FrankWza
Member
Right when it was shown by one of the other analysts that PS5 may have a performance upper hand. The timing...
Anything to take away from the topic.
Right when it was shown by one of the other analysts that PS5 may have a performance upper hand. The timing...
Hmm maybe you can point that out to me. I can't find it.
Anything to take away from the topic.
It’s right next to the dolphin. See?Hmm maybe you can point that out to me. I can't find it.
Still no. I'm blindIt’s right next to the dolphin. See?
"80 Plus" program mainly targets end-users who couldn't be bothered testing the PSU.So why not state 235w than? Why not just say 63% of what it's rated for? 372×63%=234.36. No where near gold, unlike your made up claims. This isn't how you rate PSU's btw, fyi.
Also Google search has defeated you again. Just like Google has proven non ECC to be faster than ECC, Google also doesn't state ps5 PSU being gold rated? Again, where are you getting this info from? There's a difference between being rated for a PSU standard, vs PSU's that are unrated that you can buy on eBay, alibaba, Amazon, etc. Before you misconstrue my words again, I'm not saying that Sony bought their PSU from there, but there is a big difference between being rated, and not being rated. Again, before you misconstrue my words again, this doesn't mean that unrated power supplies are bad, they just aren't rated according to PSU standards, like PC for instance.
Not sure why you keep coming for me lately? I just lay down the facts, you misconstrue them. Personally, I'd get tired of being proven wrong over and over again by me, if I were you. I come in peace though. No harm, no bad blood.
Sorry if I misunderstood your previous comment.I also didnt say you were wrong, merely that efficiency can be way broader than power usage. For instance a Tesla uses more power than a Mustang, which one is more efficient?
Also if that point was so trivial what does the term ENERGY efficient exist? To denote that the subject matter is efficient when energy is the FOCUS
Ask yewles1Still no. I'm blind
I mean the post that shows an advantage to the ps5 in this game.
I'm not so sure. Is it really using realtime lighting everywhere? If the possibility of DRS with a higher target resolution is so evident, then maybe they were too conservative in settings precisely as a shortcut for optimization.I think the game is well optimized
But we already have quite a few dips into the 40's in fixed 1080P resolution, are you suggesting something like 900P-1440P with DRS? I don't think it will hit the upper bound that often.I think the game is well optimized. The only thing the XSX/PS5 need is dynamic resolution engaged in 'performance mode' and a change in target resolution from 1080p to 1440p. The quarantine zone chapter will see res dip into 1080p along with frame rate drops, but after this chapter, the rest of the playthrough should run smoothly at 1440p with only small res changes, IMO. We've seen DRS working in 4K 'quality mode', so I don't get why they didn't enable in the perf mode too. XSS just needs a DRS and uncapped frame rate at the same 1080p res. Maybe they should consider this when patching the game with RT support.
Alex seems to think so. I'll be honest, I'm no expert when it comes to spotting what graphical technique a game is using, especially lighting.I'm not so sure. Is it really using realtime lighting everywhere?
900p min would be too low I think. I'm suggesting they let the game run at higher than 1080p resolution, so in sections where there's enough GPU headroom left can look nice and sharp. I feel the GPUs are being underutilized by fixing the res at 1080p as the vast majority of the game doesn't seem to be as taxing as that first chapter where you see dips into 40s. IMO, they could do 1440p60, for the most part, judging by equivalent GPU perf at 1440p in the PC space. They can keep the lower bound at 75% of 1440p (so 1080p) at the cost of a few frame dips (same as now).But we already have quite a few dips into the 40's in fixed 1080P resolution, are you suggesting something like 900P-1440P with DRS? I don't think it will hit the upper bound that often.
Whatever you do don’t mention the f word. The reporters are out and VERY protective today.I'm just waiting for the Call of Duty DF thread so we can debate Wifi signals
Thanks for the breakdown, didn't even know 80+ could be given out like that. I wasn't arguing against the certificate, more so that someone said Ps5 is 80+ gold, when it truly isn't. It doesn't have a real or fake certification, even if it was in the theoretical range."80 Plus" program mainly targets end-users who couldn't be bothered testing the PSU.
If you have the time, you can test PSUs in accordance with the "80 Plus" program.
Since I own my own corporation legal entity, I can source any 3rd party PSU, perform the "80 Plus" test and apply for the "80 Plus" certification program.
80 Plus became mandatory in 2007 when Energy Star forced all companies that wanted to carry the logo of this specialized company, to comply with at least the basic 80 Plus certificate. It was at that point when manufacturers began to pass the 80 Plus standard within the Energy Star initiative. Since then, more than 2.000 power supplies have been 80 Plus certified.
One of the great blunders in recent years has been the appearance from China of totally false 80 Plus certified power supplies, for which there is no valid guarantee of efficiency. The problem is that it cannot be verified in any way that the 80 Plus certificate is real, since there is no such identifier, such as a QR code or special barcode, therefore, hacking the certificate is very easy.
Physics is applied to everybody and no one is special.
------------
Energy Star certificate is a program of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, which was created in 1992, with the idea of promoting energy efficiency in electronic products, helping to reduce the emission of gases from greenhouse effect of power plants.
What the PSU is rated for =/= what the PSU and console are actually drawing. The bold is correct as the rating comes from how efficiently it can convert DC to AC without much power loss as heat. A PSU can be rated 372W but only draws and outputs what is needed. For example, If it is able to put out 180W from 200W draw, this is what determines efficiency which would be 90%.So why not state 235w than? Why not just say 63% of what it's rated for? 372×63%=234.36. No where near gold, unlike your made up claims. This isn't how you rate PSU's btw, fyi.
It brings back the old claim that PS5 is designed to be "more efficient" than XSX by some people here. How can it be if it is using more power to produce same result?
the more efficient claim was bs but efficiency can be defined in many ways. sony is offering similar performance in some games with a 20% smaller SOC. thats efficient. the ps5 has a cheaper cooling solution, has higher clocks and far more heat produced than the xsx. in this scenario, it's also more efficient. I remember Albert Panello himself dismising the bloomberg report that the PS5 cooling solution was only a few dollars because their vapor chamber solution was far more expensive.It brings back the old claim that PS5 is designed to be "more efficient" than XSX by some people here. How can it be if it is using more power to produce same result?
This is exactly what I'm talking about as a mildly disappointed ps5 owner. I understand there's only so much one can expect from a $500 machine. I still thought there was going to be more performance than what we actually have, owing to the nature of console optimization advantages, the IO, and how much better on paper they are from the Pro systems.All the next gen systems are too underpowered to do everything all at once. You can have 60fps, but IQ will suffer. You can have high IQ, but frame rate will suffer.
You can have RT reflections or shadows or GI or AO, but you have to choose one.
You can have RT and 60fps, but then resolution suffers and RT quality is toned down or noisy.
The HW is the one for a machine that would not destroy the bank at $399, once that was announced the expectations should have been set. Still, the generation is young still .This is exactly what I'm talking about as a mildly disappointed ps5 owner. I understand there's only so much one can expect from a $500 machine. I still thought there was going to be more performance than what we actually have, owing to the nature of console optimization advantages, the IO, and how much better on paper they are from the Pro systems.
Guardians of The Galaxy Playstation 5 x Xbox Series X loading times:
Thanks cap'n, but i think nobody here talking about doing everything at once. Main premise of this thread is that 4x drop of resolution for 2x of performance, unstable performance, is too severe, and it's actually a first game which work like that.All the next gen systems are too underpowered to do everything all at once. You can have 60fps, but IQ will suffer. You can have high IQ, but frame rate will suffer.
You can have RT reflections or shadows or GI or AO, but you have to choose one.
You can have RT and 60fps, but then resolution suffers and RT quality is toned down or noisy.
I'm going by specs more than price but you're right I should've had lower expectations. I fell for the youtubers and tech channels like RedGamingtech and nx gamer hype. Df actually had more realistic expectations. Point is only listened to what I wanted to hear. I saw that unreal 5 tech demo and thought if it can pull that off it should have no problem with cross gen games, even though I knew it was 1440/30fps.The HW is the one for a machine that would not destroy the bank at $399, once that was announced the expectations should have been set. Still, the generation is young still .
I do not think NXGamer or others overhyped PS5, having both I think XSX’s API approach helped them get better support in cross generation software and BC titles (that is the advantage of higher level abstractions), but as you quoted once you see the native PS5 games you do notice quite a big boost in all areas you expected.I'm going by specs more than price but you're right I should've had lower expectations. I fell for the youtubers and tech channels like RedGamingtech and nx gamer hype. Df actually had more realistic expectations. Point is only listened to what I wanted to hear. I saw that unreal 5 tech demo and thought if it can pull that off it should have no problem with cross gen games, even though I knew it was 1440/30fps.
I thought 10 tflops, rdna 2, ssd, vastly faster cpu etc would be able to run last gen engines at max settings and at least 1440p or more via upscaling at 60 fps. It's very rare to see that. Performance modes are always below max settings. Only games that have delivered on my expectations have been Demons souls, Ratchet, and Metro exodus next gen with that RT GI. Maybe Doom Eternal could be added to that list although it's got bad anisotropic filtering in RT mode.
Don't have a Series X but if I did I would add MSFS and Forza Horizon 5. Even though with FH5 you have to sacrifice framerate vs ultra, at least that game stands out graphically.
Don't get me wrong it's been great having games like GOW, last of us 2, death stranding, ghost at 60 fps. I've bought many "next gen upgrades" though and some are depressing. Control Ultimates RT mode sucks with 30 fps and bad input lag. Mortal Kombat 11 ps5 isn't even native 4k and the visuals don't look equal to PC. Avengers ps5 version looks great only at 30 fps. Greedfall only looks max settings in 30 fps mode. AC valhalla is a great looking game at about 1440p/60 but it's very soft image.
I'm wondering now how much worse will Forbidden West and Ragnarok be at 60 fps. Horizon footage has been 30 and same with God of War. Gt7 is clearly compromised as well based on footage we've seen.
Dolby Vision vs HDR
Not even the same section, what's the point in that? Same with some of the others.
The resume test is a bit weird too, shouldn't it start when you press the button?
Thanks for the breakdown, didn't even know 80+ could be given out like that. I wasn't arguing against the certificate, more so that someone said Ps5 is 80+ gold, when it truly isn't. It doesn't have a real or fake certification, even if it was in the theoretical range.
It's like someone claiming they have a rare Nintendo woodgrain Gameboy, and they pull out this shit. All you can do is laugh, as Google results will never have this listed as an official "Nintendo Gameboy"
?Did DF get hacked?