I feel like I'm surrounded by idiots on this other forum :/

[KaareKanin]

ive been following this forever as someone who prefers the way microsoft has pushed the console genre up until now, (built in hard drive, pc derived parts, robust online service)

sony was a newcomer at one point and beat nintendo to death with its own leg, microsoft came along and did the same....now its just sony fighting back, we shall see how it plays out.

Please don't go thinking I'm an idiot console fanboy now that you know this.

ps3 had an internal power brick so this isnt anything amazing, sorry to burst the bubble.

the ps3 was somewhere around 230gigaflops of processing power and a 9600gt has around 208 i have to say i prefer the 9600gt but that may be due to it being a pc part with all the benefits that brings. cest la vie

I would say if consoles have vsync at 30fps then the raw gpu power wont make any difference when the frames are locked down (I so hope pcper did a frame capture on these and previous consoles some how), if consoles dont end up using vsync then itll either be a difference of 30fps vs 40fps which is slightly noticable or 60fps and 80fps (which is not as noticable especially if vsync is implemented as before)

at the end of the day while these consoles are mathmatically speaking 3x more powerful than thier predecessors hearing xbox fanboys and paystation fanboy arguing over it is like watching the special olympics-occasional laughter but other times hugely depressing when you realise you should be doing something better..

oh and gddr5 vs ddr3, this reminds me of the ati vs nvidia days where nvidia stuck with ddr3 and wider bus's (in this case edram) and ati went with higher speed memory with higher latency.

considering our pc's are using ddr3 and wont likely need anything else for a while i beleive its a non issue "buy amd apus need higher speed memory" if the latency is doubled then there will be little differnce in most scenarios, the OS's will then play the biggest difference.

 

You prefered the way MS has integrated a proprietary HDD in the xbox 360 as opposed to the way Sony did it where you can swap your PS3 HDD with any normal 2.5"HDD? :p

 

And whats that about only 3x more powerful than their predecessors? I'm not certain about these numbers, but didn't the old generation reside in the the ~0,2 teraflops region while the new generation lies at about 2 teraflops? That's in the ten-fold region...

 

I might less informed on the subject than I should be, but where does it say that ps4 and xbone will have a 30 fps cap? I know the 360 and ps3 had 60 fps games, I don't see why 30 fps would need to be introduced

[EricX2]

The technical aspects of the consoles will mean nothing in the long run. Game developers will program for both or for one or the other, if they do it for both they will inevitably program them to look the same, if they are only programming for one it doesn't matter what the specs are since the other won't get it. Whether that is MS, Sony, Nintendo or anything else.

 

Arguing over specs in a console is like arguing over the specs for a car that only drives on residential streets and never goes over 30 mph.

[D3MON]

You prefered the way MS has integrated a proprietary HDD in the xbox 360 as opposed to the way Sony did it where you can swap your PS3 HDD with any normal 2.5"HDD? :P

 

And whats that about only 3x more powerful than their predecessors? I'm not certain about these numbers, but didn't the old generation reside in the the ~0,2 teraflops region while the new generation lies at about 2 teraflops? That's in the ten-fold region...

 

I might less informed on the subject than I should be, but where does it say that ps4 and xbone will have a 30 fps cap? I know the 360 and ps3 had 60 fps games, I don't see why 30 fps would need to be introduced

gongratulations you pointed out that im tired because its 5am here so my math isnt quite right.

where in my post did i say that i was refering to the 360? sony came along and kicked nintendo's ass with help from the fact you can fit more data on a disc, then xbox came along and kicked the ps2 in the face by having a built in hard drive AND a great online service AND memory cards. rather than just memory cards, the use of triggers in the controller while initially a gamecube thing didnt really catch on or matter till xbox came along (eveidence?-every current gen console now has them), 

heres gameplay footage of current consoles, doesnt look like 60fps to me,

"I would say if consoles have vsync at 30fps then the raw gpu power wont make any difference when the frames are locked down (I so hope pcper did a frame capture on these and previous consoles some how), if consoles dont end up using vsync then itll either be a difference of 30fps vs 40fps which is slightly noticable or 60fps and 80fps (which is not as noticable especially if vsync is implemented as i mentioned before)"

didnt say it would be implemented but I hate tearing and if consoles are limited to 30fps (sucks) or 60fps (fine) then its not going to matter untill much later down the line. if they dont have vync then as i said the difference will be minimal or meaningless if you have tearing, everyone to thier own, i like 60fps and vsync on...

[Bleedman0xx]

the use of triggers in the controller while initially a gamecube thing didnt really catch on or matter till came along (eveidence?-every current gen colse now has them)

Pretty sure the Sega Dreamcast, PS1, PS2, N64 controllers had triggers too. The Dreamcast controller even had an LCD display. :D

[D3MON]

Pretty sure the Sega Dreamcast, PS1, PS2, N64 controllers had triggers too. The Dreamcast controller even had an LCD display. :D

right you are, dreamcast did have them-didn't help  :D

ps1 and ps2 didnt have them (they had buttons), n64 had 1  :wacko:, I wouldnt say that having 1 trigger or 1 shoulder button (gamecube) is the same as every console having them as they do now, thats like saying the nintendo wii U is just a copy of the dreamcast controller........(a blown up gameboy advance yeah).

[Whiskers]

I responded to him.

 

First time I've posted on Bungie in months.

[Guerrero]

gongratulations you pointed out that im tired because its 5am here so my math isnt quite right.

where in my post did i say that i was refering to the 360? sony came along and kicked nintendo's ass with help from the fact you can fit more data on a disc, then xbox came along and kicked the ps2 in the face by having a built in hard drive AND a great online service AND memory cards. rather than just memory cards, the use of triggers in the controller while initially a gamecube thing didnt really catch on or matter till xbox came along (eveidence?-every current gen console now has them),

heres gameplay footage of current consoles, doesnt look like 60fps to me,

"I would say if consoles have vsync at 30fps then the raw gpu power wont make any difference when the frames are locked down (I so hope pcper did a frame capture on these and previous consoles some how), if consoles dont end up using vsync then itll either be a difference of 30fps vs 40fps which is slightly noticable or 60fps and 80fps (which is not as noticable especially if vsync is implemented as i mentioned before)"

didnt say it would be implemented but I hate tearing and if consoles are limited to 30fps (sucks) or 60fps (fine) then its not going to matter untill much later down the line. if they dont have vync then as i said the difference will be minimal or meaningless if you have tearing, everyone to thier own, i like 60fps and vsync on...

YouTube only does 29-30 FPS

[Tr33]

Meant PS4. Not PS3. It has been corrected. PS3 uses GDDR3.

i know u did i just made it into a joke. but still PS1,PS2,PS3,PS4 any one of em > any Xbox

[Lays]

.5 teraflops... HOLY CRAP WE'RE GONNA SEE LIKE 2 EXTRA BIRDS IN THE SKY LOL

[Samdb]

Yea like that one guy called "Tr33" on this forum. just make sure to never get into an argument with him on this forum.  that is IF you meet him which u hopefully wont.

Wait a minute...

[Blackterror25]

I honestly wouldn't really mind a power brick. It would just sit behind the devise, and if the power supply failed you could just buy a new Power supply instead of an entire new system.

[SubTract]

I've only got one thing to say....

4K

(may not be a huge thing now, but once we get a few years through next gen, This will really separate the 2)

[Whiskers]

^ Man has a great point. With the additional RAM over the Xbox One (and the higher bandwidth of it as well as the 0.5 teraflop difference in power) the PS4 should achieve superior results at 4K resolution, of which I'm sure at least a few games will take advantage.

[Tr33]

Wait a minute...

Yes?

[Nicktrance]

That's one reason I really love this forum, especially vs using Disqus, YT comments or many tech sites focused on mobile tech, tech in general or gaming in general, you can actually have a decent conversation. It's something I notice with several PC-centric channels/sites like OC3D and Teksydicate.

[Nicktrance]

^ Man has a great point. With the additional RAM over the Xbox One (and the higher bandwidth of it as well as the 0.5 teraflop difference in power) the PS4 should achieve superior results at 4K resolution, of which I'm sure at least a few games will take advantage.

 

I doubt it, maybe some casual games with 2D graphics might but 4K will most likely only be used for movies (especially since Sony is already pushing their own 4K players and content into the market)

[D3MON]

^ Man has a great point. With the additional RAM over the Xbox One (and the higher bandwidth of it as well as the 0.5 teraflop difference in power) the PS4 should achieve superior results at 4K resolution, of which I'm sure at least a few games will take advantage.

unless theyre more powerful then a titan 4k dont matter, at 4k resolutions a ttian only eeks out 19fps on tomb raider (source-http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-nvidia-geforce-titan-review)

the ps4 is 33% more powerful so you can likely get up to 33% more performance that sounds huge by considering previous consoles got 20-40fp thats not a huge leap and not enough to make someone switch,  the hardware in the ps3 was better than the xbox, the ps4 has better hardware than the xbox one, i had a ps3 slim for a month before selling it, still kept the xbox...if you want better gamimg, game on a pc, if your not gaming then the other things a console can do come into play.

[D3MON]

YouTube only does 29-30 FPS

Yes but if you watched the video you would see the consoles arnt capped

[Whiskers]

unless theyre more powerful then a titan 4k dont matter, at 4k resolutions a ttian only eeks out 19fps on tomb raider (source-http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-nvidia-geforce-titan-review)

the ps4 is 33% more powerful so you can likely get up to 33% more performance that sounds huge by considering previous consoles got 20-40fp thats not a huge leap and not enough to make someone switch,  the hardware in the ps3 was better than the xbox, the ps4 has better hardware than the xbox one, i had a ps3 slim for a month before selling it, still kept the xbox...if you want better gamimg, game on a pc, if your not gaming then the other things a console can do come into play.

 

Mm. This is true, in some ways. It's unlikely we'll see many, if any, big budget or triple A games running at 4K on the next gen consoles. (Also, I have the funny feeling that we'll start seeing better 4K performance in the coming months even with the current lineup of GPUs. I'm fairly certain there are ways developers could optimise their games to run at 4K, and really doubt many have bothered implementing them yet as there's just no reason for it until 4K monitors and TVs become more common.

 

But we'll almost definitely see a couple of arcade or indie titles running at 4K. According to what I've read so far, games like Battlefield 4 are running on the PS4 at native 1080p with 60fps. If the console can achieve that with such graphically complex games it can assuredly achieve 4K at 30fps at least with simpler games.

[D3MON]

Mm. This is true, in some ways. It's unlikely we'll see many, if any, big budget or triple A games running at 4K on the next gen consoles. (Also, I have the funny feeling that we'll start seeing better 4K performance in the coming months even with the current lineup of GPUs. I'm fairly certain there are ways developers could optimise their games to run at 4K, and really doubt many have bothered implementing them yet as there's just no reason for it until 4K monitors and TVs become more common.

 

But we'll almost definitely see a couple of arcade or indie titles running at 4K. According to what I've read so far, games like Battlefield 4 are running on the PS4 at native 1080p with 60fps. If the console can achieve that with such graphically complex games it can assuredly achieve 4K at 30fps at least with simpler games.

source? (just wanna see, not denying it) fair enough a 7790/7850 gets around 40fps on ultra@1080projectors so MAYBE a ps4 will get 60fps @1080projectors on medium but thats 10-15fps at 4k if the gpu has enough power to render/shade 8 million pixels but thats not worth it and who cares if pacman gets 60fps at 1080p?

4k wont be a thing for me, 1080p is fine for another few years, id rather have vync and it never drop below 60fps....

[SirReallySam]

After reading this... *facepalm

[Godlygamer23]

Yes but if you watched the video you would see the consoles arnt capped

How?

[brownninja97]

I'll keep an eye out for him  :ph34r:. 

Dammit you have a picture of me.