By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Pemalite said:
curl-6 said:

So @Pemalite now that we have spec sheets for both systems, what's your take on what they mean in terms of comparative real world performance, as one of our resident tech experts?

With the information we have right now... Sony's Playstation 5 handily beats the Xbox Series X when it comes to streaming assets into DRAM due to having twice the drive interface bandwidth, so in RAM limited scenarios, the Playstation 5 should have the advantage... And in 10 years time, these consoles WILL be DRAM limited.

13.5GB available for games isn't allot of Ram in 2020. It's going to be extremely tiny by 2030...

The SSD will make up for that, just like mechanical hard drives in the Xbox One and Playstation 4... But they only help mitigate a problem, not resolve it entirely.

For sheer visual fidelity at this stage, the Xbox Series X has the clear advantage due to more known functional units, maybe 20%, maybe 10%. Need more low-level information on the hardware to know by how much and what scenarios they relate to.

I would assume developers will push for visual parity and the difference will just be framerate or resolution.

Either way, whichever console you buy, it will be a good piece of kit.

Yep I don't think 10-20% will be enough to ensure anyone is pushing for more effects or the like so it will be on pixel count. And for games that are both 4K either no difference or the devs will choose some effect or another to use the performance gap.

LudicrousSpeed said:
DonFerrari said:

Different departments have different budgets, and PS does much better than Xbox, so yes they would have more money to use to ensure they have a lower price to sell more. Even more when MS is moving away from selling HW as their focus and going for service.

They’ve spent tons of money making the most powerful consoles ever two gens in a row now. How in the world are they shifting away from selling consoles 😆 You can prepare quality services for the future AND still want to sell hardware. After all where are people supposed to use GamePass.

When MS is pretty open saying their competition is Google and Amazon, they have Play Anywhere, XCloud, etc. So it is pretty clear their focus is changing to service, that doesn't mean they don't want to sell the HW. And making the most powerful HW doesn't really mean you want to sell the most, X1X didn't and depending on price XSX also won't. The key word is focus. We need to wait and see to confirm that.

LudicrousSpeed said:
I predicted Sony would have the stronger box, I was wrong. Releasing this right after MS did a deep dive to me said they wanted to one up MS. But as soon as Cerny started running damage control on how it was fine to have less CU’s and lower TFLOP I knew they were going to put out a weaker machine.

Will be interesting to see how the imbalanced CPU/GPU setup will affect games. DF guys have some detailed posts about it on Reeeee. If a game is CPU intensive then the GPU will be affected. If a game is using the GPU then the CPU is affected. Either one affects performance. Apparently devs can use a CPU or GPU mode to help the console performance. But what happens if a game needs to utilize both? Seems the performance gap gets even wider the more devs take advantage of PS5 power. Bizarre.

Can’t wait to see the prices.

The video was recorded much earlier than MS release of information. So it was they explaining their route (sure they could already be expecting to have less CUs so where trying to say why it was better)



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."