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

  • Stuka87 - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link

    Hmm, seems they are 360P when viewed on youtube, but HD is available if watching the embedded version. Strange.
  • Hubb1e - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link

    I was able to see the 4K versions actually which was pretty cool. First time I've actually seen a 4K video from youtube.
  • Shadowmaster625 - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link

    Microsoft is just beyond stupid. It's nothing to produce GDDR5. It costs basically the same amount of money to produce 50 million GDDR5 chips vs 50 million DDR3 chips. That is the whole point of making a gaming console in the first place. You get massive volume discounts on all your parts. Only a fool would buy an xbox, there is absolutely no reason to.. its not like microsoft is going to have that much exclusivity.
  • tipoo - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link

    A few dollars extra across say 80 million units is a lot. Do I wish they used GDDR5? Yes. But their decisions are based on their own cost analysis.
  • Tyns - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link

    The predicted price and availability of GDDR5 was highly questionable at the time MSFT needed to commit to the decision. Sony gambled and it happened to work out for them. A 6 month to 1 year delay or an extra $100-200 for the console would have been devastating if it had gone the other way, no?

    Sony's gamble paid off an now MSFT looks foolish, which is a shame for all of us.
  • Hubb1e - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link

    I had also heard that Sony had decided to go with 4GB of GDDR5 but decided to double that when MS announced 8GB. Half the ram on the sony box would have hurt its ability to take advantage of its better hardware.
  • TEAMSWITCHER - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link

    I thought the image quality differences would be more subtle. But watching the COD:Ghosts video side-by-side you can see there is a more pronounced "shimmering" in the image on the Xbox One. Microsoft screwed up - I didn't spend $1500 on an HDTV to look at crappy images. Fore me the choice is clear - the PS4 wins this round. If enough people avoid the Xbox One, next year there won't be exclusive titles to miss out on.
  • Kurge - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link

    COD is badly coded, and what you don't see in the video is the frame rate choking of the PS4.

    What now?
  • Revdarian - Sunday, November 24, 2013 - link

    Actually DF found out that CoD on the PS4 was running too fast, and that was the issue.
  • Flunk - Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - link

    Thanks for confirming my suspicions that it’s likely going to be a good 12 - 24 months before we'll need to buy one of these new systems. Call me old fashioned but I like for that "killer" app before I upgrade to new hardware.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now