Support NeoGAF

[DenchDeckard]

Congrats man. You have the most avoided, best post, of all time on here.
Here’s what happened since you posted:

People are ignoring it because theyve read what beard man actually said in his interviews. That resolution and settings can be cut to make the game work and not hamper gameplay.

It's you guys that actually need to read and not just regurgitate the same screen grabs over and over again from a marketing video and saying that its gospel.

It's like grabbing shots of Mark cerny from his presentation showing levels being loaded instantly while you pan the camera and having amazing details thanks to the custom IO yet here we are with the same old games and nothing utilising all the pie in the sky shit he was talking about. No one does it because that would be pointless.

 

[SlimySnake]

Remember when the Series S was supposed to outperform the PS5?





Man, some of the Xbox teams are no better than fanboys

Panello on era said that they designed their sandwich strategy around the 8 tflops ps5 leaks. They assumed that the ps5 was $399 and went about designing a $499 12 tflops console and a 4 tflops $299 card.

And there in lies the problem. The console was designed in a board room by PR and marketing guys like Panello. The engineers had no choice but to make these drastic sacrifices because the bosses at the top put all their chips into a github leaks and were left holding an underpowered console when Sony showed up with 10 tflops.

This isn’t the first time MS has done this either. I remember how when the pro specs leaked in April of 2016, Sony chose not to reveal it at e3 despite the devkits already sent out to devs but MS showed up that e3 with nothing but a tflops number. 6 tflops. All they cared about was beating the pro’s tflops number. They had nothing at that point but they just wanted to have something to counter Sony’s announcement and ended up locking themselves into the 6 tflops figure which required 12 gb of vram, expensive cooling solution and an extra $100 compared to the pro. You have to ask why they didn’t invest the extra hundred and an extra year into going an soc with a better cpu instead. Because all they cared about was tflops and beating Sony. Even if they were a year late.

This time they wanted the most powerful and cheapest console. Phil admitted as much. You cant design hardware like this. But that’s Microsoft for you. They have always been like this. Its why Apple always designed better hardware.

 

[DarkMage619]

People are ignoring it because theyve read what beard man actually said in his interviews. That resolution and settings can be cut to make the game work and not hamper gameplay.

It's you guys that casually need to read and not just regurgitate the same screen grabs over and over again from a marketing video and saying that its gospel.

It's like grabbing shots of Mark cerny from his presentation showing levels being loaded instantly while you pan the camera and having amazing details thanks to the custom IO yet here we are with the same old games and nothing utilising all the pie in the sky shit he was talking about. No one does it because that would be pointless.

They aren't serious that's why they have to invent things that were never said. They weren't interested in what Jason Ronald actually said when making stuff up is more fun. It's the same reason why Alex is the most trusted guy at DF now despite them making fun of his name and calling him anti-Sony in other threads.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Panello on era said that they designed their sandwich strategy around the 8 tflops ps5 leaks. They assumed that the ps5 was $399 and went about designing a $499 12 tflops console and a 4 tflops $299 card.

And there in lies the problem. The console was designed in a board room by PR and marketing guys like Panello. The engineers had no choice but to make these drastic sacrifices because the bosses at the top put all their chips into a github leaks and were left holding an underpowered console when Sony showed up with 10 tflops.

This isn’t the first time MS has done this either. I remember how when the pro specs leaked in April of 2016, Sony chose not to reveal it at e3 despite the devkits already sent out to devs but MS showed up that e3 with nothing but a tflops number. 6 tflops. All they cared about was beating the pro’s tflops number. They had nothing at that point but they just wanted to have something to counter Sony’s announcement and ended up locking themselves into the 6 tflops figure which required 12 gb of vram, expensive cooling solution and an extra $100 compared to the pro. You have to ask why they didn’t invest the extra hundred and an extra year into going an soc with a better cpu instead. Because all they cared about was tflops and beating Sony. Even if they were a year late.

This time they wanted the most powerful and cheapest console. Phil admitted as much. You cant design hardware like this. But that’s Microsoft for you. They have always been like this. Its why Apple always designed better hardware.

Dude, I think you're great but the one X was an absolute beast of a console and was worth every penny. Are you saying Microsoft didn't have such an incredibly designed console tapped out and known when they announced it at E3?

The one X will be known in history as a geniusly thought out box that was everything the pro should have been. Every part of its GPU and memory set up was designed to deliver as close to a 4k experience for ps4/xbox one games as possible. Then add the first vapour chamber cooler in a console in a box that was barely bigger than a one S and tiny compared to the poorly designed ps4 pro console with its less than ideal memory set up.

This is why I trust MS a little more. The series X is a beast and so is the series s for its size. see only issue I can see is potentially the speed of the memory in the series s. I'd not looked that up before this thread. Games seem to consistently deliver so far but I have no idea for the future.

 

[dcmk7]

They aren't serious that's why they have to invent things that were never said

It was never said.. yet it's displayed for everyone's benefit with captions from Jason Ronald himself?

This overly defensive viewpoint is going to some extreme levels now, denying it was ever said shows your not really interested in discussion.

 

[DenchDeckard]

It was never said.. yet it's displayed for everyone's benefit with captions from Jason Ronald himself.

This overly defensive viewpoint is going to some extreme levels now, denying it was ever said shows your not really interested in discussion.

What did he actually say in the interview that's been shared, are you just ignoring that? Why yes, yes you are. Just get over it man Holy shit. The series S is like a 10 year old kid that you adults constantly bully because somehow you've decided it's the biggest threat to you or something. It's weird as fuck. It's always you sharing those images too. Just move on man, we are like two years in nearly. We get it. You have images of beard man saved on your computer to deploy at every opportunity.

Are you using this same energy for Mark Cerny? Where are your Mark Cerny screen grabs for how gaming will change with the ps5, how the ssd is will allow levels to be created completely differently to anything you have seen before in the last 30 years of gaming? Where's that shit?

It's all just weird to me. I'm going to play some amazing games on my switch.

 

[Banjo64]

Heres your explanation:

• XSX: 10GB @ 560 GB/s, 6GB @ 336 GB/s
• XSS: 8GB @ 224 GB/s, 2GB @ 56 GB/s

I was stunned the first time I saw the RAM split on the S. Why did they do this? 56gb/s - I genuinely thought it was a typo when they first released the info.

 

[prinz_valium]

I know why they did it, but the Series X should've been 20GB instead of 16GB and Series S should've been 12GB at 336GB/s instead of 10GB at 224GB/s +56GB/s

Even tho the 2GB is OS onyl and fast enough.
But 2GB and overall faster GPU and CPU Memory would've been nice

 

[dcmk7]

What did he actually say in the interview that's been shared, are you just ignoring that? Why yes, yes you are. Just get over it man Holy shit. The series S is like a 10 year old kid that you adults constantly bully because somehow you've decided it's the biggest threat to you or something. It's weird as fuck. It's always you sharing those images too. Just move on man, we are like two years in nearly. We get it. You have images of beard man saved on your computer to deploy at every opportunity.

Are you using this same energy for Mark Cerny? Where are your Mark Cerny screen grabs for how gaming will change with the ps5, how the ssd is will allow levels to be created completely differently to anything you have seen before in the last 30 years of gaming? Where's that shit?

It's all just weird to me. I'm going to play some amazing games on my switch.

You take criticism of Series S and 'beard man' too personally by the sounds of it

He's make some very weird claims that don't match up with reality. Not just me points that out. Rather than defend it maybe it's about time you accept it?

And yes Sony done it too. Same energy blah blah blah. That's just tedious whataboutism. Think you will find that not been overly happy with performance on all next gen consoles but guess that doesn't suit your narrative.

 

[DenchDeckard]

You take criticism of Series S and 'beard man' too personally by the sounds of it

He's make some very weird claims that don't match up with reality. Not just me points that out. Rather than defend it maybe it's about time you accept it?

And yes Sony done it too. Same energy blah blah blah. That's just tedious whataboutism. Think you will find that not been overly happy with performance on all next gen consoles but guess that doesn't suit your narrative.

I genuinely have no issue with beardmans claims, or any of it tbh. I find it weird that for two years you've shared those images. Everyone is well aware of what was shown in those images. I genuinely couldn't care about what some person tried to sell me in a marketing video. Just like Cerny with his statements etc.

No console is perfect, all could have something better. Raytracing is shit on these boxes but it doesn't stop them talking about it in marketing spiel. I'd just say move on man. You're a broken record in every single series s thread, with the same images. It's the very definition of insanity.

We will get great games this gen, some will run well on series s, most will be cut back on series s like we have seen but fundamentally the gameplay will remain.

I lookforward to when we see Mark Cernys comments come to fruition.

 

[Panajev2001a]

The one X will be known in history as a geniusly thought out box that was everything the pro should have been

It was a great box, but 12 months later and costing $100 more… that has to be taken into account and it is not that many devs spent more than token effort on maximising each console too to be fair :/. Sadly…

 

[Shmunter]

What did he actually say in the interview that's been shared, are you just ignoring that? Why yes, yes you are. Just get over it man Holy shit. The series S is like a 10 year old kid that you adults constantly bully because somehow you've decided it's the biggest threat to you or something. It's weird as fuck. It's always you sharing those images too. Just move on man, we are like two years in nearly. We get it. You have images of beard man saved on your computer to deploy at every opportunity.

Are you using this same energy for Mark Cerny? Where are your Mark Cerny screen grabs for how gaming will change with the ps5, how the ssd is will allow levels to be created completely differently to anything you have seen before in the last 30 years of gaming? Where's that shit?

It's all just weird to me. I'm going to play some amazing games on my switch.

Still denying streaming assets into ram can enable on demand assets from secondary storage? The faster, the more potential. Heard of the word logic? or the fact devs already have been doing this but within narrow limited confines of last gen reducing scope of what’s possible.

Even the pc space is chasing solutions with direct storage and RTX I/o. But no, it’s all a fantasy.

You sir are a Swiss Army knife of counter logic.

 

[dcmk7]

I genuinely have no issue with beardmans claims, or any of it tbh. I find it weird that for two years you've shared those images. Everyone is well aware of what was shown in those images. I genuinely couldn't care about what some person tried to sell me in a marketing video. Just like Cerny with his statements etc.

No console is perfect, all could have something better. Raytracing is shit on these boxes but it doesn't stop them talking about it in marketing spiel. I'd just say move on man. You're a broken record in every single series s thread, with the same images. It's the very definition of insanity.

We will get great games this gen, some will run well on series s, most will be cut back on series s like we have seen but fundamentally the gameplay will remain.

I lookforward to when we see Mark Cernys comments come to fruition.

I could suggest the same and say you and a few others are a broken record defending every Series S topic blaming developers rather than the hardware that's been provided. Which is hugely ignorant. Some have even called them lazy and need contact MS support. Be fascinated to know where you stand on that.. but think I already know.

And any criticism of the console is met with an over the top defense like you've perfectly demonstrated. Happens every thread where the Series S has performed badly or even when it's done well and it's met it's 1440p original marketing claims. It's beyond tedious.

 

[whyman]

MS sure is suffering for it with higher sales and market share gains.

Now yes. In 2 years when all games look/run like it was last gen compared to competition? We will see.

 

[Vognerful]

Panello on era said that they designed their sandwich strategy around the 8 tflops ps5 leaks. They assumed that the ps5 was $399 and went about designing a $499 12 tflops console and a 4 tflops $299 card.

And there in lies the problem. The console was designed in a board room by PR and marketing guys like Panello. The engineers had no choice but to make these drastic sacrifices because the bosses at the top put all their chips into a github leaks and were left holding an underpowered console when Sony showed up with 10 tflops.

This isn’t the first time MS has done this either. I remember how when the pro specs leaked in April of 2016, Sony chose not to reveal it at e3 despite the devkits already sent out to devs but MS showed up that e3 with nothing but a tflops number. 6 tflops. All they cared about was beating the pro’s tflops number. They had nothing at that point but they just wanted to have something to counter Sony’s announcement and ended up locking themselves into the 6 tflops figure which required 12 gb of vram, expensive cooling solution and an extra $100 compared to the pro. You have to ask why they didn’t invest the extra hundred and an extra year into going an soc with a better cpu instead. Because all they cared about was tflops and beating Sony. Even if they were a year late.

This time they wanted the most powerful and cheapest console. Phil admitted as much. You cant design hardware like this. But that’s Microsoft for you. They have always been like this. Its why Apple always designed better hardware.

Sorry but I want to disagree with you on that principle (that you can’t design a hardware this way). What makes think like that?

 

[Bogroll]

I just can't see any developers making anything different to what we have now other than nicer graphics, regardless if the SS existed or not.

Somebody give us some ideas what games we could have without the SS.

Sony release some amazing games, something different, something that's just not higher settings, nice graphics and higher resolution, something genuinely not possible on SS or SX because apparently that will be held back by SS.

Sony give me a reason to fuck my SX and SS off.

But I doubt it will happen. I hope I'm wrong and the PS5 only owners are right in this thread. Cause gaming is getting quite boring for me now.

 

[Md Ray]

ps5 is about a 6600xt
sx is about a 6700xt

Do you have any source/benchmarks comparisons for this? Especially: "sx is about a 6700xt"

 

[PropellerEar]

Source/benchmarks comparisons?

Tales from the ass.

 

[SkylineRKR]

All this discussion about Series S games hitting 720p eventually, possible, but in that case the 4k advertised PS5/X are probably being dropped to sub 1440p as well.

I just can't see any developers making anything different to what we have now other than nicer graphics, regardless if the SS existed or not.

Somebody give us some ideas what games we could have without the SS.

Sony release some amazing games, something different, something that's just not higher settings, nice graphics and higher resolution, something genuinely not possible on SS or SX because apparently that will be held back by SS.

Sony give me a reason to fuck my SX and SS off.

But I doubt it will happen. I hope I'm wrong and the PS5 only owners are right in this thread. Cause gaming is getting quite boring for me now.

I have a PS5 and PS5 games don't exactly look better than Series X games. PS5 simply has more next-gen only games, but Returnal renders internally at 1080p (and demon's at 1440p). It looks good, but it shows that the PS5, without a Series S attached to it, also needs to make sacrifices. You won't get native 4k at higher FPS or RT on that console either. Not even last-gen conversions can run native 4k/60, FF7 needs to be scaled down to 1440p, or 30fps.

There is always an excuse if a game doesn't meet the ridiculous demands set by the crowd. On PS5 its 'yeah but its also on PS4'. Its not like the next-gen exclusive games look a whole lot better.

 

[rofif]

It’s not cheap enough to justify all the cuts compared to only 100 usd more expensive ps5 digital

 

[DenchDeckard]

I could suggest the same and say you and a few others are a broken record defending every Series S topic blaming developers rather than the hardware that's been provided. Which is hugely ignorant. Some have even called them lazy and need contact MS support. Be fascinated to know where you stand on that.. but think I already know.

And any criticism of the console is met with an over the top defense like you've perfectly demonstrated. Happens every thread where the Series S has performed badly or even when it's done well and it's met it's 1440p original marketing claims. It's beyond tedious.

Read my posts on this. I've not defended the memory at all. Infect I've said the devs must be right on the slower ram and also said I hope Microsoft helps developers with tools and whatever they need to assist in porting games to the series s.

All console hardware has limitations that need to be worked around, it's the nature of it. The manufacturer should create tools to make development as easy as possible.

While it's interesting to hear about this stuff I'm not going to stress over what some developer has to do in their job.

If you actually listen to Alex's comment (who most people hate on here from a certain camp) he says some developers have said the series s is a "bit of a pain, not the cpu or gpu but the memory" take that as you will. The series S is obviously well designed in nearly all of its make up but there is obviously an issue with the memory and the speed of it. Obviously not a huge issue like you would love it to be but quite literally " a bit of a pain"

That's the exact quote.

I don't know why anyone would want to hyperthericqlly imagine for years that it's going to cause some crazy issue when the ps5 and series x versions of games have run pretty damn well considering and the series s usually launches a little gimped with improvements later as the dev decides to revisit.

It's upto the dev what they do, why are you even concerned about it? Why does the series s and Jason Ronald live rent free in your head? I guess you're not even remotely interested in owning one or playing one. Just leave it be, surely? I think everyone on here knows your stance on it now.

 

[Max_Po]

Tales from the ass.

Dam is this real ? I have released major gas bombs on subway system lines ... sound muffled by the arrival of train ... ...

 

[DenchDeckard]

Still denying streaming assets into ram can enable on demand assets from secondary storage? The faster, the more potential. Heard of the word logic? or the fact devs already have been doing this but within narrow limited confines of last gen reducing scope of what’s possible.

Even the pc space is chasing solutions with direct storage and RTX I/o. But no, it’s all a fantasy.

You sir are a Swiss Army knife of counter logic.

I'm not denying anything, I'm saying show me the games. Where are these groundbreaking games. Where? Show me a game that's on the ps5 that is different to anything we have seen in the last 30 years. It's all the same kind of levels, same gameplay, same tech. Even ratchets portals seemed like nothing he explained. It was parlour tricks. Ive not seen anything but some faster loading.

All this discussion about Series S games hitting 720p eventually, possible, but in that case the 4k advertised PS5/X are probably being dropped to sub 1440p as well.



I have a PS5 and PS5 games don't exactly look better than Series X games. PS5 simply has more next-gen only games, but Returnal renders internally at 1080p (and demon's at 1440p). It looks good, but it shows that the PS5, without a Series S attached to it, also needs to make sacrifices. You won't get native 4k at higher FPS or RT on that console either. Not even last-gen conversions can run native 4k/60, FF7 needs to be scaled down to 1440p, or 30fps.

There is always an excuse if a game doesn't meet the ridiculous demands set by the crowd. On PS5 its 'yeah but its also on PS4'. Its not like the next-gen exclusive games look a whole lot better.

Thank you for bringing logic into this. The ps5 can't even run ff7 at 4k 60 fps. Great example. Returnal is an amazing game but literally 1080p. None of these boxes are as mind blowing as some people want to act when ripping the series s. I'm not even defending the series s, I'm just saying think logically what the other boxes that advertise 8k. 4k 60 fps are actually doing in reality. It's a broken record every week. Arguments from all sides.

Unreal engine 5 is sub 1440p and under 30fps on ps5 and series x and that's next gen. Look at these boxes in reality, that's all I'm trying to get at.

 

[Md Ray]

Again most gaming PCs are weaker than the XSS.

Again, they still have more memory than XSS.

 

[Md Ray]

Are you using this same energy for Mark Cerny? Where are your Mark Cerny screen grabs for how gaming will change with the ps5, how the ssd is will allow levels to be created completely differently to anything you have seen before in the last 30 years of gaming? Where's that shit?

Naughty Dog's PS5 exclusive will show that to you, don't worry.

 

[dcmk7]

Read my posts on this.

Based on this particular argument it's completely contradictory.

We have all heard from developers for the past two years that the memory is 'a pain', even before its release and when users have expressed their feelings on the subject.. a tsunami like defensive force hits the topic raging about developers not doing their job, MS support needs be called. Not making use of the tech, etc. If you think that ignorance is ok but quoting Jason Ronald's design goal for the XSS is worse. It says it all.

I don't think it's right that potentially we have owners out there that has picked it up thinking getting getting the same experience at a lower resolution.

 

[El Pistolero]

Series S isn't underpowered. It's an entry level system that plays games like Doom Eternal flawlessly at 120fps, along with a wide range of newer next gen games. You ain't buying Series S expecting native 4K or whatever. PS5 and Series X don't even always hit native 4K in demanding next gen titles, so why would anyone automatically expect Series S to always hit 1080p-1440p native? Yet it still does in numerous games.

And at the end of the day, the thing is selling amazing, so it's a reality devs have to deal with. Microsoft were smart for acquiring all these studios. They will work with it. And once more devs start using SFS the memory issue will be resolved.

They acquired all those studios because they are rich...smart has nothing to do with it.

 

[PropellerEar]

Dam is this real ? I have released major gas bombs on subway system lines ... sound muffled by the arrival of train ... ...

Don't worry everybody does that...

 

[Haggard]

Again most gaming PCs are weaker than the XSS.

And again that doesn't matter as there is no fixed pc standard that games are designed for. The console specs are the targets and the XSS is the floor this gen.

 

[yamaci17]

Do you have any source/benchmarks comparisons for this? Especially: "sx is about a 6700xt"

Forza Horizon 5 PC: can Playground's masterpiece scale beyond Series X?

We've already established that Forza Horizon 5 scales exceptionally well over Xbox hardware old and new, but has Playgr…

www.eurogamer.net

"So what kind of GPU do you need to match or exceed Series X outputs at performance and quality modes? This is tricky for the 60fps mode as PC lacks the DRS option, but in isolating an area where Series X hits its minimum DRS window, it looks to me like RTX 2070 Super/RTX 2080 is the closest Nvidia equivalent,"

notice i said "about", not equivalent. a %9 diff. is pretty close. i'm sure there is some extra headrom due to hard cap FPS limit. but i have no tools to confirm. xbox sx is handicapped with a 60 fps cap, even with a DSR minimum window, it would still push %5-10 above what it can, making it more akin to a 6700xt/3060ti/2080 super

if you by the logic of capped framerates, sx is only equivalent to 2060 2070 or something in DL 2 due to having 1080p 60 fps. but with vrr unlocked mode, sx can push 1080p 80-100 fps;



similar performance profile from 3060ti which is only %2 behind 6700xt (couldn't find a daylight 6700xt benchmark. if you have the card yourself, go to the same location Gaming Tech gone and do a exact comparison. if i had the game, i would do it)



ps5 is easier to prove. 6600xt gets the exact same framerate at 4k in death stranding director's cut in the exact same scene.

you can go the other way: ps5 at this point cemented itself being equal to rtx 2080/rx6600xt in lots of titles (death stranding, far cry 6 and many more). sx consistently is %10-15 above what ps5 can accomplish in terms of resolution and pixel count. 6700xt is only %10-15 above the rtx 2080 and 6600xt.

what is there not to understand? it is quite an easy conclusion to draw.

 

[Riky]

Quit the BS

"Designed" that's the key phrase, no promise. The same way the bigger consoles are "designed" for 4k and up to 120fps but rarely do, it's simple when you think about it

I was stunned the first time I saw the RAM split on the S. Why did they do this? 56gb/s - I genuinely thought it was a typo when they first released the info.

It's irrelevant because the 2gb is reserved for the OS and is not available to developers, why pay for very fast ram when it isn't needed your just unnecessarily increasing the cost of the machine.

 

[Md Ray]

Forza Horizon 5 PC: can Playground's masterpiece scale beyond Series X?

We've already established that Forza Horizon 5 scales exceptionally well over Xbox hardware old and new, but has Playgr…

www.eurogamer.net

"So what kind of GPU do you need to match or exceed Series X outputs at performance and quality modes? This is tricky for the 60fps mode as PC lacks the DRS option, but in isolating an area where Series X hits its minimum DRS window, it looks to me like RTX 2070 Super/RTX 2080 is the closest Nvidia equivalent,"

notice i said "about", not equivalent. a %9 diff. is pretty close. i'm sure there is some extra headrom due to hard cap FPS limit. but i have no tools to confirm. xbox sx is handicapped with a 60 fps cap, even with a DSR minimum window, it would still push %5-10 above what it can, making it more akin to a 6700xt/3060ti/2080 super

if you by the logic of capped framerates, sx is only equivalent to 2060 2070 or something in DL 2 due to having 1080p 60 fps. but with vrr unlocked mode, sx can push 1080p 80-100 fps;



similar performance profile from 3060ti which is only %2 behind 6700xt (couldn't find a daylight 6700xt benchmark. if you have the card yourself, go to the same location Gaming Tech gone and do a exact comparison. if i had the game, i would do it)



ps5 is easier to prove. 6600xt gets the exact same framerate at 4k in death stranding director's cut in the exact same scene.

you can go the other way: ps5 at this point cemented itself being equal to rtx 2080/rx6600xt in lots of titles (death stranding, far cry 6 and many more). sx consistently is %10-15 above what ps5 can accomplish in terms of resolution and pixel count. 6700xt is only %10-15 above the rtx 2080 and 6600xt.

what is there not to understand? it is quite an easy conclusion to draw.

The closest GPU to XSX, as DF say, is 2070S/2080, not 6700 XT. Like PS5, XSX GPU is also much closer to a 6600 XT/RTX 2080.

There's an avg of 14% difference between 6600 XT and 6700 XT. You don't see that kind of difference on avg between PS5 and XSX, they perform similarly most of the time.

 

[Banjo64]

It's irrelevant because the 2gb is reserved for the OS and is not available to developers, why pay for very fast ram when it isn't needed your just unnecessarily increasing the cost of the machine.

It still seems gimped when you consider the X has more RAM and faster RAM and needs to dedicate 2.5gb to the OS. That was the only spec I saw which made me think the S would be compromised. The TF count alone would have been more than sufficient for 1080p gaming.

13.5GB of that GDDR6 RAM pool available to them, while the remaining 2.5GB sits in the background, dealing with the shell, UI and other non-obvious tasks.

 

[arvfab]

Push it in what way? It's like you guys don't even realize every game coming to Xbox hits PC day and date. You honestly think game developers will make games incapable of running on PCs less powerful than the XSX? I'm sure that is an excellent way to lose business. Again most gaming PCs are weaker than the XSS.

And you seem to forget that on PC you can adapt the minimum requirements to whatever makes sense for your game.

 

[Lysandros]

sx consistently is %10-15 above what ps5 can accomplish in terms of resolution and pixel count. 6700xt is only %10-15 above the rtx 2080 and 6600xt.

That's straight-up lie. In which plane of existence XSX is consistently (?!) 10-15% ahead of PS5 "in terms of resolution and pixel count" at the same performance? Here, some quite recent examples in which PS5 has higher resolution to refresh your memory:





But let me guess, those are nationalistic, biased, bitter Japanese developers, whereas the western developers of let say Lego Star Wars are the paragon of objectivity and work ethic right? By the way let just ignore Japanese developed games that run slightly better on XSX like Tales of Arise or RE Village, those must be the good/reasonable ones for sure... What about all the western developed games having higher average resolution or better performance at same res. on PS5 since the beginning of the generation? Again your fantasy construct has no basis on hard specs or consistent real world data.

Edit: By this occasion i'll repeat my question; in which metrics 6600 XT is ahead of 6700 XT?...

 

[Riky]

It still seems gimped when you consider the X has more RAM and faster RAM and needs to dedicate 2.5gb to the OS. That was the only spec I saw which made me think the S would be compromised. The TF count alone would have been more than sufficient for 1080p gaming.

13.5GB of that GDDR6 RAM pool available to them, while the remaining 2.5GB sits in the background, dealing with the shell, UI and other non-obvious tasks.

The Series S doesn't have the same memory setup at the Series X, it's a straight 2gb for the OS and 8gb for games. The Series X has 3.5gb of "slower" ram but that's still faster than the fast ram in the One X.

 

[yamaci17]

The closest GPU to XSX, as DF say, is 2070S/2080, not 6700 XT. Like PS5, XSX GPU is also much closer to a 6600 XT/RTX 2080.

There's an avg of 14% difference between 6600 XT and 6700 XT. You don't see that kind of difference on avg between PS5 and XSX, they perform similarly most of the time.

framerate is mostly rock solid 60 on both consoles, so its a fixed pixel advantage sx has

Volga Level Opening Train Scene - PS5: 2560x1440, Series X: 2844x1600
Caspian Level Driving - PS5: 2560x1440, Series X: 2844x1600
Taiga Level Exploration - PS5: 2176x1224, Series X: 2400x1350
Taiga Level Forest Demanding Scene - PS5: 1792x1008, Series X: 1920x1080

2560x1440 = 3.6 mil
2844x1600 = 4.55 mil

%26 difference

1792x1008 = 1.80 mil
1920x1080 = 2.07 mil

%15 difference


a consistent %10-15 pixel count bump overall.



Kabuki Entrance - PS5 2176x1224, Series X 2304x1296
Near Police Station - PS5: 2435x1370, Series X: 2560x1440
Outside Tom's Diner - PS5: 2506x1410, Series X: 2631x1480
Corpo Start Building - PS5: 2656x1494, Series X: 2744x1544
Streetkid Start - PS5: 2062x1160, Series X: 2062x1160

2176x1224 = 2.6 millions of pixels
2304x1296 = 2.9 millions of pixels

%11.5 bump

6600xt + %11.5 = 3060ti/a tad bit below 6700xt (%2 or so)

another consistent 60 fps game;



and a clear minimum resolution bump of %10;

PS5 uses a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 3392x1908 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 2944x1656. Xbox Series X uses a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 3840x2160 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 3072x1728.

2944x1656 = 4.87 millions of pixels to render
3072x1728 = 5.30 millions of pixels to render

%8.8 (6600xt + %9 = 2080 super/tad bit below 6700xt)

both three examples I gave work at a consistent 60 fps %99 of the time. so its a clear , uncontested pixel count advantage by series x

back me up dude i need some helpz Riky xd

it is easier to show clear differences on PC space. no dynamic resolution, no frame caps, completely same settings (we don't know if some devs enable extra settings on series x). can you prove that sx runs the games at completely same settings as ps5 does? we don't nothing about internals. at least i know that metro exodus and cyberpunk uses exact same settings on both consoles. and how shocking, a consistent %10-15 res/performance bump on both games

 

[Beechos]

These devs have problems with everything nowadays. This system is a pain, this engine is a pain, management is a pain, creating assest is a pain, representation is a pain, funding is a pain. Yadda, yadda, yadda. I guess whatever fits your agenda.

 

[ParaSeoul]

These devs have problems with everything nowadays. This system is a pain, this engine is a pain, management is a pain, creating assest is a pain, representation is a pain, funding is a pain. Yadda, yadda, yadda. I guess whatever fits your agenda.

 

[Haggard]

These devs have problems with everything nowadays. This system is a pain, this engine is a pain, management is a pain, creating assest is a pain, representation is a pain, funding is a pain. Yadda, yadda, yadda. I guess whatever fits your agenda.

Tell me you have never written a line of code without telling me you've never written a line of code....

 

[Md Ray]

framerate is mostly rock solid 60 on both consoles, so its a fixed pixel advantage sx has

Volga Level Opening Train Scene - PS5: 2560x1440, Series X: 2844x1600
Caspian Level Driving - PS5: 2560x1440, Series X: 2844x1600
Taiga Level Exploration - PS5: 2176x1224, Series X: 2400x1350
Taiga Level Forest Demanding Scene - PS5: 1792x1008, Series X: 1920x1080

2560x1440 = 3.6 mil
2844x1600 = 4.55 mil

%26 difference

1792x1008 = 1.80 mil
1920x1080 = 2.07 mil

%15 difference


a consistent %10-15 pixel count bump overall.



Kabuki Entrance - PS5 2176x1224, Series X 2304x1296
Near Police Station - PS5: 2435x1370, Series X: 2560x1440
Outside Tom's Diner - PS5: 2506x1410, Series X: 2631x1480
Corpo Start Building - PS5: 2656x1494, Series X: 2744x1544
Streetkid Start - PS5: 2062x1160, Series X: 2062x1160

2176x1224 = 2.6 millions of pixels
2304x1296 = 2.9 millions of pixels

%11.5 bump

6600xt + %11.5 = 3060ti/a tad bit below 6700xt (%2 or so)

another consistent 60 fps game;



and a clear minimum resolution bump of %10;

PS5 uses a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 3392x1908 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 2944x1656. Xbox Series X uses a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 3840x2160 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 3072x1728.

2944x1656 = 4.87 millions of pixels to render
3072x1728 = 5.30 millions of pixels to render

%8.8 (6600xt + %9 = 2080 super/tad bit below 6700xt)

both three examples I gave work at a consistent 60 fps %99 of the time. so its a clear , uncontested pixel count advantage by series x

back me up dude i need some helpz Riky xd

it is easier to show clear differences on PC space. no dynamic resolution, no frame caps, completely same settings (we don't know if some devs enable extra settings on series x). can you prove that sx runs the games at completely same settings as ps5 does? we don't nothing about internals. at least i know that metro exodus and cyberpunk uses exact same settings on both consoles. and how shocking, a consistent %10-15 res/performance bump on both games

Metro Exodus result is an outlier, that's not the norm. The norm is that PS5 and XSX generally perform similarly, so no "xsx is not about 6700 XT", it's more like in the 2080/6650 XT region, sometimes it's even below that.

can you prove that sx runs the games at completely same settings as ps5 does?

Yes, PS5 has higher quality setting than XSX in FC6 according to Digital Foundry.

PS5's geometry quality level does seem to be very slightly higher than Series X's

 

[Bogroll]

All this discussion about Series S games hitting 720p eventually, possible, but in that case the 4k advertised PS5/X are probably being dropped to sub 1440p as well.



I have a PS5 and PS5 games don't exactly look better than Series X games. PS5 simply has more next-gen only games, but Returnal renders internally at 1080p (and demon's at 1440p). It looks good, but it shows that the PS5, without a Series S attached to it, also needs to make sacrifices. You won't get native 4k at higher FPS or RT on that console either. Not even last-gen conversions can run native 4k/60, FF7 needs to be scaled down to 1440p, or 30fps.

There is always an excuse if a game doesn't meet the ridiculous demands set by the crowd. On PS5 its 'yeah but its also on PS4'. Its not like the next-gen exclusive games look a whole lot better.

I also have a Ps5 and I also thought about Ps5 only games and Returnal was the only one that popped up as questionable as to. Would it be possible on a SS ? And I think it would, but with obvious cut backs. But I guess we could only find that out if it ever gets released on PC.
But even then its not nothing totally new gameplay wise. It's a nice looking shooter

 

[yamaci17]

Metro Exodus result is an outlier, that's not the norm. The norm is that PS5 and XSX generally perform similarly, so no "xsx is not about 6700 XT", it's more like in the 2080/6650 XT region, sometimes it's even below that.


PS5 has higher quality setting than XSX in FC6 according to Digital Foundry.

geometry levels and lods are a CPU thing. and at this point its clear that ps5 has better CPU efficiency due to their custom chip

for me, its the norm. its not an outlier. it happened. it happened in multiple games. it will keep happening in future titles.

and i gave three "outliers". if i do some research, i can find more examples. but you would call them outliers anyways.

by that logic, i can say a 5600xt is stronger than ps5 and sx combined becuase you can run thousands of games at 1440p 60 fps with that card (back to 2006s), . and you can give 50 examples where ps5/sx wrecks the 5600xt, but i can give 500+ examples where 5600xt wrecks the ps5. then i would call every example you show an outlier. how would that sound for you?

i only care about most recent, highly ambitious AAA titles. and three of them is there.

i wont bother further. dont bother answering back. i cant be bothered further in your plastic box comparisons.

you asked benchmarks. i provided them. that's it.

 

[phil_t98]

DF found that the Series S version of the Matrix demo drops significantly BELOW 533p. We might be looking at 360p-480p here. Metro exodus dropped to 512p. I doubt Series S owners care about resolutions, but people do buy consoles with the expectation that it is up to current gen standards. 533p wasnt even acceptable in the PS360 era.

kinda like buying a ps5/series x and expecting full 4k all the time you mean?

 

[FrankWza]

Microsoft goes over what to expect out of Xbox Series S when it launches on November 10.

In this video, Jason Roland, director of program management for Xbox, goes over the finer points of Xbox Series S and how it differentiates from Xbox Series X.

In the video, Microsoft said it wanted to build two consoles with similar next-gen capabilities at a differentiated price point, but states that Xbox Series S will deliver the same experience as Xbox Series X, just at a reduced rendering resolution.

Xbox Series S delivers the same core experience as Xbox Series X, just at a reduced resolution

In this video, Jason Roland, director of program management for Xbox, goes over the finer points of Xbox Series S and how it differentiates from Xbox Series...

www.vg247.com

People are ignoring it because theyve read what beard man actually said in his interviews. That resolution and settings can be cut to make the game work and not hamper gameplay.

It's you guys that actually need to read and not just regurgitate the same screen grabs over and over again from a marketing video and saying that its gospel.

It's like grabbing shots of Mark cerny from his presentation showing levels being loaded instantly while you pan the camera and having amazing details thanks to the custom IO yet here we are with the same old games and nothing utilising all the pie in the sky shit he was talking about. No one does it because that would be pointless.

As you can see once again this is what was said PRIOR to launch.
No one is saying it needs to be maxed out in EVERY scenario.
But, when the series x version includes specific features, the s will be exactly the same at lower resolutions. There is no interpretation. This is what was said.

 

[SlimySnake]

kinda like buying a ps5/series x and expecting full 4k all the time you mean?

Nope. Nothing like that

 

[SkylineRKR]

At the end of the day, in terms of raw power, the PS5 and Series X are only twice as powerful as Pro and One X. They use newer architecture, better CPU and storage solutions sure, but these things can't work magic. I think what you see right now, sounds about right. Games that pushed the Pro, appearing on PS5 with twice the framerate, better texture streaming, slightly higher internal resolution etc. I think it represents the power difference well, especially if you did a mid-gen upgrade, the difference isn't worlds apart.

The biggest win and most important imo are the reduced access times. It means more raw game time and less frustration. These are essentially 16-bit era access times.

 

[Riky]

framerate is mostly rock solid 60 on both consoles, so its a fixed pixel advantage sx has

Volga Level Opening Train Scene - PS5: 2560x1440, Series X: 2844x1600
Caspian Level Driving - PS5: 2560x1440, Series X: 2844x1600
Taiga Level Exploration - PS5: 2176x1224, Series X: 2400x1350
Taiga Level Forest Demanding Scene - PS5: 1792x1008, Series X: 1920x1080

2560x1440 = 3.6 mil
2844x1600 = 4.55 mil

%26 difference

1792x1008 = 1.80 mil
1920x1080 = 2.07 mil

%15 difference


a consistent %10-15 pixel count bump overall.



Kabuki Entrance - PS5 2176x1224, Series X 2304x1296
Near Police Station - PS5: 2435x1370, Series X: 2560x1440
Outside Tom's Diner - PS5: 2506x1410, Series X: 2631x1480
Corpo Start Building - PS5: 2656x1494, Series X: 2744x1544
Streetkid Start - PS5: 2062x1160, Series X: 2062x1160

2176x1224 = 2.6 millions of pixels
2304x1296 = 2.9 millions of pixels

%11.5 bump

6600xt + %11.5 = 3060ti/a tad bit below 6700xt (%2 or so)

another consistent 60 fps game;



and a clear minimum resolution bump of %10;

PS5 uses a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 3392x1908 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 2944x1656. Xbox Series X uses a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 3840x2160 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 3072x1728.

2944x1656 = 4.87 millions of pixels to render
3072x1728 = 5.30 millions of pixels to render

%8.8 (6600xt + %9 = 2080 super/tad bit below 6700xt)

both three examples I gave work at a consistent 60 fps %99 of the time. so its a clear , uncontested pixel count advantage by series x

back me up dude i need some helpz Riky xd

it is easier to show clear differences on PC space. no dynamic resolution, no frame caps, completely same settings (we don't know if some devs enable extra settings on series x). can you prove that sx runs the games at completely same settings as ps5 does? we don't nothing about internals. at least i know that metro exodus and cyberpunk uses exact same settings on both consoles. and how shocking, a consistent %10-15 res/performance bump on both games

The stats speak for themselves, you can add in everything from Doom Eternal to Far Cry 6 and the last Lego Star Wars game, yes there are outliers but that even happened last gen. You will get some people clinging to momentary frame rate drops in videos of challenging areas but they are just the DRS not adjusting quick enough, it's not consistent like the resolution advantages. Plus Hitman 3 which is 4k Vs 1800p constantly with higher settings on top.

 

[Riky]

And you seem to forget that on PC you can adapt the minimum requirements to whatever makes sense for your game.

Publishers want sales, so the minimum specs will always be set to hit the maximum amount of potential users, that's the real requirement.

 

[arvfab]

Publishers want sales, so the minimum specs will always be set to hit the maximum amount of potential users, that's the real requirement.

Then why aren't all publishers making ports for the Switch? Why ending cross-gen support?