• 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.

Former Sony Dev says, PS5 and Xbox Series X Power Difference Is STAGGERING !!!

LordKasual

Member
Jul 28, 2016
5,480
971
380
If that culling technique is an automatic process, the boost that can be achieved in both frame rate and level of detail is surreal. And it still doesn't explain the Hellblade 2 demo, because there isn't any occlusion going on there and it still looks like there are no visible LOD swaps even in the distance. DirectML is basically making almost the full power of the GPU available for what you can actually see. Now there are some downsides to this, lighting being the obvious thing. If your lightsource is occluded it should still cast a light onto the visible area. And if that dragon had a shadow it should show everything and not just the front. But I suppose that's easy enough to implement, just taking the direction of lights into consideration when culling geometry.
This is what Sony was referring to when they mentioned "Geometry Engine", both the RDNA2 chips can do this out of the box apparently.

The way Cerny mentioned it, he made it sound like the block on the PS5 for this feature was customized and enhanced, which could mean really nice gains if true.

I've also seen that one way this feature can be used is by occluding internal details of a model if pieces of that model itself are not visible. An example would be a high-detail rendering of a desktop computer, or a car engine, with its internals fully modeled, but never rendered/visible due to the hull.


I really, REALLY want to see this tech utulized in a next-gen tech demo of Metal Gear Rising..........................but i feel like this allows geometry in general to be much more robust, and opens up things like better destruction.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bladed Thesis

Ascend

Member
Jul 23, 2018
1,586
2,086
385
You can play every upcoming xbox games on PC

It is known

Pointing out game like assasins creed witcher call of duty can be played on box are meaningless argument

Those game are multiplat

I have made my decision that PC covers all i need from Xbox, nothing gona change that
I'm not trying to convince you to get an Xbox. I was simply explaining why the Xbox is a viable alternative to many people.
 

Mendou

Anti-Semite/Xenophobic - report me if I use slurs
Jan 31, 2020
179
497
270
Moot. I don't buy game systems solely based on what is out at launch, I buy based on knowing that great games will clearly exist down the line. Knowing a Assassins Creed will launch with it is good enough for me tbh. Anything else is a cherry on top.

I don't even know why you asked such a question knowing the launch titles haven't been confirmed outside of Godfall. I got PS4 at launch cause I played The Last Of Us 1 on PS3 and its one of the greatest games of all time....

Sooooo PS4 having stuff like BF4, ACIV or even Knack at launch isn't something I see as anything to keep me from buying a PS4 knowing The Last Of Us 2 is very much a likelihood. By that logic, no one should buy any system around launch.

Isn't MS also NOT DOING Series X exclusives? As in...isn't Halo Infinite a XONE game being ported to PC and Series X?

So if Sony ports Ghost Of Tsushima can we also say "we know about Ghost Of Tsushima which IS a reason for many PS fans"? smh

So Halo fans could have also played Halo Infinite on XONE and PC.....they could have bought it on XONE and just played it on Series X....JUST like someone can buy Ghost and play it on PS5.....

Based on what MS is even doing, I don't know if I'd go as far as even calling those games Series X games, they are not anymore "Series X" games then The Last Of Us 1 is a PS4 game then. So to worry about PS fans is strange considering MS isn't evne making next gen games at all for several years, they are just making XONE games and porting them. So I'd rather get a PS5 where Sony will actually be making games ONLY FOR PS5 to max it out, vs here is a series of ports for a few years.
People need to understand where Microsoft is coming from. The install base of the Xbox One is under 50 million; that means they'll make less profit on each game than PlayStation. If they need to keep funding these AAA games, they'll need to be profitable first by porting games to PC without completely releasing the games on Sony's platform.

For the record, not many Xbox fans believe they'll outsell the PlayStation. Sony wants to grow its install base to increase profitability for its first-party games, hence why their recent consoles have always been cheaper than Xbox. I'm sure they're both good consoles.
 

eastwood333

Banned
Nov 3, 2019
494
761
395
The narrative according to the sony fanboys now is that weaker specs with variable clocks to boot is more impressive now. And that the PS5 is more custom apparently and clearly have ignored the DF articles about XSX. When XSX wins the majority of head to head comparisons, it will then be about devs being lazy by not utilizing the PS5 SSD to make games running on the equivelant of a 20TF box thanks to the magical alien tech in the SSD. Fun times :)
 

Maxwell House

Member
Jun 6, 2004
2,722
135
1,480
Yall are at least going to these random Dev's LinkedIn pages right? Pretty obvious this guys doesnt know anything.
Guy seems pretty legit to me with very real developer contacts. What exactly about his linked in page are you talking about?
 

Maxwell House

Member
Jun 6, 2004
2,722
135
1,480
We will see who gets the last laugh.

PS5 - Glorious locked 29,97 fps @ 1080p unlimited open worlds.
Xbox X - 120 fps 8K with stuttering with small game worlds due to slow SSD needing to buffer.

I know what I'd choose. I hate stuttering.
n/m I’m stupid.
 
Last edited:

peter42O

Member
Aug 9, 2014
3,183
892
470
I'm calling it:

$399 Playstation 5
$499 XBox Series X

:messenger_hushed:
This is what I believe both WILL BE price wise but I believe that Microsoft should put Xbox Series X at $400 and go head to head with PS5 in the price department.
 

Velius

Member
Dec 22, 2016
466
489
380
Please don't flame me.

Does this mean the PS5 or the XSX is more powerful? I have not looked at the specs.

When he says the difference is staggering, in which direction is the difference??
 

Mattyp

Gold Member
May 29, 2017
1,449
1,890
520
Yeah, here is another great one from the XBox Power King Meme Thread ;)

Credits to Vasto Vasto :)

This needs the insiders from reeeeee and here names photo shopped protecting instead :messenger_grinning_smiling:

Please don't flame me.

Does this mean the PS5 or the XSX is more powerful? I have not looked at the specs.

When he says the difference is staggering, in which direction is the difference??
Xbox is more powerful.
 

VectorVictor

Member
Jun 6, 2016
627
235
300
Contrary to popular belief, the X360 had a more powerful graphics card. The part that was more powerful in the PS3 was the CPU, the (in)famous Cell. And the PS3 had to contend with a split RAM pool as well. The X360 was simply the better console overall, because it had the better GPU, the better RAM and an eSRAM to boot. The only advantage the PS3 had was the Cell, which ultimately wasn't really an advantage. The exclusives the PS3 put out had more to do with Sony's willingness to invest in them, vs MS strategy of befriending every 3rd party out there and leaving 1st parties as a secondary priority. But this was never presented in that way, because, well, the Sony defense force has quite an influence on the general view of things.
This is the correct answer. PS3 was more powerful from a raw CPU standpoint, 360 was more powerful everywhere else. But Sony completely messed up the architecture with stupid AF decisions like splitting the RAM pool that took at least 2/3rds of that generation to eventually overcome via coding, which nullified any advantages it had.

Also, the 360 did outsell the PS3 that generation--dubious marketing numbers at the end pushed the PS3 over the top, not actual sell through numbers.

Technically, the Wii wiped the floor with both.
This is true...but do we truly consider the Wii a console, or an overweight house-frau workout station that happened to play a few Nintendo games with s****y waggle controls?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tarin02543

Al3x1s

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Nov 24, 2018
4,128
3,670
645
I mean, it’s not like we don’t have both console specs here. We know the difference, it’s 2TFLOPS at best. Anybody staggered? LOL. Eh, maybe they were talking about RT capabilities. To be honest we have to wait for the games, then we will see the difference. I predict, it will be minimal.
2TF is more than a whole PS4. Is the power it takes to run the most impressive PS4 games so negligible when put towards a portion of next gen games? What if PS5 was 2 more less, that would be fine because it's just 2 less than you expected? What is the threshold it starts making a difference?
 
Last edited:

Apollo Helios

Member
Feb 27, 2020
261
950
355
The thing I find hilarious is all the "insiders" that had wrong information all claimed to "talk" to PS5 devs. Now let's consider all the devs that consider the new PS5 the most innovative tech ever.
So their insider information was in question in its totality or not?
Suddenly you verify what the insiders have said but not who they were, BUT now you are verifying who these devs are (I mean they are real why the hell you wouldn't and that you couldn't) but questioning what they have said?

Pick something that makes sense.
 

Sycomunkee

Member
Jan 21, 2019
2,828
3,171
435
So their insider information was in question in its totality or not?
Suddenly you verify what the insiders have said but not who they were, BUT now you are verifying who these devs are (I mean they are real why the hell you wouldn't and that you couldn't) but questioning what they have said?

Pick something that makes sense.
All of the "insiders" and "developers" predicted the PS5 was going to be 11-14 TFLOPS, (there is a thread regarding this with names) claiming the power crown over Microsoft. There was even one Sony developer that was claiming Sony's RT solution was better, even though there isn't enough CU's to give any sort of credibility to that comment. All of them were full of shit. So now everyone is going to believe that somehow Sony has the more powerful system still? Seriously now. Don't kid yourself.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: darrenskywalker

Clear

Member
Feb 2, 2009
10,147
3,975
1,100
2TF is more than a whole PS4. Is the power it takes to run the most impressive PS4 games so negligible when put towards a portion of next gen games? What if PS5 was 2 more less, that would be fine because it's just 2 less than you expected? What is the threshold it starts making a difference?
Its about relative power, the ratio of difference.

You really need to consider where the power is going. If you are blowing most of your resources rendering out to the highest res you can, recouping a 20% shortfall in fillrate is much more challenging and problematic at 900p than at 4k. The bigger the numbers get the harder it is to discern the difference by eye, and the more latitude there is in the ways the reduction is achieved.

This is the crux of the matter because the CPU side is way closer on the new machines and again the floor for expected performance from that side of the hardware is way, way higher.

Point being that this and last gen a lot of work was done offloading processes that would traditionally be handled by the CPU onto GPU Compute due to the relative weakness of the Jaguar cores. This time around we are looking at way more capable Ryzen units, supported by a host of additional APU elements that exist to reduce its workload (audio, I/O etc), and so its much less about compute performance specifically.

tl;dr: there is an argument to say that many of the advantages yielded by MS approach will prove less fruitful due to the overall paradigm shifting compared to last gen.