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

Forums - Gaming - PS5 vs XSeX: Understanding the Gap

starcraft on 24 March 2020
Intrinsic said:
starcraft said:

Perhaps you've quite a liberal interpretation of the words 'nowhere close'.

There is a gap of 20% at peak performance. We know from Sony peak performance is theoretical, because the CPU or GPU will be throttled. What they have not told us (somewhat concerning, given they had a whole hour conference), is their minimum performance. I.e. What is the minimum simultaneous performance of the CPU and GPU the PS5 can sustain. 

In terms of the components for which we have the most evidence, the minimum gap is 20%. The maximum gap is unknown, until Sony tells us or a tech company gets a hold of the final product and tells us for them.

Again, until we see games, all we know is that the Xbox is more capable, and that this capability gap may well be moderate, or could be more significant.

Edit: Obviously not going to engage with your PS4P Vs XOX argument given you deliberately left off the fact they each have near identical CPU bottlenecks - that way be dragons.

Please I hope you aren't like Zero...

Where are you getting 20% minimum gap from?

And I am beginning to think some people here don't really get how the PS5 APU and constant power&variable frequency thing works.

I would have tried to explain it...but some posters here are out for blood. 

I'll say this though, I have never said there isn't a gap. I am just saying that the gap is nowhere near as significant as some people seem to think. You don't have to take my word fr it. In time gues we would see. I even went onto explain how that gap would present itself in games...

I don't know what 'like zero' means sorry.

Saying the gap is nowhere near as significant as some people seem to think is a truism, same as saying the gap is much more significant than some people think.

As I said, the games will come and the framerates, resolutions and graphical outputs will tell the tale. Until then, all we have is a significant on paper spec gap, and a bunch of hot air.

The 20% is a guess. Like anything others have posted in here. You could say the minimum gap is anywhere from 15-30% (depending on whether you want to emphasise the CPU,, GPU or take an analysis like Notebookcheck's). Again, Sony have not confirmed the thermal limits of the console. We don't know if running the CPU at 3.5 requires running the GPU at 2.5 or vica versa. Hopefully we'll know well before launch for early adopters sake.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Around the Network
Intrinsic on 24 March 2020
zero129 said:

Here is another post from another dev Remedy explaining how the PS5 SSD might not be as fast at loading as some people think.
"PS5 SSD May Not Necessarily Translate into Much Quicker Loading Times, Says Remedy Technical Director"

"If games would stay the same in terms of scope and visual quality it’d make loading times be almost unnoticeable and restarting a level could be almost instant [in PS5 games].

However, since more data can be now used there can also be cases where production
might be cheaper and faster when not optimising content, which will lead into having to load much more data, leading back into a situation where you have about the same loading times as today."

"It is almost the same as with CPU and GPU enhancements. You could do things faster or you could add more content and run things the same 30fps as before; often times it is the latter."

"We game developers can make 60fps games even on PlayStation 1! It’s always about
compromise: are you focussing on visuals, physics, AI, and such things or purely framerate? The new PS5 hardware will be powerful, yes, but also expectations are that graphics will be even more detailed, more destruction, etc and it’s always a compromise as to where we focus."

In one of my posts,I literally said that if we were talking about consoles with 24GB of RAM and 250GB+ games, then yes, the PS5sSSD would wipe the floor with the SSD the XSX has because with that amount of data the edge the PS5 SSD has would be more apparent. But went onto say that we are talking about 13.5GB of RAM consoles, and a streamheap of around 6-8GB max. With data sets that small, the PS5 SSD isn't going to do wonders. 

I said something to that effect in this very same thread. 

Oh... and you are twisting the words of the developer. Nowhere did he say the PS5 SSD may not be as fast as some think. But here is the real kicker though...whatever the PS5 SSD is or isn't...its still twice s fast as what's in the XSX. Whatever the XSX can do with streaming data into RAM, the PS5 can do it twice as fast. And lets to forget, they both have the same amount of RAM. This is as indisputable a fact as the XSX having 17% more compute and 20% more memory bandwidth (and even the relevance of that last part is debatable).

But damn.. what he said and your interpretation of it are two totally different things.



starcraft on 24 March 2020
Pemalite said:
starcraft said:

Perhaps you've quite a liberal interpretation of the words 'nowhere close'.

There is a gap of 20% at peak performance. We know from Sony peak performance is theoretical, because the CPU or GPU will be throttled. What they have not told us (somewhat concerning, given they had a whole hour conference), is their minimum performance. I.e. What is the minimum simultaneous performance of the CPU and GPU the PS5 can sustain. 

In terms of the components for which we have the most evidence, the minimum gap is 20%. The maximum gap is unknown, until Sony tells us or a tech company gets a hold of the final product and tells us for them.

Again, until we see games, all we know is that the Xbox is more capable, and that this capability gap may well be moderate, or could be more significant.

Edit: Obviously not going to engage with your PS4P Vs XOX argument given you deliberately left off the fact they each have near identical CPU bottlenecks - that way be dragons.

The Xbox One X's CPU bottleneck is not the same as the Playstation 4 Pro's.

Not only does it have a 170Mhz (7.9%) advantage, but the Xbox One X had a significant amount of engineering to offload CPU tasks onto the Xbox One X Command Processor, things like draw calls which eats a ton of CPU time for example... Plus other minor improvements like the page descriptor cache.

Poor wording on my part - I meant that the CPU remained the bottleneck for both consoles.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Intrinsic on 24 March 2020
Pemalite said:

The Xbox One X's CPU bottleneck is not the same as the Playstation 4 Pro's.

Not only does it have a 170Mhz (7.9%) advantage, but the Xbox One X had a significant amount of engineering to offload CPU tasks onto the Xbox One X Command Processor, things like draw calls which eats a ton of CPU time for example... Plus other minor improvements like the page descriptor cache.

Intrinsic said:


  2. Jesus... twisting words much? Yes. I said it would actually be harder for the XSX to hit its clocks. I was speaking design-wise. Its generally harder to get bigger chips (XSX) than it is to get smaller chips (PS5) to hit their clocks. And YES, its easier saturating the CUs of a smaller chip than it is o a larger chip with more CUs. these are all known facts. And I ai al that in a replay to someone. 

Depends on the efficiency curve. 1980Mhz is the top-end that RDNA 1.0 can achieve without much drama. RDNA 2.0 likely features additional improvements to push up clockrates.

True, like have heard rumors the XSX is pulling only like 250W or less. That's crazy. It definitely has to do with gains from RDNA2. It would be super impressive if AMD pulled that off just based n architecture improvements as opposed to it being on 7nm+/EUV

And thanks for pointing out the CPU in the 1X thing. It gets really hard explaining things when people seem to wanna just go on the offensive for no apparent  reason. 



Intrinsic on 24 March 2020
starcraft said:
Intrinsic said:

Please I hope you aren't like Zero...

Where are you getting 20% minimum gap from?

And I am beginning to think some people here don't really get how the PS5 APU and constant power&variable frequency thing works.

I would have tried to explain it...but some posters here are out for blood. 

I'll say this though, I have never said there isn't a gap. I am just saying that the gap is nowhere near as significant as some people seem to think. You don't have to take my word fr it. In time gues we would see. I even went onto explain how that gap would present itself in games...

I don't know what 'like zero' means sorry.

Saying the gap is nowhere near as significant as some people seem to think is a truism, same as saying the gap is much more significant than some people think.

As I said, the games will come and the framerates, resolutions and graphical outputs will tell the tale. Until then, all we have is a significant on paper spec gap, and a bunch of hot air.

The 20% is a guess. Like anything others have posted in here. You could say the minimum gap is anywhere from 15-30% (depending on whether you want to emphasise the CPU,, GPU or take an analysis like Notebookcheck's). Again, Sony have not confirmed the thermal limits of the console. We don't know if running the CPU at 3.5 requires running the GPU at 2.5 or vica versa. Hopefully we'll know well before launch for early adopters sake.

He seems to have it in his head that I am trying to slant/downplay the XSX... I am not, and have only talked to the strengths of all the consoles. Funny enough, I have even pointed out what I think is the biggest issue with the PS5 and haven't even said anything bad about the XSX. Even the one area that the PS5 has the XSX beat,I described as both something that would make much f a difference. Because while the PS5s SSD is fast? So is the XSX SSD.

Well...call me crazy, but I don't think the real-world difference would exceed 17%. Unless we want to go the sony is lying route and thePS5 would never hit its peak clock even though Cerny says it would run at these peaks most of the time.

And how I arrived at 17%, which mind you I think is generous, is by looking at the PS4/Xb1 and the PS4pro/XB1X. The hardware differences in these consoles were significant. SIGNIFICANT. And their performance difference pretty much ended up being about resolution and in the XB1X case (some cases)better/higher texture quality which should b expected being that it had more RAM.

In all those cases, the difference in compute was a near-identical match to the difference in resolution. And this has been the case for the past 7 years. You ca also look at GPUs from Nvidia in the 20xx series GPUs with a TF difference of 9 vs 11TF. The performance gap between them is also about proportional to their TF percentage difference.

Now looking at these coming consoles, there is not a single thing that has as much of a gap as any of the individual components from the current-gen vs their counterparts much less the combination of gaps these current-gen machines have. And some of these "advantages" or"gaps" are even understandable and necessary. Like if you have a 10TF console and a 12TF console. Then that 12TF console better has more memory bandwidth than the 10TF console. It needs more bandwidth.

But hey.. I could be wrong. This s just my opinion.



Around the Network
starcraft on 24 March 2020
Intrinsic said:
starcraft said:

I don't know what 'like zero' means sorry.

Saying the gap is nowhere near as significant as some people seem to think is a truism, same as saying the gap is much more significant than some people think.

As I said, the games will come and the framerates, resolutions and graphical outputs will tell the tale. Until then, all we have is a significant on paper spec gap, and a bunch of hot air.

The 20% is a guess. Like anything others have posted in here. You could say the minimum gap is anywhere from 15-30% (depending on whether you want to emphasise the CPU,, GPU or take an analysis like Notebookcheck's). Again, Sony have not confirmed the thermal limits of the console. We don't know if running the CPU at 3.5 requires running the GPU at 2.5 or vica versa. Hopefully we'll know well before launch for early adopters sake.

He seems to have it in his head that I am trying to slant/downplay the XSX... I am not, and have only talked to the strengths of all the consoles. Funny enough, I have even pointed out what I think is the biggest issue with the PS5 and haven't even said anything bad about the XSX. Even the one area that the PS5 has the XSX beat,I described as both something that would make much f a difference. Because while the PS5s SSD is fast? So is the XSX SSD.

Well...call me crazy, but I don't think the real-world difference would exceed 17%. Unless we want to go the sony is lying route and thePS5 would never hit its peak clock even though Cerny says it would run at these peaks most of the time.

And how I arrived at 17%, which mind you I think is generous, is by looking at the PS4/Xb1 and the PS4pro/XB1X. The hardware differences in these consoles were significant. SIGNIFICANT. And their performance difference pretty much ended up being about resolution and in the XB1X case (some cases)better/higher texture quality which should b expected being that it had more RAM.

In all those cases, the difference in compute was a near-identical match to the difference in resolution. And this has been the case for the past 7 years. You ca also look at GPUs from Nvidia in the 20xx series GPUs with a TF difference of 9 vs 11TF. The performance gap between them is also about proportional to their TF percentage difference.

Now looking at these coming consoles, there is not a single thing that has as much of a gap as any of the individual components from the current-gen vs their counterparts much less the combination of gaps these current-gen machines have. And some of these "advantages" or"gaps" are even understandable and necessary. Like if you have a 10TF console and a 12TF console. Then that 12TF console better has more memory bandwidth than the 10TF console. It needs more bandwidth.

But hey.. I could be wrong. This s just my opinion.

I don't know you, and will take what you say about your motivations at face value

I guess we will just have to wait and see. There is a lot of commentary suggesting both outcomes - and by definition its from people who haven't seen well optimised games running on both systems.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

drkohler on 24 March 2020
zero129 said:

Here is post from another dev Remedy explaining how the PS5 SSD might not be as fast at loading as some people think.
...

Sigh. (This will at least temporarily avoid your posting crap links). Take a pen and write this down at least 1000 times on every wall in your flat:

It is NOT about load times. It is about seamlessly streaming assets without the cpu taking any part of it.

Do you really think Cerny designed the entire chain of hardware (worth several Zen2 cores) just to load a game half a second faster than the competition (of which he had no knowledge at all when he figured out the hardware)?



Intrinsic on 24 March 2020
zero129 said:

it would wipe the floor?.

Also look again where am i twisting the words of the developer?. I never twisted your words before only posted what you said and now your trying to say im twisting the words of the developer.

Judging from your other replys to me (What i never bothered to reply to as like i said you where trying to say i was twisting your words) you seem to have a horse in this race and are taking offense where like i said before the is none.

When you make a thread like this expect people to call you out on what you say and have different opinions then yours.

Have all the opinions you want. that's not my problem. Don't question my character or my motives though. That's taking it somewhere else.

And yes. The PS5 SSD would wipe the floor with the XSX SSD If we were talking about the console that had upwards of 24GB/32GB of RAM. That would mean like 28GB of data feeds to be sent. PS5 would do that in about 6 seconds, XSX would do that in about 12 seconds. That's a lot more obvious than what it is with them feeding 13.5GB of RAM.

You know what though...lets just agree to disagree.



sales2099 on 24 March 2020
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.

No no it’s cool. I enjoy all these new threads popping up :)



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

sales2099 on 24 March 2020
drkohler said:
zero129 said:

Here is post from another dev Remedy explaining how the PS5 SSD might not be as fast at loading as some people think.
...

Sigh. (This will at least temporarily avoid your posting crap links). Take a pen and write this down at least 1000 times on every wall in your flat:

It is NOT about load times. It is about seamlessly streaming assets without the cpu taking any part of it.

Do you really think Cerny designed the entire chain of hardware (worth several Zen2 cores) just to load a game half a second faster than the competition (of which he had no knowledge at all when he figured out the hardware)?

My guess is that he is doing the best with the budget and target price point Sony gave him. The console is faster but the graphics and processing ceiling is still below Series X, which has always been the measure of superior specs gen after gen. 

It’s in Cernys interest, as well as your own, to talk up the one aspect the console has over the competition. 

The only question is how much this will show in the multiplats. I’m sure exclusives for each side will leverage the consoles capabilities. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.