WYP
News Guru
Has the console war already been decided? (No, it hasn't)
Read our PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X Specifications Showdown
Read our PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X Specifications Showdown
Last edited:
PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X Specifications Showdown - Which console is fastest?
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
With the PS5 lagging behind in the graphics department by quite a bit I'm guessing this will be the PS5 Base model with a PS5 Pro coming out later with all 52 compute units and higher CPU clocks to match the XBSX.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
They should have done both at the same time or make the PS4 at least 44 CUs. I get it for price but knowing MS and their way deeper pockets and their clear strategy for outright performance, Sony should have upped the ante a little bit.
RT hardware kinda kills everything. They spent so much on that they forget the GPU still needs to be fast enough. Nobody cares about 4k30 anymore and that is the target for RT games. Sony will struggle to do 4k120 like MS. They will probably be a 4k60 platform and that is a big selling point for MS. All MS has to do is market it to kiddies.
Fortnite @ true 4k 120fps
COD @ true 4k 120fps
etc
Those 2 games alone will sell a console. In this case Xbox.
AngryGoldfish
Old N Gold
It seems the clock speed is variable. That's odd for a console. I wonder will those in hotter climates see worse performance. Or maybe the variable clock rate is set on a game-by-game basis like the SMT on the Xbox.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
They said the console is always using the same amount of power. The clock speed only fluctuates depending on the workload. It won't be as variable as say Nvidia's clock speed algorithm, gpu boost. He said clock speed won't vary much.
Yep, clock rate is determined by the application load/profile, Cerny stated it is deterministic; IE A clock rate will always be predictable/the same for a given task.
WYP
News Guru
^ This. Basically the PlayStation 5 will not operate in the same way as AMD/Nvidia boost clocks. Developers will decide how high their components will be clocked based on how much they load the CPU/GPU. So GPU heavy scenes will have lower CPU clocks and CPU-heavy scenes will have lower GPU clocks etc.
There was a mention of AMD's Smart Shift tech, but TBH this is a desperate move to give the PS5 more theoretical power to not look as bad.
This is just like how Microsoft upped the Xbox One X from 800MHz to 853MHz before launch to try to lessen their gap with PlayStation 4.
So Microsoft is offering developers a fixed performance value, whereas Sony is giving developers another set of values to tinker with and optimise for that will help lower the gap between Xbox Series X and PlayStation 4.
This will be fine for developers that are either CPU or GPU heavy, but later in the generation, when ambitious studios want to do both, this will be a bad feature for Sony. This is why consoles usually stick to fixed clock speeds.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
I disagree it is a desperate move. In situations where it is both they will not clock down much as stated in the presentation and they are still fixed clocks. It is basically power steps. He says a few percentages in clock speeds reduces power consumption by 10%.
If you are running at 2.23ghz and need a 3% drop in clock speed, then you end up at 2.16ghz. That's as stated a minor difference for a 10% drop in power.
If we also take into account his word on the CPU "mostly" running at 3.5ghz we can assume that rather small mhz drop in performance on the GPU is basically irrelevant to performance since it is still fixed. Whereas if it was not and purely variable I would agree in the sense that it is an awful move.
With all that said, they should have just stuck to a fixed clock in general. They claim they had problems at 2ghz without AMD Smart Shift. Well then lower clocks a bit and add CUs. Problem solved. They just took a different approach that was ultimately far cheaper than adding more silicon.
If you are running at 2.23ghz and need a 3% drop in clock speed, then you end up at 2.16ghz. That's as stated a minor difference for a 10% drop in power.
If we also take into account his word on the CPU "mostly" running at 3.5ghz we can assume that rather small mhz drop in performance on the GPU is basically irrelevant to performance since it is still fixed. Whereas if it was not and purely variable I would agree in the sense that it is an awful move.
With all that said, they should have just stuck to a fixed clock in general. They claim they had problems at 2ghz without AMD Smart Shift. Well then lower clocks a bit and add CUs. Problem solved. They just took a different approach that was ultimately far cheaper than adding more silicon.
Last edited:
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
I think both companies are more than safe, and have both done more than enough tbh.
Sony will probably overkill the "pro" or whatever. TBH it's the rivalry between users that keeps them both in business
That's if they can release before Holiday 2020 season since manufacturing has slowed way down and materials may be scarce.
I'll definitely take a wait and see approach for PS5. Not really into Xbox as PC is also getting the same games. I can just get the Game Pass. I'm more interested in the Sony ecosystem
AlienALX
Well-known member
PS5 deffo has the better exclusives. There's barely any on the Xbox now.
TBH with my luck recently I doubt I'll need either. Unless of course TLOU2 ends up being ps5 only. I'd die if I couldn't play that.
I'll still keep and use my consoles for convenience but yeah, it'll take a pretty whopping exclusive now.
Glad they're coming in winter tho cause its usually boring af.
TBH with my luck recently I doubt I'll need either. Unless of course TLOU2 ends up being ps5 only. I'd die if I couldn't play that.
I'll still keep and use my consoles for convenience but yeah, it'll take a pretty whopping exclusive now.
Glad they're coming in winter tho cause its usually boring af.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Well, they are scheduled for winter. Who knows if they can make that target.
Seeing as for the first few years games will be cross-platform and I have a Pro I'll be fine until I see how it all turns out.
Seeing as for the first few years games will be cross-platform and I have a Pro I'll be fine until I see how it all turns out.
They have to do a lot of stockpiling for these, they'd probably have ideally wanted at least 1.5million units each on launch day to ensure they wouldn't sell out in any region, it's likely they started production or at least were ready to when the recent world issues started to come up, so I think they'll definitely both make their launch dates, it'll just potentially be an issue of how much stock is available on launch(And some regions may get borderline paper launches, this seemed to even be a bit of an issue for the XboneX in Japan, apparently they shipped less than 2000 units in the first week)).
Last edited:
I guess if we're heading for a recession they can mark those sales figures down a fair whack anyway if these were looking at ~£500 areas. Maybe Microsoft would want to swing a bit more focus to their rumoured lower end model a little sooner too.
While games themselves are seemingly recession proof, I don't think that theories ever been tested recently for hardware.
While games themselves are seemingly recession proof, I don't think that theories ever been tested recently for hardware.
