# Microsoft Pulls a Fast One with E3 Xbox One Demos



## btarunr (Jun 16, 2013)

With its focus on on-demand entertainment at the expense of gaming prowess, Xbox One didn't impress gamers at E3, who instead flocked to Amazon to pre-order their PlayStation 4, which not only features faster hardware, that could translate to better visuals in gaming, but is also a whole 20 percent cheaper ($499 vs. $399). At E3, Microsoft tried to pull a fast one. It set up several gaming stations allegedly powered by Xbox One, where gamers could play unreleased Xbox One games using the new Xbox One controller, just to get a feel of how rich and smooth the graphics really are. Some of them fell for it, others didn't. When these peeping toms didn't find the screens wired to an Xbox One main unit, they yanked open the cupboards below, only to find a full-fledged Windows 7 gaming PC.

How full-fledged you ask? Keen observers across the forumscape made out a rig powered by an Intel LGA2011 processor, which could at least be a Core i7-3820, and an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 700 series reference design graphics card, which could at least be a GeForce GTX 770. Such a system would obviously give you a rich and smooth gaming experience. 



 




Microsoft Xbox One features a custom-designed application processor by AMD, which combines eight 64-bit x86 cores based on the "Jaguar" micro-architecture, with a GPU that packs 768 Graphics CoreNext stream processors, and a unified quad-channel DDR3-2133 memory interface, holding 8 GB of memory. This memory is cushioned by a large 32 MB SRAM cache on-die. In comparison, Sony's PlayStation 4 features a custom-designed application processor, too, which features the same CPU portion, but a bigger graphics core with 1,152 stream processors, and a 256-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface, holding 8 GB of RAM, which can be used as both main and graphics memory. On top of all that, the PlayStation 4 is $100 cheaper, at $399.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Jetster (Jun 16, 2013)

That is hilarious


----------



## THE_EGG (Jun 16, 2013)

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL reminds me of the whole VLC video playing gameplay at one of Intel's press releases (at least I think it was intel IIRC).


----------



## de.das.dude (Jun 16, 2013)

there are not ethics profession anymore.
and yeah the PS is going to be the one for a lot of people XD specially after this.

just the fact that sony is using GDDR5 over the crappy DDR3 is reason enough to believe that sony is going to be atleast 20-30% better performing.


----------



## naraku (Jun 16, 2013)

LOL! Could you be more desperate?


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 16, 2013)

I posted this in the other XboxOne thread.

So when Microsoft said they would show the games at E3, what they really meant was that they would show PC games at E3, and the actual games will likely look insanely worse.

Hmmm...I seem to remember a game company that just got sued for releasing a game that looked a lot worse than the demos they showed...is Microsoft on the same path?  I sure hope they get slapped with a huge lawsuit.



de.das.dude said:


> just the fact that sony is using GDDR5 over the crappy DDR3 is reason enough to believe that sony is going to be atleast 20-30% better performing.



That and the fact that Microsoft decided to cripple the GPU in the Xbone by cutting out 1/3 of the shaders.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jun 16, 2013)

This only underscores how much this "next" generation's specs are rooted in PC architecture, what makes this really offensive is the hypocrisy of MS and the fact that these workstation's specs are based on Intel and Nvidia hardware when both MS and AMD proudly announced their partnership when creating the Xbone.

Nvidia must find this very amusing


----------



## de.das.dude (Jun 16, 2013)

15th Warlock said:


> *This only underscores how much this "next" generation's specs are rooted in PC architecture*, what makes this really offensive is the hypocrisy of MS and the fact that these workstation's specs are based on Intel and Nvidia hardware when both MS and AMD proudly announced their partnership when creating the Xbone.
> 
> Nvidia must find this very amusing



this is so true... and yet people keep on wanting to have consoles. 
i Really dont get whats so alluring about a console. the way things are now, the consoles are just like PCs, with a diff operating system, and no keyboards and other peripherals XD.

for 400$ you can build a pretty decent gaming rig!


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 16, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> this is so true... and yet people keep on wanting to have consoles.
> i Really dont get whats so alluring about a console. the way things are now, the consoles are just like PCs, with a diff operating system, and no keyboards and other peripherals XD.
> 
> for 400$ you can build a pretty decent gaming rig!



Agreed, and Xbone is supposed to even be running on the Windows kernel, so it basically has the same OS.

But a lot of console gamers have this opinion that PC gaming costs too much and believe that you constantly have to upgrade to keep playing PC games.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jun 16, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> this is so true... and yet people keep on wanting to have consoles.
> i Really dont get whats so alluring about a console. the way things are now, the consoles are just like PCs, with a diff operating system, and no keyboards and other peripherals XD.
> 
> for 400$ you can build a pretty decent gaming rig!



Unfortunately, as long as some exclusives are released for consoles only, there's no other way you can enjoy great games like Forza, Uncharted, The Last of Us, Mario, Zelda, and Gran Turismo among many others


----------



## de.das.dude (Jun 16, 2013)

i think that is going to change soon. GTA 4 was ported. and now even the consoles use the same hardware. so im pretty sure some braniac will figure out a way to bring those here.


----------



## btarunr (Jun 16, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> But a lot of console gamers have this opinion that PC gaming costs too much and believe that you constantly have to upgrade to keep playing PC games.



PC gaming costs $200. 

The average household already has a ~$300 desktop. Mate that with a $200 GTX 660 or HD 7870, and buy a $25 wireless gamepad if you must; plug it to your TV over HDMI. Sure, that PC will bottleneck the card, but it would still be faster than any next-gen console.


----------



## silapakorn (Jun 16, 2013)

There's no pride left in Microsucks these days.


----------



## Jstn7477 (Jun 16, 2013)

The octo-core 1.6GHz low power CPUs that these new consoles are using seem laughable at best. Sure, they are probably a lot better than the current generation consoles, but considering many of the games I play are hindered even by my 4.3GHz 4770K at 120Hz refresh rate due to them using 2-4 threads max and hitting 1-2 threads extremely hard, it doesn't seem to bode well for the consoles unless game devs magically create super duper multi-threading solutions for their games or they can better exploit the consoles. Yes, I know that consoles will only run at 60 FPS max if you are lucky and that makes them have less CPU overhead compared to my system, but with the somewhat lackluster multi-threading support I see in most of the PC games I play, I think devs are going to have to improve things a lot to run on 8 low power cores.

With all the past negative publicity and now these demos that are essentially fake because they aren't run on Xbone hardware, I have no idea why MS still believes everyone thinks highly of their console.


----------



## Ikaruga (Jun 16, 2013)

I'm keep saying, when it comes to gaming, you need Intel and Nvidia  



de.das.dude said:


> sony is going to be atleast 20-30% better performing.



While I agree that the Ps4 is a more appealing machine for gamers (I don't even have a TV, so Xbox1 would give no extra for me anyway), I would like to state that that 20-30% is more like 15-25% at best, which is not really an advantage in console terms. 95% of the gamers will not even understand (let alone notice) that they are looking at a 30-35fps game instead of a 42fps one, they never did with former systems ("Xbox360 vs Ps3" or "GC vs PS2", etc), and they will never will until the industry starts using some kind of a new display device (oculus rift, project into the brain, new eyes from Chiba or whatever;>). So this is actually an area where Microsoft could save up some to lower production costs, and they indeed did.

Again: please don't get me wrong, I agree that the PS4 is the better system, so this is just my "two cents" to the subject


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 16, 2013)

btarunr said:


> PC gaming costs $200.
> 
> The average household already has a ~$300 desktop. Mate that with a $200 GTX 660 or HD 7870, and buy a $25 wireless gamepad if you must; plug it to your TV over HDMI. Sure, that PC will bottleneck the card, but it would still be faster than any next-gen console.



I totally agree, but some people just won't listen.  Heck, my APU can match the PS3 and Xbox360 in visual quality.



Ikaruga said:


> While I agree that the Ps4 is a more appealing machine for gamers (I don't even have a TV, so Xbox1 would give no extra for me anyway), I would like to state that that 20-30% is more like 15-25% at best, which is not really an advantage in console terms. 95% of the gamers will not even understand (let alone notice) that they are looking at a 30-35fps game instead of a 42fps one, they never did with former systems ("Xbox360 vs Ps3" or "GC vs PS2", etc), and they will never will until the industry starts using some kind of a new display device (oculus rift, project into the brain, new eyes from Chiba or whatever;>). So this is actually an area where Microsoft could save up some to lower production costs, and they indeed did.
> 
> Again: please don't get me wrong, I agree that the PS4 is the better system, so this is just my "two cents" to the subject




True, but what the do notice is visual quality.  And once the games get to the point that they have to start sacrificing visual quality to keep a smooth frame rate console gamers tend to notice, especially on games that are multi-platform.


----------



## Novulux (Jun 16, 2013)

According to the developers, it was their choice to do this, not Microsoft's.
twitter.com/mrwilford/status/345934979324334080


----------



## YogurtMaster (Jun 16, 2013)

You all all newbies.  This is what happens at E3 at every launch.  Xbox 360 was launched at E3 running on Power PC Macintosh computers.

I love how everyone is trying to turn this into bad news.  The amount of ignorance is staggering.  There is more ignorance and scare tactics than actual facts.

Welcome to E3 guys.  Try to do some research first before putting out some article that is meant as a scare tactic instead of understanding that this is how alpha development kits can be used.  Yes, the article was true to a certain extent and a lie in another, but this is standard "INDUSTRY" stuff for a console launch.  You use alpha development kits to create the games.  You get hardware that is close to the final hardware so developers can actually create their game.  So they were running the game on hardware that is Alpha dev kit compliant.

I am sad that you guys put together computers and you should be on the up and up on this stuff and now you are just as ignorant than anyone else. 

I have been to actual E3 shows (3 of them), I used to live in LA and I worked for a media company in Marina Del Rey and I would receive passes every year.

Sorry for coming down on you guys, but half of the info going on the Internet is just a bunch of crap.  I don't work for Microsoft, but I am their target Market so I understand what they are trying to achieve here and a lot of people are too judgmental and just pilling up crap that either isn't true, isn't the full truth, or just crap like this because of the lack of understanding.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 16, 2013)

Novulux said:


> According to the developers, it was their choice to do this, not Microsoft's.
> twitter.com/mrwilford/status/345934979324334080



It doesn't really matter who made the decisions, the fact is still whoever made the decision knows the Xbone is too weak and are trying to make the games look better than they are going to be when they are running on the actual system.



YogurtMaster said:


> You use alpha development kits to create the games. You get hardware that is close to the final hardware so developers can actually create their game. So they were running the game on hardware that is Alpha dev kit compliant.



BS.  This isn't an alpha kit, this hardware isn't anything close to the final hardware.  Try doing some research yourself.  Yes, at previous E3's alpha kits that were PCs with similar specs to the final devices were used, but in this case they were not using developement kits and the specs aren't anything close to the final specs of the device, the PC specs are way beyond what the actual console will be.  Sony, on the other hand, demoed all their games on actual dev kits, not jacked up PCs.


----------



## dj-electric (Jun 16, 2013)

Why on god's green-ish earth people are suprised Microsoft used PC to show PC-hardware based console games? I'd do the exact same thing, with AMD GPU though :X


----------



## btarunr (Jun 16, 2013)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> Why on god's green-ish earth people are suprised Microsoft used PC to show PC-hardware based console games? I'd do the exact same thing, with AMD GPU though :X



Then use an A10-6800K and HD 7790. See if games at 1080p are nearly as smooth.


----------



## YogurtMaster (Jun 16, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> It doesn't really matter who made the decisions, the fact is still whoever made the decision knows the Xbone is too weak and are trying to make the games look better than they are going to be when they are running on the actual system.



Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.  The Alpha dev kits were using similar components.  The game will look the same.  It's a common practice in the INDUSTRY!

You guys are killing me with your ignorance.  This happens at EVERY LAUNCH E3, it is standard stuff.  

They are not trying to trick anyone.  E3 is at a weird time of the year when the code is not finished or even near finished.  All the developers are still working on the game while E3 is going on, they just needed to provide a stable branch of code and probably used a development kit or a pseudo development kit to run the code.

Every person here should 

1) learn how to code games
2) Should go behind the scenes at E3 and find out what is really going on behind the curtains. 

E3 is really an awkward time for developers because they are still using old hardware and still providing either demos to take time out of coding for the game for weeks to just provide a simple demo that may not be in the final game and is on old pieces of hardware.


----------



## dj-electric (Jun 16, 2013)

btarunr said:


> Then use an A10-6800K and HD 7790. See if games at 1080p are nearly as smooth.



OR, they could use the FX8350 with an HD7970 Ghz instead of going and exposing all Intel+NVIDIA systems.
It's this "when the moment of truth stikes" kinda situations


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 16, 2013)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> Why on god's green-ish earth people are suprised Microsoft used PC to show PC-hardware based console games? I'd do the exact same thing, with AMD GPU though :X



The surprise is the power level of the hardware used.  Just think of it like this, you see your friend playing the latest high end game on his shiny new GTX780, all the settings are maxed so the game looks really good. So you go buy the game and when you start playing it on your HD7850 and you have to run everything on medium, so it doesn't look nearly as good.  That is what Microsoft is doing here.  They're showing everyone the games on GTX780s when the final console will be a 7850, there is no way the games will look as good.  Kind of makes all the Xbone game coverage from E3 useless since we still have no clue what the games will actually look like.


----------



## alwayssts (Jun 16, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> That and the fact that Microsoft decided to cripple the GPU in the Xbone by cutting out 1/3 of the shaders.



Trade-offs in design for the questionable choice of 'flexibility of platform' (ie Kinect etc) for a given price is one thing, but I think the intelligent argument is against the SRAM choice. Because it is *on-die*, combined with the rest of a decently robust APU, yields are supposedly and understandably terrible resulting in a change in GPU clock from 800mhz (1.2288TF) to rumored to be as low as 600mhz (but I would reckon is closer to 650-725mhz for 1TF) was required. My guess on the range is because of the fact the OS uses ~10%, if not more now, of the GPU essentially minimizing the the overhead advantage versus a PC making it quite literally half the GPU platform of the PS4.  It's something similar (granted inherently different) to 7770 versus 7870.  It's also quite obvious from the size of the box the thing runs hot (which would also make sense if they were trying to maximize crappy yields).

Everything about the thing just screams flat-out sad/disastrous from a gaming POV.  I don't blame anybody for not demoing on dev kits.

While you can laugh about a demo system running a high-end PC, I will laugh when in the very near future retail APUs provide more real-world gaming performance.  While it's questionable if the next-gen beyond 28nm for AMD and 22nm for Intel will provide a better gaming platform than the PS4 (I would guess it will be the target they are aiming for in a couple years), it's not a question with the xbox.  Imagine people showing a xbox game simulation at E3 2014 using a 64-unit Intel APU running at somewhere close to 3x clock or (more realistically) a 512sp AMD AMD APU running at 1.5x clock... perhaps twice that count (128 Intel/896 AMD) a year later needing half the clock.  Assuming there is adequate bandwidth/buffer (Crystalwell/GDDR5/DDR4) it's conceivable, if not inevitable, and really kind of pathetic.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jun 16, 2013)

YogurtMaster said:


> Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.  The Alpha dev kits were using similar components.  The game will look the same.  It's a common practice in the INDUSTRY!
> 
> You guys are killing me with your ignorance.  This happens at EVERY LAUNCH E3, it is standard stuff.
> 
> ...



that doesnt make it fair. stop your arrogance please. before someone reports you.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 16, 2013)

YogurtMaster said:


> The Alpha dev kits were using similar components.  The game will look the same.  It's a common practice in the INDUSTRY!



I don't see how you are getting that these are Alpha dev kits with similar component so the final console.  These aren't alpha kits, and the hardware is no where near similar components.  A GTX780 isn't similar to a HD7850, and an i7-3930 isn't similar to a 8-Core Piledriver Piledriver.  I've owned dev kits, even alpha dev kits, from previous generation systems.  I have never seen a dev kit that use parts so drastically different from the actual console's.  There is no way these were dev kits.



YogurtMaster said:


> You guys are killing me with your ignorance.  This happens at EVERY LAUNCH E3, it is standard stuff.



It is standard practice to use dev kits to demo games, Sony did it, *these are not dev kits*.  Your ignorance is killing me.  I can't believe someone would look at the systems used at E3 and claim they are dev kits that are similar to the final console, and then have the arrogance to say others are ignorant.



YogurtMaster said:


> They are not trying to trick anyone.  E3 is at a weird time of the year when the code is not finished or even near finished.  All the developers are still working on the game while E3 is going on, they just needed to provide a stable branch of code and probably used a development kit or a pseudo development kit to run the code.



If they weren't trying to trick anyone they would have actually used similar hardware to the final console and not the top of the line GPU on the market.  They could have very easily gone with systems that were at least partially similar to the final specs.  They could have use an 8-Core AMD processor, and an AMD GPU with similar(but slightly better even) specs.  But they didn't, they went with PCs that were totally balls out top of the line and nothing even close to what the final console will be.  That is deceptive, and I have a hard time believing that the games will look as good, or run as smoothly, on the final hardware which will be radically different from and about half as powerful as the systems used to demo games at E3, I just don't see that happening.


----------



## PersonWithTech (Jun 16, 2013)

Why would they do that???? :O . They've used a nvidia card and intel cpu, when the Xbox uses all AMD parts.Would AMD feel betrayed, or does microsoft just see those parts as superior to AMD. I also question why they would use a fancy case if it is supposed to be hidden, with a liquid cooler which isn't even ENTIRELY necessary.


----------



## Ikaruga (Jun 16, 2013)

YogurtMaster said:


> You all all newbies......I love how everyone is trying to turn this into bad news.  The amount of ignorance is staggering.  There is more ignorance and scare tactics than actual facts.


Please forgive us, it's just mass overconfidence, nothing more really. Since we have *you* among us, we just stopped thinking altogether, it would be useless since you know everything anyway, so we just listen and learn.



YogurtMaster said:


> Try to do some research first before putting out some article that is meant as a scare tactic instead of understanding that this is how alpha development kits can be used.


PS4 games were running on actual devkits.


----------



## NC37 (Jun 16, 2013)

It isn't the first or the last time better hardware has been used to demo something. But the fact that M$ did not use actual dev kits makes me think the games just were not all the way there yet. I'd guess not totally optimized and it would be an embarrassment for M$ to have previewed them under that. So they instead toss in a gaming PC and just let the raw performance carry it.

You got both makers literally turning the industry on it's head and forcing it to adapt to multithreading beyond 3-4 cores which did not carry over into PC gaming very well aside from a few titles. That is something that won't happen as easily. Specially with M$ gimping their hardware so much compared to PS4. Optimization is going to have to be key to run on those weaker CPUs and also handle all the excess background tasks. They aren't server based CPUs, they are stuff made to combat netbook CPUs. Which is what concerns me about the PS4's social media features. It is useless frills. I'd rather all computing tasks being directed to games, not keeping tabs on Facebook/etc.


----------



## theo2021 (Jun 16, 2013)

*linux gaming*

I believe that we gamers should support more linux gaming. Microsoft is getting worse over the years in the gaming environment for windows although they made it better for the some consumers and we have to pay for the software.If games would run smoother in linux we would see many many consoles using linux since it is opensource and many companies would make their own consoles customizing the linux software as they want to and the prices would go down.But the best thing is that the game developers would make only one version of the game since pc and consoles will have identical environments so they would sell games cheaper too. So we will have cheaper and more consoles free pc software and cheaper games.


----------



## YogurtMaster (Jun 16, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> I don't see how you are getting that these are Alpha dev kits with similar component so the final console.  These aren't alpha kits, and the hardware is no where near similar components.  A GTX780 isn't similar to a HD7850, and an i7-3930 isn't similar to a 8-Core Piledriver Piledriver.  I've owned dev kits, even alpha dev kits, from previous generation systems.  I have never seen a dev kit that use parts so drastically different from the actual console's.  There is no way these were dev kits.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



They probably didn't have time and so they had to use what they have.  A lot of things are like this at E3.  I don't see your point.  You think that it's not going to be like that with the XB1.   When you use the XB1 you can use the cloud as well (or limit the FPS to a frame rate), so it's not such a one to one answer. 

This happens at E3 often, it's not like its something new.


----------



## Naito (Jun 16, 2013)

Did it occur to anyone that the Xbox OS actually runs inside a VM? And the games are most likely hard-coded to the specifications the Xbox OS environment provides? It is probably likely that there wasn't enough late prototype or early production models of Xbox One available for E3, or that the code for the Xbox One hasn't been completed to a acceptable level for demonstration ,(or a bit of both), thus MS sort to use these PCs for the demo. Whilst I think it may be possibly for these machines to run the VM faster, until production code is complete, I don't think they'll run games with misleading visuals.


----------



## Mckertis (Jun 16, 2013)

> Unfortunately, as long as some exclusives are released for consoles only, there's no other way you can enjoy great games like Forza, Uncharted, The Last of Us


Hey, if those games were any good - they'd port it on PC. Never played Uncharted, and really not suffering from it, i already have a 20+ title backlog of great games on PC.


----------



## nisen (Jun 16, 2013)

YogurtMaster said:


> You all all newbies.  This is what happens at E3 at every launch.  Xbox 360 was launched at E3 running on Power PC Macintosh computers.
> 
> I love how everyone is trying to turn this into bad news.  The amount of ignorance is staggering.  There is more ignorance and scare tactics than actual facts.



still seems beyond reasonable advertising deception showing fake gameplay when one of the main purposes is showing how well the hardware itself does.

coincidentally came across a vid yesterday comparing PS3 trailers at E3 to how they turned out irl

PlayStation® 3 'E3 '05 vs NOW'


----------



## SIGSEGV (Jun 16, 2013)

Mckertis said:


> Hey, if those games were any good - they'd port it on PC. Never played Uncharted, and really not suffering from it, i already have a 20+ title backlog of great games on PC.



i hope someday you'd port the god of war III on PC


----------



## MyTechAddiction (Jun 16, 2013)

Look They even used a system with Windows 7 .
Oh the fail level is at 10000


----------



## SmG (Jun 16, 2013)

So even microsoft uses windows 7 instead of windows 8 for their desktops.


----------



## phanbuey (Jun 16, 2013)

I've never been to E3... and maybe its just a code showoff... but they are using hardware that is 3x the power of what this software will actually run on.

And lets face it, MS is on a roll.  Lately they make shit OSes and they make shitty phones and tablets... is it really that much of a stretch to imagine that they will make a shitty console?  Will we all be surprised when the XB1 is just absolutely terrible?

I almost feel bad for the marketing guys:  

"HERE MAKE PEOPLE WANT THIS!" 

"But, sir, these are dog feces"

"TELL THEM THAT THEY WANT IT AND THAT THEY PREFER IT OVER GOOGLE"

"But, sir, no one wants this, especially over Google!!!"

"DO IT, AND THEN TELL THEM THAT THEY CAN STILL DO THE THINGS THEY DID WITH THE START MENU WITH ONLY 13 MORE CLICKS AND SOME TYPING!!!"

"Sir, please, have a snickers!!!"

"PUT METRO AND BING ON EVERYTHING! LET ALL THE ELECTRONICS FEEL THE WRATH OF METRO!!! AND BING! AND CUT THE POWER OF THE CONSOLES BY 1/3, AND DON'T LET THEM PLAY GAMES UNLESS WE ALLOW IT!  DO THIS --- AND MAKE THEM BUY IT!!!"


----------



## brutlern (Jun 16, 2013)

I am just plain shocked, I mean I have seen this kind of thing before, example, at the PS4 reveal (not at this E3m the one that was a couple of moths ago) where they showed a new Watch Dogs trailer, Ubi admitted that the demo was actually running on a PC, and not on the PS4, but at least in that case they didn't try to fool anyone, they came out and said it straight up that it was a PC build (basically Ubi juts hijacked the PS4 conference to market Watch Dogs a bit more ), but what Microsud is doing is borderline fraud.


----------



## silkstone (Jun 16, 2013)

YogurtMaster said:


> Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.  The Alpha dev kits were using similar components.  The game will look the same.  It's a common practice in the INDUSTRY!



Alpha Dev kits are completely different from finished product then? they don't even use the same manufacturer. I don't see how intel + Nvidia could be an alpha dev kit when Xone is using AMD.

Edit - It seems the Dev kits are NVidia hardware. Strange.

http://www.pcper.com/news/General-Tech/Dango-Durango-Next-Gen-Xbox-developer-kit-wild


----------



## progste (Jun 16, 2013)

lol the fact that bugs me is that they didn't even bother to lock the box or at least keep someone guarding it


----------



## progste (Jun 16, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> there are not ethics profession anymore.
> and yeah the PS is going to be the one for a lot of people XD specially after this.
> 
> just the fact that sony is using GDDR5 over the crappy DDR3 is reason enough to believe that sony is going to be atleast 20-30% better performing.



the ps4 is going to be more powerful, but i wouldn't really address that to the Ram but more to the GPU since it should be quite more powerful on the ps4


----------



## jihadjoe (Jun 16, 2013)

I learn 2 things from this:

1) Even AMD partners don't use AMD!
2) Even Microsoft doesn't use Windows 8!


----------



## acerace (Jun 16, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> that doesnt make it fair. stop your arrogance please. before someone reports you.



Why? Because he made a sensible arguments? That's why you labeling him like that? 

Linus also talked about this issue in his June 14th live stream. http://youtu.be/0GwurgaAIQg?t=24m7s Fast-forwarded to the issue.


----------



## Kaynar (Jun 16, 2013)

jihadjoe said:


> I learn 2 things from this:
> 
> 1) Even AMD partners don't use AMD!
> 2) Even Microsoft doesn't use Windows 8!



I learned exactly the same thing from this.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jun 16, 2013)

acerace said:


> Why? Because he made a sensible arguments? That's why you labeling him like that?
> 
> Linus also talked about this issue in his June 14th live stream. http://youtu.be/0GwurgaAIQg?t=24m7s Fast-forwarded to the issue.



lol, linus? HAHAHA i guess i have nothing more to say.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jun 16, 2013)

progste said:


> the ps4 is going to be more powerful, but i wouldn't really address that to the Ram but more to the GPU since it should be quite more powerful on the ps4



RAM is also as important as the cores.. just go and buy the same GPU, but different versions of RAM, DDR3 and DDR5, you will feel the difference.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jun 16, 2013)

Ha! Who thought of that brilliant idea?!


----------



## acerace (Jun 16, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> lol, linus? HAHAHA i guess i have nothing more to say.



If you watch the video long enough, you will understand why Microsoft use LGA2011 platforms.


----------



## Am* (Jun 16, 2013)

Great news for us PC gamers -- it will make porting these games to the PC THAT much easier. We may not ever even need to emulate the consoles. 

As far as this console goes, the harder the Xbone fails, the better. I want all future Xbox exclusives ported on my PC in one form or another, so I do not EVER have to have this spying piece of shit in my house. Microsoft can either wise up and release a Kinect-less/offline and secondhand-game enabled Xbox One, or they can fuck up their second biggest moneymaker right behind Windows. And after the collossal fuck up that was/is Windows 8, I strongly suggest for them to wise up and listen to the critics/fans before it is too late, because there is only so much money that a multi-billion dollar corporation like M$ can bleed before it has to close its doors and/or go bankrupt.


----------



## Rowsol (Jun 16, 2013)

I've never wanted a product to fail more.  I hope people have enough sense to buy the PS4 over this.


----------



## AsRock (Jun 16, 2013)

I find it funny that it says they had nVidia cards in them.


----------



## Mistral (Jun 16, 2013)

Not sure how this is a "fast one". Seems like pretty standard practice to me and I doubt Sony does it much differently.


----------



## Huguito (Jun 16, 2013)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> OR, they could use the FX8350 with an HD7970 Ghz instead of going and exposing all Intel+NVIDIA systems.
> It's this "when the moment of truth stikes" kinda situations






jihadjoe said:


> I learn 2 things from this:
> 
> 1) Even AMD partners don't use AMD!
> 2) Even Microsoft doesn't use Windows 8!






THEY RUN AN NVIDIA CARD INSTEAD OF AMD BECAUSE THATS THE ONLY WAY TO HAVE _*PHYSX*_ AVAILABLE[/SIZE] IN THIS SO CALLED "DEMO"



 :shadedshu


----------



## Shihab (Jun 16, 2013)

Naito said:


> Did it occur to anyone that the Xbox OS actually runs inside a VM? And the games are most likely hard-coded to the specifications the Xbox OS environment provides?



It does most likely include emulation somewhere, I doubt most of the displayed games would make it to PC, but that doesn't justify using overkill specs. 

Common sense time: Use similar specs to the end product (plus emulation cost) and be done with it, or use drastically faster ones and lock them down to what need? 

PR common sense: Use components from brands competing with our partners, or use ones from our partners?

Visual wise, it's a question of whether the games themselves have potential for any.


----------



## Covert_Death (Jun 16, 2013)

all i have to say is this just proves that PC gaming wont suffer as much this time around. if all the consoles are running PC hardware GREAT, that means ports will be better. ON TOP OF THAT they are 8-core machines! games will finally take use of 8 cores!!!!!!! my 8350 @ 5.0Ghz is really going to start to shine


----------



## dj-electric (Jun 16, 2013)

Huguito said:


> THEY RUN AN NVIDIA CARD INSTEAD OF AMD BECAUSE THATS THE ONLY WAY TO HAVE _*PHYSX*_ AVAILABLE[/SIZE] IN THIS SO CALLED "DEMO"
> 
> 
> 
> :shadedshu



So, on what games they displayd GPU physX?


----------



## Fx (Jun 16, 2013)

YogurtMaster said:


> You all all newbies.
> 
> The amount of ignorance is staggering.  There is more ignorance and scare tactics than actual facts.
> 
> ...



The hardware they used *IS NOT* close to final specs. You couldn't have sounded any worse than the least knowledgeable person in this forum. If you are going to blatantly bash people, then at least make sure your premise is sound.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jun 16, 2013)

The best part about their "demo" is they run it on nVidia GPU and Intel CPU. )))))))))))

This can be voted as FAIL OF THE YEAR!


----------



## m1dg3t (Jun 16, 2013)

Fx said:


> The hardware they used IS NOT close to final specs. You couldn't have sounded any worse than *the least knowledgeable person in this forum.* If you are going to blatantly bash people, then at least make sure your premise is sound.



You rang¿?¡! 

Xbone; Giving _you_ "The Bone"!


----------



## hardcore_gamer (Jun 16, 2013)




----------



## Jstn7477 (Jun 16, 2013)

To be a little fair, LGA 2011 is the only consumer PC platform that supports quad channel DDR3, but MS could have easily used a single socket Opteron octo-core which would have likely had slightly more realistic performance. Also, for the PhysX argument, why would a GTX 780 be needed when the console's GPU is expected to be slower than a vanilla GTX 660? These demo systems seem awfully overkill not to mention MS wasn't even using its current OS.


----------



## hardcore_gamer (Jun 16, 2013)

Jstn7477 said:


> not to mention MS wasn't even using its current OS



Not even M$ uses windows 8


----------



## Covert_Death (Jun 16, 2013)

Jstn7477 said:


> To be a little fair, LGA 2011 is the only consumer PC platform that supports quad channel DDR3, but MS could have easily used a single socket Opteron octo-core which would have likely had slightly more realistic performance. Also, for the PhysX argument, why would a GTX 780 be needed when the console's GPU is expected to be slower than a vanilla GTX 660? These demo systems seem awfully overkill not to mention MS wasn't even using its current OS.



in their defense their current OS wasn't available when they sent out dev builds, so developers have been producing on windows 7 ... as for the rest of it, its overkill but a PC is expected as these types of events, anyone expecting an actual final build xbox is nuts. i guarantee ps4 was running on PC's as well. 

for the record i pre-ordered a PS4


----------



## hardcore_gamer (Jun 16, 2013)

I bet they ran the the demo of "Ryse son of rome" on a PC as well. The visuals were stunning. It  may not look as good on an actual Xbone.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jun 16, 2013)

Huguito said:


> THEY RUN AN NVIDIA CARD INSTEAD OF AMD BECAUSE THATS THE ONLY WAY TO HAVE _*PHYSX*_ AVAILABLE[/SIZE] IN THIS SO CALLED "DEMO"
> 
> 
> 
> :shadedshu



what games now run physx? and what consoles run phsx? tress fx ftw.


----------



## Naito (Jun 16, 2013)

Shihabyooo said:


> It does most likely include emulation somewhere, I doubt most of the displayed games would make it to PC, but that doesn't justify using overkill specs.
> 
> Common sense time: Use similar specs to the end product (plus emulation cost) and be done with it, or use drastically faster ones and lock them down to what need?.



Is it really overkill, though? What consumer PC products do you find providing 68GB/s of DDR3 bandwidth and the high speed, low latency of SRAM? None. I presume the specifications of those machines would need to be rather high to provide smooth virtualization of the Xbox OS.


----------



## Huguito (Jun 16, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> what games now run physx? and what consoles run phsx? tress fx ftw.



BOTH consoles are confirmed that are going to run Physx api... how can you run Physx effects on a PC (becuase you dont have a working console in the dem at E3) ???

a PC with an Nvidia card, thats how; and yes, the APU can run DirectCompute effects too, but the fact is that Phsyx is still present, maybe iuts up to the developer wich one they want to use


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jun 16, 2013)

theo2021 said:


> I believe that we gamers should support more linux gaming. Microsoft is getting worse over the years in the gaming environment for windows although they made it better for the some consumers and we have to pay for the software.If games would run smoother in linux we would see many many consoles using linux since it is opensource and many companies would make their own consoles customizing the linux software as they want to and the prices would go down.But the best thing is that the game developers would make only one version of the game since pc and consoles will have identical environments so they would sell games cheaper too. So we will have cheaper and more consoles free pc software and cheaper games.



No thanks to that. Linux blows.


----------



## Jorge (Jun 16, 2013)

I imagine they are finalising the real Xbox software so this was a development unit. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it as I would expect the next Xbox to actually be superior in performance to the demo model used for development work on the software.


----------



## andresgriego (Jun 16, 2013)

These are 'alpha dev kits' and it's part of the reason Sony moved x86, to reduce cost of startup and to grow profit potential.

The final hardware and optimized os might be representative of the performance class they demonstrated. If so then there's nothing wrong with what they did.

Unless Xbox games are marketed cheaper, M$ is obviously just maximizing profit at our expense.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 16, 2013)

YogurtMaster said:


> They probably didn't have time and so they had to use what they have.  A lot of things are like this at E3.  I don't see your point.  You think that it's not going to be like that with the XB1.   When you use the XB1 you can use the cloud as well (or limit the FPS to a frame rate), so it's not such a one to one answer.
> 
> This happens at E3 often, it's not like its something new.



So now you've changed your argument from "they were PC based dev kits" to "they used whatever they had laying around due to time".  Ok, I can believe that, but using such insanely high powered PCs compared to the final spec to demo games is still deceptive regardless of is they intended it or not.



acerace said:


> Why? Because he made a sensible arguments? That's why you labeling him like that?
> 
> Linus also talked about this issue in his June 14th live stream. http://youtu.be/0GwurgaAIQg?t=24m7s Fast-forwarded to the issue.



Sensible arguments don't tend to start off with insults, and usually the person making the argument doesn't backtrack and change their arguments halfway through.



Covert_Death said:


> in their defense their current OS wasn't available when they sent out dev builds, so developers have been producing on windows 7 ... as for the rest of it, its overkill but a PC is expected as these types of events, anyone expecting an actual final build xbox is nuts. i guarantee ps4 was running on PC's as well.
> 
> for the record i pre-ordered a PS4



A PC is expected yes, because early dev kits are nothing more than PCs in general.  However, using such an insanely powered PC to demo games, which will likely make the games perform better and look better than the final product is not what I would call acceptable.

The Sony dev kits were also likely PCs, but they were PCs that were actually reasonably close to the final product.



de.das.dude said:


> what games now run physx? and what consoles run phsx? tress fx ftw.



TressFX is a soft body only physics engine, good for cloth and hair and thats about it.  It doesn't do particle physics, so it is not a usable alternative to PhysX or any of the other real physics engines.



Huguito said:


> BOTH consoles are confirmed that are going to run Physx api... how can you run Physx effects on a PC (becuase you dont have a working console in the dem at E3) ???
> 
> a PC with an Nvidia card, thats how; and yes, the APU can run DirectCompute effects too, but the fact is that Phsyx is still present, maybe iuts up to the developer wich one they want to use



You don't need an nVidia card to use the PhysX API.  Consoles use the software version of PhsyX that runs on the CPU, this is also available on the PC.

And if they were running hardware accelerated PhysX on their demos, then that is even more of a deception because the final console will not have hardware accelerated PhysX.


----------



## Covert_Death (Jun 16, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> The Sony dev kits were also likely PCs, but they were PCs that were actually reasonably close to the final product.



proof... im not surprised they are powerful units at all. they were probably sponsored on some level by a 3rd party "demo" vendor who doesn't rent out "cheap PC's" but top of the line gaming ready, DEMO pc's.... in all likely hood this is the scenario that happened and sony probaby did the same thing, again im NOT defending M$, they are pigs and are going to die this time around the console generation but this miss understanding of how things work is rediculous


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 16, 2013)

Covert_Death said:


> proof... im not surprised they are powerful units at all. they were probably sponsored on some level by a 3rd party "demo" vendor who doesn't rent out "cheap PC's" but top of the line gaming ready, DEMO pc's.... in all likely hood this is the scenario that happened and sony probaby did the same thing, again im NOT defending M$, they are pigs and are going to die this time around the console generation but this miss understanding of how things work is rediculous



Proof of what?  That Sony used actual Dev Kits, well they said so.  Proof that Sony's Dev Kits are close to the final spec of the product? Look at dev kits, that is what they are, close to the final product.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jun 16, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> Proof of what?  That Sony used actual Dev Kits, well they said so.  Proof that Sony's Dev Kits are close to the final spec of the product? Look at dev kits, that is what they are, close to the final product.



Sega had Dev Kits for the Dreamcast hardware in the day, consoles are nothing more than what smart phones are- firmware based hardware


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jun 16, 2013)

These demo units look nothing like the final Xbone hardware, for a console that's supposed to be released in less than 5 months this is beyond preposterous. 

Saying that MS didn't have time to put together demo units utilizing actual Xbone hardware at this point in the console development cycle shows nothing but utter misunderstanding of how these consoles were developed.

For simple reference, xbox 360 was released in 2006, and chances are MS immediately started working on the successor at some level immediately after its release. Do the math, that's almost 7 years from today.

To also suggest that MS would rent PCs from a third party doesn't make any sense at all, this is MS we are talking about, they are 100% involved in both the hardware and software for this console, why risk failure by renting equipment from a third party for such an important event so close to release date?

The fact that MS used such powerful hardware to demo their games, doesn’t bode well at all for the Xbone, this can only mean they are not confident enough in the performance of the hardware just a few months from release, at this point any hardware specifications are set in stone and MS must have already ordered parts from all the manufacturers to start assembly of the actual consoles before final packaging and shipping , either that or they'll just release a few units in November...


----------



## badtaylorx (Jun 17, 2013)

wow....i see damage controll from pr firms gittin busy


----------



## AsRock (Jun 17, 2013)

Well after watching the video below these systems might of been connected to the xbox 1 as i understand it.. Although imo ignore the supposed most wanted to know answers to peoples questions till near the end of the video were the xbox 1 actually have a HDMI input which allows to devices to be used.

Although their example while watching TV or a film you could get messages disturbing your well loved movie lol.

So just maybe there was a xbox 1 hooked up to them too ?.. 

/r/Games interview with Xbox Live's Major Nels...


----------



## entropy13 (Jun 17, 2013)

I would rather think that maybe, just maybe, this is Microsoft's way of accepting that PC gaming is better? LOL


But then again they released Windows 8...But then again they crippled the Xbone...hmmmm....lol


----------



## D007 (Jun 17, 2013)

Lame...
That is all....


----------



## Bjorn_Of_Iceland (Jun 17, 2013)

phanbuey said:


> I've never been to E3... and maybe its just a code showoff... but they are using hardware that is 3x the power of what this software will actually run on.
> 
> And lets face it, MS is on a roll.  Lately they make shit OSes and they make shitty phones and tablets... is it really that much of a stretch to imagine that they will make a shitty console?  Will we all be surprised when the XB1 is just absolutely terrible?
> 
> ...


I read this in a "Hitler Reacts to.." kind of way.


----------



## puma99dk| (Jun 17, 2013)

this just shows that u can build ur own xbox one, if microsoft will release the software that works on Windows 7


----------



## jihadjoe (Jun 17, 2013)

acerace said:


> Linus also talked about this issue in his June 14th live stream. http://youtu.be/0GwurgaAIQg?t=24m7s Fast-forwarded to the issue.



I thought you meant THE Linus, the one with his name ending in Torvalds. Now if it was him then everyone would've listened. In this case its just some dude with a youtube channel, and the point stands. They used hardware that was far from representative of what would be in the final console.


----------



## PersonWithTech (Jun 17, 2013)

why would they use a pricy, sexy corsair  case if it was supposed to be hidden ???!!! :O


----------



## silkstone (Jun 17, 2013)

puma99dk| said:


> this just shows that u can build ur own xbox one, if microsoft will release the software that works on Windows 7



Why on earth would you want to?


----------



## acerace (Jun 17, 2013)

jihadjoe said:


> I thought you meant THE Linus, the one with his name ending in Torvalds. Now if it was him then everyone would've listened. In this case its just some dude with a youtube channel, and the point stands. They used hardware that was far from representative of what would be in the final console.



Did you even watch the video? Well, maybe he is not as smart as the Linus Torvalds, but he is sure as hell smarter than most people in this thread, me included. No offense.


----------



## puma99dk| (Jun 17, 2013)

silkstone said:


> Why on earth would you want to?



well u can build a cheaper and faster computer than the Xbox One in the first place so why not?


----------



## lemonadesoda (Jun 17, 2013)

Skulltrail and x-bones. Hilarious. Intel and nV power games.


----------



## 1nf3rn0x (Jun 17, 2013)




----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 17, 2013)

1nf3rn0x said:


> http://img.techpowerup.org/130617/image.jpg



Now THAT is funny!  so representative of what we, mostly a PC community are doing in this thread!


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jun 17, 2013)

Console monkeys. Hilarious!


----------



## Octavean (Jun 17, 2013)

So wait,.......

The display above the case showing the Windows 7 desktop wasn't a clue as to what was under the hood,......? 

Pffffft,...

Its not like they had an Xbox One under each display with faux wires coming out of it to fake a connection,.....

Much ado about nothing,....


----------



## btarunr (Jun 17, 2013)

Octavean said:


> So wait,.......
> 
> The display above the case showing the Windows 7 desktop wasn't a clue as to what was under the hood,......?
> 
> ...



He quit the game (probably to check out the new home screen), saw a Windows 7 desktop instead, got curious, opened the cupboard.


----------



## KainXS (Jun 17, 2013)

it would have been nice if infinium labs waited and launched now with the rest of these pc's, they might have actually been better off.(might have died still though)

I was hoping sega would pull out a console this E3 with the spectrum(I know . . . . . . . yeah) but its probably going to be an arcade board or engine but on that sega's newest current arcade is nothing but glorified proprietary gaming pc's now also with a 2500K and GTX560Ti.


----------



## douglatins (Jun 17, 2013)

I dont care if this is usual or not, but its irrelevant.
You cant deny the bad PR, this doesn't look good for MS.
If they at least used amd systems they could release a note stating that it was similar spec hardware. But using a card that is clearly a titan (the gtx780 came too close to e3), looks bad


----------



## Drmark (Jun 17, 2013)

Here is the problem, MS is having issues with Windows 8, office upgrades etc.  They are offering a console with less, for more.  Who wants to use restricted software/hardware when even Sony opened up the terms.  I have to log into the internet every day like asking Mommy, can I play it now?
I bought the darn thing, I get to pay $60 a game and they treat you like this "before release."  I am the customer, It is not a privilege to buy this.  MS needs to hire some people with ethics and an A-game.  For all the restrictions I expect a console that would blow the socks off the competition.  

This turd has to last around 8-10 years......  Are you confident it will?  Are you willing to own all your games for 10 years and not want to show them to your friends or give your old games as a gift?


----------



## midnightoil (Jun 17, 2013)

btarunr said:


> PC gaming costs $200.
> 
> The average household already has a ~$300 desktop. Mate that with a $200 GTX 660 or HD 7870, and buy a $25 wireless gamepad if you must; plug it to your TV over HDMI. Sure, that PC will bottleneck the card, *but it would still be faster than any next-gen console.*



You and I both know that's total nonsense.  The XboxGoHome seems like a very, very compromised (some might say crippled design), so the jury's out ... but as far as the PS4 is concerned, a title properly coded for and optimised (and preferably going direct to metal or using very low level APIs) will blow any PC game out of the water at 1920x1080, regardless of what hardware it's running (Titans in SLI or whatever).  You sacrifice most of your performance budget for universal compatibility, high level APIs and the engine sitting on top of a massively bloated desktop OS.  First party Sony titles for the first couple of years should look way better than any PC game on any hardware.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 17, 2013)

midnightoil said:


> First party Sony titles for the first couple of years should look way better than any PC game on any hardware.



Normally I don't comment on peoples opinions, but this is so far out there:
absolute rubbish....on "any" hardware?!    If you really had any notion of what high-level pc hardware actually is, you would not make such a statement. Unbelievable......


----------



## midnightoil (Jun 17, 2013)

rtwjunkie said:


> Normally I don't comment on peoples opinions, but this is so far out there:
> absolute rubbish....on "any" hardware?!    If you really had any notion of what high-level pc hardware actually is, you would not make such a statement. Unbelievable......



You clearly have absolutely no notion whatsoever of how coding or hardware actually work.  If there were PC games made and optimised solely for the current cream of the crop, and using some kind of lower level API (like Glide used to be), then sure they'd beat the PS4.  But this will never happen, because it would be impossible for the developers to recoup development costs because of the miniscule potential market for games like this.

Why do you think the kind of lighting, detail and enormous size of environment seen in the Killzone engine footage are several orders of magnitude greater than any 7850 (roughly equivalent to PS4 graphical power) could ever hope to render at more than 1 or 2FPS, if ported to the PC?

Comparing base specs of PCs and consoles is apples and oranges .. they're not the same at all.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 17, 2013)

midnightoil said:


> Comparing base specs of PCs and consoles is apples and oranges .. they're not the same at all.



Except for the fact both consoles will be entering the market at basically the equivalent of mid-level gaming PC's.  Brute force can overcome almost anything....which seems to be why MS used a high-end gaming PC to showcase games to look better than they will.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jun 17, 2013)

rtwjunkie said:


> Except for the fact both consoles will be entering the market at basically the equivalent of *Entry-level gaming PC's*.  Brute force can overcome almost anything....which seems to be why MS used a high-end gaming PC to showcase games to look better than they will.



Fixed that for you!


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jun 17, 2013)

brandonwh64 said:


> Fixed that for you!



Entry level with an 8 core proc? Not quite.


----------



## midnightoil (Jun 17, 2013)

The level of ignorance on what is supposed to be a tech-minded website is quite astounding.  It seems to amount to little more than delusional PC-fanboys thinking (hoping for some reason?) that next-gen console hardware is already limiting how games look on PC before they're even released.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  What will limit how good PC games look for the next 2-3 years is developers not using next-gen engines, and as per usual most of the optimisation work being done for low to mid end PC systems (as it always is and will be) rather than high end.

That some of you think an 8-core Jaguar chip (or even Richland) and 7850/70 on PC is comparable to the same on PS4 is just laughable.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jun 17, 2013)

in the grand scheme of things, this isn't really that important. microsoft will reverse direction on some of their dumb policies, it will put out some pretty fun games people will ogle at and this will all be forgotten. i think the ps4 is going to be all around the better system with a much more customer oriented service. time will tell.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 17, 2013)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> Entry level with an 8 core proc? Not quite.



An 8-Core AMD CPU that is the equivalent of about a $150 PC CPU.  I'd say that is pretty close to entry level gaming PC , and the video card is definitely entry level gaming PC.


----------



## alucasa (Jun 17, 2013)

Spec doesn't matter. Exclusives or games that don't come to PC are what counts and that is precisely why I own PS3, Xbox360, PS vita, Nintendo 3D, and Wii. I don't have Wii U because there aren't any games.


----------



## MatTheCat II (Jun 17, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> this is so true... and yet people keep on wanting to have consoles.
> i Really dont get whats so alluring about a console. the way things are now, the consoles are just like PCs, with a diff operating system, and no keyboards and other peripherals XD.



Ease of use, lack of issues, much better value for money than PC gaming, great in-game social networking facilities....sits comfortably in the front room, next to the TV, operated with gamepad on/off



de.das.dude said:


> for 400$ you can build a pretty decent gaming rig!



No, you cannot!


----------



## Fourstaff (Jun 17, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> No, you cannot!



Everyone has a PC at home, $400 will go a long way into making it gaming ready.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 17, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> No, you cannot!



You want to bet?


----------



## MatTheCat II (Jun 17, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> Everyone has a PC at home, $400 will go a long way into making it gaming ready.



Not without the couch potatoe console gamer getting to know all about a whole loads of headaches and issues that PC gamers just take like water of a ducks back, and there will be loads more issues besides that, issues that most people wont want to know about...... aside from that......crappy desktops are being replaced by crappy laptops and even tablet devices in the home......


----------



## MatTheCat II (Jun 17, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> You want to bet?



You can barely buy a decent gfx card for that sort of money.

So, I will bet that you could not build a PC for $400, that would compete with the PS4.

Also please bear in mind, that you will be needing about twice the processing power of the PS4 to get the same PS4 level of performance on a Windows based PC....something else about consoles....much better optimised for gaming than PCs will ever be.

best of luck.


----------



## erocker (Jun 17, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> in the grand scheme of things, this isn't really that important. microsoft will reverse direction on some of their dumb policies, it will put out some pretty fun games people will ogle at and this will all be forgotten. i think the ps4 is going to be all around the better system with a much more customer oriented service. time will tell.



Unless Sony can keep Microsoft from selling at Best Buy, Walmart and other retailers plus wipe out "Xbox" from the minds of parents and children, Sony might outsell them. Might.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 17, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> crappy desktops are being replaced by crappy laptops and even tablet devices in the home......



Really?  Tell that again to everyone here.  Your assertion about desktops being replaced is belied by the record levels of sales of cpu's, motherboards, memory, graphics cards and cases, etc...in short, all the parts for building not laptops, but desktops.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jun 17, 2013)

erocker said:


> Unless Sony can keep Microsoft from selling at Best Buy, Walmart and other retailers plus wipe out "Xbox" from the minds of parents and children, Sony might outsell them. Might.



maybe. it doesn't matter to me how it turns out though since i don't get a cut of the profits from either company  

this will all be forgotten anyway. 

also, i am not sure why people are comparing a desktop pc with a desktop cpu to those chips in the xbox and the ps. they appear to be fundamentally different in the aspect that in the framework of playing games, where the provided console API interacts directly with the instruction set customized for the environment, the next gen consoles will perform quite well at 1920x1080 resolution, better shaders and more expensive textures.


----------



## erocker (Jun 17, 2013)

rtwjunkie said:


> Really?  Tell that again to everyone here.  Your assertion about desktops being replaced is belied by the record levels of sales of cpu's, motherboards, memory, graphics cards and cases, etc...in short, all the parts for building not laptops, but desktops.



It's true. Bulky desktops that were used for things that can be done on tablets and cheap laptops are being replaced by cheap laptops and tablets. 

Obviously PC enthusiasts aren't doing this, nor are they selling off their PC's for consoles.


----------



## MatTheCat II (Jun 17, 2013)

rtwjunkie said:


> Really?  Tell that again to everyone here.  Your assertion about desktops being replaced is belied by the record levels of sales of cpu's, motherboards, memory, graphics cards and cases, etc...in short, all the parts for building not laptops, but desktops.



 ach c'mon....

This is a PC tech enthusiast website...of course everyone here has a powerful gaming desktop, a powerful gaming laptop or both.

I have both. But I am almost the only person I know who has either. 5 years ago, the non-tech nerds that I knew (almost everyone) all tended to have a sub par PC for their internet access, word processing, digital images/videos, etc. These days, all the casual PC users are on laptops....crappy laptops not at all capable of gaming at any level beyond Plants V Zombies. Some people I know just make do with tablets or even smartphones.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 17, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> You can barely buy a decent gfx card for that sort of money.
> 
> So, I will bet that you could not build a PC for $400, that would compete with the PS4.
> 
> ...



Twice the processing power?  Why?  Show me a game that requires that much processing power and I'll consider it.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 17, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> These days, all the casual PC users are on laptops



I DO agree with you to a point.  My point, is the casual user numbers are going down and the enthusiast numbers going up.  How else do you account for such large numbers of parts?  How else do you account for the resurrection from near-death of PC gaming (enabled in large part by sites like Steam).


----------



## MatTheCat II (Jun 17, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> Twice the processing power?  Why?  Show me a game that requires that much processing power and I'll consider it.



Impossible to prove, but I beleive it is a general consensus amongst games developers that twice as much horsepower is required in a PC to match console gaming performance. The fact that we now have PCs 20 times more powerful than the 360/PS3 makes us forget that....

...when xbox360 came out, I had an XT1950 XT gfx card. In terms of processing power alone, this should have been a good deal better than a 360 in terms of gaming performance, in practice, it was a good deal worse.


----------



## Fourstaff (Jun 17, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> ach c'mon....
> 
> This is a PC tech enthusiast website...of course everyone here has a powerful gaming desktop, a powerful gaming laptop or both.
> 
> I have both. But I am almost the only person I know who has either. 5 years ago, the non-tech nerds that I knew (almost everyone) all tended to have a sub par PC for their internet access, word processing, digital images/videos, etc. These days, all the casual PC users are on laptops....crappy laptops not at all capable of gaming at any level beyond Plants V Zombies. Some people I know just make do with tablets or even smartphones.



If you see PC as a console, that might change your mindset a bit. There are many MMO and RTS gamers who rely on PC for their fix.


----------



## remixedcat (Jun 17, 2013)

I figured Microsoft would pull this with the Xbone. I still think they should have gone with Nvidia. It was wierd how Sony didn't stick with Nvidia does anyone know why?


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jun 17, 2013)

remixedcat said:


> I figured Microsoft would pull this with the Xbone. I still think they should have gone with Nvidia. It was wierd how Sony didn't stick with Nvidia does anyone know why?



nvidia probably didn't tickle sony's ball for a long enough period.


----------



## crazyeyesreaper (Jun 17, 2013)

Nvidia's problem was as tech got cheaper over time aka the GPU became cheaper and cheaper to produce they did not want to drop the prices aka imaging if you had a CPU at 90nm 65nm 45nm etc you made 0 changes well the chip gets smaller means more chips per wafer Nvidia did this with the RSX in the PS3 and w.e the GPU was in the Xbox to lazy to look it up regardless even tho they got much cheaper to make Nvidia didn't really want to budget on price as such their profit margin was better for this decision. Microsoft and Sony however had to eat that loss. As such they tossed Nvidia to the curb. In todays world money talks bullshit walks and Nvidia was told to take their BS and walk lol.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 18, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> Impossible to prove, but I beleive it is a general consensus amongst games developers that twice as much horsepower is required in a PC to match console gaming performance. The fact that we now have PCs 20 times more powerful than the 360/PS3 makes us forget that....
> 
> ...when xbox360 came out, I had an XT1950 XT gfx card. In terms of processing power alone, this should have been a good deal better than a 360 in terms of gaming performance, in practice, it was a good deal worse.



A good deal worse?  An X1950XT easily matched the Xbox360.  The problem was that people making the comparison often used PC monitor resolutions for the PC and the Xbox360 was only rendering games at 1280x720, sometimes even lower and barely managing a steady 30FPS.  Once you dropped the PC resolution that low the X1950XT matched the Xbox360 easily.

Anyway, here is a decent $400 gaming build:
 Once You Know, You Newegg

After rebates it is $427, close enough to $400, and it will play anything out and in the reasonable future at 1080p.  Also, it comes with 3 current AAA titles, I wonder how many the PS4 will come bundled with...zero...


----------



## AsRock (Jun 18, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> A good deal worse?  An X1950XT easily matched the Xbox360.  The problem was that people making the comparison often used PC monitor resolutions for the PC and the Xbox360 was only rendering games at 1280x720, sometimes even lower and barely managing a steady 30FPS.  Once you dropped the PC resolution that low the X1950XT matched the Xbox360 easily.
> 
> Anyway, here is a decent $400 gaming build:
> Once You Know, You Newegg
> ...



Although the PS4 will have a OS which could add a easy $100 for most people.

EDIT: Although with Steam and a like around i think the PC is the cheaper option.


----------



## MatTheCat II (Jun 18, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> A good deal worse?  An X1950XT easily matched the Xbox360.  The problem was that people making the comparison often used PC monitor resolutions for the PC and the Xbox360 was only rendering games at 1280x720, sometimes even lower and barely managing a steady 30FPS.  Once you dropped the PC resolution that low the X1950XT matched the Xbox360 easily.
> 
> Anyway, here is a decent $400 gaming build:
> Once You Know, You Newegg
> ...



Back then, I still had a 3:4 CRT monitor that I ran at 1025*768 or whatever. I can assure you, that my Radeon X1950XT did not run CoD4 anything near as well as it ran on the 360. I should know, I had that card and I tried it. I considered the game unplayable on my PC at the time, but very playable on the 360. I wasn't bothered though. I was all about BF2 back in them days.

Putting everything else that you have listed in your budget gaming rig to one side for a moment, and focusing on the graphics card. The 7790 is about the same level of graphics card as is in the Xbox One. However, obviously the same thinking that was behind the force/failware, Windows 8, it also behind the XBox One. The clear and obvious choice for console gamers' (who aren't retards) this time around, will be the PS4. Cheaper, none of the draconian DRM or the Orwellian prying potential, and notably more powerful a machine. The GPU driving the PS4 is an equivalent of the HD7870. Considerably more powerful than the HD7790, and that isn't taking into consideration the 8Gb of GDDR5 VRAM, compared with the 1GB of GDDR5 on that 7790. And then we have the fact that developers are always able/prone to getting much more punch out of the consoles per horsepower unit than they can out of the PC.

Therefore, you have failed miserably in your attempt to beat the up n coming $400 consoles with your $400 rig, which in my opinion, as a fussy gamer with cash to burn on good performing hardware is already totally obsolete. The consoles however will be good for 8 years.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 18, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> Anyway, here is a decent $400 gaming build:
> Once You Know, You Newegg



What you have done, newtekie1, is prove a valuable point.  In the same neighborhood of price, you have come up with a rig which will play comparably to either PS4 or Xbone right now, but can be improved upon as time dictates.  It won't be long before the new consoles are still stuck in 2013, and you have advanced with the times for a couple years. 

By the time 5 years have passed, PS4 and Xbone will be left impossibly far behind, and we'll see the same thing we see now, with horrible looking games compared to their PC versions, and which don't quite play as well either.


----------



## MatTheCat II (Jun 18, 2013)

rtwjunkie said:


> What you have done, newtekie1, is prove a valuable point.  In the same neighborhood of price, you have come up with a rig which will play comparably to either PS4 or Xbone right now, but can be improved upon as time dictates.  It won't be long before the new consoles are still stuck in 2013, and you have advanced with the times for a couple years.



You guys can delude yourselves all that you want for whatever reasons you wish.

But if you had access to any 7 year old rig, even one that was high end at the time and would have cost much more to put together than the price of a console, and tried to play any modern title on it such as CoD Black Ops or even FIFA 13, and then compared the performance to how these games play on the current gen of consoles...........then you will be forced to realise how wrong your whole PC v Console appraisal is.

P.S. I have tried running these games on a pseudo 2006 machine.....an Athlon 6000+ X2 CPU, 4GB RAM, and a Radeon 6670 GPU (considerably more powerful GPU than what is in the consoles), the results were pretty damn ugly and in FIFA's case, the game was unplayable.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 18, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> But if you had access to any 7 year old rig, even one that was high end at the time and would have cost much more to put together than the price of a console, and tried to play any modern title on it such as CoD Black Ops or even FIFA 13, and then compared the performance to how these games play on the current gen of consoles...........then you will be forced to realise how wrong your whole PC v Console appraisal is.



Except for those of us that DO still have a high-end machine from 5-6 years ago in the house (P5Q Deluxe mb, QX9650, 9800gt, 4gb RAM -not listed in my specs or sig), and have watched my teenagers play the same games as me over the years, and noticed just how incomparable the two systems are as far as quality.  Best examples: Oblivion, Fallout New Vegas, Medal of Honor, Black Ops, Call of Duty, etc...  So I commend you for trying to make a valid argument, but I have the past 5 years of direct comparison in the same house at the same time.  The 360 became ancient by the 3rd year.  And then I was able to move on and improve that rig as games became more trying and demanding by doubling RAM to 8Gb, upgrading to a GTX285.


----------



## Fourstaff (Jun 18, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> You guys can delude yourselves all that you want for whatever reasons you wish.



As hard as I try, I still can't play Starcraft II or Dota II using consoles (the two games which suck up 90% of my gaming time for the past 7 years). 

Can you show me how?


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 18, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> Back then, I still had a 3:4 CRT monitor that I ran at 1025*768 or whatever. I can assure you, that my Radeon X1950XT did not run CoD4 anything near as well as it ran on the 360. I should know, I had that card and I tried it. I considered the game unplayable on my PC at the time, but very playable on the 360. I wasn't bothered though. I was all about BF2 back in them days.



Odd, my X1900GT0 that was unlocked to an X1950XT played CoD4 just fine on my 1280x1024 monitor I had at the time, it looked better than my Xbox360 version too.



MatTheCat II said:


> Putting everything else that you have listed in your budget gaming rig to one side for a moment, and focusing on the graphics card. The 7790 is about the same level of graphics card as is in the Xbox One. However, obviously the same thinking that was behind the force/failware, Windows 8, it also behind the XBox One. The clear and obvious choice for console gamers' (who aren't retards) this time around, will be the PS4. Cheaper, none of the draconian DRM or the Orwellian prying potential, and notably more powerful a machine. The GPU driving the PS4 is an equivalent of the HD7870. Considerably more powerful than the HD7790, and that isn't taking into consideration the 8Gb of GDDR5 VRAM, compared with the 1GB of GDDR5 on that 7790. And then we have the fact that developers are always able/prone to getting much more punch out of the consoles per horsepower unit than they can out of the PC.



Yes, and no.  I wasn't trying to beat the PS4, just get close to it.  The computer isn't as powerful as the PS4.  However, the argument was that you can make a _decent_ gaming rig for $400, and I did just that.  It will handle every modern game with ease.

Comparing the amount of GDDR in the PS4 to just the graphics card is wrong.  The GDDR5 in the PS4 is used for system memory as well, of which the PC I built has 8GB of, so the total amount of RAM in the PC is 9GB.  And at the medium settings that the 7790 will be used at, 1GB will be enough.



MatTheCat II said:


> Therefore, you have failed miserably in your attempt to beat the up n coming $400 consoles with your $400 rig, which in my opinion, as a fussy gamer with cash to burn on good performing hardware is already totally obsolete. The consoles however will be good for 8 years.



Considering I wasn't trying to beat the PS4, I didn't fail at all.  I can't fail at something I'm not doing.

And you bring up a good point.  The console will be good for 8 years, it  will also remain exactly the same for 8 years.  Which means the games in 8 years will look pretty much the same in 8 years as they do today.  However, the PC I picked will be able to have small amount of money put into it over the years to actually improve on it.

And lets talk about all the extra things the PC is capable of.  I find it hilarious that console manufacturers are always trying to add functions into their consoles that have been part of PCs for ages.  Besides that, lets see one of the consoles run Office.  Lets see one that can even print to a wide range of printers.

Oh and then there is backwards compatibility.  My PC can play pretty much any game from the past 15 years.  Will the PS4 or Xbone be able to play any old games? No.  Here is something ironic, my PC can play PSX and PS2 and (likely)PS3 games!


----------



## remixedcat (Jun 18, 2013)

There's a tool called 3D Analyze that simulates different GPUs


----------



## MatTheCat II (Jun 18, 2013)

rtwjunkie said:


> Except for those of us that DO still have a high-end machine from 5-6 years ago in the house (P5Q Deluxe mb, QX9650, 9800gt, 4gb RAM -not listed in my specs or sig), and have watched my teenagers play the same games as me over the years, and noticed just how incomparable the two systems are as far as quality.  Best examples: Oblivion, Fallout New Vegas, Medal of Honor, Black Ops, Call of Duty, etc...  So I commend you for trying to make a valid argument, but I have the past 5 years of direct comparison in the same house at the same time.  The 360 became ancient by the 3rd year.  And then I was able to move on and improve that rig as games became more trying and demanding by doubling RAM to 8Gb, upgrading to a GTX285.



Stop moving the goalposts please.

QX9650 did not come out until 2008. XBox was out 2006, and that CPU alone cost more at release than the cost of the whole 360 console....

PCs consoles PC consoles PCs Consoles ........jeeeezus.

We all know that PCs are more powerful than consoles and that we all prefer PC gaming to console gaming.......it is just that the rest of the world doesn't share in our wisdom and preference for the superior, and vastly more expensive platform.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 18, 2013)

2013-2008=5.  I said 5-6 years. And I am in a unique position to have used that pc until December last year, and observed the quality of the games my teenagers played drop abysmally as the years went on compared to the same games on pc.  I gave a very fair representation of a high end system from back then, which you yourself said to throw up there.

The point of this article wasn't pc vs console, it was that MS had to use a high end pc to sell the public on the games and quality.  But the specs of that system far, far outweigh the mid-level gaming specs of TODAY, which is where the new consoles are.  What about in 5 months?   

I myself probably will buy one of these systems...they have their uses, as has the 360 in my house for years, but they cannot keep up with PC's.  They become outclassed in very short order  by even mid-range pc's.


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jun 18, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> An 8-Core AMD CPU that is the equivalent of about a $150 PC CPU.  I'd say that is pretty close to entry level gaming PC , and the video card is definitely entry level gaming PC.



Usually, I would agree with that statement, except in this case, Jaguar (which shares the same architecture as Kabini) was designed from the ground up to be a low power CPU to compete with the likes of Atom; a quad core Kabini (theoretically half the power as the 8 core parts depending on clock and memory bandwidth) can beat a Cortex A15 or an Atom z2760 in terms of raw CPU performance, but is easily beaten by even a low power dual core i5 Ivy Bridge:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6974/amd-kabini-review/3

So don't let the "8-Core" title fool you, these are cores for optimized for very low power use, and really don't compare all too well to a full blown desktop PC processor.


----------



## Covert_Death (Jun 18, 2013)

15th Warlock said:


> Usually, I would agree with that statement, except in this case, Jaguar (which shares the same architecture as Kabini) was designed from the ground up to be a low power CPU to compete with the likes of Atom; a quad core Kabini (theoretically half the power as the 8 core parts depending on clock and memory bandwidth) can beat a Cortex A15 or an Atom z2760 in terms of raw CPU performance, but is easily beaten by even a low power dual core i5 Ivy Bridge:
> 
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/6974/amd-kabini-review/3
> 
> So don't let the "8-Core" title fool you, these are cores for optimized for very low power use, and really don't compare all too well to a full blown desktop PC processor.



the one good thing about these 8-core consoles is that games will finally be optimized to use at least 8-cores (they will have to be if they even want them to be playable on consoles) so this means my FX-8350 @ 5.0Ghz will really start showing off what it can do as far as gaming here soon... CAN'T WAIT

(also can't wait to get a PS4!)


----------



## 15th Warlock (Jun 18, 2013)

Covert_Death said:


> the one good thing about these 8-core consoles is that games will finally be optimized to use at least 8-cores (they will have to be if they even want them to be playable on consoles) so this means my FX-8350 @ 5.0Ghz will really start showing off what it can do as far as gaming here soon... CAN'T WAIT
> 
> (also can't wait to get a PS4!)




Not necessarily, both consoles will dedicate one or more cores to run background tasks such as OS and downloads while gaming, both Sony and MS have confirmed that.

However, you can't deny the trend is for the development of multi threaded game engines, and we might finally start seeing games that utilize 4 or more cores on PC as an added benefit as you said


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jun 18, 2013)

I showed a guy who I work with this thread and article and he got so defensive about the Xbox One and Microsoft. Saying its normal practice. my rebuttal back was "Right its a standard practice to have dev kits at gaming conventions showing off the new games, on normal PCs that have hardware CLOSE too what the console will have."


----------



## Regeneration (Jun 18, 2013)

Microsoft sent us a response. They say it was a devkit system.


----------



## Ikaruga (Jun 18, 2013)

Regeneration said:


> Microsoft sent us a response. They say it was a devkit system.


_"PR Manager at Microsoft"_


----------



## andresgriego (Jun 19, 2013)

Other people in this thread have explained how these consoles could perform comparably to high end PC hardware. With an optimized OS, you bypass useless layers of functionality that you don't need on a gaming console, and at the same time you can optimize communication paths of those you do need. Windows is multipurpose, bloated and farty.



15th Warlock said:


> Usually, I would agree with that statement, except in this case, Jaguar (which shares the same architecture as Kabini) was designed from the ground up to be a low power CPU to compete with the likes of Atom; a quad core Kabini (theoretically half the power as the 8 core parts depending on clock and memory bandwidth) can beat a Cortex A15 or an Atom z2760 in terms of raw CPU performance, but is easily beaten by even a low power dual core i5 Ivy Bridge:
> 
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/6974/amd-kabini-review/3
> 
> So don't let the "8-Core" title fool you, these are cores for optimized for very low power use, and really don't compare all too well to a full blown desktop PC processor.



Yes, and they aren't going to be doing the same kind of work as a desktop processor with the implied, associated OS, so you can't really compare them to anything in the desktop world. It's not a proper comparison.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 19, 2013)

andresgriego said:


> so you can't really compare them to anything in the desktop world. It's not a proper comparison.



Except the specs are set now...not even at high-end hardware levels as a unit (and yes, we can compare this time, because Sony and MS both basically built pc's), and will be frozen there for 6 to 8 years.  Blink your eyes and you miss advances in the PC world.  

After 3-4 years, game manufacturers will be once again working their hardest to squeeze every bit of performance they can out of antiquated hardware.  The PC world though will have moved well along, and will play the same titles (of those that are released to PC as well) at superior scope, magnitude, speed, and graphical quality.


----------



## andresgriego (Jun 19, 2013)

rtwjunkie said:


> Except the specs are set now...not even at high-end hardware levels as a unit (and yes, we can compare this time, because Sony and MS both basically built pc's), and will be frozen there for 6 to 8 years.  Blink your eyes and you miss advances in the PC world.
> 
> After 3-4 years, game manufacturers will be once again working their hardest to squeeze every bit of performance they can out of antiquated hardware.  The PC world though will have moved well along, and will play the same titles (of those that are released to PC as well) at superior scope, magnitude, speed, and graphical quality.



No, what I meant is just because the cores of the jaguar fall under an entry level category in the desktop world doesn't mean they aren't up to job of running a gaming console, even in a mediocre sense. They're impressive, especially if they harbour the hUMA technology.


----------



## DannibusX (Jun 19, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> A good deal worse?  An X1950XT easily matched the Xbox360.  The problem was that people making the comparison often used PC monitor resolutions for the PC and the Xbox360 was only rendering games at 1280x720, sometimes even lower and barely managing a steady 30FPS.  Once you dropped the PC resolution that low the X1950XT matched the Xbox360 easily.
> 
> Anyway, here is a decent $400 gaming build:
> Once You Know, You Newegg
> ...



Don't forget the lack of a $50-$60 premium to play a multiplayer game online


----------



## Fourstaff (Jun 19, 2013)

So if we can emulate Xbox one with a PC, why not get a PC and install a hacked Xbox one OS and get the best of both worlds?


----------



## remixedcat (Jun 19, 2013)

You can prolly run the XboneOS in Hyper-v or Vmware


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jun 19, 2013)

Yeah, I foresee some emulators coming real soon for PC.


----------



## illincrux (Jun 19, 2013)

YogurtMaster said:


> Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.  The Alpha dev kits were using similar components.  The game will look the same.  It's a common practice in the INDUSTRY!
> 
> You guys are killing me with your ignorance.  This happens at EVERY LAUNCH E3, it is standard stuff.
> 
> ...




Don't know if this guy is a payed shill or just arrogant?

You seem to not know anything about Federal Laws having to do with fraud: US Code - Chapter 47

Just because it's E3, doesn't give anyone legal and moral immunity to fraudulence....


----------



## illincrux (Jun 19, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> So if we can emulate Xbox one with a PC, why not get a PC and install a hacked Xbox one OS and get the best of both worlds?



The best of both worlds? 

Both the Xbox One and Windows 8 are spiralling towards doom. In fact, I just switched over to Ubuntu 13.04 since it appears to finally have the support and mainstream capabilities that it nearly had 2 years ago when I last checked it out.

If anything, I'm curious to know if you can install Linux on the PS4 since you can do it with the PS3. In fact, Sony was encouraging it so perhaps they will with this next generation?


----------



## MatTheCat II (Jun 23, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> So if we can emulate Xbox one with a PC, why not get a PC and install a hacked Xbox one OS and get the best of both worlds?



This would be really funny if it happened.

I would install it and game on it just to spite Microsoft. I am p1ssed with them right now for forcing me to use Windows 8 on my new laptop.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jun 23, 2013)

Win 8 runs 2x times better on laptops than Win 7. Specially on older ones. Just saying...


----------



## scoutingwraith (Jun 24, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> This would be really funny if it happened.
> 
> I would install it and game on it just to spite Microsoft. I am p1ssed with them right now for forcing me to use Windows 8 on my new laptop.



You know somebody will try if they can get their hands on the OS image or source code for it. I am positive that somebody will try to emulate it if they can. The question will all come down to how to manage the difference in how the X1 and PC are different in architecture in both the OS and system.


----------



## MatTheCat II (Jun 24, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> Win 8 runs 2x times better on laptops than Win 7. Specially on older ones. Just saying...



Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, that doesn't change the fact that the only way to make Windows 8 tolerable, is to use a 3rd party program that enables the user to circumnavigate all the Metro UI and its nonsense apps and proprietary stores that Microsoft is trying to ram down our throats.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jun 24, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, that doesn't change the fact that the only way to make Windows 8 tolerable, is to use a 3rd party program that enables the user to circumnavigate all the Metro UI and its nonsense apps and proprietary stores that Microsoft is trying to ram down our throats.



Agree. I just use the free *Classic Shell* program which have all the tools required to make Win 8 just the way should be. Works flawlessly.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jun 24, 2013)

MatTheCat II said:


> the only way to make Windows 8 tolerable, is to use a 3rd party program that enables the user to circumnavigate all the Metro UI and its nonsense apps and proprietary stores that Microsoft is trying to ram down our throats.



Couldn't agree more!  I use Start8 and ModernMix on my W8 testbed, and it's made it a fairly nice operating system.


----------



## Ahhzz (Jun 24, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> Win 8 runs 2x times better on laptops than Win 7. Specially on older ones. Just saying...





I've noticed that win 7 runs better than win 8 on laptops. Just saying...

Just out of curiosity, what makes win8 a better os for standard PC's than win7? (not tablets, not win-phones, not touchscreen laptops, standard, home-use, gaming or otherwise).


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jun 25, 2013)

Digital Foundry: Hands-on with Xbox One

Digital Foundry: Hands-on with PlayStation 4


----------



## AsRock (Jun 25, 2013)

Frame rate meter on that PS4 vid looks like it's fake, how ever the game they were playing seemed to play nicely which should be the main concern.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jun 25, 2013)

So is true that the PS4 have a frame cap at 30fps??????


----------



## newtekie1 (Jun 25, 2013)

AsRock said:


> Frame rate meter on that PS4 vid looks like it's fake, how ever the game they were playing seemed to play nicely which should be the main concern.



It was added later using analysis tools that analysed the footage to figure out the framerate.

And the Need for Speed footage didn't look that smooth, but that seems like a frame syncing issue.



Prima.Vera said:


> So is true that the PS4 have a frame cap at 30fps??????



Probably, but as long as the games look smooth I don't care.  It will actually look smoother to have the games locked at 30FPS then it will to have them jumping back and forth between 60 and 30FPS.


----------



## Black Knight77 (Jul 4, 2013)

YogurtMaster said:


> Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong.  The Alpha dev kits were using similar components.  The game will look the same.  It's a common practice in the INDUSTRY!
> 
> You guys are killing me with your ignorance.  This happens at EVERY LAUNCH E3, it is standard stuff.
> 
> ...



Ok let me put this simply for you since you think there not triing to trick anyone, First off, processor wasnt an AMD period, yes there is a huge difference in processors from AMD and from Intel. Secondly using a GTX 770 video card, are you kidding me, look at the specs of the XBone and tell me where that video card is at on the specs and tell me why you think that video card is NOT over powered compaired to what is in the XBone. I had to make a screen name just to respond, I own THREE xbox 360s and I am not a fan boy. Heck my dell laptop with SLI can play games better then my 360 could. Simply put MS screwed up, they new what the other party was doing and let them do it, honestly IF i decide to buy a gaming console it will NOT be a XBone, for many other reason this excluded. I could see if MS had a PC that had a CLOSE AMD processor with a built in GPU or a separate card that was equal to there GPU but come on man, you have no leg to stand on, they where using INTEL and Nvidia products that are way better then what is in the consoles.


----------

