• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

Crytek Engineer praising PS5 and Chris "Series X PS5 difference is staggering" Grannell may be both complete utter frauds

kourooshkabir

Gold Member
Jan 13, 2020
309
3,203
610
Give me a break.

Crytek Guy said a weaker GPU is better than a stronger GPU, all his comments were opinions, not facts, so of course he could be wrong.

In fairness, he could be right, we’ll see, but holding his words as golden legitimacy while the other guy’s comments are immediately discarded is, AT BEST, disingenuous.

It needs to work both ways.
Crytek engineer retracts claim that PS5 is easier to develop for than Xbox Series X

 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: ANIMAL1975

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
Oh i see. So developers will make games for lockheart and the only difference between game from lockheart and SEX will be that SEX games run at higher resolution and framerate.

Good. We have an agreement.
No we don't have an agreement, because you're putting out the absurd implication that they would bode a different result. We already know there is a Series X development kit, we've seen it, the Series X is the base hardware.

You're trying to infer something would be held back, that's simply not accurate.
 

Kumomeme

Member
Mar 20, 2017
1,781
1,914
495
Malaysia
There are gonna be tons and tons of clickbait quotes, interviews, tweet headlines, etc, from anyone who has been in the same area code as a devkit in the coming months. a lot of stuff is gonna get posted without properly vetting the sources.

If a guy who sweeps the floors at Rockstar tweets one console is better than the other it will be a 30 page thread within hours
and behind these scene

 

Dontero

Banned
Apr 19, 2018
3,051
3,369
620
No we don't have an agreement, because you're putting out the absurd implication that they would bode a different result. We already know there is a Series X development kit, we've seen it, the Series X is the base hardware.

You're trying to infer something would be held back, that's simply not accurate.

If series X is base hardware then what is lockheart if it exists ?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: scydrex

ethomaz

is mad because DF didn't do a video on a video of a video of a video on PS5
Mar 19, 2013
38,805
37,388
1,310
38
Brazil
Crytek engineer retracts claim that PS5 is easier to develop for than Xbox Series X

That is not what happened.

Some days after his interview got exposed he asked the site owner to remove it because he can’t confirm the content of the interview due personal reasons.

It is was obvious CryTek calling him out due some hidden partner that didn’t like the interview.

He choose his Job over a piece of text.

BTW PS5 being easier to work was an example he gives due several developers claiming it is really easier to work.

 
Last edited:

Thirty7ven

Member
Apr 13, 2020
3,327
13,442
560
Everything he says regarding the consoles comes from the input he gets from devs.

According to you and other like minded folk:

XSX vs PS5 - Better resolution + better effects + better framerate + better ray tracing "cuz more CUs"
XSX vs XSS - It will be the exact same except one is 1080p and the other is 4K

I at least hope some of you get paid for this.
 
Aug 28, 2019
3,878
8,115
630
www.instagram.com
Crytek engineer retracts claim that PS5 is easier to develop for than Xbox Series X


I think what trips people up sometimes is they are conflating "easier" with "more powerful"; when I first read the Ali guy's stuff that's what I thought they were trying to say or at least, that's how I interpreted it, but given what we know about both systems and can extrapolate will be further features and capabilities in both of them, I honestly see them as two different things.

I.e a system doesn't need to be "more powerful" in order to be easier to develop for. The Dreamcast was relatively easier to develop on than the PS2, but outside of some select abilities (lack of deferred rendering, VRAM amount, native output resolution support etc.), it was certainly more powerful than Dreamcast. It's kind of similar with PS5 and XSX; there are some areas PS5 may have some advantages in, but for the main grunt of things and overall the XSX is the more powerful system.

However, some of PS5's advantages, namely "unified" memory pool (actually both systems have unified pools, there are no "split" pools going on in XSX but the bandwidths differ between the 1 GB + upper bound 1 GB partition of 2 GB chips (560 GB/s) and the lower-bound 1 GB partition of 2 GB chips (336 GB/s)), faster GPU clock and more powerful flash memory controller at the hardware level, are a good bit more "automated" for developers, generally to the point where they don't need to think about them too much. Not to say they don't have to think about them at all; if a game's particularly taxing on the GPU power budget due in part to the fillrate (which is influenced by the clock speed of the GPU, i.e it's not something a dev needs to explicitly tell the GPU to do through code), they may have to cut back some of the visual complexity of the scene (as one example). But compared to leveraging some of XSX's hardware headroom and hardware/software advantage potential, it could be easier to do that type of stuff on PS5 (requiring less dev "thinking").

Personally I think the XSX has more potential for "programming creativity" over PS5, particularly after the first couple of years of the systems being out. I don't mean that in terms of game design or such because both systems are capable enough to realize practically the same conceptual ideas in practice as the gen gets underway and as it progresses. However, I think there'll be more "room" regarding XSX for a bigger base of optional approaches to reach similar results, some of which can possibly prove more efficient on resources (both hardware and software) than would've been initially assumed, versus PS5 where going with certain fixed hardware functions somewhat limits what type of options can be explored in this reaard.

This is a really rough example, but think of the SEGA 32X and SEGA Saturn. Both systems could do 3D and Saturn was a lot more powerful at it comparatively, but since the Saturn used fixed polygonal hardware it could only draw polygons as quads. Conversely, the 32X could do both quads and triangles mainly due to that lack of fixed polygonal hardware, though it needed to use the CPUs to do such through software instead. Given how devs came to prefer triangles over quads, that ironically gave the 32X an advantage over the Saturn even if it came at a hardware cost.

I'm not suggesting the "programming creativity" between PS5 and XSX will be at that scale (you couldn't do a straight comparison anyway which is why I said it's a rough analogy); just suggesting sometimes easing up on dedicated fixed-function hardware and having flexible hardware headroom in one or several areas can invite certain approaches to programming and design challenges that can meet results comparable (and maybe at times even superior) to what the fixed-function hardware can provide.

Anyways, we've got a whole upcoming gen to see how all of this shakes out and that's got me kind of excited.

If series X is base hardware then what is lockheart if it exists ?

A scale-me-down. Something I'm not personally interested in, either, but it won't be holding back XSX from a technological or game design POV.

From a manufacturing, pricing and marketing POV, though,...well that's honestly still up in the air and the main reason I'd rather it wasn't a thing, at least not for a couple of years. We'll find out soon, though.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CatLady

Bolivar687

Banned
Jun 13, 2014
7,264
7,842
800
USA
I don't understand the OP's premise, Crytek guy never claimed to have a devkit and disclaimed multiple times he was only saying what was public info. He talked in general about why Xbox's numbers won't translate to a proportional image quality or performance difference at launch, and why Sony has been better with the tools they give to developers.

I can believe Grannell being a fraud, though, I can't quite put my finger on it, but something just didn't seem right about what he was saying.
 

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
According to you and other like minded folk:

XSX vs PS5 - Better resolution + better effects + better framerate + better ray tracing "cuz more CUs"
XSX vs XSS - It will be the exact same except one is 1080p and the other is 4K

I at least hope some of you get paid for this.
That would be accurate though because if the PlayStation 5 is the sole console it would be targeting roughly the equivalent operating parameters of the Series X or at least attempting to. This renders what you're saying as null. A Series S or Lockhart as it's been put would be targeting much lower operating parameters to field the rendering throughput and is not bound by its resolution keeping up with anything else, it doesn't have a competing product.
 

sonomamashine

Gold Member
Jun 29, 2019
3,232
5,988
720
Against the assault of laughter
No, somebody just did a background check, you would think people would not lie these days, especially on the internet when things can be checked so quickly....It will come to bite you hard, why do it?
Like anything else, you talk a fake hype online, it will hurt you tenfold when your lies are discovered......Just like that Dynamic Voltage Guy talking a storm about how the SSD will bottleneck the CPU and he would show us, still crickets on that btw......Yet his big reveal is some Ecco the Dolphin clone with sound bites from the MS-DOS days in the 90's.....If anything, these guys are doing more damage to MS than anything, because when the series X does not deliver the staggering performance or any game that looks better than SWWS, there will be a lot of spinning in the vein of "Multiplat devs are lazy, they are not using the full series of the X, Those Japanese devs again, Sony games only look this good because of all the money they spend on them, yet they will conveniently use 1 trillion dollars MS vs 68 Billion for Sony, when it suits them......
You are doing damage to yourself
weren't you the one who downplayed the SSD, said PS5 will have 14+TF, 32GB HBM3, 1TB SSD + 4TBHDD
 

Thirty7ven

Member
Apr 13, 2020
3,327
13,442
560
That would be accurate though because if the PlayStation 5 is the sole console it would be targeting roughly the equivalent operating parameters of the Series X or at least attempting to. This renders what you're saying as null. A Series S or Lockhart as it's been put would be targeting much lower operating parameters to field the rendering throughput and is not bound by its resolution keeping up with anything else, it doesn't have a competing product.

Sure if you want to be obtuse. But if you don’t want to be that guy, because apparently it’s your job or something, games will employ dynamic res and the only difference will be XSX will sustain higher res more times than the PS5.

Oh noes, what an apocalyptic outcome for the PS5! PS gamers will be playing down in gutter while Xbox gamers will be playing up there in the clouds where the air is clean.

The funniest part is that at the end of the day the Xbox is not a PlayStation, no matter how hard you try, and vice versa.

The people posting that kind of garbage(making a big deal out of 17.7%) won’t convince anyone with half a brain that they always go where multi platform games play best and that’s why they are stanning for one over the other, because I’m pretty sure they are the same people who bought a Xbox One and then went on forums telling everybody that they did so because MS exclusives were best, and the controller is asymmetrical, and bla bla bla
 
Last edited:

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
Sure if you want to be obtuse. But if you don’t want to be that guy, because apparently it’s your job or something, games will employ dynamic res and the only difference will be XSX will sustain higher res more times than the PS5.

Oh noes, what an apocalyptic outcome for the PS5! PS gamers will be playing down in gutter while Xbox gamers will be playing up there in the clouds where the air is clean.

The funniest part is that at the end of the day the Xbox is not a PlayStation, no matter how hard you try, and vice versa.

The people posting that kind of garbage(making a big deal out of 17.7%) won’t convince anyone with half a brain that they always go where multi platform games play best and that’s why they are stanning for one over the other, because I’m pretty sure they are the same people who bought a Xbox One and then went on forums telling everybody that they did so because MS exclusives were best, and the controller is asymmetrical, and bla bla bla
You guys constantly trying to diminish this gap is really getting boring. It's 18% at minimum to an unspecified percentage higher than that, plus an additional 44% in RT hardware which we're not entirely sure how frequency takes effect if at all, the RT cores are not bound to the shaders.

The Xbox is more powerful in every computational regard, if the PS5 is deploying dynamic resolution the Xbox can do that all the same and push more graphical flair and RT into the scene, so why even bother? I don't get the motivation to fight the tide here, it's a losing battle with a singular outcome.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,279
11,070
2,110
Hilarious


Sony warriors "Yea grannel is full of shit but crytek guy is right".

So much reaching because there was no 13.3 tf or like tlw had his "money" on 15 tf 32gb ram.

We wouldn't have needed all the bullshit threads if the Ps5 would have just at least been a .01 tf stronger.

You can discount them both as not having direct experience with the SDK, and you would be reasonable in doing so, or take them both at their words... one is still a developer/programmer working at a console developer and the other an ex-game designer that has not worked on console games himself for several years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deto

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,279
11,070
2,110
the RT cores are not bound to the shaders

The intersection and BHV acceleration HW, the RT cores, are part of the DCU (two CU’s paired together) and more specifically the texture units as per AMD patents. It stands to reason they scale with the count of CU’s (no data point to suggest otherwise that I can remember) and run at the same frequency as the CU’s with contains the vector ALU’s (the shaders) and the TMU’s.
 

SleepDoctor

Banned
Nov 11, 2019
2,355
4,625
515
You can discount them both as not having direct experience with the SDK, and you would be reasonable in doing so, or take them both at their words... one is still a developer/programmer working at a console developer and the other an ex-game designer that has not worked on console games himself for several years.


And neither have dev kits. Pretty simple. Both are supposedly speaking from hearsay. Pick the one who better fits your narrative and run with it.

Everyone wants they're 15 minutes of fame just like everyone is an engineer all of a sudden.
 

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
The intersection and BHV acceleration HW, the RT cores, are part of the DCU (two CU’s paired together) and more specifically the texture units as per AMD patents. It stands to reason they scale with the count of CU’s (no data point to suggest otherwise that I can remember) and run at the same frequency as the CU’s with contains the vector ALU’s (the shaders) and the TMU’s.
We'll have to wait and see on that, but as of right now that is presently unknown. All we know is that they are decoupled but run in parallel.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,279
11,070
2,110
We'll have to wait and see on that, but as of right now that is presently unknown. All we know is that they are decoupled but run in parallel.

Where do you take the 44% number from then if it is unknown? They are part of the CU and they sit in the TMU’s HW, per parent by AMD, we have more reasons to believe the scale linearly than not... would like to hear your reasoning on it though.
 

Thirty7ven

Member
Apr 13, 2020
3,327
13,442
560
You guys constantly trying to diminish this gap is really getting boring. It's 18% at minimum to an unspecified percentage higher than that, plus an additional 44% in RT hardware which we're not entirely sure how frequency takes effect if at all, the RT cores are not bound to the shaders.

The Xbox is more powerful in every computational regard, if the PS5 is deploying dynamic resolution the Xbox can do that all the same and push more graphical flair and RT into the scene, so why even bother? I don't get the motivation to fight the tide here, it's a losing battle with a singular outcome.

It’s 17.7% which we round up to 18% for simplicity sake. 44% more RT hardware? The intersection engines are on the CUs and they scale with clocks like everything else.

And why would devs bother with giving them parity in res performance and apply the gpu power elsewhere when they didn’t do it this entire gen?

Then tell me why devs won’t just lower the res and frame rate targets on XSX to push all those effects up until it’s no longer possible to do a simple down res to make the game work on Lockhart?

You(and others) are using two different weights and two different measures when talking about the PS5 and Lockhart because it suits your narrative. At least be consistent, but FUD let’s you sleep at night much better I suppose.

Have at it, it’s like arguing against a bot anyway.
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,279
11,070
2,110
And neither have dev kits. Pretty simple. Both are supposedly speaking from hearsay. Pick the one who better fits your narrative and run with it.

Everyone wants they're 15 minutes of fame just like everyone is an engineer all of a sudden.
Is one of them an actual programmer or not? Does one of them work at a studio working on next generation games? Yes/no?
 

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
Where do you take the 44% number from then if it is unknown? They are part of the CU and they sit in the TMU’s HW, per parent by AMD, we have more reasons to believe the scale linearly than not... would like to hear your reasoning on it though.
Well if there's 44% more CU's then there's going to be 44% more RT intersection engines, it's pretty cut and dry. In terms of the frequency and how that relates that is presently unknown because while the traditional shaders and RT cores are both bound to the CU they are decoupled from each other and operate in parallel without one interfering with the other.
 
Last edited:

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
It’s 17.7% which we round up to 18% for simplicity sake. 44% more RT hardware? The intersection engines are on the CUs and they scale with clocks like everything else.

And why would devs bother with giving them parity in res performance and apply the gpu power elsewhere when they didn’t do it this entire gen?

Then tell me why devs won’t just lower the res and frame rate targets on XSX to push all those effects up until it’s no longer possible to do a simple down res to make the game work on Lockhart?

You(and others) are using two different weights and two different measures when talking about the PS5 and Lockhart because it suits your narrative. At least be consistent, but FUD let’s you sleep at night much better I suppose.

Have at it, it’s like arguing against a bot anyway.
Let me stop you right there because no, it's 18.23% without being rounded whatsoever. How you're coming to 17.7% is beyond me.

In terms of the scaling the systems would be built to linearly replicate each other at a fixed resolution target. This wouldn't be an afterthought like the Pro or One X where the concept materialized post system release, both would be built to account for the other.

At this point any person who says FUD is getting blocked, I've never been more sick of a stupid buzzword to disregard valid argument in my life.

Well if there's 44% more CU's then there's going to be 44% more RT intersection engines, it's pretty cut and dry. In terms of the frequency and how that relates that is presently unknown because while the traditional shaders and RT cores are both bound to the CU they are decoupled from each other and operate in parallel without one interfering with the other.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DaMonsta

Thirty7ven

Member
Apr 13, 2020
3,327
13,442
560
Let me stop you right there because no, it's 18.23% without being rounded whatsoever. How you're coming to 17.7% is beyond me.

In terms of the scaling the systems would be built to linearly replicate each other at a fixed resolution target. This wouldn't be an afterthought like the Pro or One X where the concept materialized post system release, both would be built to account for the other.

At this point any person who says FUD is getting blocked, I've never been more sick of a stupid buzzword to disregard valid argument in my life.

Do the math again.

12100 is a 17.7% increase over 10280

Block me all you want, you’re an astroturfer at best. Love your non reasoning regarding the porting process though!

How come PS4 and Xbox one multiplatforms weren’t running at the same res? Oh because uh things
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: luca_29_bg

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,279
11,070
2,110
Well if there's 44% more CU's then there's going to be 44% more RT intersection engines, it's pretty cut and dry. In terms of the frequency and how that relates that is presently unknown because while the traditional shaders and RT cores are both bound to the CU they are decoupled from each other and operate in parallel without one interfering with the other.

So there is no extra RT advantage and we are at the same ~18% difference we have been discussing for a while now. Not sure what magic you think that running in parallel and not serially would do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: James Sawyer Ford

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
Do the math again.

12100 is a 17.7% increase over 10280

And you just gave me a great idea. Block me all you want, you’re an astroturfer at best.
10.28 to 12.155 is an 18.23% increase.



So there is no extra RT advantage and we are at the same ~18% difference we have been discussing for a while now. Not sure what magic you think that running in parallel and not serially would do.
The fact that the shaders are unbound from the RT engines gives credence to concept that they are also unbound in instruction.

I'm not saying they are, but it's a presently unknown possibility.
 
Last edited:

Thirty7ven

Member
Apr 13, 2020
3,327
13,442
560
10.28 to 12.155 is an 18.23% increase.


Had never seen it so specific, just went with the 12.1 that is reported everywhere. But incredible that you went the extra mile on the X1X number. My my my, such precision. I wonder why your thought process becomes so fluid when other things are being debated though.

Still waiting for you to explain why Xbox One and PS4 don’t render multiplat games at the same res. I bet it’s going to be interesting!
 

Dontero

Banned
Apr 19, 2018
3,051
3,369
620
It is kind of wrong though. Lockheart is rumored to have 4TF so PS5 has nearly 110-120% advantage power wise over next gen xbox when it comes to using graphic technologies.

The only thing that would change that would be lack of lockheart or PS5 "light"

Everything really depends on MS and if they will really release lockheart.
 
Last edited:

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
Had never seen it so specific, just went with the 12.1 that is reported everywhere. But incredible that you went the extra mile on the X1X number. My my my, such precision. I wonder why your thought process becomes so fluid when other things are being debated though.

Still waiting for you to explain why Xbox One and PS4 don’t render multiplat games at the same res. I bet it’s going to be interesting!
Of course you've seen it that specific because that's the specified number that's been floating around since day one. You trying to poke fun at me for being accurate while you are inaccurate is pretty weak.

Well obviously it comes down to GPU compute and a huge divergence in the memory interface. What's so interesting about that?
 
Last edited:

Thirty7ven

Member
Apr 13, 2020
3,327
13,442
560
Of course you've seen it that specific because that's the specified number that's been floating around since day one. You trying to poke fun at me for being accurate while you are inaccurate is pretty weak.

Well obvious it comes down to GPU compute and a huge divergence in the memory interface. What's so interesting about that?

The numbers that are floating around are 10.28 and 12.1. But what’s right is right, I will never oppose it.

So now your argument is that Xbox one rendered at lower res because it was less powerful than the PS4, but just back there you were saying that developers will render their games on PS5 and X1X at the same res, and use the extra power of the X1X on other things even though that’s not what they have been doing for two generations straight. So which is it? Devs will change how they do things because....?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: luca_29_bg

hyperbertha

Member
Nov 24, 2018
1,994
6,710
625
I don't see how not having access to devkits can discredit anyone. Its not like either console has hardware as of yet unknown to man. What matters is, obviously one of them is lying.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: DoctaThompson

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
The numbers that are floating around are 10.28 and 12.1. But what’s right is right, I will never oppose it.

So now your argument is that Xbox one rendered at lower res because it was less powerful than the PS4, but just back there you were saying that developers will render their games on PS5 and X1X at the same res, and use the extra power of the X1X on other things even though that’s not what they have been doing for two generations straight. So which is it? Devs will change how they do things because....?
No, the numbers that are floating around are 10.28 and 12.155, but I digress...

Care to highlight the post in specific so I can explain?
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,279
11,070
2,110
The fact that the shaders are unbound from the RT engines gives credence to concept that they are also unbound in instruction.

What do you mean unbound? Do you think it runs at a higher frequency and why would that even be likely? The shaders are unbound from the texture units and from the ROPS too... and?

Is this another scenario where missing data suggests a good scenario for XBX while missing data about PS5 is reasonable cause for concern only?
 

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
What do you mean unbound? Do you think it runs at a higher frequency and why would that even be likely? The shaders are unbound from the texture units and from the ROPS too... and?

Is this another scenario where missing data suggests a good scenario for XBX while missing data about PS5 is reasonable cause for concern only?
It's not a good nor bad scenario it's agnostic, whether you deem the possible effects of that as negative is for you to come to terms with, not me.
 
Aug 28, 2019
3,878
8,115
630
www.instagram.com
It’s 17.7% which we round up to 18% for simplicity sake. 44% more RT hardware? The intersection engines are on the CUs and they scale with clocks like everything else.

And why would devs bother with giving them parity in res performance and apply the gpu power elsewhere when they didn’t do it this entire gen?

Then tell me why devs won’t just lower the res and frame rate targets on XSX to push all those effects up until it’s no longer possible to do a simple down res to make the game work on Lockhart?

You(and others) are using two different weights and two different measures when talking about the PS5 and Lockhart because it suits your narrative. At least be consistent, but FUD let’s you sleep at night much better I suppose.

Have at it, it’s like arguing against a bot anyway.

No, it's 18.2% minimum, 20.6% if a 2% frequency reduction comes from a 10% power reduction. You take the lower end of the delta and work up, not the inverse.

Otherwise you can't claim PS4 had a 40% advantage over XBO last gen, since that figure comes from the same method: start from the low end and work to the higher end, not the reverse.

As for the 44%, that comes from the CU headroom XSX has over PS5. Not everything with regards to CUs or GPU components scale with increased clocks, and you need a lot more power anyway to hit the high clocks that disproportionately favors the power load relative to the frequency increase beyond the northern edge of the sweetspot anyway, as we can infer is the case with PS5 (10% power reduction for a 2% frequency drop is a 5:1 ratio).

You don't have any idea what you are talking about. It is completely the other way round. IT will be SEX running lockheart games with extra effects res and framerate.

I mean we literally have answer already. Look at Xbox One and Xbox One X or PS4 and PS4pro.
Did those more powerful version run base games with upgraded effects, res and framerate or did base games played shittier versions of pro version games ?

Again simple questions. You make asset for SEX. That asset can't be handled by Lockheart. Do you make second completely separate asset for lockheart or not ? No you don't. You don't make asset for SEX. You make one for lockheart and use that for SEX version.

This isn't really true; it's never been easier for a dev to create assets and features for the high-end and then scale down to the lower end. That's come thanks to the expanded scalability of development tools, API improvements, and overall developer workflow and pipeline improvements since jumping to the HD era.

There's no technical reason Lockhart will hold back XSX, which means there's no reason on a technical basis it will really hold back PS5 or XSX as well. If people have concerns with Lockhart, it should be over the possibility of it affecting production capacity for XSX, pricing for XSX, and marketing for XSX. Those are the legitimate reasons to remain cautious with Lockhart IMHO.

Is this another scenario where missing data suggests a good scenario for XBX while missing data about PS5 is reasonable cause for concern only?

Not so much that I"d imagine, but there is a very strong tendency for some people to take missing of concrete, officially stated info regarding XSX as if to say the XSX will not have those features, whereas for PS5 if things are not outright confirmed or mentioned, for whatever reason people are expected to still entertain the system having those unconfirmed features or customizations else they have a narrative against PS5.

It's a double standard; it's considered okay to speculate about potential features or customizations regarding PS5 even if you have to dig into patents that may have no bearing on what actually goes into the system or infer based on projects from other departments at Sony. Yet if some people try doing the equivalent for XSX they get shot down for it, even if they are not doing so at the absence of PS5 (i.e they are forced to imply both systems will have such a thing, when the same expectation isn't necessarily held for those speculating regards PS5 potentially-unannounced features/customizations/"secret sauce" etc).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Panajev2001a

Thirty7ven

Member
Apr 13, 2020
3,327
13,442
560
No, the numbers that are floating around are 10.28 and 12.155, but I digress...

Care to highlight the post in specific so I can explain?

Is your account used by multiple people or something? You don’t know where you stand? I’m out.

 
Last edited:

DynamiteCop!

Member Series S
Mar 3, 2018
5,073
12,584
870
Is your account used by multiple people or something? You don’t know where you stand?

I'm having multiple conversations and I don't know which post in specific you're talking about. If you can't post it I don't care one way or the other.
 
Aug 28, 2019
3,878
8,115
630
www.instagram.com
I don't see how not having access to devkits can discredit anyone. Its not like either console has hardware as of yet unknown to man. What matters is, obviously one of them is lying.

Or they're both lying? Or they're both telling the truth?

It doesn't have to be an either-or case. They both could've been making some things up and being legit with other things they mentioned. That's how I've come to see it, anyway. It's not hard.

Do the math again.

12100 is a 17.7% increase over 10280

Block me all you want, you’re an astroturfer at best. Love your non reasoning regarding the porting process though!

How come PS4 and Xbox one multiplatforms weren’t running at the same res? Oh because uh things

Well, first off your numbers are wrong; it's 10.275 and 12.147. And you work from the lower to the higher, which gives you 18.2%, not 17.7%.

If you take the 2% frequency reduction on PS5, it becomes 10.07 and 12.147, or 20.6%. I recalculated the numbers multiple times and got those same figures more or less each time.

If PS5 has a GPU frequency drop greater than 2%, then the delta increases beyond 20.6%. It wouldn't hit 30% unless the GPU is at a frequency of about 2 GHz, however (technically it would be greater than 30% in that case since 30% over PS5 2GHz would give 11.96).

While there's a few reports of some devs apparently running PS5 devkits in profile modes that could theoretically be seeing the GPU closer to the clocks listed in the Oberon leak and testing data, for now those are honestly just fringe cases and probably only reflective of the devkit setups; it's already been mentioned that the devkits are using profiles but the actual retail units won't, so I don't expect any frequency drops on the GPU over consistent power-hungry loads to go below the 2% or not that much lower, anyway.

At the same time, we don't have any real-world results to look at and no access to the systems to do analysis of how things are running, so we can't say for 100% sure if any frequency drops on the GPU are "just" 2%. For now though we should probably just take Cerny's word on that front.
 
Last edited:

GHG

Member
Nov 9, 2006
23,961
28,724
1,845
Irrelevant. Neither has a dev kit. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. If either did, they'd of signed an nda.

There's a chance the Crytek one has access to dev kits depending on what projects he's currently working on but based on what we know it's just that, a chance.

It's not worth putting weight behind statements based on a chance but there's a reason he's been told to retract his statements and has been silenced by Crytek while this Grannell guy is milking the momentary limelight and won't stop talking.

At the end of the day the constant speculation and theorising is boring now, nothing that can be said hasn't already been said. It's about time both companies put their money where their mouths are and started showing us some games.

Edit: Oh my god people are now arguing about decimal place percentage differences. Sony, Microsoft put these people out of their misery please.
 
Last edited:

Nickolaidas

Member
Jan 18, 2019
3,781
11,578
590
The lockheart will drag down the series x, just like the xbox one dragged down the xbox one x, and just like the ps4 dragged down the pro.

There's no sugarcoating this.

There hasn't been a single pro game which had special effects, ai scripts and character models which the ps4 didn't have. The only difference was framerate and resolution.

When a ps4 game was made, it had to take the ps4's power into account, which means a ps4 game was made with 1.something TFs in mind.

When a series x exclusive is being made, it has to be able to run on a 4TF machine.

When a PS5 exclusice is being made, it has to be able to run on a 10TF machine.

Multiplats will look sharper on the series x, and play faster, but otherwise will be identical with the ps5 versions.

Exclusives will look more impressive on the ps5, but series x exclusives will always run on 60fps, while some ps5 exclusives may run at 30fps only.
 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
46,939
94,939
1,380
At the end of the day the constant speculation and theorising is boring now, nothing that can be said hasn't already been said. It's about time both companies put their money where their mouths are and started showing us some games.

Preach!
 

replicant-

Member
Feb 7, 2020
449
557
365
Who is this Optical Code guy?

Apart from an amateur detective quick to call a guy a fraud in the basis of game credits and LinkedIn?

I listened to the podcast he was on last week and at no point did he claim to be a KZ dev at GG. He did refer to KZ, but I relation to support work done in Liverpool.
 
Aug 28, 2019
3,878
8,115
630
www.instagram.com
At the end of the day the constant speculation and theorising is boring now, nothing that can be said hasn't already been said. It's about time both companies put their money where their mouths are and started showing us some games.

But MS's already started doing this xD. Halo Infinite, Hellblade 2, Project Mara, Everwild, the Fable 4 (potentially) concept shots etc. What you probably mean to say is they should start showing us some next-gen gameplay, because otherwise I'd say MS have already been doing a decent job showing some games in general since December.

As for the percentages stuff; look, I like keeping numbers clean. If you start fudging numbers you can start creating talking points that don't need to exist. I'm interested enough in these next-gen systems to want to keep the numbers (and the method of arriving at them) consistent between them both.

For others, I'm sure that they just care about discussing next-gen in that given way, and of course not everyone is going to like seeing numbers and percentages going all over the place but there are some of us who actually like doing that from time to time and that's okay 👍

The lockheart will drag down the series x, just like the xbox one dragged down the xbox one x, and just like the ps4 dragged down the pro.

There's no sugarcoating this.

There hasn't been a single pro game which had special effects, ai scripts and character models which the ps4 didn't have. The only difference was framerate and resolution.

When a ps4 game was made, it had to take the ps4's power into account, which means a ps4 game was made with 1.something TFs in mind.

When a series x exclusive is being made, it has to be able to run on a 4TF machine.

When a PS5 exclusice is being made, it has to be able to run on a 10TF machine.

Multiplats will look sharper on the series x, and play faster, but otherwise will be identical with the ps5 versions.

Exclusives will look more impressive on the ps5, but series x exclusives will always run on 60fps, while some ps5 exclusives may run at 30fps only.

None of your logic makes a lick of sense. The Pro and X served different use-cases and purposes relative to their base hardware, than the XSX will serve to Lockhart, primarily because if we go by MS's messaging thus far XSX appears to be the baseline, not the inverse.

So everything you mention in terms of special effects, ai scripts, character models etc. will very likely be scaled down to Lockhart, not scaled up to XSX. Much improved dev programming/creative practices and scalability of code, engine components, engines and advancements in API efficiency make this easier than it's ever been.

That should naturally mean that XSX 1st-party games will target XSX and scale down what they can to Lockhart. We don't even fully know what Lockhart will be, anyhow; if it's a streaming-focused system then it won't be much of anything to XSX and can be sold for even cheaper, but that's just speculation on my end.

There are other reasons to have reservations regarding Lockhart but they fall more into the logistics territory, i.e how it could impact manufacturing capacity, pricing, and marketing cohesion for the XSX. Which is why I'd rather Lockhart come down two years from launch (or even just a year after launch) than alongside XSX right out of the gate, so here's to seeing what happens in the next couple of months.
 
Last edited: