Xbox one

[Kjoene]

Va beh, dicci tu cosa possiamo e non possiamo avere e facciamo prima, ok ?
edit:
per rispondere alla tua domanda. Prova a giocare non dico seriamente ma con un minimo di impegno ad un qualsiasi picchiaduro che richieda lo 0.1% in più del semplice button mashing su un lcd di fascia media, poi ne riparliamo.

inb4 l' lcd deve costare almeno over9000 euro senno sei sfigato.

[samefag]

Mai avuto problemi di latenza con gli LCD, 5 o 8 millisecondi non fanno la differenza. Piuttosto, vedere il cell shading di DQ8 per PS2 su un LCD, per non parlare di quando ci ho attaccato la psx, mi ha procurato brividi e nausea.

[Crysis85]

Va beh, dicci tu cosa possiamo e non possiamo avere e facciamo prima, ok ?
edit:
per rispondere alla tua domanda. Prova a giocare non dico seriamente ma con un minimo di impegno ad un qualsiasi picchiaduro che richieda lo 0.1% in più del semplice button mashing su un lcd di fascia media, poi ne riparliamo.

inb4 l' lcd deve costare almeno over9000 euro senno sei sfigato.

No mi accontentodi giocare su un LDC da 200 euro e non mi rovino gli occhi per lo 0.1% in più del semplice button smashing

[Bourbon]

Mai avuto problemi nemmeno io con la latenza degli LCD, sarà che non sono abbastanza PRO L33T SK1LLZ nei picchiaduro da accorgermi di 5 millisecondi di delay

Piuttosto, vuoi parlare di problemi? Gioca a dead rising su un crt, quelli son PROBLEMI

[Iron Mew]

L'unica cosa che mi irrita mostruosamente degli LCD è che non fanno resolution scaling. Col mio vecchio CRT da 21" potevo giocare a qualsiasi cosa con una HD4770, al peggio mettevo in 1024x768 e via. Col 27" LCD che ho ora devo per forza giocare a 1080p altrimenti o si vede da schifo o partono le barre laterali. Quando l'ho preso ho dovuto per forza prendere anche una scheda video nuova perchè la vecchia non ce la faceva.

[pitone]

L'unica cosa che mi irrita mostruosamente degli LCD è che non fanno resolution scaling.

...bè, almeno non in questa generazione

personalmente penso che se si gioca su console tipo 360/ps3 bisogna avere almeno un HDReady. Provai il crt con il 360 e pur avendo il cavo scart originale il risultato fu piuttosto scadente (magari avere un crt 16:9 aiuterebbe). Se invece si gioca su Psx/ps2 ecc. il crt resta imbattibile, basta stare un pò distanza

[Kjoene]

edit: meh

[KowKiller]

edit: meh

Scarso.

[pitone]

in coro: viva il crt!

[Bourbon]

Il crt è il male

[Black Tiger]

in coro: viva il crt!

Non vorrei essere nei vostri occhi...

[Blade Runner]

un conto è collegare vecchie console al crt,ma giocare nel 2013 con un crt è inquietante

[Crysis85]

vuoi mettere i 0.7 millesimi di secondo che guadagni in questo modo???!

Comunque io faccio riferimento a TV CRT, i monitor CRT son di tutto rispetto (e costano uno sproposito dato che son rimasti in giro solo modelli professionali)

[samefag]

Un redditor fa un'analisi delle memorie di Xbone e PS4:

PS4

8 GB of GDDR5 memory
256 bit bus
~5.5 Ghz data rate
Peak bandwidth - ~176 GB/s.

Xbox One

8 GB of DDR3 memory
256 bit bus
~2.1 Ghz data rate
Peak bandwidth - ~68.3 GB/s

Additionally, the Xbox One has approximately 32 megabytes of embedded SRAM (eSRAM) on the die. Reports suggest that there's approximately 50 GB/s of bandwidth in both directions for the embedded SRAM. We're still not quite sure how the eSRAM is being used - if it's being used as a cache, for example, the Xbox One could come close to matching the PS4's total memory bandwidth. Here's an article from AnandTech that provides a bit more detail.

Memory demands from the OS

Reportedly, the PS4 OS requires about 1 GB of memory, leaving 7 GB for developers. The Xbox One employs 3 different software elements - the Xbox OS, the Windows 8 kernel (thanks amxn), with both being tied together and managed by a hypervisor. The Windows 8 partition reportedly boots when the system is powered on and runs indefinitely until the system powers down. The Xbox OS partition, on the other hand, is booted only when you're playing a game. The hypervisor manages both of these seamlessly, allowing you to multitask between gaming and other entertainment features. It's being speculated that all three software elements consume 3 GB of memory, leaving 5 GB available for developers.

Differences in the types of memory

GDDR5 and DDR3 transmit data in different ways. GDDR delivers data in larger chunks - exactly what you would want for a GPU, but not necessarily ideal for a CPU. On the other hand, DDR3, the memory type employed by the Xbox One, transmits smaller amounts of data more quickly - this is ideal for a CPU, but not exactly the best option for a GPU.

The architectures of these systems are quite profound, as they reveal the overarching philosophies of both companies. Sony's approach with the GDDR5 is ideal for gaming, as it augments the GPU and is great for developers. Microsoft's choice for DDR3 (and the eSRAM) favors the CPU a bit more and, as a result, is better for activities like multitasking. (In realtà il fatto che il GDDR5 abbia una latenza maggiore è un mito, quindi questo pezzo non è corretto)

Aside from the memory subsystems, it should be noted that the PS4 simply does have more power under the hood, with 50% more raw shader power - 768 SPs at 800mhz for the Xbox One, versus 1152 SPs at 800 mhz for the PS4. Unlike the Playstation 3, this isn't a complicated architecture to understand, and it may not take anywhere near 3+ years for developers to harness this power.

Both systems, however, are exponentially significantly more powerful than the 360/PS3. One of the key features of both next gen systems is that they have unified memory pools. In your current computer, you have system memory, but your graphics card (if it's dedicated) has its own pool of memory as well. As a result, your system has to copy data from one pool of memory to the other, which takes time and can hinder peformance.

The 8 GB memory pools in the PS4/One are unified - meaning, quite simply, that both the CPU and GPU inside the PS4/One access the same pool of memory. This can provide significant performance increases (ie, the CPU can load textures into the memory, while the GPU is rendering). If you're interested in learning more about this, simply perform a search for "hUMA" (heterogeneous unified memory access).

And, even if you only game on a PC, and not a console, you should still be pretty excited, as the new consoles will only raise the bar for PC games. Porting games among the PC, PS4, and Xbox One is going to be far easier. In fact, the developer of Warframe recently said in an interview that Sony asked only 3 months ago if they wanted to bring the game to the PS4. They agreed, Sony sent devkits, and 3 months later, they showed off Warframe footage running on PS4 devkits at E3. Edit - Here's a link to the interview

This is definitely an exciting time to be a gamer.

Addendum

There seems to be much discussion comparing the next gen consoles against gaming PCs, and I think it's a bit unfair to make such direct comparisons. Many look at the Xbox One and PS4 and come to the conclusion that the consoles have about the same computational power as a Radeon 7850 (for those unaware, this is a mid range graphics card). And, in fact, this may be true. However, developing software for consoles is different than developing software for a PCs. When developing games for PCs, there tends to be a lot of abstraction.

A developer who is making a game to run on a PC has to make a game that can run on a seemingly endless amounts of hardware setups. Developers making a game for a console, on the other hand, know exactly what they're working with, and can extract every single iota of power from the console itself. To analogize this (bear with me) in a somewhat odd way, pretend your a chef. Your friend comes to you and tells you that there's a wedding taking place, and you need to make all the food for the reception. Well, OK, you could certainly do that successfully, but you may not get the best results. This would be similar to writing a game to run on PCs. Now, let's say your friend comes to you, says you need to make food for the reception, but tells you that there will be exactly 37 guests, 20 male, 17 female, half the males prefer chicken, the other half prefers steak, 1/3 of the females don't drink wine, none of the guests like seafood, and so forth (you get the idea). You know exactly what to make and how much to make to get the absolute best results.

It's not a perfect analogy, but hopefully it gives you an idea of why you can't exactly make a direct comparison between the next gen consoles and a PC of commensurate power. Since developers know exactly what they're working with, they can optimize their engines and games to get the most out of the console version.

[samefag]

Un'altro fa una panoramica più ampia. Non uso il quote perché frigge la formattazione.

-----------------------------------------------

I've seen a lot of confusion in this thread about the power differences between these two consoles, so I figured I'd toss in some of the research I've done on this topic -- by all means if I've missed something, share in a comment!!

Disclaimer: I used to be an Xbox 360 fanboy, but as of doing this research I became a major PS4 fan and really harsh on the Xbox One, as my comment history will show. Hopefully this post will show why.

GPU Raw Power

So this is pretty simple -- the PS4 has 50% more GCN units than the Xbox One. In layman's terms, the PS4 has a GPU equivalent to a Radeon 7870 and the Xbox One has a GPU equivalent to a Radeon 7790. Source

So how do these actually compare? Anandtech has a great benchmark tool that lets us see just that - on identical systems, here's the difference in frames per second across those two cards on a number of games

For those that don't want to click the link, it'd break down as follows for say...Far Cry 3 on Ultra:

• Xbox One GPU: 31.7 fps
• PS4 GPU: 49 fps

PS4 performed 54.5% better than the Xbox.

CPU performance

This should be near identical. Both are using 8-core AMD APUs that seem clocked at the same speeds. In fact, because they are both running on x86 architectures, porting between the two and between PCs becomes much easier, and we won't see funky things like the challenges the PS3 cell processor raised that resulted in worse ports of games.

RAM Speed

So here things get a bit more complicated, and we need to take a moment to understand the APU architecture.

The AMD APU puts both the CPU and GPU on the same chip. Now, these consoles (as well as the Kaveri chips due Q4), are the first time the AMD APUs offer true unified memory (hUMA), where the shared memory pool allows the CPU and GPU to exchange memory addresses. Previously, while both the CPU and GPU used the same memory pools, if data wanted to be shared between the two, the data had to be copied from the GPU's area in RAM to the CPU's area in RAM. Now they can just tell each other where in RAM things are located, by passing memory addresses to each other. We'll talk more about this later. (If you can't wait, read this article on ArsTechnica for how awesome this is)

So ok, RAM is shared and it's super-neat. So what?

Well, the PS4 went with all GDDR5 RAM, offering a full 8GB at 176 GB/s.

The Xbox One went with 8GB DDR3 and 32 MB of eSRAM for a throughput of ?? GB/s. Well -- we don't actually really know how fast it will be, as the DDR3 runs at 68 GB/s and the eSRAM could theoretically boost this up to 190 GB/s....but we don't really know, and it's only for those 32 MB (which would be being used as a cache in this case).

How and why does this matter? We know from past benchmarks that RAM speed really matters for the performance of APUs in games.

In these benchmarks, Tom's Hardware looks at various RAM speeds for an APU and several games. While not the same architecture as the APUs in the consoles, we can see that when not bottlenecked by the GPU computation, an increase in memory throughput of 11.2% resulted in gains of 27.5% for frames per second (using the AvP numbers without any effects -- keep in mind the built in GPU on this APU was pretty crappy, so other numbers are going to be compute limited).

I don't know how hUMA will change these results, or if/where there's a point of diminishing returns for RAM speed based on computational power for the next-gen systems, but faster RAM for the APU's GPU can definitely mean better graphics.

RAM Latency

So there's this common response to the DDR3 vs GDDR5 memory that says "but GDDR5 has higher latency than DDR3." I'm not sure where this myth comes from, but my guess would be functional tests of latency where the discrete GPU itself is an influencing factor.

• Here's the published latency speeds for GDDR5 from hynix: PDF (page 4:
• And for DDR3: PDF (page 113)

For those that don't care to read the above: the timings are better for GDDR5 than for DDR3.

Clock speed still needs to be known for calculating the latency, so let's figure those out real quick.

Xbox One DDR3 clock speed: 2133MHz

PS4 doesn't have a listed clock speed AFAIK, so we'll do a napkin calculation that hopefully gives us a ballpark estimate: The PS4 is using 16 512 MB GDDR5 chips, so theoretically each module has to support a throughput of ~11 GB/s. Using the number on Wikipedia for Quimonda's clock speeds for a 512 MB module, the clock speed would need to be around 2750 MHz to support 11 GB/s (at 4GB/s per GHz). We then double that because it's DDR and we get 5500MHz. (thanks /u/luggles !!)

So by all measures, the PS4 should actually have lower RAM latency than the Xbox One. NOTE: This section's math and figures are the ones I'm least certain about, and I welcome better data.

Unified Memory Bonuses

So remember earlier when we were talking about hUMA and unified memory? Well, Mark Cerny, lead architect of the PS4, had an AMAZING interview with Gamasutra back in April.

In it, he talks about using a faster eSRAM (though he talks about eDRAM, which is very similar to eSRAM):

"One thing we could have done is drop it down to 128-bit bus, which would drop the bandwidth to 88 gigabytes per second, and then have eDRAM on chip to bring the performance back up again," said Cerny. While that solution initially looked appealing to the team due to its ease of manufacturability, it was abandoned thanks to the complexity it would add for developers. "We did not want to create some kind of puzzle that the development community would have to solve in order to create their games. And so we stayed true to the philosophy of unified memory."

So what are the neat things the PS4 can do that may be harder on the Xbox One due to the complexity of the memory subsystem? GPU compute.

Cerny envisions "a dozen programs running simultaneously on that GPU" -- using it to "perform physics computations, to perform collision calculations, to do ray tracing for audio."

That extra 50% of GPU power won't just be for rendering frames - if the GPU is operating at only 80% to render a frame, theoretically the extra 20% can be handling physics calculations, etc. This is huge, as it reduces bottlenecks from the CPU in things like AI or physics. And this depends very much on hUMA to do this successfully.

We have yet to hear detailed tech reports from Microsoft on the hUMA potential. The most recent info was about the eSRAM throughput, which is promising, but I really question if 32 MB is going to be enough for a hUMA architecture, or if the speed of the throughput is at the cost of the flexibility of hUMA. Regardless, even if they do have no issues in hUMA, the worse GPU means there will be a lot less of the GPU left over to take on compute tasks.

Ultimately, the hUMA tasks could end up being like the cell programming, where it never really gets used properly except by exclusive games, but it sounds easy enough to manage that it shouldn't be difficult to get at least some performance increases in traditionally non-GPU tasks from the system.

System Availability

So the Xbox runs 2 operating systems and a hypervisor to switch between them, and the PS4 only runs one. How does this play out for the games?

• The Xbox One has 5GB of RAM available for the games (Source)
• The Xbox One has up to 2 cores of the cpu (25%) and 10% of the GPU reserved for the system (Source)
• The PS4 has 7GB available for games (Source)
• I haven't found any data for how much of the CPU/GPU is reserved for the system on PS4

So the whole "switching" OS aspect of the Xbox takes a pretty big bite out of the already inferior system resources.

TL;DR

The difference between these two systems is massive. If you only read one section, look at the 2nd link in the "GPU Power" section.

On every single issue, the PS4 is more powerful than the Xbox One. It's better designed for the unified memory architecture, which will likely be a huge deal in the next few years of game programming. The PS4 has least 50% more power, and the Xbox One is an additional 25% of the PS4's price.

Please understand that the difference between these two systems is MUCH bigger than Xbox 360 vs PS3. The closest system difference I could track down was the difference between the GameCube and PS2 -- you can see here how that actually ended up looking for a cross-platform port (Resident Evil). I'm not sure if the differences will be greater now (nearly identical hardware may result in better tuning), or less (diminishing returns on noticeable graphics differences). But the difference is there, and it's not some amorphous thing - the technology checks out.

[Crysis85]

Non ho letto quasto particolare articolo ma non sono molto daccordo con "The difference between these two systems is massive"
specie perchè si svilupperà sul minimo comune denominatore sui multipiattaforma

[__Ro9__]

Non ho letto quasto particolare articolo ma non sono molto daccordo con "The difference between these two systems is massive"
specie perchè si svilupperà sul minimo comune denominatore sui multipiattaforma

sui multipiattaforma probabilmente ci sarà un livellamento verso il basso, ma è probabile che nelle esclusive la differenza di anno in anno comincerà a sentirsi parecchio.

[AlexARandom]

Va beh, dicci tu cosa possiamo e non possiamo avere e facciamo prima, ok ?
edit:
per rispondere alla tua domanda. Prova a giocare non dico seriamente ma con un minimo di impegno ad un qualsiasi picchiaduro che richieda lo 0.1% in più del semplice button mashing su un lcd di fascia media, poi ne riparliamo.

inb4 l' lcd deve costare almeno over9000 euro senno sei sfigato.

Se i picchiaduro sono pensati per risoluzioni next-gen HD van benone gli schermi LCD, eh. Anzi li preferisco, perchè il gioco è in 16:9 come pensato e non viene snaturata la dimensione del quadro a 4:3 tagliando i bordi laterali o aumentando l'area visualizzata verso l'alto o peggio ancora inserendo riquadri e menate di contorno.
Se parli di picchiaduro old-school riproposti sulle nuove console, vada per il CRT... è sacrosanto. Sono pensati per quegli schermi, come tutti i giochi e le console del passato.

Se si vuol giocare seriamente, esistono LCD 24" sotto i 200€ che offrono 0 frame di lag.
Se si va su schermi di 32", 40" o più chiaro che ci si deve tenere lag video se non si spendono millemila euro.
Per un minimo impegno purtroppo bisogna abituarsi, ho giocato su TV al plasma con 5-6 frame di ritardo (e al massimo ho bestemmiato il giusto che fa sempre bene alla salute).

Personalmente, non capisco sta mania di giocare tutto su CRT per avere lag 0, quando ormai i picchiaduro moderni (SF4, MK9, BB, ecc) su console girano a 60 frame costanti... mentre su CRT vanno a 60Hz che a malapena dovrebbero essere 30fps... per cui non so come farete a far girare i giochi Ps360 a 120Hz su CRT. Boh.

Su PC, con un buon monitor lagless e tutte le giuste configurazioni del caso, non dovrebbero esserci grossi problemi di sorta.


Per cui quoto tutti quelli che dicono CRT per Wii, GC, 3DO, NES e C64 è OK.
Se al CRT ci collegate la 360 per giocare SF3:Third Strike o la MegaDrive Collection è OK.
Ma collegarvi ad un CRT per giocare Halo 7, Fifa2015 o CoD: DogBoss si chiama PEZZENZA.

P.S: Kjoene, hai il nome e il cuore curioso...

[Iron Mew]

http://www.theverge.com/2013/7/2/448...or-reorg-rumor

"Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer is now taking direct control over the Xbox business, just four months before the company is due to ship its next-generation Xbox One console."

:uhlol: