Wait so PS5 struggles with 4K but it's apparently a cake walk for Series X despite the gap in raw power being smaller than it is this gen?
Hmm
That was a given, of course we will see some checkerboarding and upscaling methods with no true 4K output.
Does it even matter though? It's a game console where most of us sit a few meters away from our TVS, I can't perceive much difference if any vs my PC when I tried some 4K games.
Pixel peeping will be the bread and butter of DF and MS for this generation, while PS5 will just have better games that pushes graphics and rendering techniques(Sony's Studios) to the next level.
Personally I couldn't care less if true 4K 120FPS games look like Halo Infinite, when I saw Ghost Of Tsushima I had my jaw dropped due to their great art direction and scale.
Pixel count does not imply a better experience, especially when the game that runs at such framerates and pixel count suck.
Also the 120FPS gimmick for console gaming has to stop, people who have 120FPS 4K TVS(not monitors) are probably less than the 1% of the console userbase, still people bring the 120FPS argument again and again thinking that they will have a perceivable advantage when they don't even have the setup to experience it.
But exclusives typically provide the best representation of any given consoles capabilities. Xbox One X was more powerful than the PS4 Pro but no exclusive in my opinion looked better than any 1st party Playstation exclusive. Although Sea of Thieves and Forza Horizon 4 could make a strong case.
Narrative again is XSX is more powerful than the PS5 yet so far they haven't shown anything to prove just that even though on paper it's true.
"slower" is the wrong term - the PS5 has less TF, but is faster in terms of the clock.
Can you elaborate? I assume you couldn’t give identifiable details, but are we talking multiple corresponding sources? Big games, small games or Indies? What exactly is this big difference’s consequences?I'm hearing that it's larger than what people expect.
Great to be you I guess, most people don't have your setup, and won't for a long time.120fps isn't a gimmick...*looks lovingly over at my new LG CX*
This is some wild mental gymnastics to cope with the fact Sony might have a weaker console. If it's more expensive and less powerful - that sucks. But this thread isn't about justifying why you've already decided it's going to be better than the series x. lol.
Can you elaborate? I assume you couldn’t give identifiable details, but are we talking multiple corresponding sources? Big games, small games or Indies? What exactly is this big difference’s consequences?
Not wanting to cause a dogpile, but that’s a pretty big statement to drop from someone marked as ‘vetted’ without any context or further elaboration.
I'm hearing that it's larger than what people expect.
Yea, can't go into details on that one. But coming from someone at a game studio where engineers have worked with PS5 and then leaving to go to MS and seeing the demos on the XSX. That's all I'll say about that. We'll see if what I'm hearing is accurate. So far though, AC: Valhalla is looking like it's an accurate statement.
Xbox Series X More Powerful Than PS5, Claims Devs Of Exclusive The Gunk
The Gunk developers say Xbox was the only choice.screenrant.com
No, that’s just not how it works at all. The difference between the One X is that games were built and designed for the base XB1, then res bumped through display and textures, that’s how it was possible on 6TF.It's very clear to me this Dusk Golem guy is spreading second hand information being fed to him by an interested party and he has a big mouth problem.
The PS5 being less powerful than the Series X is a given. This shouldn't surprise anybody. But saying the PS5 struggles with 4k when it's confortably more powerful than the Xbox One X is straight anti-Sony propaganda.
Also, I find very hard to believe Sony will price the PS5 higher than the Series X knowing beforehand it doesn't have the power advantage. In fact, if they didn't care about the Series X price tag we should know theirs by now.
AC: Valhalla is an accurate statement about what?
Yeah and running at a unacceptable framerate.
After watching the gameplay demo of The Gunk, there's no doubt this game would be constrained by the PS5 (should be fine on Xbox One though). Makes Ratchet and Clank look like a mobile game.Xbox Series X More Powerful Than PS5, Claims Devs Of Exclusive The Gunk
The Gunk developers say Xbox was the only choice.screenrant.com
In what way, sorry? As far as I’m aware both versions are targeting 4K/30fps.Yea, can't go into details on that one. But coming from someone at a game studio where engineers have worked with PS5 and then leaving to go to MS and seeing the demos on the XSX. That's all I'll say about that. We'll see if what I'm hearing is accurate. So far though, AC: Valhalla is looking like it's an accurate statement.
Variable clock means GPU/CPU frequency will change depending on many factors. MS could go with similar strategy, but they didnt wanted to create problems for developers.Do you understand? Looks like with variable clocks you tap and squeeze more than you can do with locked clocks. It was mentioned many times, with locked clocks, some power will be left on the table
We focus on optimizing the developer experience to deliver the best possible experience for players, rather than trying to 'hunt' down certain record numbers. We've always talked about consistent and sustained performance. We could have used forced clocks, we could have used variable clock rates: the reality is that it makes it harder for developers to optimize their games even though it would have allowed us to boast higher TFLOPS than we already had, for example. But you know, that's not the important thing. The important thing is the gaming experiences that developers can build.
In what way, sorry? As far as I’m aware both versions are targeting 4K/30fps.
What do I need to spin for that statement to become true?The advantage is no more than 20%
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't there a thread on here about AC on PS5 not matching the XSX in performance/resolution?
Sony put more money into other areas which is why it would cost more. The SSD would cost more, the Audio chip would cost more, the heat sink and cooling would cost more, and the list goes on.(Doubt)
PS5 components, outside of the SSD, seem to have been selected to keep the price down. The entire sense I get from their unique way of handling their clocks is maximum value from components selected with a somewhat mainstream-acceptable price in mind.
Isn’t that to be expected given the fact Xbox has the marketing rights?Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't there a thread on here about AC on PS5 not matching the XSX in performance/resolution?
It’s 12.1 not 12.75What do I need to spin for that statement to become true?
There is 44% CU advantage in XSeX favor.
To address the gargantuan gap (which is bigger than the gap between 5700XT and 2080Ti), Sony went with OC-ing the GPU.
Even if we take maximum figure of 10.28, XSeX (12.75) is at 24% more flops.
That is much more than the difference between 2070 and 2060.
No, I don't think there was unless you're talking about the Far Cry one which was debunked.
We know XSX will perform better in terms of resolution. What we want to know, is by how much.? You're telling us it's a bigger difference than we expect. 1440p vs 4K? 1800p? 1900p?
Because he has a boss and that boss' job is to make sure they make money. Like all specs given its pretty much always best case scenario. Best case isn't necessarily easy to achieve.Why would the lead architect of the console have to be told what clocks his console will run at?
None of that is relevant. I showed Cerny speaking pr talk yet the variable clocks is taken as gospel when it could very well be pr.Cerny is a nerd and engineer. He made marble madness when he was a kid and has helped build RDNA and RDNA2 with AMD. The fp16 and checkerboard rendering have been used on the Xbox and PC.
Whereas Spencer has said the xsx is the most powerful console, both shows will blow us away, there will be 5 mic drop moments, the games are coming, exclusives don't matter, exclusives do matter, generations do matter, generations don't matter...
Can you see the difference?
That sounds extremely unlikely.I have been hearing that 1TF on PS5 actually performs around 1.18-1.2 TF XSX but thats matter of getting used to the uniqueness of Ps5 architecture wich definetly wont come with the First wave of games.
Because he has a boss and that boss' job is to make sure they make money. Like all specs given its pretty much always best case scenario. Best case isn't necessarily easy to achieve.
None of that is relevant. I showed Cerny speaking pr talk yet the variable clocks is taken as gospel when it could very well be pr.
If it is, I’m seeing nothing searching for it on google. Just articles and devs stating that it will be at least 30fps and that that was what it’s been running at in all previews for XSX so far.Nah, XSX is targeting 60FPS. I'll have to find that thread. I may have misquoted.
What do I need to spin for that statement to become true?
There is 44% CU advantage in XSeX favor.
To address the gargantuan gap (which is bigger than the gap between 5700XT and 2080Ti), Sony went with OC-ing the GPU.
Even if we take maximum figure of 10.28, XSeX (12.75) is at 24% more flops.
That is much more than the difference between 2070 and 2060.
Sony put more money into other areas which is why it would cost more. The SSD would cost more, the Audio chip would cost more, the heat sink and cooling would cost more, and the list goes on.
If it is, I’m seeing nothing searching for it on google. Just articles and devs stating that it will be at least 30fps and that that was what it’s been running at in all previews for XSX so far.
That's just unfair to dusk golem. We expected differences in resolution already but with VRS and Checkerboarding in play on the consoles the differences are not very noticeable and in my opinion 4k native is just a waste of GPU power.GT7 - 4K60fps
HFW - 4K30fps
MM - 4K30ps
FUD Golem at it again
That sounds extremely unlikely.
I’m not saying it’s impossible, but it’s definitely the kind of wild speculation that requires a wheelbarrow full of salt.I dont.
Ps5 brings New concepts to the table wich make life easier but its not applicable out of the gate.
After watching the gameplay demo of The Gunk, there's no doubt this game would be constrained by the PS5 (should be fine on Xbox One though). Makes Ratchet and Clank look like a mobile game.
Scorn Dev:
“It’s very simple,” Peklar told us when we asked them about the game’s console exclusivity. “Good performance of the game is important to us. Xbox Series X is a very capable hardware that enables parity with the PC version of the game. We can’t discuss any info regarding PlayStation.”
Wow. I'm sold.
That makes it 18.1%.It’s 12.1 not 12.75
Sounds like he shut down a journalist desperate for a PS5 version. Looking forward to its release this year so I can read all the posts in the OT reminding me its coming to the PS5 with no evidence, confirmation, or date to present.
Ok let's assume he doesn't even have a contact and can say whatever he likes. He's still selling his own service as consultant/engineer. Cerny has used pr speak in the past. Why is this time different?Cerny isn't even a Sony employee. If you think he needs to be Sony's pr bitch then lol