Image Quality - Xbox One vs. PlayStation 4

This is the big one. We’ve already established that the PS4 has more GPU performance under the hood, but how does that delta manifest in games? My guess is we’re going to see two different situations. The first being what we have here today. For the most part I haven’t noticed huge differences in frame rate between Xbox One and PS4 versions of the same game, but I have noticed appreciable differences in resolution/AA. This could very well be the One’s ROP limitations coming into play. Quality per pixel seems roughly equivalent across consoles, the PS4 just has an easier time delivering more of those pixels.

The second situation could be one where an eager developer puts the PS4’s hardware to use and creates a game that doesn’t scale (exclusively) in resolution, but also in other aspects of image quality as well. My guess is the types of titles to fall into this second category will end up being PS4 exclusives (e.g. Uncharted 4) rather than something that’s cross-platform. There’s little motivation for a cross-platform developer to spend a substantial amount of time in optimizing for one console.

Call of Duty: Ghosts

Let’s start out with Call of Duty: Ghosts. Here I’m going to focus on two scenes: what we’ve been calling internally Let the Dog Drive, and the aliasing test. Once again I wasn’t able to completely normalize black levels across both consoles in Ghosts for some reason.

In motion both consoles look pretty good. You really start to see the PS4’s resolution/AA advantages at the very end of the sequence though (PS4 image sample, Xbox One image sample). The difference between these two obviously isn’t as great as from the 360 to Xbox One, but there is a definite resolution advantage to the PS4. It’s even more obvious if you look at our aliasing test:

Image quality otherwise looks comparable between the two consoles.

NBA 2K14

NBA 2K14 is one cross platform title where I swear I could sense slight frame rate differences between the two consoles (during high quality replays) but it’s not something I managed to capture on video. Once again we find ourselves in a situation where there is a difference in resolution and/or AA levels between the Xbox One and PS4 versions of the game.

Both versions look great. I’m not sure how much of this is the next-gen consoles since the last time I played an NBA 2K game was back when I was in college, but man have console basketball games significantly improved in their realism over the past decade. On a side note, NBA 2K14 does seem to make good use of the impulse triggers on the Xbox One’s controller.



Battlefield 4

I grabbed a couple of scenes from early on in Battlefield 4. Once again the differences here are almost entirely limited to the amount of aliasing in the scene as far as I can tell. The Xbox One version is definitely more distracting. In practice I notice the difference in resolution, but it’s never enough to force me to pick one platform over another. I’m personally more comfortable with the Xbox One’s controller than the PS4’s, which makes for an interesting set of tradeoffs.

Image Quality - Xbox 360 vs. Xbox One Power Consumption
Comments Locked

286 Comments

View All Comments

  • PhatTran - Friday, November 22, 2013 - link

    My sincere advice is you should buy a PS4 now. Why? You can see here: http://lovingtheclassicsreviewsite.net/trend/6-rea...
  • lilkwarrior - Friday, November 22, 2013 - link

    It is a shame hearing about the reported use of SATAII and the lack of 802.11ac from both consoles.

    Given some of the title of the game are over 40GB in size, something tells me that'll need to be addressed with the inevitable XboxOne Slim and PS4 slim models that'll come out about 2-3 years from now.

    Especially Microsoft odd stance on not allowing the hard drive to be removed. PS4 wireless limitations are sort of an odd decision given the stigma of their PSN network being slower and unresponsive; any help from the hardware to be at current standards and future-proof.

    Excluding China obviously, some of the fastest broadband infrastructures in the world (i.e. South Korea) are based in Asia. I would think that they would have at least took Microsoft's route to have a dual-band 802.11n connections being available to them.

    It's weird that even Sony's standard phones connect and download to the internet using WiFi faster than their flagship console. It makes little sense.

    Disappointed I'll have to wait this gen out for 2-3 years. By then, hopefully the ripple effect of SteamOS, Steam Controller, G-Sync, Mantle, Oculus Rift, 4K gaming, and so on will be evident enough to even consider buying either console outside of exclusives.
  • lilkwarrior - Friday, November 22, 2013 - link

    *any help from the hardware to be at least accommodate common American wireless speeds and be a bit more future-proof would have been helpful to improve the perception of PSN for Sony.
  • vol7ron - Friday, November 22, 2013 - link

    In the Gravity demo, 0:02s in. It was interesting to see the difference in the astronaut falling.

    To me, it appeared that the 360 had higher contrast, but there were also other inconsistencies. A black bar ran across the leg of another astronaut in the scene -- I suspect this was debris -- but more notably the 360's face shield was blacked out, whereas the XB1 showed the astronaut's full face.

    In terms of quality, due to the higher contrast, it actually seemed like the 360 won out there. However, as expressed, in all the other scenes despite brighter lighting, the XB1 had much better detail and noticeable edges -- the 360 was much softer and less defined.

    What I don't understand is the naming convention. Why XB1? It's not the first XBox,
  • Blaster1618 - Friday, November 22, 2013 - link

    No Minecraft yet on PS4, thats a deal breaker for our family. I want to drive a Mclaren P1.
  • blitzninja - Saturday, November 23, 2013 - link

    All this talk about specs and even the "higher spec console loses the war" non-sense is so stupid, just stop.

    You guys here on AnandTech need to realize that you live in your own little bubble and while you may know a lot about the consoles, the casual consumer market (which makes up most people) have different priorities. So why did Nintendo products beat it's competitors with the Wii while having horrible specs? The experience.

    Yes, there is a performance difference between the PS4 and the XO but what really matters is how the console feels and does what people want it to do. This is where the Wii comes in (the Wii U was a flop because they actually went backwards in this regard). Most of the console market is made up of casual gamers. Casual gamers like to invite their friends over and have a LAN party or party game, play with their family (this includes younger audiences), watch movies together and play music at times. The Wii dominated the market because of it's new control interface(s) that added the missing point to this market, it was extremely versatile and made playing it all that more fun than the other consoles.

    This is why Nintendo didn't really beef up the Wii U, they just added the extra power to allow for more advanced and precise gesture computation.

    So why isn't the Wii U dominating again? Well for starters, most people who have a Wii are satisfied with it and are not out to buy a new one, the Wii U doesn't add anything spectacular that would make the majority of it's target market want to upgrade.

    The reason the higher spec console ended up losing is because when the company developed the console, they focused their resources on the performance and as a result cut back on the usability and experience aspect. But that isn't necessarily the case, it all depends on what the focus experience of the console is (the market) and how well polished that experience is.

    If Microsoft want's to win the war it needs to pander to the needs of the casual market, not to say it should copy Nintendo but it has another market. The all-in-one market, that is to say make the XO a future PVR, set-top-box, media/streaming centre. Replace the HTPC with a low cost alternative. Most descent HTPCs fall into the $500-$700 market for those who want some light gaming too. The XO would absolutely destroy this market with the proper hardware and software support. Being a console for mid-high end gaming while still being a multimedia powerhouse that does a multitude of things. This includes the voice recognition, a killer feature, if done right.

    If I could say "latest episode of the walking dead" or some other show and it worked, then gg Sony, you just got rolled.

    @AnandTech: Fix your forum/comment software, not having an edit button is really annoying
  • Hixbot - Sunday, November 24, 2013 - link

    The Wii dominated sales at first, they captured a market of casual gamers that otherwise wouldn't have a bought a console. That market didn't buy many games, attach rate and they grew tired of the Wii, with all the smartphone and Facebook games etc.
    The Wii sales slumped, and in the end, x360 and PS3 each surpassed it in total by 2012.
    For us hardcore gamers who also are Nintendo fans, the Wii was bought but it then left a bad taste in our mouths. The outstanding titles were few and far between, and the rest was shovelware. True motion control never really materialized in many games, most just made use of a "waggle" gimmick.
    Wii-u comes out, casual gamers have already moved on, and the hardcores are reluctant to jump into another gimmick "tablet" just for the Nintendo software.

    Disclosure: As a big N fan, I bought a wii-u for the Nintendo 1st party titles. Others like me are the only people buying this thing.
  • Exodite - Saturday, November 23, 2013 - link

    Thanks for the mini-review, much appreciated! Some interesting technical information no doubt.

    Personally I'm more keen on the PS4, primarily due to having good experiences with Sony equipment in general as well as the price. We currently have a Sony BluRay player (the BDP-470S) and I'd have loved to replace it with a gaming-capable alternative (that also does Netflix) but alas that's unlikely unless Sony can squeeze in CD, MP3 and most importantly DLNA support in the machine.

    Anyway, I'm also concerned about the sound levels of the machines as I have quite sensitive ears and I find even my current BluRay player to be something of a hair dryer when playing back discs. BD discs in particular.
  • ol1bit - Saturday, November 23, 2013 - link

    That was an awesome mini review! One of the best review's I've read about these new titans.

    'm really surprised that 8 year old 360 hardware is as close as it is! A tad old now, but a great book to read on the old hardware is "The Race for a New Game Machine". This book really shows how MS pulled some fast ones on Sony and ended up with the better plan.

    This time looks like Sony really kept everything under wraps better and has at least a slight upper hand. There is no way MS can make it's hardware better/faster at this point. Good Enough? Maybe...Time will tell.
  • nerd1 - Saturday, November 23, 2013 - link

    It's funny that those 'next gen' consoles are actually on par with some gaming laptops and nothing better. PC is the best gaming console again.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now