# Xbox One Chip Slower Than PlayStation 4



## btarunr (May 24, 2013)

After bagging chip supply deals for all three new-generation consoles -- Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and Wii U, things are looking up for AMD. While Wii U uses older-generation hardware technologies, Xbox One and PlayStation 4 use the very latest AMD has to offer -- "Jaguar" 64-bit x86 CPU micro-architecture, and Graphics CoreNext GPU architecture. Chips that run the two consoles have a lot in common, but also a few less-than-subtle differences.

PlayStation 4 chip, which came to light this February, is truly an engineer's fantasy. It combines eight "Jaguar" 64-bit x86 cores clocked at 1.60 GHz, with a fairly well spec'd Radeon GPU, which features 1,156 stream processors, 32 ROPs; and a 256-bit wide unified GDDR5 memory interface, clocked at 5.50 GHz. At these speeds, the system gets a memory bandwidth of 176 GB/s. Memory isn't handled like UMA (unified memory architecture), there's no partition between system- and graphics-memory. The two are treated as items on the same 8 GB of memory, and either can use up a majority of it.






Xbox One chip is a slightly different beast. It uses the same eight "Jaguar" 1.60 GHz cores, but a slightly smaller Radeon GPU that packs 768 stream processors, and a quad-channel DDR3-2133 MHz memory interface, which offers a memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s, and holding 8 GB of memory. Memory between the two subsystems are shared in a similar way to PlayStation 4, with one small difference. Xbox One chip uses a large 32 MB SRAM cache, which operates at 102 GB/s, but at infinitesimally lower latency than GDDR5. This cache cushions data-transfers for the GPU. Microsoft engineers are spinning this off as "200 GB/s of memory bandwidth," by somehow clubbing bandwidths of the various memory types in the system.

The two consoles also differ with software. While PlayStation 4 runs a Unix-derived operating system with OpenGL 4.2 API, Xbox One uses software developers are more familiar with -- a 64-bit Windows NT 6.x kernel-based operating system, running DirectX 11 API. Despite these differences, the chips on the two consoles should greatly reduce multi-platform production costs for game studios, as the two consoles together have a lot in common with PC.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## seronx (May 24, 2013)

PS4 => OpenGL 4.3, 1152 ALUs(256 ALUs(from Jaguar SoC)+ 896 ALUs(from Bonaire)), GDDR5 is Quad-channel just like Xbox One.
Xbox One => DX11.1, 768 ALUs(256 ALUs(from Jaguar SoC)+ 512 ALUs(Ripped from Kaveri lol))

The clock-speeds for the CPU cores actually appear to be around 2.0 GHz, nominally.


----------



## NC37 (May 24, 2013)

Don't care how good it may be on paper, whenever you add extra steps to a process it doesn't usually = greater performance. That with a weaker GPU than the PS4 on top of all the outrage about used games, needing net to play, and then always on Kinect. Looks like M$ has fumbled. Time to return to the lead Sony. Don't mess it up again!


----------



## 15th Warlock (May 24, 2013)

There's also a very interesting analysis by Anand at:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6972/xbox-one-hardware-compared-to-playstation-4

In it you can see in detail how the memory bandwidth is shared between different components on both consoles.

He also reviewed Kavini, the architecture behind the Jaguar cores shared by both consoles here:

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

It's AMD's latest, but as a low power part it's really meant to compete against ARM and Atom processors, not desktop class processors like Ivy Bridge or Piledriver, future's not looking very bright for consoles in terms of CPU power, as even dual core desktop parts handily beat Jaguar...

Funny thing is, the fact that PS4 has a faster GPU won't mean much to game developers, as they usually program games for the lowest common denominator hardware, and then port their software to other platforms


----------



## de.das.dude (May 24, 2013)

i always thought they made for highest hardware and scaled it down for the lower ones.

im no expert, but shouldnt Sony start using DX11? or wont they because DX is MS tech?


----------



## Nordic (May 24, 2013)

Xbox One Fan Quieter Than PlayStation 4


----------



## 15th Warlock (May 24, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> i always thought they made for highest hardware and scaled it down for the lower ones.
> 
> im no expert, but shouldnt Sony start using DX11? or wont they because DX is MS tech?



Nope, unfortunately, that's why most current multi platform games are limited by 256MBs of RAM to do things like A.I. routines, basic polygon models, map sizes, and such as this is the amount of RAM available to the PS3 developers, they rely heavily on streaming data, and then they scale things like textures, tesselation or add more pixel intensive effects when porting these games to PC.


----------



## lZKoce (May 24, 2013)

I already saw the early reactions after the MS's press-conference late at night.


----------



## cdawall (May 24, 2013)

james888 said:


> Xbox One Fan Quieter Than PlayStation 4



Says who? Because if we go off of history even higher watt playstation systems have had quieter fans than the xbox's to date.


----------



## Lionheart (May 24, 2013)

They look like pretty good specs too me for next gen console's but I was hoping a higher clock speed for the CPU At least around the 2Ghz mark


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (May 24, 2013)

For some reason I think they will both play basically the same and in the end MS will beat SONY for some unknown reason that has absolutely no logic to it...

I think it will be awile before devs can actually take advantage full advantage of either system and by then it won't really matter which system is better....it doesn't now and I see no reason for it to matter in the future.

Besides MS is giving greedy Devs exactly what they want and then some...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 24, 2013)

lZKoce said:


> I already saw the early reactions after the MS's press-conference late at night.


Xbox is going to get a lot more developer/publisher support simply because it forbids second hand sales.  People go where the games are so I think Xbox One is going to have a huge leg up on PS4.  It disgusts me but that's the way it is.


----------



## Nordic (May 24, 2013)

cdawall said:


> Says who? Because if we go off of history even higher watt playstation systems have had quieter fans than the xbox's to date.



It might not be. Lesser gpu -> Lesser tdp -> Fan is quieter. I guess Microsoft could mess that up somehow.


----------



## NinkobEi (May 24, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Xbox is going to get a lot more developer/publisher support simply because it forbids second hand sales.  People go where the games are so I think Xbox One is going to have a huge leg up on PS4.  It disgusts me but that's the way it is.


Playstation historically has always had the best exclusive titles. This generation will not be any different. It has to do with which continent the console is developed on. MS can try to make an appeal to japanese developers but in the end there will always be that language barrier.



james888 said:


> Xbox One Fan Quieter Than PlayStation 4


If you read the Anandtech report, the PS4 should run a lot hotter/higher power. Seems unlikely that their fan will be quieter.


----------



## Nordic (May 24, 2013)

NinkobEi said:


> If you read the Anandtech report, the PS4 should run a lot hotter/higher power. Seems unlikely that their fan will be quieter.



I skimmed it. It sounds like you just said that the ps4 is hotter and that it is unlikely the xbox would be quieter? I was saying the xbox should produce less heat do to the lesser chip making a fan not have to work so hard making the system quieter.


----------



## NinkobEi (May 24, 2013)

james888 said:


> I skimmed it. It sounds like you just said that the ps4 is hotter and that it is unlikely the xbox would be quieter? I was saying the xbox should produce less heat do to the lesser chip making a fan not have to work so hard making the system quieter.



Crap apparently i'm dyslexic today. Carry on


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (May 24, 2013)

I like this, i  think maybe Nvidia is sore 'cause both Msft and Sony have gone with Ati-

http://www.nextpowerup.com/news/991/nvidia-ps4-gpu-is-too-cheap-and-too-weak.html


----------



## NinkobEi (May 24, 2013)

tigger said:


> I like this, i  think maybe Nvidia is sore 'cause both Msft and Sony have gone with Ati-
> 
> http://www.nextpowerup.com/news/991/nvidia-ps4-gpu-is-too-cheap-and-too-weak.html


Let's speculate 
My bet is that both companies wanted similar architecture to make development cheaper. Yes they probably worked together on this after learning last-gen that independent dev is absurdly costly. AMD was most certainly the lowest bidder.

Then they probably wanted the cpu/gpu to be developed by the same company for several reasons. Cost, synergy. Next gen if the Tegra has evolved to 32 cores and nvidia becomes more established in the processor department maybe they will have a better chance.


----------



## nisen (May 24, 2013)

lZKoce said:


> I already saw the early reactions after the MS's press-conference late at night.



had to see some of his other vids just to find out if hes always that angry, luckily not, but gave me headache, needed a dose of NEW XBOX ONE REVEALED Parody


----------



## DannibusX (May 24, 2013)

I got an Xbox One on my desk.  I can hook it up to my TV if I want to.


----------



## Dent1 (May 24, 2013)

james888 said:


> I skimmed it. It sounds like you just said that the ps4 is hotter and that it is unlikely the xbox would be quieter? I was saying the xbox should produce less heat do to the lesser chip making a fan not have to work so hard making the system quieter.



In theory yes, but not necessarily.

The previous Xbox's were loud because the fan they selected was badly designed, simply put, it had nothing to do with heat output.

We have desktop CPUs running a lot hotter than it's console counterpart, yet even the most mainstream cooling system is silent or near silent. If Microsoft or Sony want a quiet fan, they will source one, if they don't it's because they're cutting costs or feel that noise isn't a priority. It has little to do with heat constraints.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 24, 2013)

NinkobEi said:


> Playstation historically has always had the best exclusive titles. This generation will not be any different. It has to do with which continent the console is developed on. MS can try to make an appeal to japanese developers but in the end there will always be that language barrier.


Because Sony paid for it.  Publishers will see a much bigger pay check from no second hand sales than what Sony could ever pay.  It will be different because publishers have always resented second hand sales and they now, finally, have a console that eliminates it.  They will flock to it because all publishers are corporations and corporations are all about money.  If people don't boycott Xbox One, PS4 and Wii U will be the last consoles not to eliminate second hand sales.


Xbox 360 had inferior hardware to the PS3 but Xbox 360 won out because of its early launch.


----------



## Aquinus (May 24, 2013)

You know, my Xbox 360 isn't very loud. The only thing loud on it is the DVD drive. If you play something downloaded off the hard drive it is actually pretty quiet. I have the second to last generation of original white Xbox 360s. It has worked pretty well for me but I haven't used it lately either.

Despite the Xbox One being a bit slower, I don't think it will be noticeable. I saw it coming a mile away that MS was going to use DX and PS was going to use OpenGL. For idealism sake, I would like to see Sony succeed but I'm afraid I have to agree with Ford. The game industry businesses in general flock to where the money is.


----------



## Kaynar (May 24, 2013)

Funny thing is, some highly placed moron in EA said yesterday that Xbox One is 1 step ahead of the highest end PC today!


----------



## Black.Raven (May 24, 2013)

in the case of unified memory yes. but im sure you can build something thats waaaaay faster than the xbox one/1/3/3thgeneration. Whatever


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 24, 2013)

the worst thing about the playstation 4 is that it is made by sony. don't buy it for its advertised features because they will just come up with a way to legally remove those features.


----------



## Jacez (May 24, 2013)

So, if I'm getting this right..

Both the PS4 and the Xbox One have an *8-core Jaguar*.
We've only seen 2-core variants of the new Kabini architecture, but the IPC should be around 1/2 that of Ivy Bridge.

So, essentially, it's a *4-core i3-3120U* or a* 2-core i3-2100*, or *half the overall performance of a stock 2600k*.

Not to mention that it's split up into 8 cores, which is less of a problem when you're coding the games directly for the specific CPU.

Now, the Xbox One has an underclocked (850Mhz -> 800Mhz) *HD 6770* inside and the PS4 has an underclocked (900Mhz -> 800Mhz) *HD 6870*. The memory bandwidth appears to be accurate for both examples.

All in all, it's an Entry-Point/Mid-Range computer.


----------



## Ikaruga (May 24, 2013)

Xbox One Reveal 2013 Highlights - YouTube


----------



## librin.so.1 (May 24, 2013)

Hmmmm... Dee Three Dee Eleven[1] on a Windoze kernel for the Xbone && Oh Gee El Four Point Two[2] on a *nix for the PSfour.
I hope that means better game ports for all PC systems - Windoze, Half-eaten Apples[3] and Leen0x. I really do hope so.
...Please say it will be so. Please...? 

[1]D3D11 - Direct3D 11
[2]OGL4.2 - OpenGL 4.2
[3]Well, really - macs have essentially PC hardware these days. Hence listing under "PC systems"


----------



## Frick (May 24, 2013)

What I am most intersted in is how devs are going to use the computational power they have in Azure for The Xbox One.


----------



## newtekie1 (May 24, 2013)

btarunr said:


> While PlayStation 4 runs a Unix-derived operating system with OpenGL 4.2 API, Xbox One uses software developers are more familiar with -- a 64-bit Windows NT 6.x kernel-based operating system, running DirectX 11 API. Despite these differences, the chips on the two consoles should greatly reduce multi-platform production costs for game studios, as the two consoles together have a lot in common with PC.



This is actually the most exciting bit of this news to me.  I hope this means that games coming over to the PC will be better than the really bad ports we've seen in the past, and I also hope the PS4 running on a Unix/OpenGL base means we will see more hit games make it to the Linux/OSX side of PCs.



Easy Rhino said:


> the worst thing about the playstation 4 is that it is made by sony. don't buy it for its advertised features because they will just come up with a way to legally remove those features.



And what advertised feature has sony removed in the past?


----------



## m1dg3t (May 24, 2013)

Both look good, on paper, but still sticking to PC & PS3  

I only bought PS3 to play GT5! 



Easy Rhino said:


> the worst thing about the playstation 4 is that it is made by sony. don't buy it for its advertised features because they will just come up with a way to legally remove those features.



Sony isn't Asus!


----------



## midnightoil (May 24, 2013)

Jacez said:


> So, if I'm getting this right..
> 
> Both the PS4 and the Xbox One have an *8-core Jaguar*.
> We've only seen 2-core variants of the new Kabini architecture, but the IPC should be around 1/2 that of Ivy Bridge.
> ...



The PS4 chip is most closely related to a 7850, I can't speak about the XB1's as I don't know for sure.  Anyway, both will have more than enough oomph for GPU related tasks for the first couple of generations of games that would constrain no PC (even something with dual or triple Titans).  On the other hand, the XB1 is going to suffer badly from memory bandwidth issues for anything that relies on the CPU compute performance ... plus, due to its tripartite (windows based) operating system there's going to be a much higher baseline CPU overhead on the XB1 than the PS4.


----------



## SeventhReign (May 24, 2013)

Lionheart said:


> They look like pretty good specs too me for next gen console's but I was hoping a higher clock speed for the CPU At least around the 2Ghz mark



Not much of a gamer are you?  Higher CPU clock speeds have been proven time and time again, to have zero effect on gaming, after a certain point.  It is the GPU that you want to be faster, not the CPU.


----------



## SeventhReign (May 24, 2013)

Jacez said:


> So, if I'm getting this right..
> 
> Both the PS4 and the Xbox One have an *8-core Jaguar*.
> We've only seen 2-core variants of the new Kabini architecture, but the IPC should be around 1/2 that of Ivy Bridge.
> ...



Those numbers are wayyyyy off.  Go do some homework.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 24, 2013)

Remember that the advantage of consoles isn't in the hardware but being a one-size-fits-all platform.  When developing software for Windows, the operating system assumes control over most of the micromanagement.  On consoles, developers have control over virtually all the hardware.  Think of it like a TV's electronics: it like old cellphones (non-smartphones).  They had a fraction of the computing power as modern smartphones but did their jobs exceptionally well because they were designed for that specific task--not generalities like smartphones do.

Also, keep in mind that Xbox One will have an advantage of using DirectX over OpenGL.  DirectX sets the hardware requirements and OpenGL adapts them.  Less is more when efficiency makes up the difference.


----------



## RCoon (May 24, 2013)

SeventhReign said:


> Not much of a gamer are you?  Higher CPU clock speeds have been proven time and time again, to have zero effect on gaming, after a certain point.  It is the GPU that you want to be faster, not the CPU.



This doesnt get ephasized enough.
Games other than Civ 5, Starcraft II and other CPU intensive RTS games (most of these never come to consoles anyway) barely use processors. It has been *proven* time again that a low-midrange cpu can drive a flagship single gpu card and get comparatively good frame results when compared to a high end CPU. CPU is only important for multi GPU setups and RTS games.


----------



## midnightoil (May 24, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Also, keep in mind that Xbox One will have an advantage of using DirectX over OpenGL.  DirectX sets the hardware requirements and OpenGL adapts them.  Less is more when efficiency makes up the difference.



This is completely wrong.  AMD and NVIDIA come up with features in concert with software developers, then publish what they're doing and MS and Khronos come up with DirectX and OpenGL specs respectively.

Also, DirectX is a major disadvantage. It's much less adaptive, more bloated, generally slower, higher level and requires entire engine rewrites to make use of new API features (in OpenGL games or programs you just add them on).  Oh, and OpenGL's latest spec has a more expansive feature set than DX, they're ahead now, not behind.  Made worse is the fact that MS this time around seem to be really pushing developers towards using DirectX exclusively as opposed to programming direct to metal as much as they can (which practically all blockbuster titles for both PS3 and XB360 did after the first gen or two) ... I very much doubt Sony is being so mindlessly dogmatic.


----------



## repman244 (May 24, 2013)

Jacez said:


> So, if I'm getting this right..
> 
> Both the PS4 and the Xbox One have an *8-core Jaguar*.
> We've only seen 2-core variants of the new Kabini architecture, but the IPC should be around 1/2 that of Ivy Bridge.
> ...



You didn't get it right.

Never directly compare to the normal PC hardware. A thing to remember here is that if you optimize a game for a certain architecture you get much much better results.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (May 24, 2013)

Looking at these specs just makes me not want to buy any next gen console.  Maybe waiting two years to see how developers make use of the hardware is the way to go.  

Hell I'll be playing BF4 on PC anyway.


----------



## Fourstaff (May 24, 2013)

So can we install Windows 7 (not 8)?


----------



## ManofGod (May 24, 2013)

lZKoce said:


> I already saw the early reactions after the MS's press-conference late at night.



Got 3 words into that video and realized he had absolutely nothing worth listening to.  Clicked the X and moved on, not even worth reading the comments.


----------



## Aquinus (May 24, 2013)

Hilux SSRG said:


> Looking at these specs just makes me not want to buy any next gen console. Maybe waiting two years to see how developers make use of the hardware is the way to go.



Even though I agree with you, there were some pretty good games for PS3 and the processor in that thing was powerful but no one knew how to use it correctly. X86 on the other hand is a much different animal which has a lot of maturity behind it. I suspect that any issues that arise will be from making games multi-threaded. I think this is the push the gaming industry needs though if we want to see games scaling better on CPUs with more than 4 core or logical threads. X86, DX, and OpenGL are going to make games port between consoles and PCs very easy and that's the real added advantage. I would rather see the console gaming market get absorbed into the PC gaming market, not the other way around.

So say all you want, all I want are ports that are as good as the real thing because the hardware is the same. Nothing but good things can come out of this for PC gaming IMHO. Sony and MS are killing two birds with one stone and it's a smart move.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (May 24, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> X86, DX, and OpenGL are going to make games port between consoles and PCs very easy and that's the real added advantage.



I wonder if Sony is making a play for more FPS games on the PS4 with their support of OpenGL.  Xbox 360 had some heavy hitters in the FPS category, which really sold that console.

With the current economy both companies need to price their consoles "right," especially with what I think are toned-down next gen specs.


----------



## midnightoil (May 24, 2013)

Hilux SSRG said:


> I wonder if Sony is making a play for more FPS games on the PS4 with their support of OpenGL.  Xbox 360 had some heavy hitters in the FPS category, which really sold that console.



what on earth are you talking about?


----------



## Aquinus (May 24, 2013)

Hilux SSRG said:


> With the current economy both companies need to price their consoles "right," especially with what I think are toned-down next gen specs.



That's why they're going to cost more than the 360 and PS3 costed? I don't think so, it's not all that toned down imho.



midnightoil said:


> what on earth are you talking about?


I agree,  in general, what API is used has little to do with what kinds of games developers are going to make. I'm not sure where he is going with this.


----------



## chr0nos (May 24, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> This is actually the most exciting bit of this news to me.  I hope this means that games coming over to the PC will be better than the really bad ports we've seen in the past, and I also hope the PS4 running on a Unix/OpenGL base means we will see more hit games make it to the Linux/OSX side of PCs.
> 
> 
> 
> And what advertised feature has sony removed in the past?



Well the first PS3 had SACD playback, PS1/PS2 backward compatibility, More USB ports and Flash memory card readers.

Not to mention the removal of Other OS which was used by a lot of people.


----------



## Frick (May 24, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> This is actually the most exciting bit of this news to me.  I hope this means that games coming over to the PC will be better than the really bad ports we've seen in the past, and I also hope the PS4 running on a Unix/OpenGL base means we will see more hit games make it to the Linux/OSX side of PCs.
> 
> And what advertised feature has sony removed in the past?



+1 on the first statement, the second part I'm thinking the backwards compatibility thing maybe? It was a selling point when it was first launched.


----------



## AlienIsGOD (May 24, 2013)

the xbox one's GPU should be somewhere between a 7770 and a 7790 based on GCN core count, performance wise remains to be seen what magic devs can cook up.  Regardless the new gen consoles will look pretty gfx wise with  Dx11 and OpenGL 4.2


----------



## Hilux SSRG (May 24, 2013)

midnightoil said:


> what on earth are you talking about?



Care to elaborate your thoughts further?



Pricing hasn't been revealed, correct me if I am wrong.  I don't see Sony pulling for msrp $599 at launch;  MS may offer an optional subsidized plan.  I just think the upcoming Xbox1/PS4 could have been more powerful if the lagging economy, i.e. reduced discretionary spending, didn't matter so much.  Can you honestly say the CPU or GPU in both machines equal at least a current midrange Intel x86 chip or 7870/660?  I *know* that midrange can vary to some.


----------



## newtekie1 (May 24, 2013)

chr0nos said:


> Well the first PS3 had SACD playback, PS1/PS2 backward compatibility, More USB ports and Flash memory card readers.
> 
> Not to mention the removal of Other OS which was used by a lot of people.





Frick said:


> +1 on the first statement, the second part I'm thinking the backwards compatibility thing maybe? It was a selling point when it was first launched.




And backwards compatibility was in the consoles it was advertised for, when backwards compatibility was removed so was the advertising.  In fact the advertising had ended way before they removed PS2 backwards compatibility from the console.

The only advertisement for SACD support was on the box itself, and it was only on boxes for units that had it.

OtherOS was never advertised, it was talked about in some of the presentations, but never advertised.  I even have a launch PS3 and OtherOS isn't even mentioned on the box.  It is a bonus that they decided to remove, it was never an advertised feature.


----------



## RejZoR (May 24, 2013)

They'll ruin the console world themselves with obsession for POWEEEERRR instead of making good fun games. It's strange how they haven't learned a thing from PC segment which got into this mess largely because of constant obsession for more power and not really optimizing anything right because there was always an excuse to upgrade around a corner...


----------



## Jorge (May 24, 2013)

It's all good for AMD and consumers.


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 24, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> This is actually the most exciting bit of this news to me.  I hope this means that games coming over to the PC will be better than the really bad ports we've seen in the past, and I also hope the PS4 running on a Unix/OpenGL base means we will see more hit games make it to the Linux/OSX side of PCs.
> 
> 
> 
> And what advertised feature has sony removed in the past?



OtherOS.


----------



## Mindweaver (May 24, 2013)

Hilux SSRG said:


> I don't see Sony pulling for msrp $599 at launch;  MS may offer an optional subsidized plan.



I wouldn't be surprised if they don't price both consoles around $700-$800 bucks with Nvidia asking $650 for the new GTX 780.. Nvidia should make the new pricing for everyone.. Who else can put out a video card for an unheard of amount and sale completely out of stock.. Then a couple months down the road put out another card that's better than there last card for 3/4's the price and people say, "_WOW, that's a great price! Take my money!_"..lol People are easily misguided.. lol The new consoles will be around the old NeoGeo prices, and people will buy it.


----------



## Frick (May 24, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> And backwards compatibility was in the consoles it was advertised for, when backwards compatibility was removed so was the advertising.  In fact the advertising had ended way before they removed PS2 backwards compatibility from the console.
> 
> The only advertisement for SACD support was on the box itself, and it was only on boxes for units that had it.
> 
> OtherOS was never advertised, it was talked about in some of the presentations, but never advertised.  I even have a launch PS3 and OtherOS isn't even mentioned on the box.  It is a bonus that they decided to remove, it was never an advertised feature.



I knew you were going to say that.


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (May 24, 2013)

tigger said:


> I like this, i  think maybe Nvidia is sore 'cause both Msft and Sony have gone with Ati-
> 
> http://www.nextpowerup.com/news/991/nvidia-ps4-gpu-is-too-cheap-and-too-weak.html



Let them have ATI. Nvidia, despite what anyone wants to admit/see, is a PC platformer. More games are desined around nVidia because it's "the way its meant to be played." At least with Sony and Microsoft going AMD, it will keep them in business longer and wont lead to them going bankrupt and send nVidias prices sky rocketing.


----------



## midnightoil (May 24, 2013)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> Let them have ATI. Nvidia, despite what anyone wants to admit/see, is a PC platformer. More games are desined around nVidia because it's "the way its meant to be played." At least with Sony and Microsoft going AMD, it will keep them in business longer and wont lead to them going bankrupt and send nVidias prices sky rocketing.



NVIDIA lost that war long ago.  Far more games are developed in partnership with AMD than NVIDIA these days.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 24, 2013)

Lots bemoaning the pace of the jaguar cores its worth noteing that as well as the fine argument that consoles are optimised so do more with less useless background overhead.

Sony M$ and Amd are all Hsa buddy's , , these consoles will work like nothing that has come before in many ways and it's way to early  to  cast doubt on the performance , mid tier pcs these are Not.


----------



## KainXS (May 24, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> They'll ruin the console world themselves with obsession for POWEEEERRR instead of making good fun games. It's strange how they haven't learned a thing from PC segment which got into this mess largely because of constant obsession for more power and not really optimizing anything right because there was always an excuse to upgrade around a corner...




Sony did do this(and ultimately failed) but lets be honest MS did it also last gen and they did it RIGHT, the 360's CPU in raw power was more powerful than just about every consumer level CPU at launch and they graphics card was also very powerful and had no real equivalent on the market in terms of features at the time, they had a really good mix at power and focus towards a goal at that time and that goal was a solid gaming machine.(even though the console had too long of a life cycle) 

Fast forward to now, the specs are nothing special here and theres more of a shift towards what Sony did at the PS3's launch, with their do everything console at an insane launch price(seems like it) that everyone made fun of thereafter. It could be a real reversal, microsoft is attempting this do all all console(if you can call it that) and Sony is focusing on power again but is also looking more at games.

I have never seen anything take advantage of HSA yet to any real notable extent, has anyone here seen that.

its going to be very interesting to see how this turns out.


----------



## NinkobEi (May 24, 2013)

Mindweaver said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if they don't price both consoles around $700-$800 bucks with Nvidia asking $650 for the new GTX 780.. Nvidia should make the new pricing for everyone.. Who else can put out a video card for an unheard of amount and sale completely out of stock.. Then a couple months down the road put out another card that's better than there last card for 3/4's the price and people say, "_WOW, that's a great price! Take my money!_"..lol People are easily misguided.. lol The new consoles will be around the old NeoGeo prices, and people will buy it.



Mark my words, these consoles will be 300-400 tops for the basic editions. They should be a lot cheaper to fab than their predecessors. AMD can pump out nearly the same design for both systems.


----------



## librin.so.1 (May 24, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Also, keep in mind that Xbox One will have an advantage of using DirectX over OpenGL.  DirectX sets the hardware requirements and OpenGL adapts them.  Less is more when efficiency makes up the difference.



I'd say OGL is only a disadvantage on when on Windoze. And it's not even OpenGL's fault per se.
I'd best describe it in the words one game developer said to me not long a go (not exact words; Greatly shortened) "working with OpenGL is great. OpenGL is also lighter on the CPU and helps to keep the framerate up when running on weaker CPUs. But OpenGL implementations on _Windows_ just suck and are much slower than they could be."

Also, what *midnightoil* said.


----------



## Dent1 (May 24, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> They'll ruin the console world themselves with obsession for POWEEEERRR instead of making good fun games. It's strange how they haven't learned a thing from PC segment which got into this mess largely because of constant obsession for more power and not really optimizing anything right because there was always an excuse to upgrade around a corner...



We all want fun games, that should be the priority, yeah optimisation is poor but PC gaming isn't in a mess. PC gaming has been steady, last I read it was increasing!

Nobody forces you to upgrade at every iteration. You have an  HD7950 and a core i7 920. These components are not even needed to run games. I've been running my Athlon II X4 for over 3 years and aint a single game it can't play well.


----------



## Jstn7477 (May 24, 2013)

Dent1 said:


> We all want fun games, that should be the priority, yeah optimisation is poor but PC gaming isn't in a mess. PC gaming has been steady, last I read it was increasing!
> 
> Nobody forces you to upgrade at every iteration. You have an  HD7950 and a core i7 920. These components are not even needed to run games. I've been running my Athlon II X4 for over 3 years and aint a single game it can't play well.



While Phenoms and Athlons can still certainly run games, good luck maintaining 120 FPS in games that aren't bottlenecked by your GPU. Far Cry 3 destroys my 7970 with 100% GPU usage and 65% CPU usage, my i7-3770K @ 4.3GHz struggles to maintain even 80-100 FPS in the biggest Team Fortress 2 fights with 15-40% GPU usage, CPU bottlenecks my overclocked HD 7970 in Planetside 2 on quite a few occasions, and even Skyrim and Minecraft take a hit because they are limited to how many cores they can utilize. 120Hz makes competitive TF2 a lot smoother for everyone, and there are people out there with i7 chips and high end cards running this almost 6 year old game in DX8.1 mode just to have the highest framerates.


----------



## newtekie1 (May 24, 2013)

midnightoil said:


> NVIDIA lost that war long ago.  Far more games are developed in partnership with AMD than NVIDIA these days.



Have any proof of that?  I've seen a pretty even distribution as of late.


----------



## librin.so.1 (May 24, 2013)

Jstn7477 said:


> my i7-3770K @ 4.3GHz struggles to maintain even 80-100 FPS in the biggest Team Fortress 2 fights with 15-40% GPU usage



lolwut
That is really odd. Especially since that is a i7-3770K we are talking about.
On my FX-8320 @ 4 GHz, TF2 hardly ever goes below 100 fps, despite the fact _I have 8 BOINC threads crunching while gaming_. With BOINC off, I have to turn on vsync as it starts pointlessly sizzling at over 150 fps at all times; most of the time near 300.


----------



## Dent1 (May 24, 2013)

Jstn7477 said:


> While Phenoms and Athlons can still certainly run games, good luck maintaining 120 FPS in games that aren't bottlenecked by your GPU. Far Cry 3 destroys my 7970 with 100% GPU usage and 65% CPU usage, my i7-3770K @ 4.3GHz struggles to maintain even 80-100 FPS in the biggest Team Fortress 2 fights with 15-40% GPU usage, CPU bottlenecks my overclocked HD 7970 in Planetside 2 on quite a few occasions, and even Skyrim and Minecraft take a hit because they are limited to how many cores they can utilize. 120Hz makes competitive TF2 a lot smoother for everyone, and there are people out there with i7 chips and high end cards running this almost 6 year old game in DX8.1 mode just to have the highest framerates.



So the benchmark for smooth gaming is 120 FPS? All you need is about 40-60 FPS average and this can be achieved on even old hardware like mine. 120 FPS is for show offs and it's unnecessary in most if not all cases.


----------



## SetsunaFZero (May 24, 2013)

we should get our first test consoles in few months, cant wait to test the ps4


----------



## Jstn7477 (May 25, 2013)

Dent1 said:


> So the benchmark for smooth gaming is 120 FPS? All you need is about 40-60 FPS average and this can be achieved on even old hardware like mine. 120 FPS is for show offs and it's unnecessary in most if not all cases.



I have no problem paying for hardware that makes my games run smoothly, considering I have a $300 monitor that functions best at 120Hz. Playing games at 40 FPS was something I did a couple years ago with an X2 4400+ and 7800GS in 2008, then X4 9750 and a 9800 GT, and then a 4GHz 955BE and HD 5770 before I got my 2600K and HD 6950 in late 2011. My minimum framerate in TF2 almost doubled when I got the i7 (before you call out the video card differences, my 5770 was never fully stressed in TF2 to begin with). Without VSYNC, TF2 runs in the 200s but in the largest fights on 24-28 player servers, my framerate dips down to around 100 with shadows off, sometimes less in extreme situations. My main work computer with a 2.5GHz Phenom X3 8550 and a 3850 AGP hangs around in the mid 30s-40s in the same situations with an under-utilized GPU.


----------



## fullinfusion (May 25, 2013)

Who cares, XB1 is going to kick ass! We cant wait to get it!

But boooo on you MS for not allowing the 360 games to work in the new box


----------



## Fluffmeister (May 25, 2013)

newtekie1 said:


> Have any proof of that?  I've seen a pretty even distribution as of late.



No proof, he just pulled it straight from his arse.


----------



## Mussels (May 25, 2013)

SeventhReign said:


> Not much of a gamer are you?  Higher CPU clock speeds have been proven time and time again, to have zero effect on gaming, after a certain point.  It is the GPU that you want to be faster, not the CPU.



play something other than FPS games, and you'll find that even the highest of todays CPU's can choke.


----------



## newtekie1 (May 25, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> OtherOS.



Was never an advertised feature.


----------



## Tigershark8700 (May 25, 2013)

This thread definitely caught my attention, being an software engineer for a video game company myself in Silicon Valley (Palo Alto, CA). 

Although, we develop Desktop and Mobile applications, not console games. I can tell you however that typically game development studios will build a game not based on high resolution textures at first, but will essentially get the guts of the game in first (including low poly textures and animations). 

There is enough data analytics in the industry to show games need to compensate for low level machines first, that way they can hope to get as many people on the game as possible. The last thing you want to do is create a game, where only 15% of your market can actually play it.. this is bad business, and can lead to dramatically decreased revenue and community morale issues. 

In our company for example, we are currently working on an RPG game for the Desktop  (a spiritual successor to a famous 90s game by Konami). We built the initial structure of the game to handle a low level system, and than build out the rest of the textures and animations based on theoretical higher systems. 

How this normally works (at least in our company), is that from our growing list of publishers and content providers, we are able to establish a timeline of hardware requirement and their usage. For instance, right now over 50% of our customers would not be able to run current generation games such as Far Cry 3, Crysis 3, Battlefield 4 etc. For this fact, we build our games based on what could reasonably be built for a standard low level system. Next we prepare requirements for higher level machines and build out from there. 

At the end of the day (for our products), we have 4 optimal levels of graphic experience.. ranging from low level / no AA  to ultra level / 16x AA. 

Many companies follow this differently, but again being a software engineer, and being in the game industry for a little over 8 years, this is the best practice I've seen. 

Thanks,
Phil


----------



## entropy13 (May 25, 2013)

"an RPG game for the Desktop (a spiritual successor to a famous 90s game by Konami)"


LOL I know what that would be. I think, anyway. That Konami game was for the PlayStation...


----------



## Lionheart (May 25, 2013)

SeventhReign said:


> Not much of a gamer are you?  Higher CPU clock speeds have been proven time and time again, to have zero effect on gaming, after a certain point.  It is the GPU that you want to be faster, not the CPU.









Where do I begin

Yeah I'm not much of a gamer even though I have a decently high end rig:shadedshu and all I do on it is play farmville Also got a Xbox360, PS3, PSVita, Gamecube & PS2 and all I do is stare at them:shadedshu

"Higher CPU clock speeds have been proven time and time again, to have zero effect on gaming" 

Well tell that to my i7 920 2.66ghz OCed to 4ghz  or my i7 970 3.2ghz OCed to 4ghz or even my old AMD X2 6000+ 3ghz - 3.4ghz which all felt pretty damn smoother when playing 3D applications/games & even in the desktop and they removed any bottlenecks Hell even the PSP got a CPU speed increase, 222mhz - 333mhz  Thus the God Of War series came out on it because of that extra speed 

Anyways IMO increased CPU speeds do help but they reach a certain point where you're not really getting anything out of it but I do agree with you on the faster GPU


----------



## Tigershark8700 (May 25, 2013)

entropy13 said:


> "an RPG game for the Desktop (a spiritual successor to a famous 90s game by Konami)"
> 
> 
> LOL I know what that would be. I think, anyway. That Konami game was for the PlayStation...



Actually it was developed for the Super Nintendo, so we might be thinking of different titles, unless it was ported over (but not sure on that).


----------



## AsRock (May 25, 2013)

ManofGod said:


> Got 3 words into that video and realized he had absolutely nothing worth listening to.  Clicked the X and moved on, not even worth reading the comments.



What i find funny about it how they went on about watching movies on it so much..  Like sorry last thing i would get is a xbox to watch movies and pay MS to go online then pay other people as well to use the service.

Just that you be better of with a PS4 but they need exclusives to make people like me at least to even think about getting a xbox..

And if movies annd stuff is what you going do mostly with it get a frigging Roku 3  as that will beat the pants of it in every way even more so on power usage as the unit only takes 3.2w on load and supports 3rd party stuff too.

I would have to go PS4 for a few reasons like for Heavy Rain if there is ever another of those and uncharted and then the free online so no monthly fee's.

Again if ya just watching movies Roku 3 has more than enough to keep you happy for a long time..


----------



## Dent1 (May 25, 2013)

Jstn7477 said:


> I have no problem paying for hardware that makes my games run smoothly, considering I have a $300 monitor that functions best at 120Hz. Playing games at 40 FPS was something I did a couple years ago with an X2 4400+ and 7800GS in 2008, then X4 9750 and a 9800 GT, and then a 4GHz 955BE and HD 5770 before I got my 2600K and HD 6950 in late 2011. My minimum framerate in TF2 almost doubled when I got the i7 (before you call out the video card differences, my 5770 was never fully stressed in TF2 to begin with). Without VSYNC, TF2 runs in the 200s but in the largest fights on 24-28 player servers, my framerate dips down to around 100 with shadows off, sometimes less in extreme situations. My main work computer with a 2.5GHz Phenom X3 8550 and a 3850 AGP hangs around in the mid 30s-40s in the same situations with an under-utilized GPU.



Maybe you don't have a problem paying for hardware, but the person I was originally responding to (RejZoR) does.

Just because you have a 120Hz monitor doesn't mean your experience is diminished if 120FPS isn't achieved. Most console games are capped between 25FPS and 30 FPS yet the high end HD TVs can support up to 120Hz.  I'm not saying 25-30FPS is something PC gamers should be accustomed to as I wouldn't tolerate such a low frame rate, but I see nothing wrong with playing a game at 50-60-70+ FPS on my almost 4 year old GPU/GPU. I'm not going to drop money to see Fraps @ 120FPS vs 70FPS to run at the same detail settings to see a negligible difference.


----------



## NeoXF (May 25, 2013)

Jacez said:


> Now, the Xbox One has an underclocked (850Mhz -> 800Mhz) *HD 6770* inside and the PS4 has an underclocked (900Mhz -> 800Mhz) *HD 6870*. The memory bandwidth appears to be accurate for both examples.
> 
> All in all, it's an Entry-Point/Mid-Range computer.



What? PS4's GPU is a 1152 GCN v2.0 cores part @ 800MHz with a shared system memory of colossal size and bandwidth.

And I'm pretty sure the XBO's GPU side is no slouch either.

PS4's CPU part is @ 2GHz, it's been confirmed time and time again over the weeks after it's launch, not sure about the XBO. All in all yes, probably slightly above half the i7-2600's performance, but specific coding and optimizations should bring results of something way above what the i7 can do on a straight-up PC platform... of course, this in the following years, not at launch. However... taking into account AMD's HSA... the CPU part plus the GPU grunt work... it's computational power is going to be way above anything we see in today's PCs, heck, more FLOPs than on a 4-CPU 10-core Ivy Bridge server... (abstracting out the fact that the GPU as a pure graphics processing unit will be starved of resources in that scenario).


All in all, it's more like a mid-range or above gaming system, with the vast untapped capabilities we aren't aware of yet... (que AMD's Kaveri/Kaveri+ HSA demostrations...)


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 25, 2013)

Dent1 said:


> Maybe you don't have a problem paying for hardware, but the person I was originally responding to (RejZoR) does.
> 
> Just because you have a 120Hz monitor doesn't mean your experience is diminished if 120FPS isn't achieved. Most console games are capped between 25FPS and 30 FPS yet the high end HD TVs can support up to 120Hz.  I'm not saying 25-30FPS is something PC gamers should be accustomed to as I wouldn't tolerate such a low frame rate, but I see nothing wrong with playing a game at 50-60-70+ FPS on my almost 4 year old GPU/GPU. I'm not going to drop money to see Fraps @ 120FPS vs 70FPS to run at the same detail settings to see a negligible difference.



Good point but exactly what has 120hz /fps gameing got to do with consoles  anyway , this is an argument for 2025-2030 when the ps 5 is due


----------



## NeoXF (May 25, 2013)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Good point but exactly what has 120hz /fps gameing got to do with consoles  anyway , this is an argument for 2025-2030 when the ps 5 is due



Not likely... more like 3820x2160@30Hz... or 60, if "we're" lucky...  Seeing as how they don't see the point of 60fps when they(SONY/the developers) "think" they would rather squeeze some extra eye-candy mumbo-jumbo and stay at 30fps... I don't see 120Hz ever happening in the console world... but then again, HDTV/PC display tech might have a big revolution down the road, who knows what will make more sense then.


----------



## Ravenas (May 25, 2013)

The GPU and ram are both slightly slower, however, Xbox will most likely have a better price point.


----------



## btarunr (May 25, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> So can we install Windows 7 (not 8)?



I imagine the OS being stored on a device other than the 500GB HDD, and the system's EFI being prevented from booting from USB/ODD. It won't be long before Linux geeks figure out a way though.


----------



## AsRock (May 25, 2013)

Ravenas said:


> The GPU and ram are both slightly slower, however, Xbox will most likely have a better price point.



Maybe until you add up the monthly fee for the dam thing to be online.


----------



## purecain (May 26, 2013)

our pc's will shine on all the new titles... cant wait...


----------



## Mussels (May 26, 2013)

purecain said:


> our pc's will shine on all the new titles... cant wait...



openGL and DX11 consoles is looking good for the glorious master race.


----------



## BiggieShady (May 26, 2013)

NeoXF said:


> All in all yes, probably slightly above half the i7-2600's performance, but specific coding and optimizations should bring results of something way above what the i7 can do on a straight-up PC platform... of course, this in the following years, not at launch.



Way above? Really? For it to be true, it would mean that more than half of i7-2600 performance is regularly lost on OS + DirectX + Driver overheads, which is simply ridiculous.


----------



## Mussels (May 26, 2013)

BiggieShady said:


> Way above? Really? For it to be true, it would mean that more than half of i7-2600 performance is regularly lost on OS + DirectX + Driver overheads, which is simply ridiculous.



actually its not that ridiculous. no one has solid numbers, but coding for set hardware is a MASSIVE benefit.


----------



## freaksavior (May 26, 2013)

NinkobEi said:


> *Playstation historically has always had the best exclusive titles. *This generation will not be any different. It has to do with which continent the console is developed on. MS can try to make an appeal to japanese developers but in the end there will always be that language barrier.
> 
> 
> If you read the Anandtech report, the PS4 should run a lot hotter/higher power. Seems unlikely that their fan will be quieter.



That's an opinion


----------



## Jstn7477 (May 26, 2013)

Dent1 said:


> Maybe you don't have a problem paying for hardware, but the person I was originally responding to (RejZoR) does.
> 
> Just because you have a 120Hz monitor doesn't mean your experience is diminished if 120FPS isn't achieved. Most console games are capped between 25FPS and 30 FPS yet the high end HD TVs can support up to 120Hz.  I'm not saying 25-30FPS is something PC gamers should be accustomed to as I wouldn't tolerate such a low frame rate, but I see nothing wrong with playing a game at 50-60-70+ FPS on my almost 4 year old GPU/GPU. I'm not going to drop money to see Fraps @ 120FPS vs 70FPS to run at the same detail settings to see a negligible difference.



I will agree that some games do play fine at 60 FPS (which is what the more poorly optimized games tend to go down to on my machine on some occasions despite none of my CPU cores or GPU being maxed out), but if you play multiplayer FPS games competitively e.g. Team Fortress 2, Counter-Strike, Quake, etc. there is quite a difference in smoothness between 60Hz and 100-120Hz. Some people have hung onto their CRTs for years and play at stupid resolutions like 1024*768 and 100Hz for these particular games (if they have yet to purchase a 120Hz 1080p LCD) because your local frame rate determines how many snapshots are sent back to the server. Again, many single player games (especially slower paced ones) at 60 Hz play nicely, but in multiplayer FPS games where people tweak the hell out of their net settings, reduce their interp settings and whatnot, it's hard to be part of the 60Hz norm. Call of Duty (not that I play it) supposedly has the best hit registration at 125 or 250 client FPS from what I heard as well.


----------



## KainXS (May 26, 2013)

freaksavior said:


> That's an opinion



it really is
If I had to look at the best exclusives its nintendo without a doubt, sony tends to keep many exclusives in the japanese markets(and they're some very good ones that end up being unknown) ms tends to do multiplatform games better but when their is an exclusive its usually a pretty good minus the kinect games.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 26, 2013)

Vinska said:


> I'd say OGL is only a disadvantage on when on Windoze. And it's not even OpenGL's fault per se.
> I'd best describe it in the words one game developer said to me not long a go (not exact words; Greatly shortened) "working with OpenGL is great. OpenGL is also lighter on the CPU and helps to keep the framerate up when running on weaker CPUs. But OpenGL implementations on _Windows_ just suck and are much slower than they could be."
> 
> Also, what *midnightoil* said.


Apples to apples, Direct3D will always be faster because it's hardware + software, not just software.  Case in point, Direct3D created the unified shader model, OpenGL adapted it in its own specifications.  Whenever there is a performance hit on Direct3D, it is because it is doing something extra (e.g. post processing).

As to what midnightoil said, bare in mind that Windows on Xbox isn't the same as Windows on IBM-PC compatible.  Xbox developers likely have direct access to the hardware resources to squeeze every drop of performance from the hardware.  On consumer Windows, developers have to go through layer after layer of software to reach the hardware which means it is slower--but less likely to crash (and other undesirable outcomes) the computer.  The reason why there isn't a direct access to the hardware in consumer Windows it has to account for the hundreds of graphics devices out there.

I have no doubt that Sony would have used DirectX if they didn't have to license it from Microsoft.

OpenGL 3.# requires Direct3D 10 hardware
OpenGL 4.# requires Direct3D 11 hardware


----------



## librin.so.1 (May 26, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Apples to apples


On the other hand, comparing D3D to OGL on RL usage scenarios as "apples to apples" is not possible. D3D is only implemented on Windoze [and MS devices]. There, OGL is either greatly neglected by the implementers or is simply non-existent. Say what You want, but comparing D3D to pitiful excuses for OGL implementations found on Windoze simply cannot be called as "apples to apples".
On *nix, for example, the implementations are much better.
But comparing between D3D on Windoze and and OGL on *nix cannot be called "apples to apples" due to arising external factors [obvious one - different friggin' OS].



FordGT90Concept said:


> Direct3D will always be faster because it's hardware + software, not just software.


What the hell were You smoking?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 26, 2013)

Direct3D is emulated on *nix.  OpenGL and Direct3D both have to go through the layers of protection on Windows.  Windows is the closest apples to apples available.  The fact that most professional software is rendered using OpenGL attests to the fact that is well implemented on Windows.

There are a lot of engines out there which run on Windows that support Direct3D and OpenGL render paths and the performance is more or less the same when trying to achieve the same degree of visuals.

A lot of EA titles (The Sims 3 and Spore, for example) are DirectX on Windows and OpenGL on Mac OS X.  If DirectX was as terrible as you claim it is, why would EA go out of their way to use DirectX on Windows instead of OpenGL on both?


----------



## librin.so.1 (May 26, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> why would EA go out of their way to use DirectX on
> Windows instead of OpenGL on both?


Already said the reason many times. Do I _really_ need to repeat myself _again_?



FordGT90Concept said:


> Direct3D is emulated on *nix.  OpenGL and Direct3D both have to go through the layers of protection on Windows.


same - what the hell were You smoking?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 26, 2013)

You do know that virtually all professional software (e.g. AutoCAD, 3DSMax, Photoshop, etc.) uses an OpenGL render, correct?  OpenGLs implementation on Windows is good (much better than you claim it not to be), it just isn't up to par with the purpose-built DirectX.  Most x86 compatible games are released on Windows because of DirectX, not in spite of it.  DirectX was created because Bill Gates wasn't satisified with OpenGL at the time.  Hell, about the only game developer that loves him some OpenGL is John Carmack (ID Tech engine).  That's mostly because he resents the Microsoft empire.

And don't expect a further reply from me on this topic.  The discussion is circular.


----------



## 1c3d0g (May 27, 2013)

NeoXF said:


> ...
> All in all yes, probably slightly above half the i7-2600's performance, but specific coding and optimizations should bring results of something way above what the i7 can do on a straight-up PC platform... of course, this in the following years, not at launch. However... taking into account AMD's HSA... the CPU part plus the GPU grunt work... it's computational power is going to be way above anything we see in today's PCs, heck, more FLOPs than on a 4-CPU 10-core Ivy Bridge server... (abstracting out the fact that the GPU as a pure graphics processing unit will be starved of resources in that scenario).
> 
> 
> All in all, it's more like a mid-range or above gaming system, with the vast untapped capabilities we aren't aware of yet... (que AMD's Kaveri/Kaveri+ HSA demostrations...)


 Are you new here?!? Ahahaha! That's the dumbest dumb comment I've read in a while. 

Come on, man! :shadedshu You seriously think these shitty consoles can beat any current PC, let alone the next-generation ones? A Haswell + Titan will crush any of these so-called "gaming machines" hands down. Even the developers themselves (from both platforms) have said they won't take on the high-end PC's head on, instead focusing on "good" (read: not great, let alone the best) middle-of-the-road performance for a gaming console. This time they focused more on entertainment, making the consoles a "media hub" etc. for the living room, not raw power.

By the time the consoles launch and developers get experience coding for them, Broadwell + Maxwell will be out, so these consoles stand NO CHANCE in beating PC's. Mark my words on that.


----------



## Aquinus (May 27, 2013)

1c3d0g said:


> By the time the consoles launch and developers get experience coding for them, Broadwell   Maxwell will be out, so these consoles stand NO CHANCE in beating PC's. Mark my words on that.



Consoles aren't here to take over PC gaming. They did that already without having superior graphics so what's your point? PC gamers lately have been a slowly dying niche which is a shame.

Go ahead and pay 1000 USD for your Titan. Some person who could care less will probably get an Xbox One, pay a mere fraction of the cost of a full gaming rig, and still enjoy it just as much as you and not know the difference because the general user really doesn't care as much as we do here at TPU.

I guess that depends on how you look at "winning." Image quality wise PCs will be better. Cost effectiveness, market penetration and profits wise, I think consoles are winning by a pretty large margin.



1c3d0g said:


> Are you new here?!? Ahahaha! That's the dumbest dumb comment I've read in a while.



Don't call someone else's comments stupid when your post is just as bad. :shadedshu


----------



## NinkobEi (May 27, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> Consoles aren't here to take over PC gaming. They did that already without having superior graphics so what's your point? PC gamers lately have been a slowly dying niche which is a shame.
> 
> Go ahead and pay 1000 USD for your Titan. Some person who could care less will probably get an Xbox One, pay a mere fraction of the cost of a full gaming rig, and still enjoy it just as much as you and not know the difference because the general user really doesn't care as much as we do here at TPU.
> 
> I guess that depends on how you look at "winning." Image quality wise PCs will be better. Cost effectiveness, market penetration and profits wise, I think consoles are winning by a pretty large margin.



I bet some of us TPU'ers could build a budget pc sub-600 that is on par with the Xbone. This will be doubly true in a couple of years. And the best thing about PC is we dont have to spend $60 for a game. It is very common to buy last year's triple-A titles for $10 during a sale.

As far as PC gaming being a dying niche, well never has that statement been less true than right now. 



> The PC gaming market reached $20 billion in 2012, a healthy increase of eight percent over the previous year, the PC Gaming Alliance (PCGA) revealed this week at a news conference held in San Francisco.



Now let  us compare that to console sales in 2012


> Video game and console sales plunged 22 percent in 2012, according to NPD Group data published by Home Media Magazine. As consumers focused their dollars on a few high-profile titles and opted for new digital services, and publishers just released fewer titles, revenue for the year totaled $13.3 billion compared to $17.0 billion in 2011. The decline more than doubled the 9 percent decrease between 2010 and 2011, reported the Los Angeles Times.


----------



## AsRock (May 27, 2013)

Sales are bound to drop due to the supposed\planned release of the new consoles.  And for people like my self only play a few classy games it's more than $60 you paying with a xbox as you gotta tag on the monthly fee o top and that would be like paying $100+.  That's why they need to get the new models out the door ASAP.

So if i get one of the ewer systems it would have to not have a monthly fee.

It would be nice what the power usage is of these newer ones too how much better are they.


----------



## Aquinus (May 27, 2013)

NinkobEi said:


> Now let us compare that to console sales in 2012



Ever think that is because no one wants to buy games for a console that over 7 years old? This is fallout from Sony and MS waiting as long as possible before revamping the console yet again. I wouldn't buy any games for 360 for the simple fact that they're expensive and it doesn't look nearly as good. When the PS4/Xbox One comes out I seriously think those numbers will change again.



NinkobEi said:


> I bet some of us TPU'ers could build a budget pc sub-600 that is on par with the Xbone. This will be doubly true in a couple of years.



This was true of the 360 as well, but it didn't change a whole lot. Also you have to keep in mind that the Xbox and PS are closed systems. They don't have nearly as much overhead as regular PCs do. I would think this to be true of any hardware, including a computer you build 2 years ago then go to replace now. Technology is always getting faster and if you wait you will reap the benefits.

I don't think MS would be doing this if they didn't think they could make some money off of it.


----------



## Mussels (May 27, 2013)

AsRock said:


> Sales are bound to drop due to the supposed\planned release of the new consoles.  And for people like my self only play a few classy games it's more than $60 you paying with a xbox as you gotta tag on the monthly fee o top and that would be like paying $100+.  That's why they need to get the new models out the door ASAP.
> 
> So if i get one of the ewer systems it would have to not have a monthly fee.
> 
> It would be nice what the power usage is of these newer ones too how much better are they.



my quad core APU laptop can idle at 11W.


i'd expect the range to go between 10W-65W, at an educated guess (i dont know what things like kinect will do to power)


----------



## Dent1 (May 27, 2013)

Jstn7477 said:


> I will agree that some games do play fine at 60 FPS (which is what the more poorly optimized games tend to go down to on my machine on some occasions despite none of my CPU cores or GPU being maxed out), but if you play multiplayer FPS games competitively e.g. Team Fortress 2, Counter-Strike, Quake, etc. there is quite a difference in smoothness between 60Hz and 100-120Hz. Some people have hung onto their CRTs for years and play at stupid resolutions like 1024*768 and 100Hz for these particular games (if they have yet to purchase a 120Hz 1080p LCD) because your local frame rate determines how many snapshots are sent back to the server. Again, many single player games (especially slower paced ones) at 60 Hz play nicely, but in multiplayer FPS games where people tweak the hell out of their net settings, reduce their interp settings and whatnot, it's hard to be part of the 60Hz norm. Call of Duty (not that I play it) supposedly has the best hit registration at 125 or 250 client FPS from what I heard as well.



All games, should and would run as intended at 60 FPS, providing the frame rate is stable and consistent. 

Unless you are specially trained super soldier your brain and eyes won't be able to process 120FPS.


----------



## Frick (May 27, 2013)

Dent1 said:


> All games, should and would run as intended at 60 FPS, providing the frame rate is stable and consistent.
> 
> Unless you are specially trained super soldier your brain and eyes won't be able to process 120FPS.



Oh ye gods not this argument again.


----------



## Steevo (May 27, 2013)

NinkobEi said:


> I bet some of us TPU'ers could build a budget pc sub-600 that is on par with the Xbone. This will be doubly true in a couple of years.



But unlike the console we will have the overhead of the OS and all its integration, lack of DDR5 RAM and insane bandwidth and or low latency, custom built for a purpose. 

Current comparisons show anywhere from a 0% to 400% increase in overhead when rendering a scene.

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

The most common used number is about 25% overhead even on a "clean" gaming only machine as the host OS has threads running and interrupting, fouling caches and memory mismanagement. 

So a minimum 25% higher than a 8 core 8GB of truly high speed RAM and perhaps 10% more performance with the new memory architecture? Sure a Ivy with a Titan or a "Ghz" edition with overclocks will beat it, but that isn't the point. The point in the cost for playing a said game and the entertainment factor of it.

http://www.zdnet.com/valve-linux-runs-our-games-faster-than-windows-7-7000002060/

Linux runs it faster as it can be tweaked more by third parties to reduce the OS overhead, but it will still have some. Both the PS4 and Xbox will have even more benefit in matching hardware and software.


----------



## AsRock (May 27, 2013)

Mussels said:


> my quad core APU laptop can idle at 11W.
> 
> 
> i'd expect the range to go between 10W-65W, at an educated guess (i dont know what things like kinect will do to power)



Reasonable guess, that Kinect has vents on it hehe. Hopefully better than a aged 90w SONY PS3 slim.

I'll probably wait till they bring out the second model or even a much lower priced one as it be only used for the odd game although it will not be a XBox.


----------



## ogharaei (May 27, 2013)

I think the Playstation will win this time around. Really disappointed that Microsoft won't support Indies with the Xbox One.


----------



## TRWOV (May 27, 2013)

I won't buy either but as long as the AAA titles come over to the PC I'll be happy. I haven't even played half of my Gamecube/PS2 library yet (yay! bargain bins!) not to mention my Wii/U games (100+).

Now that both consoles have x86 hardware there's few reasons to not port games to the PC so hopefully we'll see a big influx of games this time...not that there's a shortage of good games lately anyway.


----------



## scoutingwraith (May 28, 2013)

TRWOV said:


> I won't buy either but as long as the AAA titles come over to the PC I'll be happy. I haven't even played half of my Gamecube/PS2 library yet (yay! bargain bins!) not to mention my Wii/U games (100+).
> 
> Now that both consoles have x86 hardware there's few reasons to not port games to the PC so hopefully we'll see a big influx of games this time...not that there's a shortage of good games lately anyway.



This...

I dont mean to sound like a troll or anything but i will wait it out and see who has the better exclusives. I have a 360 with probably 40+ games that i need to beat and i think 15+ are Rpgs. lol. I will probably buy another 360 for as cheap as possible just in case if my old system decides to bite the dust.


----------



## m1dg3t (May 28, 2013)

As long as consoles/consumer TVs are using HDMI don't get your hopes up for more than 1080p/1600p @ 60Hz. Thank you HDCP! 

2560 x 1600 would be pretty sweet for TVs though...


----------



## Fourstaff (May 28, 2013)

m1dg3t said:


> As long as consoles/consumer TVs are using HDMI don't get your hopes up for more than 1080p/1600p @ 60Hz. Thank you HDCP!
> 
> 2560 x 1600 would be pretty sweet for TVs though...



HDMI will be incrementally upgraded to support 4K iirc.


----------



## m1dg3t (May 28, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> HDMI will be incrementally upgraded to support 4K iirc.



Sure, our kids might have it. More than likely by the time displays/HDMI are supporting those capabilities in the mainstream i prolly won't be interested 

Don't forget there has to be content that is produced in those parameters in order to use those specs 

DL-DVI & Optical fTw!


----------



## EpicShweetness (May 28, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> On consumer Windows, developers have to go through layer after layer of software to reach the hardware which means it is slower--but less likely to crash (and other undesirable outcomes) the computer.  The reason why there isn't a direct access to the hardware in consumer Windows it has to account for the hundreds of graphics devices out there.



Lets not also forget that consoles have no "kernal" as it were. In situations were you launch a game a console has the ability to completely halt this "kernal" were a Windows machine runs a kernal for other tasks and computations requested by and of software to hardware.

One other thing lets not forget that the Xbox 360 and PS3 have notable differences in their visual ability, but were that difference shows its self is when the game devs are willing to take the time to exploit it. Example Uncharted 2, bar none. It is the fact this game took quiet awhile in the lifespan of the consoles life to show up that also supports this. Thus we will have a repeat were game devs must "learn" the platform at first and be willing to. So at first we will see no notable difference between the 2, but when we do the PS4 will shock n' awe us.


----------



## Aquinus (May 29, 2013)

EpicShweetness said:


> Lets not also forget that consoles have no "kernal" as it were. In situations were you launch a game a console has the ability to completely halt this "kernal" were a Windows machine runs a kernal for other tasks and computations requested by and of software to hardware.



Do some research or don't talk about something you don't know. The 360 and PS3, like modern PCs, have a kernel that runs and takes control when the device boots. Also, to say that older consoles do not have kernels is incorrect. Older consoles might not have had a unified kernel that everything uses like the 360 does, but each game had its own variant of a kernel to manage the hardware that it's running on. Now as we have smartened up about technology, the best things have prevailed and that's why you now see things like *nix based kernels on smartphones left and right and microcontrollers in your coffee machine (like my Keurig).


----------



## BrainCruser (May 29, 2013)

jmcslob said:


> For some reason I think they will both play basically the same and in the end MS will beat SONY for some unknown reason that has absolutely no logic to it...
> 
> I think it will be awile before devs can actually take advantage full advantage of either system and by then it won't really matter which system is better....it doesn't now and I see no reason for it to matter in the future.
> 
> Besides MS is giving greedy Devs exactly what they want and then some...



Actually there is a very good chance they will be able to use them within months since the PC code line will work for almost anything, and that extra ram oh, a devs paradise.


----------



## remixedcat (May 29, 2013)

This is scary:



> In a mind blowing demo, the Kinect then switched to a mode in which it monitored the heart rate of a person standing in front of it using the color cameras to measure how flush the skin was and the infrared cameras to track blood flow underneath the skin. This could ostensibly allow a developer to determine whether a user was scared, or even lying, and could also have health monitoring implications.
> 
> Then things started to get super freaky. A demo was run that showed the faces of people standing in front of the sensor. The Kinect was able to not only detect which controllers they were holding (player 1, player 2 etc), but also exactly who they were and whether they were happy, sad or neutral. This was done using imagery of the face to see whether they were smiling or frowning. It was pretty wild.


----------



## AsRock (May 29, 2013)

remixedcat said:


> This is scary:



New way of collecting data on people without annoying them without ads ?..  Ooh  Have fun with that XBox..

Those camera's sound more creepy each time they open their mouths.


----------



## NeoXF (May 29, 2013)

1c3d0g said:


> Are you new here?!? Ahahaha! That's the dumbest dumb comment I've read in a while.
> 
> Come on, man! :shadedshu You seriously think these shitty consoles can beat any current PC, let alone the next-generation ones? A Haswell + Titan will crush any of these so-called "gaming machines" hands down. Even the developers themselves (from both platforms) have said they won't take on the high-end PC's head on, instead focusing on "good" (read: not great, let alone the best) middle-of-the-road performance for a gaming console. This time they focused more on entertainment, making the consoles a "media hub" etc. for the living room, not raw power.
> 
> By the time the consoles launch and developers get experience coding for them, Broadwell + Maxwell will be out, so these consoles stand NO CHANCE in beating PC's. Mark my words on that.



Uhm, aside from totally missing my point and flaring out PC fanboy nonsense, what other purpose did your comment serve?


IMHO, if SONY wants to do a PS5, they can do it much sooner at this point... seeing as how they probably wouldn't have to worry about compatibility, if they keep on the x86 track that is... and seeing as how PS3 are selling for so little at this time, I can see PS4 either selling at a similar low price or being upgraded to a faster one, with full compatibility, down the road. Same goes for M$ at this point. Because I don't really see hardware price as big as a issue as some people make it out to be... I mean, gawd... we pay so much for the games themselves...


----------



## EpicShweetness (May 29, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> Do some research or don't talk about something you don't know.



Notice the quotation marks 
You want me to be technical I'll PM ya a 10 page essay :shadedshu


----------



## BiggieShady (May 29, 2013)

Mussels said:


> actually its not that ridiculous. no one has solid numbers, but coding for set hardware is a MASSIVE benefit.



Oh yes, beside direct memory access there is a benefit for really simple actions that are executed in large numbers each frame such as issuing draw calls, which is what Steevo is talking about.



Steevo said:


> Current comparisons show anywhere from a 0% to 400% increase in overhead when rendering a scene.
> 
> http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2011/03/16/farewell-to-directx/2
> 
> The most common used number is about 25% overhead even on a "clean" gaming only machine as the host OS has threads running and interrupting, fouling caches and memory mismanagement.



Luckily issuing draw calls is the only significant accumulated overhead here, because everything else for scene rendering is already in VRAM. I suppose that's why NVidia wants to integrate general purpose ARM cores into Maxwell.

 ... and now some speculation: future of pc gaming could be: cpu does AI, physics, and streams over PCI-E bus only changes/differences for dynamic game objects/characters, on GPU diff gets merged with last frame state and general purpose ARM cores issue draw calls crazy fast for all geometry and their positions/rotations already in VRAM prepared by the cpu.


----------



## Frick (May 29, 2013)

EpicShweetness said:


> Notice the quotation marks
> You want me to be technical I'll PM ya a 10 page essay :shadedshu



It's a difference between simplifying and being inaccurate. I'm pretty sure the 360 and PS3 has kernels (unless "kernal" is something else entirely).

Anyway, about processing power: Wouldn't the connection to Azure cancel this out a bit? That is the part I'm actually almost excited about.


----------



## OneCool (May 29, 2013)

This thread =


----------



## Aquinus (May 30, 2013)

EpicShweetness said:


> Notice the quotation marks
> You want me to be technical I'll PM ya a 10 page essay :shadedshu



Go ahead, maybe I should send you a picture of my degree in Computer Science. 



EpicShweetness said:


> "kernal"



You mean how you can't spell *kernel* right?



OneCool said:


> This thread =



I fixed your post.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 30, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> Go ahead, maybe I should send you a picture of my degree in Computer Science.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Is this a bad time to point out that the xbox one has 3x kernel as disclosed by Ms and one is always active sometimes two.


----------



## Frick (May 30, 2013)

About prices: If the prices out now are more or less correct they will be somewhat close. In some places it's up to a €165 difference, but in most places they are identical, about €770. Doesn't really say anything but still.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 30, 2013)

I think PS4 and XB1 will have about the same price.  The savings on the weaker hardware in XB1 is going towards Kinect.


----------



## Mindweaver (May 30, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I think PS4 and XB1 will have about the same price.  The savings on the weaker hardware in XB1 is going towards Kinect.



I agree.  

@everybody: I don't think it will matter to the masses that it's slower, because the PS3 is faster than the XBox 360 correct? and nobody cared. Of course the dev's had a very rough time harnessing the power of the PS3, because it was so crappy to code. I think it will come down to content.


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 30, 2013)

i'm not sure what all the arguing is about. when it comes to consoles, the difference in hardware specs should not be considered until AFTER examining the codebase. a console could have the most powerful proc/gpu combo but if its codebase is crap then games are going to run like crap. why do you think a company Naughty Dog can churn out amazing looking games for the PS3 or why Polyphony can add such amazing detail to their cars in GT5? It is because the codebase for the PS3, while more complicated, is far superior to the xbox 360. Of course, the downside is you get a fewer number of optimized games. anyway...


----------



## NeoXF (May 30, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> i'm not sure what all the arguing is about. when it comes to consoles, the difference in hardware specs should not be considered until AFTER examining the codebase. a console could have the most powerful proc/gpu combo but if its codebase is crap then games are going to run like crap. why do you think a company Naughty Dog can churn out amazing looking games for the PS3 or why Polyphony can add such amazing detail to their cars in GT5? It is because the codebase for the PS3, while more complicated, is far superior to the xbox 360. Of course, the downside is you get a fewer number of optimized games. anyway...



PS3 games also didn't start looking "impressive" untill late 2009... An almost 3 year lag (that's a pretty steep learning curve, even more so for first party developers)... coincidence? I think not.


----------



## Aquinus (May 30, 2013)

NeoXF said:


> PS3 games also didn't start looking "impressive" untill late 2009... An almost 3 year lag (that's a pretty steep learning curve, even more so for first party developers)... coincidence? I think not.



Yup, and the 360 having a IBM POWER chip in it with Altivec handy, a lot more developers knew how to work with that as opposed to the PS3. I think this will be less of an issue since both the Xbox One and PS4 will be on x86. I suspect that MS might pull ahead since they already have devoted a lot of time and development into writing stuff for x86(_64) in the past, a lot more so than Sony.

Consider the Windows kernel for example, it is a very mature piece of software and I suspect that MS has learned a lot of things after making mistakes in the past.


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 30, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> Yup, and the 360 having a IBM POWER chip in it with Altivec handy, a lot more developers knew how to work with that as opposed to the PS3. I think this will be less of an issue since both the Xbox One and PS4 will be on x86. I suspect that MS might pull ahead since they already have devoted a lot of time and development into writing stuff for x86(_64) in the past, a lot more so than Sony.
> 
> Consider the Windows kernel for example, it is a very mature piece of software and I suspect that MS has learned a lot of things after making mistakes in the past.



i don't know about that. between Sony and Microsoft I would argue that Sony will deliver the better codebase to develop games on.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 30, 2013)

Are you forgetting DirectX, XNA, .NET Framework, and Visual Studio?  Microsoft is the undisputed champion of codebases.


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 30, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Are you forgetting DirectX, XNA, .NET Framework, and Visual Studio?  Microsoft is the undisputed champion of codebases.



Yes, but it's not like those programmers don't also work for Sony.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 30, 2013)

Unless Sony sniped them, they don't.  Also considering that most PlayStation development isn't done by SCEA, I highly doubt they sniped many/any employees from Microsoft.


----------



## Aquinus (May 30, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> Yes, but it's not like those programmers don't also work for Sony.



We programmers have lives too. We don't eat code, defecate programs, and sleep in the interim like a computer does. 

In all seriousness, I think Ford is right. MS developed tools for making it easier to efficiently implement things and I think that will work in MS's favor. Not to say that Sony is incompetent, it's just that this is kind of MS's domain and they've been doing it for a long time. They haven't got to where they are now by writing mediocre software, despite what everyone things. Even if Sony has the developers, MS already has the technology.


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 30, 2013)

Big deal if Microsoft has been doing it a long time. Sony has been developing consoles longer than MS. The original PS was a marvel of technology. The PS2 was an incredible leap and much better than the XBOX. My bet is that Sony delivers the better codebase because they have a longer history with this stuff.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 30, 2013)

Not really.  Only thing revolutionary about the PS was CD, PS2 was DVD, and PS3 was BluRay (and Cell, but in a bad way).  Now that discs are diminishing in importance, Microsoft has a real opportunity to do a huge number on Sony.


----------



## m1dg3t (May 30, 2013)

Sega had CD as did Panasonic 3D0, which were both out before PS IIRC

Anyone recall what NeoGeo was? Cartridge or disc?


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 30, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Not really.  Only thing revolutionary about the PS was CD, PS2 was DVD, and PS3 was BluRay (and Cell, but in a bad way).  Now that discs are diminishing in importance, Microsoft has a real opportunity to do a huge number on Sony.



They could but they won't. This is Microsoft we are talking about after all. Look at the backlash they already have thanks to poor management decisions over Windows 8 and the latest XBOX. Technology has never been Microsoft's problem, it is always been poor strategy. Sony will win again.


----------



## erocker (May 30, 2013)

m1dg3t said:


> Sega had CD as did Panasonic 3D0, which were both out before PS IIRC
> 
> Anyone recall what NeoGeo was? Cartridge or disc?



Big beautiful cartridges! I loved it when software was.. hardware.


----------



## Frick (May 30, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> They could but they won't. This is Microsoft we are talking about after all. Look at the backlash they already have thanks to poor management decisions over Windows 8 and the latest XBOX. Technology has never been Microsoft's problem, it is always been poor strategy. Sony will win again.



That Windows 8 bit is murky at best and the Xbox One (if that is what you are refering to) is not out so it's hard to say anything about "backlashes".

Not to mention that XB1 shares some stuff with Windows, it'll be easier to port and all that. I think MS will draw the longest straw here.


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 30, 2013)

Frick said:


> That Windows 8 bit is murky at best and the Xbox One (if that is what you are refering to) is not out so it's hard to say anything about "backlashes".
> 
> Not to mention that XB1 shares some stuff with Windows, it'll be easier to port and all that. I think MS will draw the longest straw here.



in what? game quality or sales?


----------



## Frick (May 30, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> in what? game quality or sales?



Game quality is irrelevant, all games suck anyway. Sales, and general useability, if that is a word.


----------



## Easy Rhino (May 30, 2013)

Frick said:


> Game quality is irrelevant, all games suck anyway. Sales, and general useability, if that is a word.



damn, that is just negative. i wouldn't say all games suck. i would say though that 90% of titles delivered by the big distro/devel houses suck. most of the indie games i have played have been fun but get boring after an hour or so. all in all i think games are in a pretty big slump. i do hope things like Kinect and Move change the game a bit. pun intended.


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (May 30, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> damn, that is just negative. i wouldn't say all games suck. i would say though that 90% of titles delivered by the big distro/devel houses suck. most of the indie games i have played have been fun but get boring after an hour or so. all in all i think games are in a pretty big slump. i do hope things like Kinect and Move change the game a bit. pun intended.



I wont play a game if i have to get up and dance around.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 30, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> i do hope things like Kinect and Move change the game a bit. pun intended.


It's like 3D.  Entertaining for 15 minutes and never used again.  So...worse than indie games but a helluvalot more expensive.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 30, 2013)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> I wont play a game if i have to get up and dance around.



I can't even be bothered holding my arms up to drive , what next a pad so you don't have to exercise


----------



## Aquinus (May 31, 2013)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It's like 3D.  Entertaining for 15 minutes and never used again.  So...worse than indie games but a helluvalot more expensive.



+1: I bought a Kinect and I personally haven't used it more than 2 or 3 hours total, but I will use it for main menu navigation if I feel like it and its nice when it will log you into your gamer tag based on your face.

With that said though, 30 minutes of Kinect is a good daily exercise because it really does make you move around a lot in some games.


----------

