Had no time to watch. What is the general sentiment? The Goods and bad? Expected price?
How do you feel | |||
My brain become bigger su... | 21 | 30.00% | |
I am wet | 6 | 8.57% | |
What did he talked about??? | 5 | 7.14% | |
I want some more info | 9 | 12.86% | |
Total: | 41 |
Had no time to watch. What is the general sentiment? The Goods and bad? Expected price?
Xxain said: Had no time to watch. What is the general sentiment? The Goods and bad? Expected price? |
Good, very good for gamers....Extremely bad for folks with a MBA in Presentations.
Xxain said: Had no time to watch. What is the general sentiment? The Goods and bad? Expected price? |
No price was given. Specs were in the expected range but were showcased in a super boring presentation.
Nu-13 said:
It's amazing how far you go. I never had any problem seeing how powerful a system is once information is out. The problem here is that you pretended the switch is a lot weaker than it actually is (even in the above post) and is now pulling a full 180 when talking about ps5. The least you can do is admit your mistakes. |
Honestly Nu-13 I feel the same way "the least you could do is amdit your mistakes"
You make it sound like what Im say is far from the truth.
Its not, the Playstation 4 is alot more powerfull than the Switch.
You guys claiming that its almost Playstation 4 level, are the ones exagerating.
Me saying theres like a 4 times differnce in performance between the PS4 and the Switch shows in games, isnt wrong.
Exsample:
Wolftenstein youngblood (panicbutton port (a good port)) runs 540-720p docked, and 30fps on Switch.
With alot of compromises to graphics settings and textures on the switch.
Playstation 4, its 1080p and 60fps.
playstation is running the game at like 2-4 times the resolution, higher graphics settings, higher quality textures, and twice the fps.
Common, the reason that happends is because the PS4 has more grunt to it than the switch.
its obvious theres like a x4 performance differnce between the two.
Dont say Im cherry picking, I really wasnt.
Alot of the more demanding multiplats the switch got, its obvious theres a drastic differnce in resolution/fps/texture quality/effects ect.
Also once again, thanks for derailing a thread again about this BS claims of Switch power being more than it is.
How many more future threads will you do this in?
It wasn't a bad presentation but damn they really messed up PS5 BC. It wasn't a feature I intend to use but Sony dropped the ball on it. I wasn't expecting the PS5 to play all PS1/PS2/PS3 games but PS4 games seemed like a certainty.
GPU/CPU favors the XSX while the PS5 SSD is 2x faster. Although I think we'll see a PS5 Pro down the line. I'm also curious as to how the SSD impacts game/level design.
The bright side to all of this, Sony still hasn't had their "XOne DRM moment," despite such an underwhelming presentation. We probably won't get see PS5 SIE titles until GOT is released, though.
Here is playstation blog post about the event:
https://blog.us.playstation.com/2020/03/18/unveiling-new-details-of-playstation-5-hardware-technical-specs/
ArchangelMadzz said:
I'm just repeating what Mark Cerny said. Instead of letting the load dictate the power. They have a constant power and worst case scenario they've designed to. So the system can handle being at full frequency without the cooling or power supply being under stress. The frequency goes down i less demanding games but you can utilise 100% frequency for a game. |
And I'm not saying that Cerni lied, but he did some PR talk to make it look great while hiding some of the shadows.
The Digital Foundry article that has been posted several times on the thread explains it a bit better:
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-playstation-5-specs-and-tech-that-deliver-sonys-next-gen-vision
Put simply, the PlayStation 5 is given a set power budget tied to the thermal limits of the cooling assembly. "It's a completely different paradigm," says Cerny. "Rather than running at constant frequency and letting the power vary based on the workload, we run at essentially constant power and let the frequency vary based on the workload."
(...)
It's a fascinating idea - and entirely at odds with Microsoft's design decisions for Xbox Series X - and what this likely means is that developers will need to be mindful of potential power consumption spikes that could impact clocks and lower performance.
Also, no, it doesn't mean that it will frequencies in less demanding games. It means that if both the CPU and GPU have to run at 100% capacity and they reach the thermal limit, one of the two parts (likely the GPU) will have to lower their frequency until the spike is gone and can go up again.
Please excuse my bad English.
Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070
Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.
Nu-13 said:
There's no derailing in calling you out. It's aways been obvious that flops are just one aspect of gpus but only now you and others conveniently say that. |
That is not only derailing as it is bringing topic from different thread to attack a user.
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."
JRPGfan said:
These arnt boost clocks. |
Well hopefully it’s shape can dissipate heat effectively
Last edited by sales2099 - on 18 March 2020Runa216 said: It's kind of funny how eager people are to be angry or disappointed. Some people clearly went into this presentation prepared to be angry about it (One person even said, straight up, that if the console didn't have 100% backwards compatibility to PS1 era at launch he'd go with Xbox for the 'first time ever', which I thought was a silly, nonsensical expectation that there was virtually no chance of coming true), and as such have been needlessly hilarious with their responses. Don't get me wrong, this was a dry, boring-assed presentation that did nothing for me becuase I don't give a shit about specs or the intricacies of how SSDs work (I'm currently at the 19-minute mark in the presentation, as I got distracted doing household things when I shoulda been watching it live), but the difference in speed and performance between PS5 and XBSX isn't enough to make me care when you consider the 25 years of PS history we have to go off. Guys, (And gals, if there are any here), y'all need to remmeber that specs don't sell a console. The two consoles are pretty close in performance, but it's the exclusives and features that make a world of difference. Power didn't make the Dreamcast win that generation. Power didn't make the Xbox win that generation. Power didn't make the PS3 win that generation. Power didn't make the PSP win its handheld generation. Power didn't make the Vita win its generation. Power didn't make the Xbox One X win its half-generation. The PS1 and PS2 won their generations despite being less impressive. the DS and 3DS dominated their generations. Wii won that generation despite barely being stronger than the Gamecube. the Switch might very well win the 8th gen (Depending on how you look at it) despite it being by far the weakest console out there right now. Point is, specs are nice (For developers to work with), but for the average joe they mean nothing. cost, games, interface, and features matter. Sony has a history of delivering great games, so even though this presentation has almost put me to sleep, I'm still eager to get the PS5. Still not getting the Xbox Series X, though, because of their history with making games I don't give a shit about. To those who are going to 'jump ship' becuase of this...well, you have fun with your not having any games on a more powerful console. If you're that dense to change what console you play on due to a small change in power...you were never in it for the games or for fun, anyway. Your loss. |
It have been the story of some people since X360... complain about Playstation, lack of games, etc go Xbox first, after a couple years trade for playstation and say he won't ever again buy xbox again until new gen appears.
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."