alex69er, 23 Nov 2017xbox lame ps4 litt the only thing good about xbox is the controls which is only good for shoot... morenever ps4 doesn't even have backward compatibility
its graphics sucks
xbox step up its game
xbox lame ps4 litt the only thing good about xbox is the controls which is only good for shooting games other than that its lame
much less when the psi gets released
AnonD-695347, 28 Aug 2017Holy gawd i like the way you ultra-bake your comments.
Not to insult, but they are just yo... moreSorry for late response Dokagan. Here's a lengthy detailed post for you:
1) The PC market is very interesting. One can make an argument that Intel is innovative, they did dominate the performance AND efficiency market for 10 years straight: early 2006's Conroe to late 2016's Kaby Lake. So for good reason, there are a lot of fans of Intel.
One can also make the argument that Intel is NOT innovative at all. As they usually fail to design their own chips, and instead they resort to acquiring other businesses on the cheap, to take their experts and designs and slap an Intel logo on it. On top of this, Intel has broken the law several times, and tried to muscle out all competition from the market. They've potentially done Trillions of dollars worth of damaged, and gleefully accepted to pay small fines for their actions. The fact that Intel cannot compete with a much smaller designer like ARM lends a lot of credibility to this concept. Something like Qualcomm or Nvidia should absolutely not be able to compete with Intel, but they do, and their designs are arguably more intelligent.
So it's really hard to see where the market will go. But I can break it down to several quick points for you. The first point is how AMD will move on. Some might think Ryzen was a one hit wonder, and that AMD will not be able to make much improvements, especially without a head designer like Jim Keller. However, even if AMD makes modest improvements to Ryzen (eg 10% increased efficiency), when it transitions to a smaller node, for instance, a Ryzen v2.0 on 10nm Finfet (maybe in 2018) that could boost efficiency by another 40% on-chip. So its very possible we might see a Ryzen v2.0 that's between 20% - 55% more efficient in 2018-2019. After that, they could hit a snag or a plateau if you will... as it becomes more expensive, slow, and harder to manufacture smaller lithography wafers AND because they might not have the expertise to improve the microarchitecture further. Or one could say, AMD will become profitable again in the server, graphics, desktop, and laptop markets in 2017.... so the new revenue will allow AMD to spend better on R&D and actually innovate.
The second point is Intel. If AMD produces a Ryzen v2.0 chip that's 55% more efficient in 2018 then Intel will be in a bind. In particular, Intel has been wasting and bleeding money on nonsense for a while, and hasn't been innovating. We could potentially see a reversal of roles, where AMD might dominate the market in terms of performance AND efficiency for 5-10 years as Intel gets reduced to a laughing stock. It's shares would take a massive hit, and they might sell off certain divisions. They might even sell their wafer fabrication to someone like GlobalFoundaries, and relegate to being a patent licenser. It's definitely possible.
Or third point, its possible that Intel is actually innovative. And perhaps they have a next-gen microarchitecture that has been cooked up several years ago. It's possible that Intel sat on the technology on purpose, anticipating Zen. So while Ryzen v1.0 seems quite competitive to Broadwell and Kaby Lake... Intel's next big microarchitecture might arrive soon. It's entirely possible they could make another generational leap (eg Pentium-D to Core2Duo) (eg, or Core2Quad to Core i-Sandy Bridge). This might mean even Ryzen v2.0 will look slow and inefficient when it launches against Intel's next-gen chipset, meaning AMD will crawl back into the shadow as Intel continues to dominate the market.
So there's three factors there: AMD's progress or plateau, Intel's regression, or Intel's re-dominance. Obviously I've given you the extreme cases, so the probable outcome is likely to be a factor of all three, and something more in-between/balanced.
2) Playing Games.
This is a tricky question, as the answer is "it depends".
If I was to be objective, then the answer is PC Gaming. Even with the higher price, the expensive SSD, expensive RAM, and expensive GPUs... PC Gaming is better. Why? You get a better experience for a longer period, and, in the long-run its actually cheaper. However, it does have some caveats. For instance, a console experience is very minimalistic: just pick up and play. A PC Gaming is more complex, so it might not look as good. And PC Games lack local multiplayer / party games, and some certain console exclusives. However, you just can't deny that its a very attractive proposition with the choice of many GamePads, Keyboard, Mice, Free Online Multiplayer, Unlimited Backwards Compatibility, Lots of Mods, Better visual flair, More responsive actions, and freedom to double as a personal computer. There's even more that I can say, but the positives are long already.
Now, for the short-term, the better choice/budget would be to get a PS4 Pro when it goes on special. Get a PS+ Yearly subscription on special. Enjoy access to quite a few nice free games, and online multiplayer. Then go on Personal Ad websites (eg Craigslist-like) and buy used PS4 games on the cheap. The Xbox One platform is not worth it because the base model performs a little worse, the Scorpio is too expensive, the platform isn't as powerful/popular as PlayStation currently, and it has less variety of exclusives.
But again, if you want long-term, the better choice is PC Gaming.
Back in 2011 people built cheap Console Killers like this:
Window 7 Home, Cooler Master Elite 130, 60GB SSD bootdrive, 1TB 5400rpm HDD storage, 4GHz Core i5-2500, 8GB DDR3-1600, 1.1GHz GTX 680-4GB
... performance that is slightly superior/inferior to the PS4 Pro
... which in 2014 was upgradeable to something like:
Windows 8.1U Pro, SilverStone SG13, 512GB SSD maindrive, 2TB 5400rpm HDD storage, 4.6GHz Core i7-3770K, 32GB DDR3-2133, 1.6GHz GTX 980.
The reason such a build was powerful over a longtime, was because it overlapped the new lithography step: 28nm. And this new flash standard was used throughout in the system; SSD, RAM, CPU, and GPU. On top of that lithography jumpy, each of these components actually got an architecture jump too. So it was a double-jump, and improvements all-over the system. Such an event is rare BUT we are in the middle of another one NOW!
We're in the 14nm double-jump, thanks to NVME drives, high-bandwidth DDR4 RAM, Skylake/Ryzen CPU's, and Polaris/Pascal GPU's. So building a decent system NOW would be a smart choice. The smart people in 2016-2017 are building this:
Windows 10, SilverStone RVz02, 1TB M.2 Samsung, 3TB 7200rpm HDD storage, 4.0GHz r5-1600, 16GB DDR4-2866, 2.0GHz GTX 1070
...performance around triple of the PS4 Pro
...which in 2021 would be upgradeable to something like:
Windows Pro, Dr Zaber Sentry, 2TB SSD maindrive, 4TB 7200rpm HDD storage, 4.6GHz r7-2800x, 64GB DDR4-3600, 2.7GHz GTX 1280
However, if you want to avoid getting your hands dirty with tech....
... I recommend you grab the phenomenal Corsair One.
The MSI Trident 3 is quite neat too.
Thanks of reading : )
Kangal, 28 Aug 2017Way to completely dodge my argument. I never said the PS4 Pro was equal or better than the Xb... moreAll your claims regarding performance is based on sand. You can't possibly judge its gaming capabilities based on tech specs. Real world doesn't work like that. So you should hold backyour speculations till the real product comes on the market. Or you can even see the real gaming BENCHMARKS released by Microsoft. That'll give you an idea about how powerful X1X really is. And lastly only thing cpu doesn't is limit extend the threshold limits on a gpu, which drives the main graphical outputs. So age-old has very little to do with gpu performance. As long as it doesn't bottleneck, we're good to go.
AnonD-345931, 28 Aug 2017X1X = 500$
Titan XP = 1200$
soo.......That means we can now play games in 8k since it's cheaper to buy two xbox one x's and run them in sli configuration
Kangal, 27 Aug 2017Intel defeated AMD in terms of chipsets back when the Core 2 Duo was eating up the Athlon X2. ... moreHoly gawd i like the way you ultra-bake your comments.
Not to insult, but they are just your opinions, not to mean they aren't thought or they are cheap, they are just your opinions. Thats because external world dont give a f* about opinions or logic, its just what it is. Just look at the way you believe that MS acted stupid, they arent meant to act logical. People in comment sections like this aren't mean to write logical comments, just personal offence or hate or troll or alike.
My point is: you got the ideas, but you fall into discussion or argumenting and spend serious larg amount of your time, energy and mental stability just to fight with some random people.
Take it easy, ignore random people and spend your energy to do a good things for your own.
This was just my 10^-2 cent based on reading this comment section, and i think you should consider it.
Now back to topic
I have two questions,
1)Whats your opinion about future of desktop CPU market (AMD VS Intel) fight,
And 2) what will you recommend for next year summer as the way of playing games, between ps4, ps4.5 and gaming PC, very budget wise.
AnonD-345931, 27 Aug 2017Dude, X1X is blows PS4 Pro out of the water. There's no almost close competition like there wa... moreWay to completely dodge my argument.
I never said the PS4 Pro was equal or better than the Xbox One X (Scorpio). I openly admit the XB One X is more powerful.
However, it is a MYTH that the Scorpio blows the PS4 Pro out of the water.
They are very similar. It is like the performance difference between the base Xbox One and PS4, in fact, probably smaller.
Technical Specs, that's why. The Scorpio fixed some big problems with the Xbox One:
- Kinect is not a mandatory bundle (although this was addressed with the Base XB1)
- Its smaller (addressed with XB1 S)
- Doesn't have an external power supply/brick (addressed with XB1 S)
- Has enough bandwidth to crunch those polygons
- Increased the GPU speed by a factor of 4-fold
However, it still has the issue of:
- System performance, being held back by the slow HDD's
- Game performance, severely bottlenecked by the obsolete CPU
So what is the conclusion?
Microsoft is releasing a PS4 Pro competitor which is mildly-better... but releasing it at a higher price, a full-year late, and with less interested titles. Where have we seen this before? That's right MS with the Xbox 360 put Sony's PS3 in the same position back in 2006. And no, Sony didn't catch up in 2 years. It took them a full 6 years to do so, and that was with the addition of FREE online multiplayer, BluRay player, upgradeable Hard-drive, included Wifi, and wide-compatibility with Bluetooth gamepads/peripherals.
So I ask again, is the Scorpio enough to pull the entire 26M Xbox One ecosystem forward, to compete with the 55M PS4 ecosystem??
People who know this industry will know it will not. The best way MS could've done so is WITHOUT the scorpio and instead with the Xbox TWO, and getting addressing the concerns that I have listed.
AnonD-345931, 27 Aug 2017Dude, X1X is blows PS4 Pro out of the water. There's no almost close competition like there wa... moreWell, i still prefer PS4's Exclusive games.... time will show to winner. Maybe PS5 will become double milestone of XBONE
Kangal, 26 Aug 2017If you compare the Xbox One X to the PS4 Pro, you would notice the PS4 Pro is actually better.... moreDude, X1X is blows PS4 Pro out of the water. There's no almost close competition like there was with X1 and PS4. Just check the benchs. And EVERY game will work better on X1X. So your "exclusive" argument won't work. Heck, even MS have some very good exclusive title(though obviously, a few titles short of Sony). And the online experience of MS is years ahead of Sonys'. ANd you can even play some of the exclusives of Sony on PC through PS Now. And a PS5 won't be coming any time soon.
So on the final note, it'd now be stupid to buy a PS4 Pro instead of an X1X.
g6 user, 26 Aug 2017you are exhausted explaining a lot of stuff reason and bla bla bla bla bla to get the same po... moreIntel defeated AMD in terms of chipsets back when the Core 2 Duo was eating up the Athlon X2. However, instead of leading a small victory with the new "Core 2" architecture... what Intel did was to do another major microarchitecture revision. The new microarchitecture "Core i" with Sandy Bridge was two-steps ahead of AMD. It humiliated AMD and planted Intel in the dominant position of innovator for basically 7 years. Without innovation or competition, the industry lags... and that is something we don't want for consoles.
So my point was clear to the layman, Microsoft did NOT do enough.
They wasted a year and took a half-step like Sony. In a losing battle, they chose to compromise and MS will pay for that as SONY will likely continue to dominate them until the end of this current-gen. That is not what I want. I do NOT want Sony to win because MS was too greedy or foolish. I want MS to put its best foot-forward, spurring competition, and essentially forcing Sony to innovate as well. There were rumours of a mid-generation Xbox well before the PS4 Pro, because the PS4 was superior and doing much better than the Xbox One. These rumours were the reason why Sony felt force to actually compete MORE by designing and releasing the PS4 Pro, Sony essentially didn't want to give up their dominance. So while the early rumours have panned out exactly as we thought, MS could've thrown a wrench in the motor and instead of doing a mid-gen rehash, done a new gen release they have the funds, workers and marketing to pull it off.
So MS, they should've done MORE and be innovative.
They could have made Sony's PS4 and PS4.5 look outdated, the technology was available.
That is my rationality, I have many insights in this business, I can answer some questions if you do so have.
First of all, you're full of it.
Rockstar have NOT even released Red Dead Redemption 2, so they definitely aren't building GTA VI yet... at most its in the concept stage. Secondly, you cannot optimise for something that quick. The Project Scorpio SDK has barely been out, you won't even see a GTA V remaster for the Xbox One X in the next couple months... possibly first-half of next year, but this year is probably not going to happen.
@Trump Fan 1980
PS1 was released in 1994.
6 years later, PS2 was released in 2000.
6 years later, the PS3 was released in 2006.
6+1 years later, the PS4 was released in 2013.
6/2 = 3 years later, the PS4 Pro was released in 2016.
.... SONY are most likely designing a PS5 now to release in 2020.
Anonymous, 26 Aug 2017I'll probably get mine a few days/weeks after launch. Probanly time to replace my 10 year old... more I have been wondering about TVs that'll be released on or about 2020. I am gonna get one in 2019 or 2020. Hopefully, a smooth, top notch display will be available for a decent price.
Kangal, 26 Aug 2017Sorry, but your crappost isn't fooling anyone.
I'm not a Sony fanboy. Readers can tell, you... moreign(.)com/wikis/xbox-one/Xbox_One_X_4K_Games
For native 4k supported games either running at 4k at 30fps or 60 Fps
for enhanced 4k games on xb1.
ant this is for ps4 pro. just count and check them yourself. I have not much explanation to do now.
AnonD-310963, 26 Aug 2017Sorry but Xox can run 4 k only in indie games and some not demanded games like forza ( wich ru... moreYes and no. The fact that GTA 6 is being made optimized for XB1 X rather then PS4 Pro says it all though. You should actually listen to what the developers at Rockstar and Activision has to say about XB1 X in their personal comments about it. Or it may be the case that those folks are totally moron.
So whatever your opinion is. It doesn't even matters.
Because in the end they are going to make the games not you. lol
Kangal, 26 Aug 2017Sorry, but your crappost isn't fooling anyone.
I'm not a Sony fanboy. Readers can tell, you... moreyou are exhausted explaining a lot of stuff reason and bla bla bla bla bla to get the same point waste of specs why bother asking for xbox2 when developers are releasing current gen games,, ...
if sony is not unveiling next gen console why bothering with a next gen then if the counter part wont be able to provide similar graphics and plus it is not business for developers ... why xbox x when sony has already ps4pro so we need a similar or slightly better specs for be able to get similar quality... xbox s is slim but not near as powerfull as the pro ...use your mind
OfficialTRider, 26 Aug 2017Your comment looks like written by a kid who is pretending to be an adult and is actually a fa... moreSorry, but your crappost isn't fooling anyone.
I'm not a Sony fanboy. Readers can tell, you know how?
Because I admitted the Xbox 360 was superior to the PS3 because it was just as good, except cheaper and released a full-year earlier. A fanboy would never admit that. On top of that, I said the Xbox One X sucks not because of its GPU but because of its FAILED opportunity.
I was giving you the technical reasons why the Xb1X sucks. Actual facts.
You rebutted nothing. Why? Because YOU are a fanboy.
You have to admit it, the PS4 Pro is the more impressive and better machine. Although the PS4 Pro spec wise is also crap... at least its ahead of the Scorpio in terms of marketshare, mindshare, first-party and third-party support. Not to mention it has more games optimised for it, it is cheaper, and has been out for a full-year.
Try to see this from another perspective. If you bought a PS4 Pro last year because it was the most powerful console, and now you spent all that extra cash to upgrade to the Xbox One X.... the price would NOT be justified because it is expensive AND the performance increase is small. The PS4 Pro is not that much weaker, they are BOTH consoles aimed at doing 1440p/30fps/Medium Settings and Checker-board to 2160p.
If you applied the same specs to a Gaming PC you would be looking at 1080p/60fps/Ultra Settings. Yes, these "next-gen" consoles are ACTUALLY 1080p machines. To get to 4K they have to resort to checker-boarding, lowering graphics settings to Medium, and halving the framerate to 30fps. Stop drinking the cool-aid, and do not trust Microsoft, be skeptic of their claims until they can prove it. So far, there was nothing really impressive about the Xbox One X except its size.
And again, not biased or a fanboy in any sense. I know Gaming PC's are better and I agree consoles have their place in the world. However, Microsoft really should've skipped the Xbox One X and instead do a Xbox Two. How?
- Switch to a 8c/8t Ryzen chipset
- Increase the GPU's clockspeed a little higher.
- Embed a +128GB Flash storage on-chip to store "fast files"
- Include a removable 3.5in HDD storage to store "slow files"
- Release a couple exclusive titles
Now, instead of beating the Base PS4 by x4 and the PS4 Pro by x1.42... they could've beaten the PS4 by x9 and the PS4 Pro by x3. It would've created an actual observable difference by the mainstream public. Developers would start creating on the Xbox Two first, then cut-down to fit the specs on the PS4. And Sony? Well, they wouldn't be able to compete until the PS5 arrives in 2020... meaning Microsoft would've won this generation for three-years straight.