• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Digital Foundry about XSX teraflops advantage : It's kinda all blowing up in the face of Xbox Series X

midnightAI

Member
vPQINRm.png

DF are hardly infallible, I remember they interviewed Albert Penello about the OG gimp console the XBO and did not contest his lies. They just published them verbatim spreading FUD about the PS4 vs XBO situation. Their attitude about mid gen refreshes like XSX and XOX compared to their attitude towards a hypothetical PS5 pro also reveals their slant.
Hopefully they have at least learned not to listen to Penello
 

Arioco

Member
Honestly even a lot of the developer interviews I watch, none of them ever seem to give a shit about ray-tracing let alone path-tracing, don't get me wrong RTGI technology is super cool both on the developer side and for the visuals... but beyond that I don't think anyone gives a shit despite what the Nvidia marketing team tells Digital Foundry us.


In fact in his interview to Wired Mark Cerny said that RT was not one of the most requested features for SONY's next console. You all know that every two years Cerny travels all over the world to meet with the most important developers in the business and they discuss what they would like to see on their next hardware, Cerny believes this kind of information is very valuable when it comest to target the hardware specs. Apparently this time around the most requested feature was an SDD (most devs wanted a 1GB/s SSD and he decided to target 5-10X that speed). Cerny said he wasn't sure why devs didn't care too much about RT but that they probably thought that SONY couldn't provide enough RT performance to do anything interesting with it anyways.
 

Elios83

Member
The difference between PS5 and XSX is that one was designed around a teraflops target and checking a RDNA2 feature list, the other was carefully designed to maximize efficiency, remove bottlenecks, get the best out of the silicon and contain costs with a small chip to be able to launch at 399$.
The 2020 propaganda was just a lie, but in the end the two consoles are pretty much the same in real world applications, differences are so small that even hardcore gamers don't care.

I look forward to see what Cerny did with the PS5 Pro, clearly there is a giant room of improvement in ray tracing which is....rudimental? on current hardware since it's first gen AMD.
 
Last edited:

Lysandros

Member
Lol they're backtracking on the FUD they were spreading pre-launch and they're rightfully being called out on it.
I honestly don't think they are backtracking at all. Their latest comments on DF direct is all about forced parity, 'strangeness' and XSX technical superiority. All about teraflops and CUs and how 'the additional power' is possibly "evaporating due to DRS". They have yet to mention or emphasize a single PS5 GPU advantage, a single metric. I personally think they are as clueless and shameless as in 2020. "We still really don't know why..." Really Richard? If you are that freaking clueless and thick headed find another job, it's never too late.
 
Last edited:

Gaiff

SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
In fact in his interview to Wired Mark Cerny said that RT was not one of the most requested features for SONY's next console. You all know that every two years Cerny travels all over the world to meet with the most important developers in the business and they discuss what they would like to see on their next hardware, Cerny believes this kind of information is very valuable when it comest to target the hardware specs. Apparently this time around the most requested feature was an SDD (most devs wanted a 1GB/s SSD and he decided to target 5-10X that speed). Cerny said he wasn't sure why devs didn't care too much about RT but that they probably thought that SONY couldn't provide enough RT performance to do anything interesting with it anyways.
Definitely that. Cyberpunk's regular RT is like 1 bounce and 1 sample and demolishes something such as a 3080 that has what, 2.5-3x the ray tracing performance of a PS5? And Cerny probably did this tour in 2018-2019 where the most powerful GPU was the 2080 Ti. Everyone, even consumers, rightfully realized that viable ray tracing on consoles was still a decade away.

To be fair, I also don't know why they bothered with rt on consoles. It's half-assed almost every time and the few times it isn't, it's for a couple of reflections. Even on PC, it wasn't really good until later in the life of the 30 series. The 4080/4090 are the only GPUs I consider really ray tracing capable.
 
Last edited:
Definitely that. Cyberpunk's regular RT is like 1 bounce and 1 sample and demolishes something such as a 3080 that has what, 2.5-3x the ray tracing performance of a PS5? And Cerny probably did this tour in 2018-2019 where the most powerful GPU was the 2080 Ti. Everyone, even consumers, rightfully realized that viable ray tracing on consoles was still a decade away.

To be fair, I also don't know why they bothered with rt on consoles. It's half-assed almost every time and the few times it isn't, it's for a couple of reflections. Even on PC, it wasn't really good until later in the life of the 30 series. The 4080/4090 are the only GPUs I consider really ray tracing capable.
I'm not big on RT personally but I did find it transformative on games like Spider-man and Metro Exodus.
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
It's really kind of sad that ballersgate 3 couldn't release because the co-op would not perform adequately on the series s... If only you could at least get the 15 frames per second split screen gets on the PS5
As I read this post....imagine how bad it must be on the Series S.....

Thank you for putting the Series S issue in perspective.
 

DanielG165

Member
Honestly, it doesn’t matter at this point; both systems were carefully designed and engineered by their respective manufacturers, and both are essentially on par with one another outside of a few games with a few fps differences here, and a slightly higher resolution there. Whichever way you go, you have a great machine when it comes to the premium consoles.
 

Kilau

Member
Honestly, what game has been the biggest difference between both systems so far this gen? Current gen only.
 

JCK75

Member
As I read this post....imagine how bad it must be on the Series S.....

Thank you for putting the Series S issue in perspective

We are seriously demonized in the series. S because it can't properly run something that can't properly run on any platform..
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
We are seriously demonized in the series. S because it can't properly run something that can't properly run on any platform..
Read your post tho...its not demonizing, its facts.
 

Vergil1992

Member
I think DF is discredited (too much) for no reason. I mean, their theories make more sense than what I'm reading here. Saying that PS5 because it is faster is 22% better at some GPU task is as true as saying that Xbox One S was faster than PS4 by 11% (to a much lesser extent, but its GPU was faster and Microsoft argued exactly the same)

At the end of the day we have a GPU with an almost identical architecture (in fact, the fact that VRS 2 is used in XSX and not in PS5 is precisely because it has a small advantage), which has more (many more) CUs and more raw power but with a much lower clock frequency. Generally it can be seen that with the same architecture and Tflops, GPUs with more CUs have an advantage over those with higher clock frequencies. This design helps the overall power to be greater and on top of that with lower consumption. There is also the issue of memory and bandwidth, which is better in XSX on paper, but there are several "hints" from some developers that memories at different speeds could give some problem in specific circumstances, here it also depends on the skill of the programmers.


DF's theory that the XSX's extra power is being underutilized makes sense, for many reasons:

- We frequently see cases where the framerate is worse on XSX and equals that of PS5 after having some updates.

- DF has seen examples where the PS5 code was clearly ahead in terms of polish compared to the Xbox platforms, even games with more bugs or graphical problems. We have seen several games with problems on Xbox, Atomic Heart (even holograms were missing!), the RT problem in Callisto Protocol, many games with transversal stuttering such as Crash Bandicoot 4, The Witcher 3 with a bug that caused XSX to use the settings from XSS..)

- We have seen that "transverse stuttering" is more common on Xbox platforms (Guardians of the Galaxy, Atomic Heart, Crash 4...) coincidentally coinciding with the fact that it is a problem in the PC version.

- There are differences in graphic settings in several games. PS5 often has a completely customized and different configuration from PC/Xbox, especially in shadows but sometimes it even has optimized configurations that cannot be replicated on PC, even when on XSX it is at the equivalent of Ultra, which suggests that in Xbox could be using DirectX12 from PC without taking advantage of the features of Xbox platforms.

- We have testimonials (and DF too) that PS5 development tools are preferred by developers.

- PS5 is the best-selling console and in many of these multiplatforms, there may be a difference of 80% in favor of PS5 and 20% in Xbox in units sold of the games. It is completely logical that developers prioritize a version where they know it will generate more money.



I also don't blame anyone for the situation, the culprit is Microsoft itself. I don't think there's forced parity, I think they're just performing similarly for several of these reasons. I think XSX is slightly more powerful, although there are people who disagree, but the difference is not big enough to overcome several handicaps.
 

HawarMiran

Banned
Honestly, it doesn’t matter at this point; both systems were carefully designed and engineered by their respective manufacturers, and both are essentially on par with one another outside of a few games with a few fps differences here, and a slightly higher resolution there. Whichever way you go, you have a great machine when it comes to the premium consoles.
Yes and I think Sony will outshine Xbox on the first party front, because Xbox has so much on their plate with the day-and-date releases on Series X, Series S and PC. Sony can't even manage a proper release on PC after a few years. The PC market is a whole different beast.
 
Last edited:
I think DF is discredited (too much) for no reason. I mean, their theories make more sense than what I'm reading here. Saying that PS5 because it is faster is 22% better at some GPU task is as true as saying that Xbox One S was faster than PS4 by 11% (to a much lesser extent, but its GPU was faster and Microsoft argued exactly the same)

At the end of the day we have a GPU with an almost identical architecture (in fact, the fact that VRS 2 is used in XSX and not in PS5 is precisely because it has a small advantage), which has more (many more) CUs and more raw power but with a much lower clock frequency. Generally it can be seen that with the same architecture and Tflops, GPUs with more CUs have an advantage over those with higher clock frequencies. This design helps the overall power to be greater and on top of that with lower consumption. There is also the issue of memory and bandwidth, which is better in XSX on paper, but there are several "hints" from some developers that memories at different speeds could give some problem in specific circumstances, here it also depends on the skill of the programmers.


DF's theory that the XSX's extra power is being underutilized makes sense, for many reasons:

- We frequently see cases where the framerate is worse on XSX and equals that of PS5 after having some updates.

- DF has seen examples where the PS5 code was clearly ahead in terms of polish compared to the Xbox platforms, even games with more bugs or graphical problems. We have seen several games with problems on Xbox, Atomic Heart (even holograms were missing!), the RT problem in Callisto Protocol, many games with transversal stuttering such as Crash Bandicoot 4, The Witcher 3 with a bug that caused XSX to use the settings from XSS..)

- We have seen that "transverse stuttering" is more common on Xbox platforms (Guardians of the Galaxy, Atomic Heart, Crash 4...) coincidentally coinciding with the fact that it is a problem in the PC version.

- There are differences in graphic settings in several games. PS5 often has a completely customized and different configuration from PC/Xbox, especially in shadows but sometimes it even has optimized configurations that cannot be replicated on PC, even when on XSX it is at the equivalent of Ultra, which suggests that in Xbox could be using DirectX12 from PC without taking advantage of the features of Xbox platforms.

- We have testimonials (and DF too) that PS5 development tools are preferred by developers.

- PS5 is the best-selling console and in many of these multiplatforms, there may be a difference of 80% in favor of PS5 and 20% in Xbox in units sold of the games. It is completely logical that developers prioritize a version where they know it will generate more money.



I also don't blame anyone for the situation, the culprit is Microsoft itself. I don't think there's forced parity, I think they're just performing similarly for several of these reasons. I think XSX is slightly more powerful, although there are people who disagree, but the difference is not big enough to overcome several handicaps.
Yes DF in their video that developers just don't care about Xbox and they use DX12 code for Xbox just like they use it on PC and call it a day. However, Alex said by doing this developers are missing tons of Xbox API features.
 
Is that why PC versions usually come with more features?

Cyberpunk has path tracing on PC for Christ sakes.

Y’all dumb af
I think they mean that Xbox is not worth of their time. So it is quite opposite, where developers second priority is PC than comes Xbox.

So first the goal is optimize the game for PS5, than work on PC than the they will use PC port in Xbox as it is very simple for them and developers are just doing a general port not specific Xbox port.
 

Thirty7ven

Banned
I think they mean that Xbox is not worth of their time. So it is quite opposite, where developers second priority is PC than comes Xbox.

So first the goal is optimize the game for PS5, than work on PC than the they will use PC port in Xbox as it is very simple for them and developers are just doing a general port not specific Xbox port.

All I read/hear are lame ass excuses. Where was this bs during the PS4 Pro - X1X days?

I’ve been hearing PC is the lead platform in game development for ages. You guys think if I watch a Sigraph conference I’m suddenly an expert? Because that’s the extent it goes for somebody like Alex. It’s ridiculous, steam sells a ton of games when are these bitches going to start asking MS what’s up with their underperforming api? Etc etc

Enough of the dumb.
 
Last edited:
I think they mean that Xbox is not worth of their time. So it is quite opposite, where developers second priority is PC than comes Xbox.

So first the goal is optimize the game for PS5, than work on PC than the they will use PC port in Xbox as it is very simple for them and developers are just doing a general port not specific Xbox port.

You do know that true real RDNA is also available on PC.
 
Saying that PS5 because it is faster is 22% better at some GPU task is as true as saying that Xbox One S was faster than PS4 by 11% (to a much lesser extent, but its GPU was faster and Microsoft argued exactly the same)
Nice looks like we have found Bugaga's alt. PS5 is not faster at some random task genius, it is 22% faster at putting pixels on the screen. Do you even understand how GPUs work? And again XBSX is not objectively more powerful than the PS5, no amount of repeating that lie is gonna make it stick.
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
Just from the last page:
"And lastly, fuck off with this nonsense that path tracing is a massive difference between standard rasterization. Consoles are not lagging."

lol lmao even
That’s not downplaying pcs, that’s downplaying path tracing. I mentioned that i did the comparisons myself in that post you dared not quote because it had context that im a PC gamer myself. Very lame.

Here are some comparisons. If the difference is staggering then we need to change the dictionary.



F7MmftFW4AA6lkc



F7MmftEX0AACepO



F7MmjouWYAA-rnB


F7MmftHWgAIKW1t


The pics are offscreen because i wanted to capture them in hdr. I have dozens of on screen comparisons If you are not convinced. If you go by cherry picked comparisons by a known path tracing shill like Alex then you will be misled. Play the game, turn off path tracing on and off, capture some footage and 99% of the time it won’t be massive or staggering or whatever DF said to big up path tracing.
 

DJ12

Member
Yes DF in their video that developers just don't care about Xbox and they use DX12 code for Xbox just like they use it on PC and call it a day. However, Alex said by doing this developers are missing tons of Xbox API features.
What utter bullshit that man talks.

MS unified all their tools, if something isn't being used it's because of Microsoft not the devs, if there's something specific that increases xbox performance, MSs tools should optimise this code for xbox.

The whole point was having a unified platform to aid development of xbox games.
 

sinnergy

Member
What utter bullshit that man talks.

MS unified all their tools, if something isn't being used it's because of Microsoft not the devs, if there's something specific that increases xbox performance, MSs tools should optimise this code for xbox.

The whole point was having a unified platform to aid development of xbox games.
But MS has. Whole eco system to take care of. Unlike Sony, which only has a PlayStation. And you kinda see it happen to their PC ports which most of the time are in need of patches and what not .. that’s what happens when developing for multiple systems .. and those are just year later ports .
 

DJ12

Member
But MS has. Whole eco system to take care of. Unlike Sony, which only has a PlayStation. And you kinda see it happen to their PC ports which most of the time are in need of patches and what not .. that’s what happens when developing for multiple systems .. and those are just year later ports .
So you disagree with Alex too, good to know. No need for your anti sony drivel.
 

Darsxx82

Member
All I read/hear are lame ass excuses. Where was this bs during the PS4 Pro - X1X days?

I’ve been hearing PC is the lead platform in game development for ages. You guys think if I watch a Sigraph conference I’m suddenly an expert? Because that’s the extent it goes for somebody like Alex. It’s ridiculous, steam sells a ton of games when are these bitches going to start asking MS what’s up with their underperforming api? Etc etc

Enough of the dumb.
LOL. What's a dump argument is using XBO X vs Pro as a reference.

In that case the hardware differences were stratospheric compared to those of PS5 vs XSX. The funniest? Even so, they have a lot of cases where the Pro version was on par with the XBO X or even several cases being the superior version.

The fact is that the XBO X vs PS4Pro comparison would serve as a basis to defend against your argument. Not only that there were many cases where the PRo version was equal to or even better than the XBO, the situation is that there are even more cases where the XBO X seems poorly optimized with bugs, Or worse graphic assets, or worse framerate when the resolution could be 2x that of Pro where you had a much more coherent and polished version.


Returning to the PS5 vs XSX comparison. I'm sorry, but what comrade Vergil describes are only facts, even if you don't want to see them and react by insulting arguments that make sense.

The funniest thing of all is that you go, for example, to the A Plague Tale Requiem comparison thread and you see a case with significant differences in favor of XSX and the general opinion was that "they have optimized it better for XsX" or the PS5 version should be better optimized. Which would have its logic, but it seems that this excuse only works in one direction for you 🙃

There is no dump argument in defending that the Studios are more interested in offering the most polished version in the one that will be the one that will dictate the reactions of the media and users in the vast majority. A PS5 version significantly worse than that of XsX produces discomfort and negativity at a game launch. The opposite not so much.
The number of times that the XSX version has been fixed in later patches and in many cases even to be the best version is already an indication that its optimization at launch was not the best.

It would be perfectly logical to think that, given an equality of hardware power such as that shown by both consoles, the Studios will "relax" with a respectable or "on par" XsX version (that is, slightly better, slightly worse or the same as that of PS5).

I already told you that if XSX were less powerful than Ps5, with 70% fewer units on the market and and distributing optimization time with XSS, the differences in favor of PS5 would be more significant in the vast majority of cases vs the general equality (We could say extreme equality) that you see today.
 

sinnergy

Member
So you disagree with Alex too, good to know. No need for your anti sony drivel.
It’s no Anti Sony drivel at all, it has the has to do with maintaining multiple systems. It’s a prime example of MS bashing to be honest, and totally unnecessary. It’s only used by me to get my point across, as both Nintendo and Sony don’t really operate this way (yet)
the other side is that you maintain 1 software stack but you probably can’t put enough energy in it to really tap into the power of the different devices as a developer, because you also are develop for other systems .
 
Last edited:

Killjoy-NL

Member
It’s no Anti Sony drivel at all, it has the has to do with maintaining multiple systems. It’s a prime example of MS bashing to be honest, and totally unnecessary. It’s only used by me to get my point across, as both Nintendo and Sony don’t really operate this way (yet)
the other side is that you maintain 1 software stack but you probably can’t put enough energy in it to really tap into the power of the different devices as a developer, because you also are develop for other systems .
So when Hellblade2 will inevitably not live up to the hype, it's because they didn’t tap into Series X full potential?

Same as Fable and Everwild?
 
Last edited:

Gaiff

SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
That’s not downplaying pcs, that’s downplaying path tracing. I mentioned that i did the comparisons myself in that post you dared not quote because it had context that im a PC gamer myself. Very lame.
You perfectly know what ray tracing does to indirect lighting, so why are you acting as if you didn't? You're standing outside, seemingly at night time. The indirect lighting differences will be at their biggest in sections where sunlight cannot penetrate directly.

Here is an example of path traced vs raster during nighttime.

EWxpQN0.png


Raster looks pretty good, right? I bet some people thought the ray traced image was the one on the left. It's more moody and atmospheric but incorrect since there are bright fires burning all around the tent so it shouldn't be this dark. Still, raster looks really good.

However during daytime with the sun high...

e1ulm2o.jpg



Rasterization completely falls apart. I cannot stress how utterly ugly it is. I legitimately stopped playing the game back when I had my 2080 Ti because there were just too many instances where playing without ray tracing resulted in absolutely shit-ugly scenes like the one to the left that completely ruined the immersion. Unlike some other high-end games such as Ratchet & Clank or Horizon Forbidden West, Cyberpunk's texture quality is bad a lot of the times and combined with this terrible indirect lighting and shading, this makes the game look unsightly. And this isn't a cherry-picked screenshot. Go anywhere during daytime (shacks, tunnels, doorways, etc) with a lot of indirect lighting and you'll get a difference like this. Ray tracing, especially lighting, makes the game a lot more consistent visually. Try going to the Aldelcaldo camp during daytime, enter every single tent, and turn ray tracing on/off and tell me you don't see a huge difference every single time. That's just lighting. If you add reflections into the mix (and Cyberpunk has many reflective surfaces), the shortcomings of rasterization are further exposed.

BfvOP5Z.jpg


No points for guessing which image has rt reflection. Does this happen every time? No? Even 50% of the time? Perhaps not even but it does happen often enough to make you not want to turn back to rasterized lighting and reflections. CDPR does a pretty damn good job with whatever techniques they're using to approximate the interactions of light sources. In some cases, it's damn near indistinguishable from ray tracing. The claim that 95% of the time the difference is barely perceptible is complete bullshit. That might apply to path traced vs ray traced (and even then, I'd disagree) but rasterization vs path traced? Just no. I'm also not a ray tracing shill like Alex Battaglia is. He really undersold the artifacts brought about by ray reconstruction. The game becomes uglier as a result. I'll take noisier reflections over all that smearing any day. It's seriously ghosting galore. NPCs faces are blurred. Every time they move, you stop being able to make out their features. When they walk past an indirect source of light, their entire body leaves a ghosting trail. Cars and car headlights smear the entire screen. It's shite in motion but looks great in screenshots.

Sorry for the derailment and long-winded post but coming from you this is just unacceptable. You know better than this.

This was my reaction after reading your post.

 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
It’s no Anti Sony drivel at all, it has the has to do with maintaining multiple systems. It’s a prime example of MS bashing to be honest, and totally unnecessary. It’s only used by me to get my point across, as both Nintendo and Sony don’t really operate this way (yet)
the other side is that you maintain 1 software stack but you probably can’t put enough energy in it to really tap into the power of the different devices as a developer, because you also are develop for other systems .
Guess who is at fault even in your scenario? No… it is not the consumers… they did not force the XDK to GDK transition, they did not setup a scenario where the XSX too console is only 25% or less of the target audience, and they are the ones responsible for the “tools”… but hey, thanks for coming around that supporting a wide variety of HW with a single stack leads to difficult to optimise for scenarios / underutilisation (not just flicking switch easy eh ;))…
 
Last edited:
- PS5 wins a multi comparison by the minimum = It's that there are many more PS5s sold and the developers are trying harder, it's that the tools in SX are green, DF wondering what is happening, etc..

-SX wins a multi comparison by the minimum = anotherone.gif, xbox demonstrates its power, DF happy with the results, etc...

You have to clarify with the arguments, with how easy it would be to admit the obvious, both consoles perform the same and the differences are minimal, but no, maximum damage control.
 

8BiTw0LF

Banned
I think DF need to stop analyze/compare consoles, cause it will only get tougher down the line, with AI and hybrid systems in mind.

No need to keep making a fool out of yourselves
 
Last edited:
That’s not downplaying pcs, that’s downplaying path tracing. I mentioned that i did the comparisons myself in that post you dared not quote because it had context that im a PC gamer myself. Very lame.

Here are some comparisons. If the difference is staggering then we need to change the dictionary.



F7MmftFW4AA6lkc



F7MmftEX0AACepO



F7MmjouWYAA-rnB


F7MmftHWgAIKW1t


The pics are offscreen because i wanted to capture them in hdr. I have dozens of on screen comparisons If you are not convinced. If you go by cherry picked comparisons by a known path tracing shill like Alex then you will be misled. Play the game, turn off path tracing on and off, capture some footage and 99% of the time it won’t be massive or staggering or whatever DF said to big up path tracing.
Amazing comparison, you should really apply at DF. They should be ready to hire you considering people in this thread have convinced me how useless they are.
 

Topher

Gold Member
It’s no Anti Sony drivel at all, it has the has to do with maintaining multiple systems. It’s a prime example of MS bashing to be honest, and totally unnecessary. It’s only used by me to get my point across, as both Nintendo and Sony don’t really operate this way (yet)
the other side is that you maintain 1 software stack but you probably can’t put enough energy in it to really tap into the power of the different devices as a developer, because you also are develop for other systems .

MS deserves to be criticized for advertising XSX as the world's most powerful console and then providing tools that mitigates all that power down to a "one size fits all" approach to game development. Clearly, providing custom tools designed specifically for custom hardware is the correct approach. When it comes to Xbox, Microsoft continues to find ways to shoot themselves in the foot.
 

Vergil1992

Member
Nice looks like we have found Bugaga's alt. PS5 is not faster at some random task genius, it is 22% faster at putting pixels on the screen. Do you even understand how GPUs work? And again XBSX is not objectively more powerful than the PS5, no amount of repeating that lie is gonna make it stick.
What do you mean "it's faster at 'placing' pixels on the screen?" Is the Xbox One S 11% faster at "placing pixels on the screen" because it has a higher clock frequency?

It is as if we say that Xbox Series X is 44% more powerful when it comes to 'drawing' graphics because it has 44% more compute units. Graphics cards don't work or compare that way. Not only tflops are used as a measure, I agree with that.

We can take as an example an AMD 6700XT (40CU/2581 Mhz) vs 6800 (60CU/2105 Mhz), there are more differences (texture units, ROP...), but the difference is big. I don't want to say that this is the difference between PS5 and Xbox Series X (Ps5 does not have more texture units or more ROP, it is just faster but there is a clear and concise CU difference) and they reach the same "point" (tflops), generally the slower one but with more CUs has a higher performance. And they really aren't even at the same point (tflops), XSX is more powerful with the same architecture and very similar specifications.

Developers don't care that one console may have slightly higher resolutions than another, XSX generally seems to have an advantage when dynamic resolutions are involved and they are often higher, but what one developer especially values is having lots of memory, ease and that the API is not problematic with CPU overload, and in that sense PS5 (or its API) has done its homework better. And that is not negative for PlayStation, quite the opposite. It seems they have done a better job and that effort has been rewarded. Although I still think that being the "dominant" platform also influences.


Even One on PS4 Pro, when it was worse in any technical aspect than One X, the tools, the optimization process and the main platform also influence the final result.


On the other hand, I notice a certain tone of mockery in your response. I would appreciate more education. I am always open to debate, but with respect.
 

Mr.Phoenix

Member
LOL. What's a dump argument is using XBO X vs Pro as a reference.

In that case the hardware differences were stratospheric compared to those of PS5 vs XSX. The funniest? Even so, they have a lot of cases where the Pro version was on par with the XBO X or even several cases being the superior version.

The fact is that the XBO X vs PS4Pro comparison would serve as a basis to defend against your argument. Not only that there were many cases where the PRo version was equal to or even better than the XBO, the situation is that there are even more cases where the XBO X seems poorly optimized with bugs, Or worse graphic assets, or worse framerate when the resolution could be 2x that of Pro where you had a much more coherent and polished version.


Returning to the PS5 vs XSX comparison. I'm sorry, but what comrade Vergil describes are only facts, even if you don't want to see them and react by insulting arguments that make sense.

The funniest thing of all is that you go, for example, to the A Plague Tale Requiem comparison thread and you see a case with significant differences in favor of XSX and the general opinion was that "they have optimized it better for XsX" or the PS5 version should be better optimized. Which would have its logic, but it seems that this excuse only works in one direction for you 🙃

There is no dump argument in defending that the Studios are more interested in offering the most polished version in the one that will be the one that will dictate the reactions of the media and users in the vast majority. A PS5 version significantly worse than that of XsX produces discomfort and negativity at a game launch. The opposite not so much.
The number of times that the XSX version has been fixed in later patches and in many cases even to be the best version is already an indication that its optimization at launch was not the best.

It would be perfectly logical to think that, given an equality of hardware power such as that shown by both consoles, the Studios will "relax" with a respectable or "on par" XsX version (that is, slightly better, slightly worse or the same as that of PS5).

I already told you that if XSX were less powerful than Ps5, with 70% fewer units on the market and and distributing optimization time with XSS, the differences in favor of PS5 would be more significant in the vast majority of cases vs the general equality (We could say extreme equality) that you see today.
So just to be clear, the narrative is when PS5 performs better, it means devs messed up the XSX version. And when XSX performs better, everything is as it should be?

I could tell you why a lot of what you said is so wrong (even though strangely based on facts), but seeing that the narrative above is what you are pushing, it means it would be too difficult or next to impossible to reason with you.
 
Top Bottom