• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Next gen PS5 and next Xbox launch speculation - Secret sauces spicing 2019

When will the first 'next gen' console be revealed?

  • First half of 2019

    Votes: 593 15.6%

  • Second half of 2019(let's say post E3)

    Votes: 1,361 35.9%

  • First half of 2020

    Votes: 1,675 44.2%

  • 2021 :^)

    Votes: 161 4.2%
  • Total voters
    3,790
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader mode

cooldawn

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,449
MrKlaw said:
Simply put - MS sold 1/3 the units worldwide this year vs Sony. They're clearly behind and increasingly so. They have nothing to lose to start sowing the seeds of next gen in peoples minds already. Sony as market leader has much more to lose so it saying nothing. This is all PR for now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It's not about sowing the seeds though. It about the relative capability to produce the most powerful platform.

Reading this thread you'd think Sony isn't interested in producing the most capable platform for developers and gamers. This mindset seems to hinge on two factors - Sony will be first to market or Microsoft will have multiple SKU's with a 'world's most powerful' unit. It just seems a little absurd that people have no faith in Sony being able to compete because, apparently, they are dead-set on the middle ground.

I mean it could happen but to comparatively predict and define Sony's next PlayStation platform as under-performing, based on those metrics, is a little dangerous right now.
 
'V'

'V'

Banned
May 19, 2018
772
Why is it assumed by many posters here that MS and Sony would be willing to sell their consoles at a loss? E.g. having a very powerful console and selling it for much cheaper like $399.
 
TheTruthofKayle

TheTruthofKayle

Banned
Nov 12, 2017
2,877
cooldawn said:
It's not about sowing the seeds though. It about the relative capability to produce the most powerful platform.

Reading this thread you'd think Sony isn't interested in producing the most capable platform for developers and gamers. This mindset seems to hinge on two factors - Sony will be first to market or Microsoft will have multiple SKU's with a 'world's most powerful' unit. It just seems a little absurd that people have no faith in Sony being able to compete because, apparently, they are dead-set on the middle ground.

I mean it could happen but to comparatively predict and define Sony's next PlayStation platform as under-performing, based on those metrics, is a little dangerous right now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Um ... it's not so much that people think that Sony is stuck in the middle-ground
Ok I will say something that here will not be so successful but that in my opinion is what it is
For many years Microsoft has been trying in various ways to become a "leader" in the videogame market and we know well that initially the "videogame" was simply an excuse in its race towards the control of the living room.
Tried (and trying)... with different results..from the OG xbox or GFWL to the x360 until the OG xbox one ( i think their most poor attempt)...

People should start to understand that for them (seen the different results of their effort..and since some have completely failed)....it is not so much a problem of money .. not for such large companies (we saw Apple lose 190 billions of market cap in just 5 weeks without batting an eyelid) but it becomes (a problem) when you fail to instill in the shareholders the necessary confidence to invest in that market instead of others....that trust that at the moment Nadella has conquered... and that now he pours in Spencer and in the gaming division. This does not want to be the usual post that talks about the "myth" of their money war-chest..but the simple rationalization that companies that differ in size ....can have at their "maximum" huge budget differences...
The acquisitions made by Ms and the release of a console like the X .. the investment in services such as xcloud and gamepass all in such short times.... make it clear how much Ms is ready at the moment to invest in the gaming division ... despite .... let's say clearly that this was not one of their best GEN...so much so that many thought (clearly say stupidly) that Ms was ready to "close" the division.
I do not think any other of the big 3 could have invested (money wise) what Microsoft is doing in such a short time now, especially during a generation that absolutely does not see it as a leader. (without even questioning the 2.5 billion dollars spent on minecraft in this gen)

We know that for Sony the gaming division in the last 10 years has become one of the most important ... this is due to the fact that they lost a lot of ground in other markets such as mobile phones or TV. In the same way we know that the billions lost during the PS3 era brought the sony really to its lowest level. And I do not think investors ever want to see Sony take so much risk in a console like they did with the PS3.Unfortunately at this moment I do not think that Sony could allow another generation like PS3 one without undergoing major changes in the division itself.
This is why I think that even if they will release an excellent console (as was, and is the PS4) I do not see them wanting to fight against MS a war of power ... especially considering 3 thing the balanced design that Cerny has accustomed us to (especially with the PRO )...the price point to which Sony seems to be aiming...and even more so when the CEO of the Microsoft division in front of everyone (betting his face at E3) has made it clear that they want to have the most powerful console again.
Of course anything can happen but I personally expect microsoft (as many others have said before me) will have the most powerful console the next gen


ps. and let me add this. the strength of the brand playstation can easily, on the contrary of the xbox, win a gen even without being the most powerful console
 

Deleted member 12635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,198
Germany
Pheonix

Pheonix

Banned
Dec 14, 2018
5,990
St Kitts
only_fools_&_horses said:
They can. For more than 399$
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

In truth this thread is literally a speculation thread. And right now the only things that are pretty certain is that the consoles will use A ryzen CPU, a Navi based GPU, GDDR6 RAM and be connected to a wall power outlet.

Lookin strictly from a die size perspective and the knowledge that going from 16nm to 7nm could theoretically allow at least a doubling of transistor count; no one will be crazy if expecting anything from a 60CU to a 80CU GPU. And theoretical performance (TF) of anything from 8TF all the way up to 15TF. And depending on where or what improvements are made in Navi (which no one here knows) all that can still fall within a $399 budget. And by budget I mean sold for $399 even if it may cost $30 to $100 more than that to make.
 
DriftingSpirit

DriftingSpirit

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,904
justin haines said:
Popping in to ask.....

Are we thinking next gen consoles in 2020? It's what I've been expecting, with games prob coming out on both systems for a couple years.

I usually get them at launch, but this might be the first gen I dont. There's such a huge backlog of amazing games out right now, that will be had for cheap.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Right, announcement early 2020 and launch late 2020.

InRainbows said:
has Sony sold consoles at a loss before?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The PS4 was sold at a loss.
 

Deleted member 12635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,198
Germany
Last edited:
anexanhume

anexanhume

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,913
Maryland
VX1 said:


cc: anexanhume
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah this was known a few days ago unfortunately. The talk will still be interesting because a lot of the Zen+ optimizations would carry over.

At this rate we may have next gen specs before a Navi OR Zen 2 arch disclosure. I'm hoping AMD is playing close to the chest because it's good news and they want to minimize the time their competitors have a chance to mobilize their responses.
 
'V'

'V'

Banned
May 19, 2018
772
modiz said:
PS4 was sold at a loss that could be compensated by a purchase of one game.
PS3 was sold at a 300$ loss but that is another era ;p
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Weren't both those consoles sold for a profit? I remember reading somewhere the PS3 was sold for a profit after 2009 (iirc) and the PS4 was sold at a profit from day 1.
 
Pheonix

Pheonix

Banned
Dec 14, 2018
5,990
St Kitts
cooldawn said:
It's not about sowing the seeds though. It about the relative capability to produce the most powerful platform.

Reading this thread you'd think Sony isn't interested in producing the most capable platform for developers and gamers. This mindset seems to hinge on two factors - Sony will be first to market or Microsoft will have multiple SKU's with a 'world's most powerful' unit. It just seems a little absurd that people have no faith in Sony being able to compete because, apparently, they are dead-set on the middle ground.

I mean it could happen but to comparatively predict and define Sony's next PlayStation platform as under-performing, based on those metrics, is a little dangerous right now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

IMO, thats just nonsense and really goes to show how gullible a lot of people are.

Its not rocket science. There are hard wired limitations in place. Both companies will be using an APU of a very similar size. And barring anything crazy like putting ESRAM on the die or RTX AMsor cores, both consoles will have a very similar CPU and GPU. At the end of the day the real difference will come down to how high each company is willing to clock their APU.

Thats how close things are now..... its going t come down to a chosen cooling method.
 
Last edited:

M3rcy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
702
GhostTrick said:
Not really.
There's a 40% gap from Xbox One to PS4.
The PS4 GPU is a lot more comparable to a R9 270. As for Pro, RX 470.
Sure the PS4 SoC and Pro have some customisation going on. But it's negligeable as a whole to the performance you're getting. Maybe you'd get a 10-15% edge as a whole compared to a comparable PC part.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You should be able to scale the performance by the difference in the TFlop rating. If you can't, something else is effecting the performance. In the beginning of this gen, this worked pretty well and the performance differences between the Xbox One and PS4 (largely resolution) were often exactly what you would expect given the differences in the TFlop rating. In the latest releases, this is starting to change as developers are using GPU compute more and more.

I don't know how people got the idea in their head that PC hardware configurations were directly comparable to console hardware configurations just because they have one part of one component in common. The only hardware that is even a little comparable is the line of AMD APUs but the CPU will be significantly different and even trying to allow for this the differences with how games will actually run on it on the PC make any comparison with consoles meaningless.
 
Last edited:
modiz

modiz

Member
Oct 8, 2018
17,844
Fruity said:
Weren't both those consoles sold for a profit? I remember reading somewhere the PS3 was sold for a profit after 2009 (iirc) and the PS4 was sold at a profit from day 1.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
well of course after a certain point the consoles start on making money, when you talk about the console manufacturer taking a loss, the meaning is the launch period of the console.
and regarding the PS4, while the BoM was a bit less than 399$, adding up building the console and shipping it made them take a loss on launch, supposedly around 60$ loss.
 
GhostTrick

GhostTrick

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,315
M3rcy said:
You should be able to scale the performance by the difference in the TFlop rating. If you can't, something else is effecting the performance. In the beginning of this gen, this worked pretty well and the performance differences between the Xbox One and PS4 (largely resolution) were often exactly what you would expect given the differences in the TFlop rating. In the latest releases, this is starting to change as developers are using GPU compute more and more.

I don't know how people got the idea in their head that PC hardware configurations were directly comparable to console hardware configurations just because they have one part of one component in common. The only hardware that is even a little comparable is the line of AMD APUs but the CPU will be significantly different and even trying to allow for this the differences with how games will actually run on it on the PC make any comparison with consoles meaningless.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Yeah, that something else is architecturale differences, hence why you cant compare console GPUs with AMD GPUs. But yeah, you can compare AMD GCN GPUs performance with console GPU. And guess what ? Benchmarks prove they tend to perform in line.
 
'V'

'V'

Banned
May 19, 2018
772
modiz said:
well of course after a certain point the consoles start on making money, when you talk about the console manufacturer taking a loss, the meaning is the launch period of the console.
and regarding the PS4, while the BoM was a bit less than 399$, adding up building the console and shipping it made them take a loss on launch, supposedly around 60$ loss.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't have a source for it but I know there's a common narrative that the Xbox brand has never been profitable for MS and also that the 360 never made a profit. Maybe someone can provide more info?
 
Bowl0l

Bowl0l

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,608
anexanhume said:
I'm hoping AMD is playing close to the chest because it's good news and they want to minimize the time their competitors have a chance to mobilize their responses.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
EZ6LyI1.png
 

M3rcy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
702
GhostTrick said:
Yeah, that something else is architecturale differences, hence why you cant compare console GPUs with AMD GPUs. But yeah, you can compare AMD GCN GPUs performance with console GPU. And guess what ? Benchmarks prove they tend to perform in line.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Are you normalizing for:

The difference in CPU performance.
The difference in overall memory capacity available to the CPU and GPU
The differences in memory bandwidth available to the CPU and GPU
The overhead that the additional layers of abstraction on the PC add that reduces the performance on the PC side.
Any differences between the PC graphical settings and the console "settings" that might effect what effects are enabled and what method is being used to realize them.

Unless you somehow account for all of these differences (and probably many more), a comparison between the performance of a title on console and any selection of PC hardware is meaningless.
 
GhostTrick

GhostTrick

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,315
M3rcy said:
Are you normalizing for:

The difference in CPU performance.
The difference in overall memory capacity available to the CPU and GPU
The differences in memory bandwidth available to the CPU and GPU
The overhead that the additional layers of abstraction on the PC add that reduces the performance on the PC side.
Any differences between the PC graphical settings and the console "settings" that might effect what effects are enabled and what method is being used to realize them.

Unless you somehow account for all of these differences (and probably many more), a comparison between the performance of a title on console and any selection of PC hardware is meaningless.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


The difference in CPU performance is related to a different matter: Most PC CPUs relies on high IPC. Hence why CPUs with less cores but higher clocks are getting better performances than the jaguar CPU.
As for the rest, they are in no way the first bottleneck you meet in a PC with similar specs. GPU bottleneck happens first in a lot of cases.
You can believe in secret sauce or coding to the metal. The reality and the fact depicts something different: AMD GPUs found in PCs performs similarily than their console counterparts.
 

M3rcy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
702
GhostTrick said:
The difference in CPU performance is related to a different matter: Most PC CPUs relies on high IPC. Hence why CPUs with less cores but higher clocks are getting better performances than the jaguar CPU.
As for the rest, they are in no way the first bottleneck you meet in a PC with similar specs. GPU bottleneck happens first in a lot of cases.
You can believe in secret sauce or coding to the metal. The reality and the fact depicts something different: AMD GPUs found in PCs performs similarily than their console counterparts.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I believe in the scientific method and that involves eliminating variables before you try to extract meaningful data. What you are doing is like using the fact that a Porsche and a pickup left from and arrived at the same locations at the same time as definitive proof that those two vehicles have equivalent performance.
 
GhostTrick

GhostTrick

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,315
M3rcy said:
I believe in the scientific method and that involves eliminating variables before you try to extract meaningful data. What you are doing is like using the fact that a Porsche and a pickup left from and arrived at the same locations at the same time as definitive proof that those two vehicles have equivalent performance.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I do too. I'm comparing two GPUs with similar core count and tflop count within the SAME architecture, in a GPU limited scenario. You get the same performance. Which means they perform the same since they are in a GPU limited scenario. You're welcome (your exemple makes no sense btw).
 

M3rcy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
702
GhostTrick said:
I do too. I'm comparing two GPUs with similar core count and tflop count within the SAME architecture, in a GPU limited scenario. You get the same performance. Which means they perform the same since they are in a GPU limited scenario. You're welcome (your exemple makes no sense btw).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You're doing it in a fundamentally flawed way. The GPU portion of these designs is just part of a whole and every part of that whole has an effect on the end performance. You can't hand-wave these effects away by claiming that they are a both a GPU-limited scenario, (even if that is true) because you don't know that what is causing the GPU to be limited (i.e. where the bottleneck is) is the same in both cases.

Also, lose the patronizing attitude or we're done here.
 
GhostTrick

GhostTrick

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,315
M3rcy said:
You're doing it in a fundamentally flawed way. The GPU portion of these designs is just part of a whole and every part of that whole has an effect on the end performance. You can't hand-wave these effects away by claiming that they are a both a GPU-limited scenario, (even if that is true) because you don't know that what is causing the GPU to be limited (i.e. where the bottleneck is) is the same in both cases.

Also, lose the patronizing attitude or we're done here.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And these wont account for a huge gap in term of performances. Realistically, the myth of the secret sauce magical customisation chipset is dead, at least for this generation. Sure, for obvious reasons you wont compare a 1:1 hardware, since PS4 and Xbox One SoC are semi-custom. And for design and philosophy reasons, a 8 core Jaguar CPU wont do well on PC. But for comparable things, mainly GPU wise, comparable parts performs comparably.
 
DigSCCP

DigSCCP

Banned
Nov 16, 2017
4,201
I'm sure PSVR2 will be a thing but I don't think it would be at launch.
The PS5 own it's own will be a nice upgrade to VR and Sony just reached the sweet spot price for it with the Holidays/BF sales.
At this point I think Sony will aim to grow PSVR userbase before introducing PSVR2.
If I have to guess I would say that if PS5 launches on 2020 we are going to see PSVR2 around 2022 or 2023.
 
Anthony Hopkins

Anthony Hopkins

Banned
Feb 10, 2018
17,534
TheTruthofKayle said:
Um ... it's not so much that people think that Sony is stuck in the middle-ground
Ok I will say something that here will not be so successful but that in my opinion is what it is
For many years Microsoft has been trying in various ways to become a "leader" in the videogame market and we know well that initially the "videogame" was simply an excuse in its race towards the control of the living room.
Tried (and trying)... with different results..from the OG xbox or GFWL to the x360 until the OG xbox one ( i think their most poor attempt)...

People should start to understand that for them (seen the different results of their effort..and since some have completely failed)....it is not so much a problem of money .. not for such large companies (we saw Apple lose 190 billions of market cap in just 5 weeks without batting an eyelid) but it becomes (a problem) when you fail to instill in the shareholders the necessary confidence to invest in that market instead of others....that trust that at the moment Nadella has conquered... and that now he pours in Spencer and in the gaming division. This does not want to be the usual post that talks about the "myth" of their money war-chest..but the simple rationalization that companies that differ in size ....can have at their "maximum" huge budget differences...
The acquisitions made by Ms and the release of a console like the X .. the investment in services such as xcloud and gamepass all in such short times.... make it clear how much Ms is ready at the moment to invest in the gaming division ... despite .... let's say clearly that this was not one of their best GEN...so much so that many thought (clearly say stupidly) that Ms was ready to "close" the division.
I do not think any other of the big 3 could have invested (money wise) what Microsoft is doing in such a short time now, especially during a generation that absolutely does not see it as a leader. (without even questioning the 2.5 billion dollars spent on minecraft in this gen)

We know that for Sony the gaming division in the last 10 years has become one of the most important ... this is due to the fact that they lost a lot of ground in other markets such as mobile phones or TV. In the same way we know that the billions lost during the PS3 era brought the sony really to its lowest level. And I do not think investors ever want to see Sony take so much risk in a console like they did with the PS3.Unfortunately at this moment I do not think that Sony could allow another generation like PS3 one without undergoing major changes in the division itself.
This is why I think that even if they will release an excellent console (as was, and is the PS4) I do not see them wanting to fight against MS a war of power ... especially considering 3 thing the balanced design that Cerny has accustomed us to (especially with the PRO )...the price point to which Sony seems to be aiming...and even more so when the CEO of the Microsoft division in front of everyone (betting his face at E3) has made it clear that they want to have the most powerful console again.
Of course anything can happen but I personally expect microsoft (as many others have said before me) will have the most powerful console the next gen


ps. and let me add this. the strength of the brand playstation can easily, on the contrary of the xbox, win a gen even without being the most powerful console
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Nice post.
So do you think MS will spend extra r + d, which will result in more custom hardware or will they just take a bigger loss per console?
 
CosmicBolt

CosmicBolt

Self-Requested Ban
Member
Oct 28, 2017
884
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-metro-exodus-tech-interview
Interesting bits:
Let's talk about ray tracing on next-gen console hardware. How viable do you see it to be and what would alternatives be if not like RTX cards we see on PC? Could we see a future where consoles use something like a voxel GI solution while PC maintains its DXR path?

Oles Shishkovstov: it doesn't really matter - be it dedicated hardware or just enough compute power to do it in shader units, I believe it would be viable. For the current generation - yes, multiple solutions is the way to go.

This is also a question of how long you support a parallel pipeline for legacy PC hardware. A GeForce GTX 1080 isn't an out of date card as far as someone who bought one last year is concerned. So, these cards take a few years to phase out and for RT to become fully mainstream to the point where you can just assume it. And obviously on current generation consoles we need to have the voxel GI solution in the engine alongside the new RT solution. RT is the future of gaming, so the main focus is now on RT either way.

In terms of the viability of RT on next generation consoles, the hardware doesn't have to be specifically RTX cores. Those cores aren't the only thing that matters when it comes to ray tracing. They are fixed function hardware that speed up the calculations specifically relating to the BVH intersection tests. Those calculations can be done in standard compute if the computer cores are numerous and fast enough (which we believe they will be on the next gen consoles).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
Anthony Hopkins

Anthony Hopkins

Banned
Feb 10, 2018
17,534
GhostTrick said:
And these wont account for a huge gap in term of performances. Realistically, the myth of the secret sauce magical customisation chipset is dead, at least for this generation. Sure, for obvious reasons you wont compare a 1:1 hardware, since PS4 and Xbox One SoC are semi-custom. And for design and philosophy reasons, a 8 core Jaguar CPU wont do well on PC. But for comparable things, mainly GPU wise, comparable parts performs comparably.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So true.
It's frustrating when people try and pedal the opposite of this.
 
jroc74

jroc74

Member
Oct 27, 2017
28,995
I do think MS is going first. There's too much info about their future plans out right now.

The question is will it force Sony's hand if they planned on later....

IIRC didn't that happen with the XBO?
 
anexanhume

anexanhume

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,913
Maryland
Pheonix

Pheonix

Banned
Dec 14, 2018
5,990
St Kitts
TheTruthofKayle said:
People should start to understand that for them (seen the different results of their effort..and since some have completely failed)....it is not so much a problem of money .. not for such large companies (we saw Apple lose 190 billions of market cap in just 5 weeks without batting an eyelid) but it becomes (a problem) when you fail to instill in the shareholders the necessary confidence to invest in that market instead of others....that trust that at the moment Nadella has conquered... and that now he pours in Spencer and in the gaming division. This does not want to be the usual post that talks about the "myth" of their money war-chest..but the simple rationalization that companies that differ in size ....can have at their "maximum" huge budget differences...
The acquisitions made by Ms and the release of a console like the X .. the investment in services such as xcloud and gamepass all in such short times.... make it clear how much Ms is ready at the moment to invest in the gaming division ... despite .... let's say clearly that this was not one of their best GEN...so much so that many thought (clearly say stupidly) that Ms was ready to "close" the division.
I do not think any other of the big 3 could have invested (money wise) what Microsoft is doing in such a short time now, especially during a generation that absolutely does not see it as a leader. (without even questioning the 2.5 billion dollars spent on minecraft in this gen)


ps. and let me add this. the strength of the brand playstation can easily, on the contrary of the xbox, win a gen even without being the most powerful console
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I kinda disagree. This whole power thing is being blown outta proportion.

First, there isn't much either sony and MS can do. Its going to be one of two ways. You either build an APU in which case you are limited by yields and thermal management to what will be around a 340-370mm2 Chip or you go with a discrete CPU and GPU which will be way more expensive. By all indications they are both going with an APU. The size of the APU is as important today as it was in 2013. Back then MS had to sacrifice some CUs to fit some RAM in the chip. You can't just make these things as big as you want.

Secondly, they both have access to near identical technology. Just look at the Pro and X. Even with coming a year later being on the same node with the PS4pro meant the X had only 4CU more than the PS4pro. I don't know why anyone thinks that somehow it will be much different this time around. I can almost bet my life on it.... both MS and sony at some point have had multiple samples of APU configurations and those samples barring any specific customizations would have been identical. Ryzen CPU + (eg!) 60CU/72CU/80CU GPU. These things are such that both sony and MS will be facing the exact same kinda headaches since the underlying tech is identical, which in turn means that they both end up with the same kinda "smart" choices.

Lastly, its going to be about fine margins. Both will have the same amount of RAM and bandwidth and will have a near identical APU. Its going to come down to small differences in clock speeds cause both will probably also opt for a vapor chamber for cooling. Because believe me if using a vapor chamber is the difference between being 2TF down or 2TF ahead at the start of a new generation, thats a very small cost to absorb. And MS knows this, thats why they are gobbling up studios. They know that power will not be enough to differentiate hardware next gen. You will not be able to tell a game apart running on either a PS5/XB4. What you will need are exclusives.

Look at it this way. Lets say the XB4 is 14TF and the PS5 is 12TF. But both have the same CPU and the same amount of RAM and the same bandwidth. Outside framerate, you will not be able to tell them apart. But the real kicker is that you wont even be able to tell apart the framerate either cause they will be locked to 30fps or 60fps. XB4 runs game at 45fps and PS5 runs it at 33fps but both are locked to 30fps kinda shit.

tusharngf said:
Is it true Navi is also GCN based architecture? isn't its a bit dated?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think its still GCN based. Albeit extremely revised.
 

M3rcy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
702
GhostTrick said:
And these wont account for a huge gap in term of performances. Realistically, the myth of the secret sauce magical customisation chipset is dead, at least for this generation. Sure, for obvious reasons you wont compare a 1:1 hardware, since PS4 and Xbox One SoC are semi-custom. And for design and philosophy reasons, a 8 core Jaguar CPU wont do well on PC. But for comparable things, mainly GPU wise, comparable parts performs comparably.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Whether a gap is "huge" or not is subjective. Whether these customizations are an improvement over what came before is less so. It is telling that the focus on async compute was carried forward into every subsequent AMD architecture. The only thing that didn't make it in was the Onion+ bus because that really only makes sense in an APU and even in that case it would only benefit software that is heavily optimized for CPU and GPU to cooperatively process data, where on PC there are few use cases at the performance levels occupied by those APUs. They wouldn't have wasted silicon area on beefing up that part of the design if it didn't yield a performance benefit.
 

M3rcy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
702
console lover said:
That lost bolded bit could be what Sony is going to do for raytracing. They have enough fast processors that a software solution makes more sense than losing die space. Rumour has it that the MS solution is hardware based, yes?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It hasn't been indicated either way what MS's solution will be. Only that they have one.
 
Reader mode
Status
Not open for further replies.