Next-Gen PS5 & XSX |OT| Console tEch threaD

Status
Not open for further replies.
You-spin-me-right-round.gif
 
Anyone calling any console 1440/60 or 4k/60fps better have a TCR/TRC citation or they are a liar and speaking out their ass. As we all know resolution/FPS is (for the most part) entirely in the developers court.... unless there is a TCR/TRC.
 
Snowdonhoffen said:
So... is it safe to say that Xbox will have the best and worst versions of multiplatform games? :pie_thinking:
Click to expand...

Definitely the worse but being the best version really depends on what your looking for as a gamer.

People who see resolution as a priority will choose the Xbox Series X. People who want the fastest I/O will choose the PS5.
 
danhese007 said:
XSX has one hardware decompression block capable of 6+GB/s that supports Zlib and BCPack compression system with an estimated 50%+ texture size reduction. 2.4GB with a 50% reduction in size = 4.8GB

PS5 has one hardware decompression block that supports Zlib and Kraken capable of up to 22GB/s

Microsoft is not narrowing the gap between PS5 compression block they are making effective use of their own compression block which is capable of 6+GB/s. PS5 decompression block is capable of 22GB/s and you better believe developers will find ways to compress their data to take advantage of it.

This gen a lot of developers bypassed the zlib decompressors in PS4 and Xbox One and used oodle kraken on the CPU because it was better than using the built in decompressors. That is explicitly why Sony added a ridiculously fast hardware support for Kraken.
Click to expand...

You bring up valid points. Kraken is significantly better at general data decompression than zlib. But Cerny used a decompression ratio of 1.5 in the talk(7.5GB/s) when calculating how quickly 1GB could be loaded into RAM. 22GB/s just seems like an edge case. A rare occurrence. 8-9GB/s is more realistic. Or maybe something between 9 and 22.
 
rntongo said:
You bring up valid points. Kraken is significantly better at general data decompression than zlib. But Cerny used a decompression ratio of 1.5 in the talk(7.5GB/s) when calculating how quickly 1GB could be loaded into RAM. 22GB/s just seems like an edge case. A rare occurrence. 8-9GB/s is more realistic. Or maybe something between 9 and 22.
Click to expand...

Basically the typical values with compression are 4.8GB/s for the XSX and 8-9GB/S with the PS5. That's the norm with theoretical values being around 6GB/s for the XSX and 22GB/s for the PS5.

Also you have to take into account the Zlib is used for general data while BCpack is used for textures. Kraken handles general data compression.

But overall the PS5s I/O solution is faster than the XSX by a significant amount.

That's how I understand all this.
 
Last edited:
SlimySnake said:
This is funny because Cerny literally talked about the implementation, and making sure that they eliminated all bottlenecks that would've kept them from fully utilizing the 100x boost in SSD speeds.

zhyTE1I.png


This is where he talks about how a 10x increase in SSD speed only increases the loading times by 2x on the ps4. And how the goal with the PS5's I/O was to ensure the 100x SSD speed boost translates to 100x loading and streaming.



Here is a rule of thumb. When you have to invent marketing friendly terms like the velocity architecture, that means you are compensating for something. We saw this in action already. The load times on the demos shown were still only 4x faster than the xbox one versions. state of decay still took almost 10 seconds. whereas spiderman loaded in sub second. Literally a fade in, not even a fade out was needed in that demo we all saw. technically, it should only take 5 seconds to fill 12.5 gb of vram on the series x. But it took twice as long. And you dont even need to load 12.6gb of state of decay right away. you should be able to load 5gb max in 2 seconds. So why did it take 9+ seconds? Why didnt their fancy velocity architecture handle everything gracefully and by itself?

So if anything, despite all the custom stuff MS has done for the I/O, they are likely not even utilizing the 40x boost in SSD speed. all the work that they did in the velocity architecture was stuff they would've done to utilize the increase in SSD speed. they didnt go above and beyond like Sony has done with the I/O.

And you know what, thats ok. They went above and beyond with the GPU and thats good enough. there is absolutely no reason to downplay the SSD and I/O stuff Sony is doing. No reason to question Cerny after he's already been proven right twice. Everyone including DF laughed when he said in the first wired article that his SSD was faster than any SSD on the market. Cerny didnt lie about that. Everyone including DF and you questioned whether RT was hardware accelerated or audio only, and accused Cerny of lying. He wasn't. Now when he says the I/O lets them fully utilize the 100x increase in SSD, you better believe it. The man has earned it.
Click to expand...


giphy.gif
 
EventHorizon said:
I code for a living too and hear units of code referred to all the time. Seriously how could you not? Or how about unit testing. When coders are doing that do you think they are testing hardware? No they are testing functional units of code which is what EVERYONE calls them.
Click to expand...

Nicholas-Fraser-Why-You-Always-Lying-video-640x449.jpg
 
I have seen discussions going on in this thread about the SSD speeds between PS5 & XSX and how XSX SSD is as fast as PS5.......Guys......stop it!!

The PS5's SSD is way faster, more than double the speed, you're making yourselves look stupid with the damage control about how XSX SSD is gonna mitigate the difference with the use of "BsPaCk" and Lib Z or lesbians or something like that, it ain't gonna work.

PS5 = 5.5 GB/s with 9 GB/s compressed.
XSX = 2.4 GB/s with 4.8 GB/s compressed.

STOP IT! GET THE HECK OVER IT, Phil Spencer won't give you any dollar if you damage control for it, you get nothing from these conversations, the numbers do not lie.
 
EventHorizon said:
I code for a living too and hear units of code referred to all the time. Seriously how could you not? Or how about unit testing. When coders are doing that do you think they are testing hardware? No they are testing functional units of code which is what EVERYONE calls them.
Click to expand...
The only case when I heard normally the word unit is in "Unit testing" only in that phrase/moment maybe is a problem in the translation to english but even, we
usually use the same terminology in english doesn't matter if you talk to a japanese or indian for put an example.
 
Last edited:
HGamer said:
I have seen discussions going on in this thread about the SSD speeds between PS5 & XSX and how XSX SSD is as fast as PS5.......Guys......stop it!!

The PS5's SSD is way faster, more than double the speed, you're making yourselves look stupid with the damage control about how XSX SSD is gonna mitigate the difference with the use of "BsPaCk" and Lib Z or lesbians or something like that, it ain't gonna work.
Click to expand...
Xbox series x secret sauce was lesbian compression. It was all right there. We didn't listen.
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
The date of the Tweet says to me this was damage control when many people thought the PS5 was the stronger console.
Click to expand...

That's only if you weren't watching his videos. He always believed the Series X was stronger and sounded pretty confident. All he's doing there is stating the obvious, that a 6 teraflop GCN Xbox One X with jaguar CPUs can't possibly compare to a next gen entry level xbox with zen 2 cores with SMT enabled and a 4TF RDNA 2 GPU. His tweet had nothing to do with PS5, it had to do with people believing 6 teraflops on Xbox One X would outperform 4TF on lockhart, which it definitely will not.
 
X-Fighter said:
143mill divided by 12 months and 700k subs (AS IF 700k were all paying the whole year round), would be $17 per month per user. You really think that almost everyone was paying that amount per month? That's ridiculous. The 143 is a guess, and a bad one at that. But sure if you think PSNow can generate $143 million with 700k users, and Microsoft can't generate that with 10 million users, well...


That 10 million is active users, not a cumulated number of all users ever.
Click to expand...

Ummm....what's the definition of an active user? It's normally the number of active accounts. That means 'active' as in not expired, not necessarily 'active' in that they're downloading and playing online. That's trickery of a different sort. Why not simply use "Paying subscribers?" Same reason they haven't released revenue figures. It wouldn't benefit their PR.
 
EventHorizon said:
I code for a living too and hear units of code referred to all the time. Seriously how could you not? Or how about unit testing. When coders are doing that do you think they are testing hardware? No they are testing functional units of code which is what EVERYONE calls them.
Click to expand...

Yes "units" of code a something that is referred to. However, API's are not called "units" as far as I've ever heard. Sorry. May even be the case where you are, but that doesn't make it common nomenclature. Maybe that's the issue here? Maybe you're talking about units of code produced during Agile "Sprints?"
 
HGamer said:
I have seen discussions going on in this thread about the SSD speeds between PS5 & XSX and how XSX SSD is as fast as PS5.......Guys......stop it!!

The PS5's SSD is way faster, more than double the speed, you're making yourselves look stupid with the damage control about how XSX SSD is gonna mitigate the difference with the use of "BsPaCk" and Lib Z or lesbians or something like that, it ain't gonna work.

PS5 = 5.5 GB/s with 9 GB/s compressed.
XSX = 2.4 GB/s with 4.8 GB/s compressed.

STOP IT! GET THE HECK OVER IT, Phil Spencer won't give you any dollar if you damage control for it, you get nothing from these conversations, the numbers do not lie.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's almost twice the speed. But it needs to be seen in context. That's the only way things can be looked at objectively and evaluated fairly.
The whole purpose of the SSD, and everyone agrees, is to remove the limits of the hard drive. Games needed to be designed with the hard drive in mind, because it was the major bottleneck for a long time. So everything as of now, needs to be looked at, in comparison to hard drives. Every developer is jumping from hard drives as a standard to SSDs as a standard.

So in reality, how much does twice the SSD speed of the PS5 REALLY matter? Let's do a quick calculation...
Assume you have to load 16GB of data into RAM. You have an HDD that can transfer 50MB/s, the XSX that can do 4.8 GB/s, and the PS5 that can do 9 GB/s.
The HDD takes 16000/50 = 320 seconds
The XSX SSD takes 16 / 4.8 = 3.3 seconds
The PS5 SSD takes 16 / 9 = 1.8 seconds

The jump from 320 seconds to 3.3 seconds is HUGE. The jump from 320 to 1.8 seconds is definitely bigger, but is it really THAT much more significant compared to the XSX? Compared directly against the XSX, it is almost 90% faster, sure. But the difference between the PS5 SSD and the XSX SSD compared to the HDD is 1.5 seconds over 320 seconds, which is a mere 0.5%. Sure, maybe the HDD can do 100MB/s instead of 50 MB/s, but that would still make the difference a mere 1% between the consoles.
Slamming each other and bragging about 0.5% - 1% difference in storage improvement is not exactly what I would call good use of one's time.
 
Last edited:
Ascend said:
Yes, it's almost twice the speed. But it needs to be seen in context. That's the only way things can be looked at objectively and evaluated fairly.
The whole purpose of the SSD, and everyone agrees, is to remove the limits of the hard drive. Games needed to be designed with the hard drive in mind, because it was the major bottleneck for a long time. So everything as of now, needs to be looked at, in comparison to hard drives. Every developer is jumping from hard drives as a standard to SSDs as a standard.

So in reality, how much does twice the SSD speed of the PS5 REALLY matter? Let's do a quick calculation...
Assume you have to load 16GB of data into RAM. You have an HDD that can transfer 50MB/s, the XSX that can do 4.8 GB/s, and the PS5 that can do 9 GB/s.
The HDD takes 16000/50 = 320 seconds
The XSX SSD takes 16 / 4.8 = 3.3 seconds
The PS5 SSD takes 16 / 9 = 1.8 seconds

The jump from 320 seconds to 3.3 seconds is HUGE. The jump from 320 to 1.8 seconds is definitely bigger, but is it really THAT much more significant compared to the XSX? Compared directly against the XSX, it is almost 90% faster, sure. But the difference between the PS5 SSD and the XSX SSD compared to the HDD is 1.5 seconds over 320 seconds, which is a mere 0.5%. Sure, maybe the HDD can do 100MB/s, but that would still make the difference a mere 1% between the consoles.
Slamming each other and bragging about 0.5% - 1% difference in storage improvement is not exactly what I would call good use of one's time.
Click to expand...

It's not just the physical speed. Sony has created this custom I/O which is light-years ahead of the xsx solution. This is the real difference maker in all of this
 
SenjutsuSage said:
That's only if you weren't watching his videos. He always believed the Series X was stronger and sounded pretty confident. All he's doing there is stating the obvious, that a 6 teraflop GCN Xbox One X with jaguar CPUs can't possibly compare to a next gen entry level xbox with zen 2 cores with SMT enabled and a 4TF RDNA 2 GPU. His tweet had nothing to do with PS5, it had to do with people believing 6 teraflops on Xbox One X would outperform 4TF on lockhart, which it definitely will not.
Click to expand...

That tweet said nothing about the One X. It directly referenced PS5 and XSX.
 
Paulxo87 said:
It's not just the physical speed. Sony has created this custom I/O which is light-years ahead of the xsx solution. This is the real difference maker in all of this
Click to expand...
And you know this... How? Based on which comparison of what data? What are these things other than speed that make the PS5 I/O light years ahead of the XSX solution?

The XSX also has a custom I/O. They are claiming 100GB is instantly accessible for the developer. There's SFS, there's a bunch of other things that still have not been talked about in enough detail to paint a clear picture.

So let's step off the emotional hype. Let's remain level-headed and keep expectations in check.
 
Ascend said:
Yes, it's almost twice the speed. But it needs to be seen in context. That's the only way things can be looked at objectively and evaluated fairly.
The whole purpose of the SSD, and everyone agrees, is to remove the limits of the hard drive. Games needed to be designed with the hard drive in mind, because it was the major bottleneck for a long time. So everything as of now, needs to be looked at, in comparison to hard drives. Every developer is jumping from hard drives as a standard to SSDs as a standard.

So in reality, how much does twice the SSD speed of the PS5 REALLY matter? Let's do a quick calculation...
Assume you have to load 16GB of data into RAM. You have an HDD that can transfer 50MB/s, the XSX that can do 4.8 GB/s, and the PS5 that can do 9 GB/s.
The HDD takes 16000/50 = 320 seconds
The XSX SSD takes 16 / 4.8 = 3.3 seconds
The PS5 SSD takes 16 / 9 = 1.8 seconds

The jump from 320 seconds to 3.3 seconds is HUGE. The jump from 320 to 1.8 seconds is definitely bigger, but is it really THAT much more significant compared to the XSX? Compared directly against the XSX, it is almost 90% faster, sure. But the difference between the PS5 SSD and the XSX SSD compared to the HDD is 1.5 seconds over 320 seconds, which is a mere 0.5%. Sure, maybe the HDD can do 100MB/s instead of 50 MB/s, but that would still make the difference a mere 1% between the consoles.
Slamming each other and bragging about 0.5% - 1% difference in storage improvement is not exactly what I would call good use of one's time.
Click to expand...
It's not so much the load times, not many will feel slighted by a couple of seconds more loading. The difference is in the ability to stream when the ssd becomes an extension of the entire memory pipeline.

The real-time difference is significant in feeding new material to render while you're playing. A game that takes advantage of double the speed on PS5 for streaming purpose cannot be matched by a system twice as slow in this regard. Visible concessions would need to be made, think about it - twice as many textures, or models, or animations while playing. Important to not conflate this with scene complexity, the scene budgets will still be within the rendering ceiling of the GPU, it is about detail achieved through variety, faster LOD switching, etc.

XsX is good, but PS5 cranks next gen possibilities to 11. "IF" a 3rd party game dares to show off PS5 potential, the delta will become apparent.
 
Last edited:
Ascend said:
And you know this... How? Based on which comparison of what data? What are these things other than speed that make the PS5 I/O light years ahead of the XSX solution?

The XSX also has a custom I/O. They are claiming 100GB is instantly accessible for the developer. There's SFS, there's a bunch of other things that still have not been talked about in enough detail to paint a clear picture.

So let's step off the emotional hype. Let's remain level-headed and keep expectations in check.
Click to expand...
Ascend you share a moderate point of view please don't ruined it with "100 GB is instantly accessible".
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sony unveils next-gen RGB mini-LED TV Tech | "OLED Killer?"
2 3
118
7K
dave_d replied
What are your top 3 (non-cross gen) PS5/XSX games this gen?
46
2K
FubukiJ replied
Rocksteady’s Next Batman Game Being Developed Using Unreal Engine 5. Targeting Cross-Gen Launch With PS5, Series S|X, and Next-Gen Consoles!
News Rumor Hype  2
89
3K
Feel Like I'm On 42 replied
Xbox Wants Out of the Console War - (IGN Next-Gen Console Watch Podcast)
2 3 4
194
11K
Viruz replied
  • Locked
Gears Collection Announcement In June For PC/XSX/PS5
5
741
CyberCali replied
Top Bottom