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

Status
Not open for further replies.
jasondefaoite said:
The 10 chips used for DRAM on the Series X are all 14Gbps. 10GB are connected to via a 320bit bus (14*320/8 = 560GB/s). 6GB are connected via a 192bit bus (14*192/8=336GB/s). The 10 chips are not made of faster and slower parts.
Click to expand...
so they all cost the same? and perform worse?
 
Audiophile said:
Resolution and FPS are not the only factors though, they may favour a large jump in graphical fx, simulation etc.
Click to expand...

They might do, but I dont, 60 FPS locked and anything over 1440p upscaled they can do whatever they want.

4K I dont notice difference between native, 1600p or Checkerboard or Temporal solution on Pro, I bet most others wont either.

But frame rate is glaring 30 vs 60.
 
Last edited:
SlimySnake said:
so they all cost the same? and perform worse?
Click to expand...

Should not mix RAM chip sizes on a common bus, messes with the timing, think of reading as a slice across the chips, but more complex.

If all the chips were 1 gb, then you would get 560 GBs and could read all together as a slice

If all chips were 2 GB, you would get 560 GBs as well, think of reading either upper or lower RAM as a slice...

Mix them and you cant read them at same timings for upper and lower RAM together - it will be interesting to listen to a GDC talk on it, I am sure MS played with it.
 
Last edited:
AC: Valhalla could be 60 fps easily on the next gen console, even in lower resolution... but it won't.

And you know why?

Not because the developers are lazy.
Not because the new consoles aren't powerful enough.

But because 60 fps is a PROMISE.

A promise that all the next AC titles will also be 60 fps.
Because once you go 60 fps in a cyclic series, there's no turning back.
And it's not an easy promise, especially for open-world games.

Can you imagine that after so many years another Call of Duty only go for30 fps? What a flame on all medias it would be.

No, go back to the year 2013 when AC: Black Flag came out.
This cross-gen title could also run on PS4/XO in 60 frames. Easily.
But it didn't, for a simple reason.

Because Ubisoft already knew at that time that with the more ambitious projects they were planning for AC: Unity and later titles like AC: Origins/Odyssey, they wouldn't be able to deliver 60 fps for the current generation.

Can you imagine how much AC:Unity and later AC:Origins/Odyssey would have be downgraded if they had to deliver 60 fps on the current generation?
Yeah. And it would even have a negative impact on sales if these games were graphically much worse than other titles from competition aiming for 30 fps.

And Ubisoft knows very well that it doesn't matter that they have now enough power to make AC: Valhalla to run at 60 fps on next-gen,
But they also know well that 60 fps target would very limits the ambitions for truly next-gen Assassin's Creeds.

So, that's why do I think that Ubisoft (and many other companies,) do not want to close the 30 fps door so they can deliver much more ambitious things in the future, and the promise that all sequels game will also be always 60 fps, may just not be accomplished.
 
If they're targeting 4K60 this time around then that's a huge uplift in power requirements over 1440p and 30fps that seems common on the refreshed consoles. Is there enough headroom to add a generational leap in geometry and effects over current gen games? I know RDNA2 is radically different to GCN but I'm not expecting actual graphical detail to improve much with such a large increase in resolution and framerate.
 
ethomaz said:
Seems like they will have a bad gen again :D
Click to expand...
I think people will slowly realize that just because MS TALKS a lot doesn't mean they will PRODUCE. Yes they bought many studios, that is potentially great but what quality have those studios put out in the past? Their track record is definitely not even close to that of Sony. When it comes time for games the rift between Xbox and Sony will become clear. If MS doesn't launch strong its not like they will catch up in games. Launch is the only time they could have outplayed Sony in games but it seems like even the Xbox first party event won't yield much.
 
Luck said:
AC: Valhalla could be 60 fps easily on the next gen console, even in lower resolution... but it won't.

And you know why?

Not because the developers are lazy.
Not because the new consoles aren't powerful enough.

But because 60 fps is a PROMISE.

A promise that all the next AC titles will also be 60 fps.
Because once you go 60 fps in a cyclic series, there's no turning back.
And it's not an easy promise, especially for open-world games.

Can you imagine that after so many years another Call of Duty only go for30 fps? What a flame on all medias it would be.

No, go back to the year 2013 when AC: Black Flag came out.
This cross-gen title could also run on PS4/XO in 60 frames. Easily.
But it didn't, for a simple reason.

Because Ubisoft already knew at that time that with the more ambitious projects they were planning for AC: Unity and later titles like AC: Origins/Odyssey, they wouldn't be able to deliver 60 fps for the current generation.

Can you imagine how much AC:Unity and later AC:Origins/Odyssey would have be downgraded if they had to deliver 60 fps on the current generation?
Yeah. And it would even have a negative impact on sales if these games were graphically much worse than other titles from competition aiming for 30 fps.

And Ubisoft knows very well that it doesn't matter that they have now enough power to make AC: Valhalla to run at 60 fps on next-gen,
But they also know well that 60 fps target would very limits the ambitions for truly next-gen Assassin's Creeds.

So, that's why do I think that Ubisoft (and many other companies,) do not want to close the 30 fps door so they can deliver much more ambitious things in the future, and the promise that all sequels game will also be always 60 fps, may just not be accomplished.
Click to expand...

Just do a graphics mode and performance mode then

Problem solved
 
geordiemp said:
When ps5 60 FPS game are common, then its not good outlook for the 30 FPS ones if they want to remain competative.

I dont care about DF zooming in on blades of grass, more epic fights and fluid controls is a win.

I hope some do something clever with their hardware for temporal injection or the like, somethinga bit better than checkerboard and we are good.
Click to expand...
What is for you competitive in this context for you ?
 
Gashtronomy said:
I think I know the answer about ACV:

We have seen marketing deals for timed exclusives, timed DLC, marketing rights, Season passes

This gen, Microsoft and Sony can have exclusive framerate deals with 3rd party companies. Sony have bagged 60fps for ACV, Microsoft have had to settle with 30FPS. Battlefield 6 will be 120fps on XSX but only 60fps on PS5
Click to expand...
Yeah not in any way, the consoles are similar enough to make this theory improbable and again only us know what is a FPS yes I know feel better for most of
the people is not so important.
 
Ass of Can Whooping said:
Just do a graphics mode and performance mode then

Problem solved
Click to expand...
That could an option but still you need money and time to optimize this because remember this game
should released in:

-Pc and this came with all its possible variations but dev in so low level the optimizations like consoles for maybe some exception of Nvidia or AMD injecting money
-Xbox one
-Xbox one s
-Xbox one X
-Xbox Series X (even Xbox Series S)
-Ps4 (ps4 slim is equal)
-Ps4 pro
-Ps5

And with the fiscal year Ubisoft have can no go with the shareholders and tell them ... We need to move release to later and expend more money.
 
MasterCornholio said:
I wasn't expecting much but sheesh.

giphy.gif
Click to expand...
Even Kratos was hyped :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
We told you guys that the Xbox Series X doesn't have any "secret sauce" in its GPU, or any "secret sauce" in its SSD architecture, the PS5 has everything the Xbox has in terms of GPU but maybe some difference on the API-level.

That's it.

PS5's SSD DESTROYS XSX's SSD!! No comparison, anyone who says otherwise is a Phil Spencer taint lover.
 
Last edited:
geordiemp said:
Competition for my wallet and my gaming time.
Click to expand...
OK but we cannot use ourselves as an example for the general market for example if don't buy GTAV because x reason but this doesn't means
this game is not been selling good I think we are agree in this point.

If you want to say people like me who share similar tastes will probably not buy a game running to 30 fps that is more correct to say it.

Because man you are a person who know about many technical stuff related to hardware (that is why is worth to read you) but also you far
to be the common person who go a bough one the 13.4 million of copies of Animal crossing or one 3.5 millions of FF VII just in the last couple
of months.

I agree I prefer a game running a game to 60 fps than 30 but also that doesn't mean the game will sell more just because this or make it
the most important thing in the gameplay experience many other factors could care more even some of them technical stuff like frame pacing.

The consoles are similar so is very improbable we ever see a game running 30 fps in one side and 60 in the other and if we have a game running 30 fps in
consoles and 60 fps in PC well this already happens and the consoles still selling good and many those games can sell more in consoles.
 
X-Fighter said:
Not sure what all of you were expecting. Big 3rd party games with huge teams working on it aren't shown at their event. They have their own event, which is why the whole summer fest thing exists. I like that Microsoft takes the time to let smaller studios show case their work. If it's not your taste well then play other games, has nothing to do with the system since most of these will also release on the PS5.
Click to expand...
X-Fighter said:
The video of the games are obviously provided by the studios themselves, not created by Microsoft. The way games were brought, well that's Inside Xbox, and all Microsoft employees work from home, so not sure what you were expecting. Something as big as an E3 event, where someone is standing on stage? Wasn't going to happen.

Graphically, I'm not even sure what Microsoft can do about this. You are pretty much just shitting on all those hard working devs and their games
Click to expand...
I'm not sure you're serious here. At the very least show us the gameplay they hyped everyone about. Even Greenberg admitted they were wrong.
 
Metroiddarks said:
That could an option but still you need money and time to optimize this because remember this game
should released in:

-Pc and this came with all its possible variations but dev in so low level the optimizations like consoles for maybe some exception of Nvidia or AMD injecting money
-Xbox one
-Xbox one s
-Xbox one X
-Xbox Series X (even Xbox Series S)
-Ps4 (ps4 slim is equal)
-Ps4 pro
-Ps5

And with the fiscal year Ubisoft have can no go with the shareholders and tell them ... We need to move release to later and expend more money.
Click to expand...

This is Ubisoft. Not some broke indie dev.

And they don't need to move the release date of the game to add some profiles. It can be in a future patch for all I care

And If the game is already optimized for the consoles in the first place, then just do a 1080p/60 mode. I'm sure they can at least manage that
 
Last edited:
geordiemp said:
Should not mix RAM chip sizes on a common bus, messes with the timing, think of reading as a slice across the chips, but more complex.

If all the chips were 1 gb, then you would get 560 GBs and could read all together as a slice

If all chips were 2 GB, you would get 560 GBs as well, think of reading either upper or lower RAM as a slice...

Mix them and you cant read them at same timings for upper and lower RAM together - it will be interesting to listen to a GDC talk on it, I am sure MS played with it.
Click to expand...
I don't think it works that way. Otherwise, what would refrain Sony from calling their system a 560 GB/s system rather than a 448GB/s one?
The amount of lanes (i.e. bus width) connected to the chips is important. RAM has a certain transfer rate per pin, the general total max being 14 Gbps, which is what the consoles are using. GDDR6 RAM chips can theoretically reach 16 Gbps, but, that would be pushing things too hard for the consoles, most likely.
All that aside, each chip has a max amount of lanes that can be connected with it, so the more chips you have, the more lanes you require. The whole reason MS went with their weird configuration was to increase the amount of chips so that they can have more lanes, i.e. increase the bus width. If they could achieve the same bandwidth by using 2GB chips, they would have done it, since that is cheaper in all ways.
The only way to achieve a higher bandwidth with the same chips is to increase the data rate higher than 14Gbps. The PS5 for example, would be able to reach 512GB/s bandwidth with its 8x 2GB chips, if the chips were 16Gbps instead of 14GBps.
 
Last edited:
Luck said:
AC: Valhalla could be 60 fps easily on the next gen console, even in lower resolution... but it won't.

And you know why?

Not because the developers are lazy.
Not because the new consoles aren't powerful enough.

But because 60 fps is a PROMISE.

A promise that all the next AC titles will also be 60 fps.
Because once you go 60 fps in a cyclic series, there's no turning back.
And it's not an easy promise, especially for open-world games.

Can you imagine that after so many years another Call of Duty only go for30 fps? What a flame on all medias it would be.

No, go back to the year 2013 when AC: Black Flag came out.
This cross-gen title could also run on PS4/XO in 60 frames. Easily.
But it didn't, for a simple reason.

Because Ubisoft already knew at that time that with the more ambitious projects they were planning for AC: Unity and later titles like AC: Origins/Odyssey, they wouldn't be able to deliver 60 fps for the current generation.

Can you imagine how much AC:Unity and later AC:Origins/Odyssey would have be downgraded if they had to deliver 60 fps on the current generation?
Yeah. And it would even have a negative impact on sales if these games were graphically much worse than other titles from competition aiming for 30 fps.

And Ubisoft knows very well that it doesn't matter that they have now enough power to make AC: Valhalla to run at 60 fps on next-gen,
But they also know well that 60 fps target would very limits the ambitions for truly next-gen Assassin's Creeds.

So, that's why do I think that Ubisoft (and many other companies,) do not want to close the 30 fps door so they can deliver much more ambitious things in the future, and the promise that all sequels game will also be always 60 fps, may just not be accomplished.
Click to expand...

We'll see that, PS4 and XO were big leap over PS360 mostly on the GPU side, but not much in CPU and stockage speed. Which is opposite in this gen where we have big leap on both GPU, CPU, and SSD which is miles above HDD.

In case some games won't be able to hit 60 fps, i mostly hope that there will be the option to run 4K,30fps games at 1080p,60 fps, i rather have the latest over the first personally speaking.
 
TLZ said:
I'm not sure you're serious here. At the very least show us the gameplay they hyped everyone about. Even Greenberg admitted they were wrong.
Click to expand...
Yeah, a bit later I acknowledged that they hyped it too much. The games they showed and how they showed it were as they said it would be, just not as amazing since this came from small 3rd party studios.
 
Ass of Can Whooping said:
This is Ubisoft. Not some broke indie dev.

And they don't need to move the release date of the game to add some profiles. It can be in a future patch for all I care

And If the game is already optimized for the consoles in the first place, then just do a 1080p/60 mode. I'm sure they can at least manage that
Click to expand...
As you say is Ubisoft but they must respond to their shareholders doesn't exists unlimited money, at least you know specifcally how the engine of AC and the new hardware works
together you cannot say is just add a profile becuse I was so simple they will do it one day the junior new contract has a day free.

As I say before if you dont like they dont expend more money and time is easy dont buy it you wallet talk higher than nothing else.

The reason of why many people who works in the industry told us Flops/Herz is not a magic way to measure a GPU/CPU is because many other components even in
their respective tools can affect how the hardware is used, even could happen some specific instruction for the GPU is deprecated and now the they to use other similar.

Always have in mind this big publisher like Ubisoft makes its decisions always thinking is the have the budget to do it and now even if they have to work remotly in order
to deliver Y thing in time and with quality they expect.
 
Imtjnotu said:
They literally have all the momentum and don't know what the fuck to do with it. All the tweets leading up to today I was hoping for some good ass third party showings but I don't even know what to think
Click to expand...
They should know when to speak, and when to be quiet.
 
FranXico said:
Those people have issues.
Click to expand...
Yes if you have a preference is okay everyone has one in some level but if you want some company fails ...
bro you don't like videogames only a brand.

The best thing could happens is if the 3 are healthy and do their best we don't want other Sega situation.
 
People expecting an entire 4K/60fps with RT generation are setting themselves up for disappointment. Many dont realize how power intensive of a jump 1080p to 4k is. You need roughly 4x the graphics power, and then double that if you want 60fps. thats 8x, which is also about the same expected performance jump from current to next gen.

Picture RDR2 on the One X, but at 60fps, and you've already spent most of the graphics budget of the XsX, with little processing headroom for raytracing and other next gen effects,

You can expect a few more 60fps games, but also expect 30, as well as dynamic resolutions and 4K upscaling techniques in next gen engines
 
Metroiddarks said:
Yeah not in any way, the consoles are similar enough to make this theory improbable and again only us know what is a FPS yes I know feel better for most of
the people is not so important.
Click to expand...
It's coming.

They locked DLC behind a 108kb unlock key. The DLC was on disc.

Imagine it
Play ACV now. ACV gold and preorder editions come with 60fps unlock option
 
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