Quantcast
The wisdom of the 6Tf vs 4Tf

Forums - Gaming Discussion - The wisdom of the 6Tf vs 4Tf

konkari said:

My take on this: Ps4 pro had two targets for Sony

1) Bring in a device which would platform 4k content so that 4k TV and monitors would become intresting, both for consumers to buy and for manufacturers to offer. I think the synergy with TV has been great but on monitor side 4k HDR is still rare

2) Make a better PSVR experience. I think this has been playing out well during this holiday season when also games are available (skyrim)

 

 

 

I've said this a million times but:

I was so hyped for PSVR that I bought it on day one. I was so hyped for the improved PSVR performance that I pre-ordered the PS4 Pro. The Pro had me do hyped for 4K that I bought a 4K TV before the Pro even arrived!

They've fixed the issue now (for new buyers) but I always hated that I had to choose between HDR and PSVR. Either I had to disconnect the PSVR from the console that improved PSVR or I had to keep it connected and always have the loss of image quality gnawing in the back of my head. In that regard, I always felt Sony kinda screwed up.



Twitter: @d21lewis  --I'll add you if you add me!!

Around the Network
d21lewis said:
konkari said:

My take on this: Ps4 pro had two targets for Sony

1) Bring in a device which would platform 4k content so that 4k TV and monitors would become intresting, both for consumers to buy and for manufacturers to offer. I think the synergy with TV has been great but on monitor side 4k HDR is still rare

2) Make a better PSVR experience. I think this has been playing out well during this holiday season when also games are available (skyrim)

 

 

 

I've said this a million times but:

I was so hyped for PSVR that I bought it on day one. I was so hyped for the improved PSVR performance that I pre-ordered the PS4 Pro. The Pro had me do hyped for 4K that I bought a 4K TV before the Pro even arrived!

They've fixed the issue now (for new buyers) but I always hated that I had to choose between HDR and PSVR. Either I had to disconnect the PSVR from the console that improved PSVR or I had to keep it connected and always have the loss of image quality gnawing in the back of my head. In that regard, I always felt Sony kinda screwed up.

The lack of HDR pass through was a very bad choice.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Intrinsic said:
  1. MS marketed the XB1X significantly more than Sony marketed the PS4Pro.

A metric fuckton more. I saw One X commercials every week for months before launch. I don't recall seeing any for the Pro's launch.

The Pro was a conservative investment in an unproven scheme (the midgen home console) and intended from the start to be a niche product. It was never meant to be a smash hit, as indicated by the continually minimal marketing and supply. The X, on the other hand, is a big investment by MS to repair some of their image and retain some customers - which also benefited from Sony acclimating people to the idea of midgen upgrades in the first place. It's still a niche product, but you wouldn't know it by how much effort and hype MS is throwing behind it. So long as they didn't fuck it up it was sure to have a good launch with Xbox gamers tired of unfavorable comparisons and starved for more power. The real test will begin next year to see what kind of legs it has.



TallSilhouette said:
Intrinsic said:
  1. MS marketed the XB1X significantly more than Sony marketed the PS4Pro.

A metric fuckton more. I saw One X commercials every week for months before launch. I don't recall seeing any for the Pro's launch.

The Pro was a conservative investment in an unproven scheme (the midgen home console) and intended from the start to be a niche product. It was never meant to be a smash hit, as indicated by the continually minimal marketing and supply. The X, on the other hand, is a big investment by MS to repair some of their image and retain some customers - which also benefited from Sony acclimating people to the idea of midgen upgrades in the first place. It's still a niche product, but you wouldn't know it by how much effort and hype MS is throwing behind it. So long as they didn't fuck it up it was sure to have a good launch with Xbox gamers tired of unfavorable comparisons and starved for more power. The real test will begin next year to see what kind of legs it has.

And PS4Pro achieved 20% of the total PS4 sales since launch. X1X may get even higher.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Valid points. I have used direct cable to monitor when I am not using PSVR because I suspect it increases input lag. I tried to measure with Leo Bodnar device but I was not able to get any results at all.



Around the Network

I can't help but wonder, if Scorpio ended up being 4.5TF to 5TF, would it have sold any better? I really think it would have at launch and overall. The gap between 1.4TF and 4.5TF would still be a larger leap than 1.8TF to 4.2TF. With first party games like Forza 7 hitting 4k/60 with plenty left over in the tank apparently, a 4.5TF-5TF console could more than likely handle that same Forza 7 4k/60, just almost maxed out.
There is also the fact that Scorpio could more than likely have launched 12-6 months sooner, and would also have cost close to $100 less. This leads me to believe that the large majority of XB1X buyers would still have bought it, as well as many more who wanted an XB but just didn't want to pay, or have $500 to spend.

The marketing could remain mostly the same thing. It would still be the worlds most powerful console, and it would technically be capable of 4k/60 as well. It would have to use checkerboarding more often than it does now, but that wouldn't matter if the XB1X wasn't required to last.
In terms of longevity, this would have hurt Scorpio, considering it wouldn't have had the grunt to last as long as the XB1X will be able to, but the question is how long will XB1X remain relevant? Will XB keep their word and eventually make the XB1X the base console and release an upgrade in another 4 years?

Whether 6TF was the better choice, depends more so on what the future plans and execution are for the XB1X.



The Canadian National Anthem According To Justin Trudeau

 

Oh planet Earth! The home of native lands, 
True social law, in all of us demand.
With cattle farts, we view sea rise,
Our North sinking slowly.
From far and snide, oh planet Earth, 
Our healthcare is yours free!
Science save our land, harnessing the breeze,
Oh planet Earth, smoke weed and ferment yeast.
Oh planet Earth, ell gee bee queue and tee.

From a hardware perspective, I think MS had the right moves and the better execution. If I want to get a console for 4k, I want it to be a 4k experience. A lot of games on x1x are running native 4k or at the very least, higher than ps4 pro and it comes with a 4k Bluray player. It also has Super Sampling and AF for every game instead of leaving it up to the developers at 1080p. That is the kind of a console that I want if I wanted a "4k" experience at least for this generation. Yea it costs more money but if I can't afford it, may as well get the cheaper one.

The problem with the x1x is the same problem with the x1... The games... Sony has more exclusive games than Xbox does while having most if not all third party games the xbox one does.

So you have one console that gives you plenty of games and some exclusives vs another console that gives you mostly the same games plus a lot more exclusives. And that's not even getting into the whole "most xbox games are playable on PC."

I think at the end of the day, they made the right call overall with the x1x. If they made the hardware close to the ps4 pro, then there wouldn't be much of a reason to get an x1x but having a hardware that is much more powerful than the ps4 pro while having a 4k bluray player... There is at least something there to give buyers a reason.

Last edited by Captain_Yuri - on 20 December 2017

             

                               Anime: Haruhi                                                                                      Anime: Love Live
                              Nsfw Anime Thread                                                                             Join our Anime Threads!
                             Sfw Anime Thread                                                                                VGC Tutorial Thread

EricHiggin said:
I can't help but wonder, if Scorpio ended up being 4.5TF to 5TF, would it have sold any better? I really think it would have at launch and overall. The gap between 1.4TF and 4.5TF would still be a larger leap than 1.8TF to 4.2TF. With first party games like Forza 7 hitting 4k/60 with plenty left over in the tank apparently, a 4.5TF-5TF console could more than likely handle that same Forza 7 4k/60, just almost maxed out.
There is also the fact that Scorpio could more than likely have launched 12-6 months sooner, and would also have cost close to $100 less. This leads me to believe that the large majority of XB1X buyers would still have bought it, as well as many more who wanted an XB but just didn't want to pay, or have $500 to spend.

The marketing could remain mostly the same thing. It would still be the worlds most powerful console, and it would technically be capable of 4k/60 as well. It would have to use checkerboarding more often than it does now, but that wouldn't matter if the XB1X wasn't required to last.
In terms of longevity, this would have hurt Scorpio, considering it wouldn't have had the grunt to last as long as the XB1X will be able to, but the question is how long will XB1X remain relevant? Will XB keep their word and eventually make the XB1X the base console and release an upgrade in another 4 years?

Whether 6TF was the better choice, depends more so on what the future plans and execution are for the XB1X.

Seems like they compromised a little on FM7 compared to 6 to get the 4k60fps



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

AsGryffynn said:

At 6TF, Microsoft basically cornered the competitors before the next generation even started in the first place. Jumping much higher after this yields negligible benefits to performance, and the cost will skyrocket afterwards. Attempting to go further might be costly, so Sony either needs to find a way to be better which precludes power, or risk MS starting with an already vast catalog and around a million or more users. 

They actually played a good hand this time. They did something that would ensure they remained the top dog one way or another once this generation ends... 

Are you just talking about the remainder of this generation and the small possibility of another mid gen console or are you suggesting that the difference between the X and 7nm next gen consoles will be negligible?



The Switch isn't even 1 TFLOPS and it's outselling the XBox One and XBox One X, selling at a similar pace as the PS4.


Let that sink in.



The wisdom of less than half a TFLOPS vs 6 TFLOPS.



  • PSN: Hynad
  • NN: 3519-6016-4122
  • XBL: Hynad
  • Steam: Hynad81