• 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.

(*) Sony PS5 Vs. Xbox Series X Technical Analysis: Why The PS5’s 10.3 TFLOPs Figure Is Misleading

Eliciel

Member
Oct 30, 2009
1,166
241
940
I think it's less than 400$ BOM, even if that was the case i don't see PS5 sell more than 449$, my personal concerns are pricing (more than 449$) & thermal paste.
Mainly it is thermal paste, world consumption of thermal paste could peak soon.

Jokes aside, I think 399 is too good to be true. It is going to be closer to 449...

I expect Xsex at 549-649 range
 
Last edited:

Kadve

Member
Jun 5, 2019
89
87
200
Times like this makes me remember the whole "blast processing" thing of the Mega drive/SNES. (referring to the fact that the former's cpu ran at twice the clock of the later)

Higher number != More powerful console. FLOPs are after all only a measurement on paper.
 

Shin

Member
Feb 4, 2013
5,542
3,963
895
I think it's less than 400$ BOM, even if that was the case i don't see PS5 sell more than 449$, my personal concerns are pricing (more than 449$) & thermal paste.
I trust Bloomberg with financial news, probably $449 and eat $20-50 loss on each.
Because more RAM went into it than the 8GB is why I think that and not $399.

Scarce components have pushed the manufacturing costs for Sony Corp.’s next PlayStation to around $450 per unit, forcing a difficult price-setting decision in its battle with Microsoft Corp., according to people with knowledge of the matter.
 

Neur4lN01s3

Neophyte
Mar 19, 2020
91
129
125
FLOPs are after all only a measurement on paper.
Actually TFlop/s (not flops, T as unit multiplier, flop=floating point, /s = "per second") is the real number of Operation in double precision that hardware can execute in a second, on silicon, not on paper, it's the major number to look for "power" when you are looking for 3D performances of a chip

weaker TFlop/s numbers leads to weaker performances in 3D rendering, except the rare case when the pipeline is bad designed with severe bottleneck (es 128 bit bus data, low bandwidth memory).
in the next console field, who has the more Compute power have the best bandwidth and bus data too, so you can compare the numbers
 
Last edited:

-kb-

Member
Jun 17, 2019
358
377
235
Actually TFlop/s (not flops, T as unit multiplier, flop=floating point, /s = "per second") is the real number of Operation in double precision that hardware can execute in a second, on silicon, not on paper, it's the major number to look for "power" when you are looking for 3D performances of a chip

weaker TFlop/s numbers leads to weaker performances in 3D rendering, except the rare case when the pipeline is bad designed with severe bottleneck (es 128 bit bus data, low bandwidth memory).
in the next console field, who has the more Compute power have the best bandwidth and bus data too, so you can compare the numbers
Its single precision, and how much the ALU actually gets used depends on the workload. The only reason you can directly compare the next gen consoles is because they are the same microarchitecture, outside of the same microarchitecture it doesn't really make sense to compare them.
 

Neur4lN01s3

Neophyte
Mar 19, 2020
91
129
125
Its single precision, and how much the ALU actually gets used depends on the workload. The only reason you can directly compare the next gen consoles is because they are the same microarchitecture, outside of the same microarchitecture it doesn't really make sense to compare them.
Agreed, single precision and agreed to the fact that TFlop/s compare to similar/same arch
 

Elenchus

Banned
Jun 27, 2018
806
1,009
365
You literally just proved my point. As Cerny stated, the PS5 will run at 2.23GHz a majority of the time, with the only time it downclocking being if a game pushed it to its absolute limit. So if the clocks are stable and the cooling is sufficient, why would the PS5 have issues? OP contradicted himself trying to paint the PS5 as a 9.2TF machine that is boosting to 10.3TF when Cerny himself literally said it’s not an overclock type boost.
What does “majority of the time” mean? Cerny is an engineer and certainly has a hard figure (or at least a range) and yet he decided not to share that information. So it’s kinda unreasonable for you to demand that we all assume that “majority” means 90%of the time when it could mean just 51% of the time. Cerny decided to be vague to help Sony’s marketing and this is the result. 🤷‍♂️
 

Kadve

Member
Jun 5, 2019
89
87
200
Actually TFlop/s (not flops, T as unit multiplier, flop=floating point, /s = "per second") is the real number of Operation in double precision that hardware can execute in a second, on silicon, not on paper, it's the major number to look for "power" when you are looking for 3D performances of a chip

weaker TFlop/s numbers leads to weaker performances in 3D rendering, except the rare case when the pipeline is bad designed with severe bottleneck (es 128 bit bus data, low bandwidth memory).
in the next console field, who has the more Compute power have the best bandwidth and bus data too, so you can compare the numbers
Was referring more to the fact that there is more to a console than just GPU performance

It doesn't matter for example how powerful a GPU is if the CPU can't keep up, and we still don't know how effectively developers can utilize said TFlop/s in practice without hitting unforeseen bottlenecks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Genx3

Neur4lN01s3

Neophyte
Mar 19, 2020
91
129
125
Was referring more to the fact that there is more to a console than just GPU performance

It doesn't matter for example how powerful a GPU is if the CPU can't keep up, and we still don't know how effectively developers can utilize said TFlop/s in practice without hitting unforeseen bottlenecks.
of course GPU, memory and CPU performance is not all, Nintendo say "hi", great games anyway
but 3D-performance wise, gpu, cpu and speed of memory is all
 

Johnglen

Report me if I continue to console war
Apr 1, 2018
349
656
405
Klee said that both consoles are double digit TF and Navi in August last year

You mean January 2020.

Regarding DF, they never verified it until MS did it. DF ( Richard in this case ) after XSX reveal at TGA ( so, December ) asked MS is XSX 12 TF Navi or GCN ,but didn't get any confirmation on that. They assumed that it is TF 12 Navi because Phil Spencer said GPU performance is 2x of X1X 6 GCN TF. Here is the video.

No I mean April 2019, (made the mistake by saying January) still way before Klee said anything. Here is a quote from the April 2019 DF article:
«Combine this with the leak that Microsoft is working on an entry-level four teraflop console alongside a 12TF monster (the figures may change but the strategy is accurate, according to our sources) and the impression is that for the Xbox team at least, the top-end in console GPU power is likely to be an Xbox One X-level premium price option.».

As for the rest of the madness we are witnessing in the last few days here is what I WROTE when insiders were preaching the 13 TF gospel :
«Yep, the difference will be quite obvious when the specs are announced. I expect Sony fans to start searching for secret sauce, for how the SSD speed difference is the most important thing e.t.c . I don’t post much anyway, but I find threads like this quite interesting because if you look things objectively and analyze how each company is communicating its plans for these consoles it Is very easy to come to a logical conclusion without needing «insiders» to tell you what to believe.»
Wrote this in February 14, without being an insider or any bs like that 😉😉😂😂
 
Last edited:

wordslaughter

Member
Apr 17, 2019
450
897
340
this is a massive misrepresentation of the situation there’s two posts describes the situation pretty well.

I don't think it is.

You linked me to this quote...

"There seems to be a general confusion on here about not being able to distinguish between clock speed and current. Not saying it’s you, just speaking in general.
The load you put in at a given frequency will determine the voltage needed and thus the power draw.
Let’s say a cpu doing 3ghz pulling 20amps at 1v is generating 20w of power draw. 20w is it’s max budget. We won’t go into vrm complications on here.
Lets drop that down to 10amps. There no reason for the frequency to drop as it’s below the max power budget. So at 10 amp load the cpu is happily signing along at 3ghz (max set) drawing 10w.
Now a 25amp load comes in. Because you’re power throttling, your cpu frequency will drop as needed until ”voltage x amps = max power draw.” That’s the “boost” part.
In this situation, it’s actually reverse boost meaning its controlling frequency drop from best case scenario based on load coming in and the power budget allocated. "



And what I said is this...

"So if it's idling it will sit at 2.23GHz, but as soon as you actually use it and push it, it goes above it's power budget and throttles down. "

We are not disagreeing with each other.
 

just tray

Member
Jul 12, 2007
985
42
1,065
west coast
The sad part is that Sony increased clock speeds amd still got left behind. Those are potential best case operating speeds for rhe PS5. Its still a 9.2 Tera flop GPU. Higher speeds won't make up for lack of graphical features, worse lighting, in fact, can PS5 even do ray tracing without scaling back? I doubt it. Then there is Direct X 12 Ulrimate which the Next Box was built for.

PS5 is great but that Ford Mustang is only the fastest car on the block until someone pulls up in a Ferrari

I'm not downplaying the SSD on the PS5 as that's the best gaming SSD on the planet

I'll buy both because everyone knows Sony next to Nintendo makes the best exclusives.

I don't think consoles will be different in price, maybe a 50 dollar difference.

Why the small SSD sizes? Price and game streaming which comes down to Internet speeds and then we can talk about SSD speeds which still gives Microsoft an advantage but as far as streaming game assets as a game downloads, I can see where PS5 is better and has better download and upload speeds

Either way, both machines are great and hats off to both machines. For PC gaming these machines just extended your lifeline PC gaming benefits the most in the future from these consoles.

All this tech I a way of Microsoft breathing fresh air into the PC market. Let's be real. What outside of graphics cards has really seen more than incremental improvements? Imagine an Alienware set up (just an example) with better than Series X and PS5 tech?

Both impress me but one more than the other.

Who cares what is better? Both are going to start a new trends.

As far as exclusives? Don't counr Microsoft out. The Halo engine will surprise everyone. Halo with Ray Tracing? Ray Tracing is one right Sony shouldn't pick with Microsoft as the difference will be in resolution, effects, and frames.
 

Bumblebeetuna

Member
Jun 23, 2008
6,168
975
1,060
The speeds are variable, they both can’t run full speed all the time otherwise why not lock the speeds? So it might be a few flops less powerful when playing beefy games, so what? What bizarre damage control some are trying to run in this thread, Cerny and Sony literally say the speeds are not locked and performance can drop and yet some in here are saying it’s actually locked at 10.3 🤡
 

wordslaughter

Member
Apr 17, 2019
450
897
340
This is extreme FUD and totally misleading. If you continue I'll report you to the mods.
You do what you gotta do. What are you going to report me for? Not believing Cerny's obvious PR speak? OK

I'm just trying to figure out what's actually true. Every gen it is necessary to sort through Sony's smoke and mirrors. This is nothing new.

Normally a GPUs frequency is variable and as you add graphical load the frequency and power increase to handle that load. The heat obviously increases. The GPU will end up at a maximum clock that it can sustain. You can then use THAT clock frequency X the number of shaders to determine a TFlops # - This is normally how it's done.

But it's clear that won't work with the PS5 being setup the way it seems to be.

What seems to be true is that the PS5 GPU is happy to idle at 2.23Ghz so long as there's not too much power or graphical load put on it. Calculating a TFlops number based on the clock in that state is completely meaningless.

As you increase the graphical load the power will increase. As the power and graphical load increases the temperature will rise. When it reaches a certain power envelope ( no doubt calculated on what the temperatire would necessarily be at that power level ) it will then throttle itself to stay within its power envelope. Something it can SUSTAIN while working hard on a graphically intense game.

Here's the question - When that happens WHAT is the clock speed? THAT clock speed is what we need to know to accurately calculate a TFlops number.
 
Last edited:

it_wasn't_me

Banned
May 22, 2017
1,991
3,120
395
No I mean April 2019, (made the mistake by saying January) still way before Klee said anything. Here is a quote from the April 2019 DF article:
«Combine this with the leak that Microsoft is working on an entry-level four teraflop console alongside a 12TF monster (the figures may change but the strategy is accurate, according to our sources) and the impression is that for the Xbox team at least, the top-end in console GPU power is likely to be an Xbox One X-level premium price option.».

As for the rest of the madness we are witnessing in the last few days here is what I WROTE when insiders were preaching the 13 TF gospel :
«Yep, the difference will be quite obvious when the specs are announced. I expect Sony fans to start searching for secret sauce, for how the SSD speed difference is the most important thing e.t.c . I don’t post much anyway, but I find threads like this quite interesting because if you look things objectively and analyze how each company is communicating its plans for these consoles it Is very easy to come to a logical conclusion without needing «insiders» to tell you what to believe.»
Wrote this in February 14, without being an insider or any bs like that 😉😉😂😂
Yeah. But DF DIDN'T clarify is it Navi or GCN flops. That's surely big difference. So, Klees info regarding XSX was more accurate and more closer - double digit and Navi.
But reddit rumors are from January 2019
 
Last edited:

MisterXDTV

Member
Dec 8, 2013
891
359
480
Nobody here is saying that the clock are LOCKED

LOCKED= 100% of the time
Mostly locked could mean 90% of the time

It's not difficult to understand
 

Johnglen

Report me if I continue to console war
Apr 1, 2018
349
656
405
Yeah. But DF DIDN'T clarify is it Navi or GCN flops. That's surely big difference. So, Klees info regarding XSX was more accurate and more closer - double digit and Navi.
But reddit rumors are from January 2019
Klee clarified that after MS announced it. Anyway why are we still arguing about Klee, the guy was proven wrong, he was specifically saying that the ps5 gpu would be over 12 RDNA2 TF.
 
Last edited:

welsay01

Neo Member
Mar 19, 2020
24
23
100
The speeds are variable, they both can’t run full speed all the time otherwise why not lock the speeds? So it might be a few flops less powerful when playing beefy games, so what? What bizarre damage control some are trying to run in this thread, Cerny and Sony literally say the speeds are not locked and performance can drop and yet some in here are saying it’s actually locked at 10.3 🤡
Yeah, they wouldn't be able to lock the GPU 2.23GHz and still have the CPU at 3.5GHz. In situations that would demand that much power, it will down clock a "couple" of percent to stay within the power budget. They went with variable because that was the only way they could get over 2GHz on the GPU.

So it can run 2.23GHz all day and night, but to do that the CPU will take a hit and vice versa. TFLOP is calculated by the GPU's numbers, not the CPU. So if they choose to run the GPU at 2.23 full time and sacrifice CPU speed, then they are still 'locked' at 10.28.

This was absolutely a cost-saving measure going with this setup so that they could allocate more of their budget to the Tempest Engine CU, the custom I/O, and the fast SSD.
 

it_wasn't_me

Banned
May 22, 2017
1,991
3,120
395
Klee clarified that after MS announced it. Anyway why are we still arguing about Klee, the guy was proven wrong, he was specifically saying that the ps5 gpu would be over 12 RDNA2 TF.
Klee said in August last year it is a double digit and Navi for both consoles. And he specifically said that XSX is slightly above 12 TF, while MS it is 12 at TGA
 
Last edited:

martino

Member
Apr 25, 2013
3,452
798
610
France
What does “majority of the time” mean? Cerny is an engineer and certainly has a hard figure (or at least a range) and yet he decided not to share that information. So it’s kinda unreasonable for you to demand that we all assume that “majority” means 90%of the time when it could mean just 51% of the time. Cerny decided to be vague to help Sony’s marketing and this is the result. 🤷‍♂️
that and i have an example of game (i don't show) that do raytracing at modest cost (no data)...
for a tech presentation it felt more like spec sharing/expectation than the step where you show actual data/result....
 
Last edited:

it_wasn't_me

Banned
May 22, 2017
1,991
3,120
395
Yeah, they wouldn't be able to lock the GPU 2.23GHz and still have the CPU at 3.5GHz. In situations that would demand that much power, it will down clock a "couple" of percent to stay within the power budget. They went with variable because that was the only way they could get over 2GHz on the GPU.

So it can run 2.23GHz all day and night, but to do that the CPU will take a hit and vice versa. TFLOP is calculated by the GPU's numbers, not the CPU. So if they choose to run the GPU at 2.23 full time and sacrifice CPU speed, then they are still 'locked' at 10.28.

This was absolutely a cost-saving measure going with this setup so that they could allocate more of their budget to the Tempest Engine CU, the custom I/O, and the fast SSD.
Cerny said that both GPU and CPU will be at peak frequency most of the time. And it has nothing to do with thermals if CPU and GPU clock drops
 

welsay01

Neo Member
Mar 19, 2020
24
23
100
Cerny said that both GPU and CPU will be at peak frequency most of the time. And it has nothing to do with thermals if CPU and GPU clock drops
I never said it was about thermals. He said in the worse case scenario where a game needs to run at the highest GPU and CPU clock simultaneously, it would have to downclock by a 'couple' of percent. This is not due to heat, it's to stay within the power budget. So either you get max GPU and sacrifice 2% CPU or you get max CPU and sacrifice 2% GPU.

Point is, it can run 'locked' 10.28 TFLOPS all day. You just won't get the full 3.5GHz CPU with it.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: MisterXDTV

Johnglen

Report me if I continue to console war
Apr 1, 2018
349
656
405
Klee said in August last year it is a double digit and Navi for both consoles. And he specifically said that XSX is slightly above 12 TF, while MS it is 12 at TGA
He also specifically said that nothing has changed and the ps5 is higher.
 

hyperbertha

Member
Nov 24, 2018
644
1,467
385
It would have to be something so revolutionary that it has never been seen before.

Many PC GPUs have massive heatsinks with 3 fans cooling them. Some PC GPUs are even liquid cooled. None of them can sustain 2.23Ghz.

Bring on the magic Sony. Can't wait to see it.
Have any of PC's solutions been tested on RDNA2 gpu's though?
 

longdi

Ni hao ma, fellow kids?
Jun 7, 2004
5,810
1,536
1,820
I find it frustrating that Cerny wasted a portion of his 'GDC talk' to obfuscate PS5 boost, and to justify PS5 low specs tflops
Boost is boost is variable clocks. Tflops is tflops. APU smart shift is smart shift.
He may fooled a few and not others. Look at where we are going in circles trying to make sense...like wtf is 'reverse boost'.. :messenger_astonished:

For a developers conference, i rather he spent that time talking about any new additions he made on the CPU or GPU.
Like for PS4 and PS4p, he talked on such additions over AMD pc gpu equivalents.

Such behaviour just lead to suspicions that Mark Sony fucked things up. Panicked at the power of the X.
 
Last edited:

o'dium

Embrace the snatch.
Oct 24, 2017
4,496
10,275
780
Uk
www.overdose-game.com
I can't even bring myself to post that much atm, there's just so much misinformation and FUD everywhere its baffling. Fanboys on both sides are going into a meltdown trying to score "points" and barely any of them have any clue what they are even talking about. I just read one that said SX will give up 20% of its power for audio... I mean... Fucking hell, get a clue/life/hot dog you stupid twat.

Anyway...

The SSD in the PS5 is fucking amazing, but its not the be all end all.
The raw power of the SX is fucking amazing, but its not the be all end all.

BOTH consoles are good, no, amazing. Both would make a whore blush.

And if you don't like this just because its "neutral" then I suggest you get a bloody life, because we are in for some damn good times later this year.
 
Last edited:

hemo memo

Member
Sep 13, 2011
5,381
1,256
755
You know what’s funny? If Sony actually have more to show and less talk then this all debacle wouldn’t exists. They already tested hundreds of PS4, why didn’t they show some of them to show the capabilities of the system and how fast the SSD they keep talking about?
 
Aug 28, 2019
2,150
3,893
510
www.instagram.com
I think it's less than 400$ BOM, even if that was the case i don't see PS5 sell more than 449$, my personal concerns are pricing (more than 449$) & thermal paste.
Well, I'm only going by the Bloomberg article, and they estimated a $450 BOM. With the type of cooling Sony would need to maintain that power distribution in the system and not end up with a RROD type of situation, I think a $450 BOM (maybe slightly more) fits into that.

There's also the flash memory controller to take into account here, too, though I suspect the actual SSD NAND component to be "relatively" cheap, as they're probably using QLC NAND chips.

I can't even bring myself to post that much atm, there's just so much misinformation and FUD everywhere its baffling. Fanboys on both sides are going into a meltdown trying to score "points" and barely any of them have any clue what they are even talking about. I just read one that said SX will give up 20% of its power for audio... I mean... Fucking hell, get a clue/life/hot dog you stupid twat.

Anyway...

The SSD in the PS5 is fucking amazing, but its not the be all end all.
The raw power of the SX is fucking amazing, but its not the be all end all.

BOTH consoles are good, no, amazing. Both would make a whore blush.

And if you don't like this just because its "neutral" then I suggest you get a bloody life, because we are in for some damn good times later this year.
Yeah, it's disappointing that people simply can't be happy with both systems as they are. Now I've seen a few Xbox people downplaying the PS5's SSD (or SSDs in general, saying they'll only be good for quicker loading times when that's not going to be the ONLY benefit the way these systems can use them!), but there's a LOT more Playstation people downplaying the advantages XSX has (100MHz - 300MHz faster CPU, 16 extra CU cores, faster pool of (smaller) VRAM-orientated GDDR6 memory, etc.) and acting like PS5's SSD will mitigate every single one of those things. When just a week prior, a lot of those same guys were adament about PS5 being 12/13/14/15 TFs because that was their narrative up until the actual presentation on Wednesday.

I'm a bit more surprised at how some gaming outlets are really pushing the "SSD as a gamechanger" angle; make no mistake it WILL have an impact on certain aspects of game design and PS5 is the better positioned of the two to make full advantage of those very specific things. But I don't hear any of these outlets talking about XSX's 16 extra CUs and what that can do for GPGPU programming. We saw how Sony 1st-party exploited that on PS4, XSX 1st-party will have a lot more room to play with in GPGPU capabilities.

But I think some of that is down to them not understanding how GPGPU actually works. Maybe if it were explained more in the way of being a softer form of FPGA (but not exactly actually the same thing) combined essentially being a cluster of very powerful DSPs, they maybe could understand its purpose better. And the ironic part is that while both systems can fully make use of GPGPU capabilities, PS5 would have to compromise in at least one major area (such as visual output) to do so.

And I'd argue it's GPGPU that is the larger game-changer for next-gen compared to SSD v-cache, but that isn't to downplay SSD memory-mapped v-cache as an important thing, either. It's just that the GPGPU stuff would have a higher learning curve, but if MS and Sony can provide tools to 3rd-parties to make maximized usage of it, it could finally become commonplace this gen, and it's an area XSX will have a pretty noticeable advantage in.

No one wants to acknowledge that, tho :pie_thinking: ...
 
Last edited:

LordKasual

Member
Jul 28, 2016
5,469
960
380
What does “most of the time” mean? This is a GDC presentation. Why wasn’t Cerny more specific?
He was specific enough for those who knew what he was talking about. This architecture isn't entirely new, there are cards today that raise/lower frequency depending on load. There is almost no game where load on both the CPU and GPU will be maxed out 100% of the time. This would cause serious performance problems even on the XSX with static frequencies. Any game where this is happening is going to have inconsistent performance just due to the nature of pushing hardware like that.

The PS5's architecture allows for variable clock speeds. This doesn't mean that it "isn't consistent", it means "it matches the needs of the program". What he's saying is that the chips will scale up (to a MAXIMUM of 2.23 and 3.5) when the game demands more power, but when it doesn't, it will lower frequencies to match what is needed by the program. This is what the "UP TO" refers to.

The point is that it's extremely rare that BOTH the CPU and GPU will be pushed to their absolute limit, at the same time, consistently, during any point of time in the game. "Variable" does not mean "it's going to try to meet this but sometimes fail". It's "This is what it operates at, until it doesn't need to". So, when you need high CPU, it can easily get up to 3.5Ghz, as this is what it's designed to do. When you need high GPU, it gets up to 2.23. But it'll almost never be at 2.23 and 3.5 at the same time and consistently. So the point of the "boost" is that when the processor isn't at maximum power load, it donates its budget to the GPU and makes it run faster.

This is going to be what's happening in the vast majority of cases. So, the "worst case scenario" is when the processor is at its power limit....the GPU will need to downclock to compensate because it isn't receiving any extra power/needs to stay within power budget. But the point is that even in this worst case scenario, this situation will change and everything will adjust back to normal before you even notice it went wrong. In a game where it's expected for these situations to happen frequently....you get a 1~2% reduction in frequency to stay within the power budget alloted by the system.

This is the difference between the PS5 and XSX. The PS5 can greatly overclock its GPU/CPU as long as both components aren't being pushed to their absolute limits....at which point, you simply downclock the GPU a bit to maintain consistent CPU (OR vice versa) and then maintain the maximum levels. But the downclocking required here is minimal.

But, this system of donating power has an upper limit to both components....which is 3.5 for CPU and 2.23 for GPU.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Panajev2001a
Mar 4, 2020
415
1,510
335
What does “majority of the time” mean? Cerny is an engineer and certainly has a hard figure (or at least a range) and yet he decided not to share that information. So it’s kinda unreasonable for you to demand that we all assume that “majority” means 90%of the time when it could mean just 51% of the time. Cerny decided to be vague to help Sony’s marketing and this is the result. 🤷‍♂️
So you want to play that game, but I’m sure you take MS’s obviously disingenuous “locked” comment at face value? 😂😂😂
 
Last edited:
Aug 28, 2019
2,150
3,893
510
www.instagram.com
LordKasual LordKasual You have your clocks mixed up. GPU is 2.23, CPU is 3.5.

Deeper Underground Deeper Underground The "locked" comment refers to how the system distributes its power, i.e the inverse of what Sony's had to do for PS5. Power in XSX is distributed based on an always-determined frequency, whereas on PS5 the frequency varies based on distribution of power to the CPU and GPU and whether power envelope is being pushed beyond its upper threshold or not.

XSX's approach will be easier for developers to program to versus PS5's, even though Cerny described a "worst case" scenario of no more than 10% drop in power (2% drop in clock frequency).
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: wordslaughter
Mar 4, 2020
415
1,510
335
LordKasual LordKasual You have your clocks mixed up. GPU is 2.23, CPU is 3.5.

Deeper Underground Deeper Underground The "locked" comment refers to how the system distributes its power, i.e the inverse of what Sony's had to do for PS5. Power in XSX is distributed based on an always-determined frequency, whereas on PS5 the frequency varies based on distribution of power to the CPU and GPU and whether power envelope is being pushed beyond its upper threshold or not.

XSX's approach will be easier for developers to program to versus PS5's, even though Cerny described a "worst case" scenario of no more than 10% drop in power (2% drop in clock frequency).
I understand that, but just feel it’s quite disingenuous to say that Cerny is basically lying and that the PS5 isn’t going to stay at 2.23Ghz outside of power hungry games, but it’s safe to assume that the XSX is going to stay at a balmy 12.1 the entire time and never fluctuate ever. I don’t believe that for one moment.
 

LordKasual

Member
Jul 28, 2016
5,469
960
380
XSX's approach will be easier for developers to program to versus PS5's, even though Cerny described a "worst case" scenario of no more than 10% drop in power (2% drop in clock frequency).
I'm thinking it's only going to be harder in sustained stress situations, where developers may need to deliberately prioritize what gets pushed and what get sacrificed.

But it sounds like the majority of this would be automatic. The system is overclocking assets particularly high, on the fly, in order to crank out visuals, so a developer having to deliberately get inbetween this would definitely just be a "worst case" scenario.

I understand that, but just feel it’s quite disingenuous to say that Cerny is basically lying and that the PS5 isn’t going to stay at 2.23Ghz outside of power hungry games, but it’s safe to assume that the XSX is going to stay at a balmy 12.1 the entire time and never fluctuate ever. I don’t believe that for one moment.
The PS5 is absolutely going to punch above its weight in a surprising amount of situations.

It WILL NOT be enough to catch the XSX though, especially in first-party situations where the XSX can sacrifice things like native resolution in order to push its power into more technical visuals.

But still, the difference in visuals of these systems are going to be close enough to not be noticeable, but different enough that first party games will probably look good for fundamentally different reasons.


All this arguing is stupid. This generation is going to be AMAZING for videogames, yall don't even know.

The innovations coming from these console games are going to FUCKING EXPLODE when they reach PC-centric titles.
 

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
1,835
1,672
365
do we really want a 36 cu at more than 2.23ghz on pc for rdna 2 ?
not for middle end gpu where 5700 is already 36 cu this gen
I see this cu count more at low end in 6500 or 6600 card but at less than 2.23 ghz.
Either way it will oc much higher than 2.2ghz on PC.
 
Aug 28, 2019
2,150
3,893
510
www.instagram.com
I understand that, but just feel it’s quite disingenuous to say that Cerny is basically lying and that the PS5 isn’t going to stay at 2.23Ghz outside of power hungry games, but it’s safe to assume that the XSX is going to stay at a balmy 12.1 the entire time and never fluctuate ever. I don’t believe that for one moment.
The truth is that TF numbers for both systems are "peak" values of what the systems can provide when the game requires that much processing power. The difference between the two systems however is that there is no "worst case" scenario for XSX where the clock could drop under maximum load/stress to flux the GPU under the given 12.147 TF number.

OTOH, there may be worst-case scenarios where the PS5's GPU might drop by 2% of the clock, or to 10.07 TF, depending on just how stressful the game is in terms of being technically demanding and whether some other part of the hardware (like the CPU) is at maximum load simultaneously.

That's basically what the difference between "locked clocks" and "variable clocks" actually is, but should be easy enough to picture how it can play out in practice. So the debate shouldn't be if PS5 will see a clock drop greater than 2%; I doubt it will ever drop below that figure. The question is if the GPU's performance will scale linearly with clocking well above its sweetspot range (which we can assume, going from XSX's clock, is probably between 1825 and 1875 MHz in the upper scale range for the improved 7nm process node, 1900MHz at absolute peak).

Evidence from RDNA1 cards shows that in fact performance does NOT linearly scale, so real-world differential in performance between PS5 and XSX on GPU tasks could be a lot more than the 15% - 17% paper spec figure. I'd personally venture it could be up to 25% in favor of XSX, that's with being very optimistic on efficiency gains of RDNA2 on an improved 7nm process btw. But I doubt it will be to the 30% figure we saw with actual RDNA1 overclocked cards on PC.
 

Goliathy

Banned
Mar 18, 2020
419
1,358
335
I trust Bloomberg with financial news, probably $449 and eat $20-50 loss on each.
Because more RAM went into it than the 8GB is why I think that and not $399.
Is Sony really in the financial position to sell the console at a loss? They are not really big in the games a service division and are really focused on single player games. Not sure about that. But we will see how low they can go.
 
  • Triggered
Reactions: V4skunk

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
2,843
3,099
440
I just watched Digital Foundry's analysis of Gears 5 demo on Xbox Series X.

And, my God! That's supposed to be a generational leap? I can barely see the difference! Even side to side.

It's gonna take a lot of brainwashing, and great games, to make the world buy these new consoles for more than $300. Good luck Sony & Microsoft. I wish you both well.
In before "that only took 2 weeks"

Even with a full year of development, xbox is in alot of trouble convincing the majority that this thing is any sort of real leap over the competition. Everything you'll see that's an advantage over ps5, you'll need digital foundary special equipment to know it's even happening. Zoom lenses, frame counters with 1-4fps advantages in specific scenes.

Not to mention the exclusives. These machines are a massive jump over last gen and XSX is tethered to the pathetic 1.4TF machine with no SSD and a shitty CPU. PS5 isn't. Sony devs can create games from the ground up without last gen. Huge advantage, and I'm sure several devs are deep in development now.
 
Last edited:

Shin

Member
Feb 4, 2013
5,542
3,963
895
Is Sony really in the financial position to sell the console at a loss? They are not really big in the games a service division and are really focused on single player games. Not sure about that. But we will see how low they can go.
From the top of my head, 33M+ PS+ subscriber + userbase (software sold, everything is SCE) so it can carries the weight a bit.
Though as Bloomberg said, one party wants to be profitable while the other side wants to eat a slight loss.
 

Johnglen

Report me if I continue to console war
Apr 1, 2018
349
656
405
In before "that only took 2 weeks"

Even with a full year of development, xbox is in alot of trouble convincing the majority that this thing is any sort of real leap over the competition. Everything you'll see that's an advantage over ps5, you'll need digital foundary special equipment to know it's even happening. Zoom lenses, frame counters with 1-4fps advantages in specific scenes.

Not to mention the exclusives. These machines are a massive jump over last gen and XSX is tethered to the pathetic 1.4TF machine with no SSD and a shitty CPU. PS5 isn't. Sony devs can create games from the ground up without last gen. Huge advantage, and I'm sure several devs are deep in development now.
It seems that the ps5 being less powerful than the XSX has seriously damaged people’s perception. The Gears5 demo is an example of ENHANCED BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY , it is not an example of a new gears game for the XSX. It is like Sony showing an enhanced BC version of , say spider man, and people going on about how it doesn’t look much better. It is like taking the enhanced version of gears of war 3 on the Xbox one x as an example of how Xbox one x games look.

You are going to be begging for the Sony BC games to have these types of improvements when Sony finally reveals how it will handle BC.
 
Last edited:

ThatGuy707

Member
Jun 29, 2012
60
6
440
What does “majority of the time” mean? Cerny is an engineer and certainly has a hard figure (or at least a range) and yet he decided not to share that information. So it’s kinda unreasonable for you to demand that we all assume that “majority” means 90%of the time when it could mean just 51% of the time. Cerny decided to be vague to help Sony’s marketing and this is the result. 🤷‍♂️
Yep if it was at those clocks 90% of the time why even dedicate so much time to talking about the variable frequency? I mean we know it isn't a 10.28 TFlop machine on average. The key is what is the average performance gamers can expect and I get that can change with games. Is it 10.1, 9.2, 9,5, etc?