By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
EricHiggin on 04 July 2019
Edit Thread
Pemalite said:
EricHiggin said:

Not sure you got the main point, that in terms of the future marketing of the PS5, pointing out that XB1X at 6TF wasn't going to be "true 4k" like MS was saying, and that the next PS console would be at least double the GPU performance of the Pro (on paper), and would basically be guaranteed full native 4k capable. Maybe that's what he was hinting, maybe not. That wouldn't mean all games would be 4k/60 or whatever, but that they all would be capable of running 4k/30 if a dev wanted to without having to downgrade the eye candy. Also would depend on what PS would require from devs who make games for PS5. Cerny may have had an idea about where Navi was planned to land in terms of it's capabilities, and would know approximately where PS5 was planned to land in terms of performance, so he would be able to say something like he did, knowing he wouldn't be all that far off, and worst case hopefully, it's actually 8TF and no lower his sake. I was looking at the statement in less of a tech perspective and more of an overall marketing perspective. If Cerny is going to be the lead architect but also one of the faces and voices of the company, he has to play the PR game too.

And he does play the PR game. That was made abundantly clear when the Playstation 4 and Playstation 4 Pro dropped.
That doesn't mean his statements don't carry some credible tidbits of information... But his claims need to be weighed appropriately and within a non-hyped context.

The point I am trying to convey is that all the console manufacturers play these "games" in order to assert their platform as the best gaming platform, it's been going on for decades.

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.

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 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.