Support NeoGAF

[Zones]

I would not say a system with its core component significant less powerful/efficient than 3060 is high performance.

More like "mid performance, low power".

3060?
What?
Where?

 

[hard_boiled]

However i still doubt it will result in any tangible differences, guess its wait and see for now.

Often times in software it is not one optimization that pushes performance, but many small ones.

For example, assume you have a slow web page used to display thousands of addresses for a delivery company. Most of the page is probably written in Javascript, that can be optimized by reducing the codebase so the page is pulled up faster on initial load. The data given to the webpage from a server can be paginated so that a users machine isn't loaded up all at once & differences in load time between screens or components can be obscured via de-bouncing, providing a cleaner experience. Finally, it is possible that there are components that are rendering multiple times or assets coming from a CDN, both of these can be fixed in their own ways.

All of those small optimizations together would turn a mediocre or poor webpage experience into an excellent one.

 

[Jonsoncao]

3060?
What?
Where?

It is not announced, but it is there, and significantly more powerful than PS5.

 

[M1chl]

High performance = high power in IT terms. I understand why PS fanboys spew this bullshit, because they accustomed to the turbolent nature of their PS4 cooling, however aerodynamic does not play a role in computation performance, so any parallel with cars, planes, athletes is not valid one.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

3rd party games don't care about exotic hardware. they aint going to program a game completely around PS5 hardware and then reprogram it completely around xbox and PC they will release 1 version and that's it.

Xbox will be native 4k, PS5 will be dynamic 4k boom gpu difference defeated while doing zero effort, a bit more draw distance maybe and effects and we call it a day.

if only unreal engine, one of the top engines used by most third parties, wasn't being prepared to take advantage of ssds and direct to gpu memory fast access.

We still don't know to what extent it benefits from the ps5's ssd. An ssd which can easily produce 17+GB/s(thanks to kraken and rdo) filling the entire rumored 14GB of available ram(OS rumored to take 2GB) in under one second.

 

[yurinka]

High performance = high power in IT terms. I understand why PS fanboys spew this bullshit, because they accustomed to the turbolent nature of their PS4 cooling, however aerodynamic does not play a role in computation performance, so any parallel with cars, planes, athletes is not valid one.

I assume that they mean even if PS5 has less teraflops than Series X PS5 has other benefits like faster/with higher frequency GPU, way faster loading from SSD and memory management thanks to a better I/O system or faster wifi and Bluetooth that also have lower latency (wifi 6 and Bluetooth 5.1). So it may/should achieve better results/perfomance at some bencharks in several areas compared to Series X because as devs like John Carmack or Tim Sweeney said, more teraflops doen't always means more performance.

I mean, teraflops measure a theorical peak in some tech areas, but there are more areas and is more important what real world performance results the games achieve than the theorical peak, because always there are bottlenecks and other things preventing devs to achieve these theorical peaks. In this case, Series X has more teraflops but the difference is a smaller % than we saw other generations, and several optimizations and better performance in other areas designed to remove or reduce some of these bottlenecks should help PS5 to achieve a better % of its theorical peak, getting closer or even has better performance than Series X at least in some areas.

 

[Rayderism]

So, if a game is supposed to run at 30fps and it drops to 29fps, does that mean Sony failed?

 

[Zones]

It is not announced, but it is there, and significantly more powerful than PS5.

How much for your crystal ball? And does it come with a time machine?

'Cause I'll buy it at a high PRICE!

On a more serious note, this is how a PC with the same PS4 GPU but a significantly more powerful CPU compared to PS4 runs RDR2.



So what I am trying to respectfully tell you is to stop pretending you know jack shit about how the tech inside game consoles work compared to PCs.

 

[Johnny Silver]

Let me see if I understood what the OP said:

When you say "high performance" you mean the console constantly operating very close to the limits which define it computational capabilities.

Whereas "high power" is simply another console with a theoretical higher computational capability but there's no guarantee that it can run constantly close to its theoretical limits?

 

[M1chl]

I assume that they mean even if PS5 has less teraflops than Series X PS5 has other benefits like faster/with higher frequency GPU, way faster loading from SSD and memory management thanks to a better I/O system or faster wifi and Bluetooth that also have lower latency (wifi 6 and Bluetooth 5.1). So it may/should achieve better results/perfomance at some bencharks in several areas compared to Series X because as devs like John Carmack or Tim Sweeney said, more teraflops doen't always means more performance.

No obviously it does not mean, but you could say, that architecture is more efficient, not really having higher perfomance. Maybe it's just wording, but I do find this strage. And sure in the end PS5 could be more powerfull of them or maybe more "versatile" because now we are talking only in the theoretical sense (s).

 

[yurinka]

No obviously it does not mean, but you could say, that architecture is more efficient, not really having higher perfomance. Maybe it's just wording, but I do find this strage. And sure in the end PS5 could be more powerfull of them or maybe more "versatile" because now we are talking only in the theoretical sense (s).

I mean, imagine an imaginary console's GPU and CPU can render a theorical peak of 1 million things every second but due to bottlenecks on its memory, I/O system, bandwith in some areas etc can be feeded to render 500k things. Other console's GPU and CPU and render a theorical peak of 800k things per second but due to a more optimized and balanced architecture with better stuff in other areas its GPU and CPU are feeded to render 700k per second.

The first imaginary console has more power/theorical peak (1M vs 800k) but less performance in real world results (500k vs 700k), while the second a better perfomace with less power because it removed or reduced bottlenecks so it can reach results closer to its theorical peak.

I assume the OP means it may be the case of PS5 vs Series X. We'll need to wait and see how real next gen games perform, specially next gen only multi games, designed to take advantage of the next gen features without being hold back by current gen engines and stuff like HDD.

 

[Jonsoncao]

How much for your crystal ball? And does it come with a time machine?

'Cause I'll buy it at a high PRICE!

On a more serious note, this is how a PC with the same PS4 GPU but a significantly more powerful CPU compared to PS4 runs RDR2.



So what I am trying to respectfully tell you is to stop pretending you know jack shit about how the tech inside game consoles work compared to PCs.

I am sorry that a foreseeable "3060 significantly more powerful than PS5 GPU" and my "pretending I know jack shit about how the tech inside game consoles" make you so angry. My apology.

 

[Zones]

I am sorry that a foreseeable "3060 significantly more powerful than PS5 GPU" and my "pretending I know jack shit about how the tech inside game consoles" make you so angry. My apology.

Angry? Is that seriously your pathetic comeback after being proven (with clear evidence) that you are objectively wrong?

I am primarily a PC gamer myself, but unlike you, I am not delusional.

 

[Jigsaah]

Below is one example where custom hardware was used to resolve a bottleneck and in the process save one whole CPU core. (Meaning it could be used elsewhere) When Mark is quoted as addressing all bottlenecks then that would be where the excitement from devs is coming from.
IF similar bottlenecks are resolved on the GPU side then that means you won't need as many teraflops to perform the exact same operations as XSX.




I'm not saying PS5 is more powerful than XSX because of these changers but it obviously at the very least brings the two much closer together performance wise since PS5 is using (as per Mark Cerny) 'a lot of custom hardware'.

Quote taken from -

Spoiler

GAF isn't underestimating shit. I know that much.

 

[Jonsoncao]

Angry? Is that seriously your pathetic comeback after being proven (with clear evidence) that you are objectively wrong?

I am primarily a PC gamer myself, but unlike you, I am not delusional.

Thanks for correcting my objectively wrong opinion.

 

[WatDat]

SSD SSD SSD SSD SSD SSD SSD SSD SSD

 

[Mr. PlayStation]

I am curious as to why this thread was even started? We know potential of PS5 and we can't wait to see it translate to the real world scenario where we are interacting with the hardware through the games. And anyone who's trying to say anything otherwise, well good luck to you!