Forums - Gaming Discussion - PS5 vs XSeX: Understanding the Gap

Intrinsic said:
LudicrousSpeed said:
Barring shoddy optimization, XSX games should look better and run better. PS5 games should load a couple seconds faster. Not a large difference, though I want to see how devs use the variance in power on PS5. For all we know, the small difference on paper between 12 and 10.3 can become larger once PS5 is running demanding games or depending on how devs utilize the setup.

That’s why all along I have been more excited about QoL features and enhancements. The load times already will be great on both consoles. Quick resume on the XSX demo they showed is, for me, amazing. I cycle through six or seven games usually and some of them are online MP games so I doubt they’ll work flawlessly, but the SP games will be great to jump right back in.

Adding HDR to Xbone games that didn’t support it, free upgrades to XSX versions of Xbone games, enhanced BC for Xbone games, etc, those are the things that outside of power jumps, are most exciting imho. When the fuck is Sony going to showcase theirs

The looking better and running better is debatable. As far as running is concerned, I believe there will be no difference between the two. There isn't enough of a difference in GPU, CPU and RAM bandwidth between them to make for anything more than a 20% overall advantage or the XSX. It's not like the XSX will be able to have higher rez textures or more geometry or run any effect that the PS5 can't. 

That's why it comes down to resolution. And this is where the debatable comes in when talking about looking better. Looking better, in this case, wouldn't mean that you aren't looking at an identical game between both platforms. It would just mean that one runs at 2160p "more of the time" than the other. Both will hit that 2160p rez, but one could be running at it 100% of the time while the other runs at that rez for only 80% of the time and drops to like 2052p for 20% of the time.

And as I mentioned earlier the ceiling and floor are already very high. We aren't going to be saying ok this one is at 2160p while the other is at 1800p or even 1440p. When there are drops, we would be looking at drops to like 2052p. So yes, technically at that point the XSX still running at 2160p looks better, but not noticeably so.

Funny enough, where the PS5 does have an edge (those QoL) features you mention, are what would actually be more obvious (albeit not that important either). It would be like 1 second to go from the lobby into the game on PS5 vs 2/3secs on the XSX type stuff. Or 2 seconds to switch between games on the PS5 vs 5 seconds on the XSX.

On a side note, I am not buying a lot of the stuff MSis saying they are doing or adding to BC. Maybe my understanding of these things are limited, but you can't just add HDR to content that wasn't mastered in HDR. You can kind like change the luminosity levels of the overall damage (basically dialing contrast and brightness to 11), but unless they are going and tweaking the output file of every single game in their library, you can't just make something that wasn't mastered in HDR suddenly be HDR. You can't just give the render engine of every game an output pixel depth f 10bit from 8bit.

I`m curious and excited about what Xbox Series X will be able to do with the BC upgrading, including HDR (that is probably some very good algorithm to repack and do a good implementation of HDR, res, texture, fps, etc). It can be great.



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

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
LudicrousSpeed said:
Barring shoddy optimization, XSX games should look better and run better. PS5 games should load a couple seconds faster. Not a large difference, though I want to see how devs use the variance in power on PS5. For all we know, the small difference on paper between 12 and 10.3 can become larger once PS5 is running demanding games or depending on how devs utilize the setup.

That’s why all along I have been more excited about QoL features and enhancements. The load times already will be great on both consoles. Quick resume on the XSX demo they showed is, for me, amazing. I cycle through six or seven games usually and some of them are online MP games so I doubt they’ll work flawlessly, but the SP games will be great to jump right back in.

Adding HDR to Xbone games that didn’t support it, free upgrades to XSX versions of Xbone games, enhanced BC for Xbone games, etc, those are the things that outside of power jumps, are most exciting imho. When the fuck is Sony going to showcase theirs

The confusing aspect of the several games on quick resume is that with SSD taking 3-10 seconds to load then even without this feature the loading of several games would almost be the same wouldn`t it? It would be more of a question of saving game management.

But I really like the idea of the several games being able to resume at once.

Yh.. and technically there is a difference between loading into the main menu in 3-10 seconds and resuming from where you left off in 3-10 seconds.

And I believe game to resume in the current-gen was better or faster on the PS4 than it was in the XB1, so at least sony seems to have a handle on that issue. Unles somehow sony get and fucks something up I dn't see how they don't have a faster game resume feature than the XSX.



Bandorr said:
Mar1217 said:
Thanks, now I'll call it Xbox Sex for good

So we had the Xbox Sad. Nowt he Xbox Sex. So Microsoft just gave us Sad Sex.

Still better than no sex.



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

LudicrousSpeed said:
Intrinsic said:

The looking better and running better is debatable. As far as running is concerned, I believe there will be no difference between the two. There isn't enough of a difference in GPU, CPU and RAM bandwidth between them to make for anything more than a 20% overall advantage or the XSX. It's not like the XSX will be able to have higher rez textures or more geometry or run any effect that the PS5 can't. 

That's why it comes down to resolution. And this is where the debatable comes in when talking about looking better. Looking better, in this case, wouldn't mean that you aren't looking at an identical game between both platforms. It would just mean that one runs at 2160p "more of the time" than the other. Both will hit that 2160p rez, but one could be running at it 100% of the time while the other runs at that rez for only 80% of the time and drops to like 2052p for 20% of the time.

And as I mentioned earlier the ceiling and floor are already very high. We aren't going to be saying ok this one is at 2160p while the other is at 1800p or even 1440p. When there are drops, we would be looking at drops to like 2052p. So yes, technically at that point the XSX still running at 2160p looks better, but not noticeably so.

Funny enough, where the PS5 does have an edge (those QoL) features you mention, are what would actually be more obvious (albeit not that important either). It would be like 1 second to go from the lobby into the game on PS5 vs 2/3secs on the XSX type stuff. Or 2 seconds to switch between games on the PS5 vs 5 seconds on the XSX.

On a side note, I am not buying a lot of the stuff MSis saying they are doing or adding to BC. Maybe my understanding of these things are limited, but you can't just add HDR to content that wasn't mastered in HDR. You can kind like change the luminosity levels of the overall damage (basically dialing contrast and brightness to 11), but unless they are going and tweaking the output file of every single game in their library, you can't just make something that wasn't mastered in HDR suddenly be HDR. You can't just give the render engine of every game an output pixel depth f 10bit from 8bit.

The looking and running better is the only part of all of this that isn’t debatable. The XSX, even when the PS5 is maxed out in GPU and CPU, is more powerful. That’s ignoring the fact that the PS5 will see drops in power when the CPU or GPU is throttled. This is the area where there can be debate, and until we actually see games running and see how devs handle the variable power levels, all we know for sure is that the PS5 will drop from that max level.

I didn’t say there’d be a huge difference in graphics or how smoothly games run, I even said not a large difference. But the difference will still be there, because the XSX is more powerful, even when the PS5 is maxed out, which it won’t always be.

The QoL things I mentioned, it isn’t obvious PS5 will have them or do them better because Sony hasn’t shown anything. None of the stuff I touched on has been discussed by Sony. We don’t know how PS5 will enhance BC games or even what games will work with BC. We don’t know how Sony will handle remasters. We dont know how the resume functionality will work on PS5. Still waiting on Sony to give us info on these things.

I trust what MS says regarding BC enhancements. They haven’t failed us yet.

Sony said almost all 4000 titles should work and with the boost in performance (fps and res).



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

Intrinsic said:
DonFerrari said:

The confusing aspect of the several games on quick resume is that with SSD taking 3-10 seconds to load then even without this feature the loading of several games would almost be the same wouldn`t it? It would be more of a question of saving game management.

But I really like the idea of the several games being able to resume at once.

Yh.. and technically there is a difference between loading into the main menu in 3-10 seconds and resuming from where you left off in 3-10 seconds.

And I believe game to resume in the current-gen was better or faster on the PS4 than it was in the XB1, so at least sony seems to have a handle on that issue. Unles somehow sony get and fucks something up I dn't see how they don't have a faster game resume feature than the XSX.

Considering SSD speed and Sony promisses you would load the game in 2-3 seconds and then load the save and start playing in another 2-3 seconds. So yes under 10 seconds you could potentially return to the game.



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

Around the Network
Evilms said:

DELTA

XBO : 100% / PS4 : 129%

XSX : 100% / PS5 : 102%

Despite the fact that I like Playstation, what this graph show is biased in my opinion. Because it looks like every bar has the same importance. For me both of this consoles have the same CPU (3.5 or 3.6 is negligigible). Same amount of RAM, same architecture. So there are two important factors here that differ. One is the SSD. The PS5 SSD is faster. 9 GBps compressed. But that´s nothing compared to the 448 GBps speed of ram. So It will help to load stuff and to save some ram but I don´t think it will be a game changer. On the other side We have 12.15 XBOX teraflops of power vs 10.3 PS5 that in reality would be between 9.2 and 10.3, so let´s take an average of 9.7 like the Radeon 5700 XT. Also we have to feed those engines, XBOXs 560 GB/s of graphic data vs 448 on PS5. harder to code because the slow stuff would have to go on the 336 GB/s XBOX second bus. So we have 12.15 fixed vs let say 9.7. Arround 25% more shader core performance with better feeding 560/448 = also 25%. So I expect 25% more performance on XBOX series X. 

There are also the 1st post issue, where Intrinsic say that the difference will be what % of time the game will run at lower than native resolution. We all know that screens are made for a fixed resolution and when you are not using it, yo have a more blurred image. So , That means that if you block your fps to 60, yo will get a blurrier image on PS5 than on  XBOX for more time. Off course you can run games at 50 fps instead of 60 and go up in resolution. 

So, despite I would like the PS5 to be faster, its not and it won´t be. Maybe as it has a smaller soc, it would be cheaper.

Now, the other thing is that is not about hardware only. Multiplats will take little advantage of SSDs because they have to run on PC. Also they might concentrate on the lowest denominator, that would be the PS5. They might run better (more fps)  or with more graphical thingis on XBOX. But really, if what they have to show me is Minecraft ray tracing vs the last of us 2, I go for the later any day. 

The last thing I wanna say is that any hard core fan that has  an XBOX one X will have a little more than double what he has. from 6 TF to 12 ( and more because of the architecture changes).  Meanwhile the PS4 pro guys will go from 4,2 to 10 ( so they will see a bigger jump despite the XBOX will be faster).



LudicrousSpeed said:

The looking and running better is the only part of all of this that isn’t debatable. The XSX, even when the PS5 is maxed out in GPU and CPU, is more powerful.

What makes you so sure that the XSX is capable of maxing out the gpu all the time? AMD has a somewhat checkered history when it comes to keeping n cus busy all the time as n gets bigger and bigger. Those developers I know don't really have an all-grinning face when they encounter that problem. The more cus you have, the more difficult it gets to max out those cus.

Five to seven years ago, Sony engineers made a bet that the problem will persist within the next few years (so they went low but fast), while MS engineers made a bet that the problem will go away within the next few years (so they went wide and slower). Who is right we'll see or might not even see as there are always "tricks" to hide the problem. At this point in time, there is no way to foretell, despite your unwavering optimism.



Does this suspend/resume also work when always turning the console completely off. I don't like keeping it on since I tend to move it around often and consoles get very angry when you unplug them in standby mode :) I like the fast cold boot from ps4 but if it could be like the Switch, even better.



I expect those SSD x UI features to be largely identical between the two consoles. Speaking of which, has MS confirmed an equivalent to Sony's quick access into game modes? Or the ability to install/uninstall specific parts of a game?



SvennoJ said:
Does this suspend/resume also work when always turning the console completely off. I don't like keeping it on since I tend to move it around often and consoles get very angry when you unplug them in standby mode :) I like the fast cold boot from ps4 but if it could be like the Switch, even better.

On XSX it works even if you unplug it. There was talk from a guy who left his XSX unplugged for a couple weeks, booted it up and did an update, loaded a game and it went right to where he left off weeks prior. Amazing stuff, hopefully the PS5 matches it.