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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Rumor:PS5 & Anaconda Scarlet GPU on par with RTX 2080, Xbox exclusives focus on Cross gen, Developer complain about Lockhart.UPDATE: Windows Central said Xbox Anaconda target 12 teraflop

 

What do you think

I am excited for next gen 22 61.11%
 
I cannot wait to play next gen consoles 4 11.11%
 
I need to find another th... 2 5.56%
 
I worried about next gen 8 22.22%
 
Total:36
Pemalite on 06 December 2019
HollyGamer said:

Not as much as RT capable if it compared to GPU with  dedicated RT cores.  

Didn't I essentially say that?

HollyGamer said:

is there any equivalent of jaguar on PC? Consoles are build to run at  lower spec and lower clock speed to match mainstream setup on PC
 so it can have affordable price on the long run.

The CPU's on PC obliterate what the consoles have, no doubt, even the shittest, slowest CPU's today that only have 2~ CPU cores, 4~ threads will beat the 8-core Jaguar hands down.

In saying that a Quad-Core PC CPU from the 7th gen era can also beat Jaguar.

But we are talking Graphics here anyway...

HollyGamer said:

Optimization is actually is a thing to maximize consoles system . Lower level API is exist even Vulcan  exist to imitate consoles level optimization.  You will not find a PC spec in 2013 to 2015  that can run games on par with 7850 but with tdp 200 watt and small form factor with less heat on 399 price point. 

Introducing TDP, Form Fact, Heat, Price is shifting the goal post which is a logical fallacy, that isn't what the original argument entailed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts

Lower level API's exist on PC as well. PC also gets OS optimizations via windows updates.
For example, Microsoft last year rolled out a patch which increased performance for spectre affected machines.
https://www.howtogeek.com/406724/new-spectre-busting-update-speeds-up-windows-10-pcs/

GPU drivers are constantly being optimized which can result in performance increases... For example, here it's a claimed 18%.
https://www.pcgamer.com/amd-says-its-latest-gpu-driver-bumps-performance-up-to-18-in-modern-warfare/


Games get updated to also increase performance.
https://wccftech.com/darksiders-iii-pc-patch-performance/

As for the Radeon 7850 specifically... In non-VRAM limited games, it will still handle every competently ported PS4 multiplat game just fine at 1080P, 30fps.
Sometimes you can take a hit to that resolution and increase visual effects past what the PS4 was capable of.

I.E. The Radeon 7850 can do Battlefield 5, Medium Quality at a full-fat 1080P, 50fps.


The Playstation 4 for instance will often hit 40fps and sometimes hit a low 1280x720 resolution... But it spends most of it's time between that and 1080P rather than 1080P all the time.


Considering that the Radeon 7850 released in March 2012 and the Playstation 4 launched in November 2013... Which means the Radeon 7850 is 1 year, 8 months older than the Playstation 4. It does bloody well.

HollyGamer said:

So why developer are not  making Battlefield One on Xbox 360 and PS3? Or using Frostbite on Switch for their latest Fifa games, instead they are using old engines from PS3/360 era.  

The userbase for the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 have moved on.
The last Frostbite/Battlefield game on Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 dropped in 2015 with Hardline, 4 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_Hardline

The Switch can handle more modern engines like Unreal Engine 4, but it's probably more economical for developers to port older engines over instead.
That is something individual studios decide... Because at the end of the day, the Switch has a graphics hardware feature set that is compatible with the Playstation 4 and Xbox One and even in a couple of areas, exceed the ageing Graphics Core Next designs.

EA also historically hasn't given Nintendo much support in the modern era either.

HollyGamer said:

When we talking about game design is not just about graphic but physic, AI, load time, game design. 

And more.



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

Around the Network
HollyGamer on 06 December 2019
 
Pemalite said:

Didn't I essentially say that?

You did say something, but you implied that PS5 and scarlet will not using dedicated cores and will just be an regular RX 5700 GPU

Pemalite said:

The CPU's on PC obliterate what the consoles have, no doubt, even the shittest, slowest CPU's today that only have 2~ CPU cores, 4~ threads will beat the 8-core Jaguar hands down.

In saying that a Quad-Core PC CPU from the 7th gen era can also beat Jaguar.

But we are talking Graphics here anyway...

Well consoles is not about just graphic and performance,  but about, price, power, tdp, form factor accessibility, immediacy, and ecosystem.  You argument is correct if we are discussing "  can PC run better games than consoles ", but to run the same thing on the smaller form factor, lower TDP, affordable price less TDP, small heat temperature, in close ecosystem is just impossible.

Is just like comparing a home made food to a fast food food

Pemalite said:

Introducing TDP, Form Fact, Heat, Price is shifting the goal post which is a logical fallacy, that isn't what the original argument entailed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts

Lower level API's exist on PC as well. PC also gets OS optimizations via windows updates.
For example, Microsoft last year rolled out a patch which increased performance for spectre affected machines.
https://www.howtogeek.com/406724/new-spectre-busting-update-speeds-up-windows-10-pcs/

GPU drivers are constantly being optimized which can result in performance increases... For example, here it's a claimed 18%.
https://www.pcgamer.com/amd-says-its-latest-gpu-driver-bumps-performance-up-to-18-in-modern-warfare/

Games get updated to also increase performance.
https://wccftech.com/darksiders-iii-pc-patch-performance/

As for the Radeon 7850 specifically... In non-VRAM limited games, it will still handle every competently ported PS4 multiplat game just fine at 1080P, 30fps.
Sometimes you can take a hit to that resolution and increase visual effects past what the PS4 was capable of.

I.E. The Radeon 7850 can do Battlefield 5, Medium Quality at a full-fat 1080P, 50fps.

Considering that the Radeon 7850 released in March 2012 and the Playstation 4 launched in November 2013... Which means the Radeon 7850 is 1 year, 8 months older than the Playstation 4. It does bloody well.

Is not shifting goal post, you were asking about Equivalent hardware. TDP, and form factor, heat and price is PART OF THE HARDWARE SPEC 

comparing GPU will involve all the the things above. Is not about moving goal post is about you cannot answer your own argument. and play victim :) 

I did not said PC don't have optimization, is just PC run games with bloated driver that and full of unnecessary programs to run games on many configuration. While console run games to just run at intended spec. The scale of driver and optimization are different. You cannot hand picked and optimized every PC games by developer, every games are automated optimize using general consensus, you need to do it yourself on PC graphic option, even some games ahs exclusives affect running on consoles.

You will not find any GPU on PC  that can switch resolution between 900p and 720p in Battlefield 1 automatically , this just shows Developer optimize the consoles by them self. On PC you either do it yourself or let the available option decide it.   

Consoles optimization is a bit special then PC. 

Pemalite said:

The user base for the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 have moved on.
The last Frostbite/Battlefield game on Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 dropped in 2015 with Hardline, 4 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_Hardline

The Switch can handle more modern engines like Unreal Engine 4, but it's probably more economical for developers to port older engines over instead.
That is something individual studios decide... Because at the end of the day, the Switch has a graphics hardware feature set that is compatible with the Playstation 4 and Xbox One and even in a couple of areas, exceed the ageing Graphics Core Next designs.

EA also historically hasn't given Nintendo much support in the modern era either.

So you are saying gamers will not move on to Xbox Scarlet and stick to Xbox One ? And also battleField 4 engine using different Frostbite from Battlefield 5 and One right ? 

It's not just about Switch , PS3 and Xbox 360 has compatibility hardware with PS4 and xbox One. Isn't you just used Battlefield 4/hardline as example? So it's not the hardware able or not . It's about developing times, resourch, sacrifice on future games design that hindered by limitation hardware spec.

If you are saying it's not economical then there is no purpose of scalability, if the engines are not economical then it's not scalable. 

Pemalite said:

And more.

Then scalability is not a simple word that can be thrown whatever you like.

And also Talking about games design you cannot simply  upscale games design. You can tho downscale graphic but upscale game design ?  no chance.

Last edited by HollyGamer - on 06 December 2019

Pemalite on 06 December 2019
HollyGamer said:

You didn't say, but you implied that PS5 and scarlet will not using dedicated cores and will just be an RX 5700 GPU

No I didn't.

HollyGamer said:

Well consoles is not about just graphic and performance,  but about, price, power, tdp, form factor accessibility, immediacy, and ecosystem.  You argument is correct if we are discussing "  can PC run better games than consoles ", but to run the same thing on the smaller form factor, lower TDP, affordable price less TDP, small heat temperature, in close ecosystem is just impossible.

GPU's are not just about graphics and performance either, but they are about price, power, tdp, form fator and accesibility, immediacy and ecosystem.

Hence why they have a "Lineup" usually derived from a common feature set.

HollyGamer said:

Is not shifting goal post, you were asking about Equivalent hardware. TDP, and form factor, heat and price is PART OF THE HARDWARE SPEC 

Equivalent GPU hardware to the Playstation 4 is the Radeon 7850/7870.

HollyGamer said:

comparing GPU will involve all the the things above. Is not about moving goal post is about you cannot answer your own argument. and play victim :) 

False. That is what you wish to involve.

HollyGamer said:

I did not said PC don't have optimization, is just PC run games with bloated driver that and full of unnecessary programs to run games on many configuration. While console run games to just run at intended spec. The scale of driver and optimization are different. You cannot hand picked and optimized every PC games by developer, every games are automated optimize using general consensus, you need to do it yourself on PC graphic option, even some games ahs exclusives affect running on consoles.

Consoles use the same drivers as PC. Consoles are PC's. Consoles even use the same Operating Systems and API's as PC.

No. You do not need to "Hand pick settings" on PC. - Allot of PC games automatically pick settings based on your hardware configuration, from there you are more than welcomed to make additional changes.

Ironically, some console games are now going down a similar path and introducing toggles for graphics settings like film grain, motion blur and performance/graphics modes.

HollyGamer said:

You will not find any GPU on PC  that can switch resolution between 900p and 720p in Battlefield 1 automatically , this just shows Developer optimize the consoles by them self. On PC you either do it yourself or let the available option decide it.   

What makes you think you need a dynamic resolution? And even with a dynamic resolution the consoles still aren't maintaining 60fps.

I kinda' provided the evidence for that?

HollyGamer said:

Consoles optimization is a bit special then PC. 

You are missing the point entirely.

I have provided the evidence that all platforms get "Optimizations". Consoles aren't the exception.

Stop ignoring the evidence I have provided.

HollyGamer said:

So you are saying gamers will not move on to Xbox Scarlet and stick to Xbox One ? And also battleField 4 engine using different Frostbite from Battlefield 5 and One right ? 

How did you come to that false conclusion? Those aren't my words.

Umm. Battlefield 4 is using Frostbite 3. Same engine as Battlefield 5 and Battlefield 1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frostbite_(game_engine)

HollyGamer said:

It's not just about Switch , PS3 and Xbox 360 has compatibility hardware with PS4 and xbox One. Isn't you just used Battlefield 4/hardline as example? So it's not the hardware able or not . It's about developing times, resourch, sacrifice on future games design that hindered by limitation hardware spec.

I think you are misconstruing my statements to be something they are not.

I have provided evidence for most of my points, I suggest you go read/watch them.

HollyGamer said:

If you are saying it's not economical then there is no purpose of scalability, if the engines are not economical then it's not scalable. 

Again. You are misconstruing my statements to be something they are not.

It's not economical because there isn't a playerbase that is buying enough copies to make it financially feasible, hence why Battlefield: Hardline was the last Battlefield game on 7th gen hardware.

It's not that current games can't scale downwards, it's just not worth the extra work for a declining player base.
The fact that Frostbite powered games were still being released on 7th gen hardware years after 8th gen hardware launched is a testament to that fact.

HollyGamer said:
Then scalability is not a simple word that can be thrown whatever you like.

Which is why I provided evidence for my claims.

HollyGamer said:
And also Talking about games design you cannot simply  upscale games design. You can tho downscale graphic but upscale game design ?  no chance.

You will need to be more specific about "Upscale games design".






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

thismeintiel on 06 December 2019
shikamaru317 said:
thismeintiel said:
Lockhart is a big mistake. When we get 2 years in and MS is still trying to force devs to make last gen versions of games, even smaller teams who don't have resources to, I think you will see some dropping support.

Agreed. Hopefully they either abandon the project soon, or increase the specs to maybe 7 tflop and only slightly less RAM than Anaconda. If they bump it up to 7 tflop and only like 2 GB less RAM than Anaconda it should be powerful enough to meet the 1440p target that MS set for developers on Lockhart, with no other graphical downgrades compared to the Anaconda version. Will be alot easier for developers if all they have to downgrade is the resolution, too much work if they have to downgrade more than resolution to get a game to run on Lockhart.

Ideally though, they should drop Lockhart entirely, and just release a discless version of Anaconda, and subsidize it in order to hit an attractive price point that is $100 less than the disc drive Anaconda. They can make back what they lose on the subsidized console with the higher profit margin on digital game sales. 

Another reason why Lockhart is a terrible idea: if we get mid-gen upgrade consoles, which Sony is already hinting at for PS5, developers will have to support 3 different Xbox consoles with different specs; Lockhart, Anaconda, and whatever the codename for the mid-gen upgrade console will be. Devs will absoutely hate having to support 3 different Xbox's with different specs. Just release a discless Anaconda instead of Lockhart Microsoft.

Yea, I don't see how they are going to get 1440p out of the Lockhart, with a much weaker GPU and "significantly less" RAM, unless there is an incredible amount of scaling down in almost every aspect of the game.  My guess, though, is that they want to at least hit 1440p because 1080p will seem like last gen.  And with MS forcing them to make games on it, they will most likely use it as the base for development and then just add some bells and whistles on it for the Anaconda. 

That has a big drawback, though, because it will end up being like the PS4/XBO vs Pro/X.  What I mean by this is that for the most part, the games are the same, usually just higher res overall, with maybe better textures and a couple of added effects.  There usually isn't an increase in things like geometry.  Now, if a game could be made only for the X and Pro, the graphics could be pushed even harder.  Of course, when it is mid-gen HW, it's obvious why they shouldn't do that.

This also brings up the problem that MS is worried about having their launch games play on XBO/X, as well, which could create the same problem.  There is no way they are going to be able optimize their games to run at their fullest on all 4 consoles.  On the other hand, Sony is going to be showing what next gen has to offer, because they are focusing on pushing the HW out of the gate with PS5 exclusives not having to run on PS4.

Now, people can talk about scalability all they want, but those lower/higher quality assets and lower/higher poly models don't just create themselves.  Obviously it's a bigger deal than they want to admit if devs are complaining to Jason Screier about it.



 

crissindahouse on 06 December 2019

I like the idea how it will be such a problem with Lockhart while you will be able to play the same games on 536 different PC configurations and no dev will tell you how it's so much work to develop for all these configs.



Around the Network
andisart on 07 December 2019

True, but will be still too expensive to put a 2080 in a console in one year



HollyGamer on 07 December 2019
Pemalite said:
HollyGamer said:

You didn't say, but you implied that PS5 and scarlet will not using dedicated cores and will just be an RX 5700 GPU

No I didn't.

HollyGamer said:

Well consoles is not about just graphic and performance,  but about, price, power, tdp, form factor accessibility, immediacy, and ecosystem.  You argument is correct if we are discussing "  can PC run better games than consoles ", but to run the same thing on the smaller form factor, lower TDP, affordable price less TDP, small heat temperature, in close ecosystem is just impossible.

GPU's are not just about graphics and performance either, but they are about price, power, tdp, form fator and accesibility, immediacy and ecosystem.

Hence why they have a "Lineup" usually derived from a common feature set.

HollyGamer said:

Is not shifting goal post, you were asking about Equivalent hardware. TDP, and form factor, heat and price is PART OF THE HARDWARE SPEC 

Equivalent GPU hardware to the Playstation 4 is the Radeon 7850/7870.

HollyGamer said:

comparing GPU will involve all the the things above. Is not about moving goal post is about you cannot answer your own argument. and play victim :) 

False. That is what you wish to involve.

HollyGamer said:

I did not said PC don't have optimization, is just PC run games with bloated driver that and full of unnecessary programs to run games on many configuration. While console run games to just run at intended spec. The scale of driver and optimization are different. You cannot hand picked and optimized every PC games by developer, every games are automated optimize using general consensus, you need to do it yourself on PC graphic option, even some games ahs exclusives affect running on consoles.

Consoles use the same drivers as PC. Consoles are PC's. Consoles even use the same Operating Systems and API's as PC.

No. You do not need to "Hand pick settings" on PC. - Allot of PC games automatically pick settings based on your hardware configuration, from there you are more than welcomed to make additional changes.

Ironically, some console games are now going down a similar path and introducing toggles for graphics settings like film grain, motion blur and performance/graphics modes.

HollyGamer said:

You will not find any GPU on PC  that can switch resolution between 900p and 720p in Battlefield 1 automatically , this just shows Developer optimize the consoles by them self. On PC you either do it yourself or let the available option decide it.   

What makes you think you need a dynamic resolution? And even with a dynamic resolution the consoles still aren't maintaining 60fps.

I kinda' provided the evidence for that?

HollyGamer said:

Consoles optimization is a bit special then PC. 

You are missing the point entirely.

I have provided the evidence that all platforms get "Optimizations". Consoles aren't the exception.

Stop ignoring the evidence I have provided.

HollyGamer said:

So you are saying gamers will not move on to Xbox Scarlet and stick to Xbox One ? And also battleField 4 engine using different Frostbite from Battlefield 5 and One right ? 

How did you come to that false conclusion? Those aren't my words.

Umm. Battlefield 4 is using Frostbite 3. Same engine as Battlefield 5 and Battlefield 1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frostbite_(game_engine)

HollyGamer said:

It's not just about Switch , PS3 and Xbox 360 has compatibility hardware with PS4 and xbox One. Isn't you just used Battlefield 4/hardline as example? So it's not the hardware able or not . It's about developing times, resourch, sacrifice on future games design that hindered by limitation hardware spec.

I think you are misconstruing my statements to be something they are not.

I have provided evidence for most of my points, I suggest you go read/watch them.

HollyGamer said:

If you are saying it's not economical then there is no purpose of scalability, if the engines are not economical then it's not scalable. 

Again. You are misconstruing my statements to be something they are not.

It's not economical because there isn't a playerbase that is buying enough copies to make it financially feasible, hence why Battlefield: Hardline was the last Battlefield game on 7th gen hardware.

It's not that current games can't scale downwards, it's just not worth the extra work for a declining player base.
The fact that Frostbite powered games were still being released on 7th gen hardware years after 8th gen hardware launched is a testament to that fact.

HollyGamer said:
Then scalability is not a simple word that can be thrown whatever you like.

Which is why I provided evidence for my claims.

HollyGamer said:
And also Talking about games design you cannot simply  upscale games design. You can tho downscale graphic but upscale game design ?  no chance.

You will need to be more specific about "Upscale games design".

Simple answer, Developer are worried  games will be made using Lockhart as standar more so using Xbox One as baseline. Scaling game design is impossible especially if the  CPU is not even the same. Lockhart to Anaconda probably can, but Jaguar to Ryzen 3 . LOL 



vivster on 07 December 2019
HollyGamer said:
vivster said:

Don't forget that those consoles won't come out for another year. By that time a 2070 will be midrange. Not hard to believe that consoles will be around that power.

Agree, next year even 3060 will be as powerful as RTX2080 . The jump from 12 nm to 7 nm+ is big on performance for Nvidia. PS4 back at the time are equal to GTX 660, which is a mid tier GPU back in 2013. 

I doubt very much that a 3060 will be on par with a 2080. As I said a 2070 is the most likely performance level. We're still talking about APUs here and I'd be very impressed if a PS5 comes even close to a 2080.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

HollyGamer on 07 December 2019
vivster said:
HollyGamer said:

Agree, next year even 3060 will be as powerful as RTX2080 . The jump from 12 nm to 7 nm+ is big on performance for Nvidia. PS4 back at the time are equal to GTX 660, which is a mid tier GPU back in 2013. 

I doubt very much that a 3060 will be on par with a 2080. As I said a 2070 is the most likely performance level. We're still talking about APUs here and I'd be very impressed if a PS5 comes even close to a 2080.

For PS5 GPU  i bet it's probably between 2070 to 2080 ish (2070 super at best/ RX 5700 Xt).  For overall performance will probably better due to the APU paired with Ryzen 3700 which will be crazy if future  games utilize it the benefit of that CPU. Remember all this times since 2013 games coming to PC and consoles are all build using Jaguar CPU based as baseline, Next year games will be based on Ryzen 3700. 



think-man on 07 December 2019

I will continue to support Sonys strategy. MS strategy is about as far from what i want as possible. If Sony adapt it, I'll move to Nintendo as my primary. Since they're actually releasing good stuff that I like for once.



 

How to Make friends In Dark Souls 3