Here's where that guys statement about texture streaming falls apart for me. He claims that games struggle to utilize lots of shaders concurrently, but I'm not seeing any evidence of that when looking at PC benchmarks. XSX has 3328 enabled shader cores running at 1825 mhz. Compare that to Nvidia's Geforce 2080ti, which has a whopping 4352 shaders, more than 1000 more shaders than XSX has, running at 1350 mhz base clock, 1545 mhz boost clock. That comes out to 12.1 tflop for XSX and 11.75 tflop base/13.4 tflop boost for the Geforce 2080ti. Even though Geforce 2080ti has 1000 more shaders than XSX, games don't seem to have any trouble utilizing those shaders.

Here we have a benchmark showing that the 2080ti has a 11 fps improvement over the 2080 Super, which much like PS5, has less shaders running at a higher clock speed, 3072 shaders running at 1650 mhz base, 1815 mhz boost, which comes out to 10.1 tflop base/11.1 tflop boost. 

Here we have another benchmark for a different game, showing a 12 fps gap in minimum framrates between the 2080 Super and the 2080ti:

It seems to me that games don't seem to struggle with shader utilization like he claims, considering that 2080ti can make good use of 1000 more shaders than XSX has.

Here's where that guys statement about texture streaming falls apart for me. He claims that games struggle to utilize lots of shaders concurrently, but I'm not seeing any evidence of that when looking at PC benchmarks. XSX has 3328 enabled shader cores running at 1825 mhz. Compare that to Nvidia's Geforce 2080ti, which has a whopping 4352 shaders, more than 1000 more shaders than XSX has, running at 1350 mhz base clock, 1545 mhz boost clock. That comes out to 12.1 tflop for XSX and 11.75 tflop base/13.4 tflop boost for the Geforce 2080ti. Even though Geforce 2080ti has 1000 more shaders than XSX, games don't seem to have any trouble utilizing those shaders.

Here we have a benchmark showing that the 2080ti has a 11 fps improvement over the 2080 Super, which much like PS5, has less shaders running at a higher clock speed, 3072 shaders running at 1650 mhz base, 1815 mhz boost, which comes out to 10.1 tflop base/11.1 tflop boost. 

Here we have another benchmark for a different game, showing a 12 fps gap in minimum framrates between the 2080 Super and the 2080ti:

It seems to me that games don't seem to struggle with shader utilization like he claims, considering that 2080ti can make good use of 1000 more shaders than XSX has.

No doubt Xbox exclusive multiplayers are better than Playstation, and certainly Nintendo is better than both on this aspect, itself that doesn't tip the scale much because of the multiplats, but sure no need to damage control that.

To be fair, I also dont play any multiplayer. :p

The FPS gap is about a 16% performance difference on one of those 2 games, and about a 22% performance difference on the other game. That is pretty close to the 17% difference in tflops between 12.1 on XSX and 10.3 on PS5. So yeah, I would tend to agree that the gap will be similar in real world performance. Basically XSX should get a slightly higher resolution, or a graphical setting or 2 bumped up to a higher setting from the PC version. PS5 meanwhile should see faster initial loads and fast travel times on all games, and maybe a few other SSD improvements, like less noticeable LoD transitions. That is on multiplat games of course.

graphical setting are related to asset and texture, I am agree Xbox will have slightly better resolution or more stable frame rates. But with faster SSD and costume IO it will result on batter triangle count for high quality assets and high resolution textures. 

So quality asset (IQ)/ high quality 8k textures will be superior on PS5 over Xbox SX.  Unless Xbox using traditional loading method by dumping all assets to the RAM (old gen games) 

The GPU still has to draw all those triangles, though. If 60fps becomes the standard next gen, it'll have to draw them twice as fast, too. Even if the PS5's SSD can stream all those movie quality assets, I doubt the GPU ciould keep up in that case.

ORI dev confirmed what I said. Third parties aren't going to take full advantage of the faster SSD because they are not going to exclude Xbox One series x or PCs that are still using HDD.

What makes you think they have a similar solution to PS5? Where has that ever been mentioned? 

Right.

God forbid the PS5 will have a clear advantage over the XBSX (and PC) in one aspect of its architecture... -___-

 

Depends on the kind of chips they use. Unless that has been specified before and I missed it, the next part will explain why I think it will be more expensive.

For such a fast connection, I don't see Sony using TLC or QLC chips, but rather the more expensive MLC or even SLC or 3D XPoint. Microsoft on the other hand, could use TLC for their chips, which are much cheaper to produce than MLC, SLC or XPoint. There's also the (longshot) possibility that they use NOR memory instead of NAND, since that one is much faster than NAND on read and has a longer MTBF, but is much more expensive (2-3 times as much), less densely packed (50-80% extra size for the same capacity) and is somewhat slower at writing tasks.

Finally, the way it's connected and intertwined with the rest of the hardware could need a thicker PCB with more layers to work out correctly, and that can quickly drive up the prices.

Let's see what it means when it comes to the actual games then.

Wait, are you telling me that PS5 doesn't have 2nd, empty internal SSD slot? I could have swore I read somewhere that it does. If it only has the one slot, that is even worse than I thought. It would mean that you will have to replace the 825 GB one it comes with with something larger in order to get more storage, which will be even more expensive. On XSX, you should be able to buy a 1 TB SSD cartridge to pop in the expansion slot on the back for about $150 (the price of a 1 TB NVMe SSD currently), doubling your maximum storage from 1 TB to 2 TB. On PS5 you would have to wait until SSD's as fast as the internal one are available off the shelf, and then buy a 2 TB one, which would likely cost $300+, if not $400+. 

And here I thought that PS5`s Audio Tempest was a more powerful solution than on XSX.

So is the GPU and CPU of the Series X a minor advantage of PS5's? I'm genuinely asking. I hear a lot of PS fans say how big the SSD is over XBox's. I also hear Xbox fans say how much more vast the GPU/CPU is over. Won't the GPU/CPU of PS5 offer the same thing as Series X, but on a smaller scale?

In Series S case, it seems to have been designed specifically to not hold back next gen development, if the rumors are true anyway. If the leaked specs for Lockhart are accurate, the only differences between Series S and Series X are the weaker GPU (4 tflop vs 12 tflop) and about 4 GB less RAM on Lockhart, the CPU and SSD are supposedly the same speed as the ones used in Series X, so that Series S won't be causing any CPU or storage bottlenecks next gen that hold back development. If that is true, developers should be able to simply reduce resolution from 4k to 1080p or from 1800p to 900p for Series S as examples, with no or few downgrades to other graphical settings like shadow quality, texture quality, character model quality, lighting, anti-aliasing, anisotropic filtering, etc. MS don't want to release a console that will hold back next-gen development.

The reason that you can scale down for Series S if those leaked specs are true, instead of scaling up from Series S, is because the main difference is on the GPU, and GPU features are more scaleable, devs can simply lower resolution or turn down a few other graphical settings using PC presets. CPU, RAM, and storage are far more likely to cause bottlenecks than a GPU is. 

Of course we have to wait and see if those Series S specs leaks hold up. Supposedly MS was going to announce Series S this month, but recently delayed the announce to August. 

also SSD is not just loading but streaming assets , texture, etc. it will be resulting on better quality assets , high texture resolution , more dense, more real life like and photo realistic. 

So in worst case scenario we will see 1400p on PS5 with 8k texture and large  triangle account,  while on Xbox SX we will see around 1500p  with 4k texture and small triangle account. Both will have the same Frame Rates. with slightly better Ray Tracing on Xbox SX.