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

CrazyGPU said:

If you have the same architecture, more memory bandwith to feed the shader cores

What makes you think that feeding the shader cores requires "more memory bandwidth"?

You are of course aware that "feed the shader cores" is much faster on the PS5 than on the XSX?  For the simple reason that the gpu runs faster, and there are fewer cores to feed.



Around the Network
CrazyGPU said:
Evilms said:

The numbers don't lie

so , what you are saying is like this. 

Formula 1 car: number of doors = 0. 

Toyota corolla: number of doors = 4.

trunk capacity F1 = 0.

Trunk capacity Corolla = 470 l.

speed F1 = 340 km/h.

speed Corolla = 200 km/h.

Conclusion Corolla wins 2 to 1. Is the fastest car!.

wrong. 

The XBOX has more bandwith and more teraflops with the same AMD architecture. Game over. Yes , there are situations that can benefit the PS5, but overall, the XBOX will be faster. 

Brilliant way of breaking down how irrelevant the graph is. Don’t forget that some of those bars are also varying in power, so a bar that looks like an advantage for PS5 can easily be a disadvantage depending on the game. So in your analogy, the Corolla could have four doors, or it could have two. It could have 470 in trunk capacity, or it could have 300. 



drkohler said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

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.

Lol. I could do that with my AppleII in the late seventies. It's called loading a savegame. Not exactly breathtaking technology.

Cool you can boot up a console load a game get to the main menu and then go to your save file and load a game. Or you can just select the game you want and it instantly puts you right back to where you were hours or days or weeks ago, no loading or waiting required. 

Also I’m aware it’s not new tech, but it certainly is for consoles, especially multiple game states suspended. Hope that helps.



CrazyGPU said:
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).

Yes, I had a similar problem with that graph, some things there are more important than others and the graph doesn't weigh the importance of the different things it's touching on.

With the blurry image thing... yes, that goes without saying. The PS5 will on average run at lower rez than the XSX with all else being equal, or more specifically if both consoles are locking framerates. But why this is not important is because of what resolutions we are talking about to begin with. While 2052p is a 16% lower resolution than 2160p, that's not the kinda difference that's perceptible unless you pause the image and zoom in by like 300% or something and even then it may be still hard to see. But yes, its a difference.

Oh.. and with regards to their rated clocks? They will hit those clocks whenever they are needed to hit them. Especially the PS5. It may seem hard to believe, but its actually easier for thePS5 to hit its 2.2Ghz clock than it would be for the XSX to ht its 1.8Ghz clock. Long story...

drkohler said:
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.

Technically... nothing is ever maxing out their CPU/GPU "at all times". They just don't need to cause games aren't designed that way. To be clear, I am talking about these things ever hitting their max clocks. Whenever the software calls for it either the PS5/XSX would be able to hit those max clocks.

Now hitting max load is a completely different mater. Which is what I believe you ar talking about. Yes, its harder keeping more CUs busy and running efficiently and that is a benefit of the choice sony made with their CU count.

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.

Current gen, suspend and resume dies when you kill the console. Next-gen that shouldn't be a problem cause that suspended states just copying the active heap of the game code from RAM to the SSD. Its probably even going to be less than 6GB of data. So as long as that data is on the SSD, then suspend and resume would be persistent through total system shut downs.

I know people are all excited about this thing, ut in truth this is just the natural by-product of having an SSD as fast as these SSDs are. Its not some next-level software wizardry or anything and the PS5 wouldn't just be able to do it but b able to do it faster. Just by having a faster SSD in there.

vivster said:
Imagine being the most powerful console ever and having to scale resolution below 4k.

You know the real kicker? ven if these consoles were 20TF machines... devs would still make games that would have hem have to scale rez.

But don't get me started though... less I start talking about PC hardware that you can build in 2020 for $500 that would be able to perform as well as these consoles But please, lets not go there. 

Evilms said:

The numbers don't lie

Where are they getting the PS5 TDP from?



sales2099 said:
Nate4Drake said:
I prefer Playstation exclusives, and games are what really matter, but honestly? MS has the best hardware, and more brutal power. I don't think the difference is huge, probably roughly 20%, half of the difference between PS4 and base XOne. I will buy both on Day one, so all the exclusive games in my hands :D and probably most of multiplatform games on XSX.

And that’s the point. 3rd party multiplat game sales dwarf exclusive sales. That’s where the money is and if MS can convince people who buy both to pick Xbox for the big multiplats then I say that’s a win in itself 

Yep, I'm confident MS will do a lot better next gen, and this is very good as more competition is a great incentive for the other companies to do better.

 Now I'm just wondering which will be the price for XSX and PS5. MS put more money in the brutal power and their optimizations and velocity architecture, Sony in the very custom SSD and all the system customization and architecture and cooling system. Which Console cost more to produce ? At this point I have no idea, maybe the ones here with better hardware understanding could do a better guess.

  As you said, the biggest selling numbers are made by the best and most popular 3rd party games, which will most probably look and/or perform better on XSX, and this is already a very good point for MS.  Next Gen will be more interesting I believe :)



”Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.”

Harriet Tubman.

Around the Network

Sony needs to do something about their memory bandwidth though. Thats the one area I see there being an issue for them down the road.

The PS5 has only 448GB/s of bandwidth shared between the CPU and GPU. 2ch DDR4 in PCs peak at around 50GB/s and 4ch peaks at around 60GB/s. So even if we say the PS5 is using 48GB/s exclusively for CPU related bandwidth and running the OS in the background, that's leaving only 400GB/s of bandwidth for the GPU. I just don't think that's enough.Especially considering that the XSX has 560GB/s of bandwidth exclusively for its GPU.

I believe its a money thing, cause from previous leaks its clear sony had tested their chip using faster RAM. So t just have been that the gains they would have got for their system going from14gbs chips to 16Gbs chips which would've landed them at 512GB/s of bandwidth probably wasn't worth the cost and going with 18Gbs chips which would have landed them at around 576Gb/s would have just been too costly.



I'm just here because of Xbox Sex.





Intrinsic said:

Current gen, suspend and resume dies when you kill the console. Next-gen that shouldn't be a problem cause that suspended states just copying the active heap of the game code from RAM to the SSD. Its probably even going to be less than 6GB of data. So as long as that data is on the SSD, then suspend and resume would be persistent through total system shut downs.

I know people are all excited about this thing, ut in truth this is just the natural by-product of having an SSD as fast as these SSDs are. Its not some next-level software wizardry or anything and the PS5 wouldn't just be able to do it but b able to do it faster. Just by having a faster SSD in there.

Makes sense, and makes me less excited for the 'feature' as the OS will likely reserve space on the SSD for suspend/resume for multiple games. I guess it will be configurable and booting up a game and pressing continue won't last much longer anyway from SSD.

I do wonder if we can have a browser on PS5 that doesn't run out of memory all the time :)



SvennoJ said:
Intrinsic said:

Current gen, suspend and resume dies when you kill the console. Next-gen that shouldn't be a problem cause that suspended states just copying the active heap of the game code from RAM to the SSD. Its probably even going to be less than 6GB of data. So as long as that data is on the SSD, then suspend and resume would be persistent through total system shut downs.

I know people are all excited about this thing, ut in truth this is just the natural by-product of having an SSD as fast as these SSDs are. Its not some next-level software wizardry or anything and the PS5 wouldn't just be able to do it but b able to do it faster. Just by having a faster SSD in there.

Makes sense, and makes me less excited for the 'feature' as the OS will likely reserve space on the SSD for suspend/resume for multiple games. I guess it will be configurable and booting up a game and pressing continue won't last much longer anyway from SSD.

I do wonder if we can have a browser on PS5 that doesn't run out of memory all the time :)

Yup... but the good news is that the OS would be serving far less space in the SSD than they currently do in current-gen consoles. The reason being that current-gen consoles have to have a certain amount of space to "copy" a game to during an install. Next gen console wouldn't need to do that anymore. So of say te 825GBn the PS5, 6-8GB would be reserved per game for instant resume, lets just call it 8GB and let's say sony supports the feature or 3 games. That's 24GB gone. Then OS catch would probably take up another 10GB depending on how snappy they want things to be.

So what would be left for us is around 780-790GB of usable space.

As for the browser...what sony's approach tells me is that they probably have a hard limit of less than 500MB for apps,that's the only reason I can see as to why even the PS4 runs into RAM issues when using the browser. Hopefully, that number goes up this time around cause now they could technically have an OS that is 1GB when in the background and is 8GB when upfront.