I wonder if we would have these discussions if PS5 had the rumored 13TF practically everyone in the prediction thread was salivating over instead of 9-10
-
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.
wccftech.com: Why The PS5’s 10.3 TFLOPs Figure Is Misleading
- Thread starter Garrison
- Start date
- Status
I wonder if we would have these discussions if PS5 had the rumored 13TF practically everyone in the prediction thread was salivating over instead of 9-10
You could say the reverse too. The difference between the two today is far smaller than it was back then.
This, and there was simply so much wrong with the XB1 at the start that it was basically "pick your thing to criticise" and the underpowered machine became a focus to many. There is literally nothing technically wrong with the PS5, like you say the difference in GPU spec is smaller, with the biggest obvious difference being the SSD which is almost 2.5x faster, which is a whopping difference so naturally it gets a lot of focus.
We all know developers won't be able to help themselves after like six months and then everything will be back at 30fps again. It always happens that way.
Yeah, I feel that we are making a big deal over such a small performance drop.
Wooooooooosh 😂
Yeah but isnt it more fun to throw around silly numbers willy nilly?
It all really comes down to 12>10 and yeah it's ridiculous.
Also Cerny's keynote wasn't the sexiest thing.
In the end all of this won't matter when we see some games up and running on these things.
Oh god, the pixel counting.
The loonies in here are going to be arguing til Christmas.
That's the insane thing here people are trying to sweep under the rug. All you have to do is simply view the thread and look at 99% of the posts from before the reveal. Shit, even look at less than 24hours before the reveal. The thread was solely about PS5 speculation since XSX was moved to another thread, and it was ALL about teraflops. Insider this, teraflops that. 13TF hypetrain this, lol GitHub that. "But Matt said this," etc.
Multiple people even correctly guessed the SSD speeds (5+~) in conjunction with what we already knew, but were drowned out by teraflop talk. It wasn't really a talking point then.
In my opinion, if you're going to console warrior over speculation and shout from the rooftops about how teraflops don't matter and never did (which is a blatant lie by looking at how previous gens played out), you should probably scrub your post history so the transparancy isn't as noticable (not you, I mean in general!).
All this bickering for nothing. We all had shitty HDDs now and have for almost two decades. Now we're jumping past regular SSDs, then past crazy expensive NVMe SSDs, straight to custom silicon NVMe SSDs. Microsoft's SSD is incredibly faster than the best Samsung SSD you can buy, by a large margin. Sony's is EVEN BETTER THAN THAT. So why is all this childish bullshit coming from grown ass men even a thing right now?
Edit: two typos
Last edited:
Lets time travel back to 2013
MS announce Xbox One, the multitasking console to rule the living room. Price? 500 dollars bundled with a Kinect (that nobody wants). Features: No used games, always online, if offline for more than 24h it will become a brick. "We have a product for people who aren't able to get some form of connectivity, it's called Xbox 360"
Is it powerful?:
- It has secret sauce; it has DDR3 memory because GDDR6 was "uncomfortable"; "have you seen Titanfall?"; crushed blacks + upscalling "You realize you will see every game in 1080p as your output right?"; "We created DirectX"; Power of the Cloud;
Sony annouce PS4, it just play games. Price: 400 dollars + nothing. Features: 100 dollars less than Xbox One.
if you ignore context of course we have a bunch of hypocrites here, haven't we?
But if you think just a little and remember all the other things surrounding the Xbox One launch it might make sense that people talked about the 40% difference in TF.
You can't make a product that is more expensive with less power and expect that people won't complain about it.
Last edited:
Besides all that stuff, it's fairly silly to be grinding an axe for seven years because of a console. People get over being stabbed quicker than that.
Funny how you forget one was 100$ more expensive and weaker.
If PS5 was more expensive than the Xbox x Then maybe I'd agree.
I think the big thing about Sony's SSD is that people remember Microsoft's THE CLOUD WILL CHANGE EVERYTHING, IGNORE HOW OUR CONSOLE IS WEAKER talk at the beginning of this gen. Taking a piece of hardware that's worse than the competition at virtually everything, then saying that this one feature that virtually no games will ever make full use of is the secret sauce that gives it the edge, rings utterly hollow to a lot of people.
Sony is putting all their eggs in a very, very tiny basket and it's confusing because they don't really have anything else going for them at this point, and their trend toward infinite radio silence means that people who aren't already sold on the idea of a PS5 before it's even shown off for real don't have much to think about except the fact that it loses all the tech comparisons.
It sounds like you are misunderstanding me, by floor I mean the lowest it can be throttled. What it runs at the majority of the time has nothing to do with this. I agree more clarity around the whole situation would be nice.
And they're not going to be making flagship games with current gen graphics on the new systems... lol
30fps is going to be the console standard for a long time...
It's going to come down to games, the consoles are pretty close, let's see what they have lined up for launch.
I agree this place is in desperate need of some next-gen discussion guidelines. Not conflating the current situation with 2013 has to be one of them. Not only is it a console warrior talking point that brings nothing of value to the discussions, it's just a shitty comparison if you've been paying any attention.
I mean yes but that doesn't make them a terrible measure of performance. It doesn't say what you will get out of it but what the potential of the tech is. There is a reason everyone uses them (MS/Sony/AMD/NVidia) and it isn't because it is a useless metric... If you have a better way to communicate performance besides benchmarks please do share.
Legit surprised we haven't seen a guideline or even a staff post yet, tbh.
It keeps them off the streets fighting over toilet paper. I think it will blow over soon, they can't keep this up forever.
The amount of people in denial is incredible. After 5 gaming consoles from Nintendo, I have learned to accept reality. Let it go people.
Go play some games.
Go play some games.
denial of what? The denial is cerny said the gpu will run most of the time at 10.28 And when it does drop it will be modest. The denial is coming from Xbox fan boys and it's ridiculous. I can't wait for games to drop so we can see the comparisons
It's gonna be funny because there are a ton of people arguing over this issue
either the PS5 is throttled and at a disadvantage in performance
Or
the argument over teraflops/throttling was useless and any difference is negligible
They don't but the media sure has been working overtime on the damage control.
I suspect that the first multi platform games on these systems wont stress them at all and they will likely be exactly the same. MS got Gears 5 running at 110fps (I believe I read that?) on Xbox Series X in a couple weeks, even after adding graphical features. That's a lot of extra power over the current gen systems.
Lol i remember those list wars use to brag about Resogun being a markee game. Indies were a big deal until the sony 1st party started pumping.
we all know its arguing about TF's before the release and then how many p's the games have on each console.
just chill and play some video games.
just chill and play some video games.
There are plenty of reasons why they're a poor predictor of performance, that's just one of them.
Without knowing how much of that potential is realized in practice, does it really matter? It's also only the potential of one aspect of the rendering pipeline. Fill rate, memory bandwidth and latency, texture cache hit ratio, average pixel coverage per polygon, and plenty of other factors play equally important roles. It's just hard for most people to understand all the intricacies (heck, it's hard for the silicon architects who make a living doing this to predict how everything is going to interact without extensive simulations.)
Everyone also uses star ratings to rate movies, megapixels to describe cameras, gigahertz to describe CPUs and they're all equally lazy and of similarly limited value without knowing a whole lot more. I assure you, it's not what the engineers who design GPUs for a living care most about, nor is it what developers pay attention to. It's a marketing measure focused on a customer base that isn't going to take the time to learn all the factors involved.
If you're going to eliminate the only really effective way to measure performance, benchmarks, then you're left with slim pickings. That's literally the gold standard for how technical teams measure the effectiveness of their designs, using real-world test cases that are believed to be representative of typical scenarios. It's like saying "if you know of a better way to reproduce besides sex please do share." Every other approach is just more complicated, and require understanding the interaction between lots of parts of the system - many of which we don't know enough about in this case.
What we do know is that the Series X likely has a raw throughput advantage, but that it's probably smaller than the 16-25% reflected in GPU peak performance and memory bandwidth for a subset of the memory, because clock speeds play a role in other parts of the rendering pipeline and the PS5 has a clear advantage there. It could be the case that variable clock speeds make a difference, too, but it's impossible to quantify yet and the one reference we have suggests that it's likely only a couple of percent in extreme cases.
Me? I'm waiting for those all important benchmarks to satisfy my curiosity, but I also know that a 10 or 20 percent performance gap isn't a big enough difference to make a decision for me. It still comes down to games, as it almost always does, and that's what I'm most eager to see.
Exactly. Not only was the gap between those two consoles far larger, the weaker console was $100 more. If the PS5 is somehow $100 more than the XSX, then maybe we can start to make that comparison.
The XSX has an edge in some areas, and the PS5 has an edge in some other areas. They're honestly the most evenly matched consoles we've ever seen.
wccftech straight up makes up rumors for clicks, so I'm not sure why they're not a banned source, even if they're occasionally accurate when they latch onto things others are already reporting on. A stopped clock, and all that.
User Warned: Accusations of astroturfing
Alot of new accounts in this thread and they all seem to be pro xbox. weird.
Evenly matched and significantly different both at the same time. It's going to be a really interesting generation and it's not comparable to this one, at all.
Now you just put yourself in a place where you are not definitely sure it's the truth.
hypothetical: it throttles
Then you have instances where GPU or CPU are an issue with development.
I think the better statement would be that these numbers are meaningless until developers comment on development and gamers get to see the games. When there is zero difference between games all of this arguing was for nothing. People who say 9.2 and throttle will have to eat their words.
Sure everyone will go with the benchmarks but MS/Sony are not providing that but also want to communicate to their audiences what they can expect with regards to power. Thus we have TFlops. I agree that it doesn't tell you an extremely detailed picture but most ppl want an easy to digest performance metric. No one wants to study white papers to understand how everything fits together lol.
Also, it is more like:
Buying console = having sex with someone
Benchmarks = watching someone else have sex with the person
TFlops = having someone rate 1-10 their experience with said person
>What we do know is that the Series X likely has a raw throughput advantage
How did you come to that conclusion? Most likely from the TFlops and simple GPU details that were shared. Thus mission accomplished. You have a general idea of what to expect performance-wise.
Yeah this is what I keep thinking..like there's really not much to stop MS from upping the clocks a bit before launch considering how 'wide and slow' the architecture appears to be. Not saying they will..but it's certainly plausible if they feel like it.
My prediction is nearly identical games with ps5 having more aggressive resolution scaling. Exceptions here and there but that is the norm I'm expecting.
Will still get 2000 plus post threads.
There is plenty stopping them. They haven't designed the system around higher clocks. Their power and thermal control is all done around their set clock speeds. They can't just raise those speeds on a whim. The entire reason Sony is using this unusual variable frequency method and expensive cooling is to allow such speeds to work safely.
- Status