demigod
Member
No PCs can’t even with the fastest nvme which is currently around 3,500 mb/s.
-
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.
PlayStation 5 more powerful than Xbox Scarlet, according to Game Informer editor
- Thread starter DryvBy
- Start date
No PCs can’t even with the fastest nvme which is currently around 3,500 mb/s.
bitbydeath
Member
PS5 has devkits out in the wild so it wouldn’t be that difficult for him to find out if he wanted too.
Geki-D
Banned
Of course I already knew the answer. Consoles next gen with have an advantage, if not visually it'll be functionally. Curious to know how the "PC Master race" will get their heads around this till PC tech catches up and becomes something people actually use.
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Sarcasm?
isn't common sense a machine releasing a year after would be more powerful.
I mean could you imagine turning up a year or two later with a less powerful machine?
Point being, when going head to head and releasing in the same time frame.
Sony has always had the more powerful machine.
TeamGhobad
Banned
Lockhart is anaconda with smaller storage and no disc drive. 100 bucks cheaper. also doesn't come with a headset. and might ship with a standard xbox one controller. basically anaconda bare bones as possible.
cell worked with the RSX which gave the PS3 more graphical grunt overall compared to the 360 (it was intentionally designed that way). Not to mention the standard HDD, by 2009/10the PS3 was pumping out games the 360 couldn't do. Heck I was in shock with God Of War 3 MLAA solution which was superior to PCs at the time. Cell was a beast once they got a handle on it.
D
Deleted member 738976
Unconfirmed Member
I don't give a shit about their power levels in text form I want to see the damn games with in game graphics.
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
No matter what way you look at it.
For PS2 and Xbox you are comparing a machine that was designed and built before a lot of tech that was in the Xbox existed
PS2 had massive bandwidth compared to all consoles regardless what year they released.
People really underestimate how powerful the PS2 was considering the tech available at the time of its conception.
Point being when going head to head Sony has always produced the more powerful console.
Outrunner
Member
You are assuming Sony and Microsoft will be able to deliver what they are promising.
Geki-D
Banned
It's something they're both saying so it seems reasonable to assume as much.
Frank Spencer
Banned
Hence Microsoft were vague about specs. Neither want to jump first.
somerset
Member
Here's the deal guys, and it is *simple*
MS wants the most powerful 2D (TV) gaming console ever witnessed, and to have it as far beyond the Xbox1X as possible. And it is going to be a *monster* (which few here get, since you are still brainwashed by Nvidia, and their price per performance).
But MS seems to be going for a trad solution- at best a separate single die for the GPU.
So Sony, what gives. I really really really expect Sony to go one GPU *per eye* for the very best VR solution, then pair these *two* GPUs in 'crossfire' for normal 2D gaming - giving them the *winning* boost over MS's architectural approach.
You see there is *no way on Earth* MS is allowing a *normal* architecture from Sony to beat the Xbox Next. Cos MS asks only one thing from AMD- give us your very very very best solution on this architecture. And obviously on the same architecture, Sony can't trump that.
There are *two* types of architecture. That within the chip itself (like Zen and Navi- and then the number of cores which is essentially a limitation of die size and feasible power constraints), and *external* architecture- how the chips are used, busses, memory subsystems.
MS is getting a dream gaming PC architecture- all AMD with all Intel's sh-tty busses replaced with brand new AMD busses (gaming PCs all have sh-tty Intel busses, even the AMD ones). Dribblers here still don't get what that means for the massive boosts flash will bring. Dribblers here still think flash means Intel's shitty SSD standard on the PC.
But Sony is designing for VR- to bring game changing VR. And that implies a new architecture focused on even more render power- *and* sustainable framerates in complex games well above 60. I think Sony ios going to blow people's socks off. And MS will really have to hope that VR flops, and Sony suffers from the greater build cost expense.
MS wants the most powerful 2D (TV) gaming console ever witnessed, and to have it as far beyond the Xbox1X as possible. And it is going to be a *monster* (which few here get, since you are still brainwashed by Nvidia, and their price per performance).
But MS seems to be going for a trad solution- at best a separate single die for the GPU.
So Sony, what gives. I really really really expect Sony to go one GPU *per eye* for the very best VR solution, then pair these *two* GPUs in 'crossfire' for normal 2D gaming - giving them the *winning* boost over MS's architectural approach.
You see there is *no way on Earth* MS is allowing a *normal* architecture from Sony to beat the Xbox Next. Cos MS asks only one thing from AMD- give us your very very very best solution on this architecture. And obviously on the same architecture, Sony can't trump that.
There are *two* types of architecture. That within the chip itself (like Zen and Navi- and then the number of cores which is essentially a limitation of die size and feasible power constraints), and *external* architecture- how the chips are used, busses, memory subsystems.
MS is getting a dream gaming PC architecture- all AMD with all Intel's sh-tty busses replaced with brand new AMD busses (gaming PCs all have sh-tty Intel busses, even the AMD ones). Dribblers here still don't get what that means for the massive boosts flash will bring. Dribblers here still think flash means Intel's shitty SSD standard on the PC.
But Sony is designing for VR- to bring game changing VR. And that implies a new architecture focused on even more render power- *and* sustainable framerates in complex games well above 60. I think Sony ios going to blow people's socks off. And MS will really have to hope that VR flops, and Sony suffers from the greater build cost expense.
Last edited:
Ar¢tos
Member
Probably neither has finalised the specs yet. CPU and gpu clocks, small customizations, etc are probably still being fine tuned.
Armorian
Banned
Exclusive games from talented devs, mostly linear and tailored around system limitations - there are no 360 version of Uncharted, TLoU or GOW3 to compare.
Frank Spencer
Banned
The only thing confirmed is the colour of the console!
Ar¢tos
Member
I wish we had color choices right at launch, and I'm not talking of white or black... Give us colors or fully replaceable casings. They can even make more money by selling colored / designed casings.
Outrunner
Member
Yeah, I'm sure they made a fortune out of that on the Xbox 360
Ar¢tos
Member
As far as I'm concerned, yes. The only difference to me is the exclusives and that Sony already has a VR solution.
Outrunner
Member
No... Xbox One S games are usually at lower resolution that PS4. Like 900p or 720p vs 1080p. It changes on the mid gen upgrades though.
Armorian
Banned
Core assets are usually the same.
Aintitcool
Banned
When dev kits were going out during the PS3/360 era microsoft had a huge devkit advantage as sony was struggling withe Cell production. And devs got 360 kits like 1 year ahead of time and also for MUCH cheaper, meaning that generation for game console development 360 mastering than PS3 porting was just also a budget saving measure. I don't remember but for PS4, Xbone seems dev kits were released around the same time but sony had memory allocation problems while xbone did not. This generation it seems Xbox is behind in the dev kits. If aaron says the kits are not out yet, and Playstation devs already confirmed trying out the new feature of dev kits(Like super fast loading via Spiderman demo)
Rather have them profit of cool looking plastic than trying to get us all under subscriptions for life.
Dontero
Banned
No, neither consoles will eliminate them.
There are some tricks devs can use but no way they will be able to eliminate loading times.
First of all, data is not the only factor to loadings. Most of games these days have cpu stuff working in background that also needs to establish game while game loads. So while data can be loaded in say 1ms CPU itself could be crunching some numbers longer than that.
Good example of it is Windows itself. By switching from HDD to SSD you get difference from about 30 seconds to 4-5 seconds but going from SSD to NVME drive gives you barely 0.1s better times. Point is that Windows does much more than just data loading in that time when Windows starts up. It creates, windows, fires up protections, checks drivers responses etc.
So no. What you should expect is pretty similar to what you get from PC. For example on my rig The Witcher 3 loading times went from 20 seconds to 3 seconds after respawning.
There are though some ways that you could cut further loading times by properly handling data and CPU stuff but neither of those are exclusive to SSD which means that if someone already cared for that he could already do that on HDD and usually people who have long load times do this stuff.
What makes you think that ? Both PS4 and XboxOne were way slower than PC when they released.
Next gen consoles will have effectively same parts as mediacore PCs at the time.
The SSD stuff is just pure PR because it won't be any faster than PC currently can do because if they would have that ability pro business would long time ago use that and they don't (unless you count RAID as that)
Days of custom hardware and PC being in shadow for a year or two are past, ended up with PS3 era. For a time PS3 had pretty fucking fast CPU and that was about it, console itself wasn't even faster than PCs at the time because where most of PS3 games were played at 720p or below that, same games on PC were played in 1280x1024 or bigger and with better settings to boot.
Last edited:
Dee Dah Dave
Member
Whichever ends up being more powerful there won’t be much of a difference in terms of what you see on screen.
There would have to be at least 4TF of power difference for any real significance and that ain’t happening. My bet is they will be within 2TF of each other. Exact same CPU with slight clock difference. SSD will both do the required job. RAM could be different if Sony does use HBM, plus amount etc.
There would have to be at least 4TF of power difference for any real significance and that ain’t happening. My bet is they will be within 2TF of each other. Exact same CPU with slight clock difference. SSD will both do the required job. RAM could be different if Sony does use HBM, plus amount etc.
Bryank75
Banned
Either way, I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Since PlayStation and Xbox next gen consoles will both have an extremely fast SSD type solution and PC is not a uniform platform... we are going to see a huge benefit from console gaming. Devs will be able to work with the tech on consoles to make revolutionary changes to gaming (SSD and hardware accelerated raytracing) that will not be available on every PC, you'll probably need a huge spec to get even close.
If everyone got in behind Playstation, they could even increase the economies of scale and get more juice out every generation / refresh.
If everyone got in behind Playstation, they could even increase the economies of scale and get more juice out every generation / refresh.
Frank Spencer
Banned
can someone summarize the different in power eg 'more times powerful' between PS1/PS2/PS3/PS4 so I can get an idea of where we are.
Ellis
Member
On a scale of 0.00 to 10.00 linns
PS1 = 0.74
PS2 = 2.88
PSP = 1.97
PS3 = 5.50
PSV = 4.10
PS4 (base) = 6.90
PS4 (pro) = 7.20
Last edited:
Armorian
Banned
GPU power: PSX (I can't find flops number
) - PS2 (6.2GFLOPS) - PS3 (230GFLOPS) - PS4 (1800GFLOPS/1.8TFLOPS) - PS5 (11TF or above)RAM: PSX (2MB + 1MB VRAM) - PS2 (32MB +4MB VRAM) - PS3 (256MB + 256MB VRAM) - PS4 (8096MB/8GB shared) - PS5 (16GB or above)
Frank Spencer
Banned
Thanks wanna have a guess what PS5 will be?
That’s probably the case.
You need about 9 months to produce enough consoles for launch, and you need to be finished 3 months before, so about a year.
If they still fine tune, they have about 2 months left. So yeah, I would be quiet to.
They already gave Sony Hardware ray tracing ... now let’s see if Sony also has Turing like cores in PS5.
Last edited:
Shin
Banned
One day this one is stronger, the other day the other side is stronger.
Only take away I get from that is that everything is up in the air and everyone doing their best to 1-up each other.
In other words what might be true today might not be the case tomorrow and I expect it to be the case until the end of the year at least.
Only take away I get from that is that everything is up in the air and everyone doing their best to 1-up each other.
In other words what might be true today might not be the case tomorrow and I expect it to be the case until the end of the year at least.
Ellis
Member
Using the same same linns (How many Toy Story (1995) frames can it render in real-time per minute) method, my guess would be around 8.45 linns.
mejin
Member
After Sony humiliated MS on DAT E3 2013, they changed to a low profile attitude.
MS barked the whole gen always estimulating console wars, even when Spencer talked about toxic community. Sony didn't give a damn and continued to send messages through actions, games.
But in the past year, some people thought this silence from Sony meant they don't know what they are doing. Every single decision was criticised to put MS on better light and everyone of those critics were dismissed. Yesterday press was just the new one.
Sony knows exactly what they are doing. People should understand it by now....
MS barked the whole gen always estimulating console wars, even when Spencer talked about toxic community. Sony didn't give a damn and continued to send messages through actions, games.
But in the past year, some people thought this silence from Sony meant they don't know what they are doing. Every single decision was criticised to put MS on better light and everyone of those critics were dismissed. Yesterday press was just the new one.
Sony knows exactly what they are doing. People should understand it by now....
nani17
are in a big trouble
Said it before when there was a post about Xbox being more power..
Being 5% or 10% more powerful doesn't matter when you don't have titles people want to play. Example would be the Xbox one x it's the most powerful console on the market but it really doesn't have those amazing 4k titles you need to play.
Games are why you should buy/choose a console not how powerful they are
Being 5% or 10% more powerful doesn't matter when you don't have titles people want to play. Example would be the Xbox one x it's the most powerful console on the market but it really doesn't have those amazing 4k titles you need to play.
Games are why you should buy/choose a console not how powerful they are
Armorian
Banned
If GPU power difference will be dependand only on clocks (that is the only thing that realisticaly can be changed this far in development) then difference in power between consoles will be within ~1TF, pretty much nothing for 12TF systems.
Last edited:
sublimit
Banned
Dude why do you sound so bitter? If everyone said that this guy is talking crap and the Scarlet is 2 times as powerful as PS5 would that made you feel better? What impact would it have to you as a gamer/consumer?
In my opinion even this current gen's consoles are more than enough to make every developers dreams possible.At least those who know how to make games that are deeper than your average cinematic experience crap. PS4/XB1 are more than enough to make evrything these developers want and still run decently as long as they put the effort in it.Games are not about 4k-8k resolutions,120fps, high-res textures and all that crap.We don't need these in order to feel immersed in a game.Its gameplay,level design and art direction are more powerful than the most "shiny" graphics.
Why should we play the game of those greedy graphic card companies and tv manufactarures every 5-6 years who try to make us think that games are all about high-end resolutions and frames?
I'm not attacking you or anything i'm only saying this to you because i usually like your posts but sometimes you let a bit of fanboism cloud your judgement.
Last edited:
LazyParrot
Member
Every generation? Aren't you kinda ignoring this current gen here? Xbox One was clearly the inferior choice for multiplat titles for four entire years until MS launched the One X.
Starlight Lotice
Member
Damage contol? Shook?
"You can take away our Anime Tiddies and Western Third Party Output Microsoft .....but you cannot take away our POWAH!"
- Sony 2020
"You can take away our Anime Tiddies and Western Third Party Output Microsoft .....but you cannot take away our POWAH!"
- Sony 2020
Gormless Noodle
Member
I know it might sound dumb or silly, but this right here might actually make much more of a difference than a lot of people would reasonably expect. Sony got a lot of free exclusives from Japan but that's drying up real fast with their new censorship policies, that was a huge advantage they had as it made Playstation the only option if you wanted the best of both the West and Japan. The start of a gen is all about creating good momentum for your console and you need to be in good graces with the hardcore scene to gain that, we saw that clear as day last gen. Shit like this has impact, it might seem very small but it could make all the difference in the long run.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked