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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Which will prevail? Xbox Power or Playstation Speed?

Tagged games:

 

Pick your side!

XBOX 27 31.03%
 
PLAYSTATION 50 57.47%
 
Master Race 10 11.49%
 
Total:87
victor83fernandes said:

None, as always with all generations, exclusive games will dictate the outcome, of which xbox will have no exclusives for 2 years. So there's really no competition there.

I still will choose xbox if ps5 doesn't have vapor cooling and replaceable/upgradeable graphics card

PS - Just read that ps5 is not actually 10 tf, that's only overclocked sometimes, not at all times like 12tf on xbox. More and more Im leaning towards xbox.

The exclusives make the system (or launcher) in the end. Power is a fantasy. 

Third parties will have some influence too though: if developers lean more towards one style over another that would have an affect farther down the line. 



The Democratic Nintendo fan....is that a paradox? I'm fond of one of the more conservative companies in the industry, but I vote Liberally and view myself that way 90% of the time?

Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
thismeintiel said:

If the BOM that Forbes estimated was correct (~$450), then $499 should be break even, maybe a tiny profit.  Sony has always sold at a loss.  $449 should be the max we should expect.  Unless MS does price theirs at $599, then they may figure they can get away with a $499 price.  Remember, Sony took at $200+ loss when they felt they had to for the PS3.  I don't think a ~$100 loss is completely out of the question.  Not when this gen is very important to the future of their company.

And MS is not going to try to beat Sony or 100% be only more than them by $50.  Xbox is not a huge pillar in their company.  Satya Nadella does see it as a way to break into streaming, which is his background.  But, they are not in the business of losing millions/billions on HW, again.  If the XBX costs $100 more to make than the PS5, expect it to cost $100-$150 more than the PS5.  This is why the Lockhart existed to begin with.  Series X was to beat Sony with power, but definitely not price.  Lockhart was to beat it with price, definitely not power.  We'll have to see if they actually release the Lockhart, given some of the leaks that some devs aren't exactly excited with having to develop on it if they want to make a XBX game.

Something I just read on a few sites said that SmartShift only works in laptops with separate AMD CPU and GPU. PS5 has SmartShift, so does that mean it's not a monolithic APU? SNY's slides showed a layout much like how AMD's slides do, with separate CPU and GPU and I/O die, which is how Zen 2 is laid out (minus the GPU die). AMD also showed they were working on infinity fabric that allowed for the CPU and GPU to operate together, but for servers. Could PS5 be using a consumer form of this, and could that be cheaper? The smaller chiplets certainly should be a lot cheaper than a large APU, and it would partially explain the much higher GPU clocks as well.

I read your last reply wrong. I thought you said MS would try and keep XBSX close to PS5 cost, but you said it's own costs. Oops. Even if both have monolithic APU's, then XBSX's should cost a lot more. Though the PS5 SSD should cost a bit more than XBSX's, even with slightly less storage space. XBSX also doesn't sound like it's audio portion will cost as much as PS5's either. It's hard to say. While I don't think they'll be the same price, I don't see more than a $100 difference at most. SNY really doesn't like $50 launch pricing. That's why $499 for PS5 and $549-$599 for XBSX make more sense to me. I think that would work better than most may think for PS5. XBSX may only be another $50, but it would be over that $500 mark and that will immediately turn some people off. Unless MS sets the price at $499, then PS has to decide what they want to do, and if they can afford it, they may just bite the bullet and go with the tried and true $399. PS5 specs at $399 would destroy PS4 launch sales, if they aren't hampered by covid.

Mark Cerny was very clear that PS5 have a SOC.



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."

BraLoD said:

Sony went on about the new experience (how much of that SSD, Audio system and Controller feedback can infuence games) but MS has played really well the evolution card.

Microsoft invested allot in the SSD, Audio as well, they didn't invest in the SSD as-much, but they did implement compression/decompression on a separate functional unit, but their audio is top notch and both console manufacturers impressed me on that front.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Xbox extra power leads to resolution and frame rate bumps but the bump is not nearly enough to make noticeable differences afaik. SSD speed is game changing. Both Xbox and PS5 have game changing SSD but PS5's is on another level.

Will the PS5 SSD show big gameplay changes from the XBX's? This is a question that can only be answered once we see the games.

Last edited by src - on 19 March 2020

BraLoD said:
starcraft said:
It feels like this thread is designed to create a false equivalence? The Xbox is clearly a significantly more powerful machine.

We'll have to wait for some real world examples, but the Xbox is clearly targeting delivering extraordinary graphics with very, very small load times and rapid fast travel.

If MS can load games in 4 seconds, it is going to be irrelevant if Sony can load them in 2 seconds. This will only matter if there is some sort of major loading differential. Other than that, every comparison video online is just going to have better looking games on Xbox.

Now that is unlikely to shift the sales battle on its own due to Sony's enormous incumbent advantage, but lets not try and tear down MS for those things it has clearly committed to doing better.

What am I tearing down from MS?

False equivalence? From what? Where is it?

The only comparision I made was with SNES and MD, don't you know the SNES was stronger than the MD?

I even specially focused on saying MS has the power on its side. It's in the title as well.

Sony speed advantage is also much more than just loading a game faster, even if I never went into that, but I won't suggest you are trying to downplay it... it's rude, you know.

You can take it any way you want, I highlighted both systems advantages and asked which system will end up in the lead. 

If you want a fully focused XB thread where XB power is the only thing we are allowed to talk about, the button to create threads is right there waiting for ya.

Tearing down MS was likely a little strong, apologies.

The thread title, and statements like 'one has the power, the other has the speed', give the impression that both consoles have some sort of equal pro and con over each other. On specs alone, it is clear that is not the case. Even on stated specs the Xbox has a clear advantage. And that doesn't account for the fact that the PS5's specs are not definitive, clock speeds on both the CPU and GPU will be allowed to fall even further than their maximum state.

On the other hand, you have speed. I really like the sound of what Sony is attempting to do with the PS5's SSD. And yet, at this stage, we have no evidence that they'll be able to deliver anything in terms of gameplay that the Xbox can't. Maybe it will, maybe it won't.

The PS5 will have a lot going for it. Brand name, a very strong first party line-up, and quite likely price. Specs just aren't going to be one of those things.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Around the Network
Pemalite said:

starcraft said:

I read that as well, and agree that it is interesting. But again this thread likely overstates the distinction. It wouldn't be enough that Sony can do that. It would have to be the case the the MS console cannot do that. I consider it unlikely that that will be the case, as MS was surely mindful of this in designing its console with two different types of RAM.

Add to that, even in the worst case where the PS5 can somehow achieve this and the Xbox can not, it would be limited to a few very advanced PS5 games, and even then whats rendered on screen would look worse than the most advanced Xbox games - try marketing that!

The Xbox Series X only uses one type of Ram (GDDR6) and only has a single RAM pool.

The difference is due to the mis-matched memory module capacity, the memory addresses of which are exposed in software for developers to leverage.

Memory transactions work in parallel... So if you have a 2GB chip and a 1GB chip... The memory transaction will be twice as fast for the first 2GB, after that... It can only make memory transactions to the last 1Gb of the 2GB chip, halving the speed. (This is the dumb-down explanation anyway.)

Appreciate the clarification, thanks.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

I think a 100% difference in throughput will provide a greater benefit to game design than a ~20% difference in horsepower. That said, most people will probably be more interested in the resolutions and frame rates of multiplatform faceoffs than load times or draw distances. Where the extra throughput will really shine is in the exclusives made specifically for it.



src said:

Xbox extra power leads to resolution and frame rate bumps but the bump is not nearly enough to make noticeable differences afaik. SSD speed is game changing. Both Xbox and PS5 have game changing SSD but PS5's is on another level.

Will the PS5 SSD show big gameplay changes from the XBX's? This is a question that can only be answered once we see the games.

We will never be sure since multiplats will need to work on both systems and exclusives we won't know if that is decision of devs, capability of them or really the SSD difference.



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."

Let's all just take a moment to appreciate that we're not getting systems that are gimped before they even hit the market, like we did last time around. We're gonna see some REALLY gorgeous games next gen.



Hardware wise, I think MS has a pretty good advantage that will give them the edge in comparisons.

Sales wise, I think games will determine it and for me, unless Sony is gonna port all their games to PC in a reasonable time, I will go with ps5.



                  

PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850