Xbones incapabilty of 1080p games analyzed(32MB dedicated V"ram")

[juretrn]

It's not really that simple... The Xbox One is MUCH more powerful than the Xbox 360...

 

Resolution isn't everything.

The guy is likely to be talking about the differences between the versions of the 360 only. 

 

As to OP: you do realise you are comparing a Radeon 2900 series equivalent chip to a modern GPU, right? The SRAM cache is just the right size, obviously.

[Murdoch]

It's not really that simple... The Xbox One is MUCH more powerful than the Xbox 360...

Resolution isn't everything.

Clearly not powerful enough. Having to make compromises on resolution to achieve frame rates to me is a concession that the hardware is inadequate.

It's indicative of the Microsoft we have today, out of step with what the consumer wants, and lagging behind the competition.

[qwertywarrior]

I don't disagree, 1080p is better always, but 720p done well can be good too.

 

reminds i havent  really seen 720p gaming because most ps3 360 games i played were sub 720p

[juretrn]

Clearly not powerful enough. Having to make compromises on resolution to achieve frame rates to me is a concession that the hardware is inadequate.

It's indicative of the Microsoft we have today, out of step with what the consumer wants, and lagging behind the competition.

What you are forgetting is the fact that microsoft is selling 800 $ of hardware for 400 (or 500, I'm not sure)$, and those 400 get you a much better experience than an equivalently priced PC. In fact, it quite is comparable to a 800 $ PC. And it will run all of the games for many years to come (if it doesn't RROD every 3 months, hehe). 

Don't get me wrong, I much prefer PC as a platform, but you just can't claim the new consoles are inadequate. 

[Xorbot]

It's not really that simple... The Xbox One is MUCH more powerful than the Xbox 360...

 

Resolution isn't everything.

 

All that "MUCH more powerful", yet the end result is the Xbox One counterparts that run games in 720p.  Let me put that into perspective.  I played Unreal Tournament on my Athlon 1 Ghz and Voodoo 5 computer in 2000 at 1024x768.  Indeed, that is a 4:3 resolution, but a slightly higher vertical resolution than 720p.  Also, UT99 has much simpler graphics than Xbox One can produce, indeed.

 

But the most offending stat of all is that we have been playing "720p" games since 1999.  It is currently 2014.  15 years later, Linus chimes in and says "Resolution isn't everything."

 

Unbelievable.

[ACatWithThumbs]

I love how they always say it will get better overtime.
No it won't, because the graphics are getting more demanding from month to month.
In 2 Years they may get the hang of it but by then games will be so demanding that the hardware won't handle 1080p gaming.

In 2 Years is 2016 which is the Year Volta comes out.
That means we will already have stacked Dram with up to 1TB/s memory bandwith while the XboxOne has 68,3GB/s.
And the XboxOne is supposed to hold till 2023 by then we should be already close to the end of silicon.
 

 

What you are forgetting is the fact that microsoft is selling 800 $ of hardware for 400 (or 500, I'm not sure)$, and those 400 get you a much better experience than an equivalently priced PC. In fact, it quite is comparable to a 800 $ PC. And it will run all of the games for many years to come (if it doesn't RROD every 3 months, hehe). 

Don't get me wrong, I much prefer PC as a platform, but you just can't claim the new consoles are inadequate. 

The XboxOne GPU is on par with a HD5770 that card was cheap 5 Years ago.
The XboxOne is faaaaaaarrr away from $800 worth.
With $800 I can build a PC with a GPU and CPU that has 2-3 times the performance that can run games easy in 1080p and a lot of games even in 1440p or 4K.


 

[Stereo8]

Sony and Microsoft are selling underpowered hardware that can't run games at 1080p 60fps right now, and it will have to last for AT LEAST six years. In six years, 720p might be like 480p is today. And the graphics will get better and better on pc.

[flibberdipper]

Holy softball, linus replied to my post, I can die in peace now <3

lol Yup.

[Misanthrope]

All that "MUCH more powerful", yet the end result is the Xbox One counterparts that run games in 720p.  Let me put that into perspective.  I played Unreal Tournament on my Athlon 1 Ghz and Voodoo 5 computer in 2000 at 1024x768.  Indeed, that is a 4:3 resolution, but a slightly higher vertical resolution than 720p.  Also, UT99 has much simpler graphics than Xbox One can produce, indeed.

 

But the most offending stat of all is that we have been playing "720p" games since 1999.  It is currently 2014.  15 years later, Linus chimes in and says "Resolution isn't everything."

 

Unbelievable.

 

Really? So you're honestly going to compare the polygon count and texture resolution of Unreal Tournament to that of Battlefield 4? Well fuck me I'm going back to Geforce 2 MX since it technically can run 720p(ish)

 

In fact I'm not even sure if I needed to post this mock for everybody to see just how self-defeating your reply was.

[flibberdipper]

All that "MUCH more powerful", yet the end result is the Xbox One counterparts that run games in 720p.  Let me put that into perspective.  I played Unreal Tournament on my Athlon 1 Ghz and Voodoo 5 computer in 2000 at 1024x768.  Indeed, that is a 4:3 resolution, but a slightly higher vertical resolution than 720p.  Also, UT99 has much simpler graphics than Xbox One can produce, indeed.

 

But the most offending stat of all is that we have been playing "720p" games since 1999.  It is currently 2014.  15 years later, Linus chimes in and says "Resolution isn't everything."

 

Unbelievable.

720p is 1280x720 last time I checked... Not 1024x720.

[GoodBytes]

And yet, the WiiU does 1080p 60Hz fine on many games.

Sadly, resolution is not everything.

It's cleat that Microsoft wanted to get max CPU power, to get all it's abilities to run smoothly. The PS4 CPU suffers due to GDDR5 very high latency. But because games aren't really CPU intensive compared to the GPU, it doesn't really show. Then again, the PS4 doesn't do what the XBox One does, which is CPU intensive

Why are we even talking about this?

If you want the best visuals, get a PC. All 3 consoles offers a unique experience, whether be gaming or other things. A gaming console is an entertainment device.

WiiU -> Of screen play, unique controller, unique game play, exclusive games that you can't get anywhere else.

PS4 -> gaming focus only.

XBox One -> augments the TV experience, all by being gaming capable.

Those should be the deciding factors, not "WOW this console is marginally better graphics than that one, I must pick the one with the best graphics! Graphics are everything!!!". That is just silly. You are not going to have less games, because the console is marginally less powerful. Publishers wants to SELL games, hence why all their games are multi-platform.

I have a WiiU. My deciding factor was not the graphics, or it's CPU power. I know both of those sucks balls. Its not rocket science. I know that third party devs are not interested in it (tell me something new about Nintendo console since when.. N64?!). I don't care. I can play all the game I miss on my PC with a better graphics, and cheaper too (price of a GPU. the rest of the system (CPU, RAM, etc) I use it for my stuff.. so if I wasn't playing game, I would have the same computer with low end GPU or Intel integrated graphics). I am having a blast with it, and that is what maters.

What's the point of buying a PS4, because it has the best graphics, but your are not interested in the console experience it provide. What if you are interested in what the XBox One does with the TV? Many are, as sales indicates.

That is why, as I said since ever, console war thing, is silly. It's no longer like back in the old days where you had Sega and Nintendo, and both offering a gaming console. Now, each console manufacture target a specific audience by proving unique experiences and features. They cater to a market, big or small.

Nintendo sees themselves (and they said that many times before and now), they are a toy manufacture. That is what they have been doing since ever. Microsoft sees the XBox as an entry to the living room. They always said that the first goal was to offer a PC in every home, and now 1x PC in every living room. They tried with Media center, that failed, now they are trying, and have been successful, with the XBox. Sony sees themselves with the PlayStation, as a console to play games, and only games. You can see this, by having nothing really change in controller design all these years, the console experience is fairly bare bone, and extra features are meh at best, much like the WiiU extra features.

[Xorbot]

720p is 1280x720 last time I checked... Not 1024x720.

 

"Indeed, that is a 4:3 resolution, but a slightly higher vertical resolution than 720p."

 

Nice reading, bro.

[Xorbot]

Really? So you're honestly going to compare the polygon count and texture resolution of Unreal Tournament to that of Battlefield 4? Well fuck me I'm going back to Geforce 2 MX since it technically can run 720p(ish)

 

In fact I'm not even sure if I needed to post this mock for everybody to see just how self-defeating your reply was.

 

"Also, UT99 has much simpler graphics than Xbox One can produce, indeed."

 

Nice reading, bro.

 

The criticism in question was resolution.  720p in 2014 is not acceptable.

[Misanthrope]

"Also, UT99 has much simpler graphics than Xbox One can produce, indeed."

 

Nice reading, bro.

 

The criticism in question was resolution.  720p in 2014 is not acceptable.

 

Oh I read just fine, you just did a terrible job at phrasing your argument to highlight the supposed importance of resolution which is not really as crucial as you make it out to be when we look at the very example that you suggested, don't go blaming me because your stupid argument backfired.

 

[Xorbot]

And yet, the WiiU does 1080p 60Hz fine on many games.

Sadly, resolution is not everything.

 

 

Sadly, not all games can and will look like Nintendo's cartoon style.  This is the thing I think about when Nintendo suggest "well our games run at 60 FPS, so 3rd party developers must be doing it wrong".  Of course they don't say this directly, but they do indeed make hardware that is just adequate enough for their own games.  A game like Metro Last Light will never be adequate with cartoon graphics and incredibly low texture resolutions due to flat or cell-shading-like art.  Metro LL is a very immersive game where dark, dank tunnels is key to putting the player right into the story.  The disgusting cobwebs, dripping sewage -- these are things that benefit from high resolution and high graphics.

 

Now for the disclaimers before more people jump down my throat: the Wii U is the only console I've owned since a 360, and this is after I've totally sworn-off consoles because of their lack of power.  My decision for buying the Wii U is because of the games.  I cannot wait for Mario Kart 8.

 

But in conclusion, not all games can and will look like Mario or cell-shaded Zelda.

[Xorbot]

Oh I read just fine, you just did a terrible job at phrasing your argument to highlight the supposed importance of resolution which is not really as crucial as you make it out to be when we look at the very example that you suggested, don't go blaming me because your stupid argument backfired.

 

 

I am not a writer, so I did the best I could.

 

But I disagree; my phrasing was quite adequate.  You seem to understand it yourself, especially after you re-read it and claim that it was written poorly the first time.  Perhaps it was read poorly the first time?

[Linus_torvalds]

It's not really that simple... The Xbox One is MUCH more powerful than the Xbox 360...

 

Resolution isn't everything.

on youtube in the video where you were talking about AA you said that more resolution is better becouse you can't see that "jaggies"

 

here it is. so XBOX one + 42+ inch (full HD 1080p) TV = big fail lol

 

 

[Misanthrope]

Again with that? oh boy.

Resolution is better than AA for image clarity due to the higher pixel count and hence pixel density. However what you draw with said pixels is even more important, hence things like polygon count and textures are even more important so even if we're playing the same resolution than 6 or 9 years ago or worst, people are using far smaller polygons and taking much more advantage of the same pixel count.

This is the equivalent of comparing paper sizes with the skill of the artist to draw detailed images within the paper: paper size is important but the artist is infinitely more important.

I don't think I can make it any more simple than that example, so can we drop this already?

[ACatWithThumbs]

Again with that? oh boy.

Resolution is better than AA for image clarity due to the higher pixel count and hence pixel density. However what you draw with said pixels is even more important, hence things like polygon count and textures are even more important so even if we're playing the same resolution than 6 or 9 years ago or worst, people are using far smaller polygons and taking much more advantage of the same pixel count.

This is the equivalent of comparing paper sizes with the skill of the artist to draw detailed images within the paper: paper size is important but the artist is infinitely more important.

I don't think I can make it any more simple than that example, so can we drop this already?

That's not the same thing.

Here is the best example:

 

[totjup5]

It's sad to me that console people will be stuck with this pathetic hardware for 10 years.

[Misanthrope]

That's not the same thing.

 

 

Precisely, that's the entire point of this Linus said that there's more to image quality than the resolution, not that it was the same thing.

[GoodBytes]

It's sad to me that console people will be stuck with this pathetic hardware for 10 years.

They are not willing to cash out 800$ for a system to upgrade every 3 years.

Remember when the PS3 came out? it was about 600$. Yea... didn't sell at all. It had really awful sales. While I don't have figures, it was compared to GameCube sales. And the GameCube did far worse than the WiiU, just to put thing in perspective. Hence why they released a bunch of other revision several month after, trying to drop the cost at a point where people would get it, and minimize the already big loss they were getting from every sale.

Power costs money. There is no way around that.

[Ertman]

...

This is how I understand this subject. I am not a hardware designer and I don't know if everything I just wrote is actually true. Here is the article(it is in german, so i google translated it for you guys):

http://translate.google.de/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pcgames.de%2FXbox-One-Konsolen-232351%2FNews%2FXbox-One-Games-nicht-in-1080p-spielbar-Video-Special-zu-moeglichen-Gruenden-1110788%2F

So yeah, very future-proof the xbone, isn't it? ^^

EDIT: You need to highlight the text for whatever reason, just fyi.

You donot quite understand it's function correctly. However the problem the 'chip' lies in learning to program and make use of it.

[Ertman]

if microsoft knew this why not add a 64MB chip in the first place whatever it does that chip it must be very cheap

It's an expensive type of memory.

[ACatWithThumbs]

Precisely, that's the entire point of this Linus said that there's more to image quality than the resolution, not that it was the same thing.

Of course there is but resolution and graphics go hand in hand.

Low resolution with a high detailed world doesn't make sense and same the other way around.

And you shouldn't forget this is a console so people will play it on a big TV 720p on 42" screen is only 34,97ppi !

As an comparison an Iphone screen in 240p would have 100ppi.

Why make a game with million of particles and polygons when the end user won't see it.

So resolution is huge deal for consoles, not so much for PC or phones.