New Xbox out by the end of the year

donnajunkie

phillw wrote: »

I've never owned a MS console, but I also haven't bought into the PS4 yet. I don't play games often, so PS3 has years of life left for me. The biggest annoyance now is UHD bluray, if Sony had supported them then it would be a no-brainer.

With XBox One X supporting UHD bluray and being more powerful, means that as soon as they are cheap enough then I'll probably buy one.

I think uhd blurays have less chance of success than 3d blurays.

motorguy

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

Like the PS4 Pro, the weak processor looks like it will hold Scorpio back as it's only had a small bump in speed compared to the GPU. This means the likes of Gears of War 4 which is getting an 'X' update to 4K for the new console is still locked at 30fps for Horde compared to 60fps on the PC and it's a very noticeable difference.

I thought the GPU capability in gaming was far more significant than the CPU capability.

motorguy

donnajunkie wrote: »

I think uhd blurays have less chance of success than 3d blurays.

I think you're wrong.

UHD Blu Ray makes a lot of sense now that 4K TVs are becoming more mainstream, its the next evolution of resolution.

3D hasnt and wont succeed because it involves you sitting in a pair of weird looking glasses for very little real advantage.

donnajunkie

motorguy wrote: »

I think you're wrong.

UHD Blu Ray makes a lot of sense now that 4K TVs are becoming more mainstream, its the next evolution of resolution.

3D hasnt and wont succeed because it involves you sitting in a pair of weird looking glasses for very little real advantage.

They charge more for 4K blurays than what they do for 3d bluray. 3d quality varies but can be good. Of what I have seen of 4K it is barely any better than 1080p. To be fair I haven't seen it in bluray form. It was on sky tv because you can get 4K movies on that.

motorguy

donnajunkie wrote: »

They charge more for 4K blurays than what they do for 3d bluray. 3d quality varies but can be good. Of what I have seen of 4K it is barely any better than 1080p. To be fair I haven't seen it in bluray form. It was on sky tv because you can get 4K movies on that.

The issue isnt price. Its the goofy glasses you have to wear to watch them. Until they can do away with those, 3D will never take off.

They charge more for 4k Blurays because the discs are different and higher density. Although it shares a similar name the technology behind it is completely different - different format, different readers, different burners, different disks. A 3d Bluray movie burns on to a standard Bluray disc, a UHD Blu Ray doesnt. The price difference will drop with the economies of scale over time

UHD Bluray works better on exceptionally large TVs, but there is still benefit on "more regular" sized TVs.

UHD is a natural progression, just like DVD was over VHS, and like Bluray was over DVD.

3D is just a side show novelty act.

Johnmcl7

motorguy wrote: »

I thought the GPU capability in gaming was far more significant than the CPU capability.

It's a combination of both - the GPU is solely responsible for the pure eye candy like 4k resolution and AA/AF however the CPU is responsible for physics, AI and other features. This means Sony and Microsoft can significantly increase the rendering resolution with a more powerful GPU but can't increase the framerate.

The reason you'll see the graphics card mentioned as important for gaming in PC builds is because desktop processors are generally powerful already and spending more money on them usually doesn't yield much benefit. If you look at the popular i5 (only four cores vs eight on the consoles but much more powerful than the atom-class CPU's in the consoles) it's another hundred pounds to get much the same processor but with hyperthreading, it's faster for some tasks but not really for gaming. However £100 spent on a GPU (before you get to silly levels) will usually move you up a GPU-class or more and will bring a much more noticeable improvement.

almillar

Of what I have seen of 4K it is barely any better than 1080p

Something badly wrong with your eyes, or the setup, or you were too far away. If it's compressed a lot the quality certainly goes down, but that's the problem a disc solves versus streaming - less compression required. Same for 1080p BluRay, same for DVD. DVD is far better quality than normal Freeview TV usually is. Both the same system, DVD is just squashed less.

Goto Currys or something and look at the TVs with 4K content on them.

It was on sky tv because you can get 4K movies on that.

You were watching on a Sky Q box, on a 4K TV?

donnajunkie

almillar wrote: »

Something badly wrong with your eyes, or the setup, or you were too far away. If it's compressed a lot the quality certainly goes down, but that's the problem a disc solves versus streaming - less compression required. Same for 1080p BluRay, same for DVD. DVD is far better quality than normal Freeview TV usually is. Both the same system, DVD is just squashed less.

Goto Currys or something and look at the TVs with 4K content on them.



You were watching on a Sky Q box, on a 4K TV?

Yes it was on a sky q box on a 4K tv that also has HDR. I saw some of Forrest Gump and a modern film(I forget which) and it was good but it didn't really look much better than my 1080p bluray of Forrest Gump.

almillar

Forrest Gump won't have improved much. We need to be talking about stuff that is recorded and viewed all on 4K (and further, HDR) tech. Forrest Gump would miss out on that. You wouldn't expect Dad's Army to improve on a 4K screen, would you?!

donnajunkie

almillar wrote: »

Forrest Gump won't have improved much. We need to be talking about stuff that is recorded and viewed all on 4K (and further, HDR) tech. Forrest Gump would miss out on that. You wouldn't expect Dad's Army to improve on a 4K screen, would you?!

But there's a big improvement from standard definition to bluray. Whether the blame is attached to the film or not there's still not a massively noticable difference. It's a flaw if it can only make a difference with stuff filmed in 4K.