Quantcast
Goodby Teraflop (PS5 and Xbox Scarlet probably will not contest on Teraflop number anymore) expect 8 to 9 teraflop for PS5 and Scarlet

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Goodby Teraflop (PS5 and Xbox Scarlet probably will not contest on Teraflop number anymore) expect 8 to 9 teraflop for PS5 and Scarlet

Tagged games:

What do you think with these teraflop number

Yes 1 2.94%
 
No 0 0.00%
 
i don't care teraflop , i... 19 55.88%
 
I am expecting more 6 17.65%
 
These within my expecation 4 11.76%
 
I am impressed we get mor... 2 5.88%
 
I still believe even with... 2 5.88%
 
Total:34
DonFerrari said:
SvennoJ said:
I don't buy it. Every gen and revision claims more efficient use of CPU and GPU, faster ram and what not. At least the mid gen refreshes will look like a noticeable improvement with extra raw power.

Console generations have changed. New gen, new efficient hardware, small power increase. Mid gen pro consoles bring the power increase. Split into two updates instead of one. The best improvements will come from faster loading speeds, finally no more chugging 5400 rpm hdd and a data bus to actually make use of SSD. Perhaps I don't have to think twice about entering a house anymore in RPGs, is it worth the wait or not. Faster restarts will make Souls games more bearable as well.

I can't say how much happier GTS made me against GT5 and 6 on the loading times, more so on restart.

Sport mode is still slow though. For example race entry ends at 3:30, matching begins at 3:31, track loads for a minute or more then a minute wait, actual race starts at 3:34. Then you do one race and it has to load everything again doh.

Offline is a lot faster, still some things take forever. I now have liveries for all GR.3 and GR.4 cars and a few others. The car selection screen can show blanks for up to 5 minutes before it has all the thumbnails loaded...

Any patch takes over 35 minutes to install because it has to copy the whole game over again regardless of download speed. Starting the game still takes 2 minutes before you're entered into a race. It's all still pretty slow. (ps4 pro with stock hdd)



Around the Network
SvennoJ said:
DonFerrari said:

I can't say how much happier GTS made me against GT5 and 6 on the loading times, more so on restart.

Sport mode is still slow though. For example race entry ends at 3:30, matching begins at 3:31, track loads for a minute or more then a minute wait, actual race starts at 3:34. Then you do one race and it has to load everything again doh.

Offline is a lot faster, still some things take forever. I now have liveries for all GR.3 and GR.4 cars and a few others. The car selection screen can show blanks for up to 5 minutes before it has all the thumbnails loaded...

Any patch takes over 35 minutes to install because it has to copy the whole game over again regardless of download speed. Starting the game still takes 2 minutes before you're entered into a race. It's all still pretty slow. (ps4 pro with stock hdd)

Yep it can improve a lot, and since racing already is much close than others to photo realism it probably can improve a lot on loading times since assets shouldn't see a major increase 



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

DonFerrari said:

One part on the PC world that kinda of counter balance the improvements on the HW is how about every SW keeps increasing the demand year over year.

I simply hate that 5 years later the PC I bought even if I fully format and clean it, it will perform much worse for similar activity than when it was new. While console usually will keep similar performance even you don't do anything.

So Console gamers may forget or pretend optimization and updates don't happen on PC, but you can't pretend the end effect on a fixed HW for 5 years are similar among PC and console. On the same time the console gone from mid-tier PC HW to low-end during it's lifetime with games looking better, the equivalent HW of the PC that started with the console will lose performance instead of gaining.

Remember I have a Core 2 Quad PC as a testing rig from 12 years ago that still runs games today.
And I have a Core i7 3930K as a testing rig from 8 years ago that still runs games today at max settings.

So I can honestly and definitively say I have not experienced the effect of PC's slowing down with time.

Does some software get more demanding as time goes on with successive updates? Maybe, just not a trend I have seen.

HollyGamer said:

That's why next gen will be even better. Freesync Monitor are cheap so it's worth to invest 

Why wait? Some consoles already support such monitors. - However, the true leap will be when televisions support the technology.

HollyGamer said:

Well i know about all of you mention above no need to write  , FLOPS can be used to compare for the same bit workload and the same integer support and functionality  . Let say you can compare 32 bit fp to 32  bit fp on the same architecture design CPU or GPU. Like  "comparing the same line up GPU like RTX 2070 with RTX 2080.  FLOPS can be used to market and to tell the difference between those card, so seller or vendor dont have to write all the detail of the advantage everytime they want to sell better product. Unless if you really want telling all those crazy detail to consumer LOL 

The evidence says you can't...

HollyGamer said:

Like I Said I agree, the problem who the hell want to explain all of those to consumer. LMAO 

That is why it's best to avoid it in it's entirety?

HollyGamer said:

Now you getting out of the topic LOL.

False, I was explaining a pure compute workload that relies on the GPU.

HollyGamer said:

We still have more than a year and half  and we don't know if Sony/Microsoft planned behind close door, there is still room for theory and prediction  

Still not as much time as you think it is, they still need to store up inventory for the assembly process (months), they still need to do various logistics like shipping all around the world (months) and the like.

The fact that they are using Zen 2 and Navi is just a testament to Microsoft/Sony not leveraging more cutting edge technologies outside of a few semi-custom improvements.

HollyGamer said:

20% density improvement is big , especially combined with 10% performance. 

Those were advertising numbers, if you are porting a design from an older process, you are unlikely to achieve those goal points without some significant revisions to your library.
7nm isn't where the buck stops anyway.

HollyGamer said:

Money is important that's why they are looking for future investment not sort temporary sells gain. Spending a lot of money on expansives chip that will be cheaper down the line is very chip proposal , especially when you want to compete on the saturated market. Both companies are ready to loose money to gain consumer and ready to lose some to gain market share.  

7nm+ is likely to be more expensive than 7nm for awhile due to that aspect, lots of retooling needs to take place for a relatively modest gain.

HollyGamer said:

bigger leap in infidelity is not determined by how powerful the GPU alone, it need mass market/peoples that using the platform so Game developer can utilize it , optimize it, and develop for the mainstream. Just look at Ray Tracing , it will be a fad it's only small people buy the GPU and no games are utilizing it because nobody by the games. 

Like I said you're contradicting yourself, you said you want more powerful console but at the same time you are pessimist , with the progrest. Unlike me i am a realist. With all the current leak and progress i am already happy enough, but i still have hope and dream based on the unknown info that can be theorize to used as debate and speculation.

Not being pessimistic, I am being realistic.

Yes things like Ray Tracing will catch-on more extensively in the gaming landscape if more hardware supports it... It's already gained significant momentum in the PC space without AMD, without consoles, without mobile supporting the technology, especially in the modding world.

In saying that, Ray Tracing is far from a fad, it's a fundamental shift in rendering that has been taking place for decades and is deemed the "holy grail" of rendering. I wouldn't underestimate it's impact in the future.

And yes I do want a more powerful console as that will reflect on PC titles... But let's be brutally honest, if the consoles leverage the fastest AMD Navi GPU, then performance is likely to sit at around the Geforce 2060 Super, which is a mid-range graphics chip, not a high-end one... I wanted more.

I also wanted more when the 8th gen launched and we ended up with a Radeon 7750/7850 level GPU's, I understood why we couldn't due to cost however, doesn't mean I can't want more?

That isn't a contradiction, it's understanding the situation of something and wanting it to be better.

HollyGamer said:

But than nobody optimizing the games for 1080ti except modders or making your own games. Because games are made and optimize for low spec PC or mainstream PC

And? It's not like the performance of the 1080Ti disappears into an endless void? PC Gamers will sink that extra performance overhead into driving up resolutions framerates and quality settings. - Conesole games for all their talk of "Optimization" tends to fall around the medium quality presets in games whilst PC games can drive it up to High and Ultra which is a significant step up visually.

Plus I provided evidence that the PC gets optimizations anyway.

HollyGamer said:

Agree but in reality without optimization hardware is just a bunch of lifeless piece of metal without function.  

PC gets optimizations as per the evidence provided prior.

HollyGamer said:

Driver is not the only one, they have API and OS and game design . PC GPU are stuck with bloated API and OS and in fact most games on PC are made on low spec PC on mind, it was held by lowest spec PC.

Not really. There is no such thing as the "lowest spec PC". - PC's date back decades, there is no cut-off line.

Developers make a decision on the lowest hardware level they are willing to support... Often it's the consoles like the Xbox One and Playstation 4 which sets the baseline of games rather than the PC, especially for multiplat AAA titles.

HollyGamer said:

And also PC are used for not just gaming, all its power are divided. for console you only need to play games. All of 8 core PC will be divided by driver and OS and API to run multi tasking while console only for games. That alone speak why PC need double the performance of console to run the same games.

Consoles are not used just for gaming.. You can web browse, play music, watch movies, upload twitch streams, record footage, voice/video chat with other gamers... And in the XBox One's case... Runs multiple Operating Systems concurrently and can multitask.

Hence why the consoles reserve more Ram than my Windows 10 Operating System uses.

Maybe you have forgotten that consoles have become more PC-like and that trend will only continue as we enter next gen?

HollyGamer said:

Again Vulcan is still PC low level API, cannot compare directly to the metal optimization on console, and on top of that Directx 12 is still suck , you cannot beat Vulcan on optimization.

Who cares? Vulkan is on PC? Developers can use it? Direct X 12 is far from being the only game in town.

No developer builds games directly to the metal anymore in machine code, it's a waste of time and money, especially with how good compilers are these days.

HollyGamer said:

Of Course isn't a console thing, but my point is still correct, PC need raw performance due to compatibility on every spec combination on the market, thus it's sacrifice maximal optimization that can only happen on single device like console. 

I have obviously already provided the evidence that the PC doesn't need raw extra performance in order to provide a console-level experience.

HollyGamer said:

Like I said it depend on games developer, not all developer want to re construct their games using console API, most of the times they just lazy and ported directly using Directx or Open GL 

Not always.

HollyGamer said:

 If you follow the progress of price and consumer capability on buying product,  599 USD is very cheap if we compared in 2019 to  2007. There is a thing called inflation , 600 USD in 2007 will be equal to 750  USD in 2020 . Consoles are not for lower socio - economic peoples. In fact , poor gamer will just buy budget PC because they can be used for working and play old games, hell they will mostly buy discounted games and often pirated and play free games. Console is for people who spend more money for simple device and don't want to buy maintaining PC. Console is  niche product that's why it's always stay below 200 millions sells. 499 USD is super chips for console that will be release in 2020, if the power ratio is good, the problem with PS3 with 599 price is the price ratio . even Xbox 360 is better in most of the games and came up early.   

Oh. So you are saying PC is cheaper?

HollyGamer said:

That's why a hybrid design will be used in this gean, but we are talking about marketing jargon, not what will Developer used, so ray tracing is still a selling point to sell a console. 

From the information we have... Navi on the consoles will be deviating somewhat from the PC derivative of Navi and implementing dedicated Ray Tracing cores into the graphics processor.

HollyGamer said:

On console  early year it big advantage. Especially if they have less launch games . But remember it's only works if their previous console are the champion on the market and for the consumer. Xbox will struggle because this gen they only got 40 million consumer, so their fans from this gen will only migrate within that number. PS5 in the other hand will guarantee 100 million  PS4 player/gamer who like PS ip and have all their games to buy PS5.  So as long PS5 is not following  Xbox One X disaster or PS3 disaster . They are on great position on the market. But I bet they will be fine , Sony are not stupid. But i do believe Xbox also will do a great Job, but they need to do more than Sony to gain more consumer.

Again, I have already provided evidence where it's not a guaranteed recipe for success relative to the machines that are being replaced.

(3DS, WiiU etc'.)

HollyGamer said:

Like I said nobody buy PC alone to just playing games alone, and nobody want to spend time using emulator and update it , there is a reason why console exist , people want something simple. 

PC gamers play alone? The most popular games on PC are multiplayer games.

Majority of console games these days don't even allow for split-screen multiplayer these days.

Consoles are just becoming more PC-like, consoles need updating, games constantly need updating. - Everytime I turn my Xbox One X on... Chances are I  have 10's of Gigabytes worth of patches that needs to roll down the internet tubes and be applied... If that is "console convenience and simplicity" - You can keep it.



Pemalite said:
EricHiggin said:

While it's possible that Cerny was playing it super safe, based on where GCN was headed in terms of TF calculated performance, 8TF seems unbelievably low for the PS5, without knowing that the Navi GPU you're going to be using is likely to land around that calculated performance with RDNA. This was probably a hint way back, but also PR to smear XB1X even though it wouldn't be lying technically. Smart PR though because he could have said 12TF basing it off of old GCN, while potentially causing PS a headache later on if the PS5 launched with less than that, which is very well possible if not likely at this point.

I don't think 8 Teraflops is low at all.
I think why Teraflops wasn't mentioned earlier before RDNA became a "thing" was for this very reason, flops is irrelevant and they can't use it for marketing (like bits!) forever.

It seems low if you're still on 'GCN time' and would be expecting something closer to 12TF, and much like you mentioned, many don't understand the nitty gritty of a GPU and how it relates to the TF calculation. Cerny did mention it though, followed later by the 8.4TF FP16 remark, and MS kept hammering home 6TF, so whether or not PS and Cerny want to fight that PR battle going into next gen who knows, but they likely kept it in mind. The Pro being 4.2TF and the 5700 Navi series being around 8TF along with it's pricing, seems a little too coincidental if you ask me. Knowing where XB1X ended up and how MS isn't even hinting at Scarlett GPU performance, since it might be around 8TF as well, to where GCN would've been headed next in terms of calculated TF performance, it's hard not to see different strategies for both in there. Flops probably can't continue to be the main marketing focus as long as the GPU industry doesn't make major changes in the coming years.

Pemalite said:

EricHiggin said:

From more of a tech perspective, the Flops in general mean very little yes. It's just a ballpark figure, which is typically used to compare models within a series, or gaming performance for most casuals. It really only matters if it's an extremely direct comparison, which almost never is the case, be it from one iteration to the next or between brands. Even worse when considerable changes are finally made to the arch. While this message is being pushed more, to your typical casual gamer, it's meaningless for the most part. The best seller and the price matter way more, which should come from the best balance of tech and games.

It's not even a ballpark figure, it's a theoretical denominator that is simply unachievable in the real world... Otherwise there wouldn't be a constant race to making chip designs more efficient every year...
I mean GPU's with more flops can end up slower than a GPU with less flops.
For example the Radeon 5870 @2.72 Teraflops is slower than the Radeon 7850 @ 1.76 Teraflops. - Almost 1 Teraflop less, but sometimes faster by almost 50%... And they have the same amount of bandwidth too. (153GB/s)
https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1062?vs=1076

Not to mention, the majority of people have absolutely no idea how FLOPS even pertains to the rendering of a games world anyway.

Theoretical denominator may be a better way to describe it, but I don't know how you can say it's not even a ballpark figure. While it's an approximation, it depends on what you're comparing it to. You could say the GCN TF is 'too high', or you could say the CUDA TF is 'too low'. The 5000 series and the 7000 series aren't designed to be directly comparable, so comparing them using TF is going to steer you off course immediately from the get go. Making your designs more efficient would help to sell your GPU to companies looking to sell products like laptops, and sales overall in a world where electricity prices are rising and becoming a concern. Not to mention the sound created by fans to remove the inefficient heat created, or cost to go to a water block.

Yes, most people who buy consoles don't understand much more than the numbers put in front of their face, like much it costs, how well it performs, and how many it sells, on paper, which are what matter in order to sell mass numbers of the product.

Pemalite said:

EricHiggin said:

It's getting much tougher to sell someone on your hardware based on the games themselves visually. Trying to prove it through video is extremely tough today for so many reasons. Like for one, how do you prove your 4k box is better than their 4k box, when your 4k video can only be viewed by many at 1080p online? A bigger TF number is a much easier and simpler way of 'proving' that, even though it doesn't mean all that much. For a consumer who doesn't have the time or knowledge or ability to know the difference, specs matter more and more, especially if you can't actually outsell your cheaper 'inferior' competition.

Downsampling/Supersampling means that 4k can look better on a 1080P display than native 1080P content on a 1080P display.
We are far from the point of photorealism in gaming even at 720P... Which means it's still possible to showcase differences.

The real crutch is that the Xbox and Playstation consoles are getting closer and closer in terms of capability that it's really unimportant unless you are an enthusiast... And let's face it, if you gave that much of a shit about hardware, chances are that you are part of the PC Gaming Master Race anyway.

Who understands this though, and why isn't it what's being pushed in marketing instead of 4k? How many people take the time to watch the review and comparison video's for a bunch of different games, vs how many just spend a few minutes looking up specs and sales or flat out take whatever they're told by friends as gospel?

People in general don't want to get screwed. If it looks like they are getting the better deal, many will just roll with it, without taking the time to understand whether it's just marketing BS or not. Pro and XB1X which were apparently supposed to keep gamers from going to PC (more so Pro), weren't marketed as the 'world's most powerful console' for nothing. The closer the hardware becomes in terms of capability, the more creative marketing needs to get with the numbers. Either that or they have to both stop focusing on the hardware PR, but is either going to trust the other to do that? Right now, while MS may be more willing to do so, PS can't really because their present direction still requires selling plenty of hardware.



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.

Pemalite said:

Why wait? Some consoles already support such monitors. - However, the true leap will be when televisions support the technology.

HollyGamer said:

Xbox One X already support that, PS5 and Xbox Scarlet are going to use HDMI 2.1 Freesync already confirmed 

The evidence says you can't...

HollyGamer said:

Which evidence that said cannot, the big the Flops is compared to the same architecture  for example RTX 2070 and  RTX 2070 super,  the obvious the advantage is, RTX 2070 sit around 8 teraflop while 2070 super sit at 9 teraflop, the benchmark for real world performance shows and the teraflop represented how big the difference is . I said compared it to the same chipd design and architecture and the same bit integer .

That is why it's best to avoid it in it's entirety?

HollyGamer said:

Well let's hope it's happen, and the marketer from Sony and Microsoft avoid it,  but most developer are still using it , hell even PC GPU vendor still using it. 

Still not as much time as you think it is, they still need to store up inventory for the assembly process (months), they still need to do various logistics like shipping all around the world (months) and the like.

The fact that they are using Zen 2 and Navi is just a testament to Microsoft/Sony not leveraging more cutting edge technologies outside of a few semi-custom improvements.

HollyGamer said:

I said we still have time not because of production timeline, i said it's because we you and I and the rest of gamer still dont have the fully detail of the chip 

Those were advertising numbers, if you are porting a design from an older process, you are unlikely to achieve those goal points without some significant revisions to your library.
7nm isn't where the buck stops anyway.

HollyGamer said:

Advertising number or not it's still a number that can be used for estimating, the probability is still  viable, especially we don't kno, especially we don't have the exact number.

7nm+ is likely to be more expensive than 7nm for awhile due to that aspect, lots of retooling needs to take place for a relatively modest gain.

HollyGamer said:

For while is not hindrance as long as they can keep up  with sells , Sony are not selling console they are selling games. Console are needed because they need a platform to sell their games, the better the hardware the better the games.  

Not being pessimistic, I am being realistic.

Yes things like Ray Tracing will catch-on more extensively in the gaming landscape if more hardware supports it... It's already gained significant momentum in the PC space without AMD, without consoles, without mobile supporting the technology, especially in the modding world.

HollyGamer said:

"It's already gained significant momentum " No it's not, in fact it's far from recognition. Just count how many games are using Ray Tracing, nad count how many people utilize ray tracing on their games, how many GPU are sold on market based on  Steam , Epic Store or GOG survey. The mainstream GPU is still 1050 ti and the lower spec requirement for games is till GTX 660 or close to it.  



In saying that, Ray Tracing is far from a fad, it's a fundamental shift in rendering that has been taking place for decades and is deemed the "holy grail" of rendering. I wouldn't underestimate it's impact in the future.

HollyGamer said:

For now is still a fad because only small number of games that can be counted with finger supported and all of those are hit and miss, we will seing a better one next gen due to console also supported 


And yes I do want a more powerful console as that will reflect on PC titles... But let's be brutally honest, if the consoles leverage the fastest AMD Navi GPU, then performance is likely to sit at around the Geforce 2060 Super, which is a mid-range graphics chip, not a high-end one... I wanted more.


I also wanted more when the 8th gen launched and we ended up with a Radeon 7750/7850 level GPU's, I understood why we couldn't due to cost however, doesn't mean I can't want more?

That isn't a contradiction, it's understanding the situation of something and wanting it to be better.

HollyGamer said:

Then why are you arguing with me LOL, are you arguing for the sake of arguing. We are both agree we want more power and we both understand why it's difficult to achieve that.

And? It's not like the performance of the 1080Ti disappears into an endless void? PC Gamers will sink that extra performance overhead into driving up resolutions framerates and quality settings. - Conesole games for all their talk of "Optimization" tends to fall around the medium quality presets in games whilst PC games can drive it up to High and Ultra which is a significant step up visually.

Plus I provided evidence that the PC gets optimizations anyway.

HollyGamer said:

Nobody said 1080ti performance disappeared, because i agree PC gamer can choose to set the setting to ultra or crank up the resolution, but then again that's not the point of the argument. the point you pay more, just to play the same games on the setting that is not bring any significant difference unless you stop , pause and close your eyes to see the detail.

  

PC gets optimizations as per the evidence provided prior.

HollyGamer said:
Optimization on general and high level API not on the level where the games for PC optimized for individual part of your PC at home.


Not really. There is no such thing as the "lowest spec PC". - PC's date back decades, there is no cut-off line.

Developers make a decision on the lowest hardware level they are willing to support... Often it's the consoles like the Xbox One and Playstation 4 which sets the baseline of games rather than the PC, especially for multiplat AAA titles.

HollyGamer said:

The lowest of the mainstream spec that available on the market, the one that sold a lot and used by many gamers. , of course they will not use low spec from the old era and previous generation 

Consoles are not used just for gaming.. You can web browse, play music, watch movies, upload twitch streams, record footage, voice/video chat with other gamers... And in the XBox One's case... Runs multiple Operating Systems concurrently and can multitask.

Hence why the consoles reserve more Ram than my Windows 10 Operating System uses.

Maybe you have forgotten that consoles have become more PC-like and that trend will only continue as we enter next gen?

HollyGamer said:

Gaming is their primary task while others is very small portion that not affect a lot on their function, even PS4 have less capability on entertainment compared to PS3 and even Xbox One. You can see how powerful PS4 compared to Xbox due to the API alone. Xbox are using direct X API that are used on PC . and Xbox One is so slow even on their menu and UI, let alone on the games. It's not just because they have less capable hardware  but the combination of all aspect that focus on everything rather on one thing. PS4 is the console that represent console.  I bet Xbox Scarlet will not be like Xbox One and will be like PS4.

Who cares? Vulkan is on PC? Developers can use it? Direct X 12 is far from being the only game in town.

No developer builds games directly to the metal anymore in machine code, it's a waste of time and money, especially with how good compilers are these days.

HollyGamer said:

Say Hello to first party Ip especially Sony and Nintendo, Well some Microsoft from the past era, now not anymore due their games are being made for PC so they are using direct X

Of Course isn't a console thing, but my point is still correct, PC need raw performance due to compatibility on every spec combination on the market, thus it's sacrifice maximal optimization that can only happen on single device like console. 

I have obviously already provided the evidence that the PC doesn't need raw extra performance in order to provide a console-level experience.

HollyGamer said:

but you need to pay more, run more power tdp run more space, noise, and heat to run the same games . Just look how big PC with  radeon  7870 and CPU with mobo and power supply  in 2013 to 2014 

Not always.

HollyGamer said:

See you contradict yourself, yet on previous argument you said "No developer builds games directly to the metal anymore in machine code, it's a waste of time and money, especially with how good compilers are these days"

I just pointing out the fact that game developer are lazy and just using Directx and Opengl to porting the games to consoles, thus not all the benefit of console shows. 

 

Oh. So you are saying PC is cheaper?

HollyGamer said:

Cheaper is vague words, there is so many transalation what cheaper is, PC for working is cheaper than console but when you add a capable GPU and capable CPU it could almost double the price.

From the information we have... Navi on the consoles will be deviating somewhat from the PC derivative of Navi and implementing dedicated Ray Tracing cores into the graphics processor.

HollyGamer said:

We still don't know, probably you are tru, probably or not for now i am willing to agree because we dont have any other info

Again, I have already provided evidence where it's not a guaranteed recipe for success relative to the machines that are being replaced.

(3DS, WiiU etc'.)

HollyGamer said:

It's not guaranteed , i can agree with that, but It's a guaranteed if your console can deliver. 3DS was killed by the mobile market and their focus is different from NDS the same thing happen Wii U are killed by their promotion department and their focus and consumer are different from Wii . So my point is still right. The PS5 backward compatibility is not guaranteed to win but it will do with PS5 because they focus are clear "hardcore gaming " the same with PS4 was. All Hardcore gamers from PS4 at least will buy PS5 games

PC gamers play alone? The most popular games on PC are multiplayer games.

HollyGamer said:

My mistake,  what i mean not playing alone (single player ) I said nobody buy PC just to play games only except some people who are really rich. 



Majority of console games these days don't even allow for split-screen multiplayer these days.

HollyGamer said:

This is not true many games are still using split screens , is just that we have many genre on console that is hard to count how many of them . Hell even Diablo 3 that popular on PC are play better on console using split screen . I am not saying PC dont have these feature  (because sometimes you will try to argue with me , so i will said that's not what i am trying to argue) 


Consoles are just becoming more PC-like, consoles need updating, games constantly need updating. - Everytime I turn my Xbox One X on... Chances are I  have 10's of Gigabytes worth of patches that needs to roll down the internet tubes and be applied... If that is "console convenience and simplicity" - You can keep it.

I agree console are becoming " like " PC, but   "console is not PC", and having Driver Updates does not change your console becoming PC.  Of course if you want you can instal windows on Xbox One or linux to your PS4 by jailbreaking your consoles. Yes i think  you need to try and do benchmark how the games run on both consoles using windows OS and Linux with Steam OS. you will realize how console is superior running games on low level API instead using windows. just look at this PC version of Quantum Break  run on PS4 pro  hardware,  is even worse than Xbox One performance . 

 

 



Around the Network
Pemalite said:
ManUtdFan said:
All this extra power will be wasted on raytracing, which won't ever deliver photorealistic graphics, unlike path tracing. Don't want no shiny bricks or cartoonish, sterile environments...

And so we will have to wait another 10 years for discernible upgrade to graphics quality.

Path Tracing is Ray Tracing. Not all Ray Tracing is created equal... Games have been dipping their toes into the Ray Tracing waters for over a decade now to various degrees... It's being popularized now because of nVidia and what next-gen hardware might potentially bring to the table.

The biggest limitation to games currently is certainly lighting though, developers over the years have tried their best to 'fake' Ray tracing with baked lighting and so on which occurred heavily during the 7th gen.

I say reserve judgement until we see the games and hardware in action.

I thought raytracing used rays that could reflect, refract, create shadow off one intermediary point. So each ray, regardless of number of rays per pixel, only bounces once. Whereas path tracing can bounce off multiple points, angles from end to end?

Regardless, seeing the demos, path tracing looks near enough photorealistic. While raytracing on the other hand is kinda meh. I'm concerned game developers will prioritize it over texture detail. 



HollyGamer said:
ManUtdFan said:

Agree. 60fps should take priority over 4k. I didn't have budget to get expensive 4k tv recently, so i settled for cheap but quality 1080 instead. 

I wonder still, are we going to get blurry trees, mountains and buildings in the far background?

You better buy PC monitor with 1080p and  120hz refresh rate  for next gen if you planned to buy either of two, because i bet they will allow us to choose between performance (choosing frame rates over resolution) like with PS4 pro and Xbox One X. And PS5/Scarlet will have 120 fps capability with HDMI 2.1 and freesync. It's more cheaper especially  Freesync Monitor. 

I prefer a bigger display so you can sit further back. These monitors are always on the small side, and it's not always relaxing to sit up close. That's what the master race do and it reinforces their conceit.



ManUtdFan said:
HollyGamer said:

You better buy PC monitor with 1080p and  120hz refresh rate  for next gen if you planned to buy either of two, because i bet they will allow us to choose between performance (choosing frame rates over resolution) like with PS4 pro and Xbox One X. And PS5/Scarlet will have 120 fps capability with HDMI 2.1 and freesync. It's more cheaper especially  Freesync Monitor. 

I prefer a bigger display so you can sit further back. These monitors are always on the small side, and it's not always relaxing to sit up close. That's what the master race do and it reinforces their conceit.

Than you are lucky , future TV most of them will include HDMI 2.1 to support high refresh rate . So you can buy big monitor that also has PC feature on it if you dont want buy PC monitor.