PS5 vs. Xbox Series X UPDATED Specs Comparison!!

Aquanox

Forum Sage
May 26, 2005
8,191
22
38
#1
https://www.ign.com/wikis/playstation-5/PS5_vs._Xbox_Series_X_Comparison_Chart



PS5 Pros:
Faster SSD
• More sophisticated audio chip? (Not confirmed)

Xbox Series X Pros:
• More Powerful GPU (12TFlop vs. 10.3 FLAT vs. 10.3TFlop Peak, 9.27TF in highly CPU demanding games) ~ Check mi first comment about this one.
• Faster RAM (10GB 560GB/s 320bit + 6GB @335GB/s vs 16GB 448GB/s 256bit)
• Bigger storage (1TB vs. 825GB)
• Stable clocks (Which suggests better cooling)

What are your thoughts?
 
Last edited:
May 20, 2008
10,855
91
48
#2
Both systems sound pretty exciting but at least we now know why Sony has been so silent. Microsoft was bey confident they had the edge in performance and now it's been confirmed.
 
Likes: Aquanox

Aquanox

Forum Sage
May 26, 2005
8,191
22
38
#3
Beware though... That 10.3Tflop number for the PS5 is a Peak figure, non sustained one, whereas Xbox Series X will be 12 Flops FLAT. Ironically, the most demanding games should struggle to get past 10Flop due to thermal/power limitations for what was understood on the conference.

Heck it even feels like MS knew exactly what Sony was going to say today and hit their presentation with their monday reveal.

Looks like the earliest leak was very precise with the PS5 in neighborhood of the 9.2Tflops.

Check this Tweet:


Exactly what I understood.

So when CPU is at high utilization, GPU goes down 10% which brings it to 10.3 * 0.9 = 9.27TFlops. Exactly as leaked!!
 
Last edited:
Sep 10, 2005
6,708
4
38
49
#4
If you think that Xbox clock is sustained ,you are just kidding yourself.There is no GPU on earth with sustained clocks.They clocks are fluctuating even for the ones with the most beastly coolers.But as a very old member i know where you coming from ;)
 

Aquanox

Forum Sage
May 26, 2005
8,191
22
38
#5
If you think that Xbox clock is sustained ,you are just kidding yourself.There is no GPU on earth with sustained clocks.They clocks are fluctuating even for the ones with the most beastly coolers.But as a very old member i know where you coming from ;)
I have no idea who you are, but you need to update yourself old member =)


https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-inside-xbox-series-x-full-specs

"But up until now at least, the focus has been on the GPU, where Microsoft has delivered 12 teraflops of compute performance via 3328 shaders allocated to 52 compute units (from 56 in total on silicon, four disabled to increase production yield) running at a sustained, locked 1825MHz. Once again, Microsoft stresses the point that frequencies are consistent on all machines, in all environments. There are no boost clocks with Xbox Series X."

So yeah... Series X have sustained clocks. That's were all the efforts were aimed at and required a revolutionary cooling solution... Something Sony obviously couldn't pull off and then threw all those misleading "Peak TFlops" numbers so they didn't pale so much against Series X monstrous numbers.

Using an audio analogy, Xbox is 12TFlops RMS, PS5 10.3 TFlops PMPO.
 
Last edited:

Fijiandoce

Administrator
Staff member
Oct 8, 2007
6,496
151
63
#6
There's probably a bit of marketing behind MS's claim tho - would appear to be paying off too.

It's probably true for the most part. But, as mentioned in the other thread, AVX workloads inherently down clock the CPU - which would mean the clocks are no longer stable.

AVX is not an AMD instruction set, being created by intel for their line of CPU's, and this is how they break down AVX: https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...ication-updates/xeon-scalable-spec-update.pdf
There is basically no 8 core instance of a CPU that runs at stock clocks using AVX2 (for example) - i know Zen 2 doesn't inherently support AVX 512 so that's probs out of the question (but these fair a lot worse).

If the point is true, and the clocks are in fact solid, you could infer that MS doesn't have those instructions at all (which would be odd; Pretty sure Ass creed Odyssey uses AVX 1).
 

Aquanox

Forum Sage
May 26, 2005
8,191
22
38
#7
There's probably a bit of marketing behind MS's claim tho - would appear to be paying off too.

It's probably true for the most part. But, as mentioned in the other thread, AVX workloads inherently down clock the CPU - which would mean the clocks are no longer stable.

AVX is not an AMD instruction set, being created by intel for their line of CPU's, and this is how they break down AVX: https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...ication-updates/xeon-scalable-spec-update.pdf
There is basically no 8 core instance of a CPU that runs at stock clocks using AVX2 (for example) - i know Zen 2 doesn't inherently support AVX 512 so that's probs out of the question (but these fair a lot worse).

If the point is true, and the clocks are in fact solid, you could infer that MS doesn't have those instructions at all (which would be odd; Pretty sure Ass creed Odyssey uses AVX 1).
Not sure if we're talking about the same thing. I know it's a SOC, but MS is stressing about GPU clocks, not CPU. In the case of PS5, CPU load does affect GPU clocks.
 

Fijiandoce

Administrator
Staff member
Oct 8, 2007
6,496
151
63
#8
Not sure if we're talking about the same thing. I know it's a SOC, but MS is stressing about GPU clocks, not CPU. In the case of PS5, CPU load does affect GPU clocks.
I think MS issued a generalized statement. It's probs not wrong, but that doesn't make it 100% truthful. But that's just marketing. Any company with a marketing dept. does it.

Which was what i pointed out with that reference:
Xbox Series X Pros:
• More Powerful GPU (12TFlop vs. 10.3 FLAT vs. 10.3TFlop Peak, 9.27TF in highly CPU demanding games) ~ Check mi first comment about this one.
• Faster RAM (10GB 560GB/s 320bit + 6GB @335GB/s vs 16GB 448GB/s 256bit)
• Bigger storage (1TB vs. 825GB)
• Stable clocks (Which suggests better cooling)
It's being generally assumed (across the internet) that this is a truth for both cpu/gpu. Yet there hasn't really been any confirmation as far as i've seen.
 

Aquanox

Forum Sage
May 26, 2005
8,191
22
38
#9
There's probably a bit of marketing behind MS's claim tho - would appear to be paying off too.

It's probably true for the most part. But, as mentioned in the other thread, AVX workloads inherently down clock the CPU - which would mean the clocks are no longer stable.

AVX is not an AMD instruction set, being created by intel for their line of CPU's, and this is how they break down AVX: https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...ication-updates/xeon-scalable-spec-update.pdf
There is basically no 8 core instance of a CPU that runs at stock clocks using AVX2 (for example) - i know Zen 2 doesn't inherently support AVX 512 so that's probs out of the question (but these fair a lot worse).

If the point is true, and the clocks are in fact solid, you could infer that MS doesn't have those instructions at all (which would be odd; Pretty sure Ass creed Odyssey uses AVX 1).
I think you're looking at SMT.

Series X CPU runs @ 3.8Ghz with SMT disabled and 3.6Ghz with SMT enabled. These are fixed are non dependent on what's happening with the GPU.

On the PS5 side, CPU runs @ UP TO 3.5Ghz with SMT Enabled, which will also come down depending on the GPU load.

On the GPU it's 12TFlops sustained on the Series X, whereas it's 10.3 Peak (aka, unsustainable) on the PS5. If you are to compare apples to apples, many people indicate it would be 9.3TFlop for the PS5, on the more demanding games, which is were power matters the most.

Power-wise, this is a clear win for the Series X, wherever you look at it. Sony's focusing heavily on its SSD, and it indeed looks very impressive, but that's basically means faster load times, compared to a console in which load times are already good. Yes, that's a nice to have, but not a game changer IMO, and sacrifices a lot of space in the console, not mentioning users will have to wait quite a bit until NVME units are approved for Sony to be used on PS5, and they are actually affordable (They're absolutely not at this point)
 
Last edited:

Fijiandoce

Administrator
Staff member
Oct 8, 2007
6,496
151
63
#10
I think you're looking at SMT.
Nah, it's basically in AMD's white paper as well - Though they don't document anywhere near as nice as intel do. Refer to the intel white paper above for context.

These are fixed are non dependent on what's happening with the GPU.
You got a source for that? Curious what MS has said on the matter. "Journalists" aren't really being much use since most outlets are fanning the flames for clicks - as the case may be.
 
Sep 10, 2005
6,708
4
38
49
#11
I have no idea who you are, but you need to update yourself old member =)


https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-inside-xbox-series-x-full-specs

"But up until now at least, the focus has been on the GPU, where Microsoft has delivered 12 teraflops of compute performance via 3328 shaders allocated to 52 compute units (from 56 in total on silicon, four disabled to increase production yield) running at a sustained, locked 1825MHz. Once again, Microsoft stresses the point that frequencies are consistent on all machines, in all environments. There are no boost clocks with Xbox Series X."

So yeah... Series X have sustained clocks. That's were all the efforts were aimed at and required a revolutionary cooling solution... Something Sony obviously couldn't pull off and then threw all those misleading "Peak TFlops" numbers so they didn't pale so much against Series X monstrous numbers.

Using an audio analogy, Xbox is 12TFlops RMS, PS5 10.3 TFlops PMPO.
Sustained clocks lol Seriously?Then Ms must be the 1st company in the whole world that has sustained clocks in a GPU,and in a small closed box.Thats pretty much a miracle....Or a lie.I know that you will choose the miracle tho ;) There is no debate that X is more powerful in numbers,but how much powerful it will be in reality,that remains to be seen.Lets not forget that this gen X was 2x times more powerful that Pro.Still the difference wasnt that amazing...With new gen the gap is a lot closer.
 
Last edited:

$Greatness$

Master Poster
Sep 4, 2009
3,324
68
48
Baltimore, MD
#12
So the PS5 isn't native 4K? I see the distinct wordplay of native on the XSX side. Pretty lulzy if it isn't on the Playstation side. Still pissed about Sony's backwards compatible talk, though.
 
Sep 10, 2005
6,708
4
38
49
#13
So the PS5 isn't native 4K? I see the distinct wordplay of native on the XSX side. Pretty lulzy if it isn't on the Playstation side. Still pissed about Sony's backwards compatible talk, though.
Im not sure what you are talking about....what makes you think that Ps5 wont have native 4k when even the X that is alot slower did in many cases?
 

Shingo

Forum Guru
Dec 21, 2011
3,722
48
48
#14
Sustained clocks lol Seriously?Then Ms must be the 1st company in the whole world that has sustained clocks in a GPU,and in a small closed box.Thats pretty much a miracle....Or a lie.I know that you will choose the miracle tho ;) There is no debate that X is more powerful in numbers,but how much powerful it will be in reality,that remains to be seen.Lets not forget that this gen X was 2x times more powerful that Pro.Still the difference wasnt that amazing...With new gen the gap is a lot closer.
I think the devs didn't put any effort in it. thats the reason there is no huge gap.
 
Sep 10, 2005
6,708
4
38
49
#15
I think the devs didn't put any effort in it. thats the reason there is no huge gap.
Lets say that what you said its true.Why do you think it will change this time around?Nothing will change for multiplatforms ,especialy with a much smaller gap ,even in numbers.But im drooling to the idea,of what Sony devs will be able to archeive with that much power....Im willing to bet that it will blow away any Xbox game multiplatform or not.
 
Likes: Shingo

Aquanox

Forum Sage
May 26, 2005
8,191
22
38
#16
You got a source for that? Curious what MS has said on the matter. "Journalists" aren't really being much use since most outlets are fanning the flames for clicks - as the case may be.
Actually, Digital Foundry and Austin Evans did this on Microsoft's facilities and supervision. Everything they said is what Microsoft Engineers told them, and both DF and Austin mentioned how much MS stressed on the fact both run at sustained clocks all the time.

Since Austin was one of the guys invited to MS facilities, I took a time to locate this for your reference.

Edit:

Sustained clocks lol Seriously?Then Ms must be the 1st company in the whole world that has sustained clocks in a GPU,and in a small closed box.Thats pretty much a miracle....Or a lie.I know that you will choose the miracle tho ;) There is no debate that X is more powerful in numbers,but how much powerful it will be in reality,that remains to be seen.Lets not forget that this gen X was 2x times more powerful that Pro.Still the difference wasnt that amazing...With new gen the gap is a lot closer.
Indeed, MS is the first in the world to do many things with the Series X... you really, really need to document yourself more about the new gen, not just answer with generic statements. Key part here, is that Series X doesn't have a boost clock, it has been done from scratch to achieve sustained clocks, hence the unprecedented form factor (for a console), giant vapor chamber and cooling system in all. If you wanna call it a miracle out of ignorance on the matter, well go ahead., but it's actually top notch engineering.

Lets say that what you said its true.Why do you think it will change this time around?Nothing will change for multiplatforms ,especialy with a much smaller gap ,even in numbers.But im drooling to the idea,of what Sony devs will be able to archeive with that much power....Im willing to bet that it will blow away any Xbox game multiplatform or not.
Taking all things in consideration, the power gap is close to that between PS4 and Xbox One or Xbox One X vs. PS4 Pro. So I respect you're drolling on a 9.4Tflops console.. that's a lot... and with RDNA2 I do expect great looking games from the PS5, considering how good some of the Sony's 1st patty games are.

Series X though, is what got me more excited about at a technical level. It's true that this gen was a bit of a disaster in terms of hardware before the One X came out. 1st games... well, not so good apart from Gears 5 and the spectacular Ori 2. (My fav. game of the gen for the One X)

As for multiplatform games, there's a lot of potential for Series X to become the lead console, and this is because DirectX 12 Ultimate (please read about it before commenting) Developing for PC and Series X should be a very easy task compared to the past generation, as they share a lot of common next gen features... and PC market nowadays isn't what it used to be, it's much bigger and more important now (there's a reason Sony is launching their exclusives in Microsoft's platform, possibly including God of War as well)

So, in summary, I kinda see another 360 vs PS3 generation here, with a more friendly Microsoft platform for developers, which will translate in better looking multi games and with features PS5 might miss.... and that was with fairly equivalent hardware! ... this time, MS has the clear lead in power. Sony has the numbers and fanbase though. I foresee a fascinating next generation.
 
Last edited:

Aquanox

Forum Sage
May 26, 2005
8,191
22
38
#17
I think the devs didn't put any effort in it. thats the reason there is no huge gap.
Lets not forget that this gen X was 2x times more powerful that Pro.Still the difference wasnt that amazing...With new gen the gap is a lot closer.
Wow Wow guys... hang on there for a second.

This is very unfair and misleading. You're comparing PS4 Pro and One X to measure a generation gap? We're talking about 2x GPU power and 4X CPU power for the Series X compared to the One X, and this was a Mid Gen console.

If you want to compare correctly, you need to do so with the original Xbox One and PS4. And for a point of reference, a console that is ahead of current PC Hardware (in the case of the Series X) is always, always a big technical achievement.

PS5 GPU is RAW power is a bit lower than the already available 5700XT (which is 9.7Tflop) BUT both guys feature RDNA2 which those videocard don't.

Remember when both the XONE and PS4 were released? That hardware was already dated compared to that one PC. This time around the story is much, much different.


Im willing to bet that it will blow away any Xbox game multiplatform or not.
You sure you want to bet on that? I absolutely take that. The only way to directly compare will be multiplatform games though, so if you really want to risk it, go ahead. I say multis will look or run better on the Series X. In many cases, will do both.

Bet whatever you want. I'm in 100% sure.

Edit: Let's take Cyberpunk 2077 as an example.
 
Last edited:

Fijiandoce

Administrator
Staff member
Oct 8, 2007
6,496
151
63
#18
Actually, Digital Foundry and Austin Evans did this on Microsoft's facilities and supervision. Everything they said is what Microsoft Engineers told them, and both DF and Austin mentioned how much MS stressed on the fact both run at sustained clocks all the time.

Since Austin was one of the guys invited to MS facilities, I took a time to locate this for your reference.

Edit:
No disrespect to Austin (considering what happened to him and all) but, on top of him just reading from a spec sheet, he's not the best source for information. A while back he put out a video and positioned MS alongside Apple, when talking about Google; clearly forgetting that MS gave Win10 out pro bono and all the controversy that surrounded that (and still does). He probs couldn't even tell you what SMT is, for example. Somewhat humorously there's an early video of him beside paul from paul's hardware and the comments were not favourable - dude's come on a bit since tho.

Additionally, DF would probs be the better source, but i've not heard them discuss it (can source if you know where they discuss it). I've heard them discuss the PS5's cpu tho.

I'll put it this way however; x86 is not a prolific gaming cpu (you'd probably do better with an arm based RISC one tbh. you really don't need a cisc instruction set for gaming). when the manufacturers get the chip designs, any instructions that they aren't going to use for gaming, get junked.
I've already provided the spec sheet from intel on how AVX2 affects the core clocks, so it would be surprising to hear XB does not fluctuate, as that would imply no AVX2 (which would make no sense, the Zen 2 core is 256bit wide anyways, why not use it?)
 

Christopher

Community and Technical Manager
Staff member
Jun 1, 2007
11,955
108
63
49
Newnan, GA
#19
I think you're looking at SMT.

On the PS5 side, CPU runs @ UP TO 3.5Ghz with SMT Enabled, which will also come down depending on the GPU load.

On the GPU it's 12TFlops sustained on the Series X, whereas it's 10.3 Peak (aka, unsustainable) on the PS5. If you are to compare apples to apples, many people indicate it would be 9.3TFlop for the PS5, on the more demanding games, which is were power matters the most.
The measurement of teraflops is at its peak in all cases. If the max frequency is 2.23 GHz and it has 36 CUs then it is 10.28 TF. Nothing in the equation for determining teraflops accounts for a period of time. At peak performance, PS5 is 10.28.

Not sure why it matters so much. No matter how you look at it, the teraflops for the XSX is higher.
 

$Greatness$

Master Poster
Sep 4, 2009
3,324
68
48
Baltimore, MD
#20
Im not sure what you are talking about....what makes you think that Ps5 wont have native 4k when even the X that is alot slower did in many cases?
I didn't say the PS5 didn't, I asked a question. If you read my post, it clearly said I see the wordplay where the Xbox says "Native 4K" and the PS5 doesn't. That's why I asked the question of if it will be native 4K, relax.
 

Shingo

Forum Guru
Dec 21, 2011
3,722
48
48
#21
Lets say that what you said its true.Why do you think it will change this time around?Nothing will change for multiplatforms ,especialy with a much smaller gap ,even in numbers.But im drooling to the idea,of what Sony devs will be able to archeive with that much power....Im willing to bet that it will blow away any Xbox game multiplatform or not.
This is correct as well, most of the devs won't give a shit about the power lead, and if ps5 dominates market they will care almost none.
 

Aquanox

Forum Sage
May 26, 2005
8,191
22
38
#22
The measurement of teraflops is at its peak in all cases. If the max frequency is 2.23 GHz and it has 36 CUs then it is 10.28 TF. Nothing in the equation for determining teraflops accounts for a period of time. At peak performance, PS5 is 10.28.

Not sure why it matters so much. No matter how you look at it, the teraflops for the XSX is higher.
That's partially true. Only that the Series X isn't handling boost modes or else they could be talking about 14TFlops Peak. It matters because people wants to compare apples to apples and when it comes down to real world, the real power difference should be around 30%, instead the 17% Sony is trying to "sell" us.

Price point will decide how much it matters after all. If they cost the same (and the power gap is 30%), well... the Series X will look much more appealing than it already looks.
 

Christopher

Community and Technical Manager
Staff member
Jun 1, 2007
11,955
108
63
49
Newnan, GA
#23
That's partially true. Only that the Series X isn't handling boost modes or else they could be talking about 14TFlops Peak. It matters because people wants to compare apples to apples and when it comes down to real world, the real power difference should be around 30%, instead the 17% Sony is trying to "sell" us.
Teraflops is a maximum value whether the clock speed is fixed or variable. It isn't a range in any case. It is peak. "Boost mode" simply means the GPU's higher frequency. Just about every GPU on the market has base and boost clock speeds. They are not fixed. The RX 5700 XT has theoretical performance of 9.7 TF. The clock frequency varies between 1.6 GHz and 1.9 GHz. The TF value for this card is based on the "boost" frequency of 1.9 GHz. None of these statements are controversial in the PC gaming realm. The same principles apply to PS5 and XSX. If Microsoft adds a boost frequency to XSX then its TF could very well go above 14. Otherwise, we use its fixed clock speed and we get 12.1 TF. Again, no matter what XSX has more TF than PS5. So again.....what does it matter?

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-5700-xt.c3339

Fact is we don't know what the "real world" power difference is at all. Teraflops measure theoretical performance. We can dance around these numbers until we are blue in the face but it doesn't mean anything until we see and analysis of visuals and frame rates. And the simple fact of the matter is the difference is going to vary from game to game just like it always has. When I look at GPUs on the PC market, I look for benchmarks for 10 games, not one or two. And there is very little consistency from one game to the next. So this is a lot more complicated than simply applying a theoretical number to a GPU. There is no apples to apples comparison in that at all.

Price point will decide how much it matters after all. If they cost the same (and the power gap is 30%), well... the Series X will look much more appealing than it already looks.
I agree. Sony definitely needs to win the price war
 

Fijiandoce

Administrator
Staff member
Oct 8, 2007
6,496
151
63
#24
What little is leaking through from guys like Jason Schreier is that the way Sony use the SSD might actually be kinda neat.

They will obviously be down on power, but it sounds like they're aligning it with Netflix for ease of use - 'Click' and it starts. Sounds interesting. I've seen some publications expand this to multiplayer but im not too sure that'll work since you inherently need to make the connection first (that takes longer than even HDD's, nevermind SSD's).

That would put this into perspective:


It would still take like a whole second to fill the RAM tho. Never mind the actual program initializing. So, kinda curious.

I noticed in the other thread people making comparisons to traditional PC NVME's, the usual efficiency difference between PC and console apply here as well. There isn't a system around built to run on an SSD from the ground up. This goes for XB as well of course, but as far as i've seen, they employ a more traditional PC like set-up (I/O-wise anyways).

Hopefully we get some deep dives on this. Sounds cool!
 
May 20, 2008
10,855
91
48
#25
That's partially true. Only that the Series X isn't handling boost modes or else they could be talking about 14TFlops Peak. It matters because people wants to compare apples to apples and when it comes down to real world, the real power difference should be around 30%, instead the 17% Sony is trying to "sell" us.
I guess we will find out sooner or later about real world performances. Going by the specs the series x should easily outperform the PS5. It may take a while to see the best of both but the ps5 has no advantages where it counts the most. Not to mention the things MS are doing with backwards compatibility and Direct X12 ultimate are really exciting. 2 areas where the series x already has a advantage.
Price point will decide how much it matters after all. If they cost the same (and the power gap is 30%), well... the Series X will look much more appealing than it already looks.
That's true. Price will be a key factor for the early adopters. They both have to come in at the right price and right now more pressure is on sony.
 
Likes: Aquanox

Aquanox

Forum Sage
May 26, 2005
8,191
22
38
#26
Teraflops is a maximum value whether the clock speed is fixed or variable. It isn't a range in any case. It is peak. "Boost mode" simply means the GPU's higher frequency. Just about every GPU on the market has base and boost clock speeds. They are not fixed. The RX 5700 XT has theoretical performance of 9.7 TF. The clock frequency varies between 1.6 GHz and 1.9 GHz. The TF value for this card is based on the "boost" frequency of 1.9 GHz. None of these statements are controversial in the PC gaming realm. The same principles apply to PS5 and XSX. If Microsoft adds a boost frequency to XSX then its TF could very well go above 14. Otherwise, we use its fixed clock speed and we get 12.1 TF. Again, no matter what XSX has more TF than PS5. So again.....what does it matter?
I think we're mixing concepts here. Of course you won't get near those 12TFlops of power without proper coding/optimization, but the power is there on Series X no matter what you do with the GPU and CPU, and once devs get to know the hardware, they will squeeze it, and it will show.

On PS5, the more you stress the hardware, the less TFlops you will get. That's just how it has been engineered. They could've just gone ahead set it as 9.2 TFlops sustained, but they decided to go for those variable numbers and bill that 10.3TFlop figure in order to sound closer to the Series X, when it's not.

It matters even more when it's the first feature Microsoft is proud about when showing off their console (see below)



And Yes, this DOES matter, probably not to you, but It mattered a lot when PS4 and XONE launched... it mattered when games played and looked better on PS4 because it became a system selling point (remember 360 and PS3 virtually tied). It also mattered back then when 360 performed as good or better than PS3, almost winning that generation being the underdog. So yes, it does matter. Microsoft is selling the 12TFlop figure for a reason. They want to settle in consumers minds that they have the most powerful console, and by quite a long shot. They want to transmit the consumer that this is the best hardware you can buy at the given price by the time it launches. In short, they're going back to their roots and abandoned that stupid strategy of "Well... yeah, we don't need that much power anymore... people won't even notice"

Sony tried (failed IMO) to make it look different but just provoked a lot of negative in that respect given their vagueness on the specs.

I was honestly pretty mad at the original Xbox One strategy for including kinect and being so weak compared to the PS4. Being a hardcore 360 fan back then, I plain skipped the console and went for a PS4 and PC Gaming until the One X came out. I remember in this very forum people launching fireworks over the PS4 hardware superiority, and now, many try to make it sound as if it's not important this time around, when tables turned.

The feeling that you're buying top notch hardware for a killing price matters a lot for the hardcore gamer and it can be key in the first year (hardcores) and in the long run (future proofing).

I see a lot of people disappointed by Sony specs, not because they're bad (they're not) but because MS managed to pull of a noticeably more powerful piece of hardware. It will all come down the their library because MS has all other fronts covered: Services, Gamepass, Backwards compatibility, free "enhanced" games, DirectX 12 Ultimate and, most likely, superior looking multiplatform games (yes, the average nerd, me included, do look at those)

This gen, Sony's only noticeable advantage is their awesome 1st party potential (for now that is) and their advantage in the SSD.

It would still take like a whole second to fill the RAM tho. Never mind the actual program initializing. So, kinda curious.

I noticed in the other thread people making comparisons to traditional PC NVME's, the usual efficiency difference between PC and console apply here as well. There isn't a system around built to run on an SSD from the ground up. This goes for XB as well of course, but as far as i've seen, they employ a more traditional PC like set-up (I/O-wise anyways).

Hopefully we get some deep dives on this. Sounds cool!
PS5 SSD sounds awesome, but I'm not sure how this will be a game changer. I've read a lot of theoretical ways they will use it as a RAM expansion... we'll have to wait and see how it benefits the experience aside from shorter loading times. Not that the Series X has a slow SSD. Lets say PS5 loads a game in 3 seconds, and the Series X in 5 seconds. That's 0.1% of your total experience? ...

Maybe 1st parties will find more innovative ways of pulling more juice out of it, but you need to have the game made around it from scratch... so I believe (time might prove me wrong) it won't be a game changer in general... not mentioning the limited storage and the how expensive it looks like it's going to be to expand it to decent sizes in the first months... or even years, looking at PCI 4.0 NVME prices with half the speed in the market right now. That might change in the future, but MS should always be able to release SSD expansions at lower prices (considering they're not as fast)

Is all this pain worth it for a faster SSD? Very risky approach if you ask me.
 
Last edited:

Fijiandoce

Administrator
Staff member
Oct 8, 2007
6,496
151
63
#27
PS5 SSD sounds awesome, but I'm not sure how this will be a game changer. I've read a lot of theoretical ways they will use it as a RAM expansion... we'll have to wait and see how it benefits the experience aside from shorter loading times. Not that the Series X has a slow SSD. Lets say PS5 loads a game in 3 seconds, and the Series X in 5 seconds. That's 0.1% of your total experience? ...
In theory, you could have an experience that is measurably different between the two platforms beyond just 'visual quality'. Going off of Cerny's presentation, Sony seem to have piped the storage all the way up to the drive (i dont know if that that's the correct nomenclature anymore?). MS have only piped it to the RAM using a more traditional arrangement - You can observe this in the renders provided by DF and MS.
This obviously puts MS in a favorable position because their implementation is more "standard". Like anything different, it depends on whether devs pick it up or not - This is why Nvidia are real keen for RT to work. Sony say they've API'ified the process, but still, you need to program the correct calls to the API which you probs aren't doing with the standard approach.

The drawback of the "standard" approach is that - for all objects in a scene - you need them sat in RAM, ready to go. Sony seem to have this idea that you only really need what the player can see on screen + plus the buffer at the perimeter. That results in a more detailed scene, with no loading penalty. Is it better? who knows. If the devs don't bite then it's kinda moot.

One drawback i just thought of: if Sony's vision is to only have what's in front of the player in memory... how the hell they plan to make RT work if the objects aren't even in memory anymore? I feel like we're going to get some Forward vs Differed render types papers from solutions to these problems. Should be cool!

One thing to note for both though:
Zen 2 seems to be finicky with voltage, and heat. There are people in the PC scene who's Zen 2 cores no longer run at the speeds they once did (they'd overclocked) after just 6 months; That implies there is degradation (AMD are first to 7nm so its new water). These two consoles are obviously pushing the envelope, and we know they're both going to run hot. So i wonder if we're all walking into another potential RRoD sort of issue at some point down the line? Neither run on the 7nm+ fab (i think DF say its an "enhanced" 7nm [whatever the hell that means]) so presumably, the issue could be relevant to them as well - accept they may just brick if they both expect a certain freq.

Direct X12 ultimate.
This is like a "Gaming" chair, or like AMD's "Gaming" cache...

It's just DX12. Could have gone with DX12.2 or some junk.

The ultimate, in "Ultimate" is just marketing.
 

Christopher

Community and Technical Manager
Staff member
Jun 1, 2007
11,955
108
63
49
Newnan, GA
#28
I think we're mixing concepts here. Of course you won't get near those 12TFlops of power without proper coding/optimization, but the power is there on Series X no matter what you do with the GPU and CPU, and once devs get to know the hardware, they will squeeze it, and it will show.

On PS5, the more you stress the hardware, the less TFlops you will get. That's just how it has been engineered. They could've just gone ahead set it as 9.2 TFlops sustained, but they decided to go for those variable numbers and bill that 10.3TFlop figure in order to sound closer to the Series X, when it's not.
So you are saying a 5700 XT doesn't actually have 9.7 TF of theoretical performance?
 
May 20, 2008
10,855
91
48
#29
This is like a "Gaming" chair, or like AMD's "Gaming" cache...

It's just DX12. Could have gone with DX12.2 or some junk.

The ultimate, in "Ultimate" is just marketing.
It doesn't matter what you call it. Simplifying it doesn't make it less significant.
 

Fijiandoce

Administrator
Staff member
Oct 8, 2007
6,496
151
63
#30
It doesn't matter what you call it. Simplifying it doesn't make it less significant.
You don't even know what the thing you quoted is, do you? If they had just gone with DX12.2, would you have still used it in that context?

For reference, here's Nvidia's DX12 page from 2017/18:
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/technologies/dx12/

and here's their new page with all new "Ultimate" branding:
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/technologies/directx-12-ultimate/

DX is just a dev tool. The end user doesn't even need to know, or care. It's like selling a car and hyping the fact it's got circular tyres by slapping on some buzzword.

If anything, the fact they're trying to market the API (and it seems to be working) is to curtail Vulkan. I imagine you used it as some perceived 'advantage' because they sold it to you as some unified platform - that is highly ironic, since the thing doesn't even work on older windows OS's. Vulkan on the other hand could run on a fridge.

Vulkan is natively cross platform, runs on any OS (that needs some *** attached), open source, supported on all GPU's (a few more **), and, in the few titles that run both API's, performs better. Some newer titles have even gone from DX11 to Vulkan - ignoring DX12 outright.

So as i said, the only ultimate in "Ultimate" is the marketing. It doesn't do anything you wouldn't expect it to do.