Support NeoGAF

[gspat]

I hate to say this, but I have both consoles (XBox One X and PS4 Pro), and both are hooked up to the same TV.

I'm hard pressed to tell the difference between the two when playing the same game 10-12 feet away.

 

[RScrewed]

One might hypothesize that perhaps comparisons between ultra settings and high to medium settings with barely perceptible results on many titles may have swayed sony to go for a simple checkerboard aided usually mere resolution upgrade solution for a mid gen refresh. Considering one would expect minor work to be done by devs. given two console versions and lower install base of the refresh with incoming next gen within years.

The fact the xbox one x memory and bandwidth advantages allows it to provide additional bells and whistles in addition to resolution, has interestingly enough given notable improvements in graphics due to console optimizations that break the standard ultra high settings modes seen in PC. But it came at the price of higher price, and probably more dev involvement than simple rez increases.

One might, but I doubt the tradeoff between price of the console and image quality has anything to do with decisions made from a technical standpoint. The decision makers at any company are the businessmen and setting the price point of a console is entirely a business decision. My theory as to why the PS4 Pro and X1X are priced they way they are is:

* Microsoft did demographic research of their fans and found that the average Xbox gamer earns about $75,000 annually (published stat). They looked at PS4 console sales and recognized they'd never catch up to Sony in units sold so they took the strategy of selling a higher powered console at a higher price point at least to have something to brag about. If you can't brag about sales, at least you can brag about power.

* Sony went for more affordable and wants to sell the most units and gain the most hardware marketshare. They did not publish their demographics numbers but considering another source has the average gamer salary (not brand specific) at $58,000/yr, the average Sony gamer is probably somewhere between the 58k and 75k figure of the Xbox gamer and thus it made sense to price the PS4 Pro the way they did and as a result, the hardware reflects the decision to be more affordable.

I will be interested to see if these strategies change for the next generation, the PS5's rumored specs are hard to compare to hardware price points.

I hate to say this, but I have both consoles (XBox One X and PS4 Pro), and both are hooked up to the same TV.

I'm hard pressed to tell the difference between the two when playing the same game 10-12 feet away.

At such high resolutions, you only start to notice jaggies when you get screen sizes at bigger than 70 inches and you have to sit close enough that a 1080p image would clearly be jagged. If you can't see the difference between FarCry5 at 4k on X1X vs 1650p on the PS4P, your setup is the limiting factor. I don't have a 4k TV yet so everything looks the same at 1080p for me.

 

[SonGoku]

I think we can attribute the jump from Base to Pro is looking much more apparent because the jump is happening at the lower end of the scale. There is a wall of diminishing returns we'll reach of how good something can be rendered when both consoles are limited by the media they use (It's not like one console can issue a 150 gigabyte game while the other issues a 50 gigabyte game. They basically have the same texture space available).

However both the PS4P and PS4 Base also share the same media, so I submit that equalizes the discussion.


So to go back to your earlier point, no I do not agree that it is overall "a bit much" to say the differential between X1X and PS4 Pro is akin to the jump from PS4 Base to Pro. How the devs and multiplat games manifest all this is a different discussion, but in raw calculation it's pretty clear the jumps are comparable and not overkill.

Well that's a given, the higher you go the harder diminishing results hit that's an inescapable reality and the point I (and i assume others) was making: the real world difference between base and pro is bigger than pro vs x as in the percievable difference between games, checkerboarding further helps in this over all result of base vs pro gap being much more obvious

Even if you only consider resolution without looking at other improvements and factors base vs pro goes anywhere from
170% (1080p vs 1440p) to 277% (1080 vs 1800p) in AAA games.

Of course games developed exclusively for x would look much better but thats besides the point same goes for pro heck you could squeeze an extra 20 to 30% of GPU performance if developed exclusively to take advantage of its rpm vega feature

The X1X is 75% the gap of PS4Pro / Base in terms of Teraflops, but a whopping 200% the gap in terms of GPU RAM capacity and bandwidth of their respective gaps of PS4Pro / Base.

You could get a similar result if you applied the same math to base ps4 vs xbone, not a very practical way to compare and add up different %

 

[RScrewed]

You could get a similar result if you applied the same math to base ps4 vs xbone, not a very practical way to compare and add up different %

The base PS4 was indeed very much more powerful than the base Xbone, about 50% more.

But I couldn't figure out another way to back up my claim that the chasm between X1X and PS4 Pro is the same as the PS4 Pro to the base - since you asked me to agree that was an over exaggeration. If this wasn't a practical method, how would you define an empirical way to pit the machines against each other? Comparing the percent difference between PS4Pro to PS4, then the percent difference between Xbox 1 X and PS4Pro, to see how each respective percent difference compares. Is there a better way to compare them numerically?

I guess we don't know in what proportions each %-difference matters to the overall equation. We could leverage a site like TechPowerUp. Unfortunately they don't show consoles in their GPU charts by default, so we have to visit all three pages to get an idea of how to compare them.

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2977/xbox-one-x-gpu
The Xbox 1 X GPU ranks in relative 100% performance identical to a GTX 980 from nVidia.

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2876/playstation-4-pro-gpu
The PS4 Pro GPU ranks in relative 100% performance identical to a GTX 590 or Radeon HD 7970.

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2085/playstation-4-gpu
Playstation 4 base's GPU ranks in relative 100% performance with nothing, but we'll go with a 6970 which is listed as 102% as powerful as the PS4 Base GPU.

Now, looking at the Xbox 1 X GPU graph link, the PS4Pro equivalent (Radeon HD 7970) is ranked at 66%.

Looking at the PS4 graph link, looking at the PS4 Base equivalent (Radeon 6970) is ranked at 57%.

So using TechPowerUp's estimated performance based on architecture, shader count, and clocks, they have deduced the PS4 Base is 57% the graphical powerhouse the PS4 Pro is and the PS4 Pro is 66% the graphics powerhouse the Xbox 1 X is.

Once again, I cannot say I agree it is a huge exaggeration that the jump from the Base to the Pro is much different than the jump from the Pro to the 1 X.

On my 1080P tv though, I can't see the difference of either, but if someone had a theater room and a 120 inch projector, 8 million pixels would look a lot nicer than 4 million.

 

[SonGoku]

Once again, I cannot say I agree it is a huge exaggeration that the jump from the Base to the Pro is much different than the jump from the Pro to the 1 X.

On my 1080P tv though, I can't see the difference of either, but if someone had a theater room and a 120 inch projector, 8 million pixels would look a lot nicer than 4 million.

I don't think its appropriate to use pc parts and benchmarks to compare to consoles, too rough of a comparison without the benefit of optimization and full use of resources.

To cut it short since i have an important test to prepare for Monday, what i meant to say is that the real world difference perceived in games is much more apparent when comparing base and pro, i wasn't especially thinking or referring to specs but actual games. Reason why i brought the base ps4 vs xbone comparison: Big gaps in different areas but the actual real world difference isn't as pronounced as base vs mid gen refreshes

Actual spec differential is a rather interesting point you bring which i would like to come back later to. All in all i agree Pro GPU is held back by its memory size and bandwidth which is why X performs better than what TFs differential alone would indicate

 

[TLZ]

I hate to say this, but I have both consoles (XBox One X and PS4 Pro), and both are hooked up to the same TV.

I'm hard pressed to tell the difference between the two when playing the same game 10-12 feet away.

You're doing it the wrong way. You have to play zoomed in 800%, like Digital Foundry.

 

[prag16]

All the hubbub about 4K on TVs is a little questionable to me. Unless you're sitting 6' away from a 70 inch TV (I guess maybe some people are doing that), 1080p is perfectly fine in the vast majority of situations. The differences aren't going to be noticeable. Sitting 2 feet away from a PC monitor is another story.

 

[longdi]

Looking at the leaked specs of RTX2080 and 2080Ti, they come surprisingly close to the Quadros in cuda cores. I wonder how much RTX cores these gaming cards have, slides mentioned realtime raytracing!
Even at a third or a quarter, it is really good start for realtime raytracing in games. Like 1-3grays in 2080-2080Ti holybbqomg!

Can see a case of 8800GT again, Nvidia took everyone by surprise with unified shaders, high performing ones even! Competition has no answer for months - years!
Going with AMD Navi is like sticking with retard pack RSX when unified shaders are secretly available, only this time, Nvidia did not fuck Sony over.

Remove the Tensor cores, cut down RT cores by a third, size is manageable, boomsss!

 

[thelastword]

thelastword in what alternate reality is the xbonex not more powerful than the ps4pro? Why do you focus so much on a few gpu features that made so little difference?

Read again, I never said that PRO is more powerful. I only said that PRO had better custom engineering, which is something SONY would 1up MS on anyway. Which brings me to launching in the same time-frame...If MS is launching in the same time-frame as Sony, it means that Sony will have the better hardware due to they having better engineers for custom hardware.

Also, the ID buffer, the wavelengths, the custom CU's may not have been utilized as much with multiplat devs, but it still shows a tangible difference in first party efforts, which was the main expectation. Yes, these devs are still working with a base 1.84TF for the most part, but CB games like Horizon, GOW, the 60fps replays in GTS, with MB in gameplay at 1080p, shows a nice tick up in either rez or extra graphical or perf features on the latter on PRO.......Notwithstandng the ID buffer is doing it's work in giving us some of the best jaggie free and artifact free games this gen on top of great micro detail....

Yet, what I've been saying is that XBONEX came out 1 year later. It has 4 extra CU's over PRO, that is not a gamechanger in hardware. We know they're both custom SOC's, since polaris 480 has 36 CU's and PS4-PRO has 40 with 4 disabled whilst XBONEX has 40. Yet PRO's CU's are larger and custom CU's compared to X (which means more instructions per CU, vega features etc..), on top of that, there's the ID buffer, CB hardware and other custom features. On top of that, due to the butterfly design of PRO, it has 64 rops vs XBONEX's 32. You can argue that these rops will never be fully utilized due to a lack of bandwidth on PRO, but at a hardware level, this is what the PRO offers.

So looking at all of this, I don't see better engineering by MS. All I see is MS waiting 1 year later for a better Process from the chip manufacturer, where they did not have to resort to disabling any CU's, (barring the early devkits), but more so, all they did apart from waiting 1 year for a more mature process, was to increase memory bandwidth by adding 4Gb's of GDDR5. Another token of waiting a year....So yes, their SOC is a bit bigger in size overall, so they invested in a better cooling solution over SONY to keep a roughly 29% clockspeed over PRO's GPU at bay.....

So MS has not given us a radically better GPU or great custom engineering in XBONEX over PRO, I'd say for what they've given 1 year later, is modest at best for a $100 markup...$399.00 would have made much more sense for such hardware, coming 1 year later......

Having said that, exactly 1 year earlier, the PRO had 40 CU's (4 disabled), 64 ROPS, they barely added any tangible memory upgrades, minus the 1GB of DDR3, but yet, had all of that custom silicon and features in place already. Had they gone for a $500 box 1 year earlier, the core enginnering of PRO would easily outdo XBONEX one year early. There's nothing MS did here but wait or rather anything that spells revolutionary design.

If PRO was a $500 box, 64 rops vs 32, more CU's with more instructions over XBONEX, and they would easily feed those 64 rops with more bandwidth and ram at $500....When you look at all the specs and SOC, PRO is more accomplished engineering even 1 year earlier...

Which is why I made the point, If MS and Sony are going to launch at the same time, MS will not beat Sony on hardware....


PS4-PRO vs XBONEX silicon BTW...

Lol, check it out. I'm gonna do this with math, hopefully that's one of your strong suits (not that I'm counting on it).

1440p : 2560 x 1440 = 3,686,400 pixels
4k : 3840 x 2160 = 8,294,400 pixels

That's 225% more pixels pushes to the screen at once.

It's not surprising, the X1X costs 25% more, but the trade off is that it gives you nearly 200% more in terms of performance, seems like a good deal to me.

That's not to say Sony couldn't put the exact same specc'd machine together and sell it, it's not like Microsoft nor Sony actually makes the internal silicon of their systems, they just realized that's the sweet spot is for how much revenue they can pull from their fanbase. But there's no denying the X1X is more powerful by a margin.

Edit: messed up the maths - poetic justice perhaps.

I understand it's all about results, but how many PRO games are 1440p compared to 4k native on XBONEX? From where I'm standing, not many, what are they btw? Is that the common result of PRO vs XBONEX? Please note, that some of the games which were declared to be native on XBONEX were proven to be dynamic resolution. Some games even share the same resolution like Dark Souls-R. There might be some results like what you declare I imagine, similar to 720p vs 1080p on XBOX-ONE vs PS4, but at least PS4 had a better framerate and better graphical features in all of these titles too....

Still, it would be intersting to get some stats on that. 1440p vs 2160p (native) on PRO vs XBONEX? Is it sitting at 99% of multiplat titles?

That’s probably due to the One X requiring the One as the lowest common denominator.

Well, even GOW, Horizon, UC, Detroit, GTS; as great as they look are all done with 1.84TF in mind, looking at how great they look and how well they perform on base hardware....I imagine TLOU will be the same....

As much as I wanted a ps5 I'm

Doesn't Navi and Vega both max out at 64 cu's? Are we expecting a 1500+mhz gpu in the next consoles?

People say that, but even the mid gen consoles had more CU's than what we originally saw in Polaris.....Vega refresh should carry more CU's than 64 on top of higher clocks at 7nm......

Yet, people always wonder, why Vega has so much TF and they don't outright destroy NV, but I have a feeling Vega's engineering was not fully done. It's the reason why Raja might have been frustrated as it's rumored lots of resources was taken from him when he was tasked to complete Vega. Still on the backbone, we can see Vega had lots of potential and we can see that it peeks it's head at times with some vulkan and DX12 titles. Hopefully under David Wang, we can see what he is able to do with refresh Vega later this year with 7nm and some more time in the oven.....One thing is for sure, most of the resources taken away from Raja on Vega was channeled into Sony's collaboration with AMD on Navi. Anyone thinking Sony is spending all that money at AMD to make MS 1up them in the same timeframe is just not paying attention.....

No one knows about Navi for sure.

The clock is a by product of the process node and the micro-architecture. I'm of the opinion that Vega wasn't fully ready, but was pushed out the door anyway. The performance/watt wasn't as good as it should have been so I think there is plenty of room for improvement there. I wouldn't rule out a 1.5 Ghz clock.

Originally, I wanted something with 15+ teraflops, but after Nvidia's Turing announcement I hope AMD is working on some ray-tracing technology that will make it into next gen consoles. Give me 12 TF, hardware for ray-tracing, and beefy CPU's.

I concur on Vega, btw AMD is working on it's own raytracing tech....

I hate to say this, but I have both consoles (XBox One X and PS4 Pro), and both are hooked up to the same TV.

I'm hard pressed to tell the difference between the two when playing the same game 10-12 feet away.

It's because most XBONEX games are dynamic resolution. Even something like Skyrim remastered is dynamic on XBONEX......Yet, there's no doubt that XBONEX has a rez advantage over PRO, but I'd like to see more devs use PRO's custom hardware more....I'd personally love to see CB 4k (which is looking likely) in RDR2 on PRO vs native 1800p on XBONEX and we'll see how each stacks next to each other....on a 4k screen....

 

[Panajev2001a]

Can see a case of 8800GT again, Nvidia took everyone by surprise with unified shaders, high performing ones even! Competition has no answer for months - years!

But... that card came out one year after AMD released a fast unified shaders GPU core in the Xbox 360... competition did not need to answer the... answer?!?

 

[longdi]

But... that card came out one year after AMD released a fast unified shaders GPU core in the Xbox 360... competition did not need to answer the... answer?!?

Xenos was and will be the last great custom gaming silicon, better than cell imo.

I don't see Sony doing such forward thinking work with AMD. It will be great if im wrong, somehow PS5 gpu can also do this rtx thingy as well as Nvidia. Because as GT10x rumors grow, we may see almost the full grays capability on 2080ti!
2 years from now 2020, 7nm and all, a 10grays rtx 4060 can be possible at $299!

 

[Panajev2001a]

Xenos was and will be the last great custom gaming silicon, better than cell imo.

I don't see Sony doing such forward thinking work with AMD. It will be great if im wrong, somehow PS5 gpu can also do this rtx thingy as well as Nvidia. Because as GT10x rumors grow, we may see almost the full grays capability on 2080ti!
2 years from now 2020, 7nm and all, a 10grays rtx 4060 can be possible at $299!

You say you do not see Sony doing forward thinking with AMD in the same sentence you quote CELL (an architecture can not take off or die even with plenty of good ideas behind it... ask SPARC, Alpha EV series, etc...) and brushing aside the plethora of customisations they asked or worked directly with AMD on with the original PS4 SoC and the close collaboration on PS4 Pro (nobody was expecting them to go on a Polaris++ derived core back when the rumours started) and considerably more on PS5 (to the point of taking some resources off the desktop GPU team that was working on Vega). We will see, but I am reasonably hopeful .

That kind of GPU you propose may become $300 in two years, but that is still an absurdly high percentage of the final MSRP hence you may see that in the mid generation refresh. I think PS5 will have raytracing accelerated rendering, but that you will see a big boost there with PS5 Pro (“easy” way to get games to scale).

 

[gspat]

You're doing it the wrong way. You have to play zoomed in 800%, like Digital Foundry.

Shit... I knew I must be doing something wrong!

 

[longdi]

IDK, the original PS4 SoC don't seem too outta the box. Duct tape 2 Jaguar cores and added some more ACE units up to 290X level but these dont add to the Tflops. Semi-customed i will say.
But it is enough for Sony to beat XB1 at $100 cheaper, i give them that. But MS also went for the semi-customed route. The new MS likely will not make the same mistake.
Xenos is something else you see.

PS4 Pro is more half hearted imo, RX480 with some faux 4K saving features. They could at least give us more RAM and use faster GDDR5X, something like 256GB/s feels better.
So if we are counting on PS5 Pro to deliver RTX goodness, i am afraid it will underwhelm. :/

 

[DarkoMaledictus]

Lol, have the impression ps4 never really got started, nothing memorable... or barely. And now a new one is coming out...

 

[Shin]

Sums up this thread for me, 44 pages of it.

 

[Bernkastel]

Anybody would have told you that coming one year later at $100 more would net you a more powerful system. This is not a trend with MS, its was an expectation,perhaps even an expectation at $400 1 year later, but even that was not reality. All told, a system missing Vega features and lacking in Custom engineering mind you compared to the system released 1 year earlier.

For your knowledge, there has never been a time where MS has launched in the same timeframe as Sony and had better hardware.....even the differences in the PRO vs XBONEX 1 year later at a markup, suggests this as well....


If anything, the opposite happened. Queue some old threads on GAF when there was speculation on PS4's 8GB of Ram, it's the same sentiment you get in this thread by and large. People thought persons were on drugs, it would be impossible et al.....

The Xbox 360 launched a year earlier and had better specs than PS3. Also, the Xbox One X wasn't just more powerful than the PS4 Pro, it was also quitter and slimmer.

.

Look at this conversation now, folk are still imagining current systems and architectures with higher TF counts and basing next gen expectations or lack thereof based on that, so hence their disbelief on how said systems will be cooled etc....In truth, a PS5 in 2020 may even be based on 7nm+ or even 5nm, so a a much reduced power draw on top of new architecture or new hardware cores that offsets how things are traditionally rendered (raytracing is one, maybe even specific hardware for A.I).....

In essence, looking at current Vega AIO powerdraw at 13.7TF does not paint an accurate picture of how powerful or power efficient we can get 18-24TF in 2020 under new architecture at 7nm or 5nm. Things evolve, nodes are getting more compact, coolers are getting much better, processes are getting better. Current Vega architecture should not be used as a measuring stick to tell the future in the face of many evolving technologies.

Even Vega is going through some changes which will improve perf at a much lower powerdraw, Vega 7nm is already a thing and we can expect 20.9TF or more with it this year.....The NUC's in early 2019 will be very powerful on 7nm, so I don't see how persons believe that a PS5 in late 2020 is only going to have 16GB of ram or push only 10-12TF. If Vega 7nm is pushing north of 20+TF this year or early next year, then Navi will push much more than that when it launches....Even a mid gen Navi GPU should be 24TF at minimum in 2020...

And you think a 400 USD box will cram all that nonsense?

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

What would be amazing is if amd can pull another unified design again. Rather than having tensor cores, ray tracing accelerators, etc. it would be excellent if a design could work that not only performed unified shader tasks but also AI acceleration and Raytracing acceleration across the entire chip.

 

[SonGoku]

What would be amazing is if amd can pull another unified design again. Rather than having tensor cores, ray tracing accelerators, etc. it would be excellent if a design could work that not only performed unified shader tasks but also AI acceleration and Raytracing acceleration across the entire chip.

Heh I'd be ecstatic if amd can deliver a post gcn arch for next gen consoles
Any extra ai/raytracing features would just be icing on the cake

 

[Lort]

I find it very odd that Sony is considered gaming heritage when in reality it literally created 1 more console than Microsoft. More to the point Microsoft was making games before Sony ever started.. the only true heritage console company is Nintendo. In related news the Nintendo DS appears to have outsold the Playstation 2 and is now the best selling console ever.

 

[SonGoku]

I guess part of it has to do with the huge impact ps1 & ps2 had worldwide.
As anecdotal evidence: Where i live, people often use playstation as synonym of console and videogames in general

 

[Munhon]

I hate to say this, but I have both consoles (XBox One X and PS4 Pro), and both are hooked up to the same TV.

I'm hard pressed to tell the difference between the two when playing the same game 10-12 feet away.

Let me guess, native 1080p tv!? An even so, there are little differences. The difference is noticeable if you play both on a 4k tv, no discuss about that. Higher native resolution means better graphics definition here and in China...

 

[gspat]

Let me guess, native 1080p tv!? The difference is noticeable if you play both on a 4k tv, no discuss about that. Higher native resolution means better graphics definition here and in China...

Should have been a bit more specific... It's a 4K LG with HDR.

 

[Lort]

I guess part of it has to do with the huge impact ps1 & ps2 had worldwide.
As anecdotal evidence: Where i live, people often use playstation as synonym of console and videogames in general

Yup i think thats part of it. People still see PC’s as different to consoles when in reality they are 99% the same.

 

[Munhon]

Should have been a bit more specific... It's a 4K LG with HDR.

What game did you test in both consoles in that panel?

 

[Toe-Knee]

I find it very odd that Sony is considered gaming heritage when in reality it literally created 1 more console than Microsoft. More to the point Microsoft was making games before Sony ever started.. the only true heritage console company is Nintendo. In related news the Nintendo DS appears to have outsold the Playstation 2 and is now the best selling handheld ever.

Fixed that for you.

 

[I Love Rock 'n' Roll]

Any chance the 5 Pro is coming at launch as a option for hardcore gamers? I don't want to wait like 2026 to get one since it's gonna be a boost based model. Or do you think there can be more with a Pro model this time?

 

[gspat]

What game did you test in both consoles in that panel?

Don't remember. Was many months ago on son's machines and he's out of town right now. Will definitely get back on this though.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Any chance the 5 Pro is coming at launch as a option for hardcore gamers? I don't want to wait like 2026 to get one since it's gonna be a boost based model. Or do you think there can be more with a Pro model this time?

Almost certainly not. If iterations are done again then they will happen in 2022/23 going by this gen.

 

[Lort]

Fixed that for you.

Its been the best selling handheld for years.

It is now the best selling games console ever.. or about to be depending who u talk to https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...be-best-selling-game-console-of-all-time/amp/

What is funny is that the PC and the iPad have to be not considered as gaming consoles else they win easily. https://www.lifewire.com/how-many-ipads-sold-1994296

Is there any definition of games console that doesn't include pc or ipad ... other than.. “ a box which cant do anything else useful other than play games” ?

My xbox can download torrents, browse the web, and run heaps of apps... so maybe xbox is no longer a games console? So can the playstation 4 .. so its no longer a games console?
Edit: sorry kinda off topic ill move it a new thread.

 

[PonyStation4]

I find it very odd that Sony is considered gaming heritage when in reality it literally created 1 more console than Microsoft. More to the point Microsoft was making games before Sony ever started.. the only true heritage console company is Nintendo. In related news the Nintendo DS appears to have outsold the Playstation 2 and is now the best selling console ever.

You say Sony has released only 1 more console than Microsoft, then proceed to call the NDS a console... what makes NDS a console but not the PSP and Vita?

There has not been any accurate source on whether the NDS has outsold the PS2 or not, Nintendo and Sony have not released any sales data for a long time now. If NDS did outsell the PS2, Nintendo would do something to celebrate it or at least mention it.

 

[Tarkus98]

I find it very odd that Sony is considered gaming heritage when in reality it literally created 1 more console than Microsoft. More to the point Microsoft was making games before Sony ever started.. the only true heritage console company is Nintendo. In related news the Nintendo DS appears to have outsold the Playstation 2 and is now the best selling console ever.

Don’t mean to derail the thread but just curious; you sure Microsoft was putting out games longer then Sony? I seem to recall Sony games being on consoles as far back as the Atari 2600. I don’t recall seeing any Microsoft titles back then but I would like to know for certain.
Also DS is a handheld so different category. Anyway, hasn’t it outsold the PS2 for some time now?

 

[demigod]

You say Sony has released only 1 more console than Microsoft, then proceed to call the NDS a console... what makes NDS a console but not the PSP and Vita?

There has not been any accurate source on whether the NDS has outsold the PS2 or not, Nintendo and Sony have not released any sales data for a long time now. If NDS did outsell the PS2, Nintendo would do something to celebrate it or at least mention it.

Haha that’s just rich. You got him good. Maybe now he’ll think before posting.

 

[TLZ]

I find it very odd that Sony is considered gaming heritage when in reality it literally created 1 more console than Microsoft. More to the point Microsoft was making games before Sony ever started.. the only true heritage console company is Nintendo. In related news the Nintendo DS appears to have outsold the Playstation 2 and is now the best selling console ever.

The bolded part. Thanks for the laugh

On the heritage part, I'd say the PS had much more impact WW. Sales both hardware and software tell a lot.

 

[longdi]

Sony has won 3 of the last 4 console generations. Came in 2nd for the other one.

I think they are most successful console maker in history.

 

[Bernkastel]

Don’t mean to derail the thread but just curious; you sure Microsoft was putting out games longer then Sony? I seem to recall Sony games being on consoles as far back as the Atari 2600. I don’t recall seeing any Microsoft titles back then but I would like to know for certain.
Also DS is a handheld so different category. Anyway, hasn’t it outsold the PS2 for some time now?

Microsoft has been making consoles before Sony.

 

[Toe-Knee]

Its been the best selling handheld for years.

It is now the best selling games console ever.. or about to be depending who u talk to https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www...be-best-selling-game-console-of-all-time/amp/

What is funny is that the PC and the iPad have to be not considered as gaming consoles else they win easily. https://www.lifewire.com/how-many-ipads-sold-1994296

Is there any definition of games console that doesn't include pc or ipad ... other than.. “ a box which cant do anything else useful other than play games” ?

My xbox can download torrents, browse the web, and run heaps of apps... so maybe xbox is no longer a games console? So can the playstation 4 .. so its no longer a games console?
Edit: sorry kinda off topic ill move it a new thread.

Well a pc is a pc it's in the name and with handheld console. It is

With regards to xbox one and PS4 they're consoles that can do other things just like a pc is a computer that can play games.

 

[Tarkus98]

Microsoft has been making consoles before Sony.

Well I was actually asking about games and not a console but interestingly enough in the video you posted there is clearly a Sony published game in there.
Anyway I would still like to know if Microsoft was indeed making games around the time of the Atari 2600 because I believe Sony was.
Again not meaning to derail the thread just asking Lort if MS was making games that far back since he said they made games before Sony.

 

[gspat]

Microsoft had been making the BASIC interpreter for most computers back in the day.

So even if they weren't making games per se, they certainly provided the means to.

 

[Tistru]

Sony has won 3 of the last 4 console generations. Came in 2nd for the other one.

I think they are most successful console maker in history

2nd behind who? Are you referring to the Wii?

 

[TLZ]

I'm happy to see them all successful. I'd love to see more too.

 

[Ar¢tos]

I'm sure MS is already quite profitable without being "number 1", and they can continue being profitable in second place next gen too (if it happens to be the case then). As long as they keep their share of the US market, they will be safe. Conquering Asia is impossible for them (even Sony is not as significant there as it once was) , and Europe will continue being a challenge, they just need to keep tailoring their output to the US market (shooters, racing games and general sports) and forget about the rest of the world, it would only be money wasted they will not get back.

 

[Lort]

I'm sure MS is already quite profitable without being "number 1", and they can continue being profitable in second place next gen too (if it happens to be the case then). As long as they keep their share of the US market, they will be safe. Conquering Asia is impossible for them (even Sony is not as significant there as it once was) , and Europe will continue being a challenge, they just need to keep tailoring their output to the US market (shooters, racing games and general sports) and forget about the rest of the world, it would only be money wasted they will not get back.

The number 1 platform for games is android and ios .. Fortnite has more downloads on ios than there are ps4s ever made. So theres that.

If you want to talk about hardware sales ios / android / pc all are way higher than Playstation. Sony is doing just fine in 2/3 place and xbox is doing just fine as well.

 

[camelCase]

I hate to say this, but I have both consoles (XBox One X and PS4 Pro), and both are hooked up to the same TV.

I'm hard pressed to tell the difference between the two when playing the same game 10-12 feet away.

Such are the gifts of a rational mind

 

[Ar¢tos]

You know very well I was talking about console environment only. If I triggered your "defense" mode then there is truth in what I said...

 

[Lort]

You know very well I was talking about console environment only. If I triggered your "defense" mode then there is truth in what I said...

I was agreeing with you? Saying that being number one means nothing and companies do just fine without the bighest sales.

 

[demigod]

I was agreeing with you? Saying that being number one means nothing and companies do just fine without the bighest sales.

No you weren't. You said Sony is number 2/3 behind ios and android. You knew he was talking about consoles, not mobile. But go ahead and keep spinning.

 

[longdi]

Nvidia just raised the bar, seemingly full turing cores with 6-10 grays AND tensors AI cores for their gaming cards.

PS5 better have good raytracing hw if not their games will look flat dated in 2019

 

[bitbydeath]

Nvidia just raised the bar, seemingly full turing cores with 6-10 grays AND tensors AI cores for their gaming cards.

PS5 better have good raytracing hw if not their games will look flat dated in 2019

Genuine question, is it possible for PC to use Raytracing properly in games while also having to support non-raytracing cards? I get the feeling we won't see it properly used like we see in the demos for years.

I mean, if consoles push it there's a chance but I honestly don't expect they will.

EDIT: Just saw the BFV demo, looks like it is being focused on reflections and not graphics yet so I guess that answers my question since it can be easily turned on and off.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Nvidia just raised the bar, seemingly full turing cores with 6-10 grays AND tensors AI cores for their gaming cards.

PS5 better have good raytracing hw if not their games will look flat dated in 2019

Sure... Ray tracing in a 400$ console..
There will be SO MUCH disappointment when next gen is announced! From 15tf to 32gb hbm ram, and now Ray tracing dreams.