• 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.

Next-Gen PS5 & XSX |OT| Console tEch threaD

Status
Not open for further replies.

scie

Member

scie

Member
So is Oberon. Now, are we waiting for the reveal of Puck?

I don´t know what "reveal of Puck" means. My point was regarding that "tease" of Lockhart in their latest video and that they are most likely certain that it is comming. To underline that I showed that video that they knew relatively early the PS5 stuff....
 

rnlval

Member
I don't believe the bandwidth actually comes out unless its used, its not like a reserved amount that cannot be used by the GPU its just the speed that the CPU can access the bus.
Zen 2 CPU in these consoles will be used and the frame rates are higher than PS4/PS4 Pro CPU baseline.
 

TBiddy

Member
I don´t know what "reveal of Puck" means. My point was regarding that "tease" of Lockhart in their latest video and that they are most likely certain that it is comming. To underline that I showed that video that they knew relatively early the PS5 stuff....

Which tease are you referring to here? Is it in their XSX teardown? I've been unable to watch it as of yet.
 
I think that ultimately, for multiplatform titles, the XSX is going to handle 4K @ 60fps with ease, while the PS5 will struggle to do the same. PS5 will probably fall into the low to mid 50s.

1080p on a PS5 would be 60fps locked all the time, though.

I'm basing this on looking at 2080 TI vs AMD 5570 XT GPUs, since these are said to be close to the respective machines.

EDIT: I mean the AMD 5700 XT.
 
Last edited:
Its up to devs no matter what.
I agree, I just hope devs are intelligent enough to scale down microscopic and irrilevant details to get those frames up, it's really no use. As I said, at this point you can get important performance improvement without the sacrifice of chunks of details, to the average eye the visuals would be the exact same even if DF will of course find something.
 

Bo_Hazem

Banned
cannot one play lots of ps4 exclusives via ps now on pc? I know that these are not direct ports.

Of course you can, and I think that's 100% good. Cloud gaming is shit in general, as long as they're not downloadable, then great. But sending direct ports is another matter. And their approach to cloud gaming makes sense overall.
 

Fake

Member
I agree, I just hope devs are intelligent enough to scale down microscopic and irrilevant details to get those frames up, it's really no use. As I said, at this point you can get important performance improvement without the sacrifice of chunks of details, to the average eye the visuals would be the exact same even if DF will of course find something.

I guess is, up to devs fact, but those devs who opt for 60 will get more stable performance more easily. Of course, specs still don't solve bad programming. We will still saw poor 60 or even not locked 30. Mark my words.
 
Last edited:

B_Boss

Member
Bold statement I’m hesitant to say unlikely. Keeping a level playing field is easier on PR than having an obvious gulf and having to explain it.

Goodness I have always truly hated that reality for console gaming....so there is no point in these consoles being this or that apart from one another except for 1st party gamers?

Thanks to PR and saving face, each console isn’t allowed to show its full potential for 3rd party games because as competitors they can both be shown to lack in areas? Perhaps MS/Sony should just develop a console together...no point in trying to be different except for 1st party games lol.

P.S- This is absolutely not directed towards you Shmunts’ but more of the seeming facts that you highlighted 🍻. I absolutely hate that particular corporate reality as it relates to the game console business. Perhaps it is more complicated than I understand (or assume?)...
 
Last edited:

jonnyp

Member
I think that ultimately, for multiplatform titles, the XSX is going to handle 4K @ 60fps with ease, while the PS5 will struggle to do the same. PS5 will probably fall into the low to mid 50s.

1080p on a PS5 would be 60fps locked all the time, though.

I'm basing this on looking at 2080 TI vs AMD 5570 XT GPUs, since these are said to be close to the respective machines.

The developers can tweak some other settings lower to make it run at 60fps on PS5, if that's what's needed. I don't see any point in running games with unlocked frame rates. Either get it to run at 60fps 99.9% of the time or don't bother is my opinion on this. I'd much rather have locked 30fps than fluctuating fps.
 
Last edited:

Bo_Hazem

Banned
It's a commonly recurring strawman used by some console warriors, where criticism of MS first party being entirely cross-gen for up to one year post XSX launch is misconstrued as expecting no cross-gen titles at all for PS5, not even third party.

But PS5 is already getting exclusives even from a 3rd party? And also Lockhart is on its way to gimp XSX further for the next 7 years. PC's are there as well to hold back gaming for 2-3 years.
 

Bo_Hazem

Banned
I think that ultimately, for multiplatform titles, the XSX is going to handle 4K @ 60fps with ease, while the PS5 will struggle to do the same. PS5 will probably fall into the low to mid 50s.

1080p on a PS5 would be 60fps locked all the time, though.

I'm basing this on looking at 2080 TI vs AMD 5570 XT GPUs, since these are said to be close to the respective machines.

bucket
 

wintersouls

Member
I Just wanted to drop in with a timely reminder...the Xbox Series X is the most powerful next generation console.

Sony exclusives will, undoubtedly, be fabulous, but third-party games (which is nearly everything) will likely look better on the Series X.

Normal service may now be resumed...


No.

Have you already seen games to compare? I do not

When we see the games then we can speak properly. At the moment you cannot affirm what you say as if it were going to be true.
 
I think that ultimately, for multiplatform titles, the XSX is going to handle 4K @ 60fps with ease, while the PS5 will struggle to do the same. PS5 will probably fall into the low to mid 50s.

1080p on a PS5 would be 60fps locked all the time, though.

I'm basing this on looking at 2080 TI vs AMD 5570 XT GPUs, since these are said to be close to the respective machines.
It would make no sense from a console perspective. Your benchmarks probably uses the same settings for two different GPUs exactly to show the differences. On the consoles side, less difference there is the better is, for a third party developer. So each game will be tailored around the given console to hit the target framerate in the same way, they have no need to use the same exact settings and let the framerates go wild.
This time around should also be easier, as both consoles have Zen 2 CPU with SMT and the GPU/RAM difference aren't even half as One and PS4, optimization shouldn't require the crazy shit Dice probably did for Battlefield 4 to "run at 60 fps" (it wasn't) on this gen consoles, even the PS4 version sucked, it was probably very difficult to hit those targets in a game like Battlefield when you have a non-gaming CPU.
Mine is pure theory, but I think is from a common sense perspective. Time will tell.
 
Last edited:

BluRayHiDef

Banned
I think that ultimately, for multiplatform titles, the XSX is going to handle 4K @ 60fps with ease, while the PS5 will struggle to do the same. PS5 will probably fall into the low to mid 50s.

1080p on a PS5 would be 60fps locked all the time, though.

I'm basing this on looking at 2080 TI vs AMD 5570 XT GPUs, since these are said to be close to the respective machines.

You honestly think that Sony is careless enough to design a console that fails to perform in 4K at 60 FPS again?
 

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
Note that GPU has native support for S3TC/BCn formatted textures.
BCPack is part of their SSD decompression ASIC - it works 'on' DXT formats, it's not one of them.

PS3's split memory model argument omitted split rendering argument!
What split rendering are we talking about?
RSX and Cell both had unified address range accessing entire 512MB - which included possibilities of getting creative with things like RSX simultaneously rendering to RTs resident in both pools, or segregating texture access from RTs etc. The real difference was the bandwidth of two pools was actually cumulative because they were physically on separate buses, which is obviously not the case for SXS.

Would the SEX incur in a performance penalty in loads where CPU & GPU access the fast & slow pool simultaneously?
'Naive' implementation(since it all seems to be connected via a single bus) would suggest yes, but there isn't enough public info to say for certain here.
 
Last edited:

SonGoku

Member
1. It's against your optimization argument.

2 &3. Mentioned features are mostly resource conservation and it's against your optimization argument.
Care to be more specific and quote "my optimization argument" that contradicts these features?
4. MS still has a last-minute change option by changing four 1GB chips into four 2GB chips.
and i hope they do! just like i hope Sony upgrades to 16Gbps chips
PS5's 448 GB/s memory bandwidth has its own drawbacks when there's additional CPU memory bandwidth consumer, hence it's lower than PC's RX 5700/5700 XT with 448 GB/s
SEX has this same drawback though... They have more bandwidth but they also have a more powerful GPU too feed, after accounting for this they only have 7% to 10% "extra" bandwidth compared to PS5 and yes that's including when CPU takes a portion of it.

Luckily RDNA2 will be more efficient than RDNA1 as well as any customization console manufacturers add to mitigate this issue
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't it be amazing if Nintendo released a console that will rival the PS5 and XSX? I wish that Nintendo focused on hardcore gamers again.
Nintendo is for handled what Sony is for home consoles. They both know they are near-invincible on their grounds and so they doesn't care anymore to step outside. Sony did very well with PSP, but it was a different time, even the 3DS never reached the DS, it sold less the half the units. Switch is the modern response to the smartphones.
 
Last edited:

BluRayHiDef

Banned
I know that AMD's Epyc CPUs are for servers and not for games, but I'd like to know how the 32 and 64 core models would stack up against the CPUs in the PS5 and XSX as apart of a build with comparable graphics capabilities and bandwidth.
 

LordOfChaos

Member
Wouldn't it be amazing if Nintendo released a console that will rival the PS5 and XSX? I wish that Nintendo focused on hardcore gamers again.

It would be amazing if they released a console that rivaled the PS4 to start. I think we can just accept for now that the era of Nintendo putting out power competitive hardware has been done with since the Gamecube, they're all abou the "blue ocean" now and that tends to mean barely matching the last gen but in novel form factors.
 

BluRayHiDef

Banned
It would be amazing if they released a console that rivaled the PS4 to start. I think we can just accept for now that the era of Nintendo putting out power competitive hardware has been done with since the Gamecube, they're all abou the "blue ocean" now and that tends to mean barely matching the last gen but in novel form factors.
Would you like another company to join the console market? Perhaps even an old competitor, such as Sega?
 
Would you like another company to join the console market? Perhaps even an old competitor, such as Sega?
For what concern me, it depends.
Just another competitor? No.
A better competitor than MS? Yes. Sony needs real, strong competition because it's good for everyone, but to gather such resources and focus to be on par with Sony in few years it's kind of impossible. Let's say Amazon enter the competition, it would take one entire generation only to got the first party teams right, also tons of third parties should be converted to the new console, let alone setup services like streaming and find the sweet spot for monthly payments like PS Plus, Gold and Gamepass. It would be a gigantic operation, Sony entered the market when first parties were realized by teams of 30 people, PC wasn't even a thing for console gamers and there were no smartphones, multimedia and shit. You didn't even have to think about fucking servers (something that brought Sony to take Azure from MS) because PS1 didn't care about online play and even less than services in general, and PS2 as well aside from some titles. Now it's a hell of a mess.
I mean I would like a new competitor, yes, but in reality the console market is fucking wild, you need bilions to setup everything and other bilions to keep going, and you can get crushed in one year. I find very unlikely that someone new would propose something similar to Sony and MS, by default Google did a wise thing with Stadia but then got everything else wrong.
 
Last edited:

Imtjnotu

Member
I think that ultimately, for multiplatform titles, the XSX is going to handle 4K @ 60fps with ease, while the PS5 will struggle to do the same. PS5 will probably fall into the low to mid 50s.

1080p on a PS5 would be 60fps locked all the time, though.

I'm basing this on looking at 2080 TI vs AMD 5570 XT GPUs, since these are said to be close to the respective machines.
You're basing this off a Nvidia Gpu and a amd card from 2010... Nicely done
 

BluRayHiDef

Banned
For what concern me, it depends.
Just another competitor? No.
A better competitor than MS? Yes. Sony needs real, strong competition because it's good for everyone, but to gather such resources and focus to be on par with Sony in few years it's kind of impossible. Let's say Amazon enter the competition, it would take one entire generation only to got the first party teams right, also tons of third parties should be converted to the new console, let alone setup services like streaming and find the sweet spot for monthly payments like PS Plus, Gold and Gamepass. It would be a gigantic operation, Sony entered the market when first parties were realized by teams of 30 people, PC wasn't even a thing for console gamers and there were no smartphones, multimedia and shit. You didn't even have to think about fucking servers (something that brought Sony to take Azure from MS) because PS1 didn't care about online play and even less than services in general, and PS2 as well aside from some titles. Now it's a hell of a mess.
I mean I would like a new competitor, yes, but in reality the console market is fucking wild, you need bilions to setup everything and other bilions to keep going, and you can get crushed in one year. I find very unlikely that someone new would propose something similar to Sony and MS, by default Google did a wise thing with Stadia but then got everything else wrong.

So, considering the difficulty of joining the console market, you don't think any company will actually try to do it, apart from Google with their failed effort? Also, do you think Google will make another attempt?
 
So, considering the difficulty of joining the console market, you don't think any company will actually try to do it, apart from Google with their failed effort? Also, do you think Google will make another attempt?
No, I indicated Google exactly like an example of not joining the standard console market. I mean, it's like the Switch: yes you use it at home and stuff, but c'mon it's not the same thing. Google wanted to do a different thing because had NO CHANCE to get in your home an actual console for 400+ dollars with games needed to be converted for who fuck knows what hardware. Their idea was to be "invisible" but everywhere, also smartphones and pads. I've no idea if they will come back, they really showed how difficult is to gather support: they had no games and like one first party, and their tech wasn't working as intended at all lol one year before they were boasting about dual GPUs and shit.
No, I don't believe anyone will try to join unless at least MS really take another hard, VERY HARD hit. Some devs, those of Project Cars, are making a new console called "MadBox", but I give them 0% chance.
 
Last edited:

kareemna

Member


man says he does not care about console or it's wars.

he gave his opinion about consoles.


I think this video is very important. It gives a big piece of info about Lisa working with IBM for CELL. Which proves the direct collaboration between Sony and AMD in RDNA2.

Basically the APU is becoming a CELL. Heck even that infinity fabric is like the Element Interconnect Bus.

Many old gen consoles had multiple coprocessors which were later integrated on the main CPU for example.

Check out the Sega Saturn.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
He's gonna flip, just like MBG, Crapgamer. I can smell it.
Being playstation fanboy is probably most addictive thing ever.
I think this video is very important. It gives a big piece of info about Lisa working with IBM for CELL. Which proves the direct collaboration between Sony and AMD in RDNA2.

Basically the APU is becoming a CELL. Heck even that infinity fabric is like the Element Interconnect Bus.

Many old gen consoles had multiple coprocessors which were later integrated on the main CPU for example.

Check out the Sega Saturn.
Except not really, all the cores can operate as full blown core, which in case with Cell they could not.
 
I Just wanted to drop in with a timely reminder...the Xbox Series X is the most powerful next generation console.

Sony exclusives will, undoubtedly, be fabulous, but third-party games (which is nearly everything) will likely look better on the Series X.

Normal service may now be resumed...

Xbox fans: “XSX is the most powerful next gen console on paper!”

Everyone else: “Well yes, but the things that the PS5 are doing may possibly give it the better performance in real world application. Let’s just wait for more info and games.”

Xbox fans: “ XSX IS THE MOST POWERFUL. YOU SONY PONIES ARE JUST BUTTHURT. AN SSD CAN’T MAKE UP COMPUTE POWER! EVERYTHING WILL LOOK AND RUN BETTER ON XSX!”

And people wonder why discussion has slowed down in these threads. People are tired of getting shouted down by manchildren.
 
Being playstation fanboy is probably most addictive thing ever.

Except not really, all the cores can operate as full blown core, which in case with Cell they could not.
And thanks god I guess, at least developers will not be forced to divided the work in seven parts to use all the power lol
 

kareemna

Member
Being playstation fanboy is probably most addictive thing ever.

Except not really, all the cores can operate as full blown core, which in case with Cell they could not.
Yes true one of the biggest differences are the CELL has one scalar and 8 vector cores. But the philosophy behind it is the same as an APU.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
And thanks god I guess, at least developers will not be forced to divided the work in seven parts to use all the power lol
Obviously that's a good thing, I though that goes with saying : ) Just look at this mess, with synchronising shit, so it could actually do something:
Timestamped


That's "Hello world" on X360/PC vs. PS3. It's absolutely terrible design choice which hardly materialized in games.

Yes true one of the biggest differences are the CELL has one scalar and 8 vector cores. But the philosophy behind it is the same as an APU.

I don't thing I agree with that, since in Cell you have central segment in for of PPC core which then controlled the SPEs. And GPU was not really anything like in APU, also no shared memory controller, etc.
 
Last edited:
Obviously that's a good thing, I though that goes with saying : ) Just look at this mess, with synchronising shit, so it could actually do something:
Timestamped


That's "Hello world" on X360/PC vs. PS3. It's absolutely terrible design choice which hardly materialized in games.

Yeah I was just elaborating not correcting you or something.
I saw that video, yes, PS3 was really a big mistake, Kutaragi always had this "imma put nuclear power in it" that really went overboard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom