The devs called it half baked and it was. The system is so loud that it's almost defective in a way that requires the end user to do their own repairs, installing new thermal paste etc
-
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.
PS5 Specs are out. Does Microsoft need to respond? And when will they?
- Thread starter Empyrean Cocytus
- Start date
x was revealed in june 2016 and pro was revealed in september 2016.
PS4 was leaked with all info in june 2012 and feb 2013 announced. xbox 1 was may 2013.
but again it doesn't matter these dates. many things are design criteria set from the day they start designing these machines
MS tweeted an hour after the PS5 announcement for people to get ready for their June E3 briefing, so while they are in no rush to reveal their specs just yet, they definitely didn't want to be left out of the conversation.
i see thanks for the clarification..many people saying that ms had advantages due to the console launch late than ps4 pro
No, it's not the same, just more. The architecture is very similar, but the system has many custom optimizations (so does the Pro, but they're different custom optimizations), it's balanced differently, and a lot of work went into making it not just highly efficient, but also power efficient with a small physical and energy footprint. It also takes a different approach to making sure it's compatible with base Xbox One software. Digital Foundry had several insightful features about it, so I suggest you check them out.
Yeah, while I don't necessarily agree that AMD gives anyone confidential info about their other customers' products, that's how some business deals go down in my experience as well. It's not how it should be done, of course, but it often is. And when years later you get insider accounts about how these big wigs conducted their business, it's rarely all by the book.
thats yield advantage .1x launched a year after pro.as years goes by the prices for gpu drops and u get better yields for the chip therefore cheaper price.so u can increase the number of CU for the same $ a year later.
"The specs are out"
no, they are not, they have outlined what people can expect, pure specs with raw horsepower this was not.
no, they are not, they have outlined what people can expect, pure specs with raw horsepower this was not.
So it really was just out of nowhere huh. I thought I missed an event or something.
Thx.
I would argue that the X1X is the complete opposite. It was made to the highest engineering standards while the Pro was made to be affordable.
that doesn't make sense. he means architecture and yes they have the same hardware architecture from same GPU to same CPU to same RAM to same HDD.
yes 1x is built more premium but they are the same in their design of hardware architecture.
Microsoft, Amazon and Google likely will not give access to their data centres as the Sony server racks physically have to be present inside the data centres. That's how Stadia and XCloud works. Of course Microsoft, Amazon and Google want money, but whether they give Sony a dedicated space for PS consoles that has no use beyond streaming the PS platform is an entirely different question.
Unlike Sony, Microsoft, Google can license XCloud and Stadia Servers to third parties to develop their own streaming services by developing on their Dev Kits.
I love my X, but it came out a year after the Pro for $100 dollars more.
If the Pro was released for the same MSRP at the same time as the X, it would have been about the same hardware wise. That's just how things work.
Last edited:
One of the main reasons they are all doing game streaming services is to sell their cloud streaming services/tech to other corporations. At least 1 would probably happily sell to Sony (likely Amazon given PSN uses there services already).
I can't see what could prevent Sony to deploy and maintain the Unix-based Playstation OS on a server, as to fit a PS5 mainboard into a 1U rack with minor adaptations regarding power and network. The question is more to know it it's profitable or relevant regarding the market. And you seem to confuse cloud business with hosting business with a consumer perspective : there is a lot of other big players in the networking business than the five NASDAQ stars we heard about every day.
Last edited:
i don't think that's correct - one x was revealed in june 2017 not 16
I'm not sure where this impression comes from, that Microsoft, Amazon and Google are the only datacenter owners/operators in the world.
There are huge companies engaged in huge build outs in the datacenter business, globally, many of whom the three above companies actually lease from for a good chunk of their own DC space.
Sony can lease from those companies in exactly the same way, and that's what they're already doing for PSNow. Look up companies like Equinix, Digital Realty et al. The public cloud services are by far not the custodians of the world's datacenter infrastructure.
no 2016 . a year and half before launch it was revealed at MS E3 2016
The proof is in the pudding. Psnow service is awful and needs drastic improvements. The streaming lag in unbearable for many who are not near one of these data centers. Maybe Sony should go with one of the big three. It's would be a winning situation for psnow.
Yup, thank you for genuine comments from someone else who experiences this.
The amount of times I've been in a room with questionable conversations going down. I wont even start on once the meetings over and you are going out for drinks and food.
I guess some people just dont know this side of business at all.
Project Scorpio was announced at E3 2016, with more detailed specs than we know about the next gen Playstation.
Sony should expand PSNow's footprint - but it doesn't need to tap one or more of the public cloud services to do that. There's a vast industry, and a vast network of third party DC and IX vendors out there to tap and grow with. There are big services running on top of privated leased DC/IX infrastructure that show it can be done - there's a lot of headroom for PSNow to grow vs where it is now, using that kind of strategy.
They are using the amazon servers....
It is awful because streaming is awful, the tec is not there yet.
Why would MS want to work with a company that so easily sells out their own clients?
I actually used google streaming for odyssey. As much as some folks hate stadia. The service was amazing. I'm pretty confident ms will follow suit as well. Their tech is just superior.
Depends were you live.
Streaming servers are good as long as you live close to a datacenter, there is nothing new about that. The PSNOW has a quality problem because of the ps3 servers whitch i assume, is getting fix by the ps5 hardware.
How many times do you come up with this nonsense, and how many times do people need to tell you that those Cloud infrastructures where always build for external costumers? Do you not want to listen or someting or are you just trolling every time? It's really getting a bit annoying right now.
Even those companies are leasing space in some places in the world. Microsoft doesn't own every data center in the world, but they do own some of them.
Tis! There was already a rumor that Sony is working on a large infrastructure overhaul for next-gen. They can use Pro and PS5 hardware in data centers. A combination of these or just PS5 hardware.
Last edited:
Because everyone does it, and it's how business works, unfortunately.
Do you not think information will be shared with Sony as well?
People know there's such things as leaks right, we see them everyday. How do you think this stuff get's out?
After the beating Microsoft took for having the weaker system this gen, there's no way in hell they will accept being the weakest again. They will have the power advantage - come hell or high water.
I don't think that was the main reason. Their content output was awful most part last couple of years. They can't claim to always have the best because they can't control the competition. It's like they're always trying to convince themselves of this, and that doesn't feel healthy for a company. It looks more like that Microsoft is worry about not have the best hardware if that is their focus every time.
It's also certainly not the reason to get people to have an Xbox.
Personally, I think it was the combo of being a hundred dollars more expensive, less powerful, and general ill will towards Microsoft. The lineups were actually pretty comparable for the first two years.
This. Weaker console for $100 more and the whole early messaging (always online, no used games, TV TV TV).
Don Mattrick almost killed the Xbox brand, Phil Spencer managed to get the boat back on track.
If the X is any indication, MS def need to release a more powerful console to compete. Even if it means releasing 6 months after the PS5. On similar specs/prices, most are going to stick with Sony
That'd be a terrible move. Would give Sony an even greater foothold and give them plenty of time to fix the inevitable supply issues without any threat or pressure whatsoever.
No need to do anything until the expected E3 announcement. Expect these next gen consoles to be similar in price and power, going to be interesting to see timeframes of release over the next 6-12 months.
Better than releasing a system with similar specs. As of right now the games on the PS5 seem to be superior, what incentive do people have to buy a Xbox instead of a PS5 with similar specs/price?
It really wouldn't, the last thing they should do is give Sony an easy massive lead. But sure either way they likely wouldn't beat PS5 in WW sales, but being significantly late to the next gen party just for what would likely be very small performance gains will just lose them more buyers, not gain any (assuming Sony don't absolutely fuck it up of course). It's very hard to go head-to-head when you release months later. A big reason XB1 did so bad in Europe is them being late to a lot of Europe markets for example, it pretty much killed any progress the 360 made and Sony took full advantage of it.