Microsoft Disputes PS4 Power Advantage

[StewShearerOld]

Microsoft Disputes PS4 Power Advantage

Microsoft's Albert Penello believes the technical details of the PS4 and Xbox One are irrelevant as long as they produce equivalent experiences.

Thanks to its GDDR5 RAM and GPU, there are some who have been claiming that the PlayStation 4 will have a substantial power advantage over the Xbox One. Albert Penello, Microsoft's director of product planning, in turn, has stepped up to defend the company's forthcoming console. "I'm not dismissing raw performance," said Penello. "I'm stating - as I have stated from the beginning - that the performance delta between the two platforms is not as great as the raw numbers lead the average consumer to believe."

Penello went on to describe how absurd it is to imagine that Microsoft would ever let the Xbox One be considerably weaker than its most direct competitor. "Microsoft has some of the smartest graphics programmers IN THE WORLD," he said. "Do you really think we don't know how to build a system optimized for maximizing graphics for programmers? Seriously? There is no way we're giving up a 30%+ advantage to Sony. And ANYONE who has seen both systems running could say there are great looking games on both systems. If there was really huge performance difference - it would be obvious."

Penello would peg such talk as little more than the standard rhetoric that emerges with every new console generation. "It's been the same EVERY generation, Sony claims more power, they did it with Cell, they did it with Emotion Engine, and they are doing it again. And, in the end, games on our system looked the same or better." While there are doubtless some who would claim issues like this are important in the grand scheme of the console wars, Penello perhaps has some point when he pegs such discussions as being fairly redundant. As long as the two consoles can produce comparable experiences, few are likely to notice or care in the long run about which system has the most impressive internal doodads. As tends to be the case in the end, it's all about the games.

Source: <a href=http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=80168873&postcount=708>NeoGAF via <a href=http://www.videogamer.com/news/microsoft_no_way_ps4_has_a_30_power_advantage_over_xbox_one.html>Videogamer


Permalink

 

[Neverhoodian]

Is this sort of thing even relevant anymore?

It was impressive back in the 80's and 90's to throw around stats full of bits and megabytes, but that was because of the limitations of the day. Somehow I doubt your average Joe or Jane nowadays is going to notice, much less care, if one console is less powerful than another, since they all offer high fidelity performance and visuals.

Of course, this is coming from someone who thinks Xbox/PS2/GameCube era visuals still look pretty dang nifty.

 

[Tiamat666]

In German there is a saying: "when two quarrel, the third profits".

This would be the perfect moment for everyone to turn their backs on the evil consoles and embrace the PC, for a better, deeper, and more gameplay oriented future! Say goodbye to the couch. The revolution is now!

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

This is kind of funny. 1st PlayStation was viewed as more powerful, so Microsoft does a last minute fix upping their power a tad to come out still less powerful than the PlayStation, then comes out and says " Power doesn't matter."
Whoever is in charge of their PR really needs to find work that they are cut out for, because this certainly isn't it.

Now I do have to wonder if their last minute CPU changes are overclocking rather than changing actual hardware, because if they went with overclocking without adding the needed extra cooling they are going to burn it up quickly greatly reducing it's lifespan. Hopefully they didn't go that route and are replacing the actual hardware? If they just overclocked it in that little box don't expect it to last very long if you buy one because it is going to cook.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Oh, let's believe them. It's only Microsoft. They can't tell a lie. Right?

 

[seditary]

I feel like bringing up DirectX but I'm just getting tired of this now.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

I know this is undeserved, blind MS hatred but... Oh, so you've got the smartest programmers in the world, eh? Too bad your PR guys were scraped from the bottom of the barrel, eh? Maybe your programmers should be doing all your PR if they're so smart...

Oh wait, weren't these the same guys who came out and said "Look, our console is powerful enough to make fish who swim around and react to the player"?

Edit: Well now I feel stupid. Turns out it was the COD devs who did that. Sorry guys, I'll try to make my blind hatred a little more educated in the future.

 

[yamy]

Wait, if power doesn't matter, then why did they up the performance of their CPU and GPU last minute? Does that sound like people who are the 'smartest graphics programmers IN THE WORLD'?

Surely if you really believe it doesn't make a difference you would have stuck with your initial conviction instead of trying to play catch up.

 

[Boris Goodenough]

...technical details...are irrelevant as long as they produce equivalent experiences.

Yes? I mean that's pretty obvious if they both provide the same experiences they are equal in those terms?

Also David Carmack already said they were more or less the same in terms of practical power.

 

[Yopaz]

Is this sort of thing even relevant anymore?

It was impressive back in the 80's and 90's to throw around stats full of bits and megabytes, but that was because of the limitations of the day. Somehow I doubt your average Joe or Jane nowadays is going to notice, much less care, if one console is less powerful than another, since they all offer high fidelity performance and visuals.

Of course, this is coming from someone who thinks Xbox/PS2/GameCube era visuals still look pretty dang nifty.

I think there were quite a few who noticed the difference with Skyrim. Also the performance does matter. There are quite a few games that experience drop in framerate at points. A stronger console would be able to avoid that. Consoles are still limited by their hardware.

OT: I can't say I disagree too much here. The PS4 extra power isn't enough to give an advantage on its own, this is all about how it's utilized and how good the games turn out. The fact that these news come right after they decided to increase the clock speed of the CPU does kinda speak against him though.

 

[Evil Smurf]

Microsoft needs to give us free stuff if they want us to like them.

 

[Able Seacat]

Most people who are concerned about power will be using a PC for gaming but I guess we'll have to wait until launch to see how the two new consoles will perform.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Is this sort of thing even relevant anymore?

It was impressive back in the 80's and 90's to throw around stats full of bits and megabytes, but that was because of the limitations of the day. Somehow I doubt your average Joe or Jane nowadays is going to notice, much less care, if one console is less powerful than another, since they all offer high fidelity performance and visuals.

Of course, this is coming from someone who thinks Xbox/PS2/GameCube era visuals still look pretty dang nifty.

I was going to say that! Well the first sentence. Yeah, it does seem pointless to argue over power when the Wii out sold both 360 and PS3 with inferior power in comparison. An people never by a console for graphics alone, its whether a specific console has the games you want.

Although im waiting for when the sales figures come in. It will be obvious that PS4 will sell more, mostly due to being released in more territories that the XB1. Though i will be interested in comparisons of sales in those specific territories that both consoles sell in.

 

[ZeroAE]

"Our games looked better!"

Whatever, dude.

Some games looked better on the 360 than on PS3, but that's because the Xbox was far easier to program on that on PS3.
Now X1 doesn't have that advantage, as PS4 is apparently pretty easy to port and code.

 

[Vie]

This is kind of funny. 1st PlayStation was viewed as more powerful, so Microsoft does a last minute fix upping their power a tad to come out still less powerful than the PlayStation, then comes out and says " Power doesn't matter."
Whoever is in charge of their PR really needs to find work that they are cut out for, because this certainly isn't it.

Now I do have to wonder if their last minute CPU changes are overclocking rather than changing actual hardware, because if they went with overclocking without adding the needed extra cooling they are going to burn it up quickly greatly reducing it's lifespan. Hopefully they didn't go that route and are replacing the actual hardware? If they just overclocked it in that little box don't expect it to last very long if you buy one because it is going to cook.

It's too late to make hardware changes in the launch models, particularly given that virtually the entire system is on one huge chip (wich is no doubt going to be causing a massive failure rate during production.) Unless they want to scrap all the stuff they have already built and release a new hardware spec that would be ready in a few months down the line this has to be overclocking.

And I doubt anybody seriously trusts Microsoft with that.

Also; I would have trimmed down the quote, but I'm on a phone and its a canine of the female perswasion to edit text on it.

 

[Flippincrazy]

The man has a point, even if he subsequently obscures it with a very silly 'our games look better' remark.

Any difference in power will likely have only marginal effect, in any, on the two consoles. The main thing it is, and will be, used for is advertising and promotion of the 'superior' console.

It's best to ignore all the rhetoric that Microsoft and Sony spout in the lead up to release of a new generation.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

He does have a decent point, aside from the dumbass "we have the best/we look better" shit.

Raw power only really matters to first-party devs who can milk it to the fullest, ease of coding and porting is far more important to third-party devs and both consoles seem about the same in that aspect.

 

[Dragonbums]

Microsoft's Albert Penello believes the technical details of the PS4 and Xbox One are irrelevant as long as they produce equivalent experiences.

Personally, I agree with that sentiment.
Sadly that is a viewpoint slowly dying off in the game industry today. It's all about power because that's all that most devs care for, and if you don't have that then they will take their ball and go home.

 

[Flunk]

Microsoft's Albert Penello believes the technical details of the PS4 and Xbox One are irrelevant as long as they produce equivalent experiences./

It sounds like Microsoft is biting and scratching for any traction because they made some mistakes with their new console. Seeing as the hardware is so similar there really isn't any way to argue that the Xbox One is actually competitive so they're just saying it doesn't matter. It's classic marketing.

That being said, seeing as almost all games are now cross-platform the performance difference is really not going to matter very much. "Experience" is not really a factor when it comes down to most cross-platform games anyway as the "Experience" is going to be the same. Developers will just program for the Xbox One's capabilities and the PS4 extra GPU resources will go to waste except in exclusives.

As for the 360 vs PS3 angle, people are forgetting that the Xbox's GPU was actually slightly more powerful than the PS3's GPU and it has a unified memory system where the PS3's was split 50/50 main vs graphics. Xbox 360 had some real performance advantages over the PS3 as will as PS3's raw FP advantage on the CPU. Comparing those two systems was apples and oranges, this time the hardware is very similar, just slanted to favour PS4.

 

[Saltyk]

Now, it's my understanding that Microsoft has inferior architecture. That the Xbox One has one chip doing the same things that PS4 has divided among three chips. And that seems to be an issue that could cause a system failure in extended play. Not helped by the less than stellar reputation that the 360 had when it came to failing.

Of course, the reason it's so big is to help with the cooling process. Still not convinced it won't fail in time. Nor am I convinced that the system can handle the same processing as the PS4. The PS4 was designed to download games in the background while you play. It seems (according to a chart I saw) that Xbox One can, too. But I'm thinking they added that after they realized it was a good idea and I'm not certain it's something that the system will do well.

Honestly, it seems that Microsoft is playing catch up already. They pulled all those 180's on the DRM and such. They added the ability to record and upload video. I think they even stated that the system doesn't need the Kinect to work (though I think others have since said otherwise).

In comparison, PS4 has not made any changes.

And with all those recent changes, I'm not certain that the system should be coming out as soon as it is. Can you completely change a system six months before it launches and have it work?

And, of course, the final question. Which system will have better processing and framerate? I doubt graphics will vary much, especially in multiplatform titles, but which is better as the putting it all together?