

On 12/12/2015, 2:09:54, theyarecomingforyou said:

Can you really not see that those two statements make the same point? I don't understand how you think they're different. As for the IGN list, that is the most comprehensive comparison of the two platforms that we have. You haven't provided any evidence that 'most of the games on the Xbox One are 900p or higher'. That statement may be true—something I fully accept—but you haven't provided any evidence to support it. Based on the information we have the PS4 consistently manages 1080p, whereas the XB1 consistently doesn't. Either way it is indisputable that the PS4 has fewer games running at 900p or below. In fact I'm not aware of a single game on the PS4 that runs below 900p, whereas there are numerous games on XB1 that do.

 

As for your claim about developers, there are those on either side of the debate—some claiming the difference is 'significant', others claiming the difference is 'minimal'—and it's a subjective argument so we're not going to make any progress there. All I would point out is that the numbers speak for themselves.

lol I don't get it either, you said the same thing in the two separate posts.

 

@Kvally If "most XB1 games don't run at 1080p" then "most XB1 games run at 900p or less" which are the two separate posts you quoted from theyarecomingforyou. These two separate posts aren't contradicting each other they are two seperate ways to word the same thing.

 

I also checked the ign list and verified it is true, PS4 has no games below 900p.

 

Xbox One on the other hand has 12 games below 900p (Mostly at 720p).

[GotBored]

On 12/9/2015, 2:04:56, fusi0n said:

I use my Xbox One as a Hulu\NetFlix Box.. PS4 for gaming.. 

The PS4 also has Hulu and Netflix. You could probably keep the Xbox One if you like the MS exclusives that are out for it but if not I don't really see the point in keeping it if its only purpose is for hulu and netflix. I'm guessing you only use it for these things because you want to make use out of it and not keep it as an expensive paper weight but I'd suggest selling it on ebay or something if you don't game on it.

[Hedon]

On December 11, 2015 at 9:09:54 PM, theyarecomingforyou said:

Can you really not see that those two statements make the same point? I don't understand how you think they're different. As for the IGN list, that is the most comprehensive comparison of the two platforms that we have. You haven't provided any evidence that 'most of the games on the Xbox One are 900p or higher'. That statement may be true—something I fully accept—but you haven't provided any evidence to support it. Based on the information we have the PS4 consistently manages 1080p, whereas the XB1 consistently doesn't. Either way it is indisputable that the PS4 has fewer games running at 900p or below. In fact I'm not aware of a single game on the PS4 that runs below 900p, whereas there are numerous games on XB1 that do.

 

As for your claim about developers, there are those on either side of the debate—some claiming the difference is 'significant', others claiming the difference is 'minimal'—and it's a subjective argument so we're not going to make any progress there. All I would point out is that the numbers speak for themselves.

The numbers do indeed speak for themselves.

[Polonium]

The numbers may speak for themselves and I think we all know that the PS4 is indeed the more powerful console, however .... The Xbox One isn't a bad console in its own right. It has some great exclusives. 

 

Surely that's all that matters, no?

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

7 minutes ago, Polonium said:

The numbers may speak for themselves and I think we all know that the PS4 is indeed the more powerful console, however .... The Xbox One isn't a bad console in its own right. It has some great exclusives. 

 

Surely that's all that matters, no?

Hear hear!

 

The only thing MS need to learn for the next console is packed in peripherals shouldn't deduct from the console internals budget as consoles aren't modular and need to retain the same CPU/GPU and memory for a lifetime.

 

I don't doubt the next consoles will probably be identical on the CPU/GPU and memory front. Or insanely close. Kinect 3.0 isn't going to be getting bundled

[fusi0n]

9 hours ago, GotBored said:

The PS4 also has Hulu and Netflix. You could probably keep the Xbox One if you like the MS exclusives that are out for it but if not I don't really see the point in keeping it if its only purpose is for hulu and netflix. I'm guessing you only use it for these things because you want to make use out of it and not keep it as an expensive paper weight but I'd suggest selling it on ebay or something if you don't game on it.

I don't mind keeping it around.. I like the PS4 better for gaming.. and I really hate the interface of even the new Xbox.. but, it's still a better media machine.. Also, my wife likes just dance.. lol

[Hedon]

On 12/13/2015, 7:33:31, Polonium said:

The numbers may speak for themselves and I think we all know that the PS4 is indeed the more powerful console, however .... The Xbox One isn't a bad console in its own right. It has some great exclusives. 

 

Surely that's all that matters, no?

Indeed, there is no disputing that the PS4 is more powerful on paper when looking at the GPU and the type of RAM it has. Luckily, the differences between the consoles have been marginal, which is good for gamers. The Xbox One has amazing exclusives (as does the PS4), and FUN games to PLAY.

[BajiRav]

On ‎12‎/‎11‎/‎2015‎ ‎6‎:‎07‎:‎29‎, theyarecomingforyou said:

That's because the difference between the X360 and PS3 was extremely small. The difference this generation is much greater, with some games running at half the framerate or half the resolution on XB1 versus the PS4. This topic is simply a way to have all performance related topics in one place, as otherwise there would be a separate topic for each game. If you don't like this topic then just ignore it - it really is that simple.

If my memory serves me right, PS3 had overall poor image quality almost all the time for first 3-4 years in addition to lower resolution/fps. It wasn't "extremely small" in reality even though PS3's theoretical horsepower was much greater.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

7 minutes ago, BajiRav said:

If my memory serves me right, PS3 had overall poor image quality almost all the time for first 3-4 years in addition to lower resolution/fps. It wasn't "extremely small" in reality even though PS3's theoretical horsepower was much greater.

Split memory architecture and a weaker GPU than the 360s. CELL was good for CPU tasks but I guess like comparison to this gens ESRam bottleneck and weaker GPU most multiplatform devs will simply favour ease of development for results. The devs like ND who did find ways to produce the best results had to bend over backwords to do so, which is fine if you're 1st party, but 3rd party devs aren't going to do that. So in many ways it's really just what we are seeing all over again this gen. At least MS didn't go and fund proprietary chips like Sony did for the CELL. That was the biggest mistake of all.

[Polonium]

1 hour ago, Kvally said:

Indeed, there is no disputing that the PS4 is more powerful on paper when looking at the GPU and the type of RAM it has. Luckily, the differences between the consoles have been marginal, which is good for gamers. The Xbox One has amazing exclusives (as does the PS4), and FUN games to PLAY.

For the most part, yes the differences are indeed marginal, so it's all good, especially if you only own the Xbox One. Thankfully I own both so my Xbox One is mostly used for exclusives with the odd cross platform title thrown in (I share my account with a family member so games work out much cheaper).

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Gravity Rush looking like another good remaster from Bluepoint

 

 

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-gravity-rush-remastered-on-ps4

[1337ish]

11 hours ago, Audioboxer said:

Gravity Rush looking like another good remaster from Bluepoint

 

 

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-gravity-rush-remastered-on-ps4

In all honesty though is a remake really relevant to this thread considering its not on xbox one?

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

6 hours ago, ZeroHour said:

In all honesty though is a remake really relevant to this thread considering its not on xbox one?

Back in October you and others were discussing Halo 5, it's not on PS4?

[1337ish]

8 hours ago, Audioboxer said:

Back in October you and others were discussing Halo 5, it's not on PS4?

Halo's res and frame rate as a first party game were relevant, posting a news snippet about a new game nothing similar. 

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

16 minutes ago, ZeroHour said:

Halo's res and frame rate as a first party game were relevant, posting a news snippet about a new game nothing similar. 

What? Gravity Rush is first party, SCEJ make it. 

[Hedon]

I don't know what seems to be the problem. The thread says you can post PS4 and X1 resolution/frame rate stuff here. Looks like that is what Audioboxer did. Unless I missed something.

[SnoopZ]

Can't view this thread after page 91, has it all bben deleted or something?

[SnoopZ]

Access is now fixed.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Quote

In terms of the core rendering set-up, perhaps unsurprisingly it's business as usual for PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. Just like the original game, PlayStation 4 runs natively at 1080p, while the Xbox equivalent settles at 900p. As you might expect, the difference in resolution leads to slightly softer imagery on Xbox One, but the gap between the two platforms isn't especially noticeable during gameplay. The post-process anti-aliasing works well in smoothing off the jaggies, with only minor aliasing and pixel-popping issues - even on the lower resolution Xbox One version. Certainly, the presentation overall is a significant upgrade over the 720p we saw in Star Wars Battlefront on the Microsoft console.

 

Quote

Beyond resolution, the core art and effects work are basically interchangeable in Garden Warfare 2, with identical quality levels across almost all aspects of the game's visual make-up, with a decent level of texture filtering in place on both games. However, based on the beta, PS4 seems to have a noticeable streaming advantage: higher quality assets and shadows load in more quickly during cut-scenes and gameplay, which translate to slightly less visible pop-in in areas such as the beginning of a match, or after respawning back into the environment.

 

Quote

It's only when the engine is under heavy, sustained load that more noticeable differences start to appear, with PS4 carving out a lead over the Xbox One version in the most demanding scenes. With around a dozen players occupying a single area, the volume of particle effects in particular appears to cause issues, bringing with it an impact in controller response. Aiming feels a lot heavier and it's harder to shoot more accurately with all the chaos kicking off on-screen.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-hands-on-with-garden-warfare-2

 

 

 

 

Regardless of graphical differences, I hope it is as good as the first. The biggest game I was totally wrong about criticizing this generation. Went on to be one of my most played games, and I platinumed it.

[wakjak]

Quantum Break seems to be running at 720p! How devastating!

 

 

 

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

 

 

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

You can't make me feel buyers remorse now Andy. Team double-dip anyhow. 

[tjtremor7865]

not counting the resolution, I find the overall production quality is way higher on the PS4 vs xbox one

As for resolution you can look at Quantum Break fiasco where it's 720p and even lower for reflections and shadows and impacts gameplay and production quality

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Doom is as you'd expect

 

 

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

It's absolutely stunning on PC