• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The PlayStation 5 GPU Will Be Supported By Better Hardware Solutions, In Depth Analysis Suggests

RAIDEN1

RAIDEN1

Member
nqseK83.jpg
 
Elcid

Elcid

Banned
I legit sympathize for the diehard X-boys, they’ve been screwed two gens in a row. This one was supposed to be their moment 😂. Just buy both consoles and don’t commit to a single brand and you’ll be good. My preference is Sony but they’ve fucked me over a few times, I acknowledge that.
 
Muddy

Muddy

Member
DonMigs85 said:
yeah, remember when early PS3 ports were often shit? Later they were at least closer or in some cases slightly better than on 360
Click to expand...

Don't remember that. PS3 never caught the X360 in Multi platform games

It had obvious flaws from day one.

I remember it being difficult to develop for because of the Cell processor.

Not to forget less ram because it was split and an older GPU with less features.

What reasons does the XSX have?

Tools? I smell Bullshit.

Microsoft a software giant which produces operating systems, DX APIs, better backwards compatibility etc has worse tools than Sony? 😆

For me this is a hardware issue.

Most likely being the higher clock speeds on the PS5.

Similar to 6 core Ryzens outperforming 8 core Ryzens in the past because they had higher clocks.

Also no one seems to mention the split ram in the XSX. That won't help.
 
Last edited:
Gamerguy84

Gamerguy84

Member
I remember Cerny or someone saying it was a premium product and would come with a price but people would be happy.

Its looking like all the custom baked in goods that was designed inside the PS5 is very much paying off.

They have just scratched the surface. We should see some amazing experiences and games in this consoles lifetime.
 
THE DUCK

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
After skimming the giant article, and thinking maybe this knows something, it all goes out the window after reading this:

"This also means that the PS5's sound processing will take less CPU power from the system compared to the SX - which, again, counts against the SX in terms of resources available to run games"

This shows he has no clue as to what he's talking about, the series x also has its own separate chip for sound processing. It doesn't rely on the cpu for sound processing either.
If he doesn't know this basic fact, he's likely 99% lost on the rest.....
 
Last edited:
longdi

longdi

Banned
whoever wrote the op content is embarassing. pure FUD attack, fake news on the truth. yeah this needed a bump. 🤷‍♀️
 
Tajaz2426

Tajaz2426

Psychology PhD from Wikipedia University
Slashinghook said:
there are plenty of games that perform better on XSX compared to PS5. There are even games that are running 120 FPS compared to 60 FPS only on PS5.
Click to expand...
In most of the games so far the PS5 has been punching above the XSX. It’s a win for the Sony guys and girls who developed it. It wasn’t supposed to even be close.

The games that are running 120 FPS are BC mode that the PS5 doesn’t do. Doesn’t make the X any better.
 
Last edited:
Shmunter

Shmunter

Member
Slashinghook said:
there are plenty of games that perform better on XSX compared to PS5. There are even games that are running 120 FPS compared to 60 FPS only on PS5.
Click to expand...
That’s the spirit! No need for XSX owners to be crying into a pillow. There are positives!

Tajaz2426 said:
In most of the games so far the PS5 has been punching above the XSX. It’s a win for the Sony guys and girls who developed it. It wasn’t supposed to even be close.

The games that are running 120 FPS are BC mode that the PS5 doesn’t do. Doesn’t make the X any better.
Click to expand...

But they can enjoy 120 in certain titles that ps5 owners cannot. No point in raining on that parade.
 
Last edited:
B

BeardGawd

Banned
Alphagear said:
Similar to 6 core Ryzens outperforming 8 core Ryzens in the past because they had higher clocks.
Click to expand...

Are you even aware of why that's the case? OLD engines are coded for lower cores. Thus lower cores but higher clocks will perform better (see Intel vs AMD). BUT future engines that are coded for next generation and multi-threading tend to perform better on AMD (More cores, less clocks). So in essense you're saying XSX is more future proof for next-gen games and engines and PS5 will perform better on old engines and games.

Which actually makes a lot of sense because these launch games are all using last gen engines. :pie_thinking:
 
Last edited:
Muddy

Muddy

Member
BeardGawd said:
Are you even aware of why that's the case? OLD engines are coded for lower cores. Thus lower cores but higher clocks will perform better (see Intel vs AMD). BUT future engines that are coded for next generation and multi-threading tend to perform better on AMD (More cores, less clocks). So in essense you're saying XSX is more future proof for next-gen games and engines and PS5 will perform better on old engines and games.

Which actually makes a lot of sense because these launch games are all using last gen engines. :pie_thinking:
Click to expand...

Could be but I'm not an expert.

The Jaguar cores were 8 core and performed worse than 4 core Intel i5 processors.

Obviously GPU cores are different from CPUs.

Maybe those 36 super fast Compute units are better than 52 slow compute units because of the game engines.

Or it's just a case of the XSS gimping the XSX because developers have to port for both consoles.

PS5 doesn't have that issue because both versions are the same spec minus the disc drive.

I refuse to believe it's the tools since Microsoft is a software giant producing APIs of its own alongwith operating systems etc.

Sounds like a poor excuse.

Its either hardware or the XSS holding the XSX back because developers have to port to both consoles which are vastly different in specs.

This problem is long term if you ask me.
 
danielJackson

danielJackson

Banned
dvdvideo said:
After skimming the giant article, and thinking maybe this knows something, it all goes out the window after reading this:

"This also means that the PS5's sound processing will take less CPU power from the system compared to the SX - which, again, counts against the SX in terms of resources available to run games"

This shows he has no clue as to what he's talking about, the series x also has its own separate chip for sound processing. It doesn't rely on the cpu for sound processing either.
If he doesn't know this basic fact, he's likely 99% lost on the rest.....
Click to expand...

Not all sound chips are created equal.

It says "will take less CPU power" = it doesnt mean that:

PS5 = 0% cpu
xbox = 10% cpu

it means LESS, running audio with dedicated chip can still take some cpu time, so real question is that how much each solution needs CPU time

It is already known that PS5 have highly customized audio processor, so it is possible that their solution needs less CPU time than xboxs, which sounds less custom and simpler solution with more marketing talk than Sonys version.

So, are you sure that he is wrong and you are right?

"This shows he has no clue as to what he's talking about, the series x also has its own separate chip for sound processing." Doesnt mean they do the same stuff with same level.

On PC world +10y ago integrated audio were seen as worse option as it ate some CPU time, while dedicated cards didnt as much. And xbox solution reminds me more of those integrated solutions, isnt it "just" radeon audio harware parts basically?

And in the end difference could be just 1% vs 2%, so basically not much, but without hard date I would not say it is either
 
Last edited:
M

Murdoch

Member
alabtrosMyster said:
You remember the reason?
Click to expand...

It seems to be for the same reason to be honest... More powerful platform on paper but less mature development environment and harder to program for.

I'm sure things will improve massively in the next few years for Xbox. Especially with a unified development platform
 
P

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
BeardGawd said:
Are you even aware of why that's the case? OLD engines are coded for lower cores. Thus lower cores but higher clocks will perform better (see Intel vs AMD). BUT future engines that are coded for next generation and multi-threading tend to perform better on AMD (More cores, less clocks). So in essense you're saying XSX is more future proof for next-gen games and engines and PS5 will perform better on old engines and games.

Which actually makes a lot of sense because these launch games are all using last gen engines. :pie_thinking:
Click to expand...

Turns out that on the CPU side the clockspeed difference disappears once you thrown SMT into the mix which you can expect to happen as titles mature and using SMT the XSX CPU lowers the clock to 3.6 GHz (and you do need a bit higher clocks to maintain parity if you have a thicker virtualisation layer between game and CPU than your competitor).
 
Last edited:
Stilton Disco

Stilton Disco

Member
It's always fun reading the old 'super secret inside sauces' threads that got it right, both to laugh at the people making such bold declarations that it's nonsense, and because it helps contextualise what we're seeing now, from a time when NDA's were harder to enforce and Developers weren't being watched quite so closely as they will be at this second.

The stuff they're saying about speed and bandwidth capabilities absolutely makes sense for what we're seeing. Combined with some other early analysis out there , looking at the chips directly, pointing to similar such bottlenecks that are present on the XSX and not on the PS5, I really am very doubtful that better tools are going to be enough to ever make up the performance gap.

Add to that the decision to make Xbox more or less just a PC in it's development goals and API's, and the additional dev time required to get games running on the objectively too weak to run these games properly XSS, and I very much doubt we'll ever see multiplat games running unquestionably better on XSX unless zero effort (or a deliberate underutilising of the console to achieve true parity) is put into the PS5 port.
 
B

BeardGawd

Banned
Panajev2001a said:
Turns out that on the CPU side the clockspeed difference disappears once you thrown SMT into the mix which you can expect to happen as titles mature and using SMT the XSX CPU lowers the clock to 3.6 GHz (and you do need a bit higher clocks to maintain parity if you have a thicker virtualisation layer between game and CPU than your competitor).
Click to expand...
This is true but we are referring to the GPU. Will future NextGen games and engines benefit from more GPU cores vs a smaller number and higher clocks? That seems to be the case when it comes to CPUs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I asked ChatGPT to build a PC thats equivalent to the PS5 Pro, this was it's response
Analysis 2 3 4
150
11K
Kupfer replied
Is a "Portable PS5" feasible, and when?
49
1K
Self High Five replied
Intel announces Arc B580 at $249 and Arc B570 GPUs at $219
News Hardware 2 3 4
169
8K
grvg replied
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 50 “Blackwell” GPU Configs Revealed
4 5 6 7 8
372
28K
ap_puff replied
  • Locked
  • Poll
Exploring The Complications Of Series X's Memory Configuration & Performance
Opinion Analysis Hardware 2 3 4 5
218
21K
Corndog replied
Top Bottom