It's not even that actually, Xbox One didn't have anything better than PS4 when it comes to specs, it wasn't just about TF.
If you go by just TF numbers, yes XSX is 16% more than PS5, but if you go by overall specs it can go much less specially because of the SSD that is twice faster, it can even go in the advantage of the PS5 when it comes to performance if the console in good hands that will use the full power of all specs including GPU CPU and SSD all together.
16% performance difference is not even enough to have 1800p on one and 2160p on the other, that would require 40% performance difference. What we are talking about here amounts to 1440p VS 1512p, at most 1620p (maybe that would be too much). I think Xbox fans will be very disappointed when the Digital Foundry comparisons start rolling out.I was there online for the moment, and the general reaction was one of me sat there with my hands on my face. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. It was a classic case of "shut up shut up what are you talking about man!". It was just a colossal flop, and everybody was talking about it online for weeks afterwards.
It was one of the biggest fuck ups of a console launch I can remember. The PS5 one doesn't even come close. That's not to say that Sony haven't handled this all badly every step of the way, they have. MS have been on total top form with everything so far, from media presence to even making jokes, it's been perfect. But Sony have been utterly dreadful, which is a massive shame because they have a good product here.
Come E3 (time), all this two of spec will dispense. The games will do the talking.
Honestly I'm tired of this shit.When's the next big "event" that we know of now? E3 timeframe?
I would imagine that come next showing, you will see a completely different Sony, a total 180 to this... whatever you want to call this way of showing off your product is.
Yeah, indeed E3. Wondering if Microsoft might drop info on Lockhart before that. To keep the hype going, would be weird to stop this marketing campaign for 3 months, right? Maybe they'll already show some games or demos.When's the next big "event" that we know of now? E3 timeframe?
I would imagine that come next showing, you will see a completely different Sony, a total 180 to this... whatever you want to call this way of showing off your product is.
Yeah, indeed E3. Wondering if Microsoft might drop info on Lockhart before that. To keep the hype going, would be weird to stop this marketing campaign for 3 months, right? Maybe they'll already show some games or demos.
But 1440p to 4K is more than double the pixels! It would be a bigger gap then the 900p VS 1080p of X one to PS4, and those had a 40% Tflop difference, apart from the much faster memory on PS4. How would that be the case?It could. We really don't know at this point. We could see a lot of games could go true 4k for XSX while PS5 could render at 1440p upscaled to 4k to maintain consistent FPS.
I would assume, there will be another writeup geared toward more layman styleWhen's the next big "event" that we know of now? E3 timeframe?
I would imagine that come next showing, you will see a completely different Sony, a total 180 to this... whatever you want to call this way of showing off your product is.
They don't need Lockhart this year, save that till next year once the 'hardcore' have bought your latest and greatest, and keep supplies up.Yeah, indeed E3. Wondering if Microsoft might drop info on Lockhart before that. To keep the hype going, would be weird to stop this marketing campaign for 3 months, right? Maybe they'll already show some games or demos.
Makes sense, but the longer you wait the less need there is for a 1080p console.They don't need Lockhart this year, save that till next year once the 'hardcore' have bought your latest and greatest, and keep supplies up.
They better have a 180, Sony have a solid product, but their messaging is awful. Cerny's presentation should have come after a proper reveal with demos and games, just like the one on 2013. The only reason I can think they didn't do it is because they don't want to divert attention from the incoming PS4 blockbusters coming till June.When's the next big "event" that we know of now? E3 timeframe?
I would imagine that come next showing, you will see a completely different Sony, a total 180 to this... whatever you want to call this way of showing off your product is.
But 1440p to 4K is more than double the pixels! It would be a bigger gap then the 900p VS 1080p of X one to PS4, and those had a 40% Tflop difference, apart from the much faster memory on PS4. How would that be the case?
16% performance difference is not even enough to have 1800p on one and 2160p on the other, that would require 40% performance difference. What we are talking about here amounts to 1440p VS 1512p, at most 1620p (maybe that would be too much). I think Xbox fans will be very disappointed when the Digital Foundry comparisons start rolling out.
For now, they basically sacrified next gen for old gen exclusives. On the long term is nuts, they need to do something about it. They will probably, but for now we will sucks a lot of doubts and waiting again.They better have a 180, Sony have a solid product, but their messaging is awful. Cerny's presentation should have come after a proper reveal with demos and games, just like the one on 2013. The only reason I can think they didn't do it is because they don't want to divert attention from the incoming PS4 blockbusters coming till June.
They better have a 180, Sony have a solid product, but their messaging is awful. Cerny's presentation should have come after a proper reveal with demos and games, just like the one on 2013. The only reason I can think they didn't do it is because they don't want to divert attention from the incoming PS4 blockbusters coming till June.
how much is a good set of noise cancelling headphones? cant be doing with jet engine fan spoiling my glorious 3d audioBTW I just listened again to cerny about clocks under heavy load .
"10 % reduction on electricity consumption by lowering the clock by 2% at maximum "
Where is the 10% down clock comes from?
10% reduction is for electricity not gpu clock
Yes it's a clever implementation, which not many people seemed to grasp, which we will likely see in the PC GPU space to allow for some absurd clocks not long from now, as Cerny hinted at, also likely the reason we had rumors of RDNA2 being developed 'for' Sony.BTW I just listened again to cerny about clocks under heavy load .
"10 % reduction on electricity consumption by lowering the clock by 2% at maximum "
Where is the 10% down clock comes from?
10% reduction is for electricity not gpu clock
Exactly. It'll be 9.9tf or just at 10tf all of the time.BTW I just listened again to cerny about clocks under heavy load .
"10 % reduction on electricity consumption by lowering the clock by 2% at maximum "
Where is the 10% down clock comes from?
10% reduction is for electricity not gpu clock
yea but i kind a know reason why he's was trolling at first he said ps5 is 9.2Tflops xsex 12tTlops then there was lot resistance against ps5 leak me including because i thought 9.2 in 2019 would make sense but it was revealed for 2020 holidays, then suddenly tommy switched ps5 to 13 Tflops just to troll ps fans.It's not about knowing everything. I don't give a damn if Fisher has sources, other things he said were much probably pure TROLLING, because they were so exagerated and yet not even explained by him that one could think that. Plus, he never added truly to the discussion, he just shows up and throw a thing (mostly wrong).
but he says otherwise i quote:The reason to not get vetted is that he doesn't want to. What's the point of being vetted if you you're not 100% sure of your data?
if he thinks he can post here as insider without vetted that's his mistake , now he has to eat a crow, and get banned. end of story. that's what happened to many of these fake insiders but not to him as for now..Everyone does the hell he wants, if OsirisBlack wanted to get vetted that's totally fine, it's totally fine also that another guy doesn't want because he HOPE people will not take him as 100% truth. But you are right. He can't be taken seriously as an insider, so do not set expectation on his info and just go with the flow instead of asking for bans.
Yea 10 to 10.3 tf at all times . And even he said the 2% drop barely happens when we reach the critical heavy loadExactly. It'll be 9.9tf or just at 10tf all of the time.
I agree with most here they should have kept this to devs only. Most of the people watching have no idea what half of that presentation meant.
Hopefully Sony's PR goes into panic mode and forces a demo or 2 to leak
BTW I just listened again to cerny about clocks under heavy load .
"10 % reduction on electricity consumption by lowering the clock by 2% at maximum "
Where is the 10% down clock comes from?
10% reduction is for electricity not gpu clock
Possible... possible...
But then, I'm of the opinion here that maybe they should have just not said anything at all like this. They couldn't do an info drop, because people will only see the numbers, as this all proves.
It was a tricky position to be in really, I don't envy them. Personally, the only way forward now is to let the tech do the talking. But as you said... to do that, means people may look at the upcoming games and go "oh, this looks shit now" lol.
Really weird situation to be in for them. I honestly don't know what their best strategy is here.
but he says otherwise i quote:
I was never once doubtful of my source otherwise I wouldn't post them.
how can you trust your sources but doubt in data they provide? and he says it first hand info.
basically he contradicts himself.
Ok, seems I need to repeat.yea but i kind a know reason why he's was trolling at first he said ps5 is 9.2Tflops xsex 12tTlops then there was lot resistance against ps5 leak me including because i thought 9.2 in 2019 would make sense but it was revealed for 2020 holidays, then suddenly tommy switched ps5 to 13 Tflops just to troll ps fans.
but he says otherwise i quote:
I was never once doubtful of my source otherwise I wouldn't post them.
how can you trust your sources but doubt in data they provide? and he says it first hand info.
basically he contradicts himself.
if he thinks he can post here as insider without vetted that's his mistake , now he has to eat a crow, and get banned. end of story. that's what happened to many of these fake insiders but not to him as for now..
Nice to program for. Anyway for a 399 machine they did a great job.This is probably the most interesting and controversial feature. We will wait for developers and digital foundry for more info. Because:
1. CPU can run at 3.5 ghz and GPU at 9.2 or 9.6 tflops
2. CPU can run at 3.2 ghz and GPU at 10.2 tflops;
3. CPU can runt at 3.4 ghz and GPU at 10 tflops.
So many scenarios.
BTW I just listened again to cerny about clocks under heavy load .
"10 % reduction on electricity consumption by lowering the clock by 2% at maximum "
Where is the 10% down clock comes from?
10% reduction is for electricity not gpu clock
You can't have 14.5TF if your GPU doesn't clock at 2.23GHz.Microsoft should put out theoretical peak TF numbers as a fairer contrast between the systems. Would probably be around 14.5TF running at the same clocks as ps5.
This is probably the most interesting and controversial feature. We will wait for developers and digital foundry for more info. Because:
So many scenarios.
If it reaches the critical situation then based on his comment :
1. CPU can run at 3.5 ghz and GPU at 10.08tf
2. CPU can run at 3.4 ghz and GPU at 10.28 tflops;
3. CPU can runt at 3.45 ghz and GPU at 10.1 tflops.
With that tower they will get close.You can't have 14.5TF if your GPU doesn't clock at 2.23GHz.
This gives them 10% reduction on electrical consumption by varying the clocks by 2% in rare stances and that can calm the system so it doesn't get loudIf the performance was so minimal then why wouldn't they just fix the clocks.
This is probably the most interesting and controversial feature. We will wait for developers and digital foundry for more info. Because:
1. CPU can run at 3.5 ghz and GPU at 9.2 or 9.6 tflops
2. CPU can run at 3.2 ghz and GPU at 10.2 tflops;
3. CPU can runt at 3.4 ghz and GPU at 10 tflops.
So many scenarios.
With that tower they will get close.
This is probably the most interesting and controversial feature. We will wait for developers and digital foundry for more info. Because:
1. CPU can run at 3.5 ghz and GPU at 9.2 or 9.6 tflops
2. CPU can run at 3.2 ghz and GPU at 10.2 tflops;
3. CPU can runt at 3.4 ghz and GPU at 10 tflops.
So many scenarios.
It is based in what the dev workload is... so devs will choose when and where the GPU and/or CPU will run at max speeds.the interesting thing will be how sustainable it is for developers to run both at max clocks... because it very much sounds like that's not really feasible for many games.
and I wonder how many developers will chose CPU over GPU especially since the Series X will have a CPU advantage of up to 300MHz, and Multiplatform releases that push CPUs will possibly have to sacrifice GPU speed on PS5.
pairing back graphics is way easier than pairing back game logic after all.
it will be very interesting to see the effects of these dynamic clock speeds, especially once developers are able to talk freely about it all.
Ots so minor man .its between 10.08 to 10.28 (2% clock reduction to get 10% lower electrical consumption)This will be a hard choice for cpu heavy games. Big open world games and racing simulations are very cpu intensive.
So, they are forced to chose between more cars/population or higher graphical fidelity.
GTA 6 might need 3.5 Ghz from the cpu, so they are left with ~ 9.5 tflops or so.
The XSX doesnt have that problem.
They have disabled CUs for yield.Its not just about cooling to reach a given clock rate, it would also lower the yields as not all chips would reach it. This is the reason I discarded it at first as I thought it wouldnt be possible with such a high clock and a acceptable yield.
Each console has it own set of problems.This will be a hard choice for cpu heavy games. Big open world games and racing simulations are very cpu intensive.
So, they are forced to chose between more cars/population or higher graphical fidelity.
GTA 6 might need 3.5 Ghz from the cpu, so they are left with ~ 9.5 tflops or so.
The XSX doesnt have that problem.
In ideal conditions can be +20GB/s.It's 5-6GB per sec, more if you include compression . lets call it 10 per sec .. that's 1GB/frame @10fps , 100MB/frame @100fps etc .. that's not enough to complete loading of a scene if it changes substantially
Wait, is this serious? Xbox Series X's GPU is only capable of 1.825GHz... unless I'm missing something?With that tower they will get close.
See I think that's where the SSD speed will come into it.Each console has it own set of problems.
What about games that use more than 10GB RAM? Devs will need to deal with slow memory access on Xbox.
On PS5 devs will need to deal with their workload to get the max of the system.