Roughly 450-500% faster than a PS4 if we fudge the numbers and assume a PS4 is generally equivalent to a Radeon 7850, but it's always fuzzy to compare a GPU to an APU like the PS4 has.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
"8 Cores, 16 Thread CPU, Zen/Ryzen" etc mean nothing to me. What kind of graphics can we expect next gen?
- Thread starter SeriousGoku
- Start date
Roughly 450-500% faster than a PS4 if we fudge the numbers and assume a PS4 is generally equivalent to a Radeon 7850, but it's always fuzzy to compare a GPU to an APU like the PS4 has.
No they arent but youll be proven wrong soon enough just like everyone was proven wrong last gen when they made the exact same claims.
I get what you're saying and I hate to just single out this small part of your post but I the lack of interaction HZD's world seems like an issue with the Decima engine rather than an indictment on this generation. You have multiple games this gen, open world and linear where characters interact with grass, tress, snow and pretty much everything on screen.
It's particularly impressive in red dead redemption 2.
And this not fully true, Aloy only interact with one type of grass where you can hide. The second little default is the interaction with water is not so great but Guerrilla Games progammer and artists read the critics and I am pretty sure it will not be the case on HZD 2 on PS5. The snow interaction in the Frozen Wild is great.
it's been barely a year since the leak. Who knows how long it's been in development for.
You do realize current gen consoles are 8 cores as well and yet 4 core/4 threads CPU can run them as well as any console can. This baseline will not be reached until we are late into the next generation maybe.
Give it up. The only thing I have seen this guy post is pc master race-esque. No way to reason with him. It's pretty annoying how he can't see past his PC tower though.
He will never see why a high end pc playing current gen games on ultra is different from a next gen game.
This is so true. And that's about to change drastically in a year or two.
Funny how you're only mentioning games we can't do cross-platform comparisons with... I've got a gaming PC too, so I don't need to take your word for any of it.
I'm just offering an easy way to see some of the improvements that will be offered for the average next-gen title, today. There will be new big titles that outdo it of course, but looking at high-end PC titles can give pointers towards what improvements to expect.
PS5's processing power will be quite impressive. It's an AMD Ryzen CPU, and AMD has made HUGE strides in processing power over the past few years. Back when PS4 was in development, AMD processors -- especially lower power AMD processors, which both Sony and MS used for the current gen -- were really not impressive at all, but PS4/Xbox One used them anyway because it was the most cost effective/efficient means to usher in this generation. Also, Intel (AMD's competition) was lightyears ahead of AMD back then, but that's not the case anymore. Current AMD CPU tech ranges from pretty cutting edge, to at the very least, quite powerful.
PS5's processor won't be like PS4's which is basically a beefed up laptop APU that was already pretty stale right out of the gate. Regardless of this fact, look at what has been accomplished on even the base PS4 over the years, despite having such lackluster processing power. It's very safe to say that the leap in processing power will be massive on PS5. Look at it this way, when PS4 launched it was, as I said previously, using a beefed up low power laptop class APU. PS5 will, by default, have an advanced desktop class processor using much newer tech -- not even taking into account more technical details, that in and of itself should give you an idea of how much more powerful we're talking here.
PS5's processor won't be like PS4's which is basically a beefed up laptop APU that was already pretty stale right out of the gate. Regardless of this fact, look at what has been accomplished on even the base PS4 over the years, despite having such lackluster processing power. It's very safe to say that the leap in processing power will be massive on PS5. Look at it this way, when PS4 launched it was, as I said previously, using a beefed up low power laptop class APU. PS5 will, by default, have an advanced desktop class processor using much newer tech -- not even taking into account more technical details, that in and of itself should give you an idea of how much more powerful we're talking here.
Last edited:
Because high-end PC hardware is rarely pushed anymore (as far as the minimum base spec).
The last time PC was really pushed was 12 years ago with the original Crysis. Most games today released on PC are built with 1.3 TF Xbox One as the base spec.
So therefore, I'm really curious to see what happens when a 10+ TFLOP RDNA gpu with an, 8 core, 16t ZEN 2 cpu and 16-20 GB RAM is the base spec (for models detail, environments, assets, lighting, physics, animation, etc.,
What game graphics can be like with that level of power is in many tens of millions of consoles.
Then, ALL the additional cpu/gpu power that high-end 2020-2025 PCs have over PS5/Scarlett (and it will be a lot, more for the more you spend, as always) will go toward bruteforcing higher native resolutions, framerates and get to use better raytracing, etc.
Last edited:
Of course there are a lot of great technical advancements here but IMO the biggest one is that for the first time ever consoles are going to have the absolute latest in regards to available parts. I mean right now you can't buy an AMD GPU with hardware raytracing but consoles gonna have those (PS5 at least).
To be honest I expect improvements in a lot of areas with graphics being really down in the list of priorities. I just hope they don't focus on 8K but on performance instead.
To be honest I expect improvements in a lot of areas with graphics being really down in the list of priorities. I just hope they don't focus on 8K but on performance instead.
My concern is if we'll still see indie games with pixel graphics.
Move on to PS1 nostalgia already.
Move on to PS1 nostalgia already.
I think the most noticeable differences will be in performance and load times / less streaming issues. We'll see smoother and more responsive games that are more seamless and immersive. I will be more than happy with that alone, but the visual/IQ upgrades will be icing on the cake. All in all I think we'll see a significant jump, but maybe not as much in terms of pure visuals/IQ due to diminishing returns. Don't get me wrong, we'll still see a nice visual jump.
Last edited:
How about this at 30fps / 1080p on PS5:
.
Will those kind of graphics be possible in-game in 2023-2025 on next-gen consoles at Full HD 30fps?
Maybe cb reconstruction or dynamic 1800p/4K
on midgen upgrades.
.
Will those kind of graphics be possible in-game in 2023-2025 on next-gen consoles at Full HD 30fps?
Maybe cb reconstruction or dynamic 1800p/4K
on midgen upgrades.
There Is something some people don't understand.
Let's use Control for example.
The game Is incredibly good looking on PC, with Everything , RTX, included maxed Out. It looks better than PS4 exclusives, even when PS4 exclusives aren't exactly ugly compared, they are Just edged Out.
Control was still done with consoles in mind. As was Metro Exodus, etc. Imagine how games Will look without being thought to run on this gen's hardware. That's the jump yo expect
Let's use Control for example.
The game Is incredibly good looking on PC, with Everything , RTX, included maxed Out. It looks better than PS4 exclusives, even when PS4 exclusives aren't exactly ugly compared, they are Just edged Out.
Control was still done with consoles in mind. As was Metro Exodus, etc. Imagine how games Will look without being thought to run on this gen's hardware. That's the jump yo expect
A 4C/4T CPU can run them as well as any console is because those 8-core Jaguar CPUs on consoles are extremely slow, with terrible IPC, initially designed for low-power mobile devices. That's why even 4-core i5 CPUs from 2013-14 run circles around them. So naturally, games designed for Jaguar CPUs ran extremely well even on quad-core CPUs with extremely fast IPC. That won't be the case next-gen.
Their Zen 2 CPUs are very potent in terms of IPC, cache, etc. If/when a game is designed to take advantage beyond 8 threads on consoles, it will likely require the same amount of threads/horsepower on PC.
The CPU upgrade from an 8C Jaguar to an 8C Zen2 won't bring nearly as many benefits to a gaming machine as people are thinking.
The way the enviroment reacts and the fidelity of the particle effects is the biggest difference in the harry potter Gifs (page 1) The rest is looking slightly better than current-gen. They'll get a good step closer to photorealism in certain games.
I think that will be one of the most prominent areas improved over this gen -- the general reactions and interactivity of the worlds we play in. I'm sure the visuals will be stunning as well, but the standout factor that the gen will be remembered for will be things like that.
Hopefully we will see alot more cool physics,=) but, i guess most devs wants their games on the old machines though. A few years forward atleast the ps4 will hold things back.
There isn't one. We'll start seeing several of them starting next year, however.
Yeah, the graphical bump will probably be pretty small, as the real generational leap will be in the CPUs. A built-specifically-for-next-gen Hitman will blow minds.
In terms of real-world functionality/performance, I realistically see the graphics inside the two boxes being roughly around nVidia's 2060 Super, only with AMD's flavour of raytracing bolted on.
This isn't necessarily a bad thing. The main issue plaguing this gen was the severe imbalance between general processing and graphics budgets, especially for the mid-gen refreshes. XboneX is the worst case, with the (unreleased as a stand-alone card) RX 485 (Ellesmere XTL) awkwardly stapled to two netbook-tier Kaveris.
Last edited:
People need to realize current games are made with base console 1.3-1.8 tf in mind.
Next gen games will be based around 10+tf machines. Thats like 5-6x the power, how can you say the graphical jump will be small? The fuck..
And no, current games on ultra will be nothing compared to next gen games. Just.. no.
Next gen games will be based around 10+tf machines. Thats like 5-6x the power, how can you say the graphical jump will be small? The fuck..
And no, current games on ultra will be nothing compared to next gen games. Just.. no.
I would actually put my chips on the graphics being comparable to the regular RTX 2060. With that said, comparing PC hardware and console hardware isn't particularly useful, given that the console is one (or two) specs every dev have to work to, while PCs are all over the shop.
Looking at last generation, current gen games like Crysis 3 and Battlefield 4 on PC were extremely good indicators of how early next generation games would look. Not sure if we can expect the same this generation, but I'd assume so especially as I expect many early next generation games will still have current gen versions.
You can expect the studio that did this:
To make the jump to this:
What games are those?
I'll be highly, incredibly disappointed if this was what next gen looks like. That looks bad for showing off what next gen can be.
How about DeepDown but with more polish in realtime?
Imagine the leap from Xbox One to Scarlett, it'll be even a bigger leap!
How do you figure?
AMD A6-5200 4 cores 4 threads 25W Jaguar@2GHZ - Passmark score 2434
Ryzen 5 Pro 3400GE 4 cores 4 threads 35W Zen+ - Passmark score 8219
So we are looking at a 4 core Jaguar with higher clocks than base PS4, so better than the PS4 part. Then we have a Ryzen 5 that's Zen+, not even Zen2, I will use this to forgive the wattage difference. The Jaguar in the PS4 is only 15W, but I am looking for a approximation on both sides here not actual 1 to 1 comparisons. Zen2 8 core should be real world 3 times faster than Jaguar.
The new CPUs will be very important for streaming game data from the SSD to memory/video memory, so yes the new CPUs will make a big difference in gaming. Not to mention high frame rate applications.
Edit: This might not mean as much in a closed environment, but Zen2's gaming performance is what increased the most. It's what's making them competitive with Intel for the first time in forever.
Last edited:
Even if the jump will be quite substantial, I feel that AAA devs will have less room to show off because with the CPU improvement it will be expected that all games run at 60 FPS. And with all the buzz about high resolution they may also push for 4k dynamic/ checkerboard out of the box. That leaves you with little margin, unless they keep targeting 1080p 30 FPS for the single player AAA games. A 1080p 30 FPS made with say a 2060 as a baseline will be impressive but these consoles will last until say 2026 and everyone should have a 4k tv by then so 1080p on a 4k TV will look terrible.
What I'm curious about is if they're gonna have separate RAM for the CPU and GPU this time. Apparently memory bandwidth has been an issue on consoles this gen.
Unified memory architectures save on bandwidth because you don't need to use a slow bus to communicate from main ram to vram. The reason PCs don't use a unified memory architecture is the modular nature of graphics hardware, the bus for the video card being too slow. The only way to circumvent this limitation is to have a second type of ram on the card with a very high bandwidth. In this regard, vram is kind of like a specialized form of cache.
You can expect this...
This would be a disappointment honestly
Naturally we will move towards a higher core/thread landscape but not anytime soon. Dual core CPUs were viable until 2015 and depending on the game they are still viable today (eg Overwatch, Destiny 2). A game specifically designed for 8c/8t should choke a 4c/4t CPU, regardless of Intel or AMD. This was not the case during this generation. Even compared to Zen 2 CPUs now and in games which will utilize as many thread as you throw at them, the lesser core/threads Intel compare favorably.
We've already begun seeing games absolutely choke on 4c/8t CPUs and 6c/6t ones. Monster Hunter World fully scales across a ton of threads, and actually runs better on a Ryzen 9 3900x than an i9 9900k. To say that games aren't using more threads these days shows you either haven't been playing a lot of AAA releases lately, or are ignorant on the current state of affairs. Probably both. DICE outright said that they designed Battlefield V for a 6c/12t CPU.
The real time editing is just surreal, even with youtube compression.