PlayStation 5 Rumors Latest: Console Reveal Within the Next Six Weeks

[TokoTurismo]

Nvm

 

[inCloud]

Will GT (or Forza) really be able to improve the AI much with this next tech. Or will we be stuck with 'chasing the rabbit' forever?
As a long time gamer, I know the AI in games always needs some kind of advantage over the player to be competitive, but even just more
variables would be nice, like any car in the pack is capable of finishing first or last, or is that a pipe dream?

In case of Forza, better CPU could afford more resources for AI simulation physics. Problem is, FM8 and FH5 will be crossgen and, most likely, crossplay titles that means improvements in this department will be difficult.

 

[zzz_pt]

You're expecting a step change in the way game environments are made that isn't going to happen. It'll take time. This is part of the inertia problem.

PS5 games will not make full use of the ability to pull vast amounts of data continuously for a while either, for the same reason.

So in a way MS are being sensible. Once everyone starts to get to grips with what is possible, learns new tricks and can streamline production in a different way (the downside to having more detail is that you have to make it all and tie it all together), sure, then the older / lesser consoles will prove troublesome in trying to adapt a vision, so to speak.

It won't be until developers are really pushing up against the limits of the new hardware that we will actually see any real innovation anyway. That's just how people work: constraint drives originality.

I'm not saying world design will immediatley change so that it reaches the limits of the hardware right away. But Sony will see gradual innovation from the get go (because first party AAA won't have to design with the PS4 in mind).

We'll only see what MS first party studios can do with XBSX exclusives 2 to 3 years down the line.

 

[Jtheripper]

It seems the RT is a part of each cu of the rdna2 gpu from what i learned. So it's a reserved specialized part for rt and doesn't use the remaining part of each cu for this directly. But the more standard remaining part of each cu still has to process and render this rt info it gets from the rt part, so the more you use for rt the less you have of the rest of the gpu speed and/or cpu.
So there wil still be sacrifices if using more rt, either less detail, effects, res or fps.
But amd says they added a variable rate shading which helps reduce the sacrifices.

We'll see i guess

 

[beyond72]

In case of Forza, better CPU could afford more resources for AI simulation physics. Problem is, FM8 and FH5 will be crossgen and, most likely, crossplay titles that means improvements in this department will be difficult.

I don't know, a stripped down FH2 came out for the xbox 360, which didn't effect the Xbox one version.
So I have a feeling crossplay titles will hurt those 'left behind' if anything. Maybe they'll get another team to work on those or just throw them out for last gen like Project Cars 2 or Dirt Rally 2.0, which didn't have a negative effect on the pro or X verisons. I'm still curious how much racing games AI can change with these new consoles though.

 

[redhed17]

I'm still curious how much racing games AI can change with these new consoles though.

With the move to more racing online, I don't think AI may be that much of a priority any of them, as it has not seemed to have improved in line with the increase in processing power as much as it should have up to this point imho.

They all make money by people racing online in one way or another after all.

 

[Griffith500]

I'm not saying world design will immediatley change so that it reaches the limits of the hardware right away. But Sony will see gradual innovation from the get go (because first party AAA won't have to design with the PS4 in mind).

We'll only see what MS first party studios can do with XBSX exclusives 2 to 3 years down the line.

I think the argument is the same for both consoles: we'll see a few very high-quality "top-tier" games from the start, with a gradual improvement across the board as experience grows. That's on both platforms, just to reiterate.

I would fully expect MS to have something in place to make the multiple hardware targets easier to deal with for all developers, not just first party. They are the software specialists - and they showed it with the way they supported development on the 360, which was not even an "x86 PC" in principle, as all other XBox generations are.

Sony hopefully have learned their lessons on this front, but I'd wager cross-platform development will be much harder for anyone outside the Sony bubble. You could of course just tell the devs to "git gud".


So we really don't know what it means, in practice, to get the "best" from each console yet, and it's going to be quite exciting to see just where the mainstream will be very soon. It also means we are not likely to see the end of console exclusives, despite all the cross-platform talk.

 

[Terronium-12]

Since I'm a little bored (aren't we all?) I figured why not try and explain some stuff...that no one else is going to understand or care to remember.

If you have even a passing interest in any of this techno mumbo jumbo, you may have wondered "How are Teraflops calculated?" and maybe "Where are people getting the number of Stream Processors when neither company has explicitly revealed anything other than the number of Compute Units?"

Let's start with the latter question since it'll lead into answering the former. It's actually real simple how that's done. So RDNA uses an inner infrastructure called a Shader Engine, and each engine (up to 8 of them) has multiple Compute Unit clusters (also up to 8). With me so far? So let's illustrate that using my super professional skills.

To make it crystal clear, I'm in no way claiming this to be accurate, just that it's what I know based on how RDNA works.

Xbox Series X layout would look something like this:

SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU

So, the Series X features 8 Shader Engines, each with 7 Compute Unit clusters (works with 7 SEs and 8 CU clusters as well, but I figured this was cleaner). What's 8 x 7? 56. But, wait, the Series X features 52 CUs and not 56! Ah, that's where disabling comes in. Disable four of the clusters (doesn't matter where for the sake of the diagram) and you end up with — you guessed — 52.

Which would now look like this:

SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU -CU - CU

Within each Compute Unit is up to 64 Stream Processors, and taking that into account we wind up with 3,136 SPs per the 7 full clusters (64 x 49) and 3,328 SPs in total when adding in the additional 192 SPs from the cut down eighth engine. With that in mind, take that 3,328 and multiply it by the GPU clock frequency, 1825 MHz in this case, and multiply that by 2 (since the GPU is doing both vertex and pixel shader operations per clock cycle) and you end up with the peak figure of 12.14 TFLOPs.

The same holds true for the PlayStation 5, whose diagram would look something like this:

SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU

To shortcut the hell out of this: 6 SEs multiplied by 6 CUs comes out to 36 total CUs. Multiply that number by 64 SPs per, and you come out with 2,304 SPs in total. 2304 x 2230 x 2 is 10.3 TFLOPs (rounded up; the exact number is 10.27). I expect everyone that doesn't already have an interest in this to have glossy eyes and drool coming out of the mouths.

 

[aguia]

Play Gran Turismo Sport on PS5 until Gran Turismo 7 comes out.

 

[inCloud]

I don't know, a stripped down FH2 came out for the xbox 360, which didn't effect the Xbox one version.
So I have a feeling crossplay titles will hurt those 'left behind' if anything. Maybe they'll get another team to work on those or just throw them out for last gen like Project Cars 2 or Dirt Rally 2.0, which didn't have a negative effect on the pro or X verisons. I'm still curious how much racing games AI can change with these new consoles though.

There isnt any reason to do two versions, both games isnt struggle all that much from being part of XboxOne lineup.

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Since I'm a little bored (aren't we all?) I figured why not try and explain some stuff...that no one else is going to understand or care to remember.

If you have even a passing interest in any of this techno mumbo jumbo, you may have wondered "How are Teraflops calculated?" and maybe "Where are people getting the number of Stream Processors when neither company has explicitly revealed anything other than the number of Compute Units?"

Let's start with the latter question since it'll lead into answering the former. It's actually real simple how that's done. So RDNA uses an inner infrastructure called a Shader Engine, and each engine (up to 8 of them) has multiple Compute Unit clusters (also up to 8). With me so far? So let's illustrate that using my super professional skills.

To make it crystal clear, I'm in no way claiming this to be accurate, just that it's what I know based on how RDNA works.

Xbox Series X layout would look something like this:

SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU

So, the Series X features 8 Shader Engines, each with 7 Compute Unit clusters (works with 7 SEs and 8 CU clusters as well, but I figured this was cleaner). What's 8 x 7? 56. But, wait, the Series X features 52 CUs and not 56! Ah, that's where disabling comes in. Disable four of the clusters (doesn't matter where for the sake of the diagram) and you end up with — you guessed — 52.

Which would now look like this:

SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU -CU - CU

Within each Compute Unit is up to 64 Stream Processors, and taking that into account we wind up with 3,136 SPs per the 7 full clusters (64 x 49) and 3,328 SPs in total when adding in the additional 192 SPs from the cut down eighth engine. With that in mind, take that 3,328 and multiply it by the GPU clock frequency, 1825 MHz in this case, and multiply that by 2 (since the GPU is doing both vertex and pixel shader operations per clock cycle) and you end up with the peak figure of 12.14 TFLOPs.

The same holds true for the PlayStation 5, whose diagram would look something like this:

SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU
SE > CU - CU - CU - CU - CU - CU

To shortcut the hell out of this: 6 SEs multiplied by 6 CUs comes out to 36 total CUs. Multiply that number by 64 SPs per, and you come out with 2,304 SPs in total. 2304 x 2230 x 2 is 10.3 TFLOPs (rounded up; the exact number is 10.27). I expect everyone that doesn't already have an interest in this to have glossy eyes and drool coming out of the mouths.

This is incorrect AFAIK, getting late and also bored so thought I'd give an answer on how I think it works hoping this will bore me further off to sleep. (Sorry if I made any mistakes below)

RDNA has dual compute units which in total have four SIMDs which each include 32 ALUs. So the stream processor count for a dual compute unit is 4*32 = 128.

PS5 GPU has 36 active CUs = 18 dual compute units. 18 dual CUs * 128 stream processors = 2304 stream processors (Shader count). Each shader can do two instructions each clock cycle (One multiply, one accumulation). GPU Clock speed = 2.23GHz
So teraflop of an RDNA GPU can be calculated like this: (Shader count * instruction count per clock * clock speed in GHz) / 1000 (This is to convert from giga to tera)
(2304 * 2 * 2.23)/1000 = 10.27584 teraflops

Easier / cheating way is by just treating each RDNA CU having two SIMDs so in total having 64 shaders which is how I do it since GCN as it works out same amount for both as that had four SIMD units per CU but each only had 16 ALUs). This works out (36 (CU count) * 64 * 2 * 2.23 (GHz Clock Speed))/1000. Only need to change CU count and clock speed for AMD's GCN and RDNA GPUs to get accurate teraflop amount.

If PS5 power throttles due to too heavy utilisation of CPU and GPU, it could reduce clocks by about 2% reducing teraflop count to about 10.07 teraflops. CPU clock speed could also go down to about 3.4GHz to save in total about 10% power consumption and stay in power limits of console design.

If RDNA 2 based GPU is like RDNA, then PS5 likely consists of two shader engines which each include two shader arrays which the dual compute units reside in (Five dual compute units per array). However two dual compute units are disabled to help yields giving 36 CU count so makeup of PS5 GPU might be a shader engine with two shader arrays consisting of five dual compute units each and another shader engine with two shader arrays consisting of four dual compute units each.

 

[Terronium-12]

four SIMDs which each include 32 ALUs

I'm just going to stop you right there.

The point of mine was a simple understanding, not to hold a lecture that explains seventeen other things along the way. Other than a handful of people, no one is going to follow along with what an Arithmetic Logic Unit is/does, how Infinity Fabric ties everything together, or the four included render back ends — I've probably bored someone half to death saying what little I have already.

 

[Griffith500]

Only boring people get bored

 

[GT6mebe]

Will GT (or Forza) really be able to improve the AI much with this next tech. Or will we be stuck with 'chasing the rabbit' forever?
As a long time gamer, I know the AI in games always needs some kind of advantage over the player to be competitive, but even just more
variables would be nice, like any car in the pack is capable of finishing first or last, or is that a pipe dream?

A lot of AI in game is less limited by tech and more limited by game design. A lot of times, the majority of players do not like really competent AI. GT's AI problem seems to be it being way too timid, from how it drives to how it treats other agents.

There will be big improvements for GT next gen. Tempest 3D audio, ray tracing lighting and effects, ultra fast SSD to allow better LOD loading (a larger jump in detailed circuits and backgrounds then prior gens), more physics calculations that can be operated at smaller time steps, maybe use Machine Learning to affect AI and so on.

 

[SimTourist]

The only real concern we should have is how much longer game development will take, powerful hardware is nice and exciting, but pushing for even higher production values will require even bigger teams and more time, for instance from 2006-2013 Rockstar has released 7 games for PS360, and I'm not even counting the games made for portable platforms and expansions made during this time, from 2013-2020 they've released just 1 game - RDR 2. I think the industry is running head first into a wall where AAA development becomes unsustainable despite the straightforward hardware and much better tools than in the past. I much preferred the variety and breadth of games produced in the PS2 days, the issues started to appeard during 7th gen and they're getting worse as expections keep growing. I wouldn't be surprised if we see some games take 10 years to develop even with smooth production and experienced teams just because of the amount of high fidelity assets required.

 

[inCloud]

The only real concern we should have is how much longer game development will take, powerful hardware is nice and exciting, but pushing for even higher production values will require even bigger teams and more time, for instance from 2006-2013 Rockstar has released 7 games for PS360, and I'm not even counting the games made for portable platforms and expansions made during this time, from 2013-2020 they've released just 1 game - RDR 2. I think the industry is running head first into a wall where AAA development becomes unsustainable despite the straightforward hardware and much better tools than in the past. I much preferred the variety and breadth of games produced in the PS2 days, the issues started to appeard during 7th gen and they're getting worse as expections keep growing. I wouldn't be surprised if we see some games take 10 years to develop even with smooth production and experienced teams just because of the amount of high fidelity assets required.

They scrapping game worlds that costs millions to build every 2-3 years, sure this would cost alot. Industry is inefficient, thats why R* making one game this gen.

First of all, titles like Forza will go game as a service model.

Next step is asset production with modern Ai tools.

 

[SimTourist]

Next step is asset production with modern Ai tools.

That's what I've been thinking lately - AI assisted development, but so far I haven't seen much talk about from developers, doesn't seem like the concept is doable now. There's only so much meat you can throw in the grinder, R* had more than 1000 workers on RDR2, back in the PS2 days they had a fraction of that and made all sorts of games quickly. Now GTA has skipped a whole generation and is not even on the horizon, given that they usually announce them at least a couple years before release, even if they show it now, it's a 2022 game at the earliest, but so far we got nothing, it could very well be a 10+ years long project.

 

[GT6mebe]

The only real concern we should have is how much longer game development will take, powerful hardware is nice and exciting, but pushing for even higher production values will require even bigger teams and more time, for instance from 2006-2013 Rockstar has released 7 games for PS360, and I'm not even counting the games made for portable platforms and expansions made during this time, from 2013-2020 they've released just 1 game - RDR 2. I think the industry is running head first into a wall where AAA development becomes unsustainable despite the straightforward hardware and much better tools than in the past. I much preferred the variety and breadth of games produced in the PS2 days, the issues started to appeard during 7th gen and they're getting worse as expections keep growing. I wouldn't be surprised if we see some games take 10 years to develop even with smooth production and experienced teams just because of the amount of high fidelity assets required.

This is a natural evolution though. Games nowadays are run in higher resolutions, larger worlds, more detailed worlds, so more code and art assets need to be created. Game dev was always going to increase if you want more larger, more detailed, more complex animations, graphics, level design, AI etc.

But you are confusing this dev time with other factors. For instance, Rockstar released no new GTA because GTAV continued to sell 10 million or so every year. This is a business decision. We also have cases where teams are working on engines hence dev time is prolonged, or have games drastically retooled which again prolongs dev time yet neither are a consequence of stronger hardware. These are design decisions.

Cerny already said that the PS4 has 1-2 month to triangle (create mesh), similar to PS1 and the PS5 will be similar. In general, the time to make games is leveling off. AAA games in PS3 took 2-4 years, PS4 took 3-4 years, PS5 should be the same. Death Stranding took 3 years to create a studio and make a game.

The reason there is less variety is because games have far higher standards these days in every aspect. From animations, to graphics, to AI, to multiplayer. This requires more man power and hence is a larger cost, meaning studios are less likely to make risky games.

That's what I've been thinking lately - AI assisted development, but so far I haven't seen much talk about from developers, doesn't seem like the concept is doable now. There's only so much meat you can throw in the grinder, R* had more than 1000 workers on RDR2, back in the PS2 days they had a fraction of that and made all sorts of games quickly. Now GTA has skipped a whole generation and is not even on the horizon, given that they usually announce them at least a couple years before release, even if they show it now, it's a 2022 game at the earliest, but so far we got nothing, it could very well be a 10+ years long project.

Game development is an extension of game design philosophy and art. AI will not help in the creative decisions. It will help in the technical aspects like procedural generation (already being used), or upscaling resolutions.

RDR2 has more detail and world complexity than probably all their PS2 games combined though. You're simply looking at the number of games, instead of looking at how much work each game is.

 

[SimTourist]

RDR2 has more detail and world complexity than probably all their PS2 games combined though. You're simply looking at the number of games, instead of looking at how much work each game is.

I agree that the amount of work put into RDR2 is far beyond their previous work, it's a masterpiece by all accounts. But if I don't like cowboys I'm **** out of luck. In the PS2 days you would have several GTA games set in different time periods, racing game with Midnight Club, some games for NDS and PSP, Manhunt, Bully, Max Payne and others. The simpler graphics allowed a diversity in games produced in a small window of time. You know, me and you are not getting younger, so waiting 10 years for a single game is a bit sad, and it may not be the one I'm interested in. By the time next GTA comes out I will be pushing 30, and then the next one I might be over 40 years old. Yeah these games are impressive displays of modern tech and ambition, but the trade off is too much for me. It would be fine if others were picking up the slack, but they don't, there's nothing like Bully or Midnight Club or Manhunt on the market, and nobody else has Dan Houser as a writer. I always enjoyed his work but now he's retired, so who knows if next GTA will even have his style of writing and humour.

 

[GT6mebe]

I agree that the amount of work put into RDR2 is far beyond their previous work, it's a masterpiece by all accounts. But if I don't like cowboys I'm **** out of luck. In the PS2 days you would have several GTA games set in different time periods, racing game with Midnight Club, some games for NDS and PSP, Manhunt, Bully, Max Payne and others. The simpler graphics allowed a diversity in games produced in a small window of time. You know, me and you are not getting younger, so waiting 10 years for a single game is a bit sad, and it may not be the one I'm interested in. By the time next GTA comes out I will be pushing 30, and then the next one I might be over 40 years old. Yeah these games are impressive displays of modern tech and ambition, but the trade off is too much for me. It would be fine if others were picking up the slack, but they don't, there's nothing like Bully or Midnight Club or Manhunt on the market, and nobody else has Dan Houser as a writer. I always enjoyed his work but now he's retired, so who knows if next GTA will even have his style of writing and humour.

Like I said, GTA was withheld because GTAV made so much money and continued selling. Your problems seem less about dev complexity and more about business.

The racing genre has tanked since the PS2 days. Iirc Max Payne 3 did not do too well. Its not just simpler graphics though: its simpler game design, simpler AI, simpler physics, simpler game systems etc

I do agree that the PS1 days were the peak for game creativity but there are many other reasons for that. The first step in 3D graphics attracted a lot of outside talent to try their shot at it. Far lower standards relative to the top games compared to nowadays. Far smaller and shorter games. Consumer standards have changed.

On the plus side the game industry is far more refined (less shovelware) and there is a thriving indie scene.

 

[SimTourist]

On the plus side the game industry is far more refined (less shovelware) and there is a thriving indie scene.

Not sure about refined, more corporate and safe than ever for sure. But even with 10 year dev cycles games are shipping with big day 1 patches, bugs and glitches, incomplete content and DLC planned for years in advance. Back before solid online connectivity you had to ship a finished game, polished to absolute perfection because you had no other option, in case of a particularly terrible bug you'd have to recall the entire stock and reprint the game. These days most games if not all games have less polish because of that ability to update later.
In regards to GTA maybe there is an incentive to continue making money off GTA 5, but the creative people at the studio, the artists and programmer aren't gonna see a cent of that and they wanna work on something new, with the kind of money and talent R* is housing they probably have way more ideas than to continue making GTA style games, one with cars and one with horses. And I wanna see those fresh ideas.
The reality is that there are less high quality games than before, people keep going on about PS4 exclusive but in reality there are maybe 10-15 worthy exclusives in total, you can finish all of them in a month or two, on PS3 you had entire trilogies completed during the generation, this time NaughtyDog released a slapped together rushed Uncharted 4, an expansion and TLOU2 at the very end of PS4's life, they didn't even get to stretch their legs and refine their work or introduce a new franchise. Just pathetic. And after they're done with TLOU2 it will be another 3-4 years if not more before we see their PS5 project, by that time the generation will be halfway done already.

 

[Jay84]

Better not be like 360 where amazing titles like ALL the 007`s were incompatible.

 

[rhalgr]

Finally all the dumb rumours and insiders will be put to bed, the speculation has become ridiculous in the last few months.

The speculation got more crazy xD

I think tracks details will be a complete revolution. No more Sainte Croix track (emptiness and ugly textures) .

Going from HDD speed to SSD should be like Christmas for racing devs. Games will blow us away.

Also everyone, don't immediately discount it based on TFlops vs Xbox. All the optimizations in the surrounding hardware, plus all the coprocessors, may actually make it faster in practice than the xbox

Nope, the xbox has dedicated hardware for audio & decompression, aswell.

It'll be a 1TB SSD, but after over provisioning, system requirements, and other stuff that's needed that's what'll be available for the end user - or at least that's my guess

I think the SSD itself is 825 and it'll be less for the end user. Such a fast SSD is expensive.

Sure, but the point is that systems usually aren't actually capable of running at their to speed all the time, as they are bottlenecked by the surrounding hardware. Sony seems to have really focused on removing those bottlenecks, so they may be able to run at their peak performance for a higher percentage of time

MS already stated Xbox Series X doesn't have variable clockspeeds. While the PS5 has them.

Video of Series X showing a side by side comparison of State fo Decay loading

I would bet my house that the PS5 would leave Series X in the dust with that.

The State of Decay Demo isn't using any of the benefits of the Velocity engine. It's just the Xbox One game running on the Series X.

What makes me worry a little too is the possibly more specialized design, especially audio, means it will be taken advantage of if the devs put alot of effort into it. Where as the series x could just run more standard coding with a little more grunt.

Don't worry. Devs will use them imo, because XSX supports RT Audio, 3D audio and their own engine aswell. Ninja Theory is very excited about it. Obviously their audio engine isn't Sony tempest engine, but both are pushing audio & habe dedicated hw for it. imo third party devs will take advantage of them.

That dedicated 3D audio processor is intriguing. It'll basically free up (half) a CPU core for other stuff, including graphics. At some point, excess GPU horsepower isn't any benefit if you can't throw enough of anything interesting at it to process, so having some CPU power in hand might be a real advantage

Both consoles have dedicated hardware for sound and so on to minimise or remove bottlenecks all together.

Only first party studios will be able to explore the faster hardware of the PS5, since 3rd parties have to develop and design for multiple platforms and that means bottlenecks in world building, as Cerny illustrated yesterday (with a level from an old game).

His example was an HDD game. Although PS5 has an fairly big advantage in bandwidth, the Xbox SSD is an huge jump from HDD, too. Game design will chance on both consoles. With PS5 probably offering a bit more. I could see teleportation working in PS5, but not without drawbacks on Series X.

it's I/O unit has multiple Zen 2 processors

This is false. The PS5 & Series X don't have multiple Zen 2 cores for I/O. What they said is their dedicated hardware frees up CPU cores worth of multiple ZEN 2 cores. But there aren't hidden Zen cores... The new consoles have 8. Not more, not less.

I'm worried about titles that have been removed from PSN like Driveclub though - will I still be able to redownload it and all the DLCs in the future?

Should be fine, if you bought the game already.

We'll only see what MS first party studios can do with XBSX exclusives 2 to 3 years down the line

This interview was made in 2019 and published in 2020. Him saying 1-2 years of cross gen games means holiday 2021 should end the period.

Very excited for next gen and how similar, despite the difference in SSD speeds, both companies want to push gaming forward. Especially the SSD should be an huge relief for racing game devs. Can't wait to see racing games on these consoles. We are in for an incredible gen imo. Hopefully with dynamic times of day and weather in GT again

 

[AlanH49]

Moore’s Law is Dead: PS5 Analysis

 

[Tired Tyres]

This is false. The PS5 & Series X don't have multiple Zen 2 cores for I/O. What they said is their dedicated hardware frees up CPU cores worth of multiple ZEN 2 cores. But there aren't hidden Zen cores... The new consoles have 8. Not more, not less.

They have AMD CU's custom designed for specific purposes to relieve the main CPU from carrying out those purposes.

 

[zzz_pt]

His example was an HDD game. Although PS5 has an fairly big advantage in bandwidth, the Xbox SSD is an huge jump from HDD, too. Game design will chance on both consoles. With PS5 probably offering a bit more. I could see teleportation working in PS5, but not without drawbacks on Series X.

Yes, the XBSX SSD is also pretty fast (even if 50% slower than the PS5's). My point is that, because devs have to develop for the base Xbox during the first 2/3 years, you won't see anything (game and level design related, not loading times of performance) taking advantage of the SSD on XBSX as you'll see on the PS5 much sooner.

 

[rhalgr]

Remember that Spiderman comparison between PS4 Pro and PS5?

This was fast travel in the Spiderman demo and State of decay starting the game. If we want to see the difference in load times, we should wait for an third party game. Otherwise it's not a fair comparison. Obviously PS5 should be much faster there. But not 0,8 vs 10 seconds faster.

 

[ImaRobot]

My point is that, because devs have to develop for the base Xbox during the first 2/3 years, you won't see anything (game and level design related, not loading times of performance) taking advantage of the SSD on XBSX as you'll see on the PS5 much sooner.

Why's that? Developers are already seem used to building on 2+ different pieces of hardware, especially this late in the console' life span - First party and Third party alike. What would make it so drastically different?

 

[zzz_pt]

Why's that? Developers are already seem used to building on 2+ different pieces of hardware, especially this late in the console' life span - First party and Third party alike. What would make it so drastically different?

I'm focusing only on 1st party studios, because those are the ones that can better take advantage of a particular system and innovate.

Sony's 1st party studios, especially AAA, are probably already designing PS5 exclusives that fully take advantage of the console's hardware.

MS's 1st parties are developing games that have to run on the base Xbox.

3rd parties are not part of the conversation in this regard because they will always have to develop around the weaker system, be it PS4, Xbox, switch, etc.

On top of that, if MS don't release XBSX console exclusives, there's no point in buying it if you have a decent PC in 2 or 3 years from now (which will be much cheaper).

 

[rhalgr]

On top of that, if MS don't release XBSX console exclusives, there's no point in buying it if you have a decent PC in 2 or 3 years from now (which will be much cheaper).

Agree with your argument about First Party and cross gen titles. But i disagree with this, because building an PC for 500$ (rumoured Xbox price) with the same performance will be impossible in 2020 and even looking at 2021/22 i don't think an pc stronger than an series x will be "much cheaper" than the price of the Xbox Series X.

I don't understand why you keep saying 2-3 years cross gen period. The interview was published in 2020 and done at XO19 in 2019. So 2-3 years would be 2021-2022. Which is still false, because he talked about 1-2 years iirc. => 2020-2021