Forums - Sony Discussion - NX Gamer PS5 Full Spec Analysis

ClassicGamingWizzz said:
Hynad said:

Who are you talking about?? O_o

Ryuu96 is selnor, dont know If he is still a mod Here or not or If those comments on the vídeo are from a troll inpersonating him ir something, its hard to believe he is a mod Here and its Trash talking vgchartz and talking shit about Sony fans Here on that comments section

Ryuu is not selnor, lol. Ryuu has been around as long as I have, his account pre-exists selnor's banning by several years afaik. 



Around the Network
shikamaru317 said:
ClassicGamingWizzz said:

Ryuu96 is selnor, dont know If he is still a mod Here or not or If those comments on the vídeo are from a troll inpersonating him ir something, its hard to believe he is a mod Here and its Trash talking vgchartz and talking shit about Sony fans Here on that comments section

Ryuu is not selnor, lol. Ryuu has been around as long as I have, his account pre-exists selnor's banning by several years afaik

It doesn't, but eh. Ryuu isn't selnor. Soooooo, let's all move on now.



                                                                                                             

vivster said:
EricHiggin said:

The difference should be that XB fans had a hard time praising XB1 because when it came to gaming, it really had nothing over PS4. That partially flipped when XB1X launched though, but PS4 Pro still had a clear games and price advantage.

Now you're going to have games, that to gamers in the flesh, will be slightly more visually pleasing on XBSX across most titles, but will be slightly faster and snappier on PS5 across most titles.

One group will praise the visuals, the other will praise the speed, when in reality, the difference between both will be minimal most of the time. A write off or a wash basically. That won't mean each console has small advantages, but what's going to matter are the games, services, and prices.

I'm actually not sold yet on the PS5 SSD or its clock. I will expect the XSX to be just as snappy as the PS4. They both have fast SSDs and the PS5 will run into diminishing returns.

But in the end it's gonna be meaningless. As I've said long before we knew the specs; the XSX could have double the specs of the PS5 across the board and it would still lose if their games output stays as uncompetitive as it has been the last 3 gens. And there is no reason for me to believe that it will improve in any way.

Well then I would assume you're also not sold on XBSX and it's higher TF either. With PS4 and XB1X, the performance gap was enough that gamers said they could notice it. Not like it blew their minds, but if you paid attention you could see the difference. That was with a 40% difference or so. Now we're looking at a 20% difference or less, depending on how much devs optimize XBSX over PS5.

If it's not worth optimizing PS5's vast SSD potential to some degree, then why bother optimizing for a slight visual enhancement for XBSX?

Third party will probably spend a little bit of time optimizing PS5 for extra speed, while they spend a little bit of time optimizing XBSX for extra visuals. PS5 would end up slightly faster and snappier, and XBSX would look slightly better. Both will likely offer diminishing returns when it comes to third party games. It won't be until first party games before we see these specialties put to good use, and it will take 3 or 4 years before first party can push these consoles hard enough to truly see what both can ultimately do.

eva01beserk said:
vivster said:

I'm actually not sold yet on the PS5 SSD or its clock. I will expect the XSX to be just as snappy as the PS4. They both have fast SSDs and the PS5 will run into diminishing returns.

But in the end it's gonna be meaningless. As I've said long before we knew the specs; the XSX could have double the specs of the PS5 across the board and it would still lose if their games output stays as uncompetitive as it has been the last 3 gens. And there is no reason for me to believe that it will improve in any way.

Its like you said like the cell, they could promise all they want and devs dint really take advantage of it, but sony did and first party games where technically better and end of gen games like the last of us almost match early 8th gen games. So I at least believe sony willmake good use of it.

And I hate to agree on you with the xbox games being uncompetitive because people instantly get called a fanboy or/and out rite dismiss everything you say, But even buying all thouse studios dosent gime hope they will change as they seem to be going the small games route to feed gamepass. Things could change but I just dont see it happening. 

Most devs seem to be saying, from what's out in public anyway, that they are quite happy and excited about the SSD. If they go and ignore it now, that's pretty hypocritical on their part. No point in praising something you're never going to use, and liable to backfire. I don't remember devs in general praising cell though. They were not happy about it but weren't as vocal because it was a different time and social media wasn't really a thing. I'm pretty sure Cerny said the SSD in some ways is practically invisible to devs and will just do it's own thing. While that doesn't mean optimization isn't needed, it certainly helps. The SSD situation doesn't seem to be anywhere the nightmare that cell was.

As for the games, while I doubt MS/XBSX has near as many AAA exclusives as SNY/PS5, I'm willing to bet that MS will at the very least, let a few studios go absolutely hog wild and create a few amazing games (might have to wait two years though). This is all MS really had before as well, and it worked for them, so I wouldn't be surprised if they try that approach again. The rest of the studios would churn out smaller, just ok games, consistently for Game Pass. This will allow MS to tout that they now have a little bit of everything and it certainly could help them gain traction. They have to have a few GoW/HZD level overall splendors or XBSX won't sell worth a damn, unless it's surprisingly cheap. All that performance needs to get pushed at least here and there or it's mostly for nothing. Hopefully they don't just put all their funds into hyper subsidizing XBSX to be cheap, while making their studios work with lower, tighter budgets. That would be a shame.



twintail said:
Can someone simplify the CPU/ GPU thermal ?

My understanding is that because they have a set thermal limit, games will be able to nearly max out the CPU/ GPU for extended periods of time without any concern.
Whereas in a more traditional design, the hardware cooling and thermals need to guess theoretical max loads because of fluctuations?

I don't know.

Basically, you set your aircon to 23 degrees because you know regardless of the sunlight or activities in the room, you'll remain cool. You can party hard during the day because the Aircon has been set to accept all that play.
As opposed to setting it to 25 and having to drop the temp because the sunlight and in room activities are warming up the room, thus making the Aircon work harder?

Like I said, I'm trying to understand how it works on a more basic level.

Thanks.

You are pretty much spot on. Its something like this...Two key things to note.

  1. The first thing to note is that the core load is what determines power draw and not necessarily frequency. A 36CU GPU running at 1.5Ghz at 100% load can be drawing more power than a 36CU GPU running at 1.8Ghz at a 70% load.
  2. The second thing of note is that its nearly impossible to get any chip running at 100% load all the time. That would require impossibly good optimization.

Now into the details.

Traditional console (aka fixed clocks)
Clock frequency is fixed, but power draw is variable. However, power draw at 70% load is very different from power draw at 100% load (1). So designers kinda guess how capable their cooling needs to be, based on an estimated load/power consumption TDP, but also to account for the duration of time that the chip would run in that state. This is very hard to do, and if you just go for the biggest cooler you can then you aren't really in the traditional console design form factor anymore... eg.XSX.

PCs (variable clocks & variable power)
With PCs everything is variable. They have a minimum clock, base clock, and boost clock. Thermals control the system. The GPU sits at its normal clock for most of the time and can boost its clock depending on how much load it has. It typically would alternate between that boost clock and the normal clock as long as thermals allow it. if the thermals are good, it can sit at its boost clock longer, if they aren't then it throttles and clocks down.

PS5 (fixed power, variable frequency)
The power draw is fixed. The APU can never draw more than a set amount of power. This allows sony to build a cooling system for that specific TDP. Let's call this 200W. Now sony could have a CPU budget of 50W and a GPU budget of 150W at an estimated load of 90%(2). That power will keep both the CPU and GPU at their peak clocks of 3.5Ghz and 2.2Ghz respectively.

However, when that game comes along that has that one scene or system in the game that can saturate the GPU/CPU to over 90%-100% load (eg. pulling up the map in Horizon zero dawn) then the GPU would likely be exceeding its 150W power budget. So the PS5 can, in that case, drop GPU clocks by around 2% - 3% (44Mhz to 66Mhz) and that little percentage drop can save as much as 10W in power consumption. 

Thats it... there is a reason why a 3% drop in clock speed can save as much as 10W of power and why something as simple as a map screen can make the GPU go crazy. But that's not what you asked lol.

And the people that say things like "just how big is that clock drop going to be", do not understand this fundamental part clocks and power draw. Eg, it can take 20W to get a chip from 1500Mh to 1800Mhz, but take 20W to get it from 1800Mhz to 1830Mhz.

Last edited by Intrinsic - on 27 March 2020

EricHiggin said:
vivster said:

I'm actually not sold yet on the PS5 SSD or its clock. I will expect the XSX to be just as snappy as the PS4. They both have fast SSDs and the PS5 will run into diminishing returns.

But in the end it's gonna be meaningless. As I've said long before we knew the specs; the XSX could have double the specs of the PS5 across the board and it would still lose if their games output stays as uncompetitive as it has been the last 3 gens. And there is no reason for me to believe that it will improve in any way.

Well then I would assume you're also not sold on XBSX and it's higher TF either. With PS4 and XB1X, the performance gap was enough that gamers said they could notice it. Not like it blew their minds, but if you paid attention you could see the difference. That was with a 40% difference or so. Now we're looking at a 20% difference or less, depending on how much devs optimize XBSX over PS5.

If it's not worth optimizing PS5's vast SSD potential to some degree, then why bother optimizing for a slight visual enhancement for XBSX?

Third party will probably spend a little bit of time optimizing PS5 for extra speed, while they spend a little bit of time optimizing XBSX for extra visuals. PS5 would end up slightly faster and snappier, and XBSX would look slightly better. Both will likely offer diminishing returns when it comes to third party games. It won't be until first party games before we see these specialties put to good use, and it will take 3 or 4 years before first party can push these consoles hard enough to truly see what both can ultimately do.

eva01beserk said:

Its like you said like the cell, they could promise all they want and devs dint really take advantage of it, but sony did and first party games where technically better and end of gen games like the last of us almost match early 8th gen games. So I at least believe sony willmake good use of it.

And I hate to agree on you with the xbox games being uncompetitive because people instantly get called a fanboy or/and out rite dismiss everything you say, But even buying all thouse studios dosent gime hope they will change as they seem to be going the small games route to feed gamepass. Things could change but I just dont see it happening. 

Most devs seem to be saying, from what's out in public anyway, that they are quite happy and excited about the SSD. If they go and ignore it now, that's pretty hypocritical on their part. No point in praising something you're never going to use, and liable to backfire. I don't remember devs in general praising cell though. They were not happy about it but weren't as vocal because it was a different time and social media wasn't really a thing. I'm pretty sure Cerny said the SSD in some ways is practically invisible to devs and will just do it's own thing. While that doesn't mean optimization isn't needed, it certainly helps. The SSD situation doesn't seem to be anywhere the nightmare that cell was.

As for the games, while I doubt MS/XBSX has near as many AAA exclusives as SNY/PS5, I'm willing to bet that MS will at the very least, let a few studios go absolutely hog wild and create a few amazing games (might have to wait two years though). This is all MS really had before as well, and it worked for them, so I wouldn't be surprised if they try that approach again. The rest of the studios would churn out smaller, just ok games, consistently for Game Pass. This will allow MS to tout that they now have a little bit of everything and it certainly could help them gain traction. They have to have a few GoW/HZD level overall splendors or XBSX won't sell worth a damn, unless it's surprisingly cheap. All that performance needs to get pushed at least here and there or it's mostly for nothing. Hopefully they don't just put all their funds into hyper subsidizing XBSX to be cheap, while making their studios work with lower, tighter budgets. That would be a shame.

I dont think at the begining they would like to scare off xbox gamers so parity will be standard if the ps5 ends up outperforming the xbox. But the ps5 will in no doubt sell more regardless so after that in like 2years when the ps5 has sold a great deal more I do see third party's really pushing the ps5 even if the xbox can't keep up.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

Around the Network
eva01beserk said:
EricHiggin said:

Well then I would assume you're also not sold on XBSX and it's higher TF either. With PS4 and XB1X, the performance gap was enough that gamers said they could notice it. Not like it blew their minds, but if you paid attention you could see the difference. That was with a 40% difference or so. Now we're looking at a 20% difference or less, depending on how much devs optimize XBSX over PS5.

If it's not worth optimizing PS5's vast SSD potential to some degree, then why bother optimizing for a slight visual enhancement for XBSX?

Third party will probably spend a little bit of time optimizing PS5 for extra speed, while they spend a little bit of time optimizing XBSX for extra visuals. PS5 would end up slightly faster and snappier, and XBSX would look slightly better. Both will likely offer diminishing returns when it comes to third party games. It won't be until first party games before we see these specialties put to good use, and it will take 3 or 4 years before first party can push these consoles hard enough to truly see what both can ultimately do.

Most devs seem to be saying, from what's out in public anyway, that they are quite happy and excited about the SSD. If they go and ignore it now, that's pretty hypocritical on their part. No point in praising something you're never going to use, and liable to backfire. I don't remember devs in general praising cell though. They were not happy about it but weren't as vocal because it was a different time and social media wasn't really a thing. I'm pretty sure Cerny said the SSD in some ways is practically invisible to devs and will just do it's own thing. While that doesn't mean optimization isn't needed, it certainly helps. The SSD situation doesn't seem to be anywhere the nightmare that cell was.

As for the games, while I doubt MS/XBSX has near as many AAA exclusives as SNY/PS5, I'm willing to bet that MS will at the very least, let a few studios go absolutely hog wild and create a few amazing games (might have to wait two years though). This is all MS really had before as well, and it worked for them, so I wouldn't be surprised if they try that approach again. The rest of the studios would churn out smaller, just ok games, consistently for Game Pass. This will allow MS to tout that they now have a little bit of everything and it certainly could help them gain traction. They have to have a few GoW/HZD level overall splendors or XBSX won't sell worth a damn, unless it's surprisingly cheap. All that performance needs to get pushed at least here and there or it's mostly for nothing. Hopefully they don't just put all their funds into hyper subsidizing XBSX to be cheap, while making their studios work with lower, tighter budgets. That would be a shame.

I dont think at the begining they would like to scare off xbox gamers so parity will be standard if the ps5 ends up outperforming the xbox. But the ps5 will in no doubt sell more regardless so after that in like 2years when the ps5 has sold a great deal more I do see third party's really pushing the ps5 even if the xbox can't keep up.

That would be the lazier, easier way to go about it. Save time and effort and just make the game run almost identical on both for the first year, maybe two. The devs will have to put the consoles potential to good use sooner than later though, or SNY and MS will stop listening to them as much going forward and stop giving them as many new advancements. SNY and MS would just rely more on marketing to sell consoles in the future then, and the devs and gamers would suffer, and nobody wants that.

It's in the best interests of everyone to push the next gen consoles as much as reasonably possible since it's not like PS3 vs 360. Let gamers decide which they prefer, more eye candy or speed, and let them have that. If that leads to one selling better than the other, then the people have spoken.

PS5 has an advantage right now based on PS4's momentum, but that's no guarantee it will lead to sales similar to this gen. It still has to prove itself.



EricHiggin said:
eva01beserk said:

I dont think at the begining they would like to scare off xbox gamers so parity will be standard if the ps5 ends up outperforming the xbox. But the ps5 will in no doubt sell more regardless so after that in like 2years when the ps5 has sold a great deal more I do see third party's really pushing the ps5 even if the xbox can't keep up.

That would be the lazier, easier way to go about it. Save time and effort and just make the game run almost identical on both for the first year, maybe two. The devs will have to put the consoles potential to good use sooner than later though, or SNY and MS will stop listening to them as much going forward and stop giving them as many new advancements. SNY and MS would just rely more on marketing to sell consoles in the future then, and the devs and gamers would suffer, and nobody wants that.

It's in the best interests of everyone to push the next gen consoles as much as reasonably possible since it's not like PS3 vs 360. Let gamers decide which they prefer, more eye candy or speed, and let them have that. If that leads to one selling better than the other, then the people have spoken.

PS5 has an advantage right now based on PS4's momentum, but that's no guarantee it will lead to sales similar to this gen. It still has to prove itself.

I get you . I wish things end up that way. But still is money that drives big publishers like EA. Sony and ms could bend over backwards but if it dont make them money they will abandon it on the spot. Its unless one console pulls ahead enough they won't allow any lost profit by making one obviously better than another. And ps3 and 360 was diferent as they probably tried parity but where not able to reach it. 

Just remember there have been so many games in the last couple of years that are runing like trash on the base xbox on. Devs dont care anymore. While base ps4 plays average.

Yea sony has all the momentum. I'm pretty sure they will deliver. And honestly ps5 dominating again seems more than likely with MS approach to gaming now. 



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

eva01beserk said:
EricHiggin said:

That would be the lazier, easier way to go about it. Save time and effort and just make the game run almost identical on both for the first year, maybe two. The devs will have to put the consoles potential to good use sooner than later though, or SNY and MS will stop listening to them as much going forward and stop giving them as many new advancements. SNY and MS would just rely more on marketing to sell consoles in the future then, and the devs and gamers would suffer, and nobody wants that.

It's in the best interests of everyone to push the next gen consoles as much as reasonably possible since it's not like PS3 vs 360. Let gamers decide which they prefer, more eye candy or speed, and let them have that. If that leads to one selling better than the other, then the people have spoken.

PS5 has an advantage right now based on PS4's momentum, but that's no guarantee it will lead to sales similar to this gen. It still has to prove itself.

I get you . I wish things end up that way. But still is money that drives big publishers like EA. Sony and ms could bend over backwards but if it dont make them money they will abandon it on the spot. Its unless one console pulls ahead enough they won't allow any lost profit by making one obviously better than another. And ps3 and 360 was diferent as they probably tried parity but where not able to reach it. 

Just remember there have been so many games in the last couple of years that are runing like trash on the base xbox on. Devs dont care anymore. While base ps4 plays average.

Yea sony has all the momentum. I'm pretty sure they will deliver. And honestly ps5 dominating again seems more than likely with MS approach to gaming now. 

You've got a point, but devs won't forget PS3 or XB1 for a long time. XBSX will give devs new hope and they will try to push it as much as reasonably possible due to MS's renewed efforts. They don't want SNY getting too full of themselves again. Just look at the cross play push for example. Now the pubs though, how much they can push the devs to favor one console over another is hard to say. They certainly will favor the one that sells the most games, but I don't think the devs will fall in line like they may have decades ago. They both should know better by now as to what happens when you decide to basically go all in on just one brand, and need to keep an open mind going forward.

The hardware hasn't been the most exciting really, yet interesting. Hopefully the big excitement now comes with the games and prices.

*XB1(S) is a lot like PS3. Both were the wrong moves at the wrong time, and maybe just flat out dumb altogether. PS3 Slim and XB1X though were redeeming.

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 28 March 2020

EricHiggin said:
eva01beserk said:

I get you . I wish things end up that way. But still is money that drives big publishers like EA. Sony and ms could bend over backwards but if it dont make them money they will abandon it on the spot. Its unless one console pulls ahead enough they won't allow any lost profit by making one obviously better than another. And ps3 and 360 was diferent as they probably tried parity but where not able to reach it. 

Just remember there have been so many games in the last couple of years that are runing like trash on the base xbox on. Devs dont care anymore. While base ps4 plays average.

Yea sony has all the momentum. I'm pretty sure they will deliver. And honestly ps5 dominating again seems more than likely with MS approach to gaming now. 

You've got a point, but devs won't forget PS3 or XB1 for a long time. XBSX will give devs new hope and they will try to push it as much as reasonably possible due to MS's renewed efforts. They don't want SNY getting too full of themselves again. Just look at the cross play push for example. Now the pubs though, how much they can push the devs to favor one console over another is hard to say. They certainly will favor the one that sells the most games, but I don't think the devs will fall in line like they may have decades ago. They both should know better by now as to what happens when you decide to basically go all in on just one brand, and need to keep an open mind going forward.

The hardware hasn't been the most exciting really, yet interesting. Hopefully the big excitement now comes with the games and prices.

I'm all for good competition. Drops prices drives innovation and so on. But I'm not gona root for someone who is definitely doing something wrong just cuz they need the boost. 7th and 8th gen ms does not get any good will from me and I'm pessimistic going into 9th. Phil's promises might come true but unroll they do I will prefer Sony to dominate than to prop up bad practices just for the sake of competition. 



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

EricHiggin said:
eva01beserk said:

I get you . I wish things end up that way. But still is money that drives big publishers like EA. Sony and ms could bend over backwards but if it dont make them money they will abandon it on the spot. Its unless one console pulls ahead enough they won't allow any lost profit by making one obviously better than another. And ps3 and 360 was diferent as they probably tried parity but where not able to reach it. 

Just remember there have been so many games in the last couple of years that are runing like trash on the base xbox on. Devs dont care anymore. While base ps4 plays average.

Yea sony has all the momentum. I'm pretty sure they will deliver. And honestly ps5 dominating again seems more than likely with MS approach to gaming now. 

You've got a point, but devs won't forget PS3 or XB1 for a long time. XBSX will give devs new hope and they will try to push it as much as reasonably possible due to MS's renewed efforts. They don't want SNY getting too full of themselves again. Just look at the cross play push for example. Now the pubs though, how much they can push the devs to favor one console over another is hard to say. They certainly will favor the one that sells the most games, but I don't think the devs will fall in line like they may have decades ago. They both should know better by now as to what happens when you decide to basically go all in on just one brand, and need to keep an open mind going forward.

The hardware hasn't been the most exciting really, yet interesting. Hopefully the big excitement now comes with the games and prices.

*XB1(S) is a lot like PS3. Both were the wrong moves at the wrong time, and maybe just flat out dumb altogether. PS3 Slim and XB1X though were redeeming.

Saw your edit late.

I don't think its the same. Ps3 slim solved the main issue of the ps3 such was the price. Xb1x gave more power. There where many issues with the launch of the x1 but power was just one and not the main one. Kinect was the main one and they got it. Games is their second biggest and I believe its truly their biggest flaw and it was not solved, it was basicly pushed for the new gen. More power for more money really dint do much and can see by the still lack of sales.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.