Does anyone else think it would be a case of games still running at 30fps with the ps5 or Xbox one two? Developers will still push graphics over frame rate.
Yes absolutely
Does anyone else think it would be a case of games still running at 30fps with the ps5 or Xbox one two? Developers will still push graphics over frame rate.
Denial - the post.
You think tech & BC are going to dig MS out of their global irrelevance? Lol.
It depends.Does anyone else think it would be a case of games still running at 30fps with the ps5 or Xbox one two? Developers will still push graphics over frame rate.
Does anyone else think it would be a case of games still running at 30fps with the ps5 or Xbox one two? Developers will still push graphics over frame rate.
Kinda, it's the design wattage for the power supply like I said. Real world system consumption will be lower than that. Generally speaking though Sony would have determined that requirement through profiling. There is no reason to put a 300w PSU in there if the machine can never draw that current. But, with cooling the design power will typically be lower than the peak draw of the system. That's because the system will quickly throttle if it gets too hot and it allows cutting costs considerably.According to Wikipedia, the base PS4 PSU has a maximum rating of 250W (230W in the slim). I can't find the number for the PS4 Pro., so I assumed the max. power draw figures on Sony's site are actually profiled max. power consumption.
Of course an APU is cheaper for a variety of reasons. APUs can also be faster when the hardware is like for like. The thing though is that you can fit more hardware if you don't go with an APU. The size of the system depends on how good your design is at spreading heat. Vapour chambers aren't very exotic, they are pretty similar in cost to heat pipes and work on the same principle. There are caveats there of course. The benefit of something like the setup on the XBO X is that it helps move the heat to the heatsinc more evenly that improves its efficiency. Hot spots are a real problem in thermal design and can lower the efficiency of a design considerably! separate chips help here a bit by splitting the heat sources in two areas so instead of having to pull 90W in a small APU area you need to move 45W and 55W or whatever. The other point of course is that if the node allows you can get more flexibility that way to lower costs over time by moving to simpler cooling or an APU.Nothing I wrote implies that... Also the heatsink on the PS4 is the huge finned metal structure whose very purpose is provide sufficient surface area for heat exchange with the airflow through the unit. Locating the heatsink on top of the chip saves space. The PS3 had to use thermal wick solutions like heatpipes to transfers heat from the two chips to the heatsink, so that it can in turn be transferred to air (and ejected from the system). So a single APU design will always be superior in terms of both cost and complexity of the cooling solution.
Also, not that I'm assuming you're suggesting it, but I highly doubt either Sony or MS will want to go with something as exotic as a vapour chamber solution for cooling in their next consoles... not unless they want to price themselves out of competition with the other.
PS4 is already capable of playing PS1/2 games. Sony just doesn't want people to have that feature.How long until the HW is powerful enough to emulate PS1-PS3 too so we can use the discs?
30 FPS games aren't going away.
NO I dont agreeYes absolutely
I think they are.
Zen is already 1.7 IPC of Jaguar, and likely will be 3 Ghz, so we are already 3 x faster work rate of a ps4 pro never mind OG ps4 .
Where did you get the 1.7 from, spot me a link if you can I'd like to read up, AFAIK AMD compared Zen to Excavator (52% IPC boost, don't know about Jaguar).
Kinda, it's the design wattage for the power supply like I said. Real world system consumption will be lower than that. Generally speaking though Sony would have determined that requirement through profiling. There is no reason to put a 300w PSU in there if the machine can never draw that current. But, with cooling the design power will typically be lower than the peak draw of the system. That's because the system will quickly throttle if it gets too hot and it allows cutting costs considerably.
NO I dont agree
Maybe devs could slow down the i5 Class CPU's and put big pauses in so the game runs nice and slow lol
Sony's official specs.Edit: I just checked the specs for the PS4 Pro PSU and if my maths is right it can only provide 289W? So where does 310W come from?
See I don't think this is true but as I'm no expert I hope one comes in here and explains it. If the PS4 Pro does in limited situations pull close to 300W then my question is why have Microsoft equipped One X with a poultry 245W PSU? Surely a 6TF and more RAM console on the same node pulls more watts than PS4 Pro?
Edit: I just checked the specs for the PS4 Pro PSU and if my maths is right it can only provide 289W? So where does 310W come from?
I didn't expect you would
Not saying I want that, just I think we'll still see it. Just because the cpu may no longer be a major bottleneck doesn't matter -any devs will use the extra performance to do more at 30fps. You can get a lot more done in 32ms vs 16ms
I've been wondering what the increase in IPC is from Jaguar to Zen myself. I mean clock for clock.
With Zen being ~52% more than Excavator, the leap from Jaguar to Zen must be quite massive, not even counting clock speed.
The tech in Scorpio isn't even that good. It was so underwhelming I decided I rather build a PC that cost 3 times as much or more. Shame both refreshes stuck with that shitty Jaguar.
It depends.
What if devs realize that pushing the production values/graphics envelope is a non-sustainable business? What if VR takes off?
They may opt for 60 fps in that case.
If you ask me, I'd be happy with Uncharted 4 quality graphics at 4k60 becoming the norm on the PS5. I can't speak for the majority, but it's good enough for me.
CPU is the major bottleneck....for consoles.
What more is there to do, I game at 2160c or therabouts now on 4.2 TF on 16 nm and I dont really see much difference between 1440 and 2160. Consumers wont notice 8 or 12 TF and that is not good for sales.
So, interestingly, what is there to push besides frame rates and load times ? Yeah, we could get more dense worlds, but if devs are given a porsche will they not be temped to let it go fast ? Maybe all games will have busy assassin creed type streets full of NPC's lol...
I am struggling to see what you would prioritise at say 12 TF to make a game run at 30 FPS. This gen its clear, Jaguar limits you.
Like you said streets full on NPCs might do it or just far more detailed world's or just really realistic hair animations .
Why would they need a stronger CPU for that? Seems like a waste of resources.or just really realistic hair animations .
What more is there to do, I game at 2160c or therabouts now on 4.2 TF on 16 nm and I dont really see much difference between 1440 and 2160. Consumers wont notice 8 or 12 TF and that is not good for sales.
So, interestingly, what is there to push besides frame rates and load times ? Yeah, we could get more dense worlds, but if devs are given a porsche will they not be temped to let it go fast ? Maybe all games will have busy assassin creed type streets full of NPC's lol...
I am struggling to see what you would prioritise at say 12 TF to make a game run at 30 FPS. This gen its clear, Jaguar limits you.
Like you said streets full on NPCs might do it or just far more detailed world's or just really realistic hair animations .
We will see if it works in their favor.
Sony has yet to prove that they are capable of a seamless backwards compatibility solution. At the same time, Xbox One X is strong enough that it could be viewed as a next-gen console even though it is current-gen. When you look at it this way, MS will have a 2 or 3-year headstart against PS5 because we already know that their generational transition will be seamless. And they can and will release a new Xbox no later than one year after PS5.
So whatever Sony does, whether they are waiting or rushing things with PS5, it will always work in Microsoft's favor, that's how I look at it and therefore I think that releasing Xbox One X at this particular time was a smart decision.
I think they are. How many 30 FPS games run on a 4 Ghz I5 with enough TF behind it (which will be the case on 7nm) ?
The answer is none. How many 30 FS games will run on a Ryzen ? Probably none.
I think posters like you just make that up to somehow believe current gen will last another 5 years. It would be some clever programming to run at 30 next gen.
The tech in Scorpio isn't even that good. It was so underwhelming I decided I rather build a PC that cost 3 times as much or more. Shame both refreshes stuck with that shitty Jaguar.
Both refreshes were designed to play the same games at higher resolutions. There's little point in paying for a faster CPU that's going to be woefully underutilized because the same game has to run on the original console.
Sure, it could allow games to run at higher frame rates presuming they were designed to accommodate 60fps animations, cut scenes, etc. The fact that this wasn't a priority should be a clear indication of just how important both manufacturers think it is to focus on frame rate over visuals.
Ryan also talked about the recurring topic of whether or not the hardware refreshes released mid-generation (PlayStation 4 Pro and Xbox One X) will happen again in the future. He seemed to leave the door open to the possibility, though he wouldnt confirm either way.
I actually think MS were hanging on as long as possible for AMD to deliver a usable Ryzen.
Nah, the X we have is basically exactly what it was always supposed to be.I actually think MS were hanging on as long as possible for AMD to deliver a usable Ryzen.
Nah, the X we have is basically exactly what it was always supposed to be.
Well, yeah. A lot of good work went into the Pro, so it makes sense there would be a lot of good work to go beyond it. The X is a well made and designed machine.Wow, all that fancy design & engineering work for what amounts to the Pro+.
The X is a well made and designed machine.
There is no real reason to feel that way from a HW standpoint.I can't say the same for PS4 Pro but that's just me
There is no real reason to feel that way from a HW standpoint.
Both refreshes were designed to play the same games at higher resolutions. There's little point in paying for a faster CPU that's going to be woefully underutilized because the same game has to run on the original console.
See I don't think this is true but as I'm no expert I hope one comes in here and explains it. If the PS4 Pro does in limited situations pull close to 300W then my question is why have Microsoft equipped One X with a poultry 245W PSU? Surely a 6TF and more RAM console on the same node pulls more watts than PS4 Pro?
Edit: I just checked the specs for the PS4 Pro PSU and if my maths is right it can only provide 289W? So where does 310W come from?
I actually think MS were hanging on as long as possible for AMD to deliver a usable Ryzen. The amount of reengineering in the X would more than justify the investment in a new CPU, and it would have given MS a genuine jump on Sony beyond FauxK and Xbone users a bigger reason to upgrade.
Who are these people viewing the Xbox One X as a new gen?
This might be true, but when games stop working on Xbox One S due to Xbox Two being released, they will still work on Xbox One X, at least that is my expectation. To me this means that Xbox One X is half current-gen and half next-gen, which is essentially what MS has been touting with their generationless approach.If we're still buying the same exact games on the shelves, few [if any] will think that way. It's not until that brand new high profile game [GTA6, or whatever] no longer works on your machine that the average buyer sits up and takes notice. [Cross gen releases still count, because the buyer still needs to go past the shiny new game aisle to get to the 'old' gen display]. It doesn't matter to most that a game plays slightly better if it's the same disc.
Regarding your second bold, a year late has proven to be problematic in the past, as others have stated. I can't say I agree with your final thought at all either... I think the risk of buyer alienation is real for both brands.
Microsoft explicitly positioned the One X as a member of the Xbox One family designed to play the same games, just like the PS4 Pro relative to the PS4. At no point did they claim otherwise. The APU features were locked when it was first unveiled last year, so all inferences that Scorpio was ever going to be the start of a new generation were just wishful thinking. Abandoning Xbox One customers after such a short time in market would risk some significant customer backlash, so the strategy we see today is certainly the safer path.
Both refreshes were designed to play the same games at higher resolutions. There's little point in paying for a faster CPU that's going to be woefully underutilized because the same game has to run on the original console.
Sure, it could allow games to run at higher frame rates presuming they were designed to accommodate 60fps animations, cut scenes, etc. The fact that this wasn't a priority should be a clear indication of just how important both manufacturers think it is to focus on frame rate over visuals.
The "next gen is going to be all 60 fps games" is something I have been reading since the PSX/Saturn era.
It's not going to happen. A lot of devs will always cater to push the machine to it's max, and that means limiting the FPS to 30. PC comparisons are irrelevant because PC games are catered to be run on a lot of different settings and never the most powerful builds.
So, which is more likely :
1. All games have super AI and enemy density on Ps5 at 30 FPS, all jaguar consoles cant run them...at all or at 10 FPS
2, All games are normal AI and density, run at 60 FPS on Ps5, can still run on Ps4 pro / xb1X at 30
Pick one and reason why !
I pick 2, no way games will be so complex only I5 class CPU can run them. Thats business suicide. Maybe gen after next one
Option 1. PS4/Pro will not play PS5 games either way, so I don't see why this matters. Next -gen will have backwards compatibility, not forwards compatibility. There needs to be a strong incentive to upgrade to a new console, and that's usually new games. Besides, Devs will always focus on things other framerate, in most cases. Frame rate doesn't sell games. Gorgeous graphics, and ambitious, innovative ideas do.
So, you really believe with > 120 million Ps4 / xb1 developers will make games that cant run on them and cater to < 10 million Ps5.
One cannot image how good/great something can/could look until they actually witness it, weird statements you're making today.Horizon cant look much better on my TV on Ps4pro without going to 60 FPS.
I choose 3.: The first round of multi-platform games will almost look identical on PS5 vs. PS4 Pro, especially if compared using YouTube videos, but the PS5 edition will still not run on a PS4 Pro.
Next gen will be a tough sell, with regards to graphics. Last gen it was the same, although it took Sony 8 years to introduce their new console. People were still complaining about miniscule graphics improvements on the first PS4 multiplats. Thanks to PS4 Pro and XBOX One X, we'll see a lot more of those comments at the beginning. But seriously, Uncharted 4 was the very first current game where I thought "now this couldn't be done on a PS3, now matter how much they'd reduce resolution!". I suppose it will be up to 1st party games again to show actuall benefits of decent new hardware.
Well, if that was actually plausible, there would be no need for new generations in the first place...
One cannot image how good/great something can/could look until they actually witness it, weird statements you're making today.
We need new info about this console :S
I we are just talking graphics, then ps4pro on games like Horizon or UC4, there is no real reason to upgrade, yes I have an HDR 4K set. Unless i start using a gaming monitor, then there is no point, I dont pause games and put my nose to the screen.
For general public, past pro and X there is only frame rate, load times and VR / AR if games must also run on OG ps4 and pro.
Hm, I'm just not convinced that neither frame rates, load times nor - for now - high-end VR/AR are actually propositions which are suited for marketing a new console generation. Both XBOX One X and PS4 Pro are already playing the 4K card, so one has to ask if playing that one again (alone) will do the trick.
I believe that at the end of the day, it all comes down to exclusive new games that - even if they could run on last gen consoles with turned down graphics - won't be available on them (at least later on, of course almost all 3rd party games will be cross-platform the first 1-2 years).