PS4 vs Xbox One - Who Wins and Why - Updated

There will always be PS4 fans there, XBox fans and sometimes those who love both. Can you guess who we deem superior?

PS4 vs XBox One - Two Reviews - Winner Declared:
See full details below, post your comments!

PS4 vs XBox One: After the fact
Ever since the dawn of man, if you give humanity an option there will be competition. Whether that is choosing what deity you bow to or selecting your favorite brand of booze at the bar, people’s opinions and choices will always create competition. There are few competitors on the market that can create the following of the big name consoles; the passion and dedication of the fans can be seen in rant form on any gaming community website, including this one.

PS4 vs Xbox One

This has been true with consoles ever since Nintendo and Sega; did you prefer bouncing across the heads of mushrooms in the slightly trippy land of the Mario Brothers, or were you a fan of our speedy, blue haired friend on the Sega? Everyone has their own preference and now that the PS4 and the Xbox One have been out for a year, it's time to reevaluate the situation and see for ourselves who is currently winning the race.

E3 2016 and Beyond: The War Begins Anew

Sony was handing Microsoft their proverbial posteriors going into 2016, but E3 shook the very halls of the gaming world. Not only were we given confirmation that the PS4 Neo, otherwise known as the PS4.5, is real, but Microsoft also had a few announcements of their own.

Chief among them was the announcement of Xbox 2, codenamed Project Scorpio. They also mentioned something about an Xbox One S, but let's be honest, people are more interested in this new console they're talking about.

Phil Spencer promised it would be "the most powerful console ever built." Meanwhile, Sony focused on games and neglected to speak about the PS4 Neo until the time was right. That time, apparently is September 7th, 2016 when Sony plans to hold "The PlayStation Meeting" to talk about the "future of the PlayStation business."

With both Sony and Microsoft bringing out new consoles (or console refreshes as some people call them), it's no longer simply the PS4 vs Xbox One. We've got a new war on our hands people.

Microsoft Going All In

Let's start with an away game. Microsoft announced both Xbox 2 (Project Scorpio) and Xbox One S at E3 2016. The S came out in August of 2016 and Project Scorpio is scheduled for a holiday 2017 date.

Up until 2016, Microsoft was way behind monthly sales on PS4 systems. While Sony still has quite the lead overall, the Xbox One managed to beat PS4 sales in July 2016.

Mike Nicholas, head of Xbox's marketing, was clearly happy with the turnaround:

"We're honored that Xbox One was the best-selling console in the U.S. in July, and that total gaming hours on Xbox consoles globally were up 18 percent over last year, reaching 1.55 billion hours."

Impressive to be sure, but let's not forget that PS4 has already sold over 40 million consoles, and they've had a 2-to-1 lead over Xbox One up until now. Even so, Microsoft isn't playing around.

They've been ramping up on the exclusive titles in 2016, with new titles coming like Recore, Forza Horizon 3, Gears of War 4, Dead Rising 4, Sea of Thieves, Halo Wars 2, and Scalebound.

They've also promised that the Xbox 2 (Project Scorpio) will be both backwards and forwards compatible. Microsoft has thus far said there will be no Scorpio exclusives. Every game released will work across all version of their current consoles.

Aaron Greenberg, head of Xbox Games marketing tweeted this after E3 2016:

"Great thing is with Project Scorpio as part of #XboxOne family all your games will work, no Scorpio exclusives, so no one gets left behind."

Top this off with the promise that Project Scorpio/Xbox 2 will be compatible with VR and it's clear Microsoft is looking to catch up or even surpass Sony.

Don't worry though, Sony has something up their sleeves. They always do.

Sony Playing For Keeps With PS4 Neo

Just before E3 2016, PlayStation boss Andrew House confirmed the existence of PS4.5, otherwise known as PS4 Neo. Furthermore, additional details are set to be revealed September 7th, 2016 at The PlayStation Meeting.

When rumors first appeared regarding the PS4.5, people were worried (myself included) that Sony was planning on cutting the PS4's lifecyle short to keep pace with technology. During an interview with The Guardian, PlayStation boss Andrew house put those fears to rest.

"I don't think we're suggesting with Neo, the conventional console lifecycle is over, I'm certainly not making that statement. This is an additional option, it's a high-end version of a PlayStation 4, let's be very clear about that, rather than a generational shift."

The real reason behind the PS4 Neo is to cater to the audience of gamers that inevitably shift away from consoles to PC as the technology gap widens. Essentially, this is a supercharged PS4 for those who want the best of the best.

This reasoning doubles if you're someone who has a 4K television as the Neo will offer 4K experiences. Neither Project Scorpio or PS4 Neo have confirmed specs as of this writing, but it will be certainly interesting to see how the two stack up.

Looking back to the game side of things, Microsoft may have some interesting titles coming for the Xbox, but PlayStation continues to crush it with the exlusive titles. Check out these bombshells coming to the PS4:

  • God of War IV
  • Detroit: Become Human
  • Days Gone
  • Death Stranding
  • Spider-Man
  • Horizon: Zero Dawn
  • Sony's game-focused E3 presentation was a clear indicator that they are still in the business of creating epic new experiences. With PlayStation VR releasing in October 2016, they are also going to have the edge of VR on consoles before Microsoft.

    The race is getting tighter, we can't argue with that, but it looks like Sony isn't too worried about Microsoft catching up with them. What about you? Who do you think is winning? Let us know your thoughts in the comments!

    It's Still (And Always Will Be) About the Games

    These respective systems continue to evolve with updates and tweaks, along with new apps like HBO Go, but ultimately these are game consoles and they live and die by their games. Microsoft hasn't seen any major exclusives this year (so far) except for the occasional indie title that gets high praise.

    The best way to describe the current state of affairs is to admit that the playing field has been leveled to an extent. We're in between furious bouts of heated debate, but this is only the eye of the storm. The two contenders are in their respective corners, taking a breather before they go at each other's throats again.

    You can bet that this article will receive more updates on the ongoing console war. Until then my friends, game on!

    PS4 vs XBox

    Hardware Wars
    The technology behind the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 is so close that even I had to take notice. I’ve compiled a chart that lists all of the information that is confirmed for each system so we can compare the two.

    Xbox One PS4
    CPU 8 Core AMD Jaguar Custom CPU 1.75GHZ 8 Core AMD Jaguar X64 (10X PS3 Processing Power) 1.6GHZ
    GPU AMD GPU 'Durango' D3D 11.1 chip AMD Radeon GPU (1080P 60 frames/sec) 4k Ultra HD
    RAM 8 GB DDR3 68.3gb/second +32 Embedded Static Ram 8 GB Unified GDDR5 - 176gb/second
    Optical Drive Blu-ray Blu-ray
    Storage 500 GB Hard Drive (not removable) 500 GB Hard Drive (removable)

    PS4 versus Xbox OneI know what you’re thinking upon looking at this chart; the statistics of both systems look the same. I know I previously guessed that both systems would have quite a difference between them; after all, looking at the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, both systems use extremely different hardware. However, it seems with the next generation, this isn’t the case, as both systems are close in terms of specifications despite Sony relying on AMD and Microsoft relying on their own proprietary hardware.

    GPU - Graphics Power

    Looking at the GPU, which is commonly referred to as the graphics card, you’ll notice a slight difference; while the PlayStation 4 is using a Radeon, the Xbox One is using a card capable of Direct3D 11 to align itself with the Windows architecture the system is using. However, both cards feature DirectX 11 support in addition to an increase of VRAM, which is going to blow the current generation of consoles away. I previously didn’t think we’d see a big jump in graphics, but I was definitely wrong.

    CPU - Processing Power

    In terms of CPU, the Xbox One is using feature an 8 core CPU, same as the PlayStation 4. The PlayStation 4’s 8 core CPU is specifically designed to work with the graphics card, much like the Xbox One's graphics card and CPU are designed to work together in the Windows-based environment the system provides. This reminds me of how the PlayStation 3 components were designed to work together and how it produced better PlayStation 3 exclusive games, so color me excited.

    As for the rest of the specs, both systems are using the same amount of RAM, though the PS4 has the edge due to it using DDR5. Both systems are using Blu-ray drives, as expected. Both systems also included a 500GB hard drive . The PS4's drive can be removed and replaced, while the Xbox is stuck with what it's got. That being said, it does support external drives while PS4 doesn't, so pros and cons both ways here.

    It's clear that there are some differences between the two in terms of power. For example, a lot of Xbox One games have been launching at a lower resolution than PS4. In most cases Xbox will get something under 1080p resolution while PS4 will come forward with a native 1080p resolution and a top notch frame rate. Even with this information in mind though, the differences on multiplatform games hasn't been anything massive in either direction.

    Don't upset Francis:

    PS4 is second to none...
    Original Article by - Blaine Smith
    Article Updated by Bradley Ramsey 8/17/16

    See Also:



    Actually Gakai isn't capable of that now,

    Gakai won't allow for PS3 games to be played on PS4 not currently when it would require a cell processor, RSX (GPU) & XDR ram for every gamer wanting to stream their PS3 games to their PS4 console. Plus there are issues with sending data over long distances from the backwards compatibility servers. Maintaining servers would require additional cost & BC would be subject to every user having a perfect internet connection that can handle the bandwidth of a PS3 game when they need it, which isn't currently available to everyone. Using a streaming service isn't going to kill any competitor, not if Sony sets one up, Nintendo or Microsoft. The only way to guarantee backwards compatibility with PS3 games in the PS4's hardware is to have the cell processor, fast enough ram & SPUs, since Sony can make PS3 Super Slim & sell that for as cheap as £119.99 (the 12GB console has gone down to that cheap a price Xmas 2012) cell, etc would be very cheap to add into the PS4's make-up. No games company is going to "Kill Off" their competitors, every fanboy thinks that's going to happen, but they ignore the fact that each company has their own fanbase, a group of people that always buy Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft no matter what, it's naive to think one company by themselves can end another. Can a company make mistakes that their competitors can take advantage of? Of course, but right Microsoft is in the processor of getting the Xbox platform into the household in numerous ways (through windowns 8 & surface), Nintendo's continuing to sell a boatload of consoles (2.2+Wii Us in under 2months is pretty impressive) & Sony has refined their internet system on PS3 & placed themselves second in overall console sales dispite releasing their 7th generation machine a full year behind their closest rival (MS), even though they released PS3 was a more expensive machine initially Sony has sold more PS3s than MS has sold Xbox 360s. Anyway Gakai won't allow for streaming of PS3 games, in order to back that up Sony would have to have a cell processor, PS3 gpu for every person wanting to game & their would be lagging problems in doing so. Unless Sony improves the global broadband network by themselves, builds a cell processor & RSX that can handle multiple users simultaneously then Gakai won't work for streaming PS3 games. It makes far more financial sense for Sony to put PS3 hardware in either every PS4 or make a model that includes BC, with other bonus features to sell a machine that is more feature packed.

    ps3 wins in the tecnologey side guys

    because its cpu processer is an i7 while the xbox is still a i5 and the controlers are easer with vibration enablers soooo yeah


    Ps4 will win Xbox 720 is gay Microsoft is greedy End of discussion SONY rules


    Some moron was saying that it was 60 dollars a month for xbox live, its 25 pounds A YEAR you idiot, thats the same as 2.00 pounds a month. That is nothing. For that money you get a better connection, party chat and more security. Xbox definitely dominates in terms of online play, which is really what the majority of gamers want at the moment.

    Re: Price

    Where the hell did you buy a year's Xbox live for £25? The best price I've ever found is £29.99 from Amazon, usually it's £39.99. There's nothing really wrong with PSN, it is free, though I do pay for my XBox live I do think it isn't worth the money, not when it should be free unless MS was giving customers some content or something for their cash. PSN+ gives customers access to games for 10+ free every month, for the same price as XBox live. Xbox live in no way gives a better connection, that's down to your ISP in most cases so that part wasn't right actually in many cases getting into Xbox lobbies isn't always perfectly easy and connections do mess up. Far as I'm aware there hasn't been any issues with security since the major hack on PSN a few years ago, the only real issue I can see is the cross party chat thing, while it'd be nice to have if I want to talk to a mate I'll call them, use Skype or soemthing, to pay for that is pretty silly, when such a service should be free.


    PS-By far much better tha XBOX its like UZI vs MUSKET. NO COMPETITION. PS is far better gaming system than XBOX multi disc packs XBOX-SUCKS Only positives is multi-player OnLine hack are eliminated so NO GAY CHEATERS, also the motion sensor is the bestever no wands.


    Author says he's not a fanboy and then makes statements like "Personally, I've always been a Playstation guy so I already know that the Playstation 4 will knock the socks off the next generation of Xbox." Your article is riddled with bias. What a worthless pile of drivel.

    You can like something

    You can like something without being a fan boy. I suggest you actually look up the definition.

    Actually... he is a fanboy lol

    "Personally, I've always been a Playstation guy so I already know that the Playstation 4 will knock the socks off the next generation of Xbox." A fanboy believes their system/game is the best no matter what they hear or see, even if facts say otherwise. Of course he's a fanboy. But it's a PS4 site, what do you expect? lol

    My personal opinion means I

    My personal opinion means I prefer the Playstation but then I also respect and understand why people prefer the Xbox. A fan boy, by definition, will usually defend their choice to the death, regardless of logic. I can enjoy something more than something else but I can still approach it objectively :D

    To be honest you could be a

    To be honest you could be a fan of anything and the product could fail to your assumptions. When xbox first came out I really didn't like the controller but it felt like any other game system. The only reason why I think xbox got its hype is from halo and exclusive games that ps3 can't get. Overall I feel ps3 is better buy than xbox elite because you get blu ray and free online in the end xbox would coast more because of monthly membership or year base and also the ring of death I have been hearing about as well. PS4 I think will be better but who knows we have to wait and see :)

    of course

    Yes anything you are a fan of could fail my whole point is the writer states he isn't a fanboy but the whole article is full of bias. I have owned gaming systems since the atari. I have owned both the ps3 and the xbox 360. The ps3 while a nice gaming system has dainty controllers that don't feel comfortable in my hand. It seems to load slow and the textures seem washed out. I mean I can start a game and then the textures come in seconds later and on top of that they aren't even all that good. When I get an in game invite it takes forever to navigate through the menu just to accept it and get in game. Also when I download a demo or get a new game they seem to always have an update that is large in size and I have to sit staring at the update screen for an extra 5 to 10 minutes. The ps3 has a free service which is awesome I give them credit there but then they limit things such as certain demos and betas to exclusive members....which is odd because demos are like advertising. Blu-ray is the only thing I really think that ps3 had that xbox couldn't compete with. Other then that it comes down to title preference and I know ps has more exclusive titles and if that is what you are looking for then the ps is for you. I am happy with the titles that are on both systems and actually I prefer pc over all of them due to increased graphical capabilities and first person shooter true aim.(lack of sticky aim that every gets to use because developers believe it would be too hard for casual gamers to play without it.) Oh and one last thing, ps had its ylod(yellow light of death). Plenty of bricked ps3s out there. Luckily for us both manufacturers extended their warranties and took care of these problems.


    You say you aren't a fanboy but "ps4 will knock the socks off of the xbox" the article it shows from the stats given the same basic system other then the a8 vs the 16 core. So do tell how will it "knock the socks off of the xbox"? If you are not a fanboy and you use "logic" then logic dictates it will be a close comparison and all socks will stay on. I can say I have owned gaming systems since the atari was out and in comparison of the ps3 and xbox360 the only good things, other then personal preference of titles which could go either way according to the gamer, that the ps3 has is a free service online(which limits you to the things you can do such as certain demos online can't be downloaded without the paid service)and a blu ray player. The ps3s graphics (at least on my 1080p led) don't look as good. The textures draw in late a lot. The home menu is less user friendly(imo) and navigating them takes longer then on the 360. Personally to be honest though they still fall short of pc gaming only difference is there are more hacks/cheats on pc to ruin a persons gaming experience. As far as you being a fanboy well...denial is part of the fanboy syndrome as well.

    Refusal of a persons personal

    Refusal of a persons personal opinion is a sign of ignorance, however I do not assume that you are ignorant. The Playstation 3 is superior to the Xbox 360 technically, that's not opinion, it's fact. I'm only assuming that the next generation will follow suit with PS4 going for hardware over software, which is what it has done this generation. The stats in the box are not updated as often as the article.

    Most current next gen rumoured specs.

    Apparently the most current specs for the PS4 & XBox 720 go like this: Both are APU systems. PS4 is a quad core steamroller based cpu, with a GPU rated at 1.84TFlops, backed up with 4GB of very fast RAM, similar in bandwidth to 256BIT GDDR5 (could be stacked DDR4, which is very fast). Xbox 720 is an 8 core cpu using jaguar (more lightweight cores), GPU around 1.2TFlops, with 8GB of a lower bandwidth RAM similar bandwidth to DDR3/4 (not stacked) for everything, supposedly the system will have eDRAM to help prevent the low bandwidth bottlenecking the system. Both systems will have unified RAM, likely high speed Bluray drives, it's not known whether either will have SSDs, though previous rumours did mention something like 16GB of solid state memory for fast access to OS in both systems. Both systems seem to sound like they will be easy to develop for. The specs above would put XBox somewhere inbetween Wii U & PS4 for overall power. For referance in order to have similar graphics on par with what the most up to date game engine demos have shown 1.8TFlops is required to hit 720p @ 30FPS (please note that this would be a major image quality jump over current gen games on consoles & thus levels of effects shown on PC multiplats), this was stated some time ago by Epic. Something like Square Soft's Luminous engine requires that sort of power, with 1.8GB of VRAM to run a game on the level of Agni's Philosophy. These are not final specs, but show a base for where the hardware is headed. Modern GPUs will have some pretty big efficiency gains over what we currently see in console graphics, even without the added power & step-up in RAM for both systems. If these specs are what we can expect then a basic game console, with regular controllers (wireless, current 360 or PS3 type devices) then prices should be around the same as Wii U cost at launch. MS has some update to Kinect, a room/AR picture projection system (currently dubbed Ilumi-View). Sony has been working on their own AR technologies, updating Move (with a potential dualshock controller than can split into separate nunchuks). Perhaps with these additions we can expect to pay maybe £350 (similar price in dollars & Euros for people around the globe). If Sony bundles something like an improved Vita, to compete with Wii U more (basically a HD version, with a proper, decent tablet built for gaming, full analogue triggers with a multitouch display) then prices could jump up another £100+ (maybe more if it has it's own CPU,GPU & RAM to make games look comparable to PS4's graphics). MS has of course started to get into tablets, with their whole Windows 8 deal so things could get more expensive. Core CPU, RAM & GPU, along with Bluray mentioned above are apparently accurate as of right now, but final versions haven't been specifically nailed down. On the specs above games will look amazing compared to current gen stuff. Something like KZ3, in full native 1080p, 60FPS (rock solid), with improved textures, geometry & lighting should be easily done on a PS4 with those specs, with power to spare & even before the system is even remotely optimized for. An Uncharted 3 like that or Last Of Us should be the same. Gran Turismo as shown in the HD adverts (without being downgraded) will be possible. If 4K games happen to come into play on PS4 then it'll be stuff like Ridge Racer, Wipeout HD, basically any games that could be run in full 1080p 60FPS on PS3. With Xbox 720, expect the same kinds of improvements mentioned above in games like Halo 4, Forza 3/4, Gears Of War 3, also without really tapping into the optimizations possible with a fixed piece of gaming hardware like consoles. Games on both systems will show a definite, noticeable jump in graphics from the 7th gen. This should also be the case with Wii U when exclusives start to come out, dispite the Wii U not being considered to have more than 2X the power of PS3/360, though because of the moderate power jump over those systems, optimizing for the more modern architecture of Wii U should yield some noticeably better graphics (particularly image quality, not necessarily resolution or frame rates) than last gen machines (7th gen basically, which is Wii/360/PS3). If specs are better than this in PS4 & 720 (basically hitting Epic's 2.5Tflops requirement for 1080p 30FPS in UE3) then games can jump even further from the start & having more staying power over the curent 8th gen time period. Things are definitely starting to get exciting. BTW components of PS4/720 listed above were found on Neogaf, mainly in the A10 PS4 dev kit thread.

    Bandwidth is Key

    This isn't a case of "if" anymore. Microsoft's Next Xbox is going to have 8Gb of memory; And even though there is cause for concern about its use of DDR3 with a bandwidth of between 51-70Gb/sec, the architecture is APU/SOC, so there is not going to be any caveats in terms of a UMA memory approach and where each processor is on the board. They're all in one place... all that bandwidth is there and it's not being shared out like slices of crumbling cakes to the most desperate processor. Sony's PS Orbis/Omni was originally a 2Gb memory destined games console before they were aware of Microsoft's intent for a 8Gb system. From mid-2012, it was currently know to be 4Gb UMA of some kind of memory; Similar to GDDR5, but not GDDR5, but twice as fast as 256bit DDR3 (154-192Gb/sec); Which lead to many claims that PS4 was using 512bit DDR (and even 1024bit); Now translated as "Wide IO". The problem Sony have is the perceived differences of 4Gb and 8Gb: and is not something you want to mess around with in terms of marketing a games console as being a viable mainstream product for 2018... Sony has to go for 8Gb as they do what the always do; Wait for Microsoft to make their move - match spec - and better it. It's not as bad as many of you might think. They don't have Windows 8 to contend with; They don't have Kinect 2.0 to contend with; They just don't have much to contend with at all in the sense that they're doing more than great with the PS3 at the moment. For Sony, the PS3 is a success and it got there not because of the hardware tech inside of it: it got there because it's a Playstation from Sony. Sony know that if they get the next Playstation just right this time, those exact figures will repeat in just the first year alone. But Microsoft... Sony shouldn't think for a moment they have the upper-hand in this. Various reports indicate that the Next Xbox is extremely balanced in all areas, offset by some description to the effect that "there is a magical property inherent within..."; Its been described as eDRAM, but it's not eDRAM; Whatever it is, it's generally agreed that a type of eSRAM is applied liberally within the APU/SoC, so that the 1Teraflop rated GPU is meaningless and performs at a level twice that in real world tests; That the CPU is rated at 0.25Teraflops, but performs at a level many times that, in real-world tests. Sony know they can't beat them on pure tech, but they can beat them on bandwidth; "Bandwidth is Key".

    PS4/720 performance differences.

    In terms of GPUs there are no components or technological milestone devices on the horizon that could just magically boost performance of whatever AMD GPU Microsoft will use, not by 2X or more, more like a unit that can improve a certain kind of effect that modern game engines use, compared to what the base unit (which is rumoured to be an overclocked 8870m). Basically stream processors are stream processors, if you have more of them then you can deal with more calculations than the competitor's product. If MS has added some quick buffer RAM like eDRAM then it will be to offset the lack of bandwidth in their DDR3, but this buffer is small, it can't be more than 128MB, but even 128MBIT is probably too expensive (it would make more sense to just use Something like GDDR5) & that bandwidth is to aid the already low bandwidth of the DDR3 (DDR4 wouldn't really add any bandwidth when used in a single layered design). The only things that I've read could improve the performance of the 720's GPU is some component that handles the newer lighting effects of nextgen game engines or something for tesselation/geometry (both are going to be more demanding in Nextgen games engines), I don't see how that component could be an additional eDRAM style device, more like a unit dedicated to those effects (a specific processor), so as not to strain the GPU. AMD have talked about task specific components, so it's possible they could have built something specific for the task into 720's GPU. Really though if Sony has the greater bandwidth, more stream processors then generally speaking they are ahead in overall performance, if they have 4 Steamroller Cores (vs 8 Jaguar cores) they have the more powerful CPU too. By the time either company officially announces what products they have, if they plan to launch then even a year wouldn't be sufficient to complete a redesign of their hardware. Basically if come this year's E3 both companies announce they plan to launch by the end of 2013 whatever console they've designed isn't changing, mainly because they have to manufacture enough consoles for sale, this was always the case, especialliy last gen. I know it's been a rumour some people have believed to be true, but back when PS3 was developed Sony wouldn't have had the time to buy 360's, crack them open to see what was inside, whatever architecture was made was already fixed by the time Xbox 360 was announced back in 2005, besides maybe adding more RAM to the final design there was very little Sony could change back then. With both 8th gen consoles launching so close together it's impossible for either company to make changes to their console based on what the competition is doing, the only way that could have happened is if one side found out the architecture of the othe's machine just as specs became finalized & even then they'd have to push a launch back to make those changes, also it would only happen if it was deemed the "financially better solution". If these specs are correct then Sony has the more powerful machine overall, whether the games will be better is down to developers and the tools they're given, but the overall straightfoward hardware has to be more powerful than what Microsft is using, things can't really be seen any differently because both companies have 8000 series AMD GPUs, AMD's calculations would have been used to work out their GPU Flop rating, which directly relates to the amount of hardware in the GPU, no magical memory device is going to improve the number of Stream processors, Texture units or anything else. The PS4 being the quad core device (rather than 8core machine) means it's easier to develop for too. BTW Sony having less RAM doesn't really mean much, developers working on the system can just use compression techniques to effectively increase how much data can be stored in the RAM, the added speed means they're in the better position overall. MS can't really do anything to increase bandwidth to any significant level (besides change all of the RAM to a higher bandwidth component) so they will effectively be in the worse state later in the next generation from the point of view of developers. IF these specs are real (I can't stress the IF part enough, with these being rumours) then Sony has the better system. PS4 would be less complex, it has the better RAM situation (they have more bandwidth, which is much more important than than having a lafrger amount that doesn't compensate for the slow speed of MS's system), has the better CPU (four larger hardware cores, that are more capable overall than the weaker situation in the compared specs) & the better GPU, the only way MS can have something better is if the rumours aren't accurate, which is of course possible. Supposedly MS has finalized their dev kits, while Sony is still yet to do that, so if Sony's targeted final design was stronger then things can get even better for Sony on the power side of things, if they were targetd lower then things could reduce in power slightly. I hope proper announcements come soon, until then nothing concrete is known.

    Bandwidth or Memory

    I don't know how many times the Chief Technical guy of Sony has said it, but "Bandwidth is Key" is primarily the reason they've cornered themselves to a maximum of 4Gb of "some sort of memory" that's UMA. Sony is going for memory bandwidth above all else as that was the intent of Sony many years ago; Sony clearly mentioned that 100Gb/sec was the ballpark where they were headed shortly after PS3 arrived. Microsoft are going for memory amount above all else; Probably because of having to run Windows 8 OS on it and Kinect 2.0, so they may had little choice in a a number of technical and engineering areas. Sony seem to be focusing on games that need an amount of memory bandwidth that's seen in AMD's own class of memory controllers: in the region of 200Gb/sec all the way up to 320Gb/sec. This is the main attraction Sony has to AMD. I doubt any one here can possibly argue that their Studio Developers have had a hand in directing Sony toward Bandwidth above all. Microsoft's attraction to AMD is that they can get them to do "anything they want" as they [AMD] don't really have a choice against Intel, IBM and nVidia, who are running circles around them. It's been mentioned by the last poster for this thread that compressing into memory is a "can always do that sort of thing"; Well, that's not really a good idea: first off, it introduces latency and secondly, GDDR5 is quad-pumped [latency is higher still], and with all the latency that that implies, you don't want to start compressing anything with GDDR5. I know they're using DDR3 of some kind, but it still has latency of a class that is inherent to the industry, and shouldn't be treated as if DDR is the only reason memory exists. Latency and High Bandwidth is not something you want to elevate beyond the problems of memory as it currently stands. But who are we kidding - Sony and Microsoft have the best technical and engineering minds to do this: you don't mess around with billions just to make Developers - or Gamers - unhappy for a further 5-7 years. And then there's Apple. And Samsung. And many other big corporations that must be looking at the Game Console industry and thinking, "Is that all Sony and Microsoft have? Is that it? x86 is the future?" Because that's what I'm thinking...

    Bandwidth over everything else.

    I don't really see compression as a neccessary thing, it was more of an "option" rather than a certainty to close the gap with size competition, tbh the inherent data transfer benefits of something like GDDR5 over DDR3 or even single layer DDR4 would surely mean that such a thing as compression wasn't really necessary anyway. Even an engine like Square Soft's Luminous engines supposedly only uses 1.8GB of VRAM to produce a demo like Agni's Philosophy when running at 1080p 60FPS, if PS4 does indeed have 4GB of some RAM on par with GDDR5 then I doubt Sony would be suffering problems with running such a thing. I guess streaming textures straight can be done more, rather than storing tonnes of texture data in RAM, which I'd guess is where the speed of the RAM would come in more handy. If the Xbox is going DDR3 isn't that a higher latency RAM than GDDR5?

    Parallel Bandwdith

    GDDR5 has higher latency (and more cycles) than DDR3, but it's highly parallel. In that regard, Parallel Memory and Bandwidth are a contributor to latency; This is offset by having GDDR5 operate at multi-Ghz frequencies (7Ghz as an example). GDDR5 is parallel in the sense that it has DDR-type pathways. DDR3 is similar to QDR; And as such, QDR is not GDDR5 (therefore, it's not quad-pumped as mentioned in another post). All that matters here is parallelism and bandwidth, and high frequency - that seems to be Sony's intent; Combine those and you have a system that can handle game engines like Agni's Philosophy with comparative ease. Once game consoles like the next Playstation and the next Xbox rely on APU/SOC's with parallel memory footprints, high bandwidths and high frequencies, you can say goodbye to the high-end PC, until they too move to APU/SOC/x64/HSA. If HSA is in these next gen consoles in some form, that gap will widen until at least 2019.

    lol again

    "Personally, I've always been a Playstation guy so I already know that the Playstation 4 will knock the socks off the next generation of Xbox."....that's not a fanboy statement? Based off YOUR articles stats and even you said so yourself that it would be a close race between the two hardware wise. Your description of a fanboy is, "A fan boy, by definition, will usually defend their choice to the death, regardless of logic." Where is the logic in giving your opinion on which one will be better? The only ignorant statements around here would be ones trying to determine a better system off of hearsay. So if you don't want to be labeled a fanboy then maybe you shouldn't make a biased article with YOUR opinions in it.

    PS3 texture drawing.

    As someone who owns an Xbox 360 and a PS3, along with a very high end Panasonic Plasma TV (the 50 inch VT20) I have never witnessed any late texture drawing from my PS3. Comparing exclusives PS3's always look better than titles released around the same time on the XBox, there must be an issue with your PS3 as my FAT (which I've had since the day after launch) has never had any of those issue like late texture drawing, not when comparing exclusive 1st party games from PS3 to XBox 360. Being objective it's possible that 3rd party games that were ported from the 360 to PS3 could possibly have such a thing happen because of the differences in architecture (PS3 has a split pool of RAM, with 256MB of XDR & GDDR3 & Xbox 360 has all 512MB of GDDR3), if a 3rd party developer hasn't done a good job of using the PS3's architecture then the difference in RAM or the fact PS3's Cell CPU is what is required to be used to make the best looking games on the system in conjuction with it's GPU. XBox's architecture is more straight forward than PS3 for those devs that can't be bothered to really make the most of the PS3. Generally speaking the PS3 is the more powerful console, it has higher Bandwidth than the Xbox, it's overall processing power is greater than the Xbox, Bluray means textures don't have to be compressed, so if any system should have issues drawing textures in time then it should be the XBox. Even comparing a game like Killzone 2 that looks better than a more modern game that really pushes the Xbox like Halo 4, Killzone 3 makes Halo 4 look like a last game. Most 3rd party games being made first on Xbox, then lazily ported to PS3 without any care for the difference in how the other system works means some games will come off looking worse on the PS3, mainly because it's a more costly affair than just clicking a few tabs to make the game run on PS3. If you take a game like Vanquish that is an example of a game developed first on the PS3, that looks better than the 360 version, which shows that not all 3rd party games look better on the 360. Personally I've found that games like Gears of War (all 3 of them) are more prone to screen tearing than PS3 exclusives, AA looks far more none existant on the Xbox in anything but a few exclusives like Forza. When saying something like "textures draw in late" on x platform you need to be specific with what titles you're talking about, but the very best PS3 games easily blow away the best Xbox 360 games graphically speaking. When it comes to the interface that's down to preferences, personally I like both, I wouldn't want one to be exactly like the other. . . . . As far as nextgen goes those rumours above are pretty old, it hasn't been an A8 for the PS4 in a long time, XBox isn't a 16 core, never was, it was actually a 16 thread CPU. Right now the most up to date rumours go like this: XBox 720 8Core AMD Jaguar CPU, with 8GBs of DDR3 (with some eDRAM to aid the low bandwiddth of the system) & a 1TFlop AMD GPU based around the 8870. PS4 4 Core steamroller CPU, 4GBs of an equivalent to 256BIT GDDR5 RAM & a 1.8TFlop AMD GPU based around the 7970m chipset. If the above specs for the next gen consoles are accurate then the PS4 is the more powerful machine in all regards, it has the more powerful CPU (being that Jaguar is a mobile part, designed for tablets & netbooks), the RAM in the Xbox is very low bandwidth, even with eDRAM overall data transfer speeds will suffer and the GPU is much weaker. There have been some rumours than the Xbox's GPU will have some special component that will improve things, but just like the PS3 this generation it will suffer if developers don't make use of it's abilities. The PS4 specs listed above in my post make for a much easier to develop on system, it's CPU being 4 Core means developers don't have to mess around deviding up code, RAM being higher bandwidth means textures and other data can be shifted around much faster & the whole system being very "PC like" would mean they don't have to mess around specifically catering for the architecture like they will have to with the XBox. Of course those are rumours, they're considered pretty accurate by Neogaf which has people that are working on the systems commenting in threads all of the time & they say this is pretty close to what is coming. The Xbox is apparently pretty finalized, but PS4 can still be tweaked. If those specs are true the PS4 will be the more powerful platform, even if MS pays for developers to use their platform as the lead system PS4 being a straightfoward design will mean porting will be easier & the added power will mean it's more likely to get the most out of nextgen games engines like UE4, Luminous, Cryengine 3, Frostbite 2, ect.


    You are basing all of your information off of rumor. No one knows what the xbox will have in it. It's just speculation at this moment. As for aa, the ps3 hardly has any aa. You can tell that by playing games and looking at all the jaggies in it. While the xbox has better aa all around. As for screen tearing, that usually happens when the gpu is overheating and going out. It is quite possible you had a bad gpu in yours. I personally never noticed screen tearing and I had an original xbox from day one. It lasted me a long time before it rrod. They fixed it and I still have it. Of course it's only thermal paste issues. Which when my died was probably from overuse and it drying up as it will on a pc overtime. I know on some games such as black op 2 in multiplayer I can spawn up on a map and it takes roughly 5-8 seconds after the round starts before it draws in some textures. not as noticeable if you only play the ps3 and are used to the graphics but I owned it on pc as well so I notice things like this. Since I am an avid pc gamer/builder I do enjoy great graphics and consider myself a decent judge of systems. While I find that ps3 has its perks I personally feel that the xbox 360 looks better for whatever reason. I wouldn't mind seeing the ps4 with version of the 7970m since I have a 7970 in my pc and it runs great. Although it won't be as strong as mine it will be promising if the consoles are right behind pcs and on par with gaming laptops.

    I am a xbox 360 player soon to be switching to the PS3

    My first real console was the PS1 it was a fine console back in the day, when the ps2 came out I switched to that, you could tell it had already improved.. Then I finally went to microsoft and had my first xbox (xbox 360 elite) I have had it now for quite awhile but sadly for some strange reason mircosoft just messed up my account not letting me to get online or not even letting me log in to my own avatar!!! So I had a thought and I do NOT want to re-do all of the games and make a new account.. This is why I am going over to PS3 (Sony) Yes I have heard there are many haters over the PS3 but that does not put me off the idea, I am willing to give this a chance! it can't be that bad! ;L


    You won't be disappointed. I would recommend R&C (not the last 2), heavy rain, uncharted, infamous, resistance 3, journey, flower, god of war, and littlebigplanet


    Yes because PSN never got hacked, people were never offline for more than a month, and MP games on PSN never glitch out and the lobby collapses. One call to Micorsoft would have fixed your problem bro and restored everything. That's the difference. PSN won't guarantee to fix your problem because you don't pay for it or you get to wait weeks for them to get around to it. There is a reason there are less PS consoles than 360 and it isn't game exclusives.

    im being neutral here

    i don't care who wins or loses the console war! Game systems are just to entertain and have fun online with friends. I have all those systems including the Wii. Yes those companies rip-off from eachothers but they make it look better guys! The PS Move copied the Wii Remote but its more accurate, the Kinect is the eyecamera from PS3 and the sensor bar from the Wii but its awsome! Plus each console has a ability that the other consoles dont! For example: i could watch Blu-Ray movies with my friends and/or families on the PS3 ,i could exercise with the Kinect on Xbox 360,and i could just play relaxing games like Mario on my Wii. So deal with it guys! "Gaming consoles are just to entertain!"


    Are you that poor that you cannot pay 60 bucks for a YEAR of online service? Xbox live is really worth it to me.


    What if someone is that poor? Is that really your best insult?

    HM, XBOX720 VS PS4?

    I have a PS3 and I love it! But to me the only thing I wish they had is a bigger community. Most of my friends have Xbox360 and they say it is better since it has Halo and it doesn't lag when playing online. My PS3 doesn't lag at all and I don't want to pay to go online every month. Also I love the exclusive games like Uncharted for the PS3. But to me I think they just really say it is because they have had the Xbox360 first. That's what my cousin says and it is true since Xbox360 came out a year before the PS3. But I hope the PS4 doesn't have alot of problems so it can have a good release and possibly ahead of the Xbox720. But I'm scared because I heard they would take away the preowned games since I have I think ⅔ of my games preowned. So lets think about that as it also goes for the Xbox720 steering in the same direction as the PS4. I hope too that the PS4 is less expensive than Xbox720. If the Xbox is less expensive and good I would get it, no questions asked. Out of all I'm most likely going to buy the PS4 but who knows if I change my mind. They would both have it's pros and cons when it is released but it matters to me which has more pros and less cons. So with that said, I'm out.

    The Xbox 360 lags a bunch

    The Xbox 360 lags a bunch especially on games like call of duty mw3


    There is so many factors for lag and to blame xbox is just ignorant. It partially has to do with the netcode from the game developer, the speed of the internet you are using, the internet of the p2p host or server you are on, and factors such as stability of the hardwired or wireless setup you have.

    Look Closely at the Prices

    People buy the XBOX 360 because it's cheaper. But think of it this way. You buy an XBOX, then you have to pay monthly for XBOX Live. That adds up. With a PS3, it's a one-time fee. And it's probably going to be the same with the XBOX 720 and PS4. I don't see why Microsoft would say, "Oh, let's make the XBOX Live free on the XBOX 720." Plus, people are moving to XBOX because of it's online community. Sure, XBOX's online community is great. But that doesn't make the gaming any better. You can do the same thing with gaming as you can with PS3, just in different ways. The PS3 gaming community is good. PS Home is a great source. There's games you can play, you can chat, all that good stuff. It's just in a different form. For example, the social tab in the XBOX, you can chat and invite friends to games and all that. The social tab in the PS3 is basically Playstation Home. People are also saying that Blu-Ray is pointless, because everybody downloads movies and games these days. I still buy CD's for games, but I download movies a lot. I think it's just better to have both a Blu-Ray player and a movie down loader. Personally, I use iTunes to download media.

    You Forgot

    Most of PS3 game are 720P vs XBOX360 games are 1080P


    The only reson that MS dosent make it free with Live is because they are greedy and only wants money, yeah who doesn't but Sony wants to reach out to the customers rather then MS.


    I'm glad that Microsoft is trying to compete with Sony. It keeps Sony at the top of their game, but Microsoft should stick to making computer programs and beefing up their tablet.

    Blue Ray is Sony's.

    Isn't Blue Ray Sony's property? I thought thats why the wii u didn't have it. Doesn't anyone find it fishy that the wii u disk can store 25GB per layer which is exactly the same as blue ray. If the next generation console from microsoft has blue ray, wouldn't it cost microsoft sone kind of fee like a cirtain ammount of money per console or some kind of fixed initial license.

    No Bluray isn't Sony's.

    There are a board of companies that own the rights to Bluray, it's not the sole property of Sony, if you google it you'll see the list, but I think there are more than 9 companies that have their say about the format. I believe Wii U uses a similar technology, but because Nintendo doesn't want to pay a license fee they can't play Bluray Movies on their machine or use the Bluray label stamped on the console. MS will probably include something similar in the next Xbox, but if they want to have the bluray label and allow people to play BD films then they'll have to pay a fee to the board that owns Bluray, through which Sony earns some revenue. As far as I understand things thats how it works.

    100% honest

    Ps3 is the top tier console. Xbox game is only 8.5 GB max. PS3 games CAN be up to about 50GB on the BL-DVD (meaning more data, bigger worlds, longer stories, ect) Which means that alone is why ps3 graphics are and could blow xbox out the water. But PS3 games arent that big because developers are lazy and dont want to remake a game thats on xbox for ps3 @ 50GB. I got the xbox because i couldnt afford a ps3 @ launch. Ive had 3-4 xbox due to overheating, e74, e71 ect. Ive had 2 ps3's and one just now caught the ylod. I have a jtagged xbox with about 50 games installed. no disc. thats a point for xbox for me. I paid for netflix. on xbox id have to pay for live too! just to use netflix! point taken from MS. Ps3 is indeed the better console.

    You can store data on the Hard Drive...

    Many games nowadays are "compressed" on a disk, and made to be offloaded, and "decompressed" onto the HD. (Even so, you can only compress code so much). The 8.5 GB limit on the Disks isn't limiting the quality of Xbox games - it's causing games to be split onto multiple disks, like L.A. Noire, Battle Field, etc. Certain disks hold certain cases, one could hold the multiplayer section, the other with the campaign mode, etc. It's still an issue, though. Quite frankly, though, Xbox Live is really that much better than PSN to make it worth what you pay...

    Chill Dudes

    Who cares? PS3 has great games. XBox has great games. Wii has great games. I just hope Nintendo doesn't suffer too much as it will probably be underpowered compared to the new machines. A world without Zelda is probably the day I will give up on gaming. All machines have good and bad bits.


    very true. to me, all are equal.

    Pick ONE you say? I say nay.

    Im getting both...just a thought here guys but, you know you CAN own more than one console... its not illegal. I have a 360, Ps3, and an alienware desktop...and honestly, i play my computer the most. It smokes both consoles any day of the week. But seriously though, if you got the extra cash, get both. Its like $600 + live... if you cant afford that then maybe you should stop buying so much tree...

    I 12 yr old kid can't have me

    I 12 yr old kid can't have me all. Depends if ur rich or not too. I'm 17 and I'm just going to buy the ps4 because they have more exclusives worth playing. All Xbox has is the racing game and fable......

    Racing games and fable?? What

    Racing games and fable?? What about Halo and Gears of War, which in my opinion are both better than any PS3 exclusives.

    "All xbox has is the racing

    "All xbox has is the racing game and fable"?? What about halo and gears of war. I own both consoles and in my opinion both those games are better than any ps3 exclusive.



    A Bit Rushed Perhaps?

    Although I do not own a Xbox, and I am currently a PS3 gamer, I have to agree that this is a very bias article. personally both of these consoles seem very rushed particularly the PS4, as the PS3 has at least 2-3 years left but alas I understand its reasoning for not holding out and creating a better console, "release its console first, and get a bigger audience (the mistake SONY made with the PS3) and dumb down its specs to be less costly (Sigh)". Buying the PS3 was an easy choice, it is the better console or at least the 60 gig one was. but this time its too soon to say what console I will get on release as I think they are going to be pretty similar and not really offer anything exciting or particularly new. I'm hoping that one of these consoles will be able to WOW me nearer the release date a but right now I'm sticking to my PS3 and PC.

    web browser

    Nobody mentions a web browser. I have had a ps3 for years, but I have to admit that the browser it TERRIBLE! Seriously, Sony couldn't put at least a decent browser in the ps3? The Xbox browser is so much better. C'mon sony, how hard can it be? Give us a decent browser.

    It's already great.

    How to make the PS3 web browser usable: Step 1: Plug mouse into USB port 1 (Wireless/bluetooth mice work, too.) Step 2: Plug keyboard into USB port 2 (Wireless/bluetooth keyboards work, too.) Step 3: ???? Step 4: Profit