Thirty7ven
Banned
Funny OP, you didn’t mind jumping to conclusions without material evidence for 11 months straight. Is this some sort of born again Christian phase you’re going through?
I don’t believe it is possible to build that PC like PS5 or even Series X.If I built 2 PCs and one was close to PS5 specs and the other close to Series X specs the PC close to Series X specs would give a higher framerate.
Given the raw hardware for Series X has a higjer performance ceiling than PS5 when it comes to framerate the obvious conclusion as to why multiplats work better on PS5 is software.
You are one of the xbox fanboys that went into hiding after the comparisions started rolling in. Suprised Dirt 5 not looking like trash on xbox anymore gave you enough confidence to crawl out of your hole.Lol, you have NO idea who I am, do you?
It wasn’t in any way shape or form a reasonable conclusion.I don't agree with OP. It was a reasonable conclusion to draw at the time. It turned out wrong and that should be conceded without guilt.
This isn't a UN roundtable, it's a gaming forum. People are going to call it like they see it without worrying too much about being proven wrong later when more info comes out.
It seems people are suckers for that "voice of reason" tone OP used but the actual message is self-important and laughable. "We can all do better" makes it sound like it's such a big deal we should think about holding a benefit concert for the "victims" of the now debunked speculation.
Maybe because some of them have more context and nuance than that disingenuous take.
I don’t believe it is possible to build that PC like PS5 or even Series X.
So you are comparing Apple to Oranges.
I stated a fact. The difference is software. There are a few minor differences like 18 active CUs per SE vs 26 but that is not going to make the series X get lower FPS than the PS5 from a raw hardware standpoint.
Totally doable. Not a 100% replacement but close enough to know that the primary factor for the framerate differences is software.
That is not true.I stated a fact. The difference is software. There are a few minor differences like 18 active CUs per SE vs 26 but that is not going to make the series X get lower FPS than the PS5 from a raw hardware standpoint.
Totally doable. Not a 100% replacement but close enough to know that the primary factor for the framerate differences is software.
You are one of the xbox fanboys that went into hiding after the comparisions started rolling in. Suprised Dirt 5 not looking like trash on xbox anymore gave you enough confidence to crawl out of your hole.
P.s. fanboys that hide behind neutrality are the worst kind. Even Riky is superior to you.
This thread a late lazy load. Trying to take theHe spend most of his time on the Next Gen thread doing walltexts. He should edit his old posts before made this thread.
This thread a late lazy load. Trying to take thefalsealtruistic route which should have been the humble pie on day 0 of these systems launch and comparisons.
I remember when Dirt 5 was being treated like an Xbox exclusive for the month or two prior with all the hooting and hollering at PR language comparisons between the two versions and the like.The dude is so out of the touch that is quite depressing. I was laughting all the day from those comparisons thread, but I don't even care about Dirt 5 comparison because IMO the game is still very very last gen no matter what plataform or what DF say. I played bunch of time Dirt 3 on Xbox 360 and Dirt 5 looks like nothing drastic really change to the vision of the game.
Those people really take console wars too far.
The issue I see with this thread was that it was premature.He spend most of his time on the Next Gen thread doing walltexts. He should edit his old posts before made this thread.
That is not true.
There is big hardware differences.
+ Unified memory pool
+ Decompress and DMAs units
+ I/O specific co-processors
+ Cache scrubbers
These are from top of my head... we can find more if start to get deep in the arch.
The dude is so out of the touch that is quite depressing. I was laughting all the day from those comparisons thread, but I don't even care about Dirt 5 comparison because IMO the game is still very very last gen no matter what plataform or what DF say. I played bunch of time Dirt 3 on Xbox 360 and Dirt 5 looks like nothing drastic really change to the vision of the game.
Those people really take console wars too far.
Glad more people recognise those fake BS.
OP is completely full of shit and anybody whose encountered his BS (usually a BS of wall of text) know what he truly is.
+ Unified memory poolThat is not true.
There is big hardware differences.
+ Unified memory pool
+ Decompress and DMAs units
+ I/O specific co-processors
+ Cache scrubbers
These are from top of my head... we can find more if start to get deep in the arch.
He's been saying that BOTH consoles are not the same as slapping PC parts together.+ Unified memory pool
+ Decompress and DMAs units
+ I/O specific co-processors
Are also on Series X. Not sure if they have cache scrubbers, or even need them.
I don’t believe it is possible to build that PC like PS5 or even Series X.
So you are comparing Apple to Oranges.
It is about console vs PC.+ Unified memory pool
+ Decompress and DMAs units
+ I/O specific co-processors
Are also on Series X. Not sure if they have cache scrubbers, or even need them.
Aside unified memory pool (but it's virtually splitted so) such unit who talking about are quite standard and nothing special to squeeze out more by the hardware. And forgive me but series X beg for cache scrubbers with such higher number of CUs. It no need for what reason exactly? Bandwidth is quite low for such CUs counts and it's even splitted.+ Unified memory pool
+ Decompress and DMAs units
+ I/O specific co-processors
Are also on Series X. Not sure if they have cache scrubbers, or even need them.
He's been saying that BOTH consoles are not the same as slapping PC parts together.
CPU is in most cases the big offence in framerate... not the GPU (that is true for GPU bound games that are less than CPU bound).Sure but the main differences between the two when it comes to framerates are GPU, a tiny CPU difference and software. The hardware difference you can simulate with PC parts and while the raw performance numbers will not match the delta will be close.
You are one of the xbox fanboys that went into hiding after the comparisions started rolling in. Suprised Dirt 5 not looking like trash on xbox anymore gave you enough confidence to crawl out of your hole.
P.s. fanboys that hide behind neutrality are the worst kind. Even Riky is superior to you.
That is not true.
There is big hardware differences.
+ Unified memory pool
+ Decompress and DMAs units
+ I/O specific co-processors
+ Cache scrubbers
These are from top of my head... we can find more if
CPU is in most cases the big offence in framerate... not the GPU (that is true for GPU bound games that are less than CPU bound).
The consoles have hardware units that free up the CPU while PC not.
You can't simulate any console with PC parts.
Because you can't get the same hardware with PC parts.
Development since last generation often is done on PC hardware, so I’m not sure how this can be true.I don’t believe it is possible to build that PC like PS5 or even Series X.
So you are comparing Apple to Oranges.
Wut?Development since last generation often is done on PC hardware, so I’m not sure how this can be true.
Wut?
What the development being often on PC has to do with what I said? lol
You can't build a PC like PS5/Xbox because there is no hardware parts like it is on these consoles.
PC had to brute force with CPU a lot of tasks executed by specific hardware units on consoles.
About that, I can be totally wrong but I noticed a curious thing about the CUs on ps5 compared the series X. MS has clearly reported on series X, CUs perform the 20% better compared the CUs of the past generation.Not trying to do that though, perhaps try reading and then comprehending. Let's try again.
The primary hardware difference between the two consoles outside of the SSD is the GPU with a tiny amount of CPU but probably barely worth mentioning.
The primary difference between the two PCs I compared is again the GPU.
So what I am saying is that if you have two GPUs with a similar on paper delta to the consoles and compare them the higher specified one is faster when bot CPU bound.
This should also be the case for the consoles yet it evidently is not so lets try and think of the reason for this.
It could be the PS5 has secret sauce that allows the shader units to have better utilisation.
An alternative is that the PS5 software stack is better leading to more optimised code and or lower OS/driver overhead than on Series X.
To me the software stack answer seems far more likely.
About that, I can be totally wrong but I noticed a curious thing about the CUs on ps5 compared the series X. MS has clearly reported on series X, CUs perform the 20% better compared the CUs of the past generation.
Cerny to the other side claimed the 36 CUs on ps5 are like to have 52 CUs of the old PS4 on it which not seems exactly a 20% of more perfomance. Something doesn't up to my math but again I could be easily wrong and misunderstood something.
Die shot are already leaked but no one has reported anything about the CUs unfortunately.Well there is the speculation that the CUs are different between the two. However without a die shot we really don't know if that's true.
There is no x-ray die shot for PS5 yet.Die shot are already leaked but no one has reported anything about the CUs unfortunately.
Die shot are already leaked but no one has reported anything about the CUs unfortunately.
I meant an x-ray so we can see how everything is organized on that die.
There is no x-ray die shot for PS5 yet.
MS claim the CUs have a 25% perf/clock compared with Xbox One X’s CUs.
That is the same increase claimed by AMD from GCN to RDNA.
RDNA to RDNA 2 has more ~15% increase in perf/clock on CUs... I’m saying ~15% but it is actually double digit... it can be a bit lower than 15 or a bit more.
Overall by AMD GCN’s CUs to RDNA 2’s CUs has a bigger than 38% (using 11% RDNA to RDNA 2) increase in perf/clock.
It is from AMD docs.6800 is ~52% faster than radeon 7 at 4k and both are 60 CUs. The 6800 also clocks 24% higher on average.
For the Vega -> RDNA2 IPC gain to be 38% it would mean the 24% clockspeed increase only accounts for 10% of the performance uplift (100 x 1.38 x 1.1 = 152 incase you are wondering why 38% + 10% does not equal 52%).
We know that RDNA2 clockspeed scaling is better than that so it cannot be that vega -> RDNA2 is a 38% IPC uplift and is likely closer to 25%.
This also does not account for the fact that 6800 has 96 ROPs vs the 64 in R7.
It is from AMD docs.
GCN to RDNA: 25% perf/clock increase on CU
RDNA to RDNA 2: double digit perf/clock increase on CU
Let’s say GCN is 100.
GCN = 100
RDNA = 100 + 25% = 125
RDNA 2 = 125 + xx%
For 11% = 138.75
For 15% = 143.75
For 19% = 148.75
I don’t believe they said double digit if it was 20%... that is the range I believe it is.
I agree but both my comparisons were not real world performance... it is the actual IPC of the chips.It is multiplactive not additive.
Perf/clock/CU is also a nonsense stat because it will not factor bottlenecks so is very unlikely to be seen in a real use case.
I also do not think we will see a huge IPC gain going from RDNA to RDNA2 because the 6900XT with a higher clockspeed and 2x the CUs is only a bit more than 2x faster at 4k.
Anyway as shown the actual real world performance gain going from VEGA to RDNA 2 does not match the perf/cu/clock claims because those numbers won't be seen in a real workload.
Yeah I think this gen will be an exhausting roller-coaster for those highly invested in having a gap, more patches will likely come for a long time, for all games.Absurd.
let’s wait for PlayStation patch them. Later the Xbox , later the PlayStation, later the Xbox...
better, let’s wait 7 years. Lols
Game is splendid .Yeah I think this gen will be an exhausting roller-coaster for those highly invested in having a gap, more patches will likely come for a long time, for all games.
And how many here has even bothered to start the game after the new patch? Raise your hand, please.
Instead of starting the game and check if there are issues and most importantly if they even matter, while actually playing it and having some fun, people just sit around grumping about downgrades or what not while waiting for a DF analysis to stare at a fps counter and play the console war game instead...
The game is actually fun. I wish more people talked more about this than used it as dumb console war fuel. It’s not like it’s the best racer ever but it’s pure arcade rally and we really don’t get many of these games anymore so I think we should make sure this is not the last one. Just go play it, even with some issues (still there occasionally on XSX which you should know if you’ve started it) it’s still solid fun.
It is lol....It's not "just software."
Funny OP, you didn’t mind jumping to conclusions without material evidence for 11 months straight. Is this some sort of born again Christian phase you’re going through?