Support NeoGAF

[Ashamam]

Upcoming DF Direct indirectly touched on the topic of "low level API" significance and "to the metal" coding that was a point of contention just earlier this week. One of the supporter questions asked why Series X underperforms in comparison with PS5 despite the supposed hardware advantages. DF did what we've been asking them to do and posed the question to developers. Per John:

Be interested to watch this. I'm starting to think the IGN ownership is really starting to change things at DF. I just don't think this supporter question would have made it to air prior.

 

[onQ123]

Upcoming DF Direct indirectly touched on the topic of "low level API" significance and "to the metal" coding that was a point of contention just earlier this week. One of the supporter questions asked why Series X underperforms in comparison with PS5 despite the supposed hardware advantages. DF did what we've been asking them to do and posed the question to developers. Per John:

1. PS5 compilers are "extremely faster and optimized" compared to Xbox and "makes better use of the silicon that allows for speedier performance"
2. PS5 API (GNMX) is "faster than Xbox/DirectX".

This isn't necessarily news to most of us but again there are some in this thread who have been arguing that "to the metal" optimizations were a thing of the past. This is categorically false. I also think this insight has direct ramifications on prospective PS5 Pro performance, specifically as it relates to the usage of dual issue compute. As I said a few times in this forum/thread, it wouldn't be wise to scoff at the 33TF figure as PS developer environment will likely allow the console to run a number of games as you would expect a 33TF machine to perform.

No because when people think of 33TF they will be thinking of the old compute to fixed function ratio.

But also yes because it actually will be 33TF when it comes to compute but will be bottlenecked by memory & fixed function hardware so finding the best use for it will show amazing results & it will push devs to do things differently from the normal pipeline.

 

[Zathalus]

Upcoming DF Direct indirectly touched on the topic of "low level API" significance and "to the metal" coding that was a point of contention just earlier this week. One of the supporter questions asked why Series X underperforms in comparison with PS5 despite the supposed hardware advantages. DF did what we've been asking them to do and posed the question to developers. Per John:

1. PS5 compilers are "extremely faster and optimized" compared to Xbox and "makes better use of the silicon that allows for speedier performance"
2. PS5 API (GNMX) is "faster than Xbox/DirectX".

This isn't necessarily news to most of us but again there are some in this thread who have been arguing that "to the metal" optimizations were a thing of the past. This is categorically false. I also think this insight has direct ramifications on prospective PS5 Pro performance, specifically as it relates to the usage of dual issue compute. As I said a few times in this forum/thread, it wouldn't be wise to scoff at the 33TF figure as PS developer environment will likely allow the console to run a number of games as you would expect a 33TF machine to perform.

Of course there are performance benefits a dedicated PS5 API vs the DX12 API. While DX12 and Vulcan are low-level APIs they still need to abstract a bit. But the performance difference is nowhere near what is used to be. A 2080 (when not VRAM limited) is still roughly as fast as a PS5 in the vast majority of titles, it also has wins and losses in other titles as well. The days of expecting a console version of a game to release with a large lead over equivalent PC hardware are long gone.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Of course there are performance benefits a dedicated PS5 API vs the DX12 API. While DX12 and Vulcan are low-level APIs they still need to abstract a bit. But the performance difference is nowhere near what is used to be. A 2080 (when not VRAM limited) is still roughly as fast as a PS5 in the vast majority of titles, it also has wins and losses in other titles as well. The days of expecting a console version of a game to release with a large lead over equivalent PC hardware are long gone.

Your idea of "equivalent PC hardware" always favours differences that favour the PC, and because we are no longer dealing in bytes/kilobytes for L2 and L3 caches, Kilobytes/megabytes for RAM and VRAM the scale difference of these "equivalences" would be as unfair as putting the fastest AMD laptop CPU with integrated graphics against the PS5 APU.

All we can say is that you can still no longer take brand new cheap commodity PC hardware and outperform consoles, and the wait for new cheap commodity hardware catching up is getting longer.

When I say cheap commodity, I'm meaning like a 1050 Ti and before, or CPUs like a Pentium Gold as was the comparison in the PS4 gen, as the closet it ever got because consoles dropped desktop high clocked CPUs when adjusting to an APU future.

 

[Zathalus]

Your idea of "equivalent PC hardware" always favours differences that favour the PC, and because we are no longer dealing in bytes/kilobytes for L2 and L3 caches, Kilobytes/megabytes for RAM and VRAM the scale difference of these "equivalences" would be as unfair as putting the fastest AMD laptop CPU with integrated graphics against the PS5 APU.

All we can say is that you can still no longer take brand new cheap commodity PC hardware and outperform consoles, and the wait for new cheap commodity hardware catching up is getting longer.

When I say cheap commodity, I'm meaning like a 1050 Ti and before, or CPUs like a Pentium Gold as was the comparison in the PS4 gen, as the closet it ever got because consoles dropped desktop high clocked CPUs when adjusting to an APU future.

A 4800s/3600 CPU combined with a 6700 offers similar performance to a PS5 in the far majority of games. The PC build has some minor advantages which supports my point, the PS5 API is obviously going to have some performance benefits, but the difference between that API and something like DX12 or Vulkan is not this massive advantage that it used to be.

I’m not sure why you are bring up cost, obviously PC is more expensive these days, you need to spend at least around $700 to match the PS5. It would be rather deluded for someone to claim that you can build something that can beat the PS5 at under $500.

 

[Gaiff]

Your idea of "equivalent PC hardware" always favours differences that favour the PC, and because we are no longer dealing in bytes/kilobytes for L2 and L3 caches, Kilobytes/megabytes for RAM and VRAM the scale difference of these "equivalences" would be as unfair as putting the fastest AMD laptop CPU with integrated graphics against the PS5 APU.

All we can say is that you can still no longer take brand new cheap commodity PC hardware and outperform consoles, and the wait for new cheap commodity hardware catching up is getting longer.

When I say cheap commodity, I'm meaning like a 1050 Ti and before, or CPUs like a Pentium Gold as was the comparison in the PS4 gen, as the closet it ever got because consoles dropped desktop high clocked CPUs when adjusting to an APU future.

Well, yeah, but that’s because the cheap commodity hardware on PC had skyrocketed in price in no small part due to one company’s sheer greed while the console price increase only went up by 25% gen-on-gen. The 4060 should really be a named the 4050 Ti and sell for $175-200.

 

[PaintTinJr]

A 4800s/3600 CPU combined with a 6700 offers similar performance to a PS5 in the far majority of games. The PC build has some minor advantages which supports my point, the PS5 API is obviously going to have some performance benefits, but the difference between that API and something like DX12 or Vulkan is not this massive advantage that it used to be.

I’m not sure why you are bring up cost, obviously PC is more expensive these days, you need to spend at least around $700 to match the PS5. It would be rather deluded to claim you can beat the PS5 at under $500.

A RX 6700 is not commodity hardware, and unless you are going to pair the CPU with just 6GBs of RAM, run the games in linux with Proton and restrict the OS to 4.5GB of the 6GB, and pick a 10GB version of the GPU - beyond the smaller PC advantages you are ignoring - you are still giving the PC multi factor redundancy advantages in so-called "equivalent" hardware at Gigabyte scale for RAM and VRAM, and will always have megabyte/kilobyte bottleneck hardware advantages at GPU cache levels that aren't equivalent.

Your opening suggestion that a modern flagship GPU like a 2080 is needed (or even a 6700), should surely have had you pause for thought when the context is talking about optimisation advantages of software and software design on console versus PC.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Well, yeah, but that’s because the cheap commodity hardware on PC had skyrocketed in price in no small part due to one company’s sheer greed while the console price increase only went up by 25% gen-on-gen. The 4060 should really be a named the 4050 Ti and sell for $175-200.

But how much VRAM would that £250 RTX 4050 ti ship with? and would it still bottleneck compared to PS5 when VRAM starved - even forgetting starving the PC CPU at just 4.5GB?

The optimisation is bridging all of those free hardware advantages the PC gets in these false "equivalency" comparisons IMO.

 

[Little Mac]

Do you guys think SquareEnix would spend the development time to boost FFXVI performance on the Pro? I have a copy of the game still shrink-wrapped.

 

[Zathalus]

A RX 6700 is not commodity hardware, and unless you are going to pair the CPU with just 6GBs of RAM, run the games in linux with Proton and restrict the OS to 4.5GB of the 6GB, and pick a 10GB version of the GPU - beyond the smaller PC advantages you are ignoring - you are still giving the PC multi factor redundancy advantages in so-called "equivalent" hardware at Gigabyte scale for RAM and VRAM, and will always have megabyte/kilobyte bottleneck hardware advantages at GPU cache levels that aren't equivalent.

Your opening suggestion that a modern flagship GPU like a 2080 is need (or even a 6700), should surely have had you pause for thought when the context is talking about optimisation advantages of software and software design on console versus PC.

Commodity Hardware? Who the hell gives a shit? I’m strictly comparing the PS5 to equivalent PC GPUs, I really didn’t bring up cost or how console unified memory is obviously advantageous compared to the split memory pools of PC (also it really has nothing to do with the API comparison I’m making, Xbox uses DX12 and also had the ability to take advantage of its unified memory). Furthermore, claiming the 2080 is some modern flagship GPU is a laugh, it’s almost 6 years old. I could have just said 4060 or 7600, they all perform roughly the same.

Does the PS5 have a massive GPU performance advantage over a PC GPU that is caused by its API that is roughly in the same ballpark rasterization wise (around a ~6700)? No. My point is made, you can bring up memory or cost all you want but that has got nothing to do with my original claim.

 

[Skifi28]

Do you guys think SquareEnix would spend the development time to boost FFXVI performance on the Pro? I have a copy of the game still shrink-wrapped.

It's the one reason I haven't bought it yet. I don't know if they will do it, but there's a chance and I'd rather wait to play it with decent image quality.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Commodity Hardware? Who the hell gives a shit? I’m strictly comparing the PS5 to equivalent PC GPUs, I really didn’t bring up cost or how console unified memory is obviously advantageous compared to the split memory pools of PC (also it really has nothing to do with the API comparison I’m making, Xbox uses DX12 and also had the ability to take advantage of its unified memory). Furthermore, claiming the 2080 is some modern flagship GPU is a laugh, it’s almost 6 years old. I could have just said 4060 or 7600, they all perform roughly the same.

Does the PS5 have a massive GPU performance advantage over a PC GPU that is caused by its API that is roughly in the same ballpark rasterization wise (roughly around a ~6700)? No. My point is made, you can bring up memory or cost all you want but that has got nothing to do with my original claim.

Cost came into it implicitly when you claimed "But the performance difference is nowhere near what is used to be" because consoles are restricted by their BoM, and the hardware comparison to make that claim true has to be like for like "used to be" (i.e at similar commodity pricing otherwise it is a meaningless claim).

The 2080 is a 6year old GPU against a 3.5year old PS5, but it is still a consistent design of all modern Nvidia GPUs and its entry flagship workstation class status at launch is so far removed from "optimisation" concerns when it was a brute force king, and IMO seems like a ridiculous comparison talking point in regards of optimisation being less of a win on consoles nowadays.

Your whole premise also demonstrates a real lack of understanding about software optimisation in the comparison. Overall system design gains to redesign through the entire topology are far more important than syntactical, compiler or local algorithm optimisations. I mean just listen to how nanite and lumen came to be as is, where a topological change happened to bulk handle each task in longer complex single call shaders requiring the data to be re-engineered prior to use too.

 

[Gaiff]

But how much VRAM would that £250 RTX 4050 ti ship with? and would it still bottleneck compared to PS5 when VRAM starved - even forgetting starving the PC CPU at just 4.5GB?

The optimisation is bridging all of those free hardware advantages the PC gets in these false "equivalency" comparisons IMO.

You could have the 4060 16GB configuration and call it a 4050 Ti. That's actually what it is, relatively speaking, if we scale the core count.

The reality is that PC parts, especially GPUs, have seen an astronomical increase in price since the Pascal generation whereas consoles, while they increased, saw a much more modest difference. The GTX 1080 was retailing for $600 but the 4080 is double that. The PS5 would have needed to be $700-$800 to scale accordingly to PC parts.

The thing is at $300 instead of $180, we can no longer call a 4060 a commodity part.

Cost came into it implicitly when you claimed "But the performance difference is nowhere near what is used to be" because consoles are restricted by their BoM, and the hardware comparison to make that claim true has to be like for like "used to be" (i.e at similar commodity pricing otherwise it is a meaningless claim).

I think he might be referencing the John Carmack quote. "For the same given paper spec, a console will deliver twice the perf(ormance) of a PC, and a PC will deliver twice the perf(ormance) of a mobile part." Which I don't think has been true for a long time, but many people still run with it.

 

[Zathalus]

Cost came into it implicitly when you claimed "But the performance difference is nowhere near what is used to be" because consoles are restricted by their BoM, and the hardware comparison to make that claim true has to be like for like "used to be" (i.e at similar commodity pricing otherwise it is a meaningless claim).

The 2080 is a 6year old GPU against a 3.5year old PS5, but it is still a consistent design of all modern Nvidia GPUs and its entry flagship workstation class status at launch is so far removed from "optimisation" concerns when it was a brute force king, and IMO seems like a ridiculous comparison talking point in regards of optimisation being less of a win on consoles nowadays.

Your whole premise also demonstrates a real lack of understanding about software optimisation in the comparison. Overall system design gains to redesign through the entire topology are far more important than syntactical, compiler or local algorithm optimisations. I mean just listen to how nanite and lumen came to be as is, where a topological change happened to bulk handle each task in longer complex single call shaders requiring the data to be re-engineered prior to use too.

The performance difference claim was strictly in reference to the APIs. The advantage of being closer to the metal is much smaller now vs things like DX12 and Vulkan compared to DX11, DX9, or even earlier. That is the only claim I was making (and it’s factually true), the rest I’m not going to get dragged into because it has got nothing to do with my point.

 

[PaintTinJr]

You could have the 4060 16GB configuration and call it a 4050 Ti. That's actually what it is, relatively speaking, if we scale the core count.

The reality is that PC parts, especially GPUs, have seen an astronomical increase in price since the Pascal generation whereas consoles, while they increased, saw a much more modest difference. The GTX 1080 was retailing for $600 but the 4080 is double that. The PS5 would have needed to be $700-$800 to scale accordingly to PC parts.

The thing is at $300 instead of $180, we can no longer call a 4060 a commodity part.


I think he might be referencing the John Carmack quote. "For the same given paper spec, a console will deliver twice the perf(ormance) of a PC, and a PC will deliver twice the perf(ormance) of a mobile part." Which I don't think has been true for a long time, but many people still run with it.

But it isn't the same paper spec when all the advantages are in onboard memory for PC and memory has been heavily responsible for the rise in console BoM, hence why XsX didn't get 24GB and XsS wasn't getting 16GB.

 

[Hunnybun]

Do you guys think SquareEnix would spend the development time to boost FFXVI performance on the Pro? I have a copy of the game still shrink-wrapped.

I think at the very least any big PS5 exclusives will get some kind of Pro mode leveraging PSSR. I'm not sure something like FF XVI will get much more than that, but my bet would be that both fidelity and performance modes will get significant IQ and more modest performance improvements.

There are at least half a dozen games I'm waiting on for those sorts of improvements.

 

[Hunnybun]

It's the one reason I haven't bought it yet. I don't know if they will do it, but there's a chance and I'd rather wait to play it with decent image quality.

Me too. I've tried the demo and while fidelity mode looks ok-ish (definitely not good), I'm not playing 30fps games anymore, and performance mode looks like shit, frankly.

 

[Gaiff]

But it isn't the same paper spec when all the advantages are in onboard memory for PC and memory has been heavily responsible for the rise in console BoM, hence why XsX didn't get 24GB and XsS wasn't getting 16GB.

Yeah, we kind of dumb it down by a lot. We find a roughly (I use that word loosely) CPU and GPU with other parts that won't hold them back and see how they stack up to a console. In the case of the PS5, it's generally something along the lines of a Ryzen 3600 and an RX 6700.

We can't do much better than that for equivalency.

 

[Spukc]

Sweet can’t wait to play minecraft ps5 on it

 

[Dunker99]

Oh joy. More discussions about PC in a PS5 thread.

 

[Musilla]

Oh joy. More discussions about PC in a PS5 thread.

It is exhausting

 

[winjer]

Oh joy. More discussions about PC in a PS5 thread.

Curious how the exact thing happens in PC specific threads.
Every time someone creates a PC thread to talk about new CPUs, GPUs, memory or some other hardware, there is always some one asking when it's coming to console.
Or if it's some new PC software, there is always some one talking about consoles.
For example, just recently 6 games were updated with FSR 3.1, only on PC. But somehow, a bunch of PlayStation fanboys managed to turn that thread into shitshow about console wars.

 

[Hunnybun]

Oh joy. More discussions about PC in a PS5 thread.

It's so, sooo, tedious.

 

[twilo99]

Only console manufacturers can get away with pushing outdated hardware advertised as cutting edge technology to consumers, at volume, with great success.

It’s an amazing business model really..

It is exhausting

You’ll be ok.

 

[Fafalada]

Of course there are performance benefits a dedicated PS5 API vs the DX12 API. While DX12 and Vulcan are low-level APIs they still need to abstract a bit. But the performance difference is nowhere near what is used to be. A 2080 (when not VRAM limited) is still roughly as fast as a PS5 in the vast majority of titles, it also has wins and losses in other titles as well. The days of expecting a console version of a game to release with a large lead over equivalent PC hardware are long gone.

The advantages of optimising for a single spec with low-level API are and have always been context depending. I know people love shorthands like XXX% difference - but there's never been such a delta, that's not how optimisations ever worked.
Moreover - the effect of such optimisations affects CPU and GPU side and arguably CPU impact remains the most visible one by considerable margin (again, not to generalize - but the kind of deltas that are 'possible' are just larger).
Eg. I've personally seen the PS4 Jaguar outperform contemporary I7 CPUs about 2:1 on equivalent VR workloads(the same GNM vs DX12 comparison) - courtesy of having those low-level API options. But that doesn't magically translate to every game, or even every VR setup - and it doesn't preclude the fact that same Jaguar cores were up to 4x slower in everything else, so you're starting from behind. Ie. there's no nice and round single number to represent this.

The other part is that more and more games are content driven to the point where such optimisations are no longer as impactful, especially in an era of cross-platform everything - and that's also a journey we've been on for the last 20 years. Plenty of PS2 software was already badly underperforming due to CPU limitations and reworking that code to be fully 'console friendly' just wasn't worth the cost/benefit to most.

 

[Lysandros]

Upcoming DF Direct indirectly touched on the topic of "low level API" significance and "to the metal" coding that was a point of contention just earlier this week. One of the supporter questions asked why Series X underperforms in comparison with PS5 despite the supposed hardware advantages. DF did what we've been asking them to do and posed the question to developers. Per John:

1. PS5 compilers are "extremely faster and optimized" compared to Xbox and "makes better use of the silicon that allows for speedier performance"
2. PS5 API (GNMX) is "faster than Xbox/DirectX".

With the important and purposefully/stubbornly overlooked point being that those "supposed hardware advantages" are a reality for both systems, those are in no way exclusive to XSX. And, a higher level API can actually offer better performance in situations where the additional effort, difficulty, expertise, time and resources required for the lower level API (to go further to offer better performance) isn't quite there, in a similar fashion to dx11 vs dx12 situation on PC.

"Let's completely ignore PS5 hardware advantages and search the (imaginary) 'culprit' in software and preferential treatment" was always DF's own trademarked narrative from the beginning of the generation. Nothing new essentially.

 

[Bernoulli]

we are in july and no leaks from production lines

 

[ChiefDada]

With the important and purposefully/stubbornly overlooked point being that those "supposed hardware advantages" are a reality for both systems, those are in no way exclusive to XSX. And, a higher level API can actually offer better performance in situations where the additional effort, difficulty, expertise, time and resources required for the lower level API (to go further to offer better performance) isn't quite there, in a similar fashion to dx11 vs dx12 situation on PC.

"Let's completely ignore PS5 hardware advantages and search the (imaginary) 'culprit' in software and preferential treatment" was always DF's own trademarked narrative from the beginning of the generation. Nothing new essentially.

Yeah, Alex touched on this but in a somewhat inconsistent manner; he insists that the lower CU/higher clocks design of the PS5 allowed the console to outperform SX in older-gen/cross-gen games that leveraged fixed function hardware more for performance. So rasterized graphic features such as shadowmaps can often be better on PS5. He claimed that current-gen games, specifically UE5, virtually always performs better on Series X because it is more dependent on compute. When Richard expertly countered him by asking about the RT performance differences where PS5 take lead, such as the case of Callisto Protocol, Alex response becomes an incoherent mess and basically blames the CP developers for bad development job, as if CP is the only game with RT where PS5 overtakes SX.

I should also mention that developers told John they had an option to utilize less optimized PS4 APIs on PS5 games which he theorizes could be the reason why some games can see a performance advantage for Series X.

 

[Imtjnotu]

we are in july and no leaks from production lines

its real and coming

 

[Sleepwalker]

Shouldn't there be more leaks by now? This is meant to be releasing pretty soon no?

 

[Fafalada]

he insists that the lower CU/higher clocks design of the PS5 allowed the console to outperform SX in older-gen/cross-gen games that leveraged fixed function hardware more for performance. So rasterized graphic features such as shadowmaps can often be better on PS5. He claimed that current-gen games, specifically UE5, virtually always performs better on Series X because it is more dependent on compute.

I do wonder why DF - with all their connections - doesn't simply try to explore this a bit more in depth - eg. have a developer at any studio that lets them visit outright show them the metrics for different Consoles/GPUs on specific workloads (as opposed to measuring end-framerates of any given game) which would be a lot more meaningful than the endless speculations on things they have little direct experience with. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if they could get their own devkit access at this point too and just run some tests on UE5 that way
It might not be looked on favorably by either Sony or MS but given how they get invited to Phil's private trailer they probably have the clout to actually pull this off if they wanted to.

Granted there were some similar specific-usecase numbers available in PS4/XB1 era and they largely avoided referencing them past the initial leak (the CPU bench favored PS4, on two separate instances even, which didn't support the existing narratives though so...)

 

[Lysandros]

Yeah, Alex touched on this but in a somewhat inconsistent manner; he insists that the lower CU/higher clocks design of the PS5 allowed the console to outperform SX in older-gen/cross-gen games that leveraged fixed function hardware more for performance. So rasterized graphic features such as shadowmaps can often be better on PS5. He claimed that current-gen games, specifically UE5, virtually always performs better on Series X because it is more dependent on compute. When Richard expertly countered him by asking about the RT performance differences where PS5 take lead, such as the case of Callisto Protocol, Alex response becomes an incoherent mess and basically blames the CP developers for bad development job, as if CP is the only game with RT where PS5 overtakes SX.

I should also mention that developers told John they had an option to utilize less optimized PS4 APIs on PS5 games which he theorizes could be the reason why some games can see a performance advantage for Series X.

Well, the Dictator's utmost high esteem and razor sharp accuracy in matter of PS5 hardware is world-renowned, i wouldn't dare to contradict this of course... He has an abundant number of forum posts and plentiful of facial expressions to back that up after all.

As to overall level of DF's technical knowledge in the subject matter, you can add in Tomas Morgan. The man is a real expert at counting console teraflops in particular, he always counts them very accurately. In each one of his video analysis he repeatedly mentions that XSS has 4 teraflops for example, which is undoubtedly very accurate. He also knows some very advanced and overlooked facts such as XSX having a larger GPU, hence (very rightly i must say) always expects a better performance on this machine in comparison to PS5. All this to say that this is a very high level stuff and experts truly abound in the team.

 

[MisterXDTV]

we are in july and no leaks from production lines

The PS4 Pro Neo PDF leak came out mid-July

Today is June 30

 

[Bernoulli]

its real and coming

i know it's real but they better start production early or we'll have no stock for launch

 

[Loxus]

Don't forget that supposedly leaked document.

One would assume another small piece of new info would drop by now.

 

[blastprocessor]

we are in july and no leaks from production lines

It will have black instead of white covers. Just a hunch...

 

[Three]

Do you guys think SquareEnix would spend the development time to boost FFXVI performance on the Pro? I have a copy of the game still shrink-wrapped.

You can just enable boost mode and it will since it has DRS modes.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

i know it's real but they better start production early or we'll have no stock for launch

No stock at launch? You have no idea when the PS5 Pro is going to go into production or when it will launch.

We saw leaked images of the PS5 Slim in August 2023 and we had more than enough stock by the end of the year. If this is released in the same timeline as other PlayStation consoles, there is no need to fret over a lack of information at this point.

Sony had so much stock for the PS5 Slim, they weren't even able to sell out of it (Spider-Man 2 bundle was available until recently).

So super strange why you're acting hysterical for no reason.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Do you guys think SquareEnix would spend the development time to boost FFXVI performance on the Pro? I have a copy of the game still shrink-wrapped.

You have a lot of different scenarios for games for PS5 Pro.

Many games will get boosted without updates. Some games will receive a PS5 Pro patch, which yes, would obviously be worth it and other games will even add things in like RTX, likely games that have RTX assets already created for PC or high profile PS5 titles like GT7.

 

[Fafalada]

i know it's real but they better start production early or we'll have no stock for launch

IIRC PS4Slim/Pro only had production line leaks around the time of official reveal (September) - until then noone knew what they'd even look like.
Anyway given historical precedent for 'Pro' consoles - even combined 1X & Pro sales were barely 30-40% of what PS4 sold on average holiday month, so this is unlikely to be stock limited. Or if it is - the naysayers will have a lot of crow on the plates...

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Don't forget that supposedly leaked document.

One would assume another small piece of new info would drop by now.

Nothing supposedly about it. Sony put in a DMCA claim against MLID, it's definitely a leaked document.


We got this leaked information way earlier relative to say the PS4 Pro (which leaked in July)

Somehow people don't want to focus on the fact that we didn't get confirmation of a PS4 Pro from Sony until September and here we are in June and people are super impatient around leaks and announcements.

Could we hear something before September? Sure. Could the PS5 Pro launch before November? Sure, but that's the precedent we have to go on.

Something I think *might* complicate matters is a 30th anniversary edition of the PS5. Consoles, plates, and controllers. And hopefully we see a 25th anniversary of the PS2 supported by plates and controllers too, which would come out or be announced in March of next year.

Big opportunity for Sony to sell quite a few peripherals, we'll see if they take it. Hopefully it's a little bit better than Jim Ryan's retirement peripherals/console.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Nothing supposedly about it. Sony put in a DMCA claim against MLID, it's definitely a leaked document.


We got this leaked information way earlier relative to say the PS4 Pro (which leaked in July)

Somehow people don't want to focus on the fact that we didn't get confirmation of a PS4 Pro from Sony until September and here we are in June and people are super impatient around leaks and announcements.

Could we hear something before September? Sure. Could the PS5 Pro launch before November? Sure, but that's the precedent we have to go on.

Something I think *might* complicate matters is a 30th anniversary edition of the PS5. Consoles, plates, and controllers. And hopefully we see a 25th anniversary of the PS2 supported by plates and controllers too, which would come out or be announced in March of next year.

Big opportunity for Sony to sell quite a few peripherals, we'll see if they take it. Hopefully it's a little bit better than Jim Ryan's retirement peripherals/console.

Not to mention others have also gotten the documents like Digital Foundry that even had a little more info

 

[nial]

Something I think *might* complicate matters is a 30th anniversary edition of the PS5. Consoles, plates, and controllers.

I think they will just make that for PS5 Slim.
Kind of weird to sell a special, limited edition for PS5 Pro only 2-3 weeks after launch.

 

[Bernardougf]

Only console manufacturers can get away with pushing outdated hardware advertised as cutting edge technology to consumers, at volume, with great success.

It’s an amazing business model really..



You’ll be ok.

I dont think anybody buys a 500 plastic box thinking its cutting edge technology...

 

[Physiognomonics]

Yeah, Alex touched on this but in a somewhat inconsistent manner; he insists that the lower CU/higher clocks design of the PS5 allowed the console to outperform SX in older-gen/cross-gen games that leveraged fixed function hardware more for performance. So rasterized graphic features such as shadowmaps can often be better on PS5. He claimed that current-gen games, specifically UE5, virtually always performs better on Series X because it is more dependent on compute. When Richard expertly countered him by asking about the RT performance differences where PS5 take lead, such as the case of Callisto Protocol, Alex response becomes an incoherent mess and basically blames the CP developers for bad development job, as if CP is the only game with RT where PS5 overtakes SX.

I should also mention that developers told John they had an option to utilize less optimized PS4 APIs on PS5 games which he theorizes could be the reason why some games can see a performance advantage for Series X.

What's the most shocking is how PS5 is outperforming XSX in games with hardware RT. Forget the UE5 games almost all using software RT (compute/bandwidth), but games using hardware RT have almost all being performing better on PS5 (and like a lot better in some games) while compute / bandwidth bound UE5 games are unsurprisingly mostly performing better (but not that much) on XSX. This has been seen in different engines.

But yes Alex will never admit any kind of RT advantage for PS5 whether hardware or tools against XSX. Thing is sadly for him PS5 seems to performs better than XSX in those games but also there are no games on Xbox XSX showing anything remotely similar to what Insomniac have being doing on PS5. They have being praising true RDNA2 RT on XSX for months, this was their main propaganda script for very long, but the best games showcasing RT on that consoles don't even use that RDNA2 RT hardware and are using compute and bandwdith to render those ray traced effects (which are of lower quality obviously, most characters in those games don't have reflections).

What's happening here? is it about superior tools on PS5, deficiency in the Xbox hardware, RT not being bound by compute and banwidth but by something else? Why did DF forget their RDNA2 true RT hardware script they were playing before? Shouldn't they be doing alarming articles about it? But they don't talk about it anymore, they just changed their script. It's all about those UE5 "software RT features" now. Of course they don't call it "software RT", just RT in UE5 engine.

IIRC PS4Slim/Pro only had production line leaks around the time of official reveal (September) - until then noone knew what they'd even look like.
Anyway given historical precedent for 'Pro' consoles - even combined 1X & Pro sales were barely 30-40% of what PS4 sold on average holiday month, so this is unlikely to be stock limited. Or if it is - the naysayers will have a lot of crow on the plates...

I predict it's going to sell like hotcakes, more so than with PS4 Pro. I actually think they won't produce them in enough quantities and it's going to be very expensive to get one this holiday season, a bit like PS5 for months (or years).

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I think they will just make that for PS5 Slim.
Kind of weird to sell a special, limited edition for PS5 Pro only 2-3 weeks after launch.

That's my point.

It'll be strange to have them be marketed at the same time.

If I was Sony, I'd get the Pro out earlier and then the special edition out slim out later, though I'd put plates out for standard, slim, and pro, and the controller as well.

 

[Rocco Schiavone]

It will have black instead of white covers. Just a hunch...

That doesn't make any sense at all.

Why should Sony release the console in a color that most people think is good instead of releasing a color that many people think sucks???

It makes much more sense to release the console in a color that customers find ugly and then collect additional money with different faceplates. So the obvious choice is the pro will be white too.

 

[nial]

That's my point.

It'll be strange to have them be marketed at the same time.

If I was Sony, I'd get the Pro out earlier and then the special edition out slim out later, though I'd put plates out for standard, slim, and pro, and the controller as well.

There's no other way going at this point, it's 100% targeting November. The thing is that a special edition PS5 Slim wouldn't be a really hard sell around the same time (compared to a special edition PS5 Pro), and also yes, they could sell the controller and plates for the four different models.

 

[Darsxx82]

What's the most shocking is how PS5 is outperforming XSX in games with hardware RT. Forget the UE5 games almost all using software RT (compute/bandwidth), but games using hardware RT have almost all being performing better on PS5 (and like a lot better in some games) while compute / bandwidth bound UE5 games are unsurprisingly mostly performing better (but not that much) on XSX. This has been seen in different engines.

But yes Alex will never admit any kind of RT advantage for PS5 whether hardware or tools against XSX. Thing is sadly for him PS5 seems to performs better than XSX in those games but also there are no games on Xbox XSX showing anything remotely similar to what Insomniac have being doing on PS5. They have being praising true RDNA2 RT on XSX for months, this was their main propaganda script for very long, but the best games showcasing RT on that consoles don't even use that RDNA2 RT hardware and are using compute and bandwdith to render those ray traced effects (which are of lower quality obviously, most characters in those games don't have reflections).

What's happening here? is it about superior tools on PS5, deficiency in the Xbox hardware, RT not being bound by compute and banwidth but by something else? Why did DF forget their RDNA2 true RT hardware script they were playing before? Shouldn't they be doing alarming articles about it? But they don't talk about it anymore, they just changed their script. It's all about those UE5 "software RT features" now. Of course they don't call it "software RT", just RT in UE5 engine.

I predict it's going to sell like hotcakes, more so than with PS4 Pro. I actually think they won't produce them in enough quantities and it's going to be very expensive to get one this holiday season, a bit like PS5 for months (or years).

The problem is that that is the first lie. Some of you want us to believe that all games with some type of RT are performing better on PS5 and nothing could be further from the truth. There are quite a few cases where the version that performs best is that of XSX and not counting the cases where after a patch the launch situation has changed. And we are talking about different and varied graphics engines.

But hey! It is perfectly fine to point out and criticize people for being dishonest while oneself is dishonest.

 

[omegasc]

Do you guys think SquareEnix would spend the development time to boost FFXVI performance on the Pro? I have a copy of the game still shrink-wrapped.

I think the delay in releasing the PC version is because they are working on the Pro enhancements. It would be a good showcase for the Pro, so maybe Sony a$ked politely and Square agreed. I may be way off, but whatever.