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

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

.....or not



Around the Network

All these threads are just brining more attention to it. I can't recall one Xbox fan made thread really talking up the power discrepancy. We talk about it in the empire thread and what have you though.

I mean it's nice to have the more powerful console but guys... We don't really care that much. Just wait for the games, for the love of god.



Evilms said:

As far as I know Bolo Yeung was champion in South Korea as body builder. So masters of different fields =p



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."

Intrinsic said:
SvennoJ said:

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.

The SSD is so fast that I don't think there would be major issues having OS or browser or any other aplication using majority of the RAM while in screen and then SSD fastly feeding RAM when you change to another app or back to game.

And 790Gb of usable space on the SSD is almost as much as a 1Tb drive would neet you on PS4.

Also important to notice that several games you would need as much free space as the game uses full just for update since it had to duplicate what is installed to apply the patch.



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."

ironmanDX said:
All these threads are just brining more attention to it. I can't recall one Xbox fan made thread really talking up the power discrepancy. We talk about it in the empire thread and what have you though.

I mean it's nice to have the more powerful console but guys... We don't really care that much. Just wait for the games, for the love of god.

The you have a bad memory, because between reveal and release of X1 there were plenty of threads about secret sauce, directX, Cloud, eDram, and people reposting some shody websites as evidence.

We also had Major Nelson or Don Mattrick saying on official page of MS that there was no way they would allow their console to be 30% weaker than Playstation and people used that as evidence for secret sauce.



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."

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
ironmanDX said:
All these threads are just brining more attention to it. I can't recall one Xbox fan made thread really talking up the power discrepancy. We talk about it in the empire thread and what have you though.

I mean it's nice to have the more powerful console but guys... We don't really care that much. Just wait for the games, for the love of god.

The you have a bad memory, because between reveal and release of X1 there were plenty of threads about secret sauce, directX, Cloud, eDram, and people reposting some shody websites as evidence.

We also had Major Nelson or Don Mattrick saying on official page of MS that there was no way they would allow their console to be 30% weaker than Playstation and people used that as evidence for secret sauce.

I'm talking about the XSX and PS5.

Not really looking for... "But you guys did it first" type of responses.

I could also retort with talk about The cell but that was so many years ago are most of the users even likely to be the same? Probably not.



ironmanDX said:
DonFerrari said:

The you have a bad memory, because between reveal and release of X1 there were plenty of threads about secret sauce, directX, Cloud, eDram, and people reposting some shody websites as evidence.

We also had Major Nelson or Don Mattrick saying on official page of MS that there was no way they would allow their console to be 30% weaker than Playstation and people used that as evidence for secret sauce.

I'm talking about the XSX and PS5.

Not really looking for... "But you guys did it first" type of responses.

I could also retort with talk about The cell but that was so many years ago are most of the users even likely to be the same? Probably not.

Sorry, I thought you were saying that back when Xbox was the one with less power the Xbox users didn't made a lot of threads defending it.

If we are talking about PS5, yes I have only seem Sony fans making ones to defend or diminish the difference but not a single one attacking PS5 (at least in VGC). Also several of the Xbox fans commenting are just saying the very obvious that Xbox is more powerful but PS5 is strong enough to show a good performance.



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."

ironmanDX said:
DonFerrari said:

The you have a bad memory, because between reveal and release of X1 there were plenty of threads about secret sauce, directX, Cloud, eDram, and people reposting some shody websites as evidence.

We also had Major Nelson or Don Mattrick saying on official page of MS that there was no way they would allow their console to be 30% weaker than Playstation and people used that as evidence for secret sauce.

I'm talking about the XSX and PS5.

Not really looking for... "But you guys did it first" type of responses.

I could also retort with talk about The cell but that was so many years ago are most of the users even likely to be the same? Probably not.

Unfortunately that's the problem with today. Too many people hold things in the past. There are still a select few who say MS don't give creative freedom in making games because they did it in the 360 era.. even though iv linked articles of MS actually stating they are giving creative freedom to all there new studios etc.

Its a tug of war contest between who did it first, instead of who's doing it right now. Much the same with Cross Play when MS announced Cross Play between all systems and Sony refused to be part of it, the same argument raised "But 360 didn't do it, when PS3 was doing it"...

We can date back to PS2's emotion engine before the Cell, Sony claimed Power almost every generation either though it was completely mauled by the Gamecube and OG Xbox when it came to power. Every company tries to push the envelope to make their consoles sound more attractive, because Power is attractive and Power does sell consoles if the games are their as well.



I have a question for you techy lot. Does audio processing take up a lot of RAM since the ps5 has its own processor for this?

Secondly, Cerny made a point where the audio processor can also be utilised for other processing needs if need be to offset workload. Do we know any tech details for the audio processor?



Intrinsic said:
SvennoJ said:

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.

Current gen you have to free up space yourself for patches. Luckily the OS doesn't reserve 105 GB in case GT Sport needs an update (but it's a pain when there is one). Smarter patching would be greatly appreciated. It's weird, Sony has got the start playing while installing from disc thing down, but patching is an archaic mess.

Another thing that baffles me is that sometimes games won't start anymore when I have too many video clips saved. I usually save all my race footage to disk in case something happened during one of them and at some point GT Sport won't start anymore (free up memory message) even though I still have 100GB available. Maybe some file system limit for the gallery.

The OS does reserve space for instant recording for up to an hour, that's going to be a chunk in 4K60! Yet trimming videos and putting clips together will be so much faster :)

Anyway, faster booting, faster loading, faster saving, that's all the quality of life improvements I want. Both should provide that in spades. Please keep the non skipable splash and startup screens to minimum next gen!