By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PS5 vs XSeX: Understanding the Gap

Azzanation said:
Intrinsic said:

Don't blame me... tell MS to name their consoles better.

X360
XB1
XB1S
XB1SSAD
XB1X
XSX
XSS?(lockhart)

And the shocking thing is that they all have really cool project names. I wonder what they would call the eventual mid gen refresh. Xbox series X two? Xbox Series XX? Xbox series Xb? Xbox Series X 2024? Gotta wonder who picks these names. 

Erm, you do know that MS don't call it XseX.. that's what randoms on the internet call it.

I call it the XSX as it makes a lot more sense and is shorter so win win.

Maybe you need to call the consoles better.

As for there mid gen refresh console, id be calling it XSX2, XSX3, XSX4 etc. Same goes for XSS, XSS2, XSS3 etc.

I call it the XSX but speak as if it was XCX because it sounds better. 

I just gave Xbox UK a great marketing idea though. 



Around the Network

The performance gap between PS5 and Xbox SeX will be quite small, so small that we will have an hard time figuring it. As mentioned in the original post, it will all about who will maintain an higher (variable) resolution most of the time. Probably it will be SeX, given the specs, but it is absolutely relative considering the fact that are the exclusive (optimized) games that will make the difference, in terms of style, wonder and amazement. Again, all will be decided by the games, games, games.



Both systems are similar, so debating on specs now is pointless. This is what matters going forward:
1. Understanding and taking full advantage of system architecture
2.How great the game engine is and how effeicient it is used on the system developed for. Also updates and improvements to Engine going forward
3. Budget allocated for the game
4. Time constraints and whether the design of the system and given features allow for quicker development hence more features and stuff added to game, more time to polish. We will see what the ssd for example does for both going forward.
5. Ambition of the game director and making the dream game.
6. talent of the design team, artists, programmers working collectively for a stand out product.



barneystinson69 said:
Another gen means more pissing over minute differences in specx...

Love it. Also, I'm calling it Xsex from now on as well XD.

Yes. I did notice that in the title of the OP is: SeX: Understanding the Gap

What you need to widen that gap is robust, game ready hardware, followed by large volume, high velocity streams of software.



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."

Just buy a high end PC if you want ultimate power, forget about flops... but seriously just wait until the consoles both launch and watch some DF if you care so much.

For a more in depth analysis for GPU's you guys should check out this video from NX Gamer, who goes quite in depth with comparisons with different hardware GPU configs and API. Really interesting stuff and goes to show that you shouldn't get too hung up on paper specs.

I'm actually more excited that these consoles are designed to be easier to develop for. So the cycle for games will be much faster this time. Graphics be damned. I mean I still appreciate really nice graphics but yeah, I think we've got to a point where games are visually good enough and can't wait to see what developers can do with that juicy Zen 2 CPU and SSD's.



Around the Network
hinch said:

Just buy a high end PC if you want ultimate power, forget about flops... but seriously just wait until the consoles both launch and watch some DF if you care so much.

For a more in depth analysis for GPU's you guys should check out this video from NX Gamer, who goes quite in depth with comparisons with different hardware GPU configs and API. Really interesting stuff and goes to show that you shouldn't get too hung up on paper specs.

I'm actually more excited that these consoles are designed to be easier to develop for. So the cycle for games will be much faster this time. Graphics be damned. I mean I still appreciate really nice graphics but yeah, I think we've got to a point where games are visually good enough and can't wait to see what developers can do with that juicy Zen 2 CPU and SSD's.

The Series X specs are higher then 90% of PCs currently used on Steam. And for half the price with the added benefit of being more compatible with entertaining groups while hosting. 

PCs have their place and plenty strengths, but consoles have always been more cost effective and convenient. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

sales2099 said:
hinch said:

Just buy a high end PC if you want ultimate power, forget about flops... but seriously just wait until the consoles both launch and watch some DF if you care so much.

For a more in depth analysis for GPU's you guys should check out this video from NX Gamer, who goes quite in depth with comparisons with different hardware GPU configs and API. Really interesting stuff and goes to show that you shouldn't get too hung up on paper specs.

I'm actually more excited that these consoles are designed to be easier to develop for. So the cycle for games will be much faster this time. Graphics be damned. I mean I still appreciate really nice graphics but yeah, I think we've got to a point where games are visually good enough and can't wait to see what developers can do with that juicy Zen 2 CPU and SSD's.

The Series X specs are higher then 90% of PCs currently used on Steam. And for half the price with the added benefit of being more compatible with entertaining groups while hosting. 

PCs have their place and plenty strengths, but consoles have always been more cost effective and convenient. 

What I'm saying is that its all relative. Consoles are closed based design and will be optimised more than PC. And multiplats will be limited by lowest common denominator making the difference defunct; look at PS4 Pro<Xbox One X.

PC's will always be technologically ahead of the curve as consoles take years of planning to make GPU manufacturers will still be developing new GPU tech. Take the PS4/Xbox one for example by the time that launched it was already low mid-tier by launch. Its the same this upcoming generation.

Nvidia Ampere is soon out and will dwarf the next gen consoles in pure throughout and you can be sure the raytracing capabilities in conjunction with DLSS 2.0+ up scaling will be way more capable than either consoles.

All I am saying is that a minor difference in GPU throughput is not going to make much of a difference in real world performance. And if people are interested in tech I don't see why they spend so much energy into a topic, instead of.. you know, just buying a console and enjoying games like normal people xD Or like I said, get a PC tweak with settings. Play with mods, enjoy super high refresh rates and not being tied to an ecosystem that forces you to pay to access essential features.



CGI-Quality said:
sales2099 said:

The Series X specs are higher then 90% of PCs currently used on Steam. And for half the price with the added benefit of being more compatible with entertaining groups while hosting. 

PCs have their place and plenty strengths, but consoles have always been more cost effective and convenient. 

PC gamers care less about convenience and cost (many of them, anyway). That's something always thrown about, but means little in the end. If you want the superior experience, you build a gaming PC. 

On top of that (I always have to say this too) the Steam survey tracks a fraction of the segment of PC gamers out there. Just based on the benchmark world, alone, plenty of people have PCs that already crush both upcoming next gen consoles. That's just how it is and will only be worse at launch (when the 3000 series arrives).

Of course there are many PC gamers with high end systems that aren't part of the Steam survey. But there are also many more PC gamers with low end and average PCs that aren't part of the Steam survey.

And I doubt that the percentage of high end PC gamers in total / without Steam is higher than the percentage of high end PC gamers shown in the Steam survey.

Why should high end PC gamers overproportionately avoid Steam? These hardware enthusiasts often are very active gamers which won't dispense PC games that are only available on Steam.

Or why should Steam gamers with high end systems overproportionately deny the hardware survey? Most of them are proud of their hardware and want to show the specs all the time. Even if the survey is anonymous probably more Steam gamers with low end systems will deny the hardware survey than people with high end systems.

So the absolute numbers of PC high end systems will be a lot higher than higher than "active Steam users x GPU percentage), but the percentage shares of PC gamers with high end systems will probably be lower than shown by the survey.

And how many people are participating in the "benchmark world"? A few thousands per month, a few tenthousands per year? IMHO the Steam data is much more representative than benchmark data collections.