you think? aren't console the base for almost all games because they sell far more? and isn't usually better creating something with the weaker hardware in mind becuase it's more easy to add bells and whistles in more powerfull hardware?
-
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.
PlayStation 5 Specs Revealed by EuroGamer (See Threadmarks)
- Thread starter Deleted member 18944
- Start date
More like PS3 done right. Devs seems to like this design compared to Cell.
Seems likely to be the usable space with over provisioning baked in to give the SSD more life.
Of course, but the standard moves on. Or hopefully will move on. What's good today will hopefully look antiquated in a few years. That would be great!
No, the difference in these machines is very small. You might see minor differences in settings but nothing massive like that.
Basically, it's safe to go for the console that has the games you want to play. The difference of performance in these consoles is close enough that it shouldn't make a big difference in third party games.
Oh, I like the man also and I find it all fascinating from the tech involved, is cool stuff and all.
I just can't understand why Sony wen't with this to alienate their core audience, be beaten by Microsoft on numbers and not show anything that really makes their case, like agressive pricing, their hardware operating, games and all.
I think the real question, though, and one that Sony didn't answer is what the 2x speed of PS5 gets you that the XBX SSD speeds don't.
He said that it may go down depending on the workload, so if the CPU needs more, it definitely will clock down.
The numbers are unlimited power consumption. Not with the power limiter they are using.
9.2 may be the true sustained number after all with everything being pushed hard. But gotta wait for more info.
I do think the focus on audio is a little odd because I don't think te average gamer cares about that.
The all run in 'legacy mode', those 100 games out of the box run in a 'boost mode', they'll be adding titles to boost mode over time.
I was talking about exclusives. They just need a conference with Spiderman 2, Horizon 2, God of War 2(even if some of these are teasers), the rumored Demons Souls remake and god knows what else to have the games as the main talking point.
I do agree with what you say though, multiplatforms will be compared and i'm sure we'll see differences like for the Xbox One X and the Pro...but this time Sony will for sure have the cheapest console and the public cares about that for sure. In a post-corona virus time this is going to play a role (and even if there was no virus tbh).
They've tested the top 100 PS4 games and "most" of them work in the boosted mode.
No raw #s on the rest of the PS4 library.
No mention of PS1-3.
All PS4 games going by Reseteras own thread title, just 100 that will take advantage of the PS5 while the rest run in Legacy mode
But the whole point of this design is that they can underclock the hardware if the thermals are getting out of control, yet you're saying they've made the cooling far better than is required so they'll never have to underclock the hardware!
We'll see. Microsoft isn't going to mess up pricing this gen. Spencer has been very clear on that.
True, but at high elasticity. He mentioned a few % drop in MHz leads to 10% reduction in TDP. 2.23GHz is at an extreme end of RDNA2, so the curve is very steep.
I wouldn't be so sure. It's already been reported that the PS5 costs ~$450 to manufacture
I understand waiting for a Pro version, but it also appears you where expecting such version now even though the Series X's specs are in the same ballpark (thus proving that a significantly more powerful console is simply not achievable at this point).
Well this is a bit premature. The Engineers and Cerny are likely smarter than us in hardware design. Maybe there's something to the secret sauce.
it is weird though, as PS4 was pretty straightforward and I was expecting a repeat of that.
Exactly. Again, read the article and watch the video people.
Too many people talking out of their ass in here.
(and I'm not even comparing the consoles, Series X is a beast. The misinformation and uninformed hot takes just takes away from any meaningful discussion)
Exclusive first-party games from third-party studios may be on the rise.
We have no idea what kind of rollout Sony has planned for the upcoming generation, but it's probably going to include lots of exclusive first-party games. Either way, hmmmm decreased (next to zero) loading times by a significant amount as well the potential for innovation in game design across first and third party studios? Sounds good investment to me, in addition to some other impressive aspects of the console design. It's probbaly going to be an amazingly well rounded machine. People are acting like these specs are disappointing without even considering how games are going to look regardless.
I guess we'll see. I really wasn't hoping for another "worst at multiplatform games, best at exclusives" console, especially considering Sony's first party has been pretty consistently irrelevant for me the past three or four years or so.
If they markedly undercut Microsoft on price I'll get a PS5, but if the two machines cost the same I'm just not gonna bother with either one.
The wind is blowing in the exact opposite direction than that, though. Even SONY is putting their own games on other platforms. The age of third party exclusives seems to be well and truly dead.
What's more noticeable - 1836p vs 2160p, or double the asset resolution on screen? Resolution is more than just in screen space...
I mean, I'm being contrarian here - but limiting the SSD improvement to load time is missing half the picture. Sony did not go to this effort for diminishing returns in upfront load times, it was in recognition of how much games are leaning - or want to lean in- on storage at runtime also.
very very ugly - no confirmation of Rdna 2 vrs, or hdmi 2.1.
Fair enough. Assuming a max of 5% reduction in freq:
CPU: 3.3GHz
GPU: 9.8TF
This is essentially a sub-10TF machine.
As Albert Penello said, don't expect 3.5GHz CPU and 2.23GHz GPU at the same time. When the CPU is a little free, that power will help drive the GPU closer to 2.23GHz.
This is regarding boost mode compatibility. You'll be able to run your PS4 titles.
The point of the design is to maximize the clocks of the CPU and GPU depending on 1) power envelope & 2) their respective loading.
If the cooling was specced exactly according to match the max TDP, there would be variations of clock based on ambient temperature and cooling efficiency (due to dust buildup etc). Only way to eliminate those is to over-spec the cooling (I guess 10-15%) or be very aggressive with fan noise at the upper levels of the spectrum.
That's just my guess so we'll see.
Only until we get games we won't know for sure
Oh, nice. Thanks for the clarification.
Still not as good as the other approach though :(
Have enhancements, the other games run in 'legacy mode' with no enhancements (currently)....
would that ssd speed really double the asset resolution even with slower ram?
I would assume that CUs are where ray tracing hardware is too. But PS5 has higher clock GPU so it should be similar differential as the raw TF count, unless Sony spent a lot of die space on I/O computation off loading from the Zen 2 cores...But then again they haven't told us the die size so hard to say until a teardown.
I was expecting the PS5 to be slightly weaker... but still is an incredibly powerful thing for a home console. I'm excited how this will "affect" the PC world especially terms of GPU pricing, hope they can severaly decrease because god damn, a 2080ti being $1000+ is simply ridiculous right now considering these consoles are as powerful as a 2080 or 2080 Super and they will cost way less.
Also the games, it all comes to the quality of the games.
Also the games, it all comes to the quality of the games.
It's true that they should have at least shown in game examples of the SSD's capabilities. I think that by just showing this they would have done enough. Maybe they think that there is nothing they can do to convince people to look away from the TF number so they preferred to just get the technical details out of the way so they can only focus on games next time.
OP
OP
Speaking in absolutes about something we don't fully grasp is the classic gamer take.
Maybe but that doesn't seem like a positive. Fast resume sounds like a properly good next gen feature to have.
EDIT: hit enter too soon, i believe both will have resonable pricing
You got backward compatibility wrong : The 100 titles refer to those that were tested using PS5 Boost Mode. The rest of the PS4 library will be compatible using PS5's legacy modes for PS4 Pro/PS4.
Actually, the opposite is true. Simpler games are more likely to cause thermal issues.
Yeah, we know XSX has a 17% shader advantage, but PS5 could easily have a 22% advantage in fillrate and geometry based on the clockspeed difference. It's anything but clearcut.
Only if you completely ignore the clockspeed differential.
The audio chip is only adding like 100GFlops. Redirecting it to the GPU isn't a game changer.
bwahaha
I don't expect Series X to be any less than $649, with the expandable storage at $249.
And you think that Xbox Series X is going to be costing the same? Have you seen those specs?
They didn't plan a cheaper model for no reason.
$399. Idk why people are still doubting this. This price point has been really good for them and allows them to have a competent machine.
I want to see if Xbox can say fuck it and match Sony.