Will laugh when we see Horizon Zero Dawn 2 vs Crackdown 4 in a Digital Foundry graphics comparison.
A 1st part game vs C tier 3rd party game? Why not compare Playgrounds new RPG vs HZDYeah can't wait to see the power of Series X when Crackman 4 and Halo 7: Upscaled edition are compared to Horizon 2 and God of War 2
I'm teasing guys but its true
He was clear
Yup. It does make sense. It does appear that sony was caught off gard with XSX 12tf when PS5 was only 9.2tf. There comes the variable clocks and frequency idea and upclocking to the very high number it now is to get to the 10.2 number.
Based on workload? People do realize that as a gen goes on, games only get more demanding increasing workloads more and more.
Was the Xbox One vastly underpowered compared to the PS4 in your opinion?I know enough about hardware to not need Digital Foundry to form my views. I do watch them because I find their content interesting. At the same time, they have been caught to base their opinions on who is sponsoring them, but that's another story for another time.
PCs are expected to have less stable performance than a console, because the user can tweak as much/little as he/she wishes. Consoles generally have to go for many years, and the hardware is what it is. The main way to optimize for it and squeeze everything out of it, is to have a set system. If you make things variable, it inevitably makes the optimization more difficult. Sony is known to make things more difficult than necessary though. Look at the PS3....
Obviously, yes. But that was not the point. The point is that the XSX design is in such a way that the cooling is sufficient to run the system at a constant speed at all times. In other words, no part of the hardware is being hampered from working at its max design capacity.
The PS5 is different. The combination of the CPU and GPU are obviously exceeding the cooling capabilities, meaning they have to do some load balancing to keep power usage in check. And even then, the CPU and GPU are less powerful.
I actually suspect that they went with a smaller GPU, because GCN had a scaling issue. The most obvious example was the Vega 56 and Vega 64, where they both performed exactly the same despite the Vega 64 having 14% more CUs. Sony most likely figured out that past 40CUs, scaling was bad, so, they didn't want to risk spending die size and thus cost on a larger GPU. This is why Cerny was talking about the whole clock speed vs CU thing. Apparently RDNA has fixed that though, so, despite their good initial intention, it didn't turn out right for them. If the XSX has issues scaling towards 52 CUs, we'll find out soon enough.
The question is whether this is because of a need, since they are weak in comparison to the XSX specs, or if it really was intended like that from the beginning. The former is more logical, although the second one is not impossible.
Not at all. Having two modes is a sound strategy. SMT also produces additional heat, so, it is simply a logical way of operating things. They are aware that as the years go by, SMT will become more relevant. In the early years, 8 cores are more than enough. The developer can choose either one from the beginning.
In contrast, the whole load balancing the PS5 is doing it by itself. The developers cannot choose, but have to experiment to somehow find the optimal load for each component.
Not to mention there is zero reason to panic for the XSX, considering the specs are higher than the PS5....
In terms of TFLOPS it's over 17% when the PS5 is boosting. So it's at least 17%. Add in the RAM bandwidth difference, and the difference widens quite quickly.
You are right though, that mindshare wise, the PS5 will still outsell the XSX. That has more to do with Sony brand loyalty more than anything else. Look how many people are trying to defend the PS5 in here, vs the ones supporting the XSX...
That's funny. The only viable reply to that, is this meme;
In any case... I'm extremely annoyed at all the threads here trying to defend the PS5, or even try to justify how it is actually superior to the XSX. Maybe if there was some humbleness after the inferior PS5 specs were announced, the PS5 wouldn't be trashed so much. Still, it's a fact that it looks inferior. But some people have issues dealing with that.
That still doesn't change the fact that they have to experimentally determine (i.e. a slow and tedious process) what the optimal way of doing things is.
Yes. And so is the Xbox One S. There's a reason the PS4 had basically playable framerates in most games while the Xbox One didn't.
Then you agree that it will stay at 10.2 because the workload will require that much GPU power.
A 1st part game vs C tier 3rd party game? Why not compare Playgrounds new RPG vs HZD
No I do not. Because it's all in theory at this point until we see games.
Interesting, but we'll see its power at the PS5 reveal
Wrong. Playgrounds new ip is still yrs away. It has never been confirmed as a XB1 title. Get your info correct
When he says " i think" then yes, its not absolute like XSX's locked clocks. Its in theory and has to be put in practice by the industry.Its a tech guy hyping is own design, just like MS hyped the XB1 design and it special esram, etc after the backlash of the competitors console have the clear win in raw specs.Turns out, the esram was not the savior MS envisioned.
Maybe I should elaborate a bit. The graphical power difference was quite big. The CPU advantage of the Xbox One couldn't really be seen in most games simply because the GPU was the limiting factor. There were some instances though that the CPU did give the XO some leeway, particularly in open world games where the CPU has more work. So 'vastly' is a bit exaggerated, but the difference was significant enough for the XO to need either lesser graphical details, or suffer framerate dips below 30fps more regularly than vice versa.Interesting, but we'll see its power at the PS5 reveal
Halo 6,Hellblade 2,Forza next for starters. It's called scaleing. It's been going on for yrs in PC/console development. For instance, Halo 6 on XSX will have RT, more enemies on screen, better framerates, higher resolutions at much higher settings, faster load times, better draw distance and on it goes.
Stop what? XSX is the clear winner in terms of power. That is not going to change.
Where was I talking about the XSX?
And I can argue you guys are trying too hard to overplay PS5 weaker spec and SSD.
He said exclusives, though.
They are console exclusive. HZD is coming to PC along with many others that have(Death Stranding,Quantic Dreams games) or will in the future. including MLB The Show. So if u want to play that game, exlude HZD2 as it will inevitably come to PC etc.
Jason isn't saying PS5 is overall more powerful. He's stating devs claim PS5 has wins over XSX. What are these wins? SSD? 3D audio? Who are these devs? Audio programers? VR devs? Who knows.
I'm a PlayStation fan and I approve this message
Good point. Thanks
The PS4 was stronger than the Xbox One, which is why it wasn't included. It was quite clear that I was pointing out instances when the PS was the weaker console, which is pretty much every generation except one.
Really? Remember last week when it was all about the TFLOPS and today TFLOPS talk is taboo? That's technically not really a change though. You're right. The PS fan base has always stayed the same, with their constant goal post shifting.
Never claimed Sony fans didn't change their narrative.
They planned to have a keynote at GDC. GDC got cancelled, so they repurposed that keynote into Cerny's video. The plan was always GDC. That was when they wanted to show it off.
Fair enough. I find the Sony fans more annoying though. There are so many of them...
Well yes. There are more fans of a platform which has existed for longer and has a much larger international customer base.
