Support NeoGAF

[farmerboy]

This is easily one of the worst methods of dodging criticism and the underpinnings of a failed counterpoint. I don't have to be a system architect to understand voltage and wattage draws, frequencies, thermals and the like and how they all relate.

More CU's at lower frequencies making up the same compute ceiling would draw less power and produce less heat.

Jesus H Christ on the fucking cross! You're basically saying you are qualified and equipped to critically examine the output of Sony's R&D dept and Mark Cerny himself. You're arguing with them mate, not me.



By the way, XboxX is a perfectly legimate design. I just think Sony's will be too.

 

[cireza]

The downgrade in resolution and framerate will be automatic

 

[DynamiteCop!]

Jesus H Christ on the fucking cross! You're basically saying you are qualified and equipped to critically examine the output of Sony's R&D dept and Mark Cerny himself. You're arguing with them mate, not me.



By the way, XboxX is a perfectly legimate design. I just think Sony's will be too.

No, I'm arguing with you and the horribly flawed assertion that someone has to be a system architect to understand the implications of CU prioritization over increased frequencies, frequencies which will require more voltage for stability, which will produce more heat and will increase wattage draw.

What you're saying is ridiculous.

 

[makaveli60]

Basically it would perform better or worse depending on your environment, i.e. during the summer or winter?

Based on what I understood so far, yes. But I don't want to believe that, that would be basically destroying the purpose of the console. I'm waiting for someone to convince me that this is not the case.

 

[GymWolf]

I don't think talking about it is helping, just show it already.

Ideally Sony would just use 40 CU's @ ~2150Mhz sustained clocks for similar power consumption but provide 11 Tflops, use a larger GPU die in a revision for better binning, just take the L.

Having said that, I plan on buying a PS5 even if they change nothing.

yeah this look like a simpler and more elegant solution tbh.

sony fanboy: can you imagine ND and santa monica with 10+tf after the games they created with a miserable 1.8 machine? 5 times the power yo!

me: yeah but can you imagine ND and santa monica with 12+tf under their asses? 6 times the power bromigo

sony fanboy: BZZZZ CAN'T COMPUTE THIS INFORMATION-BZZZZZ- WE CARE ABOUT GAMES- BZZZZZZ

me:

 

[farmerboy]

No, I'm arguing with you and the horribly flawed assertion that someone has to be a system architect to understand the implications of CU prioritization over increased frequencies, frequencies which will require more voltage for stability, which will produce more heat and will increase wattage draw.

What you're saying is ridiculous.

There are many, many considerations in the development of a new console. All these things need to be balanced against the others. I have faith Cerny and Sony has achieved this. You do not. No problem, we'll see soon enough anyway. The only thing I'll agree is that when considering which console has the "highest" chance of not achieving its goals, it's probably Sony - because they are going an unconventional route.

 

[Handy Fake]

Ah well. Another potentially fascinating tech thread ruined by posters who refuse to try and understand what's being said.

Moving on.

 

[M1chl]

Yeah that's fine, it's obviously automatic, but you have to take your power budget to an account, what instruction you should call and what you shouldn't call in order to maintain performance. It's simply less than ideal solution in my opinion.

 

[makaveli60]

Ah well. Another potentially fascinating tech thread ruined by posters who refuse to try and understand what's being said.

Moving on.

Check my previous post and help me understand. I don't refuse, I want to and I want the best possible PS5 but Sony makes it difficult to do so.

 

[GymWolf]

Funny how you guys have no trouble understanding XBOXs split ram setup, but variable clocks are convoluted damage control. Wow.

sex ram is more simpler to understand tho, 10 gb of super fast ram for games, it they are not enough there is another 3,5 of slower ram available, you can literally explain this stuff with one sentence without many doubts about it, 10 gb of superfast ram with an additional 3,5 of slower ram, finish.

and we already know the exact specs of the slower ram without any room for secret sauce or technobabble.

 

[replicant-]

I really don’t understand the benefit of having variable clockspeed over locked In a console.

Looking at this from the POV from a console and pc gamer. I know my 3800x and 2070 Super have variable OC clocks, but feel the benefits are there for PC.

 

[GymWolf]

There's a list of games on PS4 that look better than those. Gears 5 is a good game and it looks good

TLOU Part 2
Ghost of Tsushima
Uncharted 4
The Order 1886
Detroit
Death Stranding

All look better

horizon looks better too for being an open world game.

 

[JMZ555]

I have never based my console purchases on Power. Do i wish PS5 was 20 TF? Of course but it comes down to the games..

Do your prefer Xbox 1st party games/ Studios? Get a XSEX or a Gaming PC

Do you prefer Sony 1st party games/ studios? Get a PS5

For me it will be Gaming PC and PS5.

We all know what games we love and what console will match our wants. No amount of TFLOPS going to change that....

 

[DynamiteCop!]

I have never based my console purchases on Power. Do i wish PS5 was 20 TF? Of course but it comes down to the games..

Do your prefer Xbox 1st party games/ Studios? Get a XSEX or a Gaming PC

Do you prefer Sony 1st party games/ studios? Get a PS5

For me it will be Gaming PC and PS5.

We all know what games we love and what console will match our wants. No amount of TFLOPS going to change that....

Yeah but like 98%+ of game releases are third party, so it's much more important than these few exclusive games a year. Sure they're a consideration but they're not what fill out the gaming year, they fill out a few week period.

 

[JMZ555]

Yes so 1st part games are likely to be the deciding factor.... Why would i choose a console with more power and give up on playing the games/studios i love?

 

[GymWolf]

Yeah but like 98%+ of game releases are third party, so it's much more important than these few exclusive games a year. Sure they're a consideration but they're not what fill out the gaming year, they fill out a few week period.

i mean, if you care about third party games and you have a pc, sex is basically useless (especially if you already are a wanker)
pc+ps5 and maybe a switch to play old games at even older resolutions in the toilette\tram is the best way to go tbh.

 

[ruvikx]

i mean, if you care about third party games and you have a pc, sex is basically useless.
pc+ps5 and maybe a switch to play old games at even older resolutions in the toilette\tram is the best way to go tbh.

Price is something to consider, i.e. a PC with specs equivalent with a Series X will be a hell of a lot more expensive (certainly in Europe). That's why consoles still have real economic value, even when the games are multiplatform & on pc as well.

 

[geordiemp]

Cerny literally said that games that draw too much power will see less performance, and games will now have to optimized around a power threshold

Did you actually read what you just posted ?

Mark Cerny sees a time where developers will begin to optimise their game engines in a different way - to achieve optimal performance for the given power level. "Power plays a role when optimising. If you optimise and keep the power the same you see all of the benefit of the optimisation. If you optimise and increase the power then you're giving a bit of the performance back.

Is reading hard ?

 

[geordiemp]

This just goes to show that a fixed system is universally better. All that has happened with the PS5 is the introduction of convolution for the developers because Sony is too proud to just take the compute L and lower clocks to a level of fixed stability.

Who cares if it lands at say 3.5Ghz on the CPU and 9.X teraflops on the GPU, it will still be a fine system, and it will be an easier development environment. This whole variable clocks nonsense is just damage control, that's all it is.

Fixed is better as its easier for the challenged amd ignorant to understand that is evidently clear.

It is not necessarily better for efficiency.

Its always the posters who dont understand anything that make these posts.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

Fixed is better as its easier for the challenged amd ignorant to understand that is evidently clear.

It is not necessarily better for efficiency.

Its always the posters who dont understand anything that make these posts.

While I appreciate the cute effort involved here trying to make yourself appear more knowledgeable than me, sadly it was in vain. You're markedly avoiding in what way it's efficient, or if that efficiency actually matters. Don't bother because I'll handle it for you. While the Xbox Series X will undoubtedly process more useless cycles when not stressed, that matters not to the end user or the performative outcome. The system itself will arguably be more power efficient relative to the hardware so wasted processing cycles doesn't really mean anything. We won't see the results, we won't hear the results, the heat output won't reflect the results.

Efficiency isn't intrinsically good because on one hand something can be inefficient where it matters, and efficient where it doesn't and vice versa. It's a frail and weak minded argument if you can't pin the efficiency or inefficiencies into relative context, or even break down how they apply.

I'm not even sure why people like you think that what you've just said passes as any kind of substantive position. It almosts literally translates to "Nuh uh, you're wrong but I'm not going to articulate why, because reality is I don't actually know".

Miss me with this bullshit, and actually come prepared to talk next time.

 

[RaySoft]

Richard from Digital Foundry stated that devs he talked to were already maximising the GPU performance while sacrificing CPU performance. I'm too lazy to find the exact place where he said it, but the point is that it isn't as 'automatic' as you think.

It is automatic, just not on the devkit. This has been discussed to death already. On the devkits they use fixed profiles, than will be taken care of by smartshift when ran on retail units. I guess the next devkit iteration will support smartshift too. Going from fixed to dynamic will only, if anything, increase performance slightly.

 

[geordiemp]

While I appreciate the cute effort involved here trying to make yourself appear more knowledgeable than me, sadly it was in vain.

Thats not hard is it really.

Look at the quality and technical insight of your posts.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

Thats not hard is it really.

Whats your technical point exactly ?

If you're going to quote me do it in its entirety, also address what's being said and don't cherry pick, furthermore if you don't I'll just blink you out of existence.

You're trying my patience.

 

[GymWolf]

Price is something to consider, i.e. a PC with specs equivalent with a Series X will be a hell of a lot more expensive (certainly in Europe). That's why consoles still have real economic value, even when the games are multiplatform & on pc as well.

i was talking about people who have no problem sustaining the pc upgrade cost and and pc gaming quirks.
an ideal scenario if you will.

 

[geordiemp]

If you're going to quote me do it in its entirety, also address what's being said and don't cherry pick, furthermore if you don't I'll just blink you out of existence.

You're trying my patience.

At least have a technical arguement against what Cerny said....You just coming across like a trolling kid, not a bright one at that.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

At least have a technical rarguement against what Cerny said....You just coming across like a kid, not a bright one at that.

I'm talking to you and addressing what you said, quit vacillating.

 

[geordiemp]

I'm talking to you and addressing what you said, quit vacillating.

Ok lets look at what you said

1) This just goes to show that a fixed system is universally better.

2) All that has happened with the PS5 is the introduction of convolution for the developers because

3) Sony is too proud to just take the compute L and lower clocks to a level of fixed stability.

4) Who cares if it lands at say 3.5Ghz on the CPU and 9.X teraflops on the GPU, it will still be a fine system, and it will be an easier development environment. This whole variable clocks nonsense is just damage control, that's all it is.

1. Made up, you dont know that - facts ?

2. Made up in your mind - show evidence of what is convoluted other than you cannot understand or do not want to ?

3. Too proud- thats emotional drivel of timdog level hahahaha

4. Giving a 9.xx TF complement - again pathetic, you dont know this

5. Variable clock nonsense - Its not worth my time, your cannot understand fair enough. Neither would my mum.

Shall I go on ? Yes it feels like taliking to a child I am sorry for that as you have no idea what your driveling


You dont even put questions to your statements hence i assume you are young and just trolling . If you are happy for your XSX then fine we are all happy for you and phil..

But what does trying to convince others Ps5 is weak with poor technical statements make you look like ?

 

[Caio]

PlayStation 5 Reportedly Has Overheating Issues | Sony Worried About PS5 Design


Can this be true ?

 

[Clear]

While I appreciate the cute effort involved here trying to make yourself appear more knowledgeable than me, sadly it was in vain. You're markedly avoiding in what way it's efficient, or if that efficiency actually matters. Don't bother because I'll handle it for you. While the Xbox Series X will undoubtedly process more useless cycles when not stressed, that matters not to the end user or the performative outcome. The system itself will arguably be more power efficient relative to the hardware so wasted processing cycles doesn't really mean anything. We won't see the results, we won't hear the results, the heat output won't reflect the results.

This paragraph is literally incoherent and technically nonsensical.

All that needs to be said is that the APU in the series X, specifically the GPU side, has a higher potential throughput under maximal load than the one in the PS5. That's all that can be said based on the known fact.

This has nothing to do with any sort of efficiency, because efficiency is an entirely different metric independent of maximal capacity. I mean this both in terms of power efficiency, and sustained occupancy of processing elements.

 

[Krisprolls]

PlayStation 5 Reportedly Has Overheating Issues | Sony Worried About PS5 Design


Can this be true ?

It has been debunked long ago. It's more MS FUD from Windows Central fanboys. MS are certainly masters at using FUD against competitors.

Too bad they're not as good at making good 1st party games, they'd probably have a better marketshare by now.

 

[geordiemp]

PlayStation 5 Reportedly Has Overheating Issues | Sony Worried About PS5 Design


Can this be true ?

Its called Fanboy FUD. Posted many times by the Mindless.

 

[Krisprolls]

This is easily one of the worst methods of dodging criticism and the underpinnings of a failed counterpoint. I don't have to be a system architect to understand voltage and wattage draws, frequencies, thermals and the like and how they all relate.

More CU's at lower frequencies making up the same compute ceiling would draw less power and produce less heat.

Yes, yes you need to know something about what you're talking about. Science doesn't come from thin air.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

Ok lets loom at what you said



1. Made up, you dont know that - facts ?

2. Made up in your mind - show evidence of what is convoluted

3. Too proud- thats emotional drivel of timdog level hahahaha

4. Giving a 9.xx YF complement - again pathetic

Shall I go on ?

A fixed system at peak compute is universally better, that's inarguable because a fixed compute ceiling can be coded around without unknown variables and pushed to capacity. There's no benefit to variance. Variance introduces convolution and exception in coding, it changes tolerances. If you know the system boosts but can fall below a certain threshold you are forced to code around the lower limit as the baseline, and introduce exceptions in code in the event it can push higher. That's convoluted design and developing around a limitation.

The only way a system of the PlayStation 5's nature would be introduced in its present capacity is because Sony is taking a lower spec'd machine and pushing it in ways never intended. That's why it has to offset between the GPU and CPU, not because of some intelligent design. If it was intelligent design it would never have to throttle and shift resources, they would have merely given it more CU's and a fixed frequency which would nullify this entire power struggle mess.

This paragraph is literally incoherent and technically nonsensical.

All that needs to be said is that the APU in the series X, specifically the GPU side, has a higher potential throughput under maximal load than the one in the PS5. That's all that can be said based on the known fact.

This has nothing to do with any sort of efficiency, because efficiency is an entirely different metric independent of maximal capacity. I mean this both in terms of power efficiency, and sustained occupancy of processing elements.

Well it's not because when the GPU is not being stressed to its maximum potential it's still operating at 1,825Mhz, that is inefficient but it doesn't matter because it's invisible to the user experience. Just because you say something is incoherent doesn't make it so, and efficiency isn't a unilateral aspect of a systems operation. Efficiency needs to be defined on a case by case basis for multiple aspects of function. You can't just say "X system is more efficient than Y system", you have to break down in which ways it is.

 

[MadchesterManc]

I never expected people to know more about a system they've never seen than the architect of the system himself. NeoGaf is such an amazing place.

Wait, no. The discussion has just devolved into one of those 'Cerny is a fool and variable clocks sux cuz Series X locked clocks' threads as usual.

 

[Tomeru]

This just goes to show that a fixed system is universally better. All that has happened with the PS5 is the introduction of convolution for the developers because Sony is too proud to just take the compute L and lower clocks to a level of fixed stability.

Who cares if it lands at say 3.5Ghz on the CPU and 9.X teraflops on the GPU, it will still be a fine system, and it will be an easier development environment. This whole variable clocks nonsense is just damage control, that's all it is.

Its probably something to do with carbon prints as well. Maybe sony wants their console to be as power efficient as can be, but still want as much power they can get from the bar they set for it.

 

[magnumpy]

this is terrible I've grown weary of your nonsense mr. cerny! this is just like playstation3 optimization none will be spared!! D:

 

[Clear]

Well it's not because when the GPU is not being stressed to its maximum potential it's still operating at 1,825Mhz, that is inefficient but it doesn't matter because it's invisible to the user experience. Just because you say something is incoherent doesn't make it so, and efficiency isn't a unilateral aspect of a systems operation. Efficiency needs to be defined on a case by case basis for multiple aspects of function. You can't just say "X system is more efficient than Y system", you have to break down in which ways it is.

What?

Efficiency starts with raw material cost. Why spend more on a larger die to support more CU's when you can achieve the same average throughput/performance with a smaller chip?

The real discussion here is the trade-offs between slower but wider, versus narrower but faster in terms of power usage, thermals, yields, chips-per-wafer, etc. Its a bunch of complicated equations that nobody outside of the inner circle designing, building, and testing these chips will have a solid idea about. Then comes the overall system architecture which will be crucial in deciding development efficiencies and performance parameters because its all theoretical untils omebody actually manages to apply the hardware resources optimally.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

I never expected people to know more about a system they've never seen than the architect of the system himself. NeoGaf is such an amazing place.

Wait, no. The discussion has just devolved into one of those 'Cerny is a fool and variable clocks sux cuz Series X locked clocks' threads as usual.

Like I told the others, this is just weak and a total lack of a real argument. An appeal to authority doesn't make you able to hold a debate, or even understand why a debate is happening.

"But Mark Cerny said!" Yeah? And? Can you actually understand what he said? Because if you could it would seem pretty clear that a cohesive argument from you would follow, but nope, what follows is a non sequitur and the inability to bring a personal view to light.

It has nothing to do with knowing more about this system in particular, it's just an x86 PC for christ sakes.

 

[Genx3]

Any time any negative news comes out about PS5 the warriors are right back out to start accusing sites with good reputations of spreading FUD, According to them 36 CU PS5 was FUD, 2Ghz clocks running hot was FUD.

Unfortunately its not fud. Its news.

PS5 is apparently having issues staying cool just like everyone thought it would once they heard about the 2.2 Ghz clocks.

I'm sure Sony will eventually figure out a way to cool this thing. Its not as if Sony doesn't have smart engineers working for them.

People just need to calm down. Everything is not an attack on Sony.

 

[MayauMiao]

PlayStation 5 Reportedly Has Overheating Issues | Sony Worried About PS5 Design


Can this be true ?

His source is also Jeff Rickel. Instant fail.

 

[kittoo]

Basically it would perform better or worse depending on your environment, i.e. during the summer or winter?

No. Thats exactly opposite of what i wrote.
It will perform same since power usage is fixed, and the power usage is fixed in such a way that at any reasonable ambient temperature the system will not overheat (and maybe thats why the rumors that Sony is working really hard on the thermals of PS5).
The problem is that whatever power limits Sony is talking about, it cant sustain both CPU and GPU at their max frequencies (which makes sense because 2.23GHz for GPU is insanely high. It makes sense to me personally that Sony did increase the GPU clock after they realized that MS had a very powerful system). If the power could sustain both simultaneously, Sony wouldve simply said tha, like MS, and there never would've been all this confusion.
So, since the system will keep throttling CPU or GPU, depending upon what the current scene requires more of, to keep under the power usage requirements- it represents a complexity for developers which to me seems a big problem. Obviously, we will need to see more details to really see what the case is.

 

[geordiemp]

A fixed system at peak compute is universally better, that's inarguable because a fixed compute ceiling can be coded around without unknown variables and pushed to capacity. There's no benefit to variance. Variance introduces convolution and exception in coding, it changes tolerances. If you know the system boosts but can fall below a certain threshold you are forced to code around the lower limit as the baseline, and introduce exceptions in code in the event it can push higher. That's convoluted design and developing around a limitation.

The only way a system of the PlayStation 5's nature would be introduced in its present capacity is because Sony is taking a lower spec'd machine and pushing it in ways never intended. That's why it has to offset between the GPU and CPU, not because of some intelligent design. If it was intelligent design it would never have to throttle and shift resources, they would have merely given it more CU's and a fixed frequency which would nullify this entire power struggle mess.

Well it's not because when the GPU is not being stressed to its maximum potential it's still operating at 1,825Mhz, that is inefficient but it doesn't matter because it's invisible to the user experience. Just because you say something is incoherent doesn't make it so, and efficiency isn't a unilateral aspect of a systems operation. Efficiency needs to be defined on a case by case basis for multiple aspects of function. You can't just say "X system is more efficient than Y system", you have to break down in which ways it is.

You do realise now that all new devices work on variable clocks except MS consoles ? Sony now with Ps5, even Nintendo moves clocks, PCs, apple....shall I go on ? So MS all alone in keeping fixed clocks is better because you say so.../s

All we know is the paper TF number of XSX is higher, and its bandwidth is higher for the first 10 GB, XSX will loose the advantage per TF for larger games as its a shared bus with slower access to the last 6GB.

We dont know the variablility of the PS5 clocks other than Cerny stating 2 % gave 10 % less power. Thats it. Everything else you spewed is just tales and FUD nonsense for now.

We dont know the max clock of RDNA2 where it stops giving performance benefits....AMD inferred RDNA2 some critical layers of both consoles employing EUV, likely on Fins and gates allowing the AMD stated 50 % per / watt improvement. Might have improved some of the semiconductor tech in the gates as well..

Cerny did say that there was no benefit above 2.23 for RDNA2 if you bother to read the articles is allw e have to go on..... Oh and you and Timdog and widows central fanboys of course.

We dont know the effects of VRS. cache scrubbers or indeed other thinsg that may effect efficiency.

You dont know either, that DEFINATELY is for sure.

Both consoles seem bandwidth constrained if pushing 4K and high detail compared to equivalant TF PC parts, we dont know how well both will perform....

 

[Genx3]

What?

Efficiency starts with raw material cost. Why spend more on a larger die to support more CU's when you can achieve the same average throughput/performance with a smaller chip?

The real discussion here is the trade-offs between slower but wider, versus narrower but faster in terms of power usage, thermals, yields, chips-per-wafer, etc. Its a bunch of complicated equations that nobody outside of the inner circle designing, building, and testing these chips will have a solid idea about. Then comes the overall system architecture which will be crucial in deciding development efficiencies and performance parameters because its all theoretical untils omebody actually manages to apply the hardware resources optimally.

The 1st answer is because 2.2 Ghz is way passed the sweet spot of 1.9Ghz. for this architecture. Meaning you're creating a lot more heat but only making minimal gains in performance.
The 2nd answer is because as DF already proved more CU's is more performant than less CU's even if the TF's are equal.

 

[BluRayHiDef]

A fixed system at peak compute is universally better, that's inarguable because a fixed compute ceiling can be coded around without unknown variables and pushed to capacity. There's no benefit to variance. Variance introduces convolution and exception in coding, it changes tolerances. If you know the system boosts but can fall below a certain threshold you are forced to code around the lower limit as the baseline, and introduce exceptions in code in the event it can push higher. That's convoluted design and developing around a limitation.

The only way a system of the PlayStation 5's nature would be introduced in its present capacity is because Sony is taking a lower spec'd machine and pushing it in ways never intended. That's why it has to offset between the GPU and CPU, not because of some intelligent design. If it was intelligent design it would never have to throttle and shift resources, they would have merely given it more CU's and a fixed frequency which would nullify this entire power struggle mess.

Well it's not because when the GPU is not being stressed to its maximum potential it's still operating at 1,825Mhz, that is inefficient but it doesn't matter because it's invisible to the user experience. Just because you say something is incoherent doesn't make it so, and efficiency isn't a unilateral aspect of a systems operation. Efficiency needs to be defined on a case by case basis for multiple aspects of function. You can't just say "X system is more efficient than Y system", you have to break down in which ways it is.

I don't know why Clear said that your post was incoherent; it was coherent and quite understandable in my opinion.

 

[MadchesterManc]

Like I told the others, this is just weak and a total lack of a real argument. An appeal to authority doesn't make you able to hold a debate, or even understand why a debate is happening.

"But Mark Cerny said!" Yeah? And? Can you actually understand what he said? Because if you could it would seem pretty clear that a cohesive argument from you would follow, but nope, what follows is a non sequitur and the inability to bring a personal view to light.

It has nothing to do with knowing more about this system in particular, it's just an x86 PC for christ sakes.

Wow. You've quoted me to pick an argument and managed to write an articulated wall of text that says absolutely nothing. All power to you if this is the height of your day

 

[DynamiteCop!]

Wow. You've quoted me to pick an argument and managed to write an articulated wall of text that says absolutely nothing. All power to you if this is the height of your day

You're so insightful that you completely glossed over the fact that I already addressed everything. I was merely drawing you into the discussion because like the others I belayed the same sentiments to earlier you're not adding anything because you don't know anything. You're merely running to appeal to authority fallacies in place of an actual argument to dismiss criticisms you can't dismiss yourself.

Weak.

 

[geordiemp]

You're so insightful that you completely glossed over the fact that I already addressed everything. I was merely drawing you into the discussion because like the others I belayed the same sentiments to earlier you're not adding anything because you don't know anything. You're merely running to appeal to authority fallacies in place of an actual argument to dismiss criticisms you can't dismiss yourself.

Weak.

Are you practicing debating for politcs with no technical understanding what so ever, as that is what your posts seem to suggest

 

[alabtrosMyster]

This is one of these things that has to be proven in practice.

 

[thelastword]

Here come the xbox fans on here trying to make it seem like an issue. you make an effort to make a console look bad.
Tryung to act like sony isnt showing anything.

To make it clear for xbox fans.
Playstation doesnt need to rush and reveal there plans just because xbox done it. They have a set plan and goal and MS isnt flose to there league so dont get a hissy fit and make it seem like an issue Playstationhadnt been fully revealed.
Stop acting like they need to rush and show or xbox wins lmao.

Guys your console sold half of playstation and is outsold by switch.

Xbox one is closer Wii U sales then PS4 sales...
( this is for reality check for the xbox fans its like economy cola saying coka cola needs to rush there ads or economy cola wins lol)

Check out the likes compared to PS5 logo reveal and your whole xbox reveal....

Nos Stay home and play ori and pretend your console is gonna win a console war it has never won. Just because you want to make The doesnt mean it will.
Its not gonn be in a worse postion than the PS3 no matter how bad you want to make it look and the Xbox look good.


Looks like I have to keep posting this, so xbox fans get it. Read it with me.

Xbox will never win the console war.

Xbox never has won any console war.

Xbox only came close but lost to ps3 because of: (read it with me xbox fans, it helps u understand)


Xbox will never be as successful as they once were with xbox 360. The only reason xbox 360 had a 4 year success over PS3 was because the xbox 360:

1. Released a a whole year ahead of PS3

2. Cheaper than the PS3

3. Easier to develop for than PS3

4. The boom of online gaming, online store, indies, DLC which playstation didnt have any at the time.

5. Having loads of Playstation associated games for the first time, like Devil May Cry, Resident Evil 5, Tekken, Final Fantasy, Street fighter IV.

6. Having the better performance for most 3rd party games

7. Playstation launching horribly and all the bad press it got those days.
2010 onwards Playstation made a comeback and hasnt look lost since. Xbox doesnt have those advantages apart from having maybe better performance for 3rd party games.

Great post, but don't forget, 360 had a 54% defect rate, people keep forgetting that. Had it not been for those high defect rates, 360 would have sold the same 40 million consoles XBONEX has. There is really not an 80 million base for XBOX outside of rebuying their consoles at such an alarming rate. Lots of Xbox fans came into this gen thinking XBONES would have sold 80 million easily, but never factored in rrod.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

To me it looks a little like PS3 era but much more calculated and less risky. Primarily cause its easier to develop for than even PS4 (by Cerny's time to triangle)

Wouldn't it be faster because deva already know the tools for the PS4 , and they are probably mostly the same.