chakkra said:
CGI-Quality said:
I am not sure who said the SSD is the only thing that matters (if they are in here, they are very much a minority). This also leaves out the I/O (which will be hjust as important and people have pointed that out).
In any case, yes, those Jaguar CPUs were bottlenecks to better performance. That's a fact. So people had good reason to point blame at them when mentioning what needed a big upgrade (which happens to also be part of the next gen package). Worried about next gen bandwidth/bottlenecks (at least in regards to the PS5)? Listen to Mark Cerny.
|
Well, I don't think you need to literally see the words "SSD is the only thing that matters" to notice that that is the only thing people talk about these days (and the way they talk about it).
And yes, I watched (and read) Sony's presentation, and I watched (and read) MS's presentation.
You want to hear my opinion on the matter?
Well, Series X designers got to the conclusion that a SSD running at 2.4GB have the enough streaming speed needed for the amount of data that a GPU with 52CUs x1.8GHz and a 8x Zen 2 Cores at 3.8GHz are going to be able to process/generate.
PS5 designers, on the other hand, concluded that a SSD at 5.5GB is needed for the amount of data that a GPU with 36 CUs x2.2GHz and a 8x Zen 2 Cores at 3.5GHz are going to be able to process/generate.
One of them is going to end up being wrong. If MS is wrong then their SSD solution might end up being a bottleneck, but if Sony is wrong then the PS5 will end up with just a bunch of bandwith unused/wasted.
|
Those differences are sooo small in the grand scheme of things though. I highly doubt either console is going to be hugely bottlenecked in any significant way to the point where one console outshines the other to a significant degree.
