You know, when the specs for the Xbone and PS4 were announced, I sort of expected a rough performance parity with mid-range(-ish) gaming PCs. At this stage, though, it's pretty clear that the new consoles still lag behind in the image quality and performance departments.
Just take this story by Eurogamer, which compares the PC and Xbox One versions of the newly released Titanfall. According to Eurogamer, Titanfall "thrives" on a 60Hz frame rate, but it often dips well below that threshold on the Xbone—despite running at a rather low resolution of 1408x792 on that system.
"[T]he Xbox One version simply cannot sustain the required 60fps," says Eurogamer. "The consistency in performance just isn't there and so the gameplay often doesn't feel quite right." The site adds that frame rates can dip into the "mid-30s." In Titanfall's "Titan Last Standing" mode, "frame-rates could plummet to a noticeably unacceptable level."
Worse, the game's adaptive vsync system allows screen tearing to occur at sub-60Hz frame rates, which apparently causes other problems. "[I]n addition to torn frames, there's noticeable judder and a less than solid response from the controls."
The Eurogamer article includes a host of videos and image-quality comparison screenshots, so I recommend heading there for all the gory details. In any case, though, it sounds like Titanfall looks and plays considerably better on the PC. It's just too bad about all that uncompressed audio and the PC release's ensuingly humongous 48GB footprint. (Thanks to Slashdot for the link.)
|Here's another reason the GeForce GTX 970 is slower than the GTX 980||14|
|This might be why Windows 10 isn't called Windows 9||56|
|The Windows 10 Technical Preview is available now||37|
|ARM announces OS, server tools for the Internet of things||10|
|Borderlands 2 comes to SteamOS, and The Pre-Sequel will follow||15|
|Haswell duallie infiltrates Zotac Nano XS mini PC||7|
|Mozilla unveils $25 Matchstick HDMI dongle||15|
|Self-destruct sequence fractures the NAND in ultra-secure SSD||17|