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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Bet: Which next-gen console will be more powerful?

         

** Betting is CLOSED - all winnings have been paid out by trunkswd **
 

Which next-gen console will be more powerful

PS5 4 $3,092.90 16.00%
 
Series X 21 $14,981.51 84.00%
 
 
Totals: 25 $18,074.41  
Game closed: 03/15/2020
Pemalite on 20 March 2020
src said:
Pemalite said:

That is what you are claiming though... That because YOU believe that Sony is going to sell 100~ million consoles they will get a cheaper price.

Don't back track now.

I'm saying Sony will likely get the better deal because PS5 will more than likely sell a lot more (prior history puts it 90-100 million+) and hence yearly orders will be higher. You simply wanted me to elaborate on the last two phrases but I thought that would be obviously implied. 

"Likely" isn't good business sense.

src said:
XSX is more powerful but PS5 is going to be "faster". If you can load data twice as fast then you may not need as much RAM to get the same on screen results: the RAM could only need to store 1 second of gameplay instead of 2 seconds.

Honestly its too early to call which is more technically capable since they follow different ideologies, and so we must wait for the games.

The Xbox Series X is more technically capable, this isn't even up for debate.



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

Around the Network
Otter on 20 March 2020

Where are people getting the $100 difference between the PS5 and SX?

Is a 20% difference in GPU $100?
What about the PS5 200% difference in SSD speed?
Or the HD rumble, touchpad, prorammable triggers and gyro in the controllers?

I feel like they will be similarly priced.

Last edited by Otter - on 20 March 2020

Lafiel on 20 March 2020
Otter said:

Where are people getting the $100 difference between the PS5 and SX?

Is a 20% difference in GPU $100?
What about the PS5 200% difference in SSD speed?
Or the HD rumble, touchpad and gyro in the controllers?

I feel like they will be similarly priced.

people don't understand that raw power isn't all there is to it - if the slides in Cerny's presentation are any hint the I/O complex (which includes ESRAM) on the PS5 APU might be bigger than both CPU and GPU parts, meaning that there is a big big investment attached to the blazing fast SSD

Cerny thinks this is the best way to get as much out of the whole as possible, but in the end it probably also means it will be just as expensive as the competition

that is a risk, as the traditional "more is better" approach is simply more marketable and word of mouth is a powerful thing



src on 20 March 2020
Pemalite said:
src said:

I'm saying Sony will likely get the better deal because PS5 will more than likely sell a lot more (prior history puts it 90-100 million+) and hence yearly orders will be higher. You simply wanted me to elaborate on the last two phrases but I thought that would be obviously implied. 

"Likely" isn't good business sense.

src said:
XSX is more powerful but PS5 is going to be "faster". If you can load data twice as fast then you may not need as much RAM to get the same on screen results: the RAM could only need to store 1 second of gameplay instead of 2 seconds.

Honestly its too early to call which is more technically capable since they follow different ideologies, and so we must wait for the games.

The Xbox Series X is more technically capable, this isn't even up for debate.

Probability is fundamental to businesses where multiple paths are viable.

It really isn't as simple as that. I don't think we'll have a definitive answer till we see third party games. 



Cerebralbore101 on 20 March 2020

@trunkswd I bet a grand. Shouldn't I get two grand in winnings? I only got $1500. Yeah, they're basically Shrute bucks, but still....



Around the Network
curl-6 on 20 March 2020

Another power war this reminds me of; PS2 vs Xbox/Gamecube.

Despite the latter two being more capable overall, (though to be fair to it, PS2 still produced some impressive looking games in its own right) folks argued for years that it's Emotion Engine was some superpowered secret sauce that could overcome the superior tech of its rivals.

Last edited by curl-6 - on 20 March 2020

curl-6 on 20 March 2020
trunkswd said:
curl-6 said:

Another power war this reminds me of; PS2 vs Xbox/Gamecube.

Despite the latter two being more capable overall, (though to be fair to it, PS2 still producing some impressive looking games in its own right) defenders argued for years that it's Emotion Engine was some superpowered secret sauce that could overcome the superior tech of its rivals.

Don't forget the Sega Genesis / Mega Drive and its "blast processing". If I recall correctly the Genesis / Mega Drive had a better CPU than the SNES, but the SNES was more powerful in every other way. 

Xbox and GameCube were a fair amount more powerful than the PS2. I remember Sony saying the Emotion Engine would give the console Shrek like graphics. 

I mentioned SNES vs Megadrive in an earlier post, and yeah, that was a case where SNES had basically every advantage except CPU speed, so the Sega crowd latched onto the one thing Megadrive did better.

I believe it was Toy Story that Sony bragged about matching on the PS2, but yeah, once again, just marketing BS, like their claims that the Cell was a supercomputer chip that would deliver graphics on par with those infamous fake Killzone 2 and Motorstorm trailers.



curl-6 on 20 March 2020
trunkswd said:
curl-6 said:

I mentioned SNES vs Megadrive in an earlier post, and yeah, that was a case where SNES had basically every advantage except CPU speed, so the Sega crowd latched onto the one thing Megadrive did better.

I believe it was Toy Story that Sony bragged about matching on the PS2, but yeah, once again, just marketing BS, like their claims that the Cell was a supercomputer chip that would deliver graphics on par with those infamous fake Killzone 2 and Motorstorm trailers.

As a 5 year old I was hooked on blast processing and SEGA does what Nintendon't. Looking back it was really stupid, but effective for a kid. I still love 2D Sonic games to this day. Sonic Mania blew me away after waiting 15 years for a new good 2D Sonic. I'm playing Super Mario World for the very first time now thanks to my Switch. 

Yeah childish as they were and are, I have to admit there was fun to be had in the ol' spec wars. I spent more than a little of my late teens and early twenties arguing against those claiming Wii wasn't more capable than 6th gen systems... and then Wii U vs PS3/360. XD



curl-6 on 20 March 2020
trunkswd said:
curl-6 said:

Yeah childish as they were and are, I have to admit there was fun to be had in the ol' spec wars. I spent more than a little of my late teens and early twenties arguing against those claiming Wii wasn't more capable than 6th gen systems... and then Wii U vs PS3/360. XD

Powerwise, starting with the Wii, Nintendo has been a generation behind Microsoft and Sony. But power isn't everything. Look at the Switch. Having a hybrid console was a smart move. 

This is a whole 'nother kettle of fish that's a bit off topic, but I wouldn't call the Switch a full generation behind PS4/Xbone, as it outperfoms last gen by quite a bit and its actually more modern hardware than PS4/Xbone. Probably a conversation for another thread though haha.



DonFerrari on 20 March 2020
curl-6 said:
trunkswd said:

Powerwise, starting with the Wii, Nintendo has been a generation behind Microsoft and Sony. But power isn't everything. Look at the Switch. Having a hybrid console was a smart move. 

This is a whole 'nother kettle of fish that's a bit off topic, but I wouldn't call the Switch a full generation behind PS4/Xbone, as it outperfoms last gen by quite a bit and its actually more modern hardware than PS4/Xbone. Probably a conversation for another thread though haha.

Switch isn't a gen behind (it is quite weaker but that is a different thing), but people calling it 9th gen are even more wrong. Also I don't remember features or capabilities (besides portability) on Switch that can't be one on the PS4 and X1.



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."