Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Is RGT a trusted source? It seems like the same thing what others have been saying on the internet (without any definite proof).
Xbox Series X is performing worse then the competition, in spite being more powerful.
No AAA launch exclusive titles for the console (must be a first in console history).
Simply put, Microsoft wasn't ready to launch the Xbox Series.
Not sure what kind of alternate reality you live in, even more disturbing that you had 3 up votes for this garbage. Its not even remotely performing worse than the competition, at best you could make the arguement that they are equal.
I have some land on the moon I'd like to sell you.
Yes a refactoring of the tools , which eventually will benefit you in the future.MS created an entirely new GDK called GameCore. Essentially a PC/Xbox combo. Thus all games work for both platforms and it’s incredibly easy to switch between them. Overtime this will align PC an Console development and make it very easy to have both with almost no porting.
Sony took PS4 SDK and upgraded it for PS5. Thus everything is familiar and just improved. Anyone on PS5 sdk is essentially using something they’ve seen for 7 years. Xbox is a new platform with stuff to be worked out.
AC Valhalla: worse framerate and bad tearingNot sure what kind of alternate reality you live in, even more disturbing that you had 3 up votes for this garbage. Its not even remotely performing worse than the competition, at best you could make the arguement that they are equal.
I have some land on the moon I'd like to sell you.
AC Valhalla: worse framerate and bad tearing
DMC5 120fps mode: worse framerate
Dirt 5: worse performance, worse visual setting, tearing
All of that despite having 20% more compute power (12 vs 10 TFlops)
How is that not performing worse?
Or should we say: Series X is performing worse (than expected)?
Then perhaps, you can at least agree that Series X is not clearly superior for running third party multiplat games over PS5?You could maybe get away with saying series X is performing worse than expected on some games, not all. What is the percentage difference for the average gamer? Probably zero.
So that wasn't liquid metal after all ...Tools, bugs, late dev kits, misleading marketing, lack of Cerny Sauce, etc.
So Gears 5 running at 4k with higher than PC settings was cut down? That is a game that can be compared to PC. Are determined to say Xbox has some sort of performance despite other evidence? Doesn't Forza 4 look and run better than Dirt 5? Yet Dirt 5 proves a problem with XSX? It appears too early to draw an conclusions other than excellent tools on PS5 targeting very few platforms.Not necessarily. An exclusive can be cut down until performance targets are met.
We would never know Dirt 5 Xbox version was trash if not for the PS5 version showing us how it was supposed to look.
Indeed. People forget the GPU optimized memory of 10 GB in the consoles is just that, GPU optimized memory. It doesn't mean it is exclusively for graphics related stuff, like VRAM on the PC. On Series X, 3.5 GB is intended for the CPU by using the slower Bus. For next gen games and CPU intensive current gen games, I do not think 3.5 GB is enough as RAM. Meaning the CPU will then have to access more than 3.5 GB and does so by using the 10 GB optimized memory as RAM, which naturally then reduces the amount of memory for the graphics.A PC GPU is only holding graphics data in the VRAM. The consoles GDDR is shared for all data.
I thought that was why they came up with the "all access" thing. $25 a month for 24mo to pay off your Xbox Series X, and includes gamepass ultimate to boot, since there's nothing new to play yet. XDWait....what? You are giving Microsoft a pass for a "year or two"?
Wait....what? You are giving Microsoft a pass for a "year or two"?
GPU budgets are still a thing. As i've been saying, being able to stream assets faster is good and does provides benefits, but won't do miracles.It's unfortunate these consoles don't even have a full 16GB of RAM to utilize in games to being with. And of course Series X has fast SSD and I/O as well. My point, considering just how fast PS5's SSD and I/O is, memory constraints are reduced which allows you to crank up the details. Now that's not to say you can't do that with Series X as well, it's just PS5 is next level.
Sony isn't stupid, when they do these press conferences and tech talk, they do it fully expecting people to hail their platform.The thing is though Sony aren't talking. It's people and sites like DF doing comparisons and talking. Sony are super humble. Good guy Jim isn't rubbing it in their dominant victories despite constant immature pokes from xbox PR and marketing.
I don't think we're in disagreement here. I think it's clear Sony first-party will be the ones pulling out all the stops when it comes to the SSD and I/O solution. Maybe we'll be surprised by some third-party stuff but who knows.GPU budgets are still a thing. As i've been saying, being able to stream assets faster is good and does provides benefits, but won't do miracles.
I've seen some people thinking this'll get them games with no pop-in's or infinite draw distances. It won't.
At best what this'll do is allow levels and maps to be designed without having to take the loading of assets into account, and we'll see that on every platform not just the ps5.
If the ps5's is indeed "next level" as you're saying, considering other platforms are also introducing darn fast solutions and the target resolution of next-gen games, its likely that the differences won't even be noticeable for the end user.
Sony isn't stupid, when they do these press conferences and tech talk, they do it fully expecting people to hail their platform.
In fact, they're targeting that exact reaction.
That'll be very hard to tell, unless they start porting their games to PC.I think it's clear Sony first-party will be the ones pulling out all the stops when it comes to the SSD and I/O solution. Maybe we'll be surprised by some third-party stuff but who knows.
Wait....what? You are giving Microsoft a pass for a "year or two"?
Their priorities is multiplat development. If you think they splitted the RAM just for the sake of series X hardware performance, you are a delusional. Now I'm not saying they haven't tried their best for the series X hardware. But I don't see their approach favour at all the optimal performance in the new console. Hell the CPU latency excuse for the GDDR has been solved after the PS4, never heard of complications about it by any developers. And now MS want to make believe to us is still better split the RAM on console? Bullshits. It's more convenient for their strategy to have a console more close to the pc environment, that's it.You don't think Microsoft did not run the split ram through a simulator 10s of thousands of times or more before adding significant BOM of the console? They could of easily just did what Sony did and shave off some money on the BOM. It was done because both ran into issues of getting higher clocks on ram. This was the solution to squeeze some extra performance out of the clocks they could squeeze out of the ram. You think they did this for marketing and intentionally tanked performance?
By the time these 'tools' reach maturity we'll be seeing hype for PS5 Pro and Xbox Series X2 and the argument starts all over again.
Ugh....just think about that a minute. You bought the world's "most powerful console" that doesn't actually realize its potential until more powerful consoles are available? That's a kick to the nuts for sure.
Hopefully that won't be the case.
And what most people don't realize is by the time this legendary GDK makes games look a tiny bit better on Series X, most won't give a shit. The damage has already been done. Nothing the GDK can do will make the games look so much better on Series X that it changes people's purchasing decision. It's all damage control and the new 'secret sauce.'
It won't have less bandwith than PS5. The hit reduction is around 50-60gb/s when a game needs more than the 10gb at 556GB/s. Still averages more than PS5. This was explained months ago by devs.Bandwidth is relative to GPU. The S at 224 is good enough for 1080, the PS4 Pro only had 217 and was running games over 1080p. And the Sbox runs Dirt 5 at sub-720p lol so its not a high resolution gaming console.
The huge flaw for the S is it only gives devs 7.5 GB of RAM when last gen was 5 GB. That's basically the same for the devs. Barely any better. And the bandwidth is not unified. 2 GB of the 10 is at 56 GB/s cause of the 128 bit bus and uneven RAM setup. 56 GB/s is fucking DDR speeds, not GDDR speeds. Thats a bottlneck cause it takes away total bandwidth from the devs, because its a poor setup.
Series X is just as poor, it just doesn't lack for total amount of memory. But the fact the XSX GPU has 52 CUs, and will in real world performance when running games it will have less bandwidth than the PS5 (which has far fewer shaders that need to be fed work to do, and each CU in the PS5 is running faster) is bad. Its a clear issue.
Thats why it will take lots of time for devs to find workarounds for their code to get the system running at an optimal level. Thats what's hes saying. It will be an issue for both Xboxes for 3rd party devs because the PS5 is not like this, so they'll need to adjust their code on just xboxes, which is not the lead platform for most 3rd parties.
Not when you look at the relative sizes of both GPUs. The Xbox has more shaders to be fed data, and will likely end up starved.It won't have less bandwith than PS5. The hit reduction is around 50-60gb/s when a game needs more than the 10gb at 556GB/s. Still averages more than PS5. This was explained months ago by devs.
Not when you look at the relative sizes of both GPUs. The Xbox has more shaders to be fed data, and will likely end up starved.
Keep in mind,
Shader occupancy is a challenge, more shaders doesn't always equal more performance.
A GPU with more shaders needs more relative bandwidth.
Slower clocked GPUs are at a disadvantage compared to a faster clocked GPU.
I/O speeds feed RAM and RAM feeds the SOC, so slower I/O can hold back the APU from max performance.
Again, even the 'slower' RAM pool is insanely fast and more than enough to fill the shaders. I'm really really really tired of this anti-XBox Series X FUD and hysteria.
For 4K gaming modern GPUs, 336 GB/s is not insanely fast, its a bit slow.Again, even the 'slower' RAM pool is insanely fast and more than enough to fill the shaders. I'm really really really tired of this anti-XBox Series X FUD and hysteria.
Like anything, you're only ever as fast as your slowest part, the 6gb pool of memory will bring the bandwidth down for all 16gb once it needs to be used, this will be what's causing devs problems.
Blame the used car salesman Phil Spencer on overselling what Series X can do. MS and it's fans have been hyping Series X has the place to get ports and "wait for DF videos and ponies will be in hiding" since March. Play shitty games, win shitty prizes.
Like anything, you're only ever as fast as your slowest part, the 6gb pool of memory will bring the bandwidth down for all 16gb once it needs to be used, this will be what's causing devs problems.
They were the other week when they were saying positive stuff about the PS5. Now they're full of shit apparently.Is RGT a trusted source? It seems like the same thing what others have been saying on the internet (without any definite proof).
3.5GB of that is reserved for the OS. The CPU doesn't need super fast RAM, so it first uses the remaining 2.5GB of that slower RAM. The GPU is the one using the super fast RAM. It's fine.Like anything, you're only ever as fast as your slowest part, the 6gb pool of memory will bring the bandwidth down for all 16gb once it needs to be used, this will be what's causing devs problems.
They were the other week when they were saying positive stuff about the PS5. Now they're full of shit apparently.
So PC with seperate ddr4 pools and the monstrous 3090 will have to wait the 3200mhz ddr4 to finish the job in a cycle?
Just a thought
Why? Because the pool is separated so the bandwidth of ddr3/4 adds up?It's a totally different setup on a PC.
Little did they realise the Xbox will never get to 12 terraflops. Never.Those people are making the same mistake when people believed in the 12 > 10 campaign. They are still 100% behind that "most powerful console" marketing campaign from MS. Basically they are still in denial.
Sony have the better tools because they took COVID seriously and planned ahead for contingencies, whereas MS made jokes on Twitter and now their chickens are coming home to roost.
In all seriousness, I'm fairly sure the performance delta will narrow in a few months and both consoles will perform very similarly in third party games.
Why? Because the pool is separated so the bandwidth of ddr3/4 adds up?
I thought that having a unified pool removes some of the bottlenecks
That was basically the slogan for the Atari Jaguar.The performance will sail past the PS5 in a few months, whatever the reason, and no matter hod bad the fanoys delude themselves, physics is still physics and it cannot be broken.
I mean past consoles had vastly different architecture, nowadays is basically same. But I agree, that we should cosider results to be king.That was basically the slogan for the Atari Jaguar.
The mould for the Jaguar console was later sold to a dental company. Because no matter how badly Jagular claimed to be so much more powerful, they failed to demonstrate it with actual games. Because physics is theoretical, actual results is what gamers want.
And history also show that trying to tap into theoretical power is possible, but usually come too late. If you can't show what you can do at launch with actual games, you can't expect anyone to stick around for you to fix things.
Go learn some history of past doomed Game consoles; you might realise that all the mistakes had already been made before elsewhere.
I just added a "triggered" for balance.It’s four up votes now. Check.
That was basically the slogan for the Atari Jaguar.
The mould for the Jaguar console was later sold to a dental company. Because no matter how badly Jagular claimed to be so much more powerful, they failed to demonstrate it with actual games. Because physics is theoretical, actual results is what gamers want.
And history also show that trying to tap into theoretical power is possible, but usually come too late. If you can't show what you can do at launch with actual games, you can't expect anyone to stick around for you to fix things.
Go learn some history of past doomed Game consoles; you might realise that all the mistakes had already been made before elsewhere.
Ah, yes. The Software. The one thing Xbox was definitely behind on for the last two gaming generations. Well, we will see if this time would be any different. Halo Infinite was not a good start.HA HA HA Gooode one. These are using basically the same guts, but one is faster in every way. That leaves the software.
Ah, yes. The Software. The one thing Xbox was definitely behind on for the last two gaming generations. Well, we will see if this time would be any different. Halo Infinite was not a good start.
At this point, there is no factual basis to claim MS had superior programmers. If they were so good, maybe they could fix the Windows store?Talking about the tools, wally chops
At this point, there is no factual basis to claim MS had superior programmers. If they were so good, maybe they could fix the Windows store?
Don't mistaken wealth for competence.
That's the same thing like on a pc gpu which has a standard (usually low) amount of vram. If it is vram starved it gets help from the separate ddr3-4 ram of your normal ram.With Xbox memory config imagine you have a tunnel with 2 lanes 1 at 100mph and 1 at 60mph. XSX has 10 cars going 100mph and 6 cars going 60mph, if the 100mph lane all has the GPU as the destination that's great, but if there's traffic and we need to use the other lane, then even the 100mph lane has to slow down because it's waiting on deliveries from the slower lane.