-
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.
Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation launch thread - MY ANACONDA DON'T WANT NONE
- Thread starter Phoenix Splash
- Start date
- Status
More Navi:
https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/br4wiv/amd_navi_rumor_interview_with_sapphire_technology/
https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/br4wiv/amd_navi_rumor_interview_with_sapphire_technology/
- Confirmed to release watercooled Poison Toxic for Navi. Toxic for Vega was canceled due to restricted margin.
- Navi currently has two versions, one is priced at $499 and the other is $399.
- (Assuming talking about the top version) it is stronger than 2070
- Denied the existence of socalled "Big Navi" with 5120SP
- In terms of hardware raytracing acceleration: maybe wait for AMD's next GPU architecture, although the arch is not finalized yet.
- Navi will be presented at Computex on May 27th, and the launch date is July 7th.
Hardware raytracing looking unlikely despite what some "leaks" are saying.
Can console gamers tell the difference between 30 and 60fps?
What has that got to do with his question in regards to resolution? Bit pointless?
Yes, there is obviously a massive difference between 30 and 60 FPS which is clearly visible regardless of resolution.
However, seeing a difference in HD and 4K on a 50/ 55 or even 65 inch tv is not as easy. It depends on distance, quality of panel, eye sight etc.
Last edited:
During the investor Q and A, Sony said the average lifetime spending of year 1 PS4 owners is sitting at $1600.
I've been saying Sony is going to be in a position to take larger losses on PS5 than they did on PS4, and this only solidified it in my mind as something that will happen.
I've been saying Sony is going to be in a position to take larger losses on PS5 than they did on PS4, and this only solidified it in my mind as something that will happen.
Do you think console gamers have different brains or eyes?
We are just do used to playing at 30fps. I'm not sure we can tell the difference at this point.
We'll Navi 10 or 12 were never going to have hardware RT for PC, but Sony will have a customized version of Navi, just like the Pro borrowed tech from the next gen (Polaris)?
So its possible it will have hardware RT, hopefully we'll know more sometime this year.
Wow that ps5 loading demo video is crazy. But I can't understand why they showing this tech so early ...
i was surprised too, but i guess, if they can show it why not?
The rumor is dead no custom SSD. This is official the SSD solution inside PS5 is custom...
I imagine it's because they believe Microsoft won't match it. It's fairly well believed Microsoft will blow out their console first, so might as well have some of the conversation be around what it can't do.
Either that, or they felt on the back foot of the power conversation and wanted to change opinions.
Well, that post doesn't make it official - that's a rumour/leak. But the rather more official presentation material from the IR day does specify a 'customized broadband ssd'.
So unless the reference to customization is purely in the realm of the software stack, it does indeed seem like a custom solution.
To be honest is that demo impressive or what we should expect as a standard? We're comparing what, a 5400RPM hard drive in the PRO to a NVMe (possible even custom) SSD in the PS5? Wouldn't that be the performance you'd expect anyway from that upgrade or am I missing something completely here.
We're talking a ~7 second reduction in loading times which is what I would have expected even using a regular SATA SSD. Am I wrong in thinking that?
Either way I'll reaffirm that its nice to see the baseline adopting this tech. I'm intrigued to see how it compares in games that take really long to load on the PS4 like battlefield 4 multiplayer for example (can take like 30 seconds from what I remember).
We're talking a ~7 second reduction in loading times which is what I would have expected even using a regular SATA SSD. Am I wrong in thinking that?
Either way I'll reaffirm that its nice to see the baseline adopting this tech. I'm intrigued to see how it compares in games that take really long to load on the PS4 like battlefield 4 multiplayer for example (can take like 30 seconds from what I remember).
remember that for the fast travel they did in the wired article it took 15 seconds on the pro and still 0.8 seconds on the next gen playstation. which is like 19x the jump in speed. and this is on low speed dev kit.
Do we have any numbers we can compare it to? For example a comparison between a HDD similar to the one in the PRO, a slow SATA SSD, a fast SATA SSD and an NVMe SSD. If such a comparison existed across a range of games it would be possible to make a ballpark prediction of what kind of SSD the PS5 is sporting (and possibly make more accurate predictions regarding the custom modifications, if any).
Googling around, I'm not sure about comparisons with a 5400rpm hard drive, but ssd/hdd benchmarks seem to indicate improvements of up to 2-3x.
So, no, at face value an improvement of 10x and sub-second loads does not seem to be typical.
But of course it's possible this example was cherry picked for dramatic impact. And of course this isn't an A:B test, the CPU and memory speed differs too. But taking it as a raw bench of load time speed up, it is possibly better than might be expected I guess.
Could it be possible that Sony's hired another company to make their hardware ray-tracing component, rather than AMD, maybe Sony made one themselves in their internal R&D department?
the difference is not only in load time though, as you can see in the second demonstration in the spiderman video, once you break the speed limit on the ps4 pro the console starts to lag, get stuck, have a lot of pop in etc, but on the PS5 all of the assets load in time for the super speedy camera to render them and not be stuck at all.
that means that developers can do a lot more with their game streaming with the usage of SSD and lead to new design choices that were not possible with an HDD.
Sure the loading speed was impressive. But that's not what this is about. Just the ridiculous difference in traversal speed should show what a game changer this is. We can't even imagine what devs will come up with.
This is what I said before many times in my previous posts.
I think that it's likely that the custom SSD solution (be it entirely hardware customisations or mostly very clever software + caches) that Sony has is something that will not be matched in the new XBox.
I believe this to be the case as Sony have now promoted this as the centre of their next-gen plans twice: the wired article was mostly about the SSD solution and now this investor relations presentation.
I think this will lead to different experiences (primarily created by Sony first-party).
I'm also still not sure that MS won't be using a Vega-derived GPU (my original speculation/guess way back).
Looking forward to next-gen now after seeing this demo.
I think what will happen is:
XBox -> more TFs or more compute - leading to better visuals or better framerates on 3rd-party / cross-platform games
PS -> fewer TFs/compute, stupidly fast ram (I'm guessing now 32GB) - leading to different games entirely enabled by this custom solution
I believe this to be the case as Sony have now promoted this as the centre of their next-gen plans twice: the wired article was mostly about the SSD solution and now this investor relations presentation.
I think this will lead to different experiences (primarily created by Sony first-party).
I'm also still not sure that MS won't be using a Vega-derived GPU (my original speculation/guess way back).
Looking forward to next-gen now after seeing this demo.
I think what will happen is:
XBox -> more TFs or more compute - leading to better visuals or better framerates on 3rd-party / cross-platform games
PS -> fewer TFs/compute, stupidly fast ram (I'm guessing now 32GB) - leading to different games entirely enabled by this custom solution
SSDs are not some dark magic.
If the Next Xbox has a fast drive (even 1gb/s), dont expect "different games only existing thanks to the secret sauce of the SSD from Sony".
But didn't you know that MS is using a post-Navi GPU architecture and Zen 3? They invented a time machine, that is their secret sauce!
It is funny that when people suggest the PS5 is going to be competitive with Anaconda they get laughed out of the thread (and told they are having fanboy dreams) but when people say MS will use future tech that doesn't exist in the Xbox Two there are people that take it completely seriously...
Unless MS has invented time travel the XB2 does not have Zen 3 and some post Navi GPU arch. Especially since MS are announcing and likely launching before PS5.
Yeah that's why I'm more interested in seeing other games which really took a long time to load.
This goes back to a discussion that was had before. Will 3rd party developers really design their games to fully take advantage of this? I can't see them alienating the millions of PC gamers who will still be using HDDs. I expect faster loading times across the board and less pop-in, which is what you'd expect anyway from an upgrade to an SSD.
1st party devs will very likely take full advantage of it though.
I don't want to start that whole discussion again but just as something to think about (if you missed the previous discussion), assuming it is using a custom SSD solution, is the added cost of that hardware worth the sacrifice in raw hardware specs (assuming this custom solution has a significant cost to it) e.g. a cheaper GPU and a reduction in CU count?
For me I'd say no and would prefer a standard NVMe SSD + faster GPU. It's something to think about anyway.
The point isn't that SSDs in general are special - it's the fact that Sony have gone out of their way to design their entire system around this, where people are just convinced it will lead to 'quicker loading', I think it will completely open up new game design options. I also suspect that they will sacrifice peak GPU performance for silly amounts of fast ram - I guess 32GB - again because to me it makes sense if design your entire system around fast storage.
Sony have prior experience of stupid bandwidth in the PS2 days with rambus - it wouldn't be the first time they've trodden this path.
But again just my opinion/speculation
Did anyone notice the difference from the Wired article? In Wired they compared the PS5 with the PS4, now it's compared to the Pro.
Wired:
PS4 - 15 seconds
PS5 - less than 0.8 seconds
New demonstration:
PS4 Pro - 8.1 seconds
PS5 - 0.84 seconds
The Pro has faster memory and CPU so loading times had improved but I wonder why did the PS5 slow down from less than 0.8 seconds to 0.84 seconds. In addition, seeing the reduction in loading time from the PS4 to the Pro, from 15 seconds to 8.1 seconds, makes me wonder how fast could the PS5 do this fast travel without an SSD considering it has at least x4 more powerful CPU and much faster memory and IO. Obviously a lot slower than with an SSD but still it seems like the SSD is giving them ~4-5 times faster loading times, not 19 times like the original article claimed.
Does anyone here have a PS4 or PS4 Pro with a copy of Spider-man and is willing to do a fast travel test? Does the game even have fast travel?
Last edited:
I looked back at the Wired article and they actually compared PS5 with PS4 Pro.
It was dash line,no ? meaning they will not talk about price now
The wired article said '0.8 seconds' (less than one second, not less than 0.8), which sounds like a rounding of the same figure here.
The comparison with the base PS4 in the Wired article was fair - the PS4 represents the base bandwidth devs have to work with. Insomniac discussed at GDC how the base PS4, plus the variety of HDD and user upgraded HDDs limited their IO bandwidth budget and the fundamental knock ons that had for game design. So comparing to the base PS4 seems OK to me given that it is the fundamental limiter for PS4 games, and this will be the new baseline for PS5.
Last edited:
On the dot of 2019 it is still on 299$ the question is if the dash line after 2019 dot means the duration of this fiscal year or the next i guess.
Its 2018 sale, not an official msrp price drop in 2019
It's weird because the writer mentions PS4 Pro, but Cerny appears to talk about the original PS4, as interpreted by the writer.
Look at how the price goes down on the 2016 dot to 299, yea i am pretty sure it confirms no msrp drop in 2019
A link to the presentation:
https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/library/presen/irday/pdf/2019/GNS_E.pdf
Some highlights with interesting stats regarding some discussions we've had here:
- over 96.8m PS4 worldwide (end of March 2019).
- over 36m PS+ subscribers (end of March 2019).
- over 90% of PS4 machines had connected to the internet at some point.
- Average lifetime device spend exceeds $700
- Average launch year lifetime device spend exceeds $1,600 (very important to the "lost leader" argument).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next-gen:
- Spider-man fast travel drops from 8.1 seconds on the Pro to 0.83 seconds on the PS5.
- We will leverage Backwards Compatibility to transition our community to Next-Gen faster and more seamlessly than ever before.
- What we have said so far:
- 5.6m users use remote play (FY18).
- PSNow:
https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/library/presen/irday/pdf/2019/GNS_E.pdf
Some highlights with interesting stats regarding some discussions we've had here:
- over 96.8m PS4 worldwide (end of March 2019).
- over 36m PS+ subscribers (end of March 2019).
- over 90% of PS4 machines had connected to the internet at some point.
- Average lifetime device spend exceeds $700
- Average launch year lifetime device spend exceeds $1,600 (very important to the "lost leader" argument).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next-gen:
- Spider-man fast travel drops from 8.1 seconds on the Pro to 0.83 seconds on the PS5.
- We will leverage Backwards Compatibility to transition our community to Next-Gen faster and more seamlessly than ever before.
- What we have said so far:
- All new CPU GPU
- SSD
- BC
- RT
- 8K
- Disc support
- 3D Audio
- Date
- Price
- Games
- User experience
- Country rollout
- 5.6m users use remote play (FY18).
- PSNow:
- 15 Data centers
- 19 countries
- 780 games
- 700K PSNow subscribers (March 2019)
- The yearly growth rate is 40%
- support 1080p and beyond
- Improve the quality of content
- Strengthen marketing support
- Increase yearly growth rate to 50%
Last edited:
Yeah, you are right, it is 0.8 seconds. My bad.
But regarding the comparison, what I wonder is how much of that improvement is because of the SSD and how much is because of the faster CPU and memory.
- Status