XBX CPU/GPU/Velocity So FAST doesn't need the PS5 SSD. 4K 120FPS BLAZING!!!!!!

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

1722

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#201 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 1722 Posts

@Pedro said:
@hardwenzen said:

Look at the console itself when its placed horizontally. It looks like the plastic is melting, which means there are severe overheat issues on the plastic plates even during the molding procedure. Red flags are all over, you just need to open your eyes.

So, you are just making shit up. Thanks for clarifying.

I would never do that.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

40126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#202 Pedro  Online
Member since 2002 • 40126 Posts

@hardwenzen said:

I would never do that.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

1722

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#203  Edited By hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 1722 Posts

@Pedro said:
@hardwenzen said:

I would never do that.

Avatar image for i_own_u_4ever
I_own_u_4ever

314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#204 I_own_u_4ever
Member since 2020 • 314 Posts

@Pedro said:
@tormentos said:

@Pedro:

Your reaching and grasping badly fact is streaming will be ln gamepass is a FACT not my opinion.

But even if it wasnt it would be the same shit,downloading or stream you get access to a certain number of games for a monthly fee and the games arent yours to keed is a rental service and works exactly like PS now.

MS simple didnt have their service ready becasue well sony was ahead of them in that regard period.

Dude qhat success? It has been given for a freaking dolar,and everyone who gets a nee machine get one month free as well.

Sony already let you download games with PSN+ games that arent yours either and that are rented to you in a less selective way.

No is not superior,it has the advantage if having nee first party games,but games talking PS now has more than 7 times more games,so one service has more tham 700 games the other more than 100 they are mot even close,and if we add thay many of those games are indies and xbox 360 and xbox games is not even that great either.

But again for you lemmings everything on xbox is always better.πŸ˜‚

Which is irrelevant boost on PC work differently than boost on PS5.

The only one you own is your self lemming.πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚

Well that because it probably cant sustain them all the time,again how does that change that cerny it self stated so?

Do you work for sony? Do you have a PS5 dev kit?

Do you worked on the PS5 development?

So i take Cerny word over a blind fanboy who has months downplaying a damn 120% gap in speed but cant even admit it.πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚

You wrote all of that and the facts still remained the same

  1. You cannot stream games on Gamepass and Gamepass is not a streaming service. This fact is really eating you alive.
  2. The success of Gamepass forced PS Now to have a download option. Another fact that you cannot deny despite the mental gymnastics. Remember, your argument about PS Now being first streaming, well Gamepass was the first subscription on consoles in which you download the games and Sony.....COPIED it.πŸ˜‚
  3. Gamepass is a superior service to PS Now. (Current triple A games and day 1 launches with no streaming. I wonder which of the two has more users? Didn't sales and numbers matter to you folks?)
  4. The PS5 is using AMD Power Shift which is found in laptops. (laptops are PCs 😎)
  5. The final fact, is that when you have been owned you deflect to other topics like you are doing now. You keep reinforcing this one. I appreciate it. The funny part is that you are being owned in each of your deflection. 🀣

Now another deflection has been added. "teh SSD" πŸ˜‚

Tormentos like to get screwed by Sony and buy games 2 and 3 times on PS systems. LOL

Avatar image for Sky_Fade
Sky_Fade

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#205 Sky_Fade
Member since 2006 • 38 Posts

Breaking this down is rather simple. Lets compare the PS4 Pro vs the Xbox One X:

CPU: 2.1Ghz vs 2.3Ghz - 10% advantage to the Xbox One X.

GPU: 4.2 Tflop vs 6 Tflop - 42% advantage to the Xbox One X.

RAM Speed: 217.6 GB/s vs 326 GB/s - 50% advantage to Xbox One X.

RAM Amount: 8GB vs 12 GB - 50% advantage to Xbox One X.

Storage: The same, no advantage to either.

What was the result of all of the above? Checkerboard rendering on the PS4 Pro vs native 4k on the Xbox One X with minor graphical upgrades (Red Dead Redemption 2 and numerous others as an example. Games look very similar, and this was with a console that was 50% faster in almost all respects (other then CPU which has little impact on resolution).

Now lets compare the PS5 vs the Xbox Series X:

CPU: 3.2Ghz - 3.5Ghz vs 3.6Ghz - 3% - 13% advantage to the Xbox Series X. (I've lowered the PS5 CPU speed to account for AMD SmartShift)

GPU: 10.3 Tflop vs 12.1 Tflop - 18% advantage to the Xbox Series X. (GPU speeds should be at full bore almost all the time, considering the comments by Mark Cerny and other developers, and how AMD SmartShift actually works)

RAM Speed: 448 GB/s vs 10GB at 560GB/s, 6GB at 336GB/s (10GB 26% faster, 3.5 GB 33% slower, average looking at 11% advantage to Xbox Series X) (3.5 GB reserved by OS)

RAM Amount: 16GB vs 16 GB - The same, no advantage to either.

Storage: 8-9 GB/s vs 4.8 GB/s - 70-90% advantage to PS5.

So overall we are looking Xbox Series X being 15% more powerful the the PS5 in raw compute numbers, having no extra RAM advantage, and while having a massive disadvantage in SSD performance. But even this does not paint a clear picture. As your number of cores increase, so does your expected performance drop off. A GPU with 4000 compute units is not twice as powerful as a GPU with 2000 compute units. This is something called Amdahl's law [1], thus the amount of performance you can extract from the PS5 GPU is theoretically higher then what you can extract from the Xbox Series X GPU, as the PS5 GPU has 2304 compute units vs the 3328 compute units of the Xbox Series X. This will not have much impact, but the difference of a few % will be there. So you can conclude that the Xbox Series X GPU advantage is less then the 18% raw numbers would have you believe. Likely on the order of only 10%-15% at most.

So, to summarize, the Xbox Series X is on average 10-12% faster then the PS5 in available performance, while having a major disadvantage on the SSD front.

This is dramatically lower then the advantage that the Xbox One X had over the PS4 Pro. So forget all this nonsense about 4k120FPS or one console is going to "destroy" the other. Disregarding the SSD advantage of the PS5 (and that can be a major factor down the line, even for multi-plats) the raw numbers for a game looking the same on both platforms will roughly be as follows:

Xbox 3840x2160 (4k) vs PS5 3648x2052.

Big deal.

References:

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law

Avatar image for tormentos
tormentos

31509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#206 tormentos
Member since 2003 • 31509 Posts

@Pedro said:

You wrote all of that and the facts still remained the same

  1. You cannot stream games on Gamepass and Gamepass is not a streaming service. This fact is really eating you alive.
  2. The success of Gamepass forced PS Now to have a download option. Another fact that you cannot deny despite the mental gymnastics. Remember, your argument about PS Now being first streaming, well Gamepass was the first subscription on consoles in which you download the games and Sony.....COPIED it.πŸ˜‚
  3. Gamepass is a superior service to PS Now. (Current triple A games and day 1 launches with no streaming. I wonder which of the two has more users? Didn't sales and numbers matter to you folks?)
  4. The PS5 is using AMD Power Shift which is found in laptops. (laptops are PCs 😎)
  5. The final fact, is that when you have been owned you deflect to other topics like you are doing now. You keep reinforcing this one. I appreciate it. The funny part is that you are being owned in each of your deflection. 🀣

Now another deflection has been added. "teh SSD" πŸ˜‚

You seem to be loss lemming.

1-Were ever you stream or download the end result is the same you pay to rent a game for a monthly fee,and if you stop paying you can't play them anymore unless you pay.

That is exactly what PS Now is,MS simply have download because they did not have cloud for games period,sony did.But already MS stated that xcloud is coming to gamepass in other words you will download and stream period there is no way around that.

At this point basically are holding for dear life to not been able to do it NOW.

2-Sony had downloads on PSN+ so basically trying to argue that they copy that from MS is a joke considering that BOTH gamepass and games with gold are rip off of PSN+ and PS Now nothing more,desperation is really sinking in that you want to claim sony copy download when sony had that before MS did on their PSN+ service.

3-Tripple A? Oh you mean triple A as base on budget not Tripple A based on quality,the only thing MS has going for it now is day 1 release,which i am sure sony will not do because well it is stupid for them to do so,since you know TLOU2 just sold freaking 4 million copies,ms is desperate to get some people so they are doing it,tho i don't think they will sustain it this new gen.

By the way 700+ games >> 100+ games.

4-You are grasping just that boost on PS5 is not the same as boost on PC i am waiting for you to prove otherwise.

5-Deflecting is what you do when you resure to back up your shit,and try to downplay me or my argument without nothing to show for.Β―\_(ツ)_/Β―

@BlackShirt20 said:

@Sagemode87: Again, the PS5 has rob resources to reach max performance of either to CPU or GPU. At best, 20% difference. At worst 35% so yeah. 30% sure seems fair.

No at best 5% at worse 18%.

@BlackShirt20 said:

@tormentos: COULD POTENTIALLY. That isn’t Cerny claiming it will. He has said as long as their is CPU overhead the GPU could maintain 10.2TF. Still robbing resources to get performance of the GPU lol. Which is exactly what I have been saying. PS5 is not a efficient or well optimized machine. Fact.

Yes it could and then he say is not like you have to chose to run 1 slower,why did he say that? I don't know.

Yes but robbing 3% CPU in favor of 3% GPU is a bigger gain on the graphics side,fact is that ryzen at 3.2ghz would not hold back that 10.28TF GPU.

Let me put it this way if the xbox series X would be like the PS5 it could probably achieve over 13TF maybe close to 14TF and would be over 12TF no doubt even on the low end.

Avatar image for greygoose12
Greygoose12

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#207 Greygoose12  Online
Member since 2020 • 55 Posts

Series x running sony clocks would be 14.6 tf.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.tweaktown.com/news/73479/microsoft-flexes-xbox-series-muscle-doesnt-need-to-brag-tflops/amp.html&ved=0ahUKEwjb8Ib4rKfqAhUROs0KHQzmD98QyM8BCCwwAQ&usg=AOvVaw3JCq86TSpKBvpIYduDFdTn&ampcf=1

Avatar image for tormentos
tormentos

31509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#208  Edited By tormentos
Member since 2003 • 31509 Posts

@EG101 said:

There will be a 25% increase in Graphical fidelity in favor of the XSX over the PS5 in most 3rd party games that have equal budgets.

How do I know this?

The XSX has roughly a 25% Bandwidth advantage for its GPU.

Every console ever designed has been Bandwidth bottlenecked.

Ray Tracing is a bandwidth hog making matters worse.

1st Party games will be different.

Budget and talent will also make a difference.

I could see some XSX games taking advantage of XSX' superior features making the gap look bigger. At the same time Sony's 1st party devs are technically proficient so they'll likely be able to hide these weaknesses very well.

Please share the link were it was confirmed that the series X will be 25% ahead.

Or is this another tale of interest pulled from a lemmings ass?

Ok if the xbox series X has 18% more power but has the same bandwidth it would be problematic,if they have 18% more power and 25% more bandwidth that means they will be able to take advantage of their 18% power,not that they will have 25% advntage power wise, bandwidth is not power nor increase your power,it just allow you to take advantage of what you have.

Actually this is funny you know why? Because the xbox series X has what 45% more CU?

According with expert lemmings in this forum Ray tracing scale better with more CU,so if you have 45% more CU how exactly are you going to pass that extra power over 25% more bandwidth?

Yeap the series X just became another bandwidth limited system,oh and this is granting that 10GB is enough as well,because if not and you need from the 3.5gb for games as well but that is on a slower bandwidth it would be even more problematic.

By the way SSD speed on the PS5 is not up to developers,is something there that doesn't require extra work or coding so yeah prepare to see some kind of loading in some form.

@greygoose12 said:

Series x running sony clocks would be 14.6 tf.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.tweaktown.com/news/73479/microsoft-flexes-xbox-series-muscle-doesnt-need-to-brag-tflops/amp.html&ved=0ahUKEwjb8Ib4rKfqAhUROs0KHQzmD98QyM8BCCwwAQ&usg=AOvVaw3JCq86TSpKBvpIYduDFdTn&ampcf=1

And the fun part is that even if it dropped in frequency like the PS5 i don't see how it would go under 14TF,so effectively it would give for a more powerful system without having to make the chip bigger.

@i_own_u_4ever said:

Tormentos like to get screwed by Sony and buy games 2 and 3 times on PS systems. LOL

Dude you who pull information out of your ass for real?

I am still wating for you to back 99% of the garbage you post under this alt account.πŸ˜‚

Avatar image for Sky_Fade
Sky_Fade

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#209 Sky_Fade
Member since 2006 • 38 Posts

@greygoose12: The problem with that is that a 52 CU part at 2230Mhz would be dramatically hotter and use way more power then the 36 CU part in the PS5. I'm not even sure a GPU of that size and clocks is achievable in a console form factor. The only reason the PS5 can get to that frequency (in a rather large console form factor) is due to the rather small size of the GPU.

Avatar image for tormentos
tormentos

31509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#210 tormentos
Member since 2003 • 31509 Posts

@Sky_Fade said:

@greygoose12: The problem with that is that a 52 CU part at 2230Mhz would be dramatically hotter and use way more power then the 36 CU part in the PS5. I'm not even sure a GPU of that size and clocks is achievable in a console form factor. The only reason the PS5 can get to that frequency (in a rather large console form factor) is due to the rather small size of the GPU.

That apply to every chip,in fact how many 36CU GPU come with a 2.23ghz speed?

The 5700XT stock is not even close,even the OC model doesn't break 2.0ghz that i know off.

Thats not true either RDNA 1 doesn't reach those speeds even on PC with a huge ass case.

Avatar image for Sky_Fade
Sky_Fade

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#211  Edited By Sky_Fade
Member since 2006 • 38 Posts

@tormentos: You can't compare the two, a 5700XT is RDNA on regular 7nm, while the PS5 GPU is RDNA2 on 7nm Enhanced. In addition, the 5700XT is slightly larger at 40 CU.

Even so, most 5700XT's can reach almost 2.1GHz stable when OC'd on the regular coolers (so not talking about Nitro):

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-tuf-evo/34.html

2079 MHz for the one.

So taking into consideration the slightly smaller GPU, improved process node, and newer RDNA architecture, 2230Mhz does not sound unreasonable. But the power draw would likely be quite high - hence the use of AMD SmartShift. If you need to max your CPU or GPU then one would limit the other to stay within the power envelope, it doesn't mean that both cannot run at max sustained speeds when required.

To give a example, suppose you are running a GPU intensive scene, tons of enemies on screen, shits going down in a epic way, so you need maximum GPU power! AMD SmartShift ensure the GPU is running at that 2230Mhz at all times while downclocking the CPU a bit (3.2 seems a likely lower limit). If you need intensive CPU calculations and not 100% GPU then the reverse happens, CPU is maxed to 3.5Ghz, GPU drops down to 2.1Ghz (or whatever).

In the scenario that you need to max the GPU and CPU at the same time, then AMD SmartShift (and likely other software mechanisms Sony has implemented) will adjust the CPU/GPU speeds for maximum performance at that paticular time. Increasing the CPU to 3.5GHz if needed or the GPU to 2230MHz otherwise, or even 98% of both. You have a total system budget and that gets allocated to the required resource that needs it the most.

However, and take note, as the vast, vast majority of games can be GPU limited (especially in todays 4k world) the GPU would be the component that would likely run at max clocks the majority (if not all) the time. Just as Mark Cerny said.

For the Xbox side of things, the reason they likely did not implement AMD Smartshift, is that due to the clocks and size of the GPU, they would not get much benefit out of it. That 52 CU monster is going to dramatically increase the power budget for a very minor increase in Mhz. Rather save the die space and lower costs.

Avatar image for greygoose12
Greygoose12

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#213  Edited By Greygoose12  Online
Member since 2020 • 55 Posts

The reason why Microsoft didn't oc in my opinion is the cost factor and reliability and they all ready had more power. The AMD smart shift is not proven. The only laptop that has it dell G5 15 se. That technology is unproven and runs very hot ! So why not go the safe route when you already have more power ? Plus its easier to develop games for. Sony took a chance on a new unproven technology. Those are facts. I am glad they went the tried and true path.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.notebookcheck.net/Dell-G5-15-SE-with-AMD-Ryzen-7-4800H-records-above-100-C-average-CPU-temperatures-leaving-the-Asus-TUF-Gaming-A15-as-the-better-Ryzen-4000-gaming-laptop-option.469723.0.html&ved=2ahUKEwiq0MHWu6fqAhWbQs0KHePtApsQFjAFegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw2S_vORBgJkAdeu6TOURQFT&cshid=1593448927723

Avatar image for i_own_u_4ever
I_own_u_4ever

314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#214  Edited By I_own_u_4ever
Member since 2020 • 314 Posts

@Sky_Fade said:

Breaking this down is rather simple. Lets compare the PS4 Pro vs the Xbox One X:

CPU: 2.1Ghz vs 2.3Ghz - 10% advantage to the Xbox One X.

GPU: 4.2 Tflop vs 6 Tflop - 42% advantage to the Xbox One X.

RAM Speed: 217.6 GB/s vs 326 GB/s - 50% advantage to Xbox One X.

RAM Amount: 8GB vs 12 GB - 50% advantage to Xbox One X.

Storage: The same, no advantage to either.

What was the result of all of the above? Checkerboard rendering on the PS4 Pro vs native 4k on the Xbox One X with minor graphical upgrades (Red Dead Redemption 2 and numerous others as an example. Games look very similar, and this was with a console that was 50% faster in almost all respects (other then CPU which has little impact on resolution).

Now lets compare the PS5 vs the Xbox Series X:

CPU: 3.2Ghz - 3.5Ghz vs 3.6Ghz - 3% - 13% advantage to the Xbox Series X. (I've lowered the PS5 CPU speed to account for AMD SmartShift)

GPU: 10.3 Tflop vs 12.1 Tflop - 18% advantage to the Xbox Series X. (GPU speeds should be at full bore almost all the time, considering the comments by Mark Cerny and other developers, and how AMD SmartShift actually works)

RAM Speed: 448 GB/s vs 10GB at 560GB/s, 6GB at 336GB/s (10GB 26% faster, 3.5 GB 33% slower, average looking at 11% advantage to Xbox Series X) (3.5 GB reserved by OS)

RAM Amount: 16GB vs 16 GB - The same, no advantage to either.

Storage: 8-9 GB/s vs 4.8 GB/s - 70-90% advantage to PS5.

So overall we are looking Xbox Series X being 15% more powerful the the PS5 in raw compute numbers, having no extra RAM advantage, and while having a massive disadvantage in SSD performance. But even this does not paint a clear picture. As your number of cores increase, so does your expected performance drop off. A GPU with 4000 compute units is not twice as powerful as a GPU with 2000 compute units. This is something called Amdahl's law [1], thus the amount of performance you can extract from the PS5 GPU is theoretically higher then what you can extract from the Xbox Series X GPU, as the PS5 GPU has 2304 compute units vs the 3328 compute units of the Xbox Series X. This will not have much impact, but the difference of a few % will be there. So you can conclude that the Xbox Series X GPU advantage is less then the 18% raw numbers would have you believe. Likely on the order of only 10%-15% at most.

So, to summarize, the Xbox Series X is on average 10-12% faster then the PS5 in available performance, while having a major disadvantage on the SSD front.

This is dramatically lower then the advantage that the Xbox One X had over the PS4 Pro. So forget all this nonsense about 4k120FPS or one console is going to "destroy" the other. Disregarding the SSD advantage of the PS5 (and that can be a major factor down the line, even for multi-plats) the raw numbers for a game looking the same on both platforms will roughly be as follows:

Xbox 3840x2160 (4k) vs PS5 3648x2052.

Big deal.

References:

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law

Nah good twist attempt but all wrong.

First off the GPU in the XSX will likely 99.9% of the time never need more then the 10, 560 gigs sec for the GPU and the other ram will be for OS and other lower level tasks and or some in game physics functions. Also with over 2 tflops more GPU power at most times the XSX will have a big advantage over the PS5 in most cases.

X factor Velocity pipeline architecture makes the PS5 SSD about a wash. Devs are coming out now and saying the Velocity pipeline architecture and texture packs design of the architecture is so fast that it can in a lot of cases be faster for graphical needs over the PS5.

XSX wins hands down and devs have said that it's likely a 30+% power advantage for the XSX over the PS5.

https://gamingbolt.com/xbox-series-x-ssd-focuses-on-delivering-sustained-and-consistent-performance-microsoft

Avatar image for greygoose12
Greygoose12

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#215 Greygoose12  Online
Member since 2020 • 55 Posts

You got to realize Sony doesn't use thermals as a basis of the amd smartshift. But it doesn't mean thermals disappear. That system will run like a hot potato. As the thermals rise what happens to the hardware ?

Avatar image for i_own_u_4ever
I_own_u_4ever

314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#216 I_own_u_4ever
Member since 2020 • 314 Posts

@greygoose12 said:

You got to realize Sony doesn't use thermals as a basis of the amd smartshift. But it doesn't mean thermals disappear. That system will run like a hot potato. As the thermals rise what happens to the hardware ?

This is why the PS5 is so big. Even Sony knows this thing is going to run hot. They are scared of their own heat problems obviously.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

40126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#217 Pedro  Online
Member since 2002 • 40126 Posts

@tormentos said:

You seem to be loss lemming.

1-Were ever you stream or download the end result is the same you pay to rent a game for a monthly fee,and if you stop paying you can't play them anymore unless you pay.

That is exactly what PS Now is,MS simply have download because they did not have cloud for games period,sony did.But already MS stated that xcloud is coming to gamepass in other words you will download and stream period there is no way around that.

At this point basically are holding for dear life to not been able to do it NOW.

2-Sony had downloads on PSN+ so basically trying to argue that they copy that from MS is a joke considering that BOTH gamepass and games with gold are rip off of PSN+ and PS Now nothing more,desperation is really sinking in that you want to claim sony copy download when sony had that before MS did on their PSN+ service.

3-Tripple A? Oh you mean triple A as base on budget not Tripple A based on quality,the only thing MS has going for it now is day 1 release,which i am sure sony will not do because well it is stupid for them to do so,since you know TLOU2 just sold freaking 4 million copies,ms is desperate to get some people so they are doing it,tho i don't think they will sustain it this new gen.

By the way 700+ games >> 100+ games.

4-You are grasping just that boost on PS5 is not the same as boost on PC i am waiting for you to prove otherwise.

5-Deflecting is what you do when you resure to back up your shit,and try to downplay me or my argument without nothing to show for.Β―\_(ツ)_/Β―

Even though you spent all that time damage controlling and performing some the best mental gymnastics on the forum, the following STILL remains the same.

  1. You cannot stream games on Gamepass and Gamepass is not a streaming service. This fact is really eating you alive.
  2. The success of Gamepass forced PS Now to have a download option. Another fact that you cannot deny despite the mental gymnastics. Remember, your argument about PS Now being first streaming, well Gamepass was the first subscription on consoles in which you download the games and Sony.....COPIED it.πŸ˜‚
  3. Gamepass is a superior service to PS Now. (Current triple A games and day 1 launches with no streaming. I wonder which of the two has more users? Didn't sales and numbers matter to you folks?)
  4. The PS5 is using AMD Power Shift which is found in laptops. (laptops are PCs 😎)
  5. The final fact, is that when you have been owned you deflect to other topics like you are doing now. You keep reinforcing this one. I appreciate it. The funny part is that you are being owned in each of your deflection. 🀣

Now another deflection has been added. "teh SSD" πŸ˜‚

Avatar image for Sky_Fade
Sky_Fade

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#218 Sky_Fade
Member since 2006 • 38 Posts
@i_own_u_4ever said:

Nah good twist attempt but all wrong.

First off the GPU in the XSX will likely 99.9% of the time never need more then the 10, 560 gigs sec for the GPU and the other ram will be for OS and other lower level tasks and or some in game physics functions. Also with over 2 tflops more GPU power at most times the XSX will have a big advantage over the PS5 in most cases.

X factor Velocity pipeline architecture makes the PS5 SSD about a wash. Devs are coming out now and saying the Velocity pipeline architecture and texture packs design of the architecture is so fast that it can in a lot of cases be faster for graphical needs over the PS5.

XSX wins hands down and devs have said that it's likely a 30+% power advantage for the XSX over the PS5.

https://gamingbolt.com/xbox-series-x-ssd-focuses-on-delivering-sustained-and-consistent-performance-microsoft

The Xbox series X is obviously going to use more then 10GB of RAM for games. Microsoft themselves has already confirmed this themselves: https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-inside-xbox-series-x-full-specs

games get a total of 13.5GB in total, which encompasses all 10GB of GPU optimal memory and 3.5GB of standard memory

Thus, 3.5 GB of that RAM is going to be 33% slower then the PS5. Sure developers can choose not to use it, but then you only have 10GB vs 13.5-14GB usable in the PS5, which would mean the Xbox series X would have lower quality textures. Not gonna happen.

Additionally, 2TFLOP by itself is a meaningless number, the important thing is relative performance difference, which is only 18% and likely a bit lower due to Amdahl's law.

The Velocity statement is Microsoft just trying to spin that they too have a SSD and enhanced SSD speeds. It's impressive no doubt, but it's utterly blown away by what is in the PS5. Sony has dedicated I/O processing (on top of the SSD controller), enhanced flash translation layer, and a SSD that is more then twice as fast:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/15848/storage-matters-xbox-ps5-new-era-of-gaming

Give that article a good read, it goes into technical depth on both hardware solutions.

Pretending that the Velocity architecture is going to make up the difference is laughable when we have solid performance numbers for both. Feel free to post conclusive evidence proving me wrong.

Lastly, no developer has stated the Xbox Series X is 30% faster. That is obviously not true to anybody that has a brain and a calculator. Point me to a credible developer claiming this so I can laugh at them.

Sorry mate, 15% faster is the best case scenario for the Xbox Series X, which is frankly a tiny difference.

Avatar image for greygoose12
Greygoose12

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#219 Greygoose12  Online
Member since 2020 • 55 Posts

@Sky_Fade: believe the Sony PR untill most series x games run at 60 fps. Then question how a 1.8 tf difference could make this happen.

Avatar image for Sky_Fade
Sky_Fade

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#220 Sky_Fade
Member since 2006 • 38 Posts

@greygoose12: I'm not believing any PR. Both companies have put out technical information that anybody with a basic comprehension of maths and computing architecture can compare. The Xbox Series X is obviously the more powerful console, but the difference is nowhere as big as some make it out to be. Its far less then the Xbox One and Ps4 or the Xbox One X and Ps4 Pro. A game that is 30 fps on the Ps5 is not going to push 60 for on the Xbox Series X. A 30 FPS game on the Ps5 would be 35 FPS on the Xbox Series X at best, assuming the same settings.

This is not random guesswork, the technical specifications are out there for anyone to read.

Avatar image for tormentos
tormentos

31509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#221  Edited By tormentos
Member since 2003 • 31509 Posts

@Sky_Fade said:

@tormentos: You can't compare the two, a 5700XT is RDNA on regular 7nm, while the PS5 GPU is RDNA2 on 7nm Enhanced. In addition, the 5700XT is slightly larger at 40 CU.

Even so, most 5700XT's can reach almost 2.1GHz stable when OC'd on the regular coolers (so not talking about Nitro):

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-tuf-evo/34.html

2079 MHz for the one.

So taking into consideration the slightly smaller GPU, improved process node, and newer RDNA architecture, 2230Mhz does not sound unreasonable. But the power draw would likely be quite high - hence the use of AMD SmartShift. If you need to max your CPU or GPU then one would limit the other to stay within the power envelope, it doesn't mean that both cannot run at max sustained speeds when required.

To give a example, suppose you are running a GPU intensive scene, tons of enemies on screen, shits going down in a epic way, so you need maximum GPU power! AMD SmartShift ensure the GPU is running at that 2230Mhz at all times while downclocking the CPU a bit (3.2 seems a likely lower limit). If you need intensive CPU calculations and not 100% GPU then the reverse happens, CPU is maxed to 3.5Ghz, GPU drops down to 2.1Ghz (or whatever).

In the scenario that you need to max the GPU and CPU at the same time, then AMD SmartShift (and likely other software mechanisms Sony has implemented) will adjust the CPU/GPU speeds for maximum performance at that paticular time. Increasing the CPU to 3.5GHz if needed or the GPU to 2230MHz otherwise, or even 98% of both. You have a total system budget and that gets allocated to the required resource that needs it the most.

However, and take note, as the vast, vast majority of games can be GPU limited (especially in todays 4k world) the GPU would be the component that would likely run at max clocks the majority (if not all) the time. Just as Mark Cerny said.

For the Xbox side of things, the reason they likely did not implement AMD Smartshift, is that due to the clocks and size of the GPU, they would not get much benefit out of it. That 52 CU monster is going to dramatically increase the power budget for a very minor increase in Mhz. Rather save the die space and lower costs.

It doesn't matter the series X is RDNA2 as well and don't reach 1900mhz let alone 2,230mhz see my point?

If the chip would use smart shif the heat would be better manage,because you asign a power budget were you will not go over it and just distribute it between both CPU an GPU,fact is if the PS5 would have been like the xbox its GPU would have been locked in similar way 1800mhz or even less it was the way sony their design what allowed for much higher speeds.

Non of those are stock clocks they are heavily OC and still don't reach 2.23ghz,on PC where you can find much better cooling.

Everything you say there i know it alrady,the problem is that at 4k you are mostly GPU bound not CPU bound,so holing back the CPU a little will not be a problem,and you will gain more from 3% more GPU power at 4k that 3% more CPU power.

They didn't go with smarth shift because they chose a big ass GPU,they probably took the shortest route and be done with it,it warranty a more powerful machine,but also a more expensive chip as well.

@greygoose12 said:

@Sky_Fade: believe the Sony PR untill most series x games run at 60 fps. Then question how a 1.8 tf difference could make this happen.

This is pathetic 30FPS and 60FPS is a choice,Drive Club runs at 30FPS Forza 5 runs at 60FPS but Driveclub freaking pist all over Forza 5 visual wise,the sacrifices MS had to do to run the game at 60FPS were bastly,the same happen again with Halo 5 as well,which drops basically to 810p and look wash out and bad for trying to reach 60FPS.

Look at Resident Evil 3 remake,the PS4 Pro was 60FPS while the xbox one X version dropped frames to hell simply because Capcom chosed to chase 4k,they had to patch the game to lower resolution so the xbox one X version got acceptable frames.

Getting an xbox game to run at 60FPS will yield a less visually impressive game than sony chosing a 30FPS one,because the xbox series X doesn't have the resources to run a game at 60FPS while the game runs on PS5 at 30FPS and keep graphical parity.

If by any chance lets say Assassins Creed runs at 60FPS on series X and 30 FPS on PS5 it will certainly be worse looking on series X.

The xbox power isn't unlimite is just 18 to 21% more that is not even half the gap the XBO X had on the Pro.

So sony chosing 30FPS is a desicion make toward showing a more graphical looking game,if MS chose 60FPS they are chosing a less graphical game vs what the PS5 would output.

No xbox series X game will run at 60FPS while a PS5 on runs at 30FPS and the xbox would still hold better visuals something got to give.

Avatar image for sealionact
sealionact

5396

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#222 sealionact
Member since 2014 • 5396 Posts

@tormentos: lol, psnow is Sonys way of milking players to play old games....its nowhere near as good as Gamepass, which you yourself have admitted.

Theres no debating this...unless you would keep psnow as it is now instead of "PSpass" which would let you download all games, including ps3 games and let you play all of Sony's 1st party games day one.

Would you?

Avatar image for tormentos
tormentos

31509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#223 tormentos
Member since 2003 • 31509 Posts

@Pedro said:

Even though you spent all that time damage controlling and performing some the best mental gymnastics on the forum, the following STILL remains the same.

  1. You cannot stream games on Gamepass and Gamepass is not a streaming service. This fact is really eating you alive.
  2. The success of Gamepass forced PS Now to have a download option. Another fact that you cannot deny despite the mental gymnastics. Remember, your argument about PS Now being first streaming, well Gamepass was the first subscription on consoles in which you download the games and Sony.....COPIED it.πŸ˜‚
  3. Gamepass is a superior service to PS Now. (Current triple A games and day 1 launches with no streaming. I wonder which of the two has more users? Didn't sales and numbers matter to you folks?)
  4. The PS5 is using AMD Power Shift which is found in laptops. (laptops are PCs 😎)
  5. The final fact, is that when you have been owned you deflect to other topics like you are doing now. You keep reinforcing this one. I appreciate it. The funny part is that you are being owned in each of your deflection. 🀣

Now another deflection has been added. "teh SSD" πŸ˜‚

1-Which mean shit you pay for rentals MS copy sony.

2-Sony had download on its rental service before MS PSN+ is a more restricted rental period,you don't pay you can't play those games,PSN+ predates both games with gold and gamepass.

3-This is about the only point i can give you in half way,because 700+ games >>>> 100+ games,the selection of games in Gamepass craptasticly small,for not saying totally incomparable,but they do have day 1 release which is a + i give you that.

4-Which is irrelevant prove to me that boost on PC work like Boost on PS5,because the PS5 GPU speed is 2.23ghz and the CPU one 3.5ghz and in both cases the speed drops not rises,contrary to boost on PC were speed increases.

5-The final fact is that when you don't have a point you simple attack the posters or downplay other peoples arguments without having any proof but your sorry ass opinion.

I am still waiting for you to prove 120% faster speed will yield nothing in favor of the PS5.

Avatar image for tormentos
tormentos

31509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#224 tormentos
Member since 2003 • 31509 Posts
@Sky_Fade said:

@greygoose12: I'm not believing any PR. Both companies have put out technical information that anybody with a basic comprehension of maths and computing architecture can compare. The Xbox Series X is obviously the more powerful console, but the difference is nowhere as big as some make it out to be. Its far less then the Xbox One and Ps4 or the Xbox One X and Ps4 Pro. A game that is 30 fps on the Ps5 is not going to push 60 for on the Xbox Series X. A 30 FPS game on the Ps5 would be 35 FPS on the Xbox Series X at best, assuming the same settings.

This is not random guesswork, the technical specifications are out there for anyone to read.

I don't even know why lemmings would even imply that the xbox will run games in 60FPS and the PS5 in 30FPS,but then i remember this are the same people who though DX12 and the cloud would close a 40% game and the same who didn't see any difference between 720p and 1080p.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

40126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#225  Edited By Pedro  Online
Member since 2002 • 40126 Posts

@tormentos said:

1-Which mean shit you pay for rentals MS copy sony.

2-Sony had download on its rental service before MS PSN+ is a more restricted rental period,you don't pay you can't play those games,PSN+ predates both games with gold and gamepass.

3-This is about the only point i can give you in half way,because 700+ games >>>> 100+ games,the selection of games in Gamepass craptasticly small,for not saying totally incomparable,but they do have day 1 release which is a + i give you that.

4-Which is irrelevant prove to me that boost on PC work like Boost on PS5,because the PS5 GPU speed is 2.23ghz and the CPU one 3.5ghz and in both cases the speed drops not rises,contrary to boost on PC were speed increases.

5-The final fact is that when you don't have a point you simple attack the posters or downplay other peoples arguments without having any proof but your sorry ass opinion.

I am still waiting for you to prove 120% faster speed will yield nothing in favor of the PS5.

Still struggling to combat the facts I see.
Still struggling to combat the facts I see.

BTW Gamepass launched in 2017, PS Now enabled downloading September 2018. OWNED.

Avatar image for gifford38
Gifford38

1049

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#226 Gifford38
Member since 2020 • 1049 Posts

yes we get it the series x will be the only machine that can use full raytracing on every object in the game and still be 120fps. i get it now. even more powerful than a new gpu 2 years from now i get it

12 teraflops is all you need archive this level of graphics and still be 120fps.

ps5 is going to the same as the ps4 with a ssd. I get it now the ps5 will only have one item on the screen using raytracing while the series x will be using full raytracing on everything in the game.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

40126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#227 Pedro  Online
Member since 2002 • 40126 Posts

@gifford38 said:

yes we get it the series x will be the only machine that can use full raytracing on every object in the game and still be 120fps. i get it now. even more powerful than a new gpu 2 years from now i get it

12 teraflops is all you need archive this level of graphics and still be 120fps.

ps5 is going to the same as the ps4 with a ssd. I get it now the ps5 will only have one item on the screen using raytracing while the series x will be using full raytracing on everything in the game.

Remember what I said before about you making stupid comments. 😎

Avatar image for gifford38
Gifford38

1049

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#228 Gifford38
Member since 2020 • 1049 Posts

@Pedro said:
@gifford38 said:

yes we get it the series x will be the only machine that can use full raytracing on every object in the game and still be 120fps. i get it now. even more powerful than a new gpu 2 years from now i get it

12 teraflops is all you need archive this level of graphics and still be 120fps.

ps5 is going to the same as the ps4 with a ssd. I get it now the ps5 will only have one item on the screen using raytracing while the series x will be using full raytracing on everything in the game.

Remember what I said before about you making stupid comments. 😎

not a stupid comment every one uses the minecraft video and laugh at the ps5 raytracing then they go back to minecraft as a goal post on how much series x raytracing is going to be.

Avatar image for i_own_u_4ever
I_own_u_4ever

314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#229  Edited By I_own_u_4ever
Member since 2020 • 314 Posts

@Sky_Fade said:
@i_own_u_4ever said:

Nah good twist attempt but all wrong.

First off the GPU in the XSX will likely 99.9% of the time never need more then the 10, 560 gigs sec for the GPU and the other ram will be for OS and other lower level tasks and or some in game physics functions. Also with over 2 tflops more GPU power at most times the XSX will have a big advantage over the PS5 in most cases.

X factor Velocity pipeline architecture makes the PS5 SSD about a wash. Devs are coming out now and saying the Velocity pipeline architecture and texture packs design of the architecture is so fast that it can in a lot of cases be faster for graphical needs over the PS5.

XSX wins hands down and devs have said that it's likely a 30+% power advantage for the XSX over the PS5.

https://gamingbolt.com/xbox-series-x-ssd-focuses-on-delivering-sustained-and-consistent-performance-microsoft

The Xbox series X is obviously going to use more then 10GB of RAM for games. Microsoft themselves has already confirmed this themselves: https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-inside-xbox-series-x-full-specs

games get a total of 13.5GB in total, which encompasses all 10GB of GPU optimal memory and 3.5GB of standard memory

Thus, 3.5 GB of that RAM is going to be 33% slower then the PS5. Sure developers can choose not to use it, but then you only have 10GB vs 13.5-14GB usable in the PS5, which would mean the Xbox series X would have lower quality textures. Not gonna happen.

Additionally, 2TFLOP by itself is a meaningless number, the important thing is relative performance difference, which is only 18% and likely a bit lower due to Amdahl's law.

The Velocity statement is Microsoft just trying to spin that they too have a SSD and enhanced SSD speeds. It's impressive no doubt, but it's utterly blown away by what is in the PS5. Sony has dedicated I/O processing (on top of the SSD controller), enhanced flash translation layer, and a SSD that is more then twice as fast:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/15848/storage-matters-xbox-ps5-new-era-of-gaming

Give that article a good read, it goes into technical depth on both hardware solutions.

Pretending that the Velocity architecture is going to make up the difference is laughable when we have solid performance numbers for both. Feel free to post conclusive evidence proving me wrong.

Lastly, no developer has stated the Xbox Series X is 30% faster. That is obviously not true to anybody that has a brain and a calculator. Point me to a credible developer claiming this so I can laugh at them.

Sorry mate, 15% faster is the best case scenario for the Xbox Series X, which is frankly a tiny difference.

Sorry mate you're not a developer nor an engineer just a Pony fanboy wishing and grasping and trying to convince yourself it's only going to be 15%. You have ZERO credentials to claim or say it's only going to be 15% but I guarantee you saying this, Tomrnetos is surely your new best friend because he is looking for anything to stop having cold sweats at night about the XSX lol.

You are failing to accept that the 3.5 GB will be used to handle other various in game functions like physics and game play situations and that will be plenty fast enough in fact that is how fast the current X1X bandwidth is and that is already fast but their is no reason to believe MS would gimp themselves MS already knows the 10 gigs dedicated to the GPU at super fast 560 bandwidth is plenty for graphics and texture loading. again ZERO REASON for MS to gimp themselves their is not any real financial cost difference for them to not of just gone will a full memory at 560 but MS already knows that 10 at the super fast 560 for the GPU is plenty and they can still have 3.5 at fast speed comparable to the current X1X to use for other in game assets.

No developer thinks it's only a 15% XSX advantage just you mate just you a Pony fanboy with no credentials but actual developers have already said in most cases you can see a 30+% advantage with the XSX over the PS5.

an SSD does not magically all the sudden make graphics and resolutions way better SSD's have been around for years on PC it's always going to come down to CPU/GPU and how fast the memory bandwidth is including the software architecture that pushes these processes.

Oh by the way i'm not pretending anything Velocity and the texture pack pipeline is the real deal and it's a monster and extremely credible developers even say so just like Concertmasters working on Dirt 5. Developers are saying Kraken can speed things up about 20-30% meanwhile the Velocity pipeline in the XSX is said to be at 50+% on speeding up the process flow of streaming assets and texture packs and loading of assets.

Sorry mate you lose this is what actual developers are saying your keyboard Pony damage control does not pass the seal of development approval.

By the way I read all these articles but again at the end of the day the CPU/GPU with the most power and best architecture pushing those to pieces of hardware will always win, and the XSX has the PS5 beat in that pretty easy. The SSD in the PS5 is impressive but a super fast SSD will not make a weaker CPU/GPU all the sudden out perform a better CPU/GPU.

Simple math below

PS5 SSD >>> XSX SSD

Loading times PS5 >>> XSX

XSX CPU/GPU >>> PS5 CPU/GPU

Velocity texture streaming pipeline at 50+% speeds that pushes the CPU/GPU >>> Kraken at 20-30% speeds in the PS5.

PS5 has faster loading times between game screen loading and boot up times.

XSX has better frame rates better resolutions and graphics fidelity, why still offering great fast loading times.

Winner XSX

Avatar image for BlackShirt20
BlackShirt20

1710

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#230 BlackShirt20  Online
Member since 2005 • 1710 Posts

@tormentos: PS5 cannot sustain anything.

Avatar image for Sky_Fade
Sky_Fade

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#231 Sky_Fade
Member since 2006 • 38 Posts

@i_own_u_4ever said:

Sorry mate you're not a developer nor an engineer just a Pony fanboy wishing and grasping and trying to convince yourself it's only going to be 15%. You have ZERO credentials to claim or say it's only going to be 15% but I guarantee you saying this, Tomrnetos is surely your new best friend because he is looking for anything to stop having cold sweats at night about the XSX lol.

You are failing to accept that the 3.5 GB will be used to handle other various in game functions like physics and game play situations and that will be plenty fast enough in fact that is how fast the current X1X bandwidth is and that is already fast but their is no reason to believe MS would gimp themselves MS already knows the 10 gigs dedicated to the GPU at super fast 560 bandwidth is plenty for graphics and texture loading. again ZERO REASON for MS to gimp themselves their is not any real financial cost difference for them to not of just gone will a full memory at 560 but MS already knows that 10 at the super fast 560 for the GPU is plenty and they can still have 3.5 at fast speed comparable to the current X1X to use for other in game assets.

No developer thinks it's only a 15% XSX advantage just you mate just you a Pony fanboy with no credentials but actual developers have already said in most cases you can see a 30+% advantage with the XSX over the PS5.

an SSD does not magically all the sudden make graphics and resolutions way better SSD's have been around for years on PC it's always going to come down to CPU/GPU and how fast the memory bandwidth is including the software architecture that pushes these processes.

Oh by the way i'm not pretending anything Velocity and the texture pack pipeline is the real deal and it's a monster and extremely credible developers even say so just like Concertmasters working on Dirt 5. Developers are saying Kraken can speed things up about 20-30% meanwhile the Velocity pipeline in the XSX is said to be at 50+% on speeding up the process flow of streaming assets and texture packs and loading of assets.

Sorry mate you lose this is what actual developers are saying your keyboard Pony damage control does not pass the seal of development approval.

By the way I read all these articles but again at the end of the day the CPU/GPU with the most power and best architecture pushing those to pieces of hardware will always win, and the XSX has the PS5 beat in that pretty easy. The SSD in the PS5 is impressive but a super fast SSD will not make a weaker CPU/GPU all the sudden out perform a better CPU/GPU.

Simple math below

PS5 SSD >>> XSX SSD

Loading times PS5 >>> XSX

XSX CPU/GPU >>> PS5 CPU/GPU

Velocity texture streaming pipeline at 50+% speeds that pushes the CPU/GPU >>> Kraken at 20-30% speeds in the PS5.

PS5 has faster loading times between game screen loading and boot up times.

XSX has better frame rates better resolutions and graphics fidelity, why still offering great fast loading times.

Winner XSX

Actually, I am a software developer and work for a major Cloud provider, so I have some clue when it comes to software development and computing hardware. Admittedly not a game developer, but this discussion is hardly a deep dive on low level API development or hardware design.

As for being a 'Pony' fanboy, I actually own a PS4 PRO, Xbox Series X, Gaming PC, and a Switch. However, I will freely admit the Xbox Series X was a shit purchase as everything on it I can play on my PC. However it is by far the best console in terms of hardware design. Microsoft really needs to push console exclusives for next-gen for me to bother with the Xbox Series X.

You are correct that the 3.5 GB would likely be used for functions that do not require higher memory bandwidth, but this fails to account for the fact that PS5 has no such limitation, and that the 3.5 GB will still be slower. What happens if a game requires 12GB of really high speed memory for it's engine? 2GB of that will then be faster on the PS5. That all being said, Xbox Series X is obviously the faster solution, as I even mentioned in my original post, however it would be dishonest to claim that the Xbox Series X has always the faster memory.

The reason I claim that the difference between the two in regular graphics rasterization is that we have the numbers right before us. We don't have to guess anything. The Xbox Series X has no "secret sauce" that will allow it to perform better then the raw numbers indicate. We have the specs right in front of us, performing performance differential calculations between the two is hardly rocket science.

As for developers claiming 30% difference, how about you back that statement up? This is the second time I am asking you.

As for SSD performance, the difference between Kraken and Velocity is meaningless as we have the performance numbers for post compression for both. It's a 70/80% advantage to the PS5. This is not up for debate. Velocity might very well be the better software compression, but that hardly matters when the PS5 SSD hardware itself is more then twice as fast as the Xbox SSD. Software cannot make up that difference itself.

I have always claimed the Xbox Series X is the faster console (other then SSD), but the difference is smaller then previous consoles and is hardly going to make a difference.

Please post any evidence of developers claiming otherwise. Oh look a developer just stated they see little difference between the two:

https://wccftech.com/keoken-on-next-gen-we-dont-see-many-differences-between-ps5-tempest-will-free-cpu-resources/

Avatar image for ivangrozny
IvanGrozny

1126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#232 IvanGrozny  Online
Member since 2015 • 1126 Posts

TC get a gf. There is too much time on your hands.

Avatar image for i_own_u_4ever
I_own_u_4ever

314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#233 I_own_u_4ever
Member since 2020 • 314 Posts

@tormentos said:
@Sky_Fade said:

@tormentos: You can't compare the two, a 5700XT is RDNA on regular 7nm, while the PS5 GPU is RDNA2 on 7nm Enhanced. In addition, the 5700XT is slightly larger at 40 CU.

Even so, most 5700XT's can reach almost 2.1GHz stable when OC'd on the regular coolers (so not talking about Nitro):

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-radeon-rx-5700-xt-tuf-evo/34.html

2079 MHz for the one.

So taking into consideration the slightly smaller GPU, improved process node, and newer RDNA architecture, 2230Mhz does not sound unreasonable. But the power draw would likely be quite high - hence the use of AMD SmartShift. If you need to max your CPU or GPU then one would limit the other to stay within the power envelope, it doesn't mean that both cannot run at max sustained speeds when required.

To give a example, suppose you are running a GPU intensive scene, tons of enemies on screen, shits going down in a epic way, so you need maximum GPU power! AMD SmartShift ensure the GPU is running at that 2230Mhz at all times while downclocking the CPU a bit (3.2 seems a likely lower limit). If you need intensive CPU calculations and not 100% GPU then the reverse happens, CPU is maxed to 3.5Ghz, GPU drops down to 2.1Ghz (or whatever).

In the scenario that you need to max the GPU and CPU at the same time, then AMD SmartShift (and likely other software mechanisms Sony has implemented) will adjust the CPU/GPU speeds for maximum performance at that paticular time. Increasing the CPU to 3.5GHz if needed or the GPU to 2230MHz otherwise, or even 98% of both. You have a total system budget and that gets allocated to the required resource that needs it the most.

However, and take note, as the vast, vast majority of games can be GPU limited (especially in todays 4k world) the GPU would be the component that would likely run at max clocks the majority (if not all) the time. Just as Mark Cerny said.

For the Xbox side of things, the reason they likely did not implement AMD Smartshift, is that due to the clocks and size of the GPU, they would not get much benefit out of it. That 52 CU monster is going to dramatically increase the power budget for a very minor increase in Mhz. Rather save the die space and lower costs.

It doesn't matter the series X is RDNA2 as well and don't reach 1900mhz let alone 2,230mhz see my point?

If the chip would use smart shif the heat would be better manage,because you asign a power budget were you will not go over it and just distribute it between both CPU an GPU,fact is if the PS5 would have been like the xbox its GPU would have been locked in similar way 1800mhz or even less it was the way sony their design what allowed for much higher speeds.

Non of those are stock clocks they are heavily OC and still don't reach 2.23ghz,on PC where you can find much better cooling.

Everything you say there i know it alrady,the problem is that at 4k you are mostly GPU bound not CPU bound,so holing back the CPU a little will not be a problem,and you will gain more from 3% more GPU power at 4k that 3% more CPU power.

They didn't go with smarth shift because they chose a big ass GPU,they probably took the shortest route and be done with it,it warranty a more powerful machine,but also a more expensive chip as well.

@greygoose12 said:

@Sky_Fade: believe the Sony PR untill most series x games run at 60 fps. Then question how a 1.8 tf difference could make this happen.

This is pathetic 30FPS and 60FPS is a choice,Drive Club runs at 30FPS Forza 5 runs at 60FPS but Driveclub freaking pist all over Forza 5 visual wise,the sacrifices MS had to do to run the game at 60FPS were bastly,the same happen again with Halo 5 as well,which drops basically to 810p and look wash out and bad for trying to reach 60FPS.

Look at Resident Evil 3 remake,the PS4 Pro was 60FPS while the xbox one X version dropped frames to hell simply because Capcom chosed to chase 4k,they had to patch the game to lower resolution so the xbox one X version got acceptable frames.

Getting an xbox game to run at 60FPS will yield a less visually impressive game than sony chosing a 30FPS one,because the xbox series X doesn't have the resources to run a game at 60FPS while the game runs on PS5 at 30FPS and keep graphical parity.

If by any chance lets say Assassins Creed runs at 60FPS on series X and 30 FPS on PS5 it will certainly be worse looking on series X.

The xbox power isn't unlimite is just 18 to 21% more that is not even half the gap the XBO X had on the Pro.

So sony chosing 30FPS is a desicion make toward showing a more graphical looking game,if MS chose 60FPS they are chosing a less graphical game vs what the PS5 would output.

No xbox series X game will run at 60FPS while a PS5 on runs at 30FPS and the xbox would still hold better visuals something got to give.

Drive club was a horrible game with shit physics and worthless damage and environment interaction modeling. Sorry nice try Drive Club WAS SHIT!!!!!!

Avatar image for i_own_u_4ever
I_own_u_4ever

314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#234  Edited By I_own_u_4ever
Member since 2020 • 314 Posts
@Sky_Fade said:
@i_own_u_4ever said:

Sorry mate you're not a developer nor an engineer just a Pony fanboy wishing and grasping and trying to convince yourself it's only going to be 15%. You have ZERO credentials to claim or say it's only going to be 15% but I guarantee you saying this, Tomrnetos is surely your new best friend because he is looking for anything to stop having cold sweats at night about the XSX lol.

You are failing to accept that the 3.5 GB will be used to handle other various in game functions like physics and game play situations and that will be plenty fast enough in fact that is how fast the current X1X bandwidth is and that is already fast but their is no reason to believe MS would gimp themselves MS already knows the 10 gigs dedicated to the GPU at super fast 560 bandwidth is plenty for graphics and texture loading. again ZERO REASON for MS to gimp themselves their is not any real financial cost difference for them to not of just gone will a full memory at 560 but MS already knows that 10 at the super fast 560 for the GPU is plenty and they can still have 3.5 at fast speed comparable to the current X1X to use for other in game assets.

No developer thinks it's only a 15% XSX advantage just you mate just you a Pony fanboy with no credentials but actual developers have already said in most cases you can see a 30+% advantage with the XSX over the PS5.

an SSD does not magically all the sudden make graphics and resolutions way better SSD's have been around for years on PC it's always going to come down to CPU/GPU and how fast the memory bandwidth is including the software architecture that pushes these processes.

Oh by the way i'm not pretending anything Velocity and the texture pack pipeline is the real deal and it's a monster and extremely credible developers even say so just like Concertmasters working on Dirt 5. Developers are saying Kraken can speed things up about 20-30% meanwhile the Velocity pipeline in the XSX is said to be at 50+% on speeding up the process flow of streaming assets and texture packs and loading of assets.

Sorry mate you lose this is what actual developers are saying your keyboard Pony damage control does not pass the seal of development approval.

By the way I read all these articles but again at the end of the day the CPU/GPU with the most power and best architecture pushing those to pieces of hardware will always win, and the XSX has the PS5 beat in that pretty easy. The SSD in the PS5 is impressive but a super fast SSD will not make a weaker CPU/GPU all the sudden out perform a better CPU/GPU.

Simple math below

PS5 SSD >>> XSX SSD

Loading times PS5 >>> XSX

XSX CPU/GPU >>> PS5 CPU/GPU

Velocity texture streaming pipeline at 50+% speeds that pushes the CPU/GPU >>> Kraken at 20-30% speeds in the PS5.

PS5 has faster loading times between game screen loading and boot up times.

XSX has better frame rates better resolutions and graphics fidelity, why still offering great fast loading times.

Winner XSX

Actually, I am a software developer and work for a major Cloud provider, so I have some clue when it comes to software development and computing hardware. Admittedly not a game developer, but this discussion is hardly a deep dive on low level API development or hardware design.

As for being a 'Pony' fanboy, I actually own a PS4 PRO, Xbox Series X, Gaming PC, and a Switch. However, I will freely admit the Xbox Series X was a shit purchase as everything on it I can play on my PC. However it is by far the best console in terms of hardware design. Microsoft really needs to push console exclusives for next-gen for me to bother with the Xbox Series X.

You are correct that the 3.5 GB would likely be used for functions that do not require higher memory bandwidth, but this fails to account for the fact that PS5 has no such limitation, and that the 3.5 GB will still be slower. What happens if a game requires 12GB of really high speed memory for it's engine? 2GB of that will then be faster on the PS5. That all being said, Xbox Series X is obviously the faster solution, as I even mentioned in my original post, however it would be dishonest to claim that the Xbox Series X has always the faster memory.

The reason I claim that the difference between the two in regular graphics rasterization is that we have the numbers right before us. We don't have to guess anything. The Xbox Series X has no "secret sauce" that will allow it to perform better then the raw numbers indicate. We have the specs right in front of us, performing performance differential calculations between the two is hardly rocket science.

As for developers claiming 30% difference, how about you back that statement up? This is the second time I am asking you.

As for SSD performance, the difference between Kraken and Velocity is meaningless as we have the performance numbers for post compression for both. It's a 70/80% advantage to the PS5. This is not up for debate. Velocity might very well be the better software compression, but that hardly matters when the PS5 SSD hardware itself is more then twice as fast as the Xbox SSD. Software cannot make up that difference itself.

I have always claimed the Xbox Series X is the faster console (other then SSD), but the difference is smaller then previous consoles and is hardly going to make a difference.

Please post any evidence of developers claiming otherwise. Oh look a developer just stated they see little difference between the two:

https://wccftech.com/keoken-on-next-gen-we-dont-see-many-differences-between-ps5-tempest-will-free-cpu-resources/

Cool who do you work for? I'm a Sr. level business development and recruitment specialist for large firms and big players in the industry. Do you specialize AWS or Azure or both? If you did low level API development i'd actually want to talk to you they are limited and in high demand especially with all the robotics type technology happening these days.

Based on what I've just said you can clearly see i'm not full of shit.

I'll see if I can pull up the 30% power difference you can google it I've seen other developers mention this but it's a google thing I don't have it readily in front of me but i'll see if I can find it again.

Oh also by the way this is what i'm saying we already know that the SSD itself is faster in the PS5 what i'm saying is MS has been aware of that and have designed the pipeline that runs the processes between the SSD and the GPU and the pipeline architecture to be extremely efficient and also store huge amounts of data within other parts of the system to be loaded super fast as needed so it's not just the SSD in the XSX that is pushing textures and information super fast in the XSX.

Here are some links.

https://www.androidcentral.com/former-killzone-developer-says-xbox-series-x-advantage-over-ps5-quite-staggering

https://www.t3.com/us/news/ps5-graphics-beaten-by-xbox-series-x-in-shocking-left-field-analysis

I'm also getting the PS5 day one and looking forward to both systems.

Avatar image for i_own_u_4ever
I_own_u_4ever

314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#235 I_own_u_4ever
Member since 2020 • 314 Posts

@greygoose12 said:

The reason why Microsoft didn't oc in my opinion is the cost factor and reliability and they all ready had more power. The AMD smart shift is not proven. The only laptop that has it dell G5 15 se. That technology is unproven and runs very hot ! So why not go the safe route when you already have more power ? Plus its easier to develop games for. Sony took a chance on a new unproven technology. Those are facts. I am glad they went the tried and true path.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.notebookcheck.net/Dell-G5-15-SE-with-AMD-Ryzen-7-4800H-records-above-100-C-average-CPU-temperatures-leaving-the-Asus-TUF-Gaming-A15-as-the-better-Ryzen-4000-gaming-laptop-option.469723.0.html&ved=2ahUKEwiq0MHWu6fqAhWbQs0KHePtApsQFjAFegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw2S_vORBgJkAdeu6TOURQFT&cshid=1593448927723

Easier development better optimization and a better CPU/GPU will clearly lead to a far more powerful system. Ponies can't accept this but it's FACT!!!!!!

Avatar image for greygoose12
Greygoose12

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#236 Greygoose12  Online
Member since 2020 • 55 Posts

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.t3.com/amp/news/ps5-graphics-beaten-by-xbox-series-x-in-shocking-left-field-analysis&ved=0ahUKEwjao6v8u7LoAhXFknIEHdF-DicQyM8BCDYwAw&usg=AOvVaw1VAFjra0RnZTFba1q5lB8r&ampcf=1

There are articles both ways why someone is lying lol. We will see when DF gets a hold of the games !

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

40126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#237 Pedro  Online
Member since 2002 • 40126 Posts

@i_own_u_4ever said:

Easier development better optimization and a better CPU/GPU will clearly lead to a far more powerful system. Ponies can't accept this but it's FACT!!!!!!

You are just rambling.

Avatar image for i_own_u_4ever
I_own_u_4ever

314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#238 I_own_u_4ever
Member since 2020 • 314 Posts

@greygoose12 said:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.t3.com/amp/news/ps5-graphics-beaten-by-xbox-series-x-in-shocking-left-field-analysis&ved=0ahUKEwjao6v8u7LoAhXFknIEHdF-DicQyM8BCDYwAw&usg=AOvVaw1VAFjra0RnZTFba1q5lB8r&ampcf=1

There are articles both ways why someone is lying lol. We will see when DF gets a hold of the games !

Does anyone truly think the PS5 will offer better Ray Tracing better frame rates and better resolutions then the XSX with a better CPU/GPU? I mean i'll take bets right now place them. 10-1 odds in favor of the XSX.

Who's actually placing bets put your money where your mouths are?

Avatar image for i_own_u_4ever
I_own_u_4ever

314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#239 I_own_u_4ever
Member since 2020 • 314 Posts

More proof Velocity is a real game changer for the XSX.

https://gamingbolt.com/xbox-series-xs-velocity-architecture-will-greatly-help-open-world-games-says-developer

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

40126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#240 Pedro  Online
Member since 2002 • 40126 Posts

@i_own_u_4ever: Its not a game changer

Avatar image for phbz
phbz

5827

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 0

#241 phbz
Member since 2009 • 5827 Posts

XSX 8k/120 confirmed!

Avatar image for tormentos
tormentos

31509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#242 tormentos
Member since 2003 • 31509 Posts

@i_own_u_4ever:

But but but only sony is hyping ssd.πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚

Avatar image for i_own_u_4ever
I_own_u_4ever

314

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#243 I_own_u_4ever
Member since 2020 • 314 Posts

@Pedro said:

@i_own_u_4ever: Its not a game changer

Why isn't it? What is your engineering credentials and information to prove otherwise?

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

40126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 66

User Lists: 0

#244 Pedro  Online
Member since 2002 • 40126 Posts

@i_own_u_4ever said:

Why isn't it? What is your engineering credentials and information to prove otherwise?

Firstly, you don't need engineering or information that proves otherwise. Velocity Architecture simply allows for data to be transferred to memory faster without the need of the CPU decompressing the data. If you believe VA is game changing then the PS5 SSD is game changing. Good to know that you believe that the PS5 SSD is more of game changer than the Xbox Series X.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

8677

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#245 HalcyonScarlet
Member since 2011 • 8677 Posts

@xantufrog said:

I'd like everyone to take a moment and admire me3's effort.

In just two months - a masterclass in posting the same three points over and over again:

XBX CPU/GPU/Velocity So FAST doesn't need the PS5 SSD. 4K 120FPS BLAZING!!!!!!

MS Hardware Team is HANDS DOWN the Best in the Business. Power, Performance, Design >>> Competition.

Sony to GOUGE it's consumers again as normal. MS offers far better value.

PS5 will Struggle to be a True Native 4K Machine.

PS5 Fat Ugly PS5 Slim SICK!!!!!! = Game Stop MURDERED!!!!!!

Welp Cyberpunk 2077 is GOTY best versions XSX > PS5 > X > PS4

3080 > XSX > 2080 > 2070 > PS5

XSX BC on another level. Makes the competition BC look like TRASH!!!!!!

XSX Absolute MONSTER 24Tflops of Unprecedented Power = GAME OVER!!!!!!

Dev Confirms XSX Beast is only console able to have parity with PC. MONSTER!!!!!!

XSX Beast Pre-Order Page Up!!!!!! Worlds Most Powerful Fastest Console EVER!!!!!!

MS's Obsidian >>> All Sony Game Studios

Developer confirms PS5 SSD can't close the CPU/GPU Gap. Bottleneck likely if main focus.

Next Gen CPU's far more important then SSD's. XSX Wins Hands Down!!!

X Gonna Give It To Ya!!! Showing you why the XSX is the Hardcore Gamers system of choice.

Ponies raving about 1440p 30fps. Sorry XSX/PC are 4k 60fps standard

Why get the Inferior PS5 when Sony has no exclusives or very few left???

MS to win Next Gen and take Huge Market Share from Sony = $400 Undercut

WOW! Series X Beast Dirt 5 120FPS 4K. Not sure PS5 can keep up?

Holy Ultra Level Graphics Ultra RT Ultra VRS Ultra 60FPS-120FPS 4K-8K HDR = Hardcore Gamer Domination

Sony caught off guard and a little dumbfounded by MS

AC Vikings PS5 vs Series X

Wait Sony said Rumble is old, Power is everything, now Rumble is God Power means nothing???

Loading times do not magically beat power PS5 & Xbox Series X

What a waste of time this post was. Now THAT'S SW dedication. :-S

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

13045

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#246 xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 13045 Posts

@HalcyonScarlet: oh yeah - it was hard for a mod to pull up his spam history and call him out on it

Avatar image for Zero_epyon
Zero_epyon

14402

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#247 Zero_epyon
Member since 2004 • 14402 Posts

@xantufrog said:

@HalcyonScarlet: oh yeah - it was hard for a mod to pull up his spam history and call him out on it

lol I was about to say that for a second time this thread.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

8677

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#248 HalcyonScarlet
Member since 2011 • 8677 Posts

@xantufrog said:

@HalcyonScarlet: oh yeah - it was hard for a mod to pull up his spam history and call him out on it

And hyperlinking them all? Is that automatic as well?

Avatar image for Zero_epyon
Zero_epyon

14402

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#249 Zero_epyon
Member since 2004 • 14402 Posts

@HalcyonScarlet said:
@xantufrog said:

@HalcyonScarlet: oh yeah - it was hard for a mod to pull up his spam history and call him out on it

And hyperlinking them all? Is that automatic as well?

This is really important to you isn't it? lol

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

13045

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#250 xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 13045 Posts

@HalcyonScarlet: no. it's true - the gig is hard