Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

If you want a next generation gaming console, then you want a PlayStation 4--and not an Xbox One

245

Comments

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 Member UncommonPosts: 2,770
    How will a modified Ouya compare?
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,258
    Originally posted by mmoguy43
    How will a modified Ouya compare?

    That's like asking how a first generation netbook will compare to a modern high end gaming rig.  They're entirely different classes of products built for entirely different purposes.

  • Slappy1Slappy1 Member Posts: 458
    As little as I play consoles now,it doesn't really matter to me.I'm quite happy with my 360 and have a back log of games.PC is where I'm at 95%+ of the time and I don't need better graphic's than what the 360 provides.

    Some day I'm going to put a sword through your eye and out the back of your skull!

    Arya Stark

  • TokkenTokken Member RarePosts: 2,537


    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Microsoft's long-awaited Xbox One reveal finally came yesterday.  The rumored hardware specs had long been rumored to be underwhelming compared to the PlayStation 4, and Microsoft didn't even make a token effort at dispelling such rumors.  Add in that Microsoft may not even have a cost of production advantage over Sony, and you have the makings of a disaster.So how does Microsoft marketing handle this in their reveal?  Basically, they announce a game console, but don't want to talk much about gaming.  Instead, they focus more on, look at all the other things that the Xbox One can do.  Oh, and yeah, it can play games, too.  We think.It actually reminded me some of the launch of Intel HD Graphics.  Intel marketing said, we're focused like a laser on a bunch of things that aren't gaming.  Now, that's too harsh to Microsoft; considered in isolation (or compared to a Wii U), the Xbox One will be a capable gaming machine, unlike the dismal failure known as Intel HD Graphics.  But if your gaming console is arguably better at games than the competition's, you're going to shout that to the rooftops.  That Microsoft didn't even make a token effort here is revealing.Let's look at hardware.  Both the PlayStation 4 and the Xbox One have 8 AMD Jaguar cores, likely clocked at or a little below 2 GHz.  So they're basically identical there.Both use AMD GCN graphics, but the PlayStation 4 has 18 GCN CUs, while the Xbox One only has 12.  Both are clocked at 800 MHz, so the PS4 has a 50% GPU advantage.  Advantage Sony, right?Not so fast.  A Radeon HD 7870 is a lot faster than a Radeon HD 7770, and a GeForce GTX 660 is a lot faster than a GeForce GTX 650 Ti, but the latter card in both comparisons surely have an important role because they're cheaper.  All that Microsoft has to do is use its cheaper hardware as an opportunity to price its console cheaper than Sony's, right?That's plausible until you look at memory.  Both the PlayStation 4 and the Xbox One have a 256-bit memory bus.  But the PlayStation 4 uses GDDR5 memory, while the Xbox One uses DDR3.  That means that the PS4 has vastly more memory bandwidth.  But we already knew that the PS4 was faster, so this also makes the Xbox One cheaper, right?Well, no.  While DDR3 does tend to be cheaper than GDDR5, the Xbox One is strongly rumored to be using 2133 MHz DDR3 memory--that is, the very top bin of DDR3 that memory manufacturers sell.  Will that still be cheaper than GDDR5?  Maybe, but if so, likely not by all that much.Now, it's pretty obvious where Microsoft is going with this.  While 2133 MHz will be top bin DDR3, it will be bottom bin DDR4.  A year or two after launch, Microsoft probably does a die shrink to 20 nm and shifts the memory from DDR3 to DDR4.  Will bottom bin DDR4 be cheaper than high bin GDDR5?  You bet it will.  Eventually.But there's still the problem that traditionally, any card using DDR3 memory really shouldn't be considered a gaming card.  You could at various times make a case for a DDR3 version of a Radeon HD 4670, 5570, 5670, or 6670 as a budget card, but you don't want to pay $400 for a gaming console with all of the GPU performance of a $60 budget card.While there is a big difference between dual channel DDR3 at 1600 MHz (like the budget video cards use) and quad channel DDR3 at 2133 MHz (as the Xbox One is rumored to use), the Xbox One would still very much be crippled by memory bandwidth.  So Microsoft tried to fix this by adding 32 MB of ESRAM to the die, with something like 100 GB/s of bandwidth to the GPU.  That gets it total memory bandwidth in the same ballpark as the PS4.  Yay, Xbox One?Well, no.  With the PS4, you can use the memory bandwidth any way you want and it's there and it works.  With the Xbox One, you need to use a majority of your memory bandwidth from a small 32 MB pool rather than the normal 8 GB if you want to take advantage of the memory bandwidth.  Anything that the Xbox One can do here, the PlayStation 4 can mimic pretty well, but the converse is wildly false.To be fair to Microsoft, using a large fraction of your memory bandwidth from a small 32 MB pool actually is realistic for a lot of games.  Every single time you run a pixel/fragment shader with the depth test enabled--which typically means, most of the time that you run a shader, period--you have to read from the depth buffer.  If you pass the depth test, you write to it as well and also write to the frame buffer.  Meanwhile, post-processing effects involve reading very heavily from a frame buffer-like object used as an intermediate step.  At 1080p, the depth buffer is just shy of 8 MB, as is a frame buffer.  With one depth buffer, a front frame buffer, a back frame buffer, and an extra frame buffer available for use as an internal step in a multi-pass rendering algorithm, you total just a shade under 32 MB needed for the very heavily accessed data.  The 32 MB of ESRAM is not a coincidence.But what happens if you need larger buffers?  For example, if you want a monitor resolution higher than 1080p?  Or if you want stereoscopic 3D?  Or MSAA, SSAA, or any other form of anti-aliasing that computes multiple pixels for each pixel of the final image and then averages them?  (FXAA, MLAA, and other forms of post-processing anti-aliasing are fine here.)  Well then, suddenly you need a lot more than 32 MB for your very heavily accessed buffers--meaning that the fraction of your memory reads from ESRAM drops precipitously and you suddenly have a massive memory bandwidth bottleneck that the PS4 won't have.But what about the cost of production?  The first problem here is that on-die ESRAM greatly bloats the die size--and hence the cost of production.  Microsoft is claiming that the die has 5 billion transistors.  For comparison, that's substantially more than the 4.3 billion of a Radeon HD 7970 or the 3.5 billion of a GeForce GTX 680.  Some have estimated that the ESRAM accounts for around 1/3 of the transistors in the SoC of the Xbox One.  With cost of production proportional to die size, the main chip in the Xbox One might actually cost more than that of the PlayStation 4.That would leave Microsoft with a much slower console but without a big price advantage.  So why did they go that route?  Well, it is lower power, for one.  Even if it's not cheaper today, it could still become cheaper eventually, as ESRAM will probably scale very well with future die shrinks and DDR4 will eventually be cheaper.But there's also the possibility that Microsoft was counting on having a memory capacity advantage.  Early rumors put the PlayStation 4 at 4 GB of total memory, not the 8 GB that Sony announced.  One channel of GDDR5 memory can only have four memory chips attached.  With 2 Gb (256 MB) as the largest size of GDDR5 memory chips available, that caps you at 1 GB per channel.  Having four memory channels means that Sony is capped at 4 GB of total memory.Unless, of course, someone comes out with 4 Gb (512 MB) GDDR5 memory chips.  Not coincidentally, Hynix has promised to do exactly that later this year, just in time to be used in the PlayStation 4.  Samsung and Micron will presumably do so as well, and probably at about the same time, though I haven't seen any announcement on it.  (That's not to say that Samsung and Micron haven't already announced it, but only that I haven't seen such an announcement.)Also, don't count on this ending up like the Xbox 360 versus PlayStation 3, in which the latter was theoretically faster in peak performance, but much harder to exploit the hardware.  If anything, it will probably be easier to exploit the full capabilities of the PlayStation 4 than the Xbox One, not harder, because there's no need to fuss with ESRAM capacity.


    WALL of text, UGH!

    I'll buy a PS4 rather than the XBOX one. I didn't need a wall of text to figure that out!

    Make PvE GREAT Again!
  • TerranahTerranah Member UncommonPosts: 3,575

    Before I saw the Xbox One reveal, I was absolutely sure I would be getting it.  After the reveal, I'm absolutely sure I will not be getting it.

     

    That opens up an opportunity for PS4, but I will still be a PC gamer regardless.

  • grndzrogrndzro Member UncommonPosts: 1,156
    Originally posted by Tokken


    WALL of text, UGH!

    I'll buy a PS4 rather than the XBOX one. I didn't need a wall of text to figure that out!

    Lol Quiz I told you a caffeine IV drip was a bad idea.

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 Member UncommonPosts: 2,770
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by mmoguy43
    How will a modified Ouya compare?

    That's like asking how a first generation netbook will compare to a modern high end gaming rig.  They're entirely different classes of products built for entirely different purposes.

    image

  • ShakyMoShakyMo Member CommonPosts: 7,207
    Originally posted by grndzro

    PS4 and Xbox have common architecture this time so there will be very few titles that are not on both consoles that are from independent developers. 

    Sony has more flagship titles and more powerful hardware. PS4 has GDDR5 while Xbox has DDR3. With that said PS4 will dominate because Sony pays far more attention to RPG developers. FPS developers will make their games for both platforms. Sony charges less for it's online components and IMO has better controllers. Sony also has BR allowing even the most absurdly large titles to be on 1 disc.

    i doubt it, apparently microsoft is going heavy on xbox exclusives deals with the new console, i think we will see more "only on XXX console" with this generation.

    Regarding online, yeah if people make console mmos they are far more likely to appear on ps4 than the xbox due to microsofts draconian rules with putting out updates and the xbox live subscription.

  • ElRenmazuoElRenmazuo Member RarePosts: 5,361
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Originally posted by grndzro

    PS4 and Xbox have common architecture this time so there will be very few titles that are not on both consoles that are from independent developers. 

    Sony has more flagship titles and more powerful hardware. PS4 has GDDR5 while Xbox has DDR3. With that said PS4 will dominate because Sony pays far more attention to RPG developers. FPS developers will make their games for both platforms. Sony charges less for it's online components and IMO has better controllers. Sony also has BR allowing even the most absurdly large titles to be on 1 disc.

    i doubt it, apparently microsoft is going heavy on xbox exclusives deals with the new console

    i bet most of those exclusives will be kinect games

  • ShakyMoShakyMo Member CommonPosts: 7,207

    also microsoft is doing this, worth bearing in mind if you like to swap games with your friends once you've finished them.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22623010

  • ShakyMoShakyMo Member CommonPosts: 7,207
    Originally posted by tkreep
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Originally posted by grndzro

    PS4 and Xbox have common architecture this time so there will be very few titles that are not on both consoles that are from independent developers. 

    Sony has more flagship titles and more powerful hardware. PS4 has GDDR5 while Xbox has DDR3. With that said PS4 will dominate because Sony pays far more attention to RPG developers. FPS developers will make their games for both platforms. Sony charges less for it's online components and IMO has better controllers. Sony also has BR allowing even the most absurdly large titles to be on 1 disc.

    i doubt it, apparently microsoft is going heavy on xbox exclusives deals with the new console

    i bet most of those exclusives will be kinect games

    http://www.shacknews.com/article/79308/microsoft-wont-cater-to-traditional-desktop-pc-gamers-with-first

  • RemyVorenderRemyVorender Member RarePosts: 3,865
    Originally posted by grndzro
    Originally posted by remyburke
    Next-Gen Console = Upgrade your PC.

    If you want to play rpg's then a console is the only way. Unless you wait 10 years for an emulator.

     

    Or a year for the PC version to come out with bug fixes and improvements.

    Currently playing: Destiny 2, Apex Legends and MTG: Arena

    ==============================================================

    Played: AA, AC1, AC2, Aion, AO, AoC, BDO, CO, CoX, DAoC, DCUO, EVE, EQ1, EQ2, ESO, Fallen Earth, FFXI, FFXIV, GW1, GW2, Istaria, L2, LoTRO, MxO, Neverwinter, Rift, RoE, Ryzom, Shadowbane, SWG, SWTOR, TERA, TSW, WAR, WoW, WURM...and a bunch of others not worth mentioning.

    ===============================================================

    Joined - July 2004

  • aRtFuLThinGaRtFuLThinG Member UncommonPosts: 1,387
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    They will both be bad compared to a current mid / high end pc though.
     

    ^ This.

     

    I wouldn't go with console if I ever want performance.

     

    Console is for ease of access more than anything.

  • NERVergoproxyNERVergoproxy Member UncommonPosts: 1,500
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    They will both be bad compared to a current mid / high end pc though.

    Say they cost £300, you can build a better pc for £600. Now people might think, double the price.

    But then current old gen console games cost £45, where as Aaa pc games cost £30.

    So within a year, if you buy a game a month, your better pc is costing you £420 when you take into account what you save on game prices minus the markup to Sony / microsoft

    So if you buy a lot of games the pc soon works out cheaper, and will be more powerfull and will let you do all that non gaming stuff better than a console. And that's not counting all the steam sales, indie scene etc..

     

    OMG u just blew my brains!!! people dont usually get that technically or else everyone would be saving real money. Though I agree with you.

  • sam7dustsam7dust Member Posts: 6
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by Nhoj1983

    Price.. If xbox is 50-100 dollars less than ps4 it'll be far more tempting a product than the ps4.  We don't know where the game's going to be played here and this leads to value.

    While we don't know how Microsoft and Sony will price their respective consoles (Sony is rumored to have a launch price of $425, though prices often change later), the amount they charge is related to the amount that it costs to build the consoles.  There, it's not clear that Microsoft will have any cost of production advantage at all.  If they do, it surely won't be as large as $50, let alone $100.

    Sony should have the advantage here if hardware is somewhat equal in costs, which it seems to be.  The reason being the devaluation of the Japanese Yen.  The 425 price rumored back in February was when the yen was around 90yen = to 1 dollar.  The yen is now 102 = to 1 dollar.  It could be up to 110 to 1 dollar when the ps4 is launched.  

    What does this mean?  Sony can sell the PS4 in the U.S at a discounted rate.  If Yen is 90 then $425 is equal to 38000 yen.  If Yen is 110 then $345 equals the same amount of Yen. Sony along with many Japanese companies will have the power to undercut the competition with Yen devaluation.  If Sony uses this to its advantage its game over for Xbox,  price will be the tipping point for all those on the fence IMO.

  • ElRenmazuoElRenmazuo Member RarePosts: 5,361
    Final Fantasy 15 will be on PS4 nuff said
  • GinazGinaz Member RarePosts: 2,237
    Originally posted by grndzro
    Originally posted by remyburke
    Next-Gen Console = Upgrade your PC.

    If you want to play rpg's then a console is the only way. Unless you wait 10 years for an emulator.

     

    Skyrim, Fallout, the Witcher (among many others) say you're very wrong.

    Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?

    Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.

  • ElRenmazuoElRenmazuo Member RarePosts: 5,361
    Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    They will both be bad compared to a current mid / high end pc though.
     

    ^ This.

     

    I wouldn't go with console if I ever want performance.

     

    Console is for ease of access more than anything.

    I wish my PC cpu had 8 cores

  • ShakyMoShakyMo Member CommonPosts: 7,207
    There's a whole bunch of jrpgs that only appear on Sony and nintendo consoles, but yeah its not like the pc doesn't have a lot if rpgs too.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,258
    Originally posted by sam7dust
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by Nhoj1983

    Price.. If xbox is 50-100 dollars less than ps4 it'll be far more tempting a product than the ps4.  We don't know where the game's going to be played here and this leads to value.

    While we don't know how Microsoft and Sony will price their respective consoles (Sony is rumored to have a launch price of $425, though prices often change later), the amount they charge is related to the amount that it costs to build the consoles.  There, it's not clear that Microsoft will have any cost of production advantage at all.  If they do, it surely won't be as large as $50, let alone $100.

    Sony should have the advantage here if hardware is somewhat equal in costs, which it seems to be.  The reason being the devaluation of the Japanese Yen.  The 425 price rumored back in February was when the yen was around 90yen = to 1 dollar.  The yen is now 102 = to 1 dollar.  It could be up to 110 to 1 dollar when the ps4 is launched.  

    What does this mean?  Sony can sell the PS4 in the U.S at a discounted rate.  If Yen is 90 then $425 is equal to 38000 yen.  If Yen is 110 then $345 equals the same amount of Yen. Sony along with many Japanese companies will have the power to undercut the competition with Yen devaluation.  If Sony uses this to its advantage its game over for Xbox,  price will be the tipping point for all those on the fence IMO.

    How much does Yen devaluation matter if the APU chip (processor and graphics) is made in Taiwan, the memory in Korea, and so forth?  While I don't know where the components are going to be made, it's probable that many of them won't be made in Japan.  In particular, there are only four foundries in the world that are remotely plausible for manufacturing the APU (TSMC, Global Foundries, Samsung, and IBM), none of which operate in Japan.  None of the three big memory companies are based in Japan, either, though Micron presumably does still run the old Elpida memory fabs.

  • ElRenmazuoElRenmazuo Member RarePosts: 5,361
    Originally posted by Ginaz
    Originally posted by grndzro
    Originally posted by remyburke
    Next-Gen Console = Upgrade your PC.

    If you want to play rpg's then a console is the only way. Unless you wait 10 years for an emulator.

     

    Skyrim, Fallout, the Witcher (among many others) say you're very wrong.

    ya but theres a lot of good JRPGs that never come to PC like Dragons Dogma or Final Fantasy for example other than 7

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 22,258
    Originally posted by tkreep
    Originally posted by aRtFuLThinG
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    They will both be bad compared to a current mid / high end pc though.
     

    ^ This.

     

    I wouldn't go with console if I ever want performance.

     

    Console is for ease of access more than anything.

    I wish my PC cpu had 8 cores

    $105 gets you a CPU that is much faster than that of the PS4 or Xbox One:

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103962

    How fast the cores are matters, too, not just how many of them there are.

  • gilfeathergilfeather Member Posts: 3

    I know where you can score a great deal on an AMC Pacer.

    And I can nab you an amazing deal on a 8-track player!

  • AIMonsterAIMonster Member UncommonPosts: 2,059

    I was leaning towards PS4 this year, but the main reason was so I could play PS2 and PS3 games with Gaikai as I don't own those consoles.  I bought an Xbox 360 last generation (late in it though so I got it cheap) and regret it as the PS3 had better exclusives for me since I don't play FPS games on a console.  I also don't like the fact I have to pay for Xbox Live.

    After that horrible conference though, and all the negative press Xbox One is getting after the conference on things they didn't mention during the conference like internet connectivity being required at least once every 24 hours and especially the used games fees, I'm definitely going to be buying a PS4.  I don't care if the Xbox exclusives are amazing (I doubt it) I don't like the direction Microsoft is heading with the console.

    Yes, PC is definitely better for hardcore gaming, but consoles have lots of exclusive titles I won't see on the PC so there is still reason enough to buy them.

  • sam7dustsam7dust Member Posts: 6
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by sam7dust
    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Originally posted by Nhoj1983

    Price.. If xbox is 50-100 dollars less than ps4 it'll be far more tempting a product than the ps4.  We don't know where the game's going to be played here and this leads to value.

    While we don't know how Microsoft and Sony will price their respective consoles (Sony is rumored to have a launch price of $425, though prices often change later), the amount they charge is related to the amount that it costs to build the consoles.  There, it's not clear that Microsoft will have any cost of production advantage at all.  If they do, it surely won't be as large as $50, let alone $100.

    Sony should have the advantage here if hardware is somewhat equal in costs, which it seems to be.  The reason being the devaluation of the Japanese Yen.  The 425 price rumored back in February was when the yen was around 90yen = to 1 dollar.  The yen is now 102 = to 1 dollar.  It could be up to 110 to 1 dollar when the ps4 is launched.  

    What does this mean?  Sony can sell the PS4 in the U.S at a discounted rate.  If Yen is 90 then $425 is equal to 38000 yen.  If Yen is 110 then $345 equals the same amount of Yen. Sony along with many Japanese companies will have the power to undercut the competition with Yen devaluation.  If Sony uses this to its advantage its game over for Xbox,  price will be the tipping point for all those on the fence IMO.

    How much does Yen devaluation matter if the APU chip (processor and graphics) is made in Taiwan, the memory in Korea, and so forth?  While I don't know where the components are going to be made, it's probable that many of them won't be made in Japan.  In particular, there are only four foundries in the world that are remotely plausible for manufacturing the APU (TSMC, Global Foundries, Samsung, and IBM), none of which operate in Japan.  None of the three big memory companies are based in Japan, either, though Micron presumably does still run the old Elpida memory fabs.

    There is plenty of info on this available.  Japan is using an aggressive monetary policy to help exporting companies such as Sony, Honda, Toyota etc.., and  recent earnings from Sony have shown the profits increase due to this.  As for your question how does it matter?  Lets say Sony pays for all the costs to manufacture a PS4 in December of 2012 and sell it in November 2013,  say they paid 35000 yen for each unit, in november 2013 it will be only 320 bucks to recoup the investment, as opposed to the 390 they originally would have needed when they paid for the manufacturing.   I'm sure the economics of how Japanese businesses use the falling yen to their advantage is a lot more complicated than that though.

Sign In or Register to comment.