Xbox One Chip Slower Than PlayStation 4

[Easy Rhino]

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]

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]

Xbox One Reveal 2013 Highlights - YouTube

 

[librin.so.1]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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

I only bought PS3 to play GT5!

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]

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.

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]

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]

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.

Those numbers are wayyyyy off. Go do some homework.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

So can we install Windows 7 (not 8)?

 

[ManofGod]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.