wrote:Being so similar to PCs it won't take long for PS4 games to look better, run with more fps, better AA or a combination of all of this.
You don't say? How long will it take for the games to actually become good?
wrote:How long will it take for the games to actually become good?
Games are good. But they are not for our generation and we simply have to accept that. If they weren't good, nobody would buy them.
wrote:wrote:Being so similar to PCs it won't take long for PS4 games to look better, run with more fps, better AA or a combination of all of this.
You don't say? How long will it take for the games to actually become good?
That's what I like to call a "portable goalposts" question.
wrote:For me it's easy. PS4 has 50% more GPU power and faster memory. It's like choosing between two PCs, one with a Radeon 7770 and one with a 7850. Being so similar to PCs it won't take long for PS4 games to look better, run with more fps, better AA or a combination of all of this.
The original XBox had the "advantage" of being similar to a PC, too, but we didn't see any of that happen then so why should we expect it now?
wrote:wrote:The original XBox had the "advantage" of being similar to a PC, too, but we didn't see any of that happen then so why should we expect it now?
The Xbox was new and breaking into an existing market. Now the two main consoles are basically PCs. A different situation.
I'm excited, happy to play adventure games on the PC and all the fancy stuff on the consoles.
wrote:The original XBox had the "advantage" of being similar to a PC, too, but we didn't see any of that happen then so why should we expect it now?
This one is even more similar though. There were stuff on the original XBOX that no one knew how they worked. It's GPU was kind of a mystery, as was its DSP AFAIK. This time around, we'll probably know exactly how everything works for both machines.
^ highly doubt that, both machines have various enhancements in the "stock" parts that won't be known for a long time....
wrote:^ highly doubt that, both machines have various enhancements in the "stock" parts that won't be known for a long time....
Pure speculation at this point. Looks like we'll have to wait and see!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWSIFh8ICaA
Lol, looks like Sony hasn't lost it all yet. Twelve million views in five days. This is exactly the kind of publicity stunt they need after their PSN hack disaster and not-so-successful Vita.
Also the bit about custom additions to the parts is not entirely speculation. At least there exist die shots from the Wii U graphics chip and certain areas are vastly different from its PC counterpart.
wrote:wrote:^ highly doubt that, both machines have various enhancements in the "stock" parts that won't be known for a long time....
Pure speculation at this point. Looks like we'll have to wait and see!
No speculation at all, assuming that both machines use "stock" parts is a naive thought to begin with.
It is guaranteed that you won't know "exactly how everything works" for a long time. Chances are that certain components will never be fully understood.
Both machines are NOT pcs , they don't use stock parts and they contain several enhancements that simply won't be available outside them.
They're not exactly stock parts, as there's no 8core APU from AMD at the moment, but I take it that it's basically two dies on the APU? Even if that's not the case, since the APUs are based on the AMD FX chips, an 8core certainly is feasible.
Of course the greatest problem is the GPU side of the APU. As I see it now, they are using straight derivatives of the GCN architecture.
Anyway information on the hardware is still kinda scarce, but seeing as both machines are using APUs from AMD, I'm pretty sure they will be the closest to a PC they'll ever get. I may be completely wrong, but until release we can't know for sure.
They are not based on FX but on "Jaguar", the successor of E-350 etc. Basically their answer to Atom with some improvements. So given that the CPUs will be a low-power architecture clocked at 1.6-2 GHz and the GPU is like a 7870 I don't think the GPU is the problem here. Of course this is good for PC games as it will force better multithreading.
i wouldn't be so sure 😉
http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Xbox-One-Gam … ards-56737.html
http://i.imgur.com/xJMEtJT.jpg
http://www.legitreviews.com/images/reviews/18 … test-system.jpg
wrote:They are not based on FX but on "Jaguar", the successor of E-350 etc. Basically their answer to Atom with some improvements. So given that the CPUs will be a low-power architecture clocked at 1.6-2 GHz and the GPU is like a 7870 I don't think the GPU is the problem here. Of course this is good for PC games as it will force better multithreading.
Oh hey, I didn't know that. Makes sense then, seeing as they would want to keep the TDP and power consumption at low levels.
I certainly hope it forces better multithreading 😀.
Yea it's similar to the E-450 bit with double the cores.
The way I look at it is I look at what they did with the limited hardware of a PS3 and XBox 360 and I can only imagine what they will pull of with these consoles. It just shows how inefficient PCs are simply because everyone has different hardware and everything goes through a ton of abstraction layers.
Whatever happened to Cell being the future of Sony game consoles? Sony touted Cell as being infinitely expandable to add more processing power to future systems. What happened to that?
^ cost? not a good SDK? too much time needed to optimize code? All of the above?
Maybe cell or parts of it are living at some component of the ps4 , it did an excellent job adding textures/fx/post processing and help ps3's gpu...
Am I a PS fan boy or does the PS4 share the look of a MT-32? 😁
Maybe the "nippon effect"? 😁
I was never interested in a XBOX. XBOX One further cements this feeling.
