The Xbox One: Hardware Analysis & Comparison to PlayStation 4
by Anand Lal Shimpi on May 22, 2013 8:00 AM ESTFinal Words
It’s nearly impossible for the Xbox One not to be a substantial upgrade over the Xbox 360. The fact that Microsoft could ship a single integrated SoC instead of a multi-chip CPU+GPU solution this generation is telling enough. You don’t need to integrate anywhere near the fastest CPUs and GPUs to outperform the Xbox 360, something closer to the middle of the road works just fine.
Microsoft won’t have any issues delivering many times the performance of the Xbox 360. The Xbox One features far more compute power and memory bandwidth than the Xbox 360. Going to 8GB of RAM is also a welcome upgrade, especially since it’s identical to what Sony will ship on the PlayStation 4. As AMD is supplying relatively similar x86 CPU and GCN GPU IP to both consoles, porting between them (and porting to PCs) should be far easier than ever before. The theoretical performance comparison between the two next-gen consoles is where things get a bit sticky.
Sony gave the PS4 50% more raw shader performance, plain and simple (768 SPs @ 800MHz vs. 1152 SPs & 800MHz). Unlike last generation, you don't need to be some sort of Jedi to extract the PS4's potential here. The Xbox One and PS4 architectures are quite similar, Sony just has more hardware under the hood. We’ll have to wait and see how this hardware delta gets exposed in games over time, but the gap is definitely there. The funny thing about game consoles is that it’s usually the lowest common denominator that determines the bulk of the experience across all platforms.
On the plus side, the Xbox One should enjoy better power/thermal characteristics compared to the PlayStation 4. Even compared to the Xbox 360 we should see improvement in many use cases thanks to modern power management techniques.
Differences in the memory subsytems also gives us some insight into each approach to the next-gen consoles. Microsoft opted for embedded SRAM + DDR3, while Sony went for a very fast GDDR5 memory interface. Sony’s approach (especially when combined with a beefier GPU) is exactly what you’d build if you wanted to give game developers the fastest hardware. Microsoft’s approach on the other hand looks a little more broad. The Xbox One still gives game developers a significant performance boost over the previous generation, but also attempts to widen the audience for the console. It’s a risky strategy for sure, especially given the similarities in the underlying architectures between the Xbox One and PS4. If the market for high-end game consoles has already hit its peak, then Microsoft’s approach is likely the right one from a business standpoint. If the market for dedicated high-end game consoles hasn’t peaked however, Microsoft will have to rely even more on the Kinect experience, TV integration and its exclusive franchises to compete.
Arguably the most interesting thing in all of this is the dual-OS + hypervisor software setup behind the Xbox One. With the Windows kernel running alongside the Xbox OS, I wonder how much of a stretch it would be to one day bring the same setup to PCs. Well before the Xbox One hits the end of its life, mainstream PC APUs will likely be capable of delivering similar performance. Imagine a future Surface tablet capable of doing everything your Xbox One can do. That's really the trump card in all of this. The day Microsoft treats Xbox as a platform and not a console is the day that Apple and Google have a much more formidable competitor. Xbox One at least gets the software architecture in order, then we need PC/mobile hardware to follow suit and finally for Microsoft to come to this realization and actually make it happen. We already have the Windows kernel running on phones, tablets, PCs and the Xbox, now we just need the Xbox OS across all platforms as well.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
245 Comments
View All Comments
elitewolverine - Thursday, May 23, 2013 - link
with the eSram, 172 means nothing...You have all process, fighting for attention on a higher latency bandwith.
There is a reason pc's are still using ddr3, and its not just because of memory controllers, ddr5 has been in use for many many years.
Heck with amd producing both video card controllers for their video cards, one could simply conclude just dump a ddr5 controller on the apu and have them go to ddr5 desktop.
But cost is not just a factor, bandwith only goes so far.
x1 will be saving costs and reap the benefits with eSram, sony's bandwith starts to go out the window.
Put in cloud computing, and it becomes even more mute to have ddr5
UNCjigga - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link
Given how similar the the X1 and PS4 are, any chance developers would be able to ship a single disc with support for both platforms? Not that they would...just wondering if it's technically possible to have shared assets/textures etc. and separate binaries on a single disc that could be read by both machines.tipoo - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link
I'm sure there are security descriptors for each console that would stop that.juhatus - Thursday, May 23, 2013 - link
Double layer blu-ray disc? One layer for X1 and the other for PS4.. mmhhhrangerdavid - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link
Assuming that white Xbox logo glows on both the box and the Kinect, I can see some black electric tape coming in very handy....marc1000 - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link
lol shut it's eyes close!I bet the logo on Kinect has some kind of IR emmiter below it!
trip1ex - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link
Can I turn it into a Windows computer? That would be a selling point.Can I turn it into a DVR? Selling point.
I would question not the choices here, but the underlying principle of wanting to check stats etc on your tv in a side bar using Kinect, game controller or Smartglass instead of just using your phone or tablet directly.
I would question the attraction of this to someone not interested in games. GTV hasn't made a case for a box on a box tv product. And it is hundreds cheaper than the nextbox will be. It doesn't seem like this market will open up until, at the least, you don't need that second box.
I suppose though that this stuff is a value add to convince mom or dad to buy it or someone on the fence with their gaming interest to buy it. Or someone only interested in one or two franchises.
blacks329 - Thursday, May 23, 2013 - link
I think the scenario arises for having ESPN or a news site pinned to the side, when you have multiple people in the room watching. Where as a tablet would provide the same info; its just a personal experience. But if you have the guys over for a playoff game, while another important game is going on at the same time. Instead of having every one individually looking down at their phones/tablets/switching channels. You can have one game full time and the other with it's boxscore pinned to the side, so everyone can see everything without having to look away from the screen. Or have a news or twitter feed going on the side, which depending on the circumstances could be really interesting.The example they showed with buying tickets for a movie, while watching a movie, was such a stupid example, all of which is a personal experience and can be done on a phone or tablet anyways, especially since everything on the TV had to be manipulated by a phone to begin with.
I honestly find this really compelling and potentially awesome, but all the gamer (or anti-gamer) things they've mentioned so far as well as the XBL gold still being required for playing online are really dissuading me from thinking about getting one any time soon.
elitewolverine - Thursday, May 23, 2013 - link
300,000 servers is not free...Live this year will slowly start to show why people are paying
ncsaephanh - Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - link
In introduction:"This last round was much longer that it ever should have been, so the Xbox One arrives to a very welcoming crowd." Change that to "than"