The Xbox One - Mini Review & Comparison to Xbox 360/PS4
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 20, 2013 8:00 AM ESTFinal Words
More so than last time, it seems like this next generation of console wars will boil down to a few key questions: exclusives, online, extra features and personal preference.
If there’s an exclusive IP that you will sink a ton of time into, the rest really doesn’t matter. For Microsoft that could be Halo, for Sony that could be Uncharted. I feel like Microsoft might have the stronger lineup out of the gate this generation, but that’s not saying much as neither platform appears to have anything that’s a must have at this point. I can’t help but wonder how different this launch would’ve been had there been a Halo 5 or Uncharted 4 (or Last of Us 2) available on day one.
The online story is going to take some time to flesh out. Microsoft held the clear advantage there last generation for online multiplayer, but Sony is intent on closing the gap this round. I’m going to say it’s still wait and see on this one as neither console is going to have enough users to make for a great online experience for a while to come.
In the extra features category, Microsoft is really hoping to win users over with things like their TV integration and Kinect. I couldn’t be further from the right demographic to talk about the former so I’m going to avoid saying much there. On the Kinect front, I know people who are interested in the Xbox One solely because of Kinect. I’m not one of those people but I can definitely see the appeal there. If Sony’s price tag didn’t nerf the PS3 last round, it’s entirely possible that Microsoft’s Kinect bundle and resulting price hike won’t do the same for the Xbox One this time.
Finally, there’s an element of personal preference in all of this. Look, feel, ecosystem, company loyalty all fall into this category. There are also things like controller preference that fit here as well. I can’t help much in this department.
If you’re looking at the Xbox One as a successor to the Xbox 360, I think you’ll be very pleased. It’s a much better console in every way and a long overdue upgrade.
It's interesting to me that the performance/image quality differences that exist between the Xbox One and PS4 ultimately boil down to a difference in memory interface rather than an interest in optimizing down silicon cost. In this case Microsoft has the bigger die, but the smaller GPU in order to accommodate enough eSRAM to offset the use of DDR3 memory.
If all you play are cross-platform games, then the PS4 will give you better looking titles at a lower console cost. For those of you that are particularly bothered by aliasing, the PS4 will definitely reduce (not eliminate) that. However I would argue that if all you play are cross-platform games then you might want to look into buying/building a PC instead. I’m also unsure about how much cross shopping actually happens between these two platforms. I can understand for first time gamers (e.g. parents buying the first console for their kids), but otherwise I feel like your friend group and prior experience is going to ultimately determine whether you end up with a Xbox One or PS4.
I need a Halo box, but I also like to play Uncharted. Unfortunately I don’t know that there’s a good recommendation one way or another, other than to wait for a bit. Being an early adopter of a next-gen console is rarely a fun thing. Literally all of my friends are on Xbox 360s or PS3s, meaning online multiplayer with people I know is pretty much out of the question for at least a year or so. The launch lineup for both platforms is reasonable but could be a lot better. Having just played Grand Theft Auto V and the Last of Us, I’m going to need more than CoD or NBA 2K14 to really draw me in to the Xbox One or PS4. This is how the story goes with any new console launch.
One thing is for sure - this generation was long overdue. I remember being at E3 in 2005 and wondering what the Xbox 360 and PS3 would do to the future of PC gaming given how well specced both systems were. This time around I’m less concerned. Everyone seems to have gone more conservative with GPU choices, even though the resulting APUs are anything but small. If anything the arrival of both consoles, targeted the way they are, is likely going to make things better industry wide. As both sell in good quantities we’ll see developers target a higher class of system, which will be good for everyone.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
286 Comments
View All Comments
elerick - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link
Thanks for the power consumption measurements. Could the xbox one standby power be higher due to power on / off voice commands?althaz - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link
I suspect this is almost certainly the case. I wonder if it drops down below 10w if you turn off the Kinect (which I would never do myself)?I also hope Sony update their software - the Xbox stays in the 16-18w range when downloading updates, whereas the PS4 jumps up to 70 (70w when in standby and downloading an update, but still takes 30 seconds to start up!).
mutantsushi - Saturday, November 23, 2013 - link
It seems that the PS4's extremely high standby/download power draw is due to the ARM co-processor not being up to the task, it was supposed to be able to handle basic I/O tasks and other needed features, but apparently it wasn't quite spec'd sufficiently for the task, forcing Sony to keep the main CPU powered on to handle that task. The rumor is that they will "soon" release a new revision with a more powerful ARM core that is up to the task, and which should allow powering down the x86 CPU completely, as per the original plan. (either that, or managing to rework the "standby" software functions so that the existing ARM core can handle it would also do the trick)I believe MS is now also rumored to "soon" release a revision of the Xbone, although what that might entail is unknown. An SKU without the Kinect could allow them to drop the price $100 to better compete with PS4.
Incidentally, the Xbone seems to be running HOTTER than the PS4, so MS' design certainly cannot be said to be a more efficient cooling design, more like they have more open space which isn't being efficiently used compared to PS4's design. The temp differential is also probably down to MS' last minute decision to give a 5% clockspeed bump to the APU.
I'm looking forward to the 'in depth' article covering each. As far as performance is applicable in actual use scenarios, i.e. games, I'm interested to get the real low-down... The vast similarity in most aspects really narrows the number of factors to consider, so the actual differentiating factors really should be able to comprehensively addressed in their implications.
Like Anand says, I don't think memory thru-put is a gross differentiator per se, or at least we could say that Xbone's ESRAM can be equivalent under certain plausible scenarios, even if it is less flexible than GDDR and thus restricts possible development paths. For cross-platform titles at least, that isn't really a factor IMHO.
The ROP difference is probably the major factor for any delta in frame buffer resolution, but PS4's +50% compute unit advantage still remains as a factor in future exploitability... And if one wants to look at future exploitability then addressing GPU and PS4's features applicable to that is certainly necessary. I have seen discussion of GPGPU approaches which essentially can more efficiently achieve 'traditional graphics' tasks than a conventional pure GPU approach, so this is directly applicable to 'pure graphics' itself, as well as the other applications of GPGPU - game logic/controls like collisions, physics, audio raycasting, etc.
When assessing both platforms' implications for future developments, I just don't see anything on Xbone's side that presents much advantage re: unique architectural advantages that isn't portable to PS4 without serious degradation, while the reverse does very much present that situation. While crossplatform games of course will not truly leverage architectural advantages which allow for 'game changing' differences, PS4's CU, ROP, and GPGPU queue advantages should pretty consistently allow for 'turning up the quality dial' on any cross-platform title... And to the extent that their exploitation techniques becomes widely used, we could in fact see some 'standardizd' design approachs which exploit e.g. the GPGPU techniques in ways easily 'bolted on' to a generic cross platform design... Again that's not going to change the ultimate game experience, but it is another vector to increase the qualitative experience. Certainly in even the first release games there is differences in occlusion techniques, and this is almost certainly without significant exploitation of GPGPU.
mutantsushi - Saturday, November 23, 2013 - link
If Xbone's resolution is considered satisfactory, I do wonder what PS4 can achieve at the same resolution but utilizing the extra CU and GPGPU capacity to achieve actually unique difference, not just a similar experience at higher resolution (i.e. 1080 vs. 900). If 900 upscaled is considered fine, what can be done if that extra horsepower is allocated elsewhere instead of increasing the pixel count?errorr - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link
That is still ridiculous considering the moto x and some other future phones can do the same thing at order of magnitudes less power draw.Teknobug - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link
I love my Moto X, X8 8-core processor means each core has its own job, 1 core for always listening and 1 core for active notifications. Very easy on the battery, which is why it is one of the best battery life phones right now.uditrana - Thursday, November 21, 2013 - link
Do you even know what you are talking about?blzd - Thursday, November 21, 2013 - link
Moto X is dual core. x8 is a co processor not eight cores.errzone - Monday, November 25, 2013 - link
That's not entirely true either. The Moto X uses the Qualcomm MSM8960. The SOC is a dual core processor with an Adreno 320 GPU, which has 4 cores. Adding the 2 co-processors equals 8; hence Motorola marketing speak of X8.Roy2001 - Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - link
Kinect?