Question: if due to virus and/or other black swans PS5 will be completely canceled or redone and marketed as PS4U / PS Neo / whatever - for how long will we carry on with the avatars of shame?
Sony has been anything but reactionary to Xbox so far in announcements.I wonder if Sony would reveal anything tomorrow even if they planned to. It would seem like a reactionary measure to the xbox stuff.
Which tech sectors? Have TVs been going up in price each year? Have laptops? Have tablets? Can you name a single example of the price of electronics "steeply rising over the years," besides cell phones?
Gaming monitors, premium phones, premium graphics cards, premium motherboards, premium tablets, have all risen sharply, just off the top of my head.
Eternity. Or the rest of 2020Question: if due to virus and/or other black swans PS5 will be completely canceled or redone and marketed as PS4U / PS Neo / whatever - for how long will we carry on with the avatars of shame?
If there is a plan you just execute it. You are thinking in the line of politics and none is needed in gaming.I wonder if Sony would reveal anything tomorrow even if they planned to. It would seem like a reactionary measure to the xbox stuff.
That hasn't stopped it being pushed as gospel truth by a huge portion of the members of this thread.
At best I think it isn't the entire story - either it's a chip quickly spun out and revised for BC and to make early dev kits or Sony have gone with Power VR RTUs meaning that 9.2TF RDNA1 portion of the chip will punch well above its weight compared to flops that are competing for RT performance.
I'm not saying Sony couldn't be motivated to take a reasonably modest loss on the PS5 initially. What I am pushing back at is the use of the PS3 as a point of comparison, as if that is evidence that Sony would be willing to take a similar loss in the future and not a financially disastrous case of costs spiraling out of control.
If you're going to argue that Sony will be willing to take an initial loss on PS5 hardware, you shouldn't suggest it's because the PS3 worked out so well for them, is all I'm saying.
Not sure why the mobile argument is old and tired? Especially now that both MS and Sony have services that they want to sell you. It's not just phones people are spending more money on even though they might have less disposable income.
Anyways Long story short you are going with the old MS has a bigger warchest? Somehow even though they have more ram they are not going to be hit as hard by the increasing prices because of azure and somehow they have more overhead despite you expecting the XsX to be alot more powerful?
Yeah no.
Not giving any solid numbers would already be an indicator of a weaker console. You don't stay quiet about power if you're the one with the more powerful console. Sony didn't do it with the base PS4 and MS didn't do it with the One X.
I don't think I more powerful RT than XSX will be useful. Maybe for first party games. But the rest, devs will scale on the weaker console I think.
I start to think that if PS5 is really weaker, they may release a Pro refresh in the next year. Particularly if MS has a Lockhart. Then cut down the PS5 base price quickly.
First of all, it's not a big advantage. Second of all, we don't know the price or details about the rest of the hardware. GPU isn't everything.I think the 12TF news confirms the ps5 isn't 9TF. I mean, they can't give MS that big of advantage on power.. right?
Right?
Haha I guess. It would be good for me if they did.If there is a plan you just execute it. You are thinking in the line of politics and none is needed in gaming.
I don't think I more powerful RT than XSX will be useful. Maybe for first party games. But the rest, devs will scale on the weaker console I think.
Obviously, that's a hypothetical situation and numbers would be revealed soon by DF and the likes anyway, but if they let the games speak very few would be able to tell they are at a technical disadvantage. Even fewer would care.
Sony didn't sell 100M consoles to DF subscribers or even enthusiasts.
The vast majority of their target won't walk into a mall, see a 9TF PS5 running GT7 besides a 12TF Series X running FM8 and conclude that XSX definitely is more powerful AND a better purchase (that's a whole nother leap still) because the image is kinda sharper and shadows are maybe less blocky.
Sony could have been building a slightly cheaper machine that can still be a huge leap in terms of overall user experience (RT, SSD, controller features) and they might have a more 'balanced', well rounded and appealing product in the end.
Until PS5 is revealed, there will be no split. But fear not, we will be moderating any attempt at platform wars
Phone argument is tired because disposable income actually decreased and phones are not in the same purchase category as consoles. Pricing is important.
I'm not using war chest argument at all. I'm saying is likely that Xbox has a BOM of 500 and PS5 of 450, while Xbox being more powerful. That makes it a 50 dollars difference which is too low to differentiate. I don't believe that either will take a significant loss.
I'm of opinion that Sony slipped in exactly the same way as MS did previously - by not taking into account situation change, in this case price increase of some components and MS going all in on chip. Azure is important, since they buy a lot of volume of CPUs , memory and disks, which makes for a better bargaining position, especially when it comes to temporary price increases.
There is a saying that when war repeats, winner of the previous one expects another one just like it and loser changes strategy. I feel people significantly underestimate MS value offering this time around, where power of the console is just the cherry on top - more diverse exclusives, convenience features and most importantly Gamepass will make a lot of difference. Of course, Sony will still have a lot of customers(even myself I can't imagine skipping God of war and Insomniac games), but thinking that they have to win no matter what is what made "arrogant Sony" memes.
I openly admit that I prefer MS as a brand(even though I bought more games on PS4 this generation and I had it way shorter), but this is personal and dates back to PS3 days. My predictions come though from analyzing the market situation and messaging, as well as ignoring insiders as I find them to be quite often... let's say unreliable.
RT is very flexible, if one console has better RT performance then most games will just throw a few more rays into the scene, making the RT effect that both are using look better on that version. It's not much different than if the consoles have 2TF-3TF difference in GPU power, developers will just render in a bit lower resolution on the weaker console. We are being overly dramatic on his whole TF subject. If we really are getting a 9.2TF and a 12TF console, the difference will probably start and end with something like a 1900p VS 2160p resolution difference.That hasn't stopped it being pushed as gospel truth by a huge portion of the members of this thread.
At best I think it isn't the entire story - either it's a chip quickly spun out and revised for BC and to make early dev kits or Sony have gone with Power VR RTUs meaning that 9.2TF RDNA1 portion of the chip will punch well above its weight compared to flops that are competing for RT performance.
Both scenarios would mean that the insiders are right and the GitHub leak is accurate for what it presented.
9vs 12 tf is huge.. enough to make 30 games run on 60 on other platformsFirst of all, it's not a big advantage. Second of all, we don't know the price or details about the rest of the hardware. GPU isn't everything.
And all of that will cost them ON TOP of the 450.. hence why im saying 399 is very difficult
That sure sounds like a lot of niche "premium"-tier products.
Are game consoles niche premium-tier products?
No one ever participates in the console market hoping for a small but profitable niche, except for maybe Neo Geo. Sony is playing for market dominance. Microsoft is playing for market dominance. By definition, this means they're both going after the larger market.
(lmao at listing a bunch of categories with the "premium" qualifier to support the assertion that prices for electronics in general have steeply increased)
When you say last gen you mean ps4-xb1 gen ?I understand nothing about the technical aspects, at all. But I love reading these threads.
A stupid question; why so much focus on just TF? Last gen I remember all the focus was on RAM. Why this switch?
You say you don't use the warchest argument but somehow you think that the XsX has a BOM of 500 with a 12tf GPU and 20gb of ram while Sony has a BOM of 450 with 16gb of ram and a 9tf GPU? It doesn't add up man.
The way MS slipped up last time (ignoring the Kinect) was by going with a DDR+ESRAM combo instead of going for gddr5 like Sony did. I don't see how anything even comparible is possible this time around.
Ps5 is 7 tf confirmed.
Numbers are used that make comparisons easy.I understand nothing about the technical aspects, at all. But I love reading these threads.
A stupid question; why so much focus on just TF? Last gen I remember all the focus was on RAM. Why this switch?
That is a contradiction in terms... why would you pick the lower machine if you want multiplatform games?
9 to 12 means ps5 is 3/4 of xbx
So if a game later this gen pushes 4k the ps5 version will be lower resolution to handle it. The cpu speed which is unknown will matter for framerate aswell
If ps5 is 10.x tfs the difference is 1/6 which are minor differences in this case
If 9 vs 12 with everything else exactly the same, then it'd be similar to a pro vs 1x situation. Perhaps less noticeable to people as they'd be reconstructing from a higher base resolution and overall complexity of scenes would be much higher
also it sounds like there will be differences in some aspects (maybe SSD, RT approach etc) - still a lot we don't know
You won't know definitively until around year 3 of the next gen when third parties have minimal current gen support and they really push the high end features. Even Microsoft seems to be focusing on tools to improve frames with VRS support in engines and VRR with HDMI 2.1.
I think the most jarring difference of 9v12 would be 4K 30 frames vs 4K 60 frames
1. It does not matter how talented a developer is; if they are working on inferior tech, the gap will always show.Sony could have a 9TF machine and never declare the numbers, show God of War 2 or Horizon 2 or GT Sport RT whatever and regular people would never suspect it's the weaker console *
For multiplatforms they could get away with 1440 vs native 4k and the difference would be negligible, especially if presented at 100$ cheaper.
In fact, if Sony's strategy is cutting a few corners here and there to be cheaper than the competitor they'll stay winning.
*Unless MS newly acquired studios start consistently putting out stuff on par with Naughty Dog, Guerrilla, Santa Monica, Insomniac, RAD, Polyphony etc.
Which is why there's no reason to hide the number in the first place. Doing that just makes you look insecure about your product. If you have the weaker console then own it and focus on the areas where you're strong. Power isn't going to be the determining factor anyway. It'll only hurt them if it's vastly weaker at a similar price point.
RT is very flexible, if one console has better RT performance then most games will just throw a few more rays into the scene, making the RT effect that both are using look better on that version. It's not much different than if the consoles have 2TF-3TF difference in GPU power, developers will just render in a bit lower resolution on the weaker console. We are being overly dramatic on his whole TF subject. If we really are getting a 9.2TF and a 12TF console, the difference will probably start and end with something like a 1900p VS 2160p resolution difference.
I understand nothing about the technical aspects, at all. But I love reading these threads.
A stupid question; why so much focus on just TF? Last gen I remember all the focus was on RAM. Why this switch?
1. It does not matter how talented a developer is; if they are working on inferior tech, the gap will always show.
I think it really boils down to how hard they want to compete this holiday with MS. If the XSX is $499 and the PS5 is the same they better be pretty close in power.
Mind you this is only partaking to the US market.
If people want to believe rumors of Horizon being ported to PC, then they need to believe that both consoles are pretty much identical and around 2080 super performance.
in before someone says it's not 9 or 8, it's 9.2TF lol
Friggin' THANK YOU!
The only difference is chip and a quarter more memory(and memory is my speculation). Also, Sony probably has more expensive SSD(with RAM cache for example). 50 dollars difference would be 400 at minimal loss and profitable 500 for MS in normal situation. Now it will be 500 at minimal loss for MS and either 450 at minimal loss for Sony or 500 at a profit. My bet is that they cared about pricing and it failed. Feel free to believe otherwise.
1. It does not matter how talented a developer is; if they are working on inferior tech, the gap will always show.
I'm just joking because surely, this is how some people will want to read that.I mean, how do you still believe Sony would allow such a difference in terms of TF between ps5 and the new Xbox? It's crazy to think.
also and unfortunately, they are being hit by the corona virus situation and I'm sure a lot of plans and schedules are being changed.
I doubt a difference of 20%-30% in order size will make much difference. Both companies will probably be every supplier's biggest customer by a large margin and both will get the lowest price that supplier can afford in order to strike such a huge deal.In regards to the BOM discussion and Sony being at say $450 and MS being at $500 for example is anyone factoring in that Sony will most likely to be able to negotiate a much better price based on economies of scale and the sheer volume of components they will be most likely committing too? Like Sony could be committing to buying 80M PS5 chips over the next 5 years vs MS only committing to 40M for example which would mean they would have much lower costs and therefore have more wiggle room for final price.
They might be targeting different price points and different box sizes. If they want a device as compact as PS4Pro, they're not going to squeeze as much computing power as MS with the big(ish) XSX.I mean, how do you still believe Sony would allow such a difference in terms of TF between ps5 and the new Xbox? It's crazy to think.
I mean, how do you still believe Sony would allow such a difference in terms of TF between ps5 and the new Xbox? It's crazy to think.
also and unfortunately, they are being hit by the corona virus situation and I'm sure a lot of plans and schedules are being changed.