Bits N Pieces
Member
Whats the normal for a jump in generation for consoles? Is it not about 10x the power of the previous one?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Shuhei Yoshida: Neo won't shorten PS4's lifecycle "PS4 is PS4"
- Thread starter SOR5
- Start date
wapplew
Member
8x-10x.
geordiemp
Member
I agree, its game performance that matters, the next accepted level of gaming above Ps4 level is 1080p60 or 4K30, and is Neo designed with those performance targets in mind ?
Getting half way to those targets does not cut it.
Glorified G
Member
1080p 60fps was available 10 years ago at the launch of the PS3. You're literally making up arbitrary targets.
geordiemp
Member
Most Tv's are 1080p60 input via HDMI, that is called a fixed target in my dictionary.
And Ps3 could not achieve that for most games, hell 720p30 was a struggle.....Neither can Ps4 confidently.
Open world or demanding games like Witcher 3 or Bloodborne are still 1080p30 and struggle on frame rate.........We are still waiting, always waiting...
Freeman
Banned
I hope this gen last as long as possible, I would much rather have new consoles in 2020 or later than in 2019.
At this point creativity is a much more limiting factor than power, let the devs play with the PS4 and PS4 Neo for a while.
The best strategy would be if from now on studios started to target 60fps with both the PS4 and PS4 Neo at different resolutions/graphical settings. Everyone gets 60fps, if you value better graphics you can pay premium to get a PS4 Neo and if you don't care that much you can keep playing your games at 900p or less on the PS4. No need for 4K TVs. Having everything target 60fps also makes it easier to adapt/incorporate VR.
30fps on PS4 and 60fps on PS4 Neo, is likely much harder to achieve and much harder to market.
At this point creativity is a much more limiting factor than power, let the devs play with the PS4 and PS4 Neo for a while.
The best strategy would be if from now on studios started to target 60fps with both the PS4 and PS4 Neo at different resolutions/graphical settings. Everyone gets 60fps, if you value better graphics you can pay premium to get a PS4 Neo and if you don't care that much you can keep playing your games at 900p or less on the PS4. No need for 4K TVs. Having everything target 60fps also makes it easier to adapt/incorporate VR.
30fps on PS4 and 60fps on PS4 Neo, is likely much harder to achieve and much harder to market.
Glorified G
Member
60fps is a design choice. Console devs are trying to push as much as they can at the most playable framerate which they feel is 30fps. Why would this change with new hardware? Will it suddenly not take double the amount of resources to render at 60fps as opposed to half that frame rate?
Keep waiting.
geordiemp
Member
I am confident seeing scorpio specs, if it has zen, will end the wait in the console space. 18 months wait unless Sony delivers.
Its over to Sony...
Freeman
Banned
You are so naive.
boredandlazy
Member
The Age of Sony is done.
geordiemp
Member
Why ? End of this year with zen and 480 we will be getting very low cost VR ready 5.5 TF PC's that will be eye opening. Unless zen does not work of course.
You know this is inevitable and will start to close in on the console pricing level.
Hope not, I have 3 Ps4's. Hope they can see whats going on around them with both MS scorpio and PC market. House has already acknowledged that PSN players migrating to low cost PC's is a concern.
The perfect Dark
Banned
Yeah sure. Let's wait and see.
Freeman
Banned
60fps is a design choice. More powerful console also means a console that is more expensive to produce, won't affect Sony's plans at all (why would a more powerful Xbox gain ground on Japan, Europe, etc?).
Scorpio is a threat to Sony on the same level the WiiU was.
The funniest thing is that MS is pretty much stealthily exiting the market while some people interpret it as some grand move to beat Sony.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Realistically we won't be getting a 8x-10x jump from PS4>PS5. The best case scenario for a 2019 PS5 would be 3x Neo or 5x-6x PS4 which would be ~12TF and I would think that sort of power would need a lot of bandwidth.
According to Nvidia HBM2 @1 TB/s will consume ~60W alone which is where GDDR5 is today at 300-400GB/s. I can't see a console having such a power budget for RAM alone.
I can't see anything more than 8-10TF for a 2019 console if 6TF is what we'll see at the end of 2017 given console power budgets, costs and tech improvements.
I wouldn't go that far.
If Sony is worried about players jumping to PC, I don't think it's a stretch to say that they should take Scorpio seriously.
Alebrije
Member
Is said if Neo can not handle 1080p 60 fps as standard, no matter how you can improve other stuff like lighting or textures. There wont be strong reasons to move from PS4 to Neo , specially for people that likes better performance and graphics.
A solid 1080 p 60 fps what I think Neo should run on games like Witcher.
A solid 1080 p 60 fps what I think Neo should run on games like Witcher.
Bits N Pieces
Member
lol
Some people never disappoint.
Business
Member
Sorry but this literally made me laugh. Come on man.
I think the WiiU comparison is exagerated but otherwise I agree.
This feels like a "Yay... I have a feeling that our team is finally winning" posts.
War, indeed, never changes.
Nearly every thread he's made indicates he owns a PS4
No brand loyalty trolling here, though I don't agree with him
Freeman
Banned
I changed it a little bit before your post. It was an exaggeration indeed. Lets say the Scorpio is as much of a threat as the Xbox One was.
Journey
Banned
So by this logic, VR games for PC will also be in question if they don't work on Xbox One... No, any Occulous Rift games will work on PC, and if you happen to have Scorpio, you'll have an additional option
serversurfer
Member
Interesting read, especially the bit about contention, but I didn't really see anything to indicate PS4 didn't have an excess of bandwidth overall. Can you help me out?
Sorry, but did you miss this post?
Yes, CPU is important, but its not necessarily the roadblock you believe it to be. A big part of the reason PC CPU requirements are so high is simply because PC devs know an excess of resources are typically available there. From the article (emphasis mine)Ah, now I see where you're getting this stuff. The frame rate increases you're talking about came not from bumping the i3 to i5, but rather bumping the 750Ti to a GTX960.
Read this DF article instead. First note that in the official sysreqs for Witcher 3, CDPR say Core i5 2500K minimum. Now look at this table:
See how even a Pentium does better than 60 fps? If you're talking about minimum frame rates, then even the i5 doesn't hold 60; you need an i7 for that. It sounds like rather than do a good job of optimizing performance of their game in cities and such, CDPR's response was to say, "/shrug Just get a better CPU." Hardly an elegant solution.
Thanks for that. This is what I meant by CDPR doing a poor job of handling the cities. I understand that it may take more than 16ms for 1000 NPCs to sequentially decide what they're gonna do next, but there's no need for the rendering engine to sit around and wait for them all to figure it out. Really, NPCs don't need to be making 60 decisions a second in the first place. 10 per second should be more than sufficient. Probably even less for NPCs that are further off and not even interacting with the PC. So yeah, make that stuff asynchronous and crank the LOD way down. That should solve most of your crowd-induced performance issues.
"The Witcher 3 is game of two halves when it comes to CPU utilisation. During engine-driven cut-scenes and open world gameplay, it is relatively light on resources, but once you enter towns and cities, the additional streaming, animation and AI can push CPU utilisation to its limit - depending on your GPU. We've seen an Intel Core i7 4790K overclocked to 4.6GHz hit 80 per cent utilisation across all threads - but we did need to use Nvidia's Titan X graphics card to remove the GPU bottleneck. It's more than likely that the graphics hardware will be the limiting factor here, but reducing the amount of background characters should also reduce the CPU load if you notice uncharacteristic stutter.
What is worth pointing out is that CD Projekt Red's CPU usage is quite remarkable. Usually we see one or two main threads overseeing most of the processing, hiving off tasks to other threads, which have much lower utilisation. Not so with The Witcher 3: whether we're running on Intel or AMD CPUs, we're seeing something very close to level utilisation across all cores. This is fundamentally good news for AMD - while the Core i3 and i5 we tested tend to outperform the FX 6300 and FX 8350, AMD is much more competitive in CPU-intensive areas. The six core FX 6300 outperforms the i3 here, while the FX 8350 holds its own against the more expensive Core i5 4690K."
It's also worth remembering there's more you can do with the extra power beyond increasing frame rates like increasing visual effects and the amount of action happening on the screen, and 9 times out of 10, developers will choose the latter, because that's what most people tend to notice. So even if both new consoles offer >2x power, that's still no guarantee you're going to end up with 2x frame rates. With >3x power, then you may see some devs doubling frame rates with extra eye candy, but I imagine most will still go 100% eye candy, because to most users that's what sells. Perhaps Neo will have a performance/candy preference you can set, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Aceofspades
Banned
Wasn't PS1 to PS2 like 40x jump? Also I remember Sony saying something along the lines of 40x between PS2 to PS3.
Yup found the ad:
https://youtu.be/pXM_4VmwrDg
Edit: of course achieving 40x jump for upcoming generations are almost impossible. But PS3 to PS4 is ~10x jump in power if Im not mistaken (hard to measure different architectures and Ram).
The way tech is, those types of jumps are long gone unless you want to wait for like 10 years. Silicon is just not providing those kinds of results at a fast enough rate...maybe when Graphene hits the scene and replaces Silicon chips, but who knows when that will actually be.
If PS5 can hit 10tflops, i think that's more than enough considering all the upgrades to the other parts of the console(ZEN, HBM2 ect)
In 2019, these technologies should be somewhat matured.
If PS5 can hit 10tflops, i think that's more than enough considering all the upgrades to the other parts of the console(ZEN, HBM2 ect)
In 2019, these technologies should be somewhat matured.
geordiemp
Member
Lol, I have 3 Ps4's, 2 Ps3's , 2 360's and a Wii, Oh and 2 PSN+ and probably have more ps4 games than you. I can be found on Destiny geordie007, or killing in Bo3. Cant remember my xblive id lol. You think this is about warz ? Jeesh, you just dont get it.
I want to play more games at 60 FPS, I would need to buy 3 Neos....thats probably £ 1200 in UK. I dont want a little bump, a nicer shadow or the like, its not enough.
If I don get it, we will keep 2 destiny machines and for games like Witcher I will get something better such as Scorpio or PC if Sony cant deliver. Witcher 3 sits in my backlog, I just cant get into the flow, its just too jerky. Some games are nice at 30 or acceptable, Witcher 3 is not one of them. There are others....
Xbox One is only about 5X the Xbox 360 as far as the GPU processing speed goes.
Insane Metal
Member
capamericareference.gif
geordiemp
Member
1. All those CPUs are 3.5 Ghz or around there, we are at 1.6 to 2.1 at best. At least Zen is more efficient supposedly (+ 70 % IPC).
2. I think people need to read these threads more, most posters ask for 60. Sony and devs need to listen to what people want like they did with Ps4 development. Go read the scorpio thread....There is one common theme.
Its always amuses me that when companies really try they listen, then with a bit of success they start to do what nobody wants. MS did it with xb1 after 360. Now Sony seems to think console gamers want 4K gaming.
To be successful you do have to listen to your customers, but to fail dramatically you need only obey them. There is a loud contingent that demands 60fps games and they're dwarfed by the masses who buy games based on screen shots or can't tell you reliably what the frame rate of a game in motion actually is. Sales of 30fps titles like GTA V speak louder than a few complaints on a forum.
Given that Sony hasn't said a single thing on the topic of 4K gaming I don't understand your assertion. Microsoft are the ones who have said that Scorpio was designed with the needs of 4K gaming in mind, and that customers who aren't interested in 4K don't need to consider the Scorpio. Sure, they've also said developers can use the console as they see fit, but that's not exactly the message they opened with.
We'll see what Sony's messaging actually looks like when they announce Neo. My guess is that they'll focus very much on the core gaming experience, with 4K media and upscaling as a nice bonus.
The sane thing for both consoles is to let developers decide where to apply horsepower. Frame rate? Draw distance? Improved shaders? Better shadows? Better AA? Resolution? Every game will have different needs and priorities.
geordiemp
Member
The people that dont care about 30 FPS frame rates are probably not those consumers who mid cycle switch to PC because of performance.
You would be right for a console, your not right for an enthusiast Neo (if that is what it is meant to be).
We shall see what Sony thinks Neo is for....
Frame rate is not the only application for performance. We've seen console generation after console generation where leaps in horsepower are primarily applied to graphical fidelity or scope without a notable shift toward higher frame rates. There are some genres where 60fps is expected and is a significant boon to gameplay, and of course VR is an extension of that, but the trade offs developers choose haven't really changed.
These are still consoles, and your idea of an enthusiast may be skewed by your own desires. Early adopters in new generations are by definition enthusiasts, and I didn't see a huge swing toward 60fps title sales during the first year or two of the PS4. Neo is just kicking off another round of early adopters, this time mid-cycle. I'll be one of them, and so long as a title generally offers a smooth 30fps I'd be perfectly happy to receive fidelity improvements in visuals instead.
Agreed! It will also be just as interesting to see whether consumers agree with them.
Well, we all can only look at the actual games and this is why DF reached out to developers and they said that it depends on the game how much bandwidth they need for GPU and CPU. Look at what some developers said.
Similar threads
- Poll