So who to believe? Devs saying the SSD is the biggest difference maker or devs saying the CPU is the biggest?
Perhaps you have not been reading other threads, but in many of the more Sony centric threads many are spinning the Narrative that the advantage the PS5 has in the SSD is all that matters.
No I haven't, either way why wouldn't they? Epic and other devs haven't given then a reason to believe otherwise, as I'm sure xbox fans are quite pleased about the 12 tf and 17% gpu advantage.
Why shouldn't playstation guys tout an almost 50% SSD advantage?
Or should they listen to scorn devs who have vested interest in their exclusive Console platform (Xbox).
End of the say the CPU is pretty much the same, so PS5 will mach xbox there, but will xbox mach the ps5 ssd?
His 50% number is also wrong.
So who to believe? Devs saying the SSD is the biggest difference maker or devs saying the CPU is the biggest?
The CPU change from Jaguar to Zen 2 is like a two generation leap. It's kind of mental.
Not mine
The Scorn kickstarter even explained they were going to re-reveal the game with a gameplay trailer, but the Inside Xbox offer meant they didn't have time for that:Yeah, I read that like he was upset his game had to be mixed up in all that. And who wouldn't be, by the way. Had they been part of a normal showcase and not "Tomorrow the game changes" PR crap all of those games would have went over fine.
Why is there no gameplay in the trailer?
We were actually planning to release a different trailer at a later date that was twice as long, and that was going to feature gameplay elements, but the opportunity to be a part of Inside Xbox happened in a very short period of time. Microsoft also couldn't give us more than 2 minutes (not that we would be able to prepare more on such short notice anyway) so we decide to re-conceptualize and re-arrange it. We like to set a specific mood and pacing with the trailers and it was already hard squeezing this much into 2 minutes, let alone having additional gameplay footage without disrupting the established flow and mood.
Just look which devs are actually saying CPUs, which devs are saying SSD.So who to believe? Devs saying the SSD is the biggest difference maker or devs saying the CPU is the biggest?
The GPU and CPU for PS5 are both running on variable frequencies. What is listed in the specs are their maximum frequencies, but they will vary based on the thermal budget of the SoC vs the workload.Is the GPU details for PS5 correct, it says that its also variable as well?
No I haven't, either way why wouldn't they? Epic and other devs haven't given then a reason to believe otherwise, as I'm sure xbox fans are quite pleased about the 12 tf and 17% gpu advantage.
Why shouldn't playstation guys tout an almost 50% SSD advantage?
Or should they listen to scorn devs who have vested interest in their exclusive Console platform (Xbox).
End of the say the CPU is pretty much the same, so PS5 will mach xbox there, but will xbox mach the ps5 ssd?
With severly compromised visuals. FH4 with the 60fps option reduces resolution to 1080p and the lighting takes a major hit as well. Play a night race in FH4 and the light casting from the vehicle onto the enviroments is pretty amazing...turning the game to 60fps removes that completely.
Lol. What? you got proof of this?To be fair, its a good bit more than 17 percent. PS5 is a 9.2 TF machine that reaches over 10 with after burners on. Keep them on too long and it'll explode. But the SSD advantage is undeniable. It's almost like they have a template for game design that they made a console for.
Funnily enough, despite XSX getting marketing for Valhallah, the PS5 is seemingly better placed to stream its open world in a (shorter) blink.
Note that the PS5 CPU is 3.5ghz in both standard and SMT mode so when devs start using SMT the difference is CPUs between the Series X and PS5 becomes nonexistent.
Glad MS went all out this time..nothing was gimped.. I really can't wait to see what XGS teams will do with the hardware.
Thats a wrong info.it rarely downclocks .as cerny mentioned there is enough power available to run gpu and cpu at their max at the same time.
Tales from my assTo be fair, its a good bit more than 17 percent. PS5 is a 9.2 TF machine that reaches over 10 with after burners on. Keep them on too long and it'll explode.
He might be right.
We'll see soon enough. But yea, those CPUs were real dogs last gen. Like, yikes.
IIRC, the PS5 CPU downclocks regularly. Can't remember the details, but I'm sure someone will link. It will not be at its max frequency very regularly.
Stop this console warrior bullshit.To be fair, its a good bit more than 17 percent. PS5 is a 9.2 TF machine that reaches over 10 with after burners on. Keep them on too long and it'll explode. But the SSD advantage is undeniable. It's almost like they have a template for game design that they made a console for.
Funnily enough, despite XSX getting marketing for Valhallah, the PS5 is seemingly better placed to stream its open world in a (shorter) blink.
It has its own set of benefits but lets keep it on topic and not derail the thread. CheersThen why bother making it variable to begin with? It would be better from a marketing perspective to cap it at 99% output and not have the ambiguous *VARIABLE fine print.
Then why bother making it variable to begin with? It would be better from a marketing perspective to cap it at 99% output and not have the ambiguous *VARIABLE fine print.
To be fair, its a good bit more than 17 percent. PS5 is a 9.2 TF machine that reaches over 10 with after burners on. Keep them on too long and it'll explode. But the SSD advantage is undeniable. It's almost like they have a template for game design that they made a console for.
Funnily enough, despite XSX getting marketing for Valhallah, the PS5 is seemingly better placed to stream its open world in a (shorter) blink.
Then why bother making it variable to begin with? It would be better from a marketing perspective to cap it at 99% output and not have the ambiguous *VARIABLE fine print.
The PS5 CPU is only 3.5 GHz when the GPU isn't taxed. If a game is GPU intensive and the PS5 CPU throttles down to 3.2 GHz the Series X could version could opt to use the 3.8 GHz mode which would mean a 600 MHz difference! That's a huge difference when comparing the specs.
Can you show where u got 9.2 tf machine from ? If u refer to 2 ghz github clock in 2019 which leads to 9.2 tf , xsx clock was 1.65ghz in that github test of 2019. They both increased clocks on rdna2 by 250 mhz (ps5 to 2.25 and xsx to 1.85) which means rdna 2 allowed both to increase the clock while staying in the allowed TDP.To be fair, its a good bit more than 17 percent. PS5 is a 9.2 TF machine that reaches over 10 with after burners on. Keep them on too long and it'll explode. But the SSD advantage is undeniable. It's almost like they have a template for game design that they made a console for.
Funnily enough, despite XSX getting marketing for Valhallah, the PS5 is seemingly better placed to stream its open world in a (shorter) blink.
Exactly. It can be both.
Speaking of narratives, this is the real one here, lolTo be fair, its a good bit more than 17 percent. PS5 is a 9.2 TF machine that reaches over 10 with after burners on. Keep them on too long and it'll explode. But the SSD advantage is undeniable. It's almost like they have a template for game design that they made a console for.
Funnily enough, despite XSX getting marketing for Valhallah, the PS5 is seemingly better placed to stream its open world in a (shorter) blink.
The PS5 CPU is only 3.5 GHz when the GPU isn't taxed. If a game is GPU intensive and the PS5 CPU throttles down to 3.2 GHz the Series X could version could opt to use the 3.8 GHz mode which would mean a 600 MHz difference! That's a huge difference when comparing the specs.
thats definately not true:The PS5 CPU is only 3.5 GHz when the GPU isn't taxed. If a game is GPU intensive and the PS5 CPU throttles down to 3.2 GHz the Series X could version could opt to use the 3.8 GHz mode which would mean a 600 MHz difference! That's a huge difference when comparing the specs.
PS5 CPU has a variable clock though, 3.5ghz is a peak rather than constant. But I agree the difference between the CPUs won't provide any significant real world difference.Note that the PS5 CPU is 3.5ghz in both standard and SMT mode so when devs start using SMT the difference is CPUs between the Series X and PS5 becomes nonexistent.
Its frankly incredible how close the stats are this time, less than a 15% variance overall this time (excluding the I/O).
This is a very efficient way of telling people not to take you seriously. Era is not the only place I'm seeing this "PS5 is a 9.2TF machine! Sony overclocked it just so it could reach 10TF for marketing purposes!"PS5 is a 9.2 TF machine that reaches over 10 with after burners on. Keep them on too long and it'll explode.
"Next-gen is about responsiveness, smoothness and a lot less time wasting."
A whopping 3% difference will surely provide quite the difference right.
No it wasn't accounting for that. I posted that on my lunch break lol
Yeah, a lot of people just assume that because few games get considerable penalties with 4 or 6 cores that it's just "the limit" for parallelization in games, when it's just that devs never had even consider it before when an Intel core could easily do more work than two Jaguars, with both the frequency and IPC differences and all.I've been telling folks for months to go for 3700x over a 3600, and for their sakes I hope that's enough CPU for them, and I was just wrong - but I don't think so, especially for 60FPS. It's gonna be a rough few years for PC players from the jump.
But the jump from HDD to SSD is like 40X - 100X right? But the jump in CPU is a single digit. So I believe the SSD is the revolutionary part
It's really both. Trying to argue about which is much more revolutionary is just arguing for the sake of it.But the jump from HDD to SSD is like 40X - 100X right? But the jump in CPU is a single digit. So I believe the SSD is the revolutionary part
I can swear all the literature on the subject says the exact opposite. So I am curious to know where you are getting your information.He might be right.
We'll see soon enough. But yea, those CPUs were real dogs last gen. Like, yikes.
IIRC, the PS5 CPU downclocks regularly. Can't remember the details, but I'm sure someone will link. It will not be at its max frequency very regularly.
It's really both. Trying to argue about which is much more revolutionary is just arguing for the sake of it.