Support NeoGAF

[THE DUCK]

Dude I don't think you get the idea. Most of us who were excited for the PlayStation 5 assumed it would do multiplats worse, we believed the marketing and the BS from people on this forum but were still excited for the PS5 because of the exclusives and we expected the difference to be similar to the difference between PS4 pro and the one x which wasn't big enough to matter. So for it to turn out the world's most powerful console can't actually outperform the PS5 is just hysterical for some of us. Like there's literally no good argument for buying it.

Not sure why it would be hysterical for you that a rival console to what you bought isn't performing 100% out of the gate. No reason why you needed that to be excited about what ps5 is offering.

If you see no good arguement for buying an xbox series x, I think you are lost. Unless you are just a casual gamer, then I guess the ps5 should be fine.

I think I should qualify all of this .....I'm actually enjoying the ps5 a bit more than my series x right now, but I'm spending time with both and enjoying both. Both will offer some great exclusive games going forward. Gamepass will offer me a ton of value on the x.

 

[Lastgengamer]

How fast we forget about the unlimited power of the cloud! Xbox will be fine.

 

[anothertech]

Greatest entertainment is reading the responses lolol

Happy Thanksgiving!!

 

[Neo_game]

I just had to

 

[brownfedora]

They will both improve over time, its just some people seem to think only one will.
They are both great machines (there's the Series S as well, but that's... Whatever).
I am enjoying Tom Warren being wrong and deleting tweets though

What tweets did he delete?

 

[Explosive Zombie]

Not sure why it would be hysterical for you that a rival console to what you bought isn't performing 100% out of the gate. No reason why you needed that to be excited about what ps5 is offering.

If you see no good arguement for buying an xbox series x, I think you are lost. Unless you are just a casual gamer, then I guess the ps5 should be fine.

I think I should qualify all of this .....I'm actually enjoying the ps5 a bit more than my series x right now, but I'm spending time with both and enjoying both. Both will offer some great exclusive games going forward. Gamepass will offer me a ton of value on the x.

It's funny because posters like you have told us for months multiplats are more important than exclusives and the DF showdowns would be good popcorn eating and servings of crow. I don't need the XSX to underperform to care about PS5 but it's fun enough that it's doing it after months and months of the smug BS we've seen around here.

In what way am I lost? Why is PS5 a more casual option?

What does your qualification mean to me? I don't care that you're enjoying both. There will be scant few games that aren't on PS5 and I can play them on my PC. Better playing multiplats on XSX might have been something to steer me towards acquiring one at some point but if the multiplats are the same or better on PS5 and the only "exclusives" are playable on my PC why bother?

 

[Bogroll]

Higher res on which platform?

Admit it. PS5 is a smartly designed piece of kit. All those chest thumping, 12>10 and sometimes even 9-8 TF RDNA 1 were quoted. Some even claimed there will be an even larger difference between PS5/XSX than Pro vs One X. It all just fell flat.

No, just look at it. I'd rather look at a lot of screen tearing than have to look at that monstrosity in my my house.
My life its vile.

 

[Md Ray]

No, just look at it. I'd rather look at a lot of screen tearing than have to look at that monstrosity in my my house.
My life its vile.

Lmao what a wierd post. Ok.

 

[THE DUCK]

It's funny because posters like you have told us for months multiplats are more important than exclusives and the DF showdowns would be good popcorn eating and servings of crow. I don't need the XSX to underperform to care about PS5 but it's fun enough that it's doing it after months and months of the smug BS we've seen around here.

In what way am I lost? Why is PS5 a more casual option?

What does your qualification mean to me? I don't care that you're enjoying both. There will be scant few games that aren't on PS5 and I can play them on my PC. Better playing multiplats on XSX might have been something to steer me towards acquiring one at some point but if the multiplats are the same or better on PS5 and the only "exclusives" are playable on my PC why bother?

I have never once said mutiplatform games are more important than exclusives. I can definately give you that if you have a modern pc, you have a lot of series x games covered, and the ps5 gives you more exclusives in that circumstance- the choice makes sense. .

Ps5 (or series x without a ps5) being a casual option if you don't have a pc, in that you would be left out of a lot of exclusives.

But I'm not sure what forums you are reading, its hard to get a word in edgewise most days if one has anything good to say about Microsoft. For every 1 positive thing said about ms, there's ussually 1 valid counterpoint, and 3 posts declaring sony victory, and yes, even before launch.

Like this:

Topic started: Looks like series x is a great set of hardware, on paper looks to be the most powerfull console this generation

Poster #1: looks interesting, but sony has a fast ssd and some architecture to counter

Poster # 2: Nope, xbox is garbage, ms has no idea what its doing, and it clearly going to be $699 anyhow and won't sell

Poster #3 : Xbox has no games, so who cares. And series s will cripple it. Garbage.

Poster #4: Its just a gamepass machine, so what? Plus it looks like a pc. Ms will be lucky to sell 5 million units, just like they did this generation.

This went on and on........

 

[llien]

Reminds me of when the PS3 was more powerful than the 360 but the 360 got all the better ports back in the day.

Same shit different day.

PS3 was bananas, with that weirdo "cell" and vector cores.
This time it's identical architectures.

The 36 vs 52 CU gap is gargantuan, no OC-ing can fix that.

PS5 beating XSeX makes no freaking sense (and I wonder what "beating" actually means, as comparing games with fixed framerates to figure which one is more performant is a way to mislead, not figure anything).

 

[DinoD]

PS3 was bananas, with that weirdo "cell" and vector cores.
This time it's identical architectures.

The 36 vs 52 CU gap is gargantuan, no OC-ing can fix that.

PS5 beating XSeX makes no freaking sense (and I wonder what "beating" actually means, as comparing games with fixed framerates to figure which one is more performant is a way to mislead, not figure anything).

That's because the concept of utilization is taught later in secondary school.

 

[Klayzer]

It's funny because posters like you have told us for months multiplats are more important than exclusives and the DF showdowns would be good popcorn eating and servings of crow. I don't need the XSX to underperform to care about PS5 but it's fun enough that it's doing it after months and months of the smug BS we've seen around here.

In what way am I lost? Why is PS5 a more casual option?

What does your qualification mean to me? I don't care that you're enjoying both. There will be scant few games that aren't on PS5 and I can play them on my PC. Better playing multiplats on XSX might have been something to steer me towards acquiring one at some point but if the multiplats are the same or better on PS5 and the only "exclusives" are playable on my PC why bother?

Unbelievable amount of backpedaling from the Xguys. What happened to the chest thumping, Aaron and Phil throwing up the x?

Now Phil is crying about console tribalism (which he and pr added fuel to the fire often).

I love how their fans talk big shit, but when the actual facts come out and its not up to what's was promised its Sonygaf blah, blah, blah.

We heard for months about how much salty popcorn was going to be consumed from the DF videos and 3rd party plays best here stuff. You can't run your mouth about shit, and not expect it to be flung back at you.

 

[Larlight]

Unbelievable amount of backpedaling from the Xguys. What happened to the chest thumping, Aaron and Phil throwing up the x?

Now Phil is crying about console tribalism (which he and pr added fuel to the fire often).

I love how their fans talk big shit, but when the actual facts come out and its not up to what's was promised its Sonygaf blah, blah, blah.

We heard for months about how much salty popcorn was going to be consumed from the DF videos and 3rd party plays best here stuff. You can't run your mouth about shit, and not expect it to be flung back at you.

Truth. The cognitive dissonance is astounding. Once there is even a game that comes out that performs better on Xbox, they’ll come back thumping their chest again completely trying to forget everything that happened now lol. Also, when I say perform better, I mean insignificantly better. Not the big gap or 30% advantage they tried to claim lmao.

 

[Hawking Radiation]

What tweets did he delete?

He always deletes tweets that challenges him on his claims. He goes around blocking people too. It's good though.
That way he potentially pisses off more fans and lowers the journalistic integrity of The Verge too so I hope he continues his console warring and spreading FUD.

 

[Blade2.0]

It's because one company has mark Cerny.

 

[onQ123]

PS3 was bananas, with that weirdo "cell" and vector cores.
This time it's identical architectures.

The 36 vs 52 CU gap is gargantuan, no OC-ing can fix that.

PS5 beating XSeX makes no freaking sense (and I wonder what "beating" actually means, as comparing games with fixed framerates to figure which one is more performant is a way to mislead, not figure anything).

It make a lot of sense if you know that TF isn't everything because PS5 has the pixel & triangle output advantage plus the internal cache bandwidth advantage , better memory management & I/O system.

 

[BeardGawd]

DF and most unbiased professionals say the XSX is more powerful. Based on everything they know (CPU, GPU, RAM, SSD, Clock speeds, CU counts, etc...).. barring any unknown secret sauce that noone knows about I tend to take their word over the average forum fanboy... Yes PS5 and XSX are neck and neck for the past few launch games... but we've got an entire generation to go...

NO need to keep arguing. People are going to continue to be disingenuous and only believe what they want to.

 

[llien]

That's because the concept of utilization is taught later in secondary school.

I don't think you've picked the right target for that kind of insult, silly kid.

It make a lot of sense if you know that TF isn't everything because PS5 has the pixel & triangle output advantage plus the internal cache bandwidth advantage , better memory management & I/O system.

Had that been the case, we would be having lower end (and I mean REALLY REALLY LOWER END, a fucking 1.44 times difference in CUs) GPUs beating higher end GPUs of the same architecture.

Essentially OCed 2060 (34 SMs) beating 2080 (48SMs), which insane person thinks that's conceivable, show up.

Let's see how that works with RDNA2, shall we.
6800 - 60CUs, 6800XT - 72CUs, mere 20% more CUs, 6800 OCed by 18%, where does it get it:

Oh, look, even vastly OCed 6800, even though the gap is less than a half of that of consoles, shows that those "other things" when OCed by 18% do not help it close mere 20% CU gap.

PS
Oh, and real world examples: Rocket League. Needs checkboard rendering ("AMD has no answer to NV's up-scaling", chuckle) only on PS5.

 

[sircaw]

This belongs in the meme thread good sir!

Just wait for e3 hahah, brilliant.

Amd sold us an of the shelve pc lol.

who made this, its someone from this forum lol

 

[Riky]

Both PS5 and XSX have a custom 8-core AMD Zen 2. In PS5 3.5GHz with SMT and 3.6 GHz with SMT in XSX side. In fact this is less than 3% difference, but since in PS5 side is variable and Cerny said in some scenarios they can slightly reduce it this is why I mention 3%. Results in next gen multi games didn't show any difference in CPU heavy scenarios, this is why I sad this different it doesn't add a shit.

Your 40% additional GPU is a fantasy that doesn't appear in the performance results shown by the games. These results say what I say: games perform almost exactly on both console mostly because pros and cons of both consoles in terms of GPU, memory management and I/O basically compensate each other providing very similar results in both consoles, that outside stuff that may end or already has been patched (like XSX tearing or lack of VRR in PS5), there are no important differences that players will notice outside DF-lke videos. Educate yourself.

In fact, I think that even that big details difference in Dirt 5 where XSX looks so awful compared to PS5 will end patched too:

This image shows the biggest difference we saw in PS5 vs XSX. If you want to talk about specifics tell me where that supposed extra 40% advantage on XSX appears in this image. And why every other comparision the games look almost identical and sometimes with a slight advantage for PS5. Maybe it's because having PS5 perks on memory management and I/O in addition to a 22% extra frequency in the GPU also helps.

Or maybe it's a bug, like the actual developer said it was

 

[Cherrypepsi]

Just wait for e3 hahah, brilliant.

Amd sold us an of the shelve pc lol.

who made this, its someone from this forum lol

I made this

 

[sircaw]

I made this

Hats of to you, it's very well thought out.

 

[geordiemp]

I don't think you've picked the right target for that kind of insult, silly kid.


Had that been the case, we would be having lower end (and I mean REALLY REALLY LOWER END, a fucking 1.44 times difference in CUs) GPUs beating higher end GPUs of the same architecture.

Essentially OCed 2060 (34 SMs) beating 2080 (48SMs), which insane person thinks that's conceivable, show up.

Let's see how that works with RDNA2, shall we.
6800 - 60CUs, 6800XT - 72CUs, mere 20% more CUs, 6800 OCed by 18%, where does it get it:

Oh, look, even vastly OCed 6800, even though the gap is less than a half of that of consoles, shows that those "other things" when OCed by 18% do not help it close mere 20% CU gap.

PS
Oh, and real world examples: Rocket League. Needs checkboard rendering ("AMD has no answer to NV's up-scaling", chuckle) only on PS5.

A 6800 Xt has more RB, Primative and rasteriszer, L1 / LDS and everfything else asssocted with an extra shader engine. Its not simply more CU difference between 6800 and 6800 XT.

XSX has more CU but they are tacked on the end of the shader array to 14 CU, so the scaling is different.

Also note on RDNA2 the Raster and primatives are shared among teh shader engine (2 shader arrays) so better at distributing work, on XSX raster and prmatives are on each individual shader arrays like 5700 RDNA1

 

[Cherrypepsi]

Hats of to you, it's very well thought out.

I am native german and understand what he actually says but I was always laughing at this meme in any given context
90% of the Hitler react videos on youtube are hilarious

of course it's all fun and should not be taken seriously

 

[onQ123]

I don't think you've picked the right target for that kind of insult, silly kid.


Had that been the case, we would be having lower end (and I mean REALLY REALLY LOWER END, a fucking 1.44 times difference in CUs) GPUs beating higher end GPUs of the same architecture.

Essentially OCed 2060 (34 SMs) beating 2080 (48SMs), which insane person thinks that's conceivable, show up.

Let's see how that works with RDNA2, shall we.
6800 - 60CUs, 6800XT - 72CUs, mere 20% more CUs, 6800 OCed by 18%, where does it get it:

Oh, look, even vastly OCed 6800, even though the gap is less than a half of that of consoles, shows that those "other things" when OCed by 18% do not help it close mere 20% CU gap.

PS
Oh, and real world examples: Rocket League. Needs checkboard rendering ("AMD has no answer to NV's up-scaling", chuckle) only on PS5.

Real world like PS5 out performing Xbox Series X?

 

[Dick Jones]

It's because one company has mark Cerny.

Cerny is not even an employee of Sony. He is a consultant.

 

[Caio]

 

[SmokSmog]

We need something like this for ps5
Reverse engineered PS4 APU reveals the console’s real CPU and GPU specs

 

[Explosive Zombie]

DF and most unbiased professionals say the XSX is more powerful. Based on everything they know (CPU, GPU, RAM, SSD, Clock speeds, CU counts, etc...).. barring any unknown secret sauce that noone knows about I tend to take their word over the average forum fanboy... Yes PS5 and XSX are neck and neck for the past few launch games... but we've got an entire generation to go...

NO need to keep arguing. People are going to continue to be disingenuous and only believe what they want to.

 

[Epic Sax CEO]

I don't think you've picked the right target for that kind of insult, silly kid.


Had that been the case, we would be having lower end (and I mean REALLY REALLY LOWER END, a fucking 1.44 times difference in CUs) GPUs beating higher end GPUs of the same architecture.

Essentially OCed 2060 (34 SMs) beating 2080 (48SMs), which insane person thinks that's conceivable, show up.

Let's see how that works with RDNA2, shall we.
6800 - 60CUs, 6800XT - 72CUs, mere 20% more CUs, 6800 OCed by 18%, where does it get it:

Oh, look, even vastly OCed 6800, even though the gap is less than a half of that of consoles, shows that those "other things" when OCed by 18% do not help it close mere 20% CU gap.

PS
Oh, and real world examples: Rocket League. Needs checkboard rendering ("AMD has no answer to NV's up-scaling", chuckle) only on PS5.

Your comparison is wrong, the differences aren't so obvious as just looking at the PC cards.
Yes, The 6800 overclocked there is unable to match the 6800XT, but you forget that the 6800 started from a lower clock.

The crucial point with the consoles is that the SeX's GPU is bigger AND works at a lower clock.
A bigger GPU doesn't mean a bigger everything, that's why just the clocks only can make a big difference. While the overclocked 6800 is just matching the polygons and pixels that the 6800XT is able to push, because it's higher clock, the PS5 GPU is surpassing the SeX's GPU.

We should be rational and accept this fact already.
The PS5 GPU is performing as expected.
In situations were it's stronger it's showing better performance. The SeX's GPU will shows us better performance on scenarios where it's bigger GPU is an advantage.

 

[Md Ray]

I don't think you've picked the right target for that kind of insult, silly kid.


Had that been the case, we would be having lower end (and I mean REALLY REALLY LOWER END, a fucking 1.44 times difference in CUs) GPUs beating higher end GPUs of the same architecture.

Essentially OCed 2060 (34 SMs) beating 2080 (48SMs), which insane person thinks that's conceivable, show up.

Let's see how that works with RDNA2, shall we.
6800 - 60CUs, 6800XT - 72CUs, mere 20% more CUs, 6800 OCed by 18%, where does it get it:

Oh, look, even vastly OCed 6800, even though the gap is less than a half of that of consoles, shows that those "other things" when OCed by 18% do not help it close mere 20% CU gap.

PS
Oh, and real world examples: Rocket League. Needs checkboard rendering ("AMD has no answer to NV's up-scaling", chuckle) only on PS5.

Man, there's so much wrong with this post.

 

[assurdum]

No, just look at it. I'd rather look at a lot of screen tearing than have to look at that monstrosity in my my house.
My life its vile.

I can assure to you neither series X esthetically is that beauty. Hear someone prefer it for that anyway is something else.

 

[DeepEnigma]

No, just look at it. I'd rather look at a lot of screen tearing than have to look at that monstrosity in my my house.
My life its vile.

Gross.

 

[assurdum]

DF and most unbiased professionals say the XSX is more powerful. Based on everything they know (CPU, GPU, RAM, SSD, Clock speeds, CU counts, etc...).. barring any unknown secret sauce that noone knows about I tend to take their word over the average forum fanboy... Yes PS5 and XSX are neck and neck for the past few launch games... but we've got an entire generation to go...

NO need to keep arguing. People are going to continue to be disingenuous and only believe what they want to.

Most of unbiased professional said also is the console generation closest in specs, difference is quite modest and ps5 has is own hardware advantage. But of course we can ignore all of this and just to hear repeatedly in our mind the most powerful console hardware slogan.

 

[Jerm411]

Tom needs to realize Phil Spencer isn’t going to adopt him no matter how much nonsense and FUD he puts out....

 

[Jerm411]

BTW I could give a shit less if the XSX outperforms the PS5 on Madden, Ass Creed, Cyberpunk, etc....they’ll look and play just fine on the PS5 AND I get first party studios that were making insane looking and playing games on hardware MUCH MUCH inferior to the PS5....and now they get to work with this?

Pffffft I’ll be ok lol....moar flops though....

 

[llien]

I thought meltdowns in PS5 thread when 36CUs were revealed were bad, but it seems to be a never ending story.

It is fucking 1.44 times more CUs, it is OVERCLOCKED 2060 VS 2080 SUPER kind of gap, there is no "fixing" it, get the fuck over it.

Sony is "faster" in a game with locked fps. It is EMBARRASSING TO TALK ABOUT PERFORMANCE IN A GAME WITH LOCKED FPS.
And then "for some reason" only PS5 needs checkboard rendering in Rocket League, but PS5 leads 4:0 I was told.

Jesus Freaking Christ...

SeX's GPU is bigger AND works at a lower clock.

Oh, is it?
Let me bring news to you: 2080Ti is the biggest Turing and it works at lower clock than smaller siblings.

 

[Md Ray]

I don't think you've picked the right target for that kind of insult, silly kid.


Had that been the case, we would be having lower end (and I mean REALLY REALLY LOWER END, a fucking 1.44 times difference in CUs) GPUs beating higher end GPUs of the same architecture.

Essentially OCed 2060 (34 SMs) beating 2080 (48SMs), which insane person thinks that's conceivable, show up.

Let's see how that works with RDNA2, shall we.
6800 - 60CUs, 6800XT - 72CUs, mere 20% more CUs, 6800 OCed by 18%, where does it get it:

Oh, look, even vastly OCed 6800, even though the gap is less than a half of that of consoles, shows that those "other things" when OCed by 18% do not help it close mere 20% CU gap.

PS
Oh, and real world examples: Rocket League. Needs checkboard rendering ("AMD has no answer to NV's up-scaling", chuckle) only on PS5.

First off, both PS5 and XSX have the same amount of primitive units and ROPs.

4 = Prims
64 = ROPs

On XSX, running 4 prims at 1825 MHz gets you 7.3 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 64 ROPs at 1825 MHz = 116.8 Gpix/s of fillrate.
On PS5, running 4 prims at 2230 MHz gets you 8.92 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 64 ROPs at 2230 MHz = 142.72 Gpix/s of fillrate.

A clear-cut 22% uplift over XSX in favor of PS5 in both triangle output and fillrate.

Your 6800 vs 6800 XT comparison to dispute PS5's frequency advantage is flawed. For one, the ROPs config is vastly different between 6800 and 6800 XT and the frequency difference between them isn't as large as there is between PS5 and XSX's GPU frequency. According to Computerbase, 6800's OC frequency is 2460 MHz and 6800 XT's stock frequency is ~2313 MHz. From 2313 MHz to 2460 MHz is a mere 6% uplift.

6800:
4 = Prims
96 = ROPs

6800 XT:
4 = Prims
128 = ROPs

On 6800 XT, running 4 prims at 2313 MHz gets you 9.25 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 128 ROPs at 2313 MHz = 296 Gpix/s of fillrate.
On 6800 non-XT, running 4 prims at 2460 MHz gets you 9.84 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 96 ROPs at 2460 MHz = 236 Gpix/s of fillrate.

Notice the triangle output is just a 6% increase for 6800 non-XT, but fillrate is still much higher on 6800 XT by 25% due to 33% more ROPs. On PS5 GPU both triangle output and fillrate get a 22% uplift over XSX. That's not the case with these 6000 series cards. Hence the 6800 non-XT is still behind 6800 XT in that screenshot you posted despite an OC.

There's more to a GPU than just CUs and SMs.

 

[wachie]

I can agree with this to a point, it's when its shaded like the series x is now vastly inferior for some reason that I start to stand up for it.
You can see from some of the more rabid here that this has validated thier ps5 purchase (and self esteem) and they will run around now for the next 5 years posting how the ps5 decimates the series x based on a few launch games that were basically tied.

Please show me where one person has said this or used a wording similar to that? Because all I'm seeing is people being surprised/not surprised and making fun at Microsoft PR.

 

[AllBizness]

PS3 was bananas, with that weirdo "cell" and vector cores.
This time it's identical architectures.

The 36 vs 52 CU gap is gargantuan, no OC-ing can fix that.

PS5 beating XSeX makes no freaking sense (and I wonder what "beating" actually means, as comparing games with fixed framerates to figure which one is more performant is a way to mislead, not figure anything).

It makes perfect sense it's just that we are being led by technically daft tech tubers who dont know shit. PS5 is just more fine tuned and Xbox cant perform better without a hardware revision frankly. Digital Foundry and others in their field are scared to speak up and say there's absolutely nothing wrong with Series X or the GDK, but the PS5 is simply more efficient and Series X will have parity at best and perform worse more often then not.

 

[ethomaz]

First off, both PS5 and XSX have the same amount of primitive units and ROPs.

4 = Prims
64 = ROPs

On XSX, running 4 prims at 1825 MHz gets you 7.3 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 64 ROPs at 1825 MHz = 116.8 Gpix/s of fillrate.
On PS5, running 4 prims at 2230 MHz gets you 8.92 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 64 ROPs at 2230 MHz = 142.72 Gpix/s of fillrate.

A clear-cut 22% uplift over XSX in favor of PS5 in both triangle output and fillrate.

Your 6800 vs 6800 XT comparison to dispute PS5's frequency advantage is flawed. For one, the ROPs config is vastly different between 6800 and 6800 XT and the frequency difference between them isn't as large as there is between PS5 and XSX's GPU frequency. According to Computerbase, 6800's OC frequency is 2460 MHz and 6800 XT's stock frequency is ~2313 MHz. From 2313 MHz to 2460 MHz is a mere 6% uplift.

6800:
4 = Prims
96 = ROPs

6800 XT:
4 = Prims
128 = ROPs

On 6800 XT, running 4 prims at 2313 MHz gets you 9.25 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 128 ROPs at 2313 MHz = 296 Gpix/s of fillrate.
On 6800 non-XT, running 4 prims at 2460 MHz gets you 9.84 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 96 ROPs at 2460 MHz = 236 Gpix/s of fillrate.

Notice the triangle output is just a 6% increase for 6800 non-XT, but fillrate is still much higher on 6800 XT by 25% due to 33% more ROPs. On PS5 GPU both triangle output and fillrate get a 22% uplift over XSX. That's not the case with these 6000 series cards. Hence the 6800 non-XT is still behind 6800 XT in that screenshot you posted despite an OC.

There's more to a GPU than just CUs and SMs.

If not even DF could understand that... do you believe some forum user here will? I got a reply before but RTX 2080 has higher clock and can't beat RTX 2080TI (of course everythiing is higher on RTX 2080TI even with lower clocks lol).
Nice write btw.

 

[Epic Sax CEO]

First off, both PS5 and XSX have the same amount of primitive units and ROPs.

4 = Prims
64 = ROPs

On XSX, running 4 prims at 1825 MHz gets you 7.3 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 64 ROPs at 1825 MHz = 116.8 Gpix/s of fillrate.
On PS5, running 4 prims at 2230 MHz gets you 8.92 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 64 ROPs at 2230 MHz = 142.72 Gpix/s of fillrate.

A clear-cut 22% uplift over XSX in favor of PS5 in both triangle output and fillrate.

Your 6800 vs 6800 XT comparison to dispute PS5's frequency advantage is flawed. For one, the ROPs config is vastly different between 6800 and 6800 XT and the frequency difference between them isn't as large as there is between PS5 and XSX's GPU frequency. According to Computerbase, 6800's OC frequency is 2460 MHz and 6800 XT's stock frequency is ~2313 MHz. From 2313 MHz to 2460 MHz is a mere 6% uplift.

6800:
4 = Prims
96 = ROPs

6800 XT:
4 = Prims
128 = ROPs

On 6800 XT, running 4 prims at 2313 MHz gets you 9.25 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 128 ROPs at 2313 MHz = 296 Gpix/s of fillrate.
On 6800 non-XT, running 4 prims at 2460 MHz gets you 9.84 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 96 ROPs at 2460 MHz = 236 Gpix/s of fillrate.

Notice the triangle output is just a 6% increase for 6800 non-XT, but fillrate is still much higher on 6800 XT by 25% due to 33% more ROPs. On PS5 GPU both triangle output and fillrate get a 22% uplift over XSX. That's not the case with these 6000 series cards. Hence the 6800 non-XT is still behind 6800 XT in that screenshot you posted despite an OC.

There's more to a GPU than just CUs and SMs.

I don't get why it's so hard for some to understand this when this is being so clearly explained.

And the SeX already gave an example of where and when it's GPU have an advantage, in DMC5. 4K with RT is exactly the type of situation where the extra CUs can be put to use.

 

[sircaw]

I have never once said mutiplatform games are more important than exclusives. I can definately give you that if you have a modern pc, you have a lot of series x games covered, and the ps5 gives you more exclusives in that circumstance- the choice makes sense. .

Ps5 (or series x without a ps5) being a casual option if you don't have a pc, in that you would be left out of a lot of exclusives.

But I'm not sure what forums you are reading, its hard to get a word in edgewise most days if one has anything good to say about Microsoft. For every 1 positive thing said about ms, there's ussually 1 valid counterpoint, and 3 posts declaring sony victory, and yes, even before launch.

Like this:

Topic started: Looks like series x is a great set of hardware, on paper looks to be the most powerfull console this generation

Poster #1: looks interesting, but sony has a fast ssd and some architecture to counter

Poster # 2: Nope, xbox is garbage, ms has no idea what its doing, and it clearly going to be $699 anyhow and won't sell

Poster #3 : Xbox has no games, so who cares. And series s will cripple it. Garbage.

Poster #4: Its just a gamepass machine, so what? Plus it looks like a pc. Ms will be lucky to sell 5 million units, just like they did this generation.

This went on and on........

No disrespect dude are you sure you have been reading this forum?

There is a reason why so many of the Xbox usual suspects have disappeared. The picture your painting is a lie.

Was their a couple of people saying Sony would do well yer, but nothing like the xbox army fud spreaders, this place was out of control.

Oh yer guys or 10.3 tflop machine is going to smash that 12 tflop machines. Listen to how ludicrous that sounds.

Now i get your avatar.

 

[Epic Sax CEO]

If not even DF could understand that... do you believe some forum user here will? I got a reply before but RTX 2080 has higher clock and can't beat RTX 2080TI (of course everythiing is higher on RTX 2080TI even with lower clocks lol).
Nice write btw.

Another meaningless comparison.
The structures in the Turing Architecture are arranged differently from in RDNA2.
We are not discussing Turing or any Nvidia architecture here, we are discussing RDNA2 GPUs only.

 

[ethomaz]

Another meaningless comparison.
The structures in the Turing Architecture are arranged differently from in RDNA2.
We are not discussing Turing or any Nvidia architecture here, we are discussing RDNA2 GPUs only.

It was only an example of what people are posting to say the high clocks has no beneficies.

 

[llien]

First off, both PS5 and XSX have the same amount of primitive units and ROPs.

4 = Prims
64 = ROPs

On XSX, running 4 prims at 1825 MHz gets you 7.3 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 64 ROPs at 1825 MHz = 116.8 Gpix/s of fillrate.
On PS5, running 4 prims at 2230 MHz gets you 8.92 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 64 ROPs at 2230 MHz = 142.72 Gpix/s of fillrate.

A clear-cut 22% uplift over XSX in favor of PS5 in both triangle output and fillrate.

Your 6800 vs 6800 XT comparison to dispute PS5's frequency advantage is flawed. For one, the ROPs config is vastly different between 6800 and 6800 XT and the frequency difference between them isn't as large as there is between PS5 and XSX's GPU frequency. According to Computerbase, 6800's OC frequency is 2460 MHz and 6800 XT's stock frequency is ~2313 MHz. From 2313 MHz to 2460 MHz is a mere 6% uplift.

6800:
4 = Prims
96 = ROPs

6800 XT:
4 = Prims
128 = ROPs

On 6800 XT, running 4 prims at 2313 MHz gets you 9.25 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 128 ROPs at 2313 MHz = 296 Gpix/s of fillrate.
On 6800 non-XT, running 4 prims at 2460 MHz gets you 9.84 Gtri/s of triangle output (rasterization) and 96 ROPs at 2460 MHz = 236 Gpix/s of fillrate.

Notice the triangle output is just a 6% increase for 6800 non-XT, but fillrate is still much higher on 6800 XT by 25% due to 33% more ROPs. On PS5 GPU both triangle output and fillrate get a 22% uplift over XSX. That's not the case with these 6000 series cards. Hence the 6800 non-XT is still behind 6800 XT in that screenshot you posted despite an OC.

There's more to a GPU than just CUs and SMs.

Of all the goodness inside GPUs, ROPs (Raster Operation Pipeline) is the least "heavy".
It kicks in only after all the heavy artillery, Compute Units (CUs) and texture mapping units (TMUs, yeah, XSeX has more of those too) are done and you need to dish out final pixels.

Largely, it should be adequate to actual resolution and FPS.

GPU needs to be ROP bottlnecked, for adding ROPs/making them faster to help.
On top of it, it could only apply at high FPS figures.

Essentially, this is an accusation of not only Microsoft, but also AMD not knowing how their GPUs work.

I blame Cherny for that, he caused all the meltdowns with 36CU decision.


xacto
PS3, PS Vita, PS4 and likely future PS5 owner here, keep your empathy for butthurt fanboi.

 

[xacto]

I thought meltdowns in PS5 thread when 36CUs were revealed were bad, but it seems to be a never ending story.

It is fucking 1.44 times more CUs, it is OVERCLOCKED 2060 VS 2080 SUPER kind of gap, there is no "fixing" it, get the fuck over it.

Sony is "faster" in a game with locked fps. It is EMBARRASSING TO TALK ABOUT PERFORMANCE IN A GAME WITH LOCKED FPS.
And then "for some reason" only PS5 needs checkboard rendering in Rocket League, but PS5 leads 4:0 I was told.

Jesus Freaking Christ...



Oh, is it?
Let me bring news to you: 2080Ti is the biggest Turing and it works at lower clock than smaller siblings.

Stop bolding words, and cursing, it's making you look desperate. Hyperventilating on a forum... come on, mate, don't be ridiculous.

 

[xacto]

Of all the goodness inside GPUs, ROPs (Raster Operation Pipeline) is the least "heavy".
It kicks in only after all the heavy artillery, Compute Units (CUs) and texture mapping units (TMUs, yeah, XSeX has more of those too) are done and you need to dish out final pixels.

Largely, it should be adequate to actual resolution and FPS.

GPU needs to be ROP bottlnecked, for adding ROPs/making them faster to help.
On top of it, it could only apply at high FPS figures.

Essentially, this is an accusation of not only Microsoft, but also AMD not knowing how their GPUs work.

I blame Cherny for that, he caused all the meltdowns with 36CU decision.


xacto
PS3, PS Vita, PS4 and likely future PS5 owner here, keep your empathy for butthurt fanboi.

I don't care what you use, you're pathetic.

 

[llien]

Stop bolding words

Next time I'll need a license to use bold words, I know whom to contact.

 

[PaintTinJr]

DF and most unbiased professionals say the XSX is more powerful. Based on everything they know (CPU, GPU, RAM, SSD, Clock speeds, CU counts, etc...).. barring any unknown secret sauce that noone knows about I tend to take their word over the average forum fanboy... Yes PS5 and XSX are neck and neck for the past few launch games... but we've got an entire generation to go...

NO need to keep arguing. People are going to continue to be disingenuous and only believe what they want to.

They are picking a technical argument with Cerny and Sweeney. The people you are listening to are only just beyond the ability to wire-up those two industry legends' consoles - in a comparison of technical know how in the industry. Richard was stupid enough to imply that what Cerny said - in his theoretical comparison of TF by CU count vs clock speed - about higher clocks lifting all boats wasn't true.

How messed up is the industry when a non-programmer like Richard can imply Cerny lied - with his RDNA1 card comparison follow up video - and still have a platform to promote a narrative?

It is nuts to think he was getting a masterclass from such an industry legend that would actually help him do his DF gig in a more accurate way, and instead he insults him post-interview with his own false narrative.