Imaginedvl said:
Kyuu said:
This isn't what I meant by optimization. A Series X game having lower fps due to higher resolution still means the game is optimized in the sense that Xbox's power is being expressed in some form. But overall, Xbox's significant advantage per "specs on paper" isn't being materialized in games, and the reason is people weren't reading the entire specs sheet, just the factors they deemed more important. When Cerny explained PS5's design before launch, Digital Foundry challenged his claim that "faster GPU is superior to wider in key areas". DF made a comparison between two old GPU's with the same TLOPS figure, one of them was wide and slow, the other narrow and fast. They argued that wider was superior even when TFLOPS are equalized (though to be fair, they added a disclaimer that future tech like RDNA2 could play out differently). PS5 was thought to be an "a narrow 8~ TFLOPS machine boostclocked to 10.2". Significantly lower than Xbox's "wide 12.1 TFLOPS", and this is before factoring in the CPU and bandwidth differences. It turns out that Xbox Series X had 3 problems: Low GPU clockrate, split RAM bandwidth speeds, and apparently a poorer API. Series X probably cost quite a bit more than PS5 to manufacture, and yet it wasn't universally better in every aspect. When PS5 came out, it was often described as "pushing above its weight". There is no such thing as pushing above its weight... people just overlooked its advantages or Series X's potential bottlenecks. Technology evolves and these theoretical figures don't tell us much. The next top of the line Xbox will potentially cost hundreds of dollars more to manufacture and sell than a launch PS6. This should enable Microsoft to not give the PS6 any major hardware advantages that close the gap. I don't think optimization will do anything in this scenario. |
I think a lot of what you are saying makes sense. Esp. the fact that while the Series X is a bit more powerful on paper, it is not universally better in every aspect.
The bold part thought is weird to me :) Maybe I misunderstood you, but you are basically saying that for Microsoft to "close the gap" with whatever Sony will come out for the PS6, they have to spend more money to make the PU capable of doing the same thing? Are you assuming that Microsoft cannot simply use the same base as Sony, and if they put more money into it, it will simply be better? In short, you seem to believe that if Microsoft spends the same money as Sony on their hardware, it cannot be as good or better than whatever Sony will come out with. I find this weird :)
No fanboyism here, don't get me wrong. But if you look at it the other way around, Sony spent a truckload of money on the PS3, and in the end, it was the same scenario as with the Xbox Series X - PlayStation 5, just reversed. I just found your last statement equivalent to: "Whatever Sony does, if Microsoft wants to equal it, their solution needs to cost a hundred more"... |
No, what I meant was that the next Xbox being hundreds of dollars more expensive almost-guarantees that it will be superior by a decent margin, that no amount of "optimization" can put the PS6 ahead in any scenario. It would be hilarious if Xbox cost $300-$400 more than a PS6 and still end up not soundly outperforming it in the real world. PS3 was an embarrassment for the initial price (ignore backwards compatibility and its media player capabilities), but these are different times and neither Sony nor MS would dare doing some crazy Ken shit like 2006 Cell + Bluray lol.
But since you mentioned it... Yes, I do believe that Sony generally is better than Microsoft at making superior hardware for the production cost (not to be confused with retail price). PS3 was the exception and a bit of a disaster. Ken Kutaragi messed up big time. Microsoft never made money from Xbox hardware, not even from the expensive One X (suggesting high production costs), but they're apparently changing this by pricing their products really high.
Ironically though... If Trump's Tariff Tantrums (TTT) continue, and Microsoft doesn't tackle the problem like Sony or Nintendo, we might actually witness a situation where a $1000 would not be enough to guarantee more power than a $700 PS6. It's hard to say where we're going.
Currently Online 
