They are right about my 2 year old rig and maybe even current laptops. I am sure if that was really true about current destop computers Nvidia wouldn't had given up on making chips for consoles.
EA Exec: Xbox One and PS4 Are "A Generation Ahead" Of PC
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The claim just has no logic behind it, the games FOR the Xbone are developed on PCs and what? They're not going to be able to handle the games they're capable of creating? Sure the specs are pretty spiffy but then you weigh it down with the layers of DRM on the Xboned the required use of controller & kinnect vs the infinite options you have for controlling PC games and it's more capable ...how? It's more limited in every way and the DRM is only multiplying that.
You are right of course because we all know that the costs a publisher chargers to release a game on their console has a direct effect on the potential power that said console is capable of.Ultratwinkie said:
Honestly, I don't think these people are even trying to convince the players who care anymore. It's more of a comfort thing for those less well acquainted with what PCs can do.
My PC IS faster than an Xbox One. Your turn Rajat.
No idea what this guy considers a high end PC to be, but I built this PC about 4 months ago and I'm already complaining because my friends new PC out-guns mine. I can't use a lot of my PC's power because no developer will ever provide proper support for crossfire. If a console spec ever had the power of a high end PC then this wouldn't be a problem.
No idea what this guy considers a high end PC to be, but I built this PC about 4 months ago and I'm already complaining because my friends new PC out-guns mine. I can't use a lot of my PC's power because no developer will ever provide proper support for crossfire. If a console spec ever had the power of a high end PC then this wouldn't be a problem.
Hahahaha.. I'm sorry...Ahahahahah
No.
edit: So it is possible that what he said was taken out of context.
He does say that the architecture is way ahead of any pc today. This is actually true. SOC (System on a chip) where everything is bonded together into a neat little ball (Like your phone has), is capable of producing a huge amount of horsepower pr cm. This is because a computer has the same layout its been using since forever ago. Having the CPU a completely different place than the GPU, and the ram separated from both of them, is not a real good when they are suppose to communicate with eachother. If this is what he meant, then he is completely correct.
However, architecture and layout aside, any modern PC is way quicker than both PS4 and XBone, if you compare them directly. You can't, obviously, because games for consoles are made entirely different than for computers. So a true comparison we can't really make until the console is released.
No.
edit: So it is possible that what he said was taken out of context.
He does say that the architecture is way ahead of any pc today. This is actually true. SOC (System on a chip) where everything is bonded together into a neat little ball (Like your phone has), is capable of producing a huge amount of horsepower pr cm. This is because a computer has the same layout its been using since forever ago. Having the CPU a completely different place than the GPU, and the ram separated from both of them, is not a real good when they are suppose to communicate with eachother. If this is what he meant, then he is completely correct.
However, architecture and layout aside, any modern PC is way quicker than both PS4 and XBone, if you compare them directly. You can't, obviously, because games for consoles are made entirely different than for computers. So a true comparison we can't really make until the console is released.
Sony's reveal did quite well tbh, it focused on the games and told us what we needed to know.Ickabod said:
OT: This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard EA say, seriously someone needs to smack this guy over the head. Consoles always have and will always be the equiv of a medium range PC for the time they are released. Thats a good thing, thats their strength. By being middle range they get the perfect cost - reliability - power balance for the average consumer looking at a gaming machine in their living room/bedroom/kids room. It's not too expensive so most people can buy one, their using parts that are proven to work and be reliable *cough* except the xbox 360 *cough* and have the power to play modern games with good graphical settings that while not the max PC is still higher than most computers their level due to the device being dedicated to that purpose (Microsoft fails at this one today and most certainly with the XBone, seriously they don't understand their demigraphic or what a console's strength is).
Meanwhile, in the real world, this just came on sale.
So thanks EA, I'm now dumber for reading this.
So thanks EA, I'm now dumber for reading this.
I'll try to explain. There is no performance hit due to data transfer because the data in the memory can be manipulated by either the CPU or the GPU. There is no copying of data between the CPU and the GPU in the PS4. They use the same memory space. That's why it's called unified memory. The memory itself wouldn't be as impressive if it weren't for the AMD's APU.The Comfy Chair said:
A standard PC setup handles it like this:
1. CPU explicitly copies the data to GPU memory
2. GPU completes the computation
3. CPU explicitly copies the result back to the CPU
And here is how the PS4 unified architecture works:
1. CPU simply passes the point to the GPU
2. GPU completes the computation
3. CPU can read it instantly. There is no copying back to the CPU.
They don't need FTL communications.
I think a good analogy would be talking to someone via e-mail instead of talking in person. When you send an e-mail you have to wait for the other person to read it and respond back to you. And then you have to read it even though it already arrived. But when you're talking to someone in person you can hear the response immediately. Assuming that they know the answer. And in this analogy they always know the answer.
Don't worry. Unified APU architecture is coming to PC soon. But this is why PS4 truly is next gen and current PC's aren't. From a purely technological point of view, this EA guy is not wrong at all. And if the new Xbox is also using unified memory then it is also ahead of the PC for now. But I don't remember Microsoft saying anything about unified memory.The Comfy Chair said:
But if we're talking about raw power then fuck this guy. Right?
I'm not so sure about this, because he's talking about both the Xbox1 and the PS4. And if there's anything Sony or Microsoft hate more than PC gaming, it's each other, so neither one of them would give a bribe which also promotes the competitor's console. To me this reeks more of in-house marketing, whereby EA is trying to push its own games on the new consoles, since console copies are far more expensive than those for the PC, but production costs are roughly equivalent.Diablo1099 said:
Whatever the case, Chalk is right when he says that you shouldn't trust someone on the basis of credentials alone, not if they don't then produce hard evidence to support their claims.
Guys, guys, relax. You all need to actually read the words in front of you. And the journalist who wrote this escapist piece, who presumably actually read said article carefully and in detail, needs to go back to school and learn how to read because the sensationalist title is completely misrepresenting what was actually said (probably on purpose too).
"...[have] electronics and an integrated systems-on-a -chip (soc) architecture that unleashes magnitudes more compute and graphics power than the current generation of consoles"
What this means: these consoles are an order of magnitude faster and more efficient than current consoles because they're more efficient and better designed.
What this does not mean: these consoles are faster and more efficient than any PC ever.
"these architectures are a generation ahead of the highest end PC on the market and their unique design of the hardware
What this means: the architecture design is innovative even compared to the latest PCs because of that efficient design
What this means: if you take any PC with similar specs the console will have better measured performance when playing the same game
What this does not mean: if you compare it to the best possible PC you could build the console will have better measured performance
Pretty sure there's nothing disingenuous about claiming the architecture and design of the hardware is cutting edge and that both consoles can get a lot more out of what hardware they have then comparable PCs. That's already somewhat true of consoles because they're more specialized and have less overhead in terms of how much RAM and CPU power is needed during regular idling.
He's not saying that they have more power, he's clearly saying they use what they have better thanks to superior design and architecture that's a "generation ahead" of PC design.
Comparing the manufacturers oft-quoted PC specs (CPU processing speed & number of cores, GPU processing speed, RAM size, etc.) doesn't even make sense for a PC to PC comparison, let alone a PC to console comparison. This is because computer architecture can be designed around performing certain calculations or functions as efficiently as possible so as to make running certain applications more efficient. The more specialized the intended use of the device is, the more specialized you can make the hardware. Oh and it's also true because manufacturers like to inflate specs by measuring them only under best-case scenarios.
What matters is measured clock speeds for your two primary processors (after subtracting overhead from enforced idle, operating systems, background processes, multi-threading, etc.), but more importantly a measured processing rate or time compared to some benchmark. In general, that involves feeding the two computers a list of computations of the kind you expect it to be making in its intended use and seeing which is faster, but you guys might be more familiar with the benchmarking that most PC gamers use which is to just play a computationally intensive snippet of gameplay provided by the developer and measure the recorded framerate.
Now, granted, he may just be completely making up the fact that the PS4 and XBOne are efficiently designed. But I know what SOC architecture (and other designs of the same ilk) is and how it can improve performance, and I know that if the consoles have cutting edge, proprietary architecture, everything he is saying (and not, I might add, what you guys seem to think he is saying) is absolutely true.
"...[have] electronics and an integrated systems-on-a -chip (soc) architecture that unleashes magnitudes more compute and graphics power than the current generation of consoles"
What this means: these consoles are an order of magnitude faster and more efficient than current consoles because they're more efficient and better designed.
What this does not mean: these consoles are faster and more efficient than any PC ever.
"these architectures are a generation ahead of the highest end PC on the market and their unique design of the hardware
What this means: the architecture design is innovative even compared to the latest PCs because of that efficient design
What this means: if you take any PC with similar specs the console will have better measured performance when playing the same game
What this does not mean: if you compare it to the best possible PC you could build the console will have better measured performance
Pretty sure there's nothing disingenuous about claiming the architecture and design of the hardware is cutting edge and that both consoles can get a lot more out of what hardware they have then comparable PCs. That's already somewhat true of consoles because they're more specialized and have less overhead in terms of how much RAM and CPU power is needed during regular idling.
He's not saying that they have more power, he's clearly saying they use what they have better thanks to superior design and architecture that's a "generation ahead" of PC design.
Comparing the manufacturers oft-quoted PC specs (CPU processing speed & number of cores, GPU processing speed, RAM size, etc.) doesn't even make sense for a PC to PC comparison, let alone a PC to console comparison. This is because computer architecture can be designed around performing certain calculations or functions as efficiently as possible so as to make running certain applications more efficient. The more specialized the intended use of the device is, the more specialized you can make the hardware. Oh and it's also true because manufacturers like to inflate specs by measuring them only under best-case scenarios.
What matters is measured clock speeds for your two primary processors (after subtracting overhead from enforced idle, operating systems, background processes, multi-threading, etc.), but more importantly a measured processing rate or time compared to some benchmark. In general, that involves feeding the two computers a list of computations of the kind you expect it to be making in its intended use and seeing which is faster, but you guys might be more familiar with the benchmarking that most PC gamers use which is to just play a computationally intensive snippet of gameplay provided by the developer and measure the recorded framerate.
Now, granted, he may just be completely making up the fact that the PS4 and XBOne are efficiently designed. But I know what SOC architecture (and other designs of the same ilk) is and how it can improve performance, and I know that if the consoles have cutting edge, proprietary architecture, everything he is saying (and not, I might add, what you guys seem to think he is saying) is absolutely true.
That's one of the things he could have meant. In the best case scenario he's not just talking about that though.TomWiley said:
Again, all this guy said is that the system architecture (ie, System on Chip architecture) is a generation ahead of PCs. Which isn't entirely true either, since there are some PCs that are approaching that level of chip integration already, but it had nothing to do with performance claims. The only time he mentions power, it's in relation to last-gen consoles.
At no point did he say that the next-gen consoles will be more powerful than PCs.
So really. Stop reacting to sound bytes, start reading source articles, and stop letting "journalists" goad you into a frothing fit to generate page hits.
At no point did he say that the next-gen consoles will be more powerful than PCs.
So really. Stop reacting to sound bytes, start reading source articles, and stop letting "journalists" goad you into a frothing fit to generate page hits.