Support NeoGAF

[All_Might]

This is accurate if MS would do the same approach as Sony, but they don’t. Because it’s a nightmare.
this overclocking WILL create problems.
Why is Sony doing this? It has so many downsides. If TFLOPS don’t matter at all, why don’t they just stay at 9.2? Why are they risking so much?

also, this is a True spinning, mental gymnastics performance from your site:



Firstly, when does PS5 run both at all speed? It’s VARIABLE, not clocked, this is simply wrong what you are doing.

Also, why are you using percentages? Let’s look at RAW NUMBERS.

XBOX ONE vs PS4 = 0.53 TFLOPS difference.
PS5 vs SXS = ~2 TFLOPS difference, maybe even MORE.
This is HUGE. This is A LOT of raw power, more than a whole PS4.

This is not how hardware works, just so you know. The hardware was designed around a power Limit, this power limit allows either cpu or gpu to take advantage, to push for the maximum clock speed. Yes it is variable, but games never fully utilise either hardware at a 100% sustained load which is why Sony is aiming for the very high power limit. The reason Microsoft cannot do this is because of their very high amount of CUs. Power increases exponentially with a higher clock speed and as such the gpu of the Xbox could very well run so hot, that it gets hard to cool. Remember the Xbox series x gpu is much bigger and this is much harder to cool with the same clock speeds. While there is a performance delta, it is not very big. Also with hardware we never go with numbers, but with percentages. The reason for that is, that percentages also give indication of power difference, but raw numbers don’t (imagine 700tflops vs 725tflops, that’s a increase of 25 tflops, yet in percentages in really isn’t much and in the real world won’t make a difference). Assets and game data become increasingly more demanding and as such looking at the delta of both consoles it simply isn’t as big as some people make it out to be.
Now before you accuse me of being a fanboy in any way, I am not. I wrote in another thread about this very topic, with a more detailed analysis of both consoles and if you are really interested in a performance analysis of both consoles from a game developers standpoint, be my guest to check it out. This is in no way a personal attack, or the like. I simply try to lower the expectations of people who get baited into this console war thing.

 

[ClearMind]

No its not. GPU, RAM and CPU are.

Yes it is. Facts are on my side.

 

[Batiman]

2 days after the trainwreck reveal and still some people at denial phase

It's ok for PS5 to be weaker than XSX

I think OP was the trains conductor. Maybe he feels responsible for its crash?

XSX is more powerful by a decent margin but both are gonna be great. Everyone needs to chill out.

 

[Blond]

That's the perfect opposite of what we hear from devs.

Then those devs don't know what they're talking about. There's no way an SSD will suddenly close a power Gap that large.

9.2 tf lol

 

[CJY]

No its not. GPU, RAM and CPU are.

The largest delta is in fact the SSD. GPU, RAM & CPU are more important to overall system performance, but the biggest delta is in the SSD.

 

[ClearMind]

PS5 - 3200x1800
XSX - 3744x2106

How did you come to those resolutions?

 

[SaltyMcSalt]

Oh good, i was just thinking we don't have enough SDF topics.

 

[CJY]

Oh good, i was just thinking we don't have enough SDF topics.

Wonder no more laddie and there's a lot more to come.

 

[Bernkastel]

Yes it is. Facts are on my side.

What facts ? Side by side DF comparison of a 3rd party title ?

 

[ClearMind]

What facts ? Side by side DF comparison of a 3rd party title ?

Official spec sheets. Whats yours?

 

[Kagero]

Holy crap! I know there have been a lot of threads like this from Sony fans lately, and I’m going to admit it. I’ve seen them but I’ve actually never gone through and read the comments lol. My bad? What I’ve noticed is, there’s a lot more XBROS commenting then Sony guys. My next question is, where the heck did all you guys come from lol.

 

[Kacho]

This is going to be a long gen for some of you

 

[bigdawg69]

Some over at the other site who knew what the fuck he was talking about explained it better to us numbskulls.

He said

99% of the time at 2.23 Ghz and 1 % at a 2 % lower clock is better than 100% at 1.9 Ghz constant.

Also its not about frenqucny only, its about amount of transistors and voltage squared x frequency.

Its hard to find people who know how stuff works and listen and learn something...rather than console warriors talking absolute shit, but keep fighting good warrior..

100% of the time the sex has a a more powerful cpu,gpu, and ram.

 

[Saber]

I'm no tech guy and probably not interested in these spec talk.

But something I notice is that people are spamming the heck of this "9 teraflops" or whatever about PS5. I didn't remember Mark saying that on the presentation. Did he said exactly that?

 

[manzo]

We simply don’t know the performance delta until several multiplats have been tested, the raw specs only give an idea. For example the Xbox One X performed even better than the paper spec difference between PS4 Pro suggested. So that could be the case again, or the PS5 might punch above its weight too.

Infact we probably have to wait longer because launch window games never take full use of the new hardware. Maybe by Holiday 2022 we will have some real answers.

PS4 Pro’s biggest problem was it’s awful memory bandwidth. If it would’ve had the same BW as One X, the gap would’ve been a lot smaller.

 

[Blond]

No its not. GPU, RAM and CPU are.

I'm convinced, even as a Sony guy, that there's some type of drone contingency with a sect of Sony fans that just don't allow them to fathom that they're on the losing side.

 

[Insane Metal]

I've been making fun of this since the reveal but you're right, OP. The difference is not big. But it's there. Also, XSX SSD in best case scenario reaches 4.8GB/s while PS5 goes to 20+ GB/s.

 

[Genx3]

RDNA2 TF'S are more efficient than GCN TF's.
There is at a minimum at least a 2 TF difference between PS5 and XSX but could actually be closer to a 3 TF difference.
Either way that is a significant amount of resources.
IMO, XSX will have a noticeably better implementation of Ray Tracing in games while the games run similarly on both.
That would actually benefit Sony as the difference will only be better lighting and people will almost certainly downplay it.

 

[CJY]

I'm convinced, even as a Sony guy, that there's some type of drone contingency with a sect of Sony fans that just don't allow them to fathom that they're on the losing side.

It's not about winning or losing mate. It's about facing facts. XSX has more GPU compute power. Fact. Does it matter? no.

 

[Bernkastel]

Official spec sheets. Whats yours?

So PS5 has a SSD with more RAW speed ? Anything else ?

 

[ClearMind]

I'm convinced, even as a Sony guy, that there's some type of drone contingency with a sect of Sony fans that just don't allow them to fathom that they're on the losing side.

Damn, you take this shit way too seriously. The way you beg for validation from the xbox fanbase is pathetic.

 

[MoreJRPG]

PS5 will hit bottleneck so fast it’s not even funny. It’s hilariously underpowered and no one is gonna develop on it other than first parties. It’s THAT gimped. No one cares about an SSD when the competitor has one as well.

Sony fans are desperate, these hot takes are hilarious. It’s WEAK get over it. Nothing will change. Enjoy pseudo-4K games at 30fps that load in four seconds opposed to 7 on Series X at native 4K/60.

 

[martino]

I'm convinced, even as a Sony guy, that there's some type of drone contingency with a sect of Sony fans that just don't allow them to fathom that they're on the losing side.

can you define winning here ?
the only thing that make gamers win are good games...no matter how strong or weak the hardware is.

also what ssd bring is a promise for now...a part of this promise also comes with more costs (even more assets)

 

[ClearMind]

So PS5 has a SSD with more RAW speed ? Anything else ?

RAW and Compressed, yes.
You were the one to bring up the SSD. What else do you want to hear?

 

[PocoJoe]

This is accurate if MS would do the same approach as Sony, but they don’t. Because it’s a nightmare.
this overclocking WILL create problems.
Why is Sony doing this? It has so many downsides. If TFLOPS don’t matter at all, why don’t they just stay at 9.2? Why are they risking so much?

also, this is a True spinning, mental gymnastics performance from your site:



Firstly, when does PS5 run both at all speed? It’s VARIABLE, not clocked, this is simply wrong what you are doing.

Also, why are you using percentages? Let’s look at RAW NUMBERS.

XBOX ONE vs PS4 = 0.53 TFLOPS difference.
PS5 vs SXS = ~2 TFLOPS difference, maybe even MORE.
This is HUGE. This is A LOT of raw power, more than a whole PS4.

This just shows your lack of knowledge.

I can make a graph with 5GHz clocks and say "they could also do this with LN2 setup" and it would have nothing to do with next gen reality.

AKA that graph is silly. No point to say "b-but if xbox would be variable too!!" when in reality it isnt that simple, and they dont have variable clocks so why even mention it?

Also, Cerny said that they can lower the clocks for "few %" to gain larger drop in power draw but minor loss in perf. And then stupid fanboys think "Ok so PS5 will drop into 9.2tflops all the time?!"

"Overclocking will create problems" so you are Sony engineer because you are 100% sure? don't be a fool, it's not like it is random PC and random dude is overclocking it, again, in the presentation it were said that cooling is good enough to sustain it.

It is not overclocking, if they have targeted 2.23GHz, it is just variable clocks for gpu+cpu on demand.

About absolute differences:

Fiat punto with 60 hp vs kia ceed with 120hp = kia is clearly faster in 0-100km/h, as fiat have barely the hp to accelerate normally

ferrari with 1020hp vs tuned up Lada with 1200hp = Lada is faster, lets say 3s vs 3.5s, but with those levels of performance it is not that much because both are fast than enough.

After first 1-2 years we will see, and crying about how "slow" PS5 doesnt remove the fact that playstation is stronger brand.

people buy less powerful/good/whatever stuff all the time if the brand is popular.

 

[Kagey K]

The only thing overblown is the amount of damage control and downplaying being done.

Just accept it and move on.

 

[Armorian]

How did you come to those resolutions?

With PS5 being 100% in 3200x1800 i just calculated what resolution would look like with 117% but the result is so close to actual 4K that no one would use it But as I said this is with boost clock and ignoring RAM speed differences and things like ROP count. We will have to wait for first games but differences will probably be bigger in real life.

 

[SleepDoctor]

For all the crying there was from warriors about the 30 plus xsx/game pass threads, theres definitely no issue with 30 plus damage control/spin threads.

We need a "Ps5 OT Spin thread" asap. Tired of them flooding the forum with this shit. They were in every thread shitposting and trolling xbox and now have to eat the same fud they threw.

 

[Lampiao]

Accept the numbers, they don't lie and, at the moment, the Xbox Serie X is the base, so the direct comparison is valid. The only thing that can change the dynamics of the comparisons is if microsoft announces an eventual Xbox "S" series, the so-called "lockhart", then it becomes the base and must be directly compared to the ps5, leaving the Xbox Serie X as a premium product.

 

[bigdawg69]

This just shows your lack of knowledge.

I can make a graph with 5GHz clocks and say "they could also do this with LN2 setup" and it would have nothing to do with next gen reality.

AKA that graph is silly. No point to say "b-but if xbox would be variable too!!" when in reality it isnt that simple, and they dont have variable clocks so why even mention it?

Also, Cerny said that they can lower the clocks for "few %" to gain larger drop in power draw but minor loss in perf. And then stupid fanboys think "Ok so PS5 will drop into 9.2tflops all the time?!"

"Overclocking will create problems" so you are Sony engineer because you are 100% sure? don't be a fool, it's not like it is random PC and random dude is overclocking it, again, in the presentation it were said that cooling is good enough to sustain it.

It is not overclocking, if they have targeted 2.23GHz, it is just variable clocks for gpu+cpu on demand.

About absolute differences:

Fiat punto with 60 hp vs kia ceed with 120hp = kia is clearly faster in 0-100km/h, as fiat have barely the hp to accelerate normally

ferrari with 1020hp vs tuned up Lada with 1200hp = Lada is faster, lets say 3s vs 3.5s, but with those levels of performance it is not that much because both are fast than enough.

After first 1-2 years we will see, and crying about how "slow" PS5 doesnt remove the fact that playstation is stronger brand.

people buy less powerful/good/whatever stuff all the time if the brand is popular.

The more the ps5 sells, and the better games it puts out, won’t magically make it more powerful though.
A good analogy would be a ps5 is a Honda Civic with a turbo and the beast Xbox is a Lamborghini aventador.

 

[ResilientBanana]

Could you imagine if the PS5 actually was 13.3 TFLOPS?!?! Xbox fans would never hear the end of it and would be out numbered. PS5 games load faster, XSX games look and run better.

 

[JordanN]

I still need to see some games first.

The way I see it, if an Xbox Series X can hold 60fps, then a PS5 port would be like 30 ~ 45fps.

And that's just frame rate. Graphically speaking, don't know if there will be a gulf. It could be a PS3/360 scenario again where multiplats are virtually the same but the exclusives have a slight edge.

 

[MisterXDTV]

This is not how hardware works, just so you know. The hardware was designed around a power Limit, this power limit allows either cpu or gpu to take advantage, to push for the maximum clock speed. Yes it is variable, but games never fully utilise either hardware at a 100% sustained load which is why Sony is aiming for the very high power limit. The reason Microsoft cannot do this is because of their very high amount of CUs. Power increases exponentially with a higher clock speed and as such the gpu of the Xbox could very well run so hot, that it gets hard to cool. Remember the Xbox series x gpu is much bigger and this is much harder to cool with the same clock speeds. While there is a performance delta, it is not very big. Also with hardware we never go with numbers, but with percentages. The reason for that is, that percentages also give indication of power difference, but raw numbers don’t (imagine 700tflops vs 725tflops, that’s a increase of 25 tflops, yet in percentages in really isn’t much and in the real world won’t make a difference). Assets and game data become increasingly more demanding and as such looking at the delta of both consoles it simply isn’t as big as some people make it out to be.
Now before you accuse me of being a fanboy in any way, I am not. I wrote in another thread about this very topic, with a more detailed analysis of both consoles and if you are really interested in a performance analysis of both consoles from a game developers standpoint, be my guest to check it out. This is in no way a personal attack, or the like. I simply try to lower the expectations of people who get baited into this console war thing.

Exactly....

Saying that MS could do the same thing is nonsense. They didn't do it and they couldn't do it because their GPU strategy was different. They have 52 CU vs 36 CU. The power draw is completely different

 

[Armorian]

I still need to see some games first.

The way I see it, if an Xbox Series X can hold 60fps, then a PS5 port would be like 30 ~ 45fps.

And that's just frame rate. Graphically speaking, don't know if there will be a gulf. It could be a PS3/360 scenario again where multiplats are virtually the same but the exclusives have a slight edge.

It would be ~60FPS (XSX) - ~49FPS (PS5).

 

[Bernkastel]

RAW and Compressed, yes.
You were the one to bring up the SSD. What else do you want to hear?

And you were the one saying

Its the biggest performance delta between the two consoles by far.

 

[ClearMind]

With PS5 being 100% in 3200x1800 i just calculated what resolution would look like with 117% but the result is so close to actual 4K that no one would use it But as I said this is with boost clock and ignoring RAM speed differences and things like ROP count. We will have to wait for first games but differences will probably be bigger in real life.

Gotcha, I was just thrown of because of the funky Resolution of the XSX.

I tried to do the same with XSX as a 4K baseline and calculate down from there with a 17% perfomance delta but got no clue what Resolution it could actually end up.

4096 × 2160 = 8847360

PS5 Pixelcount 7561846

3200 x 1800 = 5760000


So its actually way closer to 4K than 1800p.

And you were the one saying

And? Stop beating around the bush and say what you want to say.

 

[JordanN]

It would be ~60FPS (XSX) - ~49FPS (PS5).

Assuming XSX is the "base" next gen (although it's more likely PC is), developers will get the XSX version running at its best settings, and PS5 would get the hand me down version.

Or honestly, they could just turn down some graphical settings and get both at 60fps but it will be obvious which version took more downgrades in the visual department.

 

[Clear]

It would be ~60FPS (XSX) - ~49FPS (PS5).

Highly unlikely, basically expect a lot more dynamic res handling because maintaining a perfect 4k really isn't that important.

Assuming XSX is the "base" next gen (although it's more likely PC is), developers will get the XSX version running at its best settings, and PS5 would get the hand me down version.

XSX isn't going to be the base, its still going to get treated with the attention befitting its marketshare. Which wont be much for a long time.

 

[Laconian Sword]

It's incredible how many people think they're engineers just because they snapped together a PC and can read a spec sheet. Arrogance born of ignorance.

Even if we take theoretical GPU performance at face value, that's only a single dimension of many. And it's laughable to read claims about overheating and major bottlenecks as if Sony's actual engineers just threw something together.

AMD and Nvidia take completely different design approaches with different tradeoffs, yet they both manage to compete and serve the market well even if some aspects are benchmarked stronger or weaker than the other.

 

[Blond]

It's not about winning or losing mate. It's about facing facts. XSX has more GPU compute power. Fact. Does it matter? no.

Boy it's like you guys are just saying anything to not be wrong.

 

[sonomamashine]

Could you imagine if the PS5 actually was 13.3 TFLOPS?!?! Xbox fans would never hear the end of it and would be out numbered. PS5 games load faster, XSX games look and run better.

I'm waiting for Lockhart (when revealed) is a 6TF machine so the base is weak, Xsx is irrelevant.
It's coming.

 

[geordiemp]

100% of the time the sex has a a more powerful cpu,gpu, and ram.

Amazing , Thank you I never knew that, clever insight.#

 

[Clear]

It's incredible how many people think they're engineers just because they snapped together a PC and can read a spec sheet. Arrogance born of ignorance.

Thanks for putting that so eloquently, been trying to get that sentiment out politely but my contempt keeps showing through! And as both my historic bans on this site came as a result of tangling with master racers, been kinda gunshy about saying what I really feel.

 

[Blond]

can you define winning here ?
the only thing that make gamers win are good games...no matter how strong or weak the hardware is.

also what ssd bring is a promise for now...a part of this promise also comes with more costs (even more assets)

In the hardware department.

 

[CJY]

Assuming XSX is the "base" next gen (although it's more likely PC is), developers will get the XSX version running at its best settings, and PS5 would get the hand me down version.

Or honestly, they could just turn down some graphical settings and get both at 60fps but it will be obvious which version took more downgrades in the visual department.

Lead system is generally chosen based on relationship, money, cost and installed base. It's less often chosen based on specs and definitely won't be chosen based on a 17% extra compute.

PC won't be lead platform for games targeting consoles due to the vast majority of PCs having slow HDDs.

I'm speaking very generally here and it's all just opinions.

 

[CJY]

Boy it's like you guys are just saying anything to not be wrong.

What exactly was I wrong about? that XSX has more compute? No man, that's a fact. Does it matter in the grand scheme of things? No again.

Doesn't any of this matter? No

 

[Hendrick's]

All I know is that the PS5 is weaker and will be harder to develop for with variable CPU/GPU clocks. Putting all their eggs on a hard drive seems like a major error.

 

[Blond]

Damn, you take this shit way too seriously. The way you beg for validation from the xbox fanbase is pathetic.

Yes, I'm begging so hard to be validated by fans.

 

[Bernkastel]

And? Stop beating around the bush and say what you want to say.

Then I will just stand by what I said

Whats even more overblown is the SSD speed comparisons.

 

[geordiemp]

It would be ~60FPS (XSX) - ~49FPS (PS5).

Thanks for your insight.

Both will be 4k60, one may be 85 % of the time with dymamic resolution, one 95 % of the time or whaetever depending on the game.

Hell dyamic resolution has been a think for ages., have you been under a rock ?

The blade of grass a mile away thanks you.

Yes series X is more powerful, but jesus the warriors and trolls....

Hell I play on a LG C7, and I cant tell difference between 1440p games, 1800p games and 4K in motion - I notice good HDR more though and 60 vs 30.