Posted in: Gaming

Xbox One: 1080p 60 FPS Performance Not Capable Of Matching PS4 Hardware

Xbox One: 1080p 60 FPS Performance Not Capable Of Matching PS4 Hardware

For the Xbox One, 1080p performance may not be capable of matching the PlayStation 4 at 60 FPS (Frames Per Second).

As previously reported by The Inquisitr, when you compare the PlayStation 4 GPU performance against the Xbox One GPU Microsoft’s latest console comes up lacking.

But things are not all bad for the Xbox One since both the Xbone and the PS4 were designed by AMD. Although there is still a marked difference in potential speed the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 share almost the same features and the creator of Resident Evil says this means the consoles are almost identical in regards to video game development.

For example the Xbox One 1080p performance at 60 FPS will match the PlayStation 4 with NBA 2K14. But keep in mind some of the initial next generation games are designed to be ported back to the Xbox 360 and PS3, which means some of these games may not push the Xbox One and PS4 hardware as far as the could potentially go. It’s possible that both systems are capable of rendering NBA 2K14 at well over 60 FPS but the renderer is capped at 60 FPS because most HDTVs tend to be 60 Hz. For example, as a rough estimate it’s possible the Xbox One may be averaging 90 FPS while the PS4 is averaging closer to 120 FPS.

In general, like with NBA 2K14 most games on the next generation should be capable of natively rendering at the high definition resolution of 1920 x 1080. With the Xbox 360 and PS3 most games didn’t even run at 720p and a hardware upscaler chip would convert whatever resolution was drawn into 1080p, which results in blurriness. Many games like the Halo series would make tradeoffs on visuals in order to meet performance goals by using different effects and using an oddball native resolution less than 720p.

Unfortunately, the same may happen again with the Xbox One. Crytek, which is known for its Far Cry and Crysis game series, said graphically intense titles like Ryse: Son of Rome would output at a max of 900p at 30 FPS on the Xbox One and then be upscaled to 1080p. It’s also rumored that Call Of Duty: Ghosts may run at less than 1080p on the Xbox One and Microsoft officials have refused to answer the question directly, instead claiming Call Of Duty: Ghosts looks “amazing” on the Xbox One.

Game developers have also been complaining about the Xbox One eSRAM, which is 32MB of high bandwidth and low latency memory embedded directly on the Xbox One SoC (System On a Chip). Some Xbox One rumors claim the bandwidth was upped significantly to 192 GB/s, which surpasses the PS4’s 8GB of GDDR5 bandwidth. Microsoft says using the eSRAM properly is the key to balancing out performance against the PS4 hardware. Since the Xbox 360 had eDRAM, Microsoft is surprised at this backlash:

“This controversy is rather surprising to me, especially when you view as ESRAM as the evolution of eDRAM from the Xbox 360…. We had to pull over all of our vertex buffers and all of our textures out of system memory concurrent with going on with render targets, colour, depth, stencil buffers that were in eDRAM. Of course with Xbox One we’re going with a design where ESRAM has the same natural extension that we had with eDRAM on Xbox 360, to have both going concurrently…. The Xbox 360 was the easiest console platform to develop for, it wasn’t that hard for our developers to adapt to eDRAM, but there were a number of places where we said, ‘gosh, it would sure be nice if an entire render target didn’t have to live in eDRAM’ and so we fixed that on Xbox One where we have the ability to overflow from ESRAM into DDR3, so the ESRAM is fully integrated into our page tables and so you can kind of mix and match the ESRAM and the DDR memory as you go… From my perspective it’s very much an evolution and improvement – a big improvement – over the design we had with the Xbox 360. I’m kind of surprised by all this, quite frankly.”

Would the Xbox One 1080p 60 FPS performance be a major factor in whether you’d choose to buy a PlayStation 4 instead?

Articles And Offers From The Web


16 Responses to “Xbox One: 1080p 60 FPS Performance Not Capable Of Matching PS4 Hardware”

  1. Jason Abraham

    I hate being confused. If the Xbox One can't run games 60 fps games at 1080p then why is Forza 5 natively 60 fps at 1080p?

  2. Kevyne Collins

    This is a Sony driven internet machine of misinformation. They are speculating. Forza is running at 1080p 60fps. NBA 2k14 the same. Call of Duty was running at 1080p 60fps before a hardware update forced Microsoft to redo their API code, so it's gonna mess with the performance of only that game it seems, possibly BF4 but confirmation on BF4 will come in 3 days on the 29th when that review goes up.

    My proof of misinformation? The eSRAM. Sony said GDDR5 was faster, and as you can see, that's not the case. It is no longer a rumor. Digital Foundary talked to Microsoft about the memory and clarified that 204 GB/s is achievable, but real world is between 150GB/s to 192GB/s.

    A lot of misinformation going around man. Not all launch games will be 1080p 60fps but that will be the norm on both systems. FPS over 60 will not happen because why? You have to code the rest of the game. That takes the resources used to run at that 120fps. This guy is spouting jargon man. Unwarranted speculation.

  3. Patrick Frye

    Kevyne Collins It's true it's speculation but it's not entirely unwarranted. The eSRAM is optimal for certain mathematical operations (see my prior articles) and will certainly help but it's not a fix all, unfortunately. For example, 32MB is not even enough to store everything involved with just shadow mapping. You can test this yourself with any modern AMD video card by using RadeonPro to monitor memory usage and then change the shadow mapping resolution manually.

    Activision hasn't officially said what the Xbox One native resolution for Ghosts will be while they have confirmed the PS4 at 1080p:

    In any case, speculation that the Xbox One is 720p is probably dead wrong. 720p is 921,600 pixels. 1080p is 2,073,600 pixels. While resolution alone doesn't cover all the various factors involved in rendering performance, the Xbox One isn't that slow so I'd guess Ghosts runs in the ballpark of 800p to 900p. But it's also possible to reduce certain effects in order to keep the resolution higher.

    Oh, and it's not tech babble. A 60 FPS lock is due to VSYNC and some game engines will have an internal "tick" rate of 30 or 60 (or ~33 ms and ~16.6 ms) separate from the graphics renderer framerate. Graphics framerate will vary based upon the scene and viewpoint, not game resources.

  4. Patrick Frye

    By the way, I say all this as someone who would rather buy a Xbox One over the PS4. But that's due to the controller design and Kinect 2.0. I barely use my PS3 compared to my Xbox 360 except for Sony exclusives.

  5. Patrick Frye

    In short, the goal is for the minimum framerate to be around 60 FPS. The last generation's goal was typically in the range of 20 to 30 FPS. Halo: Reach was infamous for stuttering and getting down into the teens in split screen CoOp.

    As a recent example, check out the GTA 5 differences on the Xbox 360 and PS3:

  6. Rosy Juarez Gomez

    that 32 mb esram is just a framebuffer.. it may be lightning fast but its only 32 mb's… that will NEVER compare in real life to 8gb gddr5 high bandwidth graphics ram with a unified pipeline straight into the gpu that runs faster than the fastest pci express busses in pc's these days… Bandwidth is key in graphics programming these days when we are moving to larger and larger textures… they need bandwidth.. latency has a miniscule effect on graphics processing and this is on top of the gpu difference 1.8 tfs vs 1.2… 1152 shader pu's vs 768… and then for the future you have 62 asynchronous compute engines that sony had amd custom build into the gpu for them (which by the way amd is taking this idea and incorperating it into its next line of gpu's).. this will allow many of what where cpu computations before to be qued for the gpu.. its called general purpose computing on graphics processing units.. as the gpu is much more capable as its not serial its parallel… and sony even figured out a way to do this on the gpu's "off" cycles when its not busy rendering frames so it will have NO impact on framerate or graphics processing… Mark cerny has built and put a ton of thought into this system while MS only put a ton of thought into casual aspects such as kinect and tv and nfl to try and get more money from the masses. They put ddr3 in because compared to gddr5 its dirt cheap… they never expected sony to come out swinging with 8gb gddr5 unified in the ps4. Anyone who says ms went with ddr3 because of latency issues doesn't know what they are talking about… Bandwidth is the key to graphics processing especially at this moment in time when textures files are becoming so large.. i mean we got 50 gb game dl's … those large hd texture files need bandwidth… latency has a minimal effect on graphics processing compared to bandwidth and the little effect latency might have had was on the cpu not the gpu but as stated before they added the 62 ace to offload much of those computations to the gpu so latency will really be a non factor for the ps4 in graphics processing… Sony has out gunned ms this time around and really it was mark cerny who did it.

  7. Patrick Frye

    You nailed it. Overall, higher bandwidth and more SPUs is king. There's very few scenarios where latency becomes an issue and that's why PC video cards use memory that has higher bandwidth with the tradeoff being slightly higher latency. AFAIK there's no planned games where they'd be a major factor. I could see someone going crazy with procedural textures in particle effects, but that's about it. That'd also work if you wanted all the textures in a scene to be crawling/morphing, but #1 how often does that happen in a game and #2 I imagine most artists would just create an animation themselves.

  8. Chris Shaq Sandoval

    Some game will be up to par but not all. I'm not really worried that cod is at 720 n its 1080 p on ps4. I use to sell TVs n that's just pixel as you'll see some parts blur n other parts depth in color. Still doesn't change the gameplay lol I'll be picking up bf4 on xbox I'm tired of cod as it will be same

  9. Terrance Davis

    The problem is your entire spectrum is skewed. The PS4 has a 14:4 ratio so 256 of the 1152 is already gated and in no way will be used for asynchronus processing. Also the GPU difference is no Longer 1.8 to 1.2. The PS4 also has an off the shelf GPu with no custom built parts thats why amd was able to foot the bill for R&D because it cost nothing to give what was already produced. Microsofts Gpu is custom built completelyand in console design optimization is key raw numbers only get you so far. PS4 without question has the better sum of individual pieces and in a normal PC there would be no conversation the problem is a console is not a PC and people should stop assuming it as such.

  10. Zackery Cheesman

    No, would still get X1'if it wasn't even 480p. I've been neglecting my PS3 & 360 for my gamecube the past month because games are more about gameplay than graphics

  11. Jason Abraham

    Patrick Frye interesting stuff. Obviously I'm not a developer or anything of the sort (yet) but there is this blog on livejournal from "misterxmedia" and his "insider" is saying a lot of stuff that says the Xbox One is more powerful than the PS4. Go to the blog posted on October 25,2013 with the title "Insider Daily. Xbox One is more powerfull but is really harder to programm for then PS4 at start." Read it and tell what you think.

    Btw this blog also has some stuff that doesn't favor Sony that much.

Around The Web