it's as if none of you have any freaking idea what you are talking about.
See my response a few comments down to see how the PS4 RAM is ALWAYS running faster than the Xbox One solution. Not to mention that the new figure Microsoft is boasting of their eSRAM running at 192gb/s actually confirms it was downclocked. The max bus bandwidth of their eSRAM is 102gb/s; if still running at 800MHz.
Microsoft are claiming it is possible for it to perform bi-directio...
Another clear indicator that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about is your reference to "move engines". The PS4 would have absolutely NO USE for them.
Their 8GB of GDDR5 RAM (@ 176gb/s) is available in a single unified pool of memory.
The Xbox One has 8GB of DD3 RAM (@ 68gb/s); which is one pool of memory; with a much smaller second pool of 32MB of eSRAM memory (the 32MB of eSRAM memory is what was being discussed as to having 102gb...
You're quite wrong; the 192gb/s figure is a complete and utter PR attempt to fog up the fact that the Xbox One is far inferior on the spec sheet. Their eSRAM is not capable of more than ~133gb/s; they even went on record as stating that no internal test has ever passed that mark. That is being generous; the actual peak performance is closer to 102gb/s. The 192gb/s is adding read and write together; which their own math does not add up. If they are using a 192gb/s figure; they are actually...
I think the confusion stems from you not understanding what FPS actually means. It's fairly easy to vary between 30-90 FPS. Any PC gamer will tell you that pretty easily.
The PS4 is an absolute beast; with twice the GPU power of the Xbox One; along with 2.5x faster RAM and a larger quantity of it used for games.
I don't even see why this would be something to question. There is no reason for them to worry about optimizations at this stage. Why would t...
Yeah, Sony was up front about the paywall (unlike the Xbox; only the case for paid to play multiplayer games; versus Xbox having even netflix behind the paywall).
Contrast that with Microsoft making no reference to their 24 hour check-in, no used games; always needing to be connected Kinect.
At E3 those policies were still their plan; but they did not mention it.
You also rent any game that relies on "the cloud".
Here is putting it in more simple terms for you:
Xbox One:
5,000MB DDR3 @ 68gb/s
+
32MB eSRAM @ 133gb/s
PS4:
7,000MB GDDR5 @ 176gb/s
(133gb/s for the eSRAM is being generous; it's closer to 102gb/s)
Even if we used your incorrect figures; it still looks like a horrible comparison in the PS4 favour:
Xbox One:
5,000MB DDR3 @ 68gb/s
+
32MB eSRAM @ 202gb...
Here is putting it more simply for you:
Xbox One:
5,000MB DDR3 @ 68gb/s
+
32MB eSRAM @ 133gb/s
PS4:
7,000MB GDDR5 @ 176gb/s
(133gb/s for the eSRAM is being generous; it's closer to 102gb/s)
Even if we used your incorrect figures; it still looks like a horrible comparison in the PS4 favour:
Xbox One:
5,000MB DDR3 @ 68gb/s
+
32MB eSRAM @ 202gb/s
The move engines are actually designed to move data between the eSRAM and DDR3 RAM. As the eSRAM is limited in size to 32MB of data; the move engines are needed to constantly supply data and limit the amount of bottlenecks being hit.
Ultimately they will have next to no effect on graphics; as the 32MB size of the eSRAM is far too small for any real graphical computations (texture sizes for example; are far too large in file size).
The real factor will be the ...
Xbox One doesn't have more bandwidth; where the heck are you getting that information from?
That 202gb/s (figure pre-downclock); is marketing BS attempting to claim the eSRAM can i/o at the same time; when in reality it's not capable of that. Microsoft used BS to claim they are taking advantages of "holes" to do so; but the hardware is plain not set up for that. Even their own internal tests have NEVER surpassed 133 gb/s. That "theoretic" 202gb/s f...
You realize that the 360 and Xbox One RAM architecture was largely copied from the PS2, right?
Microsoft have never had an architecture based off the amazingly fast high quality GDDR5. Go back to school, kid.
Joke and Fox; that was completely pathetic. Finding google is a great step; but you understand absolutely nothing about what you posted. It's incredibly obvious to just about anyone with an ounce of hardware knowledge.
Your comments make no logical sense at all.
The eSRAM is COMPENSATION for going with the slower DDR3 RAM. It's not enough to make a huge difference; 32mb is horribly small when we're talking about HD quality graphics and computation...
Enjoy your..... umm....
I guess you can get a head start watching tv; that looks to be the future for xbox anyway......
The 360 had gotten to a "State of Decay" years ago.
The only thing worse than someone who is wrong all the time; is someone who tries to mimic another who is wrong all the time.
Microsoft didn't change any policies for the betterment of their customers; they were slaughtered in pre-orders and changed it for the almighty dollar.
You have the UK and World charts mixed up. Xbone is still at 7; versus the UK where they are still in the 70 range. They had no real progress; outside the US.
I think he's "bluepowerz" now
:P
PS didn't have to change their controller; they've stuck with the best design offered for a system.
You x-fanboys are incredibly delusional.
360 Controller suffered from:
- Cheap materials; how many analog sticks have you worn out?
- Stiff analog sticks
- Huge ass unresponsive deadzones for the analog sticks
- The worst "d-pad" in console history
- Bumper buttons that are near useless; you need to stra...
I'm on my 3rd playthrough of The Last of Us; it's quite possibly the best game I have played in the current generation on either console. They hit this one out of the park; I still have multiplayer to get into after my Survivor+ pass. This game was absolutely worth the money; especially knowing I am supporting the best developer out there.
Uncharted also had a huge amount of replay value and solid multi-player. The people blasting the game have no doubt never tried it...