I'm not saying that when DF goes to compare third party games against both, that the analysis and results will be identical. There will be differences when you get more technical about it, but to the common console gamer, those differences are likely to minor enough for the first while that it won't make a difference to them. What will matter much more than that is the price of each console and it's software line up. Results will weigh more heavily for the hardcore spec heads though.

Don't forget that these 10-18% difference in res is the internal part (renderer) because whatever under 4k will be upscalled to it be it by the console (like Pro,X1S and Scorpio had an upscaller) or the TV. So that will be even harder to notice the difference.

Will the ssd advantage be offset by the memory speed advantage of the series x? Will be interesting to see how kraken compression compares to the one on x.

https://youtu.be/HbhU1uvEYcg

In this breakdown apparently the velocity architecture handily beats out the kraken. And the ssd will mostly be leveraged on 1st party exclusives, because other consoles and low end PCs must be taken into account.   

Ah but people like us on gaming sites aren’t common gamers. Even if differences are near imperceptible to the human eye, if DF says there is a difference all fan groups will use that to adjust their narrative. 

But ya, I can’t wait to see the final price of each console, that certainly does matter more. 

I think a lot of people underestimate the power factor of a console. Power doesn't technically make a console the best selling in its generation however its a huge boost to the marketing, which has a huge potential to boost sales if done right. Lets not forget that the common gamer also plays 3rd party games. The PS4 outsold the XB1 based on its price and power difference at launch. So having the power does help leverage some customers just in itself. You have enthusiasts, hardcores, and even those that just want to have the best console experience for a game like COD or GTA etc. 

Also what makes up a Software line up is the 3rd party games. Of course throw in 1st party exclusives however with the way next gen is going, all consoles are going to have there exclusives that the other console brand wont have. This is where power and price can also be a edge factor in a sale. Why game in 900p when you can play the game in 1080p for the same price. I believe that's why both Sony and MS are playing the waiting game on price. Whoever has both the price and power advantage will dominate launch. However its hard to see 1 brand having both advantages this time around.

So let's call the velocity architecture secret sauce for SSD on XSX?

No. This is the kinda misinformation that people are pushing.

Velocity architecture and Kraken are not the same things. PS5 will use Kraken for all its compression natively. MS would've both BCpack for textures and whatever else it's using for everything else. BCpack is the only thing there that beats Krakenbut specifically when it comes to texture compression. 

However, this doesn't matter, and its thanks to this that the XSX can have a theoretical throughput o up to 4.8GB/s equivalent of bandwidth through its RAW 2.4GB/s SSD line to the APU. It doesn't matter because thePS5 has a RAW 5.5GB/s line to the APU, and with compression, it can be moving the equivalent of 9GB/s worth of data through that line. 

And this is only considering SSD throughput and compression. There is a lot of things sony built into their APU that accelerates the entre processor getting data through these pipes that isn't in the XSX. 

Neither would impact the other in that sense. Firstly, the SSD doesn't affect memory bandwidth, it just ties to memory utilization and elective availability. In both those areas, the PS5 would be better than the XSX.

The XSX memory advantage isn't what I would call an advantage, but rather what I would refer to as necessary. It does have 18% more GPU compute after all. It would need more memory bandwidth to feed all the extra compute units with work and assets. Also, there is a major issue with the RAM in XSX that isn't being discussed by MS (obviously). That issue means that you aren't going to be getting that 560GB/s bandwidth as advertised. But what you do end up getting though is still going to be at least 50GB/s more than what you would have on the PS5.

But that's another story.

The XSX is the superior hardware though, it doesn’t need secret sauce. But if you want to call it that, fine, but at least wait until/if it reaches anything near eSRAM/SSD levels of saucy.

Power is all well and good but is nothing compared to prie.

If MS is coming in at $499, they better hope and pray sony is also coming in at the same price. A $399 P5 vs a $499 XSX would be very bd forMS. At that point, you would see how hard it is to show an 18% power advantage and equate that to a $100 more expensive console.

And again...this is not a 1080p vs 900p (40% difference) or a 4K vs 1440p (100%+ difference) type argument. This is a 4K vs 2052p (18% difference) to a 4K vs  1900p ( 24% difference) type thing. We are talking about a rez floor and ceiling that would be impossible to tell apart by over 90% of the gaming audience.

You are putting too much stock into resolutions and their significance. How much good did the XB1X do for MS with all its power over the PS4?