Jump to content
sonofjorel88

XBOX ONE

Recommended Posts

@SS, I wasn't aware the architecture was so different, with developers always talking up the xbox and how it was so much like a pc that ports were so easy, I thought it must have been using x86 architecture.

 

Fabman, I think you'll find that much like this generation, with multiplat games it won't matter which console is faster. Most major developers are already using next gen engines anyway, COD:Ghosts will be on a new engine, BF4 will be on Frostbite 3.0 (as will all future EA releases AFAIK) and most other multiplatform games will probably use the new Unreal engine, which is much like what was done this generation. So basically, devs are already working on next gen engines, which will mean they will just scale settings.

 

If you look at a lot of the ps3 multiplats vs the 360 multiplats, you'll see that the 360 generally runs 10% faster in a lot of multiplats (the ones that I've seen Eurogamer do on digital foundry anyway, AC3 is a good example, as is red dead redemption), usually edging out the ps3 by 2-3fps (and therefore, sometimes keeping the fps at 30 or above) as well as generally running full 720p vs the ps3 running 544p and upscaling to 720p (In some cases). This isn't true for all games, AFAIK, it will depend on how much work the developers want to put into the optimisation in the long run, but I don't think you'll see any huge discrepancies between the 2, unless the PS4 is like twice as powerful or something. If its only around 10-20% faster, then it will simply be a matter of scaling back settings slightly. No need for redoing textures or meshes or anything like that.

 

*EDIT* Actually a really good example of what you said, is games on Wii vs Xbox/PS3, the Wii was so slow compared to those two, that there are barely any multiplatform games across all 3 platforms that are the same, I remember there were COD ports which looked and ran terrible, Star Wars: The Force Unleashed was an entirely different game on the Wii too, so the "multiplatforms" that did make it, were either crippled, or totally different games. So if the Xbox One is that much slower, then it may make a difference to the point where some games simply won't get released, but going by the scalability of the engines that will most likely be getting used, they would just drop settings.

Edited by NukeJockey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, so whats that, around $620~ AUD? Thats about the max I'd be looking to spend on a next gen console, if they release over here at something like $800-$900 dollars, I'll just stick with my PC until they get more affordable. I didn't get an Xbox 360 until 2008 and a PS3 until 2009 and even then they were still expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SS, I wasn't aware the architecture was so different, with developers always talking up the xbox and how it was so much like a pc that ports were so easy, I thought it must have been using x86 architecture.

They are, but it's because you can use the same tool set to make games for both. (See: XDK and XNA)

 

If you put in any machine-specific code for one platform, though, it won't compile for the other without changes.

Edited by SquallStrife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xboxone/what-it-is)

and a 500GB hard drive give you plenty of memory for your games, demos, movies, apps, music, and more

Am I missing something? Or is 500GB a lot again?

 

 

(http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/21/xbox-one-hard-drive/)

Penello confirmed that the USB 3.0 port is there for external storage, which can be used for everything the internal storage can be used for. That includes game installs and downloads. So, don't fret: adding storage will be just as easy as ever.

Oh great, now we can have more external devices hanging off our xbox's Edited by theshaun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

500GB is a lot on a console because you don't need to keep DOCTOR WHO ALL SEASONS 1080P 7.1 etc on there forever.

 

People like us are just lazy and hoard everything because we're spoilt by massive cheap storage.

Edited by SquallStrife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a 60gig 360... most of that is taken up by game installs and that changes month to month as I play new games delete the old ones... I can't see a problem with 500gig if you don't try to keep everything on there indefinitely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So, nothing is fully confirmed yet on both sides but people are pretty sure you are looking at an AMD 7790 (X-One) vs an AMD 7850 (PS4) for the GPU. The specs are online and there are pretty substantial differences, though in real world use it might not be as much. The biggest difference between the two graphics cards is the Memory Bus Width, 128-bit versus 256-bit and that will be a big hurdle for the graphics on the XBox One. The 7790 has less Stream Processors, less textures units, less ROPs, it's core maybe running faster though, or it maybe cut down.

 

XBox One CPU will be at 1.6 Ghz versus PS4 2.0 Ghz, that is a whopping 25% difference. PlayStation 4 is using DDR5 versus DDR3, which again is a big difference.

 

Performance wise, don't be surprised to the see the PlayStation 4 being 20%+ faster in gaming.

 

Though from the looks of Microsoft's presentation, they want more than a gaming machine. XBox One will consume less power and will be very quiet. It's online features at launch will be fantastic and it will still be able to play good looking games.

 

 

I agree you'll have scaling, but I think instead of scaling back from the PlayStation 4. Developers goals will be to make sure the game runs stable at a XBox One level and then perhaps if they want to, they'll add graphical enhancements to the PlayStation 4 version. I mean, who wants to develop for the PlayStation 4 then find out you can't get it to run on the XBox One without large sacrifices?

 

Current ports from consoles to the PC's often have very few options to tweak to tweak the games graphics and are often much more limited than those games developed specifically for the PC. They've already developed a working game, why spend lots of money trying to add features for the PC version? For the next generation console ports, we'll probably get better ports with perhaps an option for increased texture sizes and a few other tweaks. Hopefully, they should be better than the current standard of console ports.

 

-EDIT-

 

The real winner is of course AMD, they produce the APU (CPU and GPU) in X1 and PS4 and the GPU in the Wii U. Even if it doesn't generate huge profits, they'll have developed new technologies and improve their current technology so that budget PC's, laptops, notebooks and ultrabooks could all use their hardware and play games at a level similar to the consoles.

Edited by fabman_uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

XBox One CPU will be at 1.6 Ghz versus PS4 2.0 Ghz, that is a whopping 25% difference. PlayStation 4 is using DDR5 versus DDR3, which again is a big difference.

 

Performance wise, don't be surprised to the see the PlayStation 4 being 20%+ faster in gaming.

The PS4 has all GDDR5, but it's also pooled between the CPU and GPU. I don't know if they've specified it, but the XOne having regular DDR3 would mean a separate pool of RAM for the GPU (which is probably GDDR5 anyway). So there are architectural differences that may help or hinder either side as this all plays out.

 

*waits for Sega to produce Dreamcast 2 with Haswell and nVidia Volta*

 

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted Image

 

Price on the EB Games website, but at the moment it's really taking a hammering.

 

EDIT: Got NFI on the orientation, seems to be happening within Safari and iOS for some reason.

Edited by krispy89

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there's the other thing I haven't seen talked about in here... launch date...

MS said "around the world later this year" so that would be US, Japan, UK? and the rest of us get it next year like the 360?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

500GB is a lot on a console because you don't need to keep DOCTOR WHO ALL SEASONS 1080P 7.1 etc on there forever.

But when the coalition gets in and scraps the NBN, what if we want to watch all the eps right naow!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

500GB is a lot on a console because you don't need to keep DOCTOR WHO ALL SEASONS 1080P 7.1 etc on there forever.

But when the coalition gets in and scraps the NBN, what if we want to watch all the eps right naow!

 

Stream them from your multi-TB media server. Given the choice, why on Earth would you use a console, with a non-accessible file system, for long-term storage of *anything*?

 

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

500GB is a lot on a console because you don't need to keep DOCTOR WHO ALL SEASONS 1080P 7.1 etc on there forever.

But when the coalition gets in and scraps the NBN, what if we want to watch all the eps right naow!

 

LOL

 

Off-topic, I think it's almost time for me to buy a PS3 and Xbox 360, before you can't buy them brand new. I've got years of gaming to catchup on!!! :-P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it will fit perfectly with most AV gear.. but for being stack-able... I would be worried about heat issues, the main fan draws from the top of the unit, it may be quieter and make less heat.. but would you put your gaming PC in a home entertainment unit, stacked under other things?

Did they actually show that it draws its air from above the unit in the technical specs, or are you just assuming that because of the ribbing on top of the unit?

 

Hmm,, WRT no backwards compatibility, I wonder why that is? Considering the Xbox 360 was already fairly close to a PC and the new Xbox is even closer to a PC, you wouldn't think backwards compatibility would be an issue, at least not on a technical level.

The venting on the top of the XB1 is an exhaust, as seen from the heatsink fan frame in Wired's hardware gallery. This follows the current Xbox 360 Slim airflow design.

 

And as mentioned, Xbox original was x86, Xbox 360 was IBM PowerPC with x86 emulation for Xbox original titles, XB1 will be x86 again with no emulation.

 

So, nothing is fully confirmed yet on both sides but people are pretty sure you are looking at an AMD 7790 (X-One) vs an AMD 7850 (PS4) for the GPU. The specs are online and there are pretty substantial differences, though in real world use it might not be as much. The biggest difference between the two graphics cards is the Memory Bus Width, 128-bit versus 256-bit and that will be a big hurdle for the graphics on the XBox One. The 7790 has less Stream Processors, less textures units, less ROPs, it's core maybe running faster though, or it maybe cut down.

 

XBox One CPU will be at 1.6 Ghz versus PS4 2.0 Ghz, that is a whopping 25% difference. PlayStation 4 is using DDR5 versus DDR3, which again is a big difference.

 

Current ports from consoles to the PC's often have very few options to tweak to tweak the games graphics and are often much more limited than those games developed specifically for the PC. They've already developed a working game, why spend lots of money trying to add features for the PC version? For the next generation console ports, we'll probably get better ports with perhaps an option for increased texture sizes and a few other tweaks. Hopefully, they should be better than the current standard of console ports.

 

The real winner is of course AMD, they produce the APU (CPU and GPU) in X1 and PS4 and the GPU in the Wii U. Even if it doesn't generate huge profits, they'll have developed new technologies and improve their current technology so that budget PC's, laptops, notebooks and ultrabooks could all use their hardware and play games at a level similar to the consoles.

Can you provide links to the graphics specs of both consoles? It's interesting that MS are using one step down, but I don't think it will affect anything fundamental to game releases.

 

Past example that comes to mind is Spider-Man 2 on Xbox original and PS2 (as an aside, the senior technical director from Spider-Man 2 is Kickstarting a spiritual sequel, Energy Hook, that looks totally awesome. Back it!); the only big differences were that the Xbox original version had reflective surfaces and nicer water/view distance, gameplay was identical. So if there is a difference, it will be moderate.

 

You're definitely right that AMD is the winner - not just in terms of console hardware sales, which will guarantee them some form of income over the cycle of the consoles - but maybe even in laptop/desktop sales. They're working so hard on their APUs, getting the CPU and GPU to be able to address the same memory (known as hUMA, heterogeneous Unified Memory Addressing), and with these two consoles supporting that feature there will be every reason in the world for devs to support it and release on PC with the same improvements. Naturally it has no benefit to Intel or NVIDIA, so it may cause a resurgence in AMD sales.

 

Exciting times, though I am unsure as to whether I am interested in a new console. Now's the time for PCs to shine again...

 

In terms of pricing, I bought an Xbox 360 Premium (20GB HDD w/ wireless controller) at launch for AU$650 from EB games locally, picked it up after high school ended and played all weekend. So the current $900 is a bit steep... but it should be revised in time for launch. JB Hi-Fi have a more reasonable "TBA" on their pre-order listing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And as mentioned, Xbox original was x86, Xbox 360 was IBM PowerPC with x86 emulation for Xbox original titles, XB1 will be x86 again with no emulation.

No, the 360 uses some high-level emulation to run Xbox games. It wasn't an x86 hardware emulator, that would have been too slow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And as mentioned, Xbox original was x86, Xbox 360 was IBM PowerPC with x86 emulation for Xbox original titles, XB1 will be x86 again with no emulation.

No, the 360 uses some high-level emulation to run Xbox games. It wasn't an x86 hardware emulator, that would have been too slow.
I didn't explicitly say software, and perhaps should've, but I definitely didn't mean hardware emulation. Apologies for my brevity :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest xyzzy frobozz

I don't mind admitting to being quite excited to see what the next gen consoles can do.

 

Having said that, I'm pretty happy with gaming on my PC, although I can see some real advantages in consoles as being all-in-one media centres. I'll probably wait for the post launch price drop 6-12 months after release.

 

I've always loved the shape of the XBox controllers, but one advantage of the PS controllers (at least up until PS2, not sure if PS3 controllers had it) is proportional buttons.

 

Being a racing sim lover, and being an old bastard, I have always preferred the D-Pad and button control method, which I find to be more accurate. With the old PS controllers, they had some measure of proportionality in how hard you pressed them. Even if it was only a 0%/50%/100% switch, it would help immensely. I always get to a certain point in Forza where the cars become uncontrollable because as soon as I hit the accelerator, 500kw of power hits the road at the apex of a hairpin.

 

Turning traction control on ruins the feel of the car. Another solution might be to have what Gran Turismo used to have - traction control on a sliding scale so it was still very possible to spin the car.....

 

But now I'm veering off topic....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm like you in that regard xyzzy frobozz; I've never really adjusted to using analog sticks. Just look at how bad I am at F1! :-P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest xyzzy frobozz

But now I'm veering off topic....

old people are good at that....

 

;-)

 

As far as I'm concerned, gaming hit it's zenith at:

 

Posted Image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a racing sim lover, and being an old bastard, I have always preferred the D-Pad and button control method, which I find to be more accurate. With the old PS controllers, they had some measure of proportionality in how hard you pressed them. Even if it was only a 0%/50%/100% switch, it would help immensely. I always get to a certain point in Forza where the cars become uncontrollable because as soon as I hit the accelerator, 500kw of power hits the road at the apex of a hairpin.

Thats why most racing games on xbox use the triggers... you have a variable amount of throttle by how much you pull the trigger in, much more precise than the buttons

 

</offtopic>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×