Right and Outsiders is a SE game made by People can Fly. So if true this is in Poland for a game and not next gen related.
-
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.
Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation |OT10| - We aim to transition those from OT9 at a pace never seen before. [SEE THREADMARKS FOR CHANCE AT GLORY]
- Thread starter Mecha Meister
- Start date
- Status
Right and Outsiders is a SE game made by People can Fly. So if true this is in Poland for a game and not next gen related.
Amazing post as always. Thank you for your insight. I hope people are paying attention. This makes the news that Sony started changing around the PS5 back in 2017 even more intriguing.
Thanks! 2017 for changes to a 2020 launch are very plausible. Again, I know nothing but that timing would work.
"Get away with it"? Sounds like you want some ammunition for your console-war rhetoric.
Oh I guess all the info we got was in advance of the conference itself
Oh. Came from work, so can't figure out what's joke and what's not lol
Thanks Albert for giving the run down of the development process and how collaboration happens behind the scene.
Xbox is just a part of one division. I imagine people buying MS stock don't do it because of Xbox and they mostly don't care about it.
There would have been 20 pages of meltdown and a new thread if this were the case lol
That wasn't my intention, sorry if it came across that way. Xbox Live is a huge part of Microsoft's services portfolio, and I would think investors would be interested in knowing just how much growth its been experiencing.
In your experience, which launch would you say was the most nerve wracking between Xbox, 360, and One?
Is it also possible that simply by looking at specs on a screen it can SEEM like someone is making a dish that isn't spicy and assume as much due to AMD not having anything spicy on their menu, but in fact this particular customer brought their own spices with them and had AMD add it to the pot when making their custom dish?
Point being, is this another reason why it's not as simple as just looking at "oh that many cores and using Navi and it has a die that size, welp, that's all we need to know to be informed!" basically?
haha ... At this point if Sony even farts, it would be 20+ pages of meltdown and new threads.
Confirmed!
Dreams are the new reality.
Yeah hopes dashed already, he couldn't let it fester for at least a few hours?
No, I wasn't saying if any of the posts I quoted were insiders, just wondering where the predictions were coming from. You answered it, so thanks. Those that did answer, thanks.
I've went with 12 for Series X. I'm more believing that's 12 vs the PS5 at 9.
I think there's going to be something between 9 and 12 most will be happy with the both consoles. I hope, lol.
I hope I haven't fucked up this quoting.
This is really interesting to me. I have no clue who BGs is, but based on what I've seen of the reaction here, I tend to trust that they may just be worth listening to.
Reading this is the first time that I'm thinking that an 8-9 TF PS5, in line with the GitHub leaks may actually be possible.
Just to be clear, I am entirely of the opinion that the actual real-world performance of the two machines will be basically indistinguishable, as this person says here, and as most insiders have been suggesting, we need to look past the raw TFs to see what these new consoles will offer us, and I'm not sure that any credible insider has suggested that there is a large gap between the machines.
I've posited before that maybe Sony have come up with enough secret sauce to make up for less flops, and this seems to go along with it.
I feel like there's a real possibility (not sure how big a possibility, but a possibility) that Sony and Microsoft have ended up with a similar level of performance, but that Sony are going to be managing it at a significantly lower BoM than Microsoft, which would be an interesting situation to say the least.
I've said before that I think it would be a mistake for Microsoft to launch at a higher price than the PS5 if they don't have a significant power advantage. What happens if their design costs them significantly more to build but doesn't give them a clear performance edge? Would they be willing to swallow a bigger loss to stay competitive? I do hope so if this is indeed the case.
The above is a particularly speculative bit of speculation, so do feel free to tell me I'm wrong.
I have no idea how people think this theorised 20-30% TFLOP power advantage is going to make any tangible difference. To rephrase it, that's 1.2-1.3x better.
If both consoles are well designed and have no obvious bottleneck or disadvantage, these things will be as close as it doesn't matter. Games will matter. Loyalty built up over generations will matter. If anything will be exciting it will be the SSD (and non-shit CPU). 20% more lines of resolution when games are moving to dynamic and other resolution tricks anyway? Come on.
- PS4 was 1000% more powerful than PS3 - sure, we noticed, we felt it, we couldn't go back, Last of Us was crisper and higher res, GTA5 too, games no longer felt like they were barely held together at the seems, but I couldn't articulate this well to my wife for example who thought it looked like the same old shit. Hell, on a lot of non-bleeding edge titles I couldn't tell myself.
- PS4 was 30% more powerful than Xbox One - didn't notice much difference, a few extra lines of resolution on some multi-platform titles? Bleh.
- 360 destroyed the PS3 in memory bandwidth and ease of programming. I wouldn't be surprised if it had a tangible 100%+ effective overall performance advantage for some multiplatform games. This translated to basically just running at higher graphical settings, and a few more frames. And PS3 ended up doing just fine, despite these crazy decisions from Sony.
If both consoles are well designed and have no obvious bottleneck or disadvantage, these things will be as close as it doesn't matter. Games will matter. Loyalty built up over generations will matter. If anything will be exciting it will be the SSD (and non-shit CPU). 20% more lines of resolution when games are moving to dynamic and other resolution tricks anyway? Come on.
That's a valid interpretation, but not what I got from it. They next few posts by BGs might be even more intriguing.
I got something different because of this:
Reading your post again, I think I agree with your interpretation, lol.
Last edited:
And you think there is something wrong with this plan? Is it not the exact Anaconda/Lockhart playbook?
The channel MBG on YouTube isn't the most trustworthy, is he? Also Tidux, best to ignore his stuff. Correct?
No it is not. Those are 2 chips for 2 SKUs.
If you go further you will find some new insight given by Albert Penello .
I will link it for you:
Excellent point. I definitely read that but it didn't stick in my mind when creating that post.
There is no practical difference between two SKU that sell 20M + 30M, and two SKU that sell 50M + 0M units. Said another way, MS strat potentially being 2 SKU is completely irrelevant - the fact is they are supposedly making 2 complete chip designs (and may even end up throwing one away and going with a 1 SKU strat!)
Hi Albert. Great stuff as always.
There is a 'performance mode' built into the X360 BC code for X1. Do you know if this was a feature which was included with future hardware in mind? As it was something which was redundant on current hardware. I appreciate this may be something out of your wheelhouse now you are no longer part of MS.
I edited my post, after reading your post again...I agree with your interpretation, lol.
It is a thing, but don't expect it this year.
So you are still on the train of 2 chips developed in parallel? That is fine. Let us agree to have a different opinion and point of view here.
Agreed.
Very few western devs get action game mechanics right, but NT have made some great progress. As janky as Heavenly Sword plays, I still enjoyed playing as Nariko (almost as much as I enjoyed hearing Anna Torv's sexy, husky voice).
That's an interesting question. It may be a SoC made for some other purpose or a simulation out of PC parts. Or maybe Sony did request its tape out and this is what we'll get in PS5 if they won't bite the cost of producing another SoC instead.
Sure, that's what is done after tape out and this is why you generally need anywhere between 3 and 12 months between the first chip coming back from the factory and it being actually ready for mass production.
This makes zero sense so I'm inclined not to believe that. You don't need the final SoC to build the console either.
Okay.
This is the point where you can produce several chips in parallel. It will cost more of course but it will cost significantly less than doing several tape-outs and also considerably less for a semi-custom part which is built out of parts and blocks which are already in production, in some other product(s).
Nobody is talking about "change".
This is what I've said. A year from a tape out to launch. In case of AMD anyway.
Which is what? Putting more ACEs into the frontend? It was always a plan for future GCN evolution and putting more units hardly counts as "a huge role in the development of the chips". First GCN iteration didn't really need this simply because of the realities of s/w back when it launched.
By "parts" I mean execution units, cache sizes, number of blocks in the frontend and backend, etc., not actual PC parts available on the market.
Last time I've checked Cerny didn't have any skills to do any kind of GPU h/w customizations.
Sony has had a choice of what tech out of the currently available stack they wanted to see inside the chip which they've ordered from AMD. They didn't add any tech above what was already available in Polaris and Vega (ID buffer is a minor and mostly s/w change; should be pretty evident from the fact that CBR solutions are running nicely on any modern h/w, not just on PS4Pro), they didn't have any hand in developing said technologies either - apart from providing high level feature input along the lines of "we want to have h/w RT acceleration in there". People are severely overestimating Sony's and MS's involvement into the development of both these chips and the technologies which they are being built upon. This is all AMD, from zero to finish, and they take this high level input not only from Sony and MS but from their own product teams, from the developers, from competition's roadmaps and from a hundred of other sources in which Sony and MS aren't even a majority - in full accordance to the share of revenue and profits which AMD gets from these two semicustom clients.
Thanks. Steppings don't change the chip configuration and rarely affect feature sets (and when they do it's mostly due to disabling stuff which doesn't work as intended).
"The most powerful" and "Our most powerful" is so different. Now I'm going to have to listen!
I am personally not at all sure, my favoured guess right now is along the lines of Liabe Brave, I think we haven't seen the full extent of an Oberon or whatever is the latest. My point is, it makes no sense to question the idea that Sony developed two chips - either in parallel or in sequence - and not also have a problem with MS doing the exact same thing.
Correct btw, Lockhart and Scarlett SoCs would have to be developed in parallel.
If you are wondering did he have a verified tag no he did not
Very good insight as always. Thanks for coming in occasionally and giving us good info.
Just decided to pop back into this thread, only to see more predictions with PS5 being around 8/9TF. Was some new info released that makes this a probable mock now? What did I miss? Is it not expected to be around 11TF or on par with Xbox?
See what gets me is that if a Sony was indeed looking at the "let's cheap out and sell PS5 for $399" strategy, what made them decide to switch in 2017 for a 2020 release? This is the part nobody can answer.
2020 allowed them to use a full 7nm product stack with significantly less risk to production.
- Status