Series X and PS5 discussion. Of TFlops and SSDs

Frozpot

Well-Known Member
Sep 13, 2013
11,174
2,956
3,629
I don't know how assembling PC has to do with knowledge of how graphics works, but okay.

The GPU determines the number of polygons that it can draw/unit time, the shading (like metallic, texturing etc). The ram determine how much graphical data it can hold to do all the shading.

As extreme case, a fast GPU but low ram graphic card can render a very high res (polygon) scene with low res textures or have many repeating textures.
A slow GPU but lot of rams can produce a lower res (polygon) scene but with more detail texture or less repeating textures. I wanted to point out ram is also used to store vertice data as well.
The good news is that both consoles will be throwing around new shading techniques, tons of polys, and advanced lighting. There really is no downside this coming gen, imo. Minds will be blown!
 
  • Like
Reactions: GordoSan

OneBadMutha

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2013
2,301
790
1,760
What's most disappointing about the gaming community reactions is how 90% of it is focused on downplaying the console of not-choice. Looking hard for flaws or bottlenecks that don't really exist...at least not yet.

It's one thing to have suspicions or concerns about balance but remeber these two pieces of tech are leveraging years of experience, results and feedback from devs. They're rebalanced with new tools and hardware efficiencies not available in past configurations. Usually mistakes at this point are not mistakes in engineering as much as they're business concessions or based on strategy (i.e. Kinect or trying to rush a launch date).

The idea someone on the engineering team forgot about RAM is downright ludicrous. The idea of any strategy for a console that's multiple years in dev bottlenecking their most expensive component with less expensive components is also not logical. Cost cutting measures will be made but in balance. If new decompression methods, improved IO speeds, or ability to use SSDs reduce the load on the RAM (and the Microsoft engineers and DF said they do) then investing in more RAM when it's not a bottleneck is going to give you limited results.

This goes all around. I would have suspicions about PS5s ability to use those overclocked frequencies consistently but in the end, 1 TF of GPU isnt going to make or break the quality of games and we'll likely never be able to prove it...so why spend so much energy debating it? Just let the games talk. Both consoles are much better than what we got on the high end in 2013.
 
Last edited:

Rollins

Well-Known Member
Sep 11, 2013
8,636
8,202
3,280


With the announcement of the PlayStation 5 and the Xbox Series X specs, the console-wars are not just heating up, but tipping over into extreme levels of insanity. While Microsoft and Sony are taking similar paths with similar technology, there is a lot of comparison to previous consoles as well.

With the next-generation consoles, Microsoft is taking an approach of stable output at high clock speeds to provide a consistent experience for developers. In theory, this should help to stabilize performance and possibly make it easy for developers but there are downsides to this model.

For example, in highly dynamic environments where explosions are happening, there is no “boost” to help keep the frames stable. Effectively, developers have to optimize their entire game to defined performance benchmark and if they attempt to render a scene that taxes the system, they have to scale down the scene rather than push the clock speed higher to maintain stability.

This really isn’t that big of an issue and it’s a minor tradeoff to having higher sustained performance than boost performance. The PlayStation has the ability to push 10.3 TFlops of output but will typically operate in a state that is around 9.2 TFlops; the Xbox will operate consistently at 12 TFlops with no deviation in performance.

Put another way, PlayStation developers should be targeting games with the performance characteristics of a 9.2TFlop console and if a scene needs some extra muscle to keep frames stable, the console can briefly kick up the horsepower. Xbox developers will be targeting an environment with 12Tflops of performance and in the event that a scene drags frames down, they will need to either optimize the loading of assets or scale other features as there is no boost performance available.

“Boost” is a common feature in the CPU world, Intel has been using ‘burst’ that can overclock a CPU for increase performance and is a proven tactic for edging out a little bit more compute when needed. But, it’s not sustainable for running for lengthy periods of time, otherwise, that would be the default clock speed.

So what does all this mean? It’s important to understand the basics of the approach to each console but at the end of the day, for the user, none of this is all that relevant. It’s great for saying one is better than the other, but there are many variables into what makes a console great.

One of the other talking points recently is the performance of the unannounced LockHart console that is targeting lower performance and also a lower price; TFlops comparisons don’t always make much sense. The console is expected to come in around the 4-5 TFlop range, well below that of the series X and the PS5 and it’s even less than the Xbox One X.

If the Xbox One X has 6 TFlops of power and the Lockhart (or possibly know as the series S) only has 4, doesn’t that make its performance worse than an existing devices? In this scenario, it’s not logical to compare apples to apples here.

Why? For starters, the Lockhart console will have at its disposal a bunch of new features that significantly optimize its output when compared to the One X’s nearly decade-old architecture. When Microsoft does announce the hardware, and especially if it supports all the features of DX12U, then the console will benefit from hardware and software improvements that should make it provide stable framerates that the One X could struggle to output.

Microsoft even points out that by enabling Sampler Feedback Streaming(SFS) ” because it avoids the wastage of loading into memory the portions of textures that are never needed, it is an effective 2x or 3x (or higher) multiplier on both amount of physical memory and SSD performance. This is one aspect, of one feature, that will be included in next-gen Xbox consoles and its enabling 2/3x performance from storage; the Lockhart console will be significantly more optimized for performance than the One X.

What I am saying is that you can’t compare the TFlop output of next-gen consoles to existing hardware as it’s not the complete picture. For next-gen consoles, it’s a fair comparison but when Microsoft does finally announce Lockhart, don’t lock-in on the raw performance as it’s not the complete story.
 

VaLLiancE

Smart Delivery=4 the gamers
Sep 11, 2013
24,896
3,053
4,031
The Delaware Valley
I don't know how assembling PC has to do with knowledge of how graphics works, but okay.

The GPU determines the number of polygons that it can draw/unit time, the shading (like metallic, texturing etc). The ram determine how much graphical data it can hold to do all the shading.

As extreme case, a fast GPU but low ram graphic card can render a very high res (polygon) scene with low res textures or have many repeating textures.
A slow GPU but lot of rams can produce a lower res (polygon) scene but with more detail texture or less repeating textures. I wanted to point out ram is also used to store vertice data as well.
Exactly
PS5 games should have better details.
XSX games could run at higher resolutions.
 

VaLLiancE

Smart Delivery=4 the gamers
Sep 11, 2013
24,896
3,053
4,031
The Delaware Valley
What's most disappointing about the gaming community reactions is how 90% of it is focused on downplaying the console of not-choice. Looking hard for flaws or bottlenecks that don't really exist...at least not yet.

It's one thing to have suspicions or concerns about balance but remeber these two pieces of tech are leveraging years of experience, results and feedback from devs. They're rebalanced with new tools and hardware efficiencies not available in past configurations. Usually mistakes at this point are not mistakes in engineering as much as they're business concessions or based on strategy (i.e. Kinect or trying to rush a launch date).

The idea someone on the engineering team forgot about RAM is downright ludicrous. The idea of any strategy for a console that's multiple years in dev bottlenecking their most expensive component with less expensive components is also not logical. Cost cutting measures will be made but in balance. If new decompression methods, improved IO speeds, or ability to use SSDs reduce the load on the RAM (and the Microsoft engineers and DF said they do) then investing in more RAM when it's not a bottleneck is going to give you limited results.

This goes all around. I would have suspicions about PS5s ability to use those overclocked frequencies consistently but in the end, 1 TF of GPU isnt going to make or break the quality of games and we'll likely never be able to prove it...so why spend so much energy debating it? Just let the games talk. Both consoles are much better than what we got on the high end in 2013.
Bottlenecks always exist.
This is a thread for debate.
You are complaining but taking jabs at PS5 on the way out lol
 

VaLLiancE

Smart Delivery=4 the gamers
Sep 11, 2013
24,896
3,053
4,031
The Delaware Valley


With the announcement of the PlayStation 5 and the Xbox Series X specs, the console-wars are not just heating up, but tipping over into extreme levels of insanity. While Microsoft and Sony are taking similar paths with similar technology, there is a lot of comparison to previous consoles as well.

With the next-generation consoles, Microsoft is taking an approach of stable output at high clock speeds to provide a consistent experience for developers. In theory, this should help to stabilize performance and possibly make it easy for developers but there are downsides to this model.

For example, in highly dynamic environments where explosions are happening, there is no “boost” to help keep the frames stable. Effectively, developers have to optimize their entire game to defined performance benchmark and if they attempt to render a scene that taxes the system, they have to scale down the scene rather than push the clock speed higher to maintain stability.

This really isn’t that big of an issue and it’s a minor tradeoff to having higher sustained performance than boost performance. The PlayStation has the ability to push 10.3 TFlops of output but will typically operate in a state that is around 9.2 TFlops; the Xbox will operate consistently at 12 TFlops with no deviation in performance.

Put another way, PlayStation developers should be targeting games with the performance characteristics of a 9.2TFlop console and if a scene needs some extra muscle to keep frames stable, the console can briefly kick up the horsepower. Xbox developers will be targeting an environment with 12Tflops of performance and in the event that a scene drags frames down, they will need to either optimize the loading of assets or scale other features as there is no boost performance available.

“Boost” is a common feature in the CPU world, Intel has been using ‘burst’ that can overclock a CPU for increase performance and is a proven tactic for edging out a little bit more compute when needed. But, it’s not sustainable for running for lengthy periods of time, otherwise, that would be the default clock speed.

So what does all this mean? It’s important to understand the basics of the approach to each console but at the end of the day, for the user, none of this is all that relevant. It’s great for saying one is better than the other, but there are many variables into what makes a console great.

One of the other talking points recently is the performance of the unannounced LockHart console that is targeting lower performance and also a lower price; TFlops comparisons don’t always make much sense. The console is expected to come in around the 4-5 TFlop range, well below that of the series X and the PS5 and it’s even less than the Xbox One X.

If the Xbox One X has 6 TFlops of power and the Lockhart (or possibly know as the series S) only has 4, doesn’t that make its performance worse than an existing devices? In this scenario, it’s not logical to compare apples to apples here.

Why? For starters, the Lockhart console will have at its disposal a bunch of new features that significantly optimize its output when compared to the One X’s nearly decade-old architecture. When Microsoft does announce the hardware, and especially if it supports all the features of DX12U, then the console will benefit from hardware and software improvements that should make it provide stable framerates that the One X could struggle to output.

Microsoft even points out that by enabling Sampler Feedback Streaming(SFS) ” because it avoids the wastage of loading into memory the portions of textures that are never needed, it is an effective 2x or 3x (or higher) multiplier on both amount of physical memory and SSD performance. This is one aspect, of one feature, that will be included in next-gen Xbox consoles and its enabling 2/3x performance from storage; the Lockhart console will be significantly more optimized for performance than the One X.

What I am saying is that you can’t compare the TFlop output of next-gen consoles to existing hardware as it’s not the complete picture. For next-gen consoles, it’s a fair comparison but when Microsoft does finally announce Lockhart, don’t lock-in on the raw performance as it’s not the complete story.

This is wrong and done by MS own Brad Sam's lol
PS5 dropping 10% with it's variable clock speed isn't 9.2....


This video(courtesy of GeorgeSoros ) which is conveniently ignored like others that been posted as have other statements that have been made that say otherwise.

Keep up the fight though
 
Last edited:

GeorgeSoros

Bensonhurst's Finest
Sep 11, 2013
454
56
148
Yeah, in terms of raw power Sony seems a lot closer than people think, but they have yet to talk about AI upscaling for current gen. Price is also important. I expect the two systems to be within $50 of each other.
 

Hedon

Hedonism
Cornerstone Member
Sep 13, 2013
17,939
4,829
15,031
Wisconsin, USA
www.unionvgf.com
Wow, I just found out that in order to add storage to the PS5 to exceed the 825GB, you need to open the PS5 case and install an additional SSD INTERNALLY. It's not an external slot like it is on the XSX.

So much for carrying games around on your SSD from console to console. Let alone installing a new SSD. :really:
 
  • Agree
Reactions: GeorgeSoros

Hedon

Hedonism
Cornerstone Member
Sep 13, 2013
17,939
4,829
15,031
Wisconsin, USA
www.unionvgf.com
Developers Begin to Weigh in on the Power Gap Between the Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5

From all accounts, the Series X is absolutely taking the power crown into next-generation as we had assumed for a long time now. Regardless, it goes without saying that we are extremely excited for both the Xbox and PlayStation 5 and we can’t wait to see more from developers on both consoles as they get closer to launch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rollins

starseeker

Your friendly Neighborhood Spiderman
Cornerstone Member
Sep 11, 2013
7,447
1,324
12,830
Wow, I just found out that in order to add storage to the PS5 to exceed the 825GB, you need to open the PS5 case and install an additional SSD INTERNALLY. It's not an external slot like it is on the XSX.

So much for carrying games around on your SSD from console to console. Let alone installing a new SSD. :really:
The average storage for a current-gen game is already easily 50+GB. Games like RDR2 is over 100GB. 825GB or even 1T will be way too little storage for next-gen.
Also, the 825 GB isn't just for games but for OS, media, apps as well.

I have to keep deleting game on PS4 & I barely play my PS4,
 

Rollins

Well-Known Member
Sep 11, 2013
8,636
8,202
3,280
Wow, I just found out that in order to add storage to the PS5 to exceed the 825GB, you need to open the PS5 case and install an additional SSD INTERNALLY. It's not an external slot like it is on the XSX.

So much for carrying games around on your SSD from console to console. Let alone installing a new SSD. :really:
I thought this number seemed super low. Is that type of memory expensive now?
 

VaLLiancE

Smart Delivery=4 the gamers
Sep 11, 2013
24,896
3,053
4,031
The Delaware Valley
Wow, I just found out that in order to add storage to the PS5 to exceed the 825GB, you need to open the PS5 case and install an additional SSD INTERNALLY. It's not an external slot like it is on the XSX.

So much for carrying games around on your SSD from console to console. Let alone installing a new SSD. :really:
I heard it will able to be added externally hmm
 

wshowers

Certified Classic
Super Mod
Sep 11, 2013
2,991
926
1,730
Wow, I just found out that in order to add storage to the PS5 to exceed the 825GB, you need to open the PS5 case and install an additional SSD INTERNALLY. It's not an external slot like it is on the XSX.

So much for carrying games around on your SSD from console to console. Let alone installing a new SSD. :really:
That's not nearly as big a deal as you think. PS4 was the same way except the drive was a sata drive instead of a NVME. It wasn't that difficult.
 

VaLLiancE

Smart Delivery=4 the gamers
Sep 11, 2013
24,896
3,053
4,031
The Delaware Valley

VaLLiancE

Smart Delivery=4 the gamers
Sep 11, 2013
24,896
3,053
4,031
The Delaware Valley
The average storage for a current-gen game is already easily 50+GB. Games like RDR2 is over 100GB. 825GB or even 1T will be way too little storage for next-gen.
Also, the 825 GB isn't just for games but for OS, media, apps as well.

I have to keep deleting game on PS4 & I barely play my PS4,
Actually we don't know what the 825 is based on.
OS and caching might already be allocated and the 825 is what's left.
 

VaLLiancE

Smart Delivery=4 the gamers
Sep 11, 2013
24,896
3,053
4,031
The Delaware Valley

VaLLiancE

Smart Delivery=4 the gamers
Sep 11, 2013
24,896
3,053
4,031
The Delaware Valley
it was in the Cerny video, he advised to not getting any of the ones out now and to wait for the ones to be approved/certified by Sony...for some may not fit or be up to speed
Right because faster ones are needed and we don't know the form factor is yet.
Likely a cartridge like add-on as they trademarked it b4 MS stole the idea.
 

karmakid

Hiding in your WiFi 🙃
Forum Mod
Sep 11, 2013
8,118
2,953
2,529
in front of a screen
Right because faster ones are needed and we don't know the form factor is yet.
Likely a cartridge like add-on as they trademarked it b4 MS stole the idea.
shoot, didn’t Sony file a patent for a cartridge kinda recently that was believed to be for the ps5 but Sony said it was for something else like video production or something?
 

karmakid

Hiding in your WiFi 🙃
Forum Mod
Sep 11, 2013
8,118
2,953
2,529
in front of a screen
Last edited:

starseeker

Your friendly Neighborhood Spiderman
Cornerstone Member
Sep 11, 2013
7,447
1,324
12,830
When someone said Sony PS5 is superior to the present, it's another red flag. Because the multi-billion company with Big S marketing/sale team will forget to mention how their hardware is more powerful, one of the most critical things people looked for? Come on.
 

OneBadMutha

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2013
2,301
790
1,760
Should keep in mind diminishing returns....as in a power gap is less and less perceivable to the average person. Xbox One X had a big advantage over the PS4 Pro yet the difference was rarely staggering. All that power went towards resolution which is only important to some enthusiasts. Next gen, ray tracing will be the new Ps....as in will replace resolution as the primary hog of system resources for differences that the mainstream probably won't pick up. A staggering power difference in GPU will take you from entry level ray tracing to mid level ray tracing.

That's why even though I don't mind discussing the power deltas, it's not that exciting. I believe it'll be better ray tracing vs better load times on most 3rd party games. It doesn't matter who the developers like developing for the best. Their publishers will decide where they make the games regardless of their favorite tools. Exclusives from the more talented studios should be exciting to look at regardless of platform. The most interesting aspect to me is how soon things like new tools and ML will have a considerable impact on game development.

As far as hardware goes, I'm just happy that Microsoft went all in on a gaming console. The amount of customization and thought that went into it is drastic compared to either of the previous consoles. It wouldn't matter to me whether the PS5 was better or worse in terms of performance. I just wanted the best possible effort and investment into hardware that's compatible with Game Pass and the Elite 2 controller. I'm getting that. I will get the Playstation for their exclusives and their exclusives would likely look great on a potato due to their dev talent. Now I can relax and just wait for the game announcements.