The PS5 and Xbox 2 thread - it's happening

[Makabb]

I just don't see a huge market for hard-core niche gamers, who want the latest tech, but don't want to buy a PC. I don't have the numbers and they do of course, but I don't see how the PS4 Pro or the Xbox One X are relevant on the market. Most promotions are restricted to the standard versions of the console. Sony puts even more effort into marketing the VR headset.

I love how effortless the PS4 is compared to my PC (push the button on the controller and it turns on) but I don't care that much about the latest and greatest visuals and features.

They are correct however, i'm getting a PS5 and not upgrading the PC, if I would want to upgrade my PC to PS5 standards I would have to pay 1500$.

Strategy games like paradox titles or other that release on PC do not require top end hardware anyway.

 

[Zarniwoop]

A $600 console will perform the same as a $1500 PC. Just like it has done every single time, remember?

-Makkkabb, the Founding Father of Fake News.

 

[Makabb]

A $600 console will perform the same as a $1500 PC. Just like it has done every single time, remember?

-Makkkabb, the Founding Father of Fake News.

This time it will, moores law.

 

[vortex]

https://www.pcgamesn.com/game-console-trump-tariff

We’ve already seen the Trump tariffs affect the PC hardware market, and the console manufacturers argue that the effects on the game industry would be even greater here. “Over 96% of video game consoles imported into the United States were made in China,” and “it would cause significant supply chain disruption to shift sourcing entirely to the United States or a third country, and it would increase costs – even beyond the cost of the proposed tariffs – on products that are already manufactured under tight margin conditions.”

 

[Zarniwoop]

A $600 console will perform the same as a $1500 PC. Just like it has done every single time, remember?

-Makkkabb, the Founding Father of Fake News.

This time it will, moores law.

Moore's Law applies to consoles only now? And not computers?

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Zarniwoop]

Rise of the Xbox: Civil War

 

[Makabb]

A $600 console will perform the same as a $1500 PC. Just like it has done every single time, remember?

-Makkkabb, the Founding Father of Fake News.

This time it will, moores law.

Moore's Law applies to consoles only now? And not computers?

to all hardware, consoles have catched up to PC's cpus, Ghz speed stagnated around 4ghz mark, so a ps5 with a 3,2 -3,4 ghz cpu will be equivalent to a top end PC. a 600 mhz difference at over 3ghz is only a few fps difference, which is negligible.

The only thing that will separate still PC and console in 5 years time will be GPU and RAM, but this will also come to a stop because over 8k human eye can't discerne difference. So in about 10 years PS6 might be the last console as we know that will be a native 8k console, after that phones will be as powerfull as top end pcs, PCs and console will die as we know it and everyone will be everything on their phone, or there will be some new 'small pc's' that will be the size of nitendo switch that you will be doing everything on it, but that is in around 20-30 years from now.

 

[Makabb]

'
So benchmarks for new 7nm Ryzen 3000 and 7nm Navi 5700 came today. Cerny already confirmed we're gonna have 8 core Ryzen 7nm in PS5.
Ryzen 3700x 8 core CPU is comparable to powerful I9 9900k while it draws only 65w.Its probably gonna be downlocked a bit but its still very powerful.
Navi 5700 is even better than 12TF Vega.
SSD ultra fast PCI 4 fastest than everything on PC currently
3DAudio
Ray Tracing
16-24gb GDDR6
Its gonna be the biggest leap ever between console generation even bigger than PS2 to PS3. Although PS3 was powerful,developers often criticise it beacuse it was so hard to code for it and lot of its potential went unused. Going from tablet Jaguar 1.6ghz CPU in PS4 to i9 9900k equavilent in PS5 is biggest improvement in CPU ever between console generation and since its x86 is developers know how to use its potential 100%. I mean looks what they managed to do with crappy Jaguar CPU.Now imagine 4-5x more powerful CPU.
Navi GPU and new RDNA architecture is developed entirely and primary for gaming,it has 40% more efficient Teraflops. So basically 7.5TF Navi RDNA GPU is slightly better than 12TF Vega GCN. They will customized it even more until next year and probably put some secret sauce and new things from Navi 2.0 next year.
I bet its gonna be 499$ with maybe even NO loss per console. People need to remember its not like they buy CPU/GPU/SSD/RAM in store.They get great deal with AMD with 80+ million chips ordered and buy just a chip.Prices of new AMD GPU/CPU hardware aren't that much higher now what they were in 2012/2013 but the thing is that new hardware is so much more powerful. Good job for AMD for a great comeback.'

I knew it, the leap will be even greater than ps2 to ps3, man, PC's will be choking on ps5 ports for first few years unless you have a 1500$ new PC.

That's probably the biggest and the last such a big leap in history of consoles and hardware in general imo, the next one will not be as big, what a time to be alive !

Born to late to explore the world, born to early to explore the universe, born in right time for biggest leap in gaming history.

 

[DalekFlay]

Even the 5700XT is beaten in most games by a $400 nVidia card, and I doubt the PS5 has a straight equivalent in it that matches the 5700XT anyway. Not at normal console prices, surely, which is what you're banking your whole theory on. Thinking a $400-500 console will beat a high-end gaming PC at any time, even 2020 is silly in the extreme. If they go full crazy and sell an $800 console then they're killing their own market, and you might as well upgrade your PC anyway.

Also this "war" people insist on having every time new consoles come out is silly from the start anyway. I'm a PC gamer, which means I upgrade my PC. There is no console deal that exists which would make me switch everything over to consoles, deal with all their other faults from controller limitations to closed systems and 30fps caps, and abandon my extensive and largely unplayed PC library. It's a silly notion from the get-go. Even if PCs are "behind" for a year or so who really cares? I certainly don't care enough to stop being a PC gamer after 30 years.

 

[unfairlight]

Even the 5700XT is beaten in most games by a $400 nVidia card,

Fake news. 5700XT performs at par or better than Nvidia competition at the same or lower price.

 

[DalekFlay]

Even the 5700XT is beaten in most games by a $400 nVidia card,

Fake news. 5700XT performs at par or better than Nvidia competition at the same or lower price.

I just spent quite a bit of time reading today's new reviews and the 2060 Super beats it in several games, and the 2070 basic (which is now discounted to just over $400 most places) beats it in pretty much everything except highly AMD focused titles like Battlefield. With the 2060 and 2070 having hardware ray tracing I can't imagine why anyone in their right mind would choose the 5700. I don't want (or care) to get into nVidia and AMD battles though, my point is that I doubt the PS5 has that strong a card in it and yet it's being beaten at a "mid-range" price today.

 

[RNGsus]

https://www.pcgamesn.com/game-console-trump-tariff

We’ve already seen the Trump tariffs affect the PC hardware market, and the console manufacturers argue that the effects on the game industry would be even greater here. “Over 96% of video game consoles imported into the United States were made in China,” and “it would cause significant supply chain disruption to shift sourcing entirely to the United States or a third country, and it would increase costs – even beyond the cost of the proposed tariffs – on products that are already manufactured under tight margin conditions.”

 

[unfairlight]

Not sure what reviews you are reading, ones from Nvidia.com?
The 5700 performs equal, better or only marginally worse compared to the 2060 Super from most of what I saw while costing $50 less, 5700xt was also better, equal or marginally worse than the 2070 Super which is $100 more.
Sure there are titles where AMD performs well, just as there are Gameworks titles that will inevitably give Nvidia the lead, but overall is all that matters.
Nvidia has very mature drivers for the RTX series at this point as well, which gives them a lead on the software side. I'd like to see it tested again in 6 months to see if the ~4 frame gap it has in some benchmarks will be closed.

and the 2070 basic (which is now discounted to just over $400 most places)

Clearing stock. They'll run out soon, they were discontinued.

With the 2060 and 2070 having hardware ray tracing

Because zero fucking games have ray tracing. Tell me 5 off the top of your head, I can only recall Battlefield 5 and Metro Exodus, two very subpar games.

 

[Wunderbar]

I won't lie, I was shocked to find that currently mobile gaming has a greater share of the gaming market than both pc and consoles.

The top played games barely qualify as games. They are just time wasters.

Video games are time wasters

so are books, movies, hobbies, exercises, work, life.

 

[DalekFlay]

Not sure what reviews you are reading, ones from Nvidia.com?
The 5700 performs equal, better or only marginally worse compared to the 2060 Super from most of what I saw while costing $50 less, 5700xt was also better, equal or marginally worse than the 2070 Super which is $100 more.
Sure there are titles where AMD performs well, just as there are Gameworks titles that will inevitably give Nvidia the lead, but overall is all that matters.
Nvidia has very mature drivers for the RTX series at this point as well, which gives them a lead on the software side. I'd like to see it tested again in 6 months to see if the ~4 frame gap it has in some benchmarks will be closed.

You seem hell-bent on an nVidia and AMD pissing match I don't care about at all or want anything to do with.The point is I doubt whatever is in the PS5 is better than the 5700xt, and nVidia has cards that beat it or are comparable around the same price point. So I don't see the PS5 making "keeping up" hard for a PC gamer in the raw GPU power front. To me, from everything I'm reading, the way the consoles are heading is dramatic increases in memory and memory speed, so we might need more dramatic improvements in those areas.

Because zero fucking games have ray tracing. Tell me 5 off the top of your head, I can only recall Battlefield 5 and Metro Exodus, two very subpar games.

Whether you care about those games or not it's obviously the future, and both console makers have focused on it in their presentations. Unless you're buying a $400 card without any care at all about future games, which seems like a silly thing to do, it's a factor. Considering the cards are at least comparable at the same price points, why the hell NOT get the one with hardware built-in to handle the ray tracing that will be more and more prominent in the next few years? It's especially compelling in Metro 3 where it changes the whole look of the game in a dramatic way. If "next-gen" games follow suit it's going to be something you want.

 

[Urthor]

The big question is where does the sudden removal of a Jaguar shaped grip around the balls of developers go to? Do they do what Assassin's creed did with the new console generation and have the same games but "with a shitload more NPCs onscreen in the crowds?" Or do we see other basic stuff like more 100 player multiplayer on console.

How will the consoles actually scale to 16 threads and use all that CPU overhead, because they got bugger all last time in terms of single thread and still barely utilised threads 5 6 7 and 8.

And how does that reflect in the games?

Navi and RDNA is an abject disappointment compared to NVIDIA and it'll be a minor leap forward, but I don't expect a leap forward in GPU logic workloads because Sony will *demand* 4k games to sell televisions.

The big change for the GPU will be in the VRAM, because suddenly that much extra VRAM means games can load a lot more into memory.

Ray tracing seems like an urban myth for consoles, like the idea there is hardware ray tracing for AMD is silly considering they have nothing atm, and to do hardware ray tracing you need *drivers* with API hooks to support the on die ASICs for it. And AMD can barely get their shit together with shaders, and I mean barely.

 

[DalekFlay]

They're rare but games that actually do use a lot of cores and threads exist. I'd guess they'll get a lot more common very quickly, which is why Intel seem to be shitting bricks considering Ryzen's great performance in those areas. As for what devs do with it, it'll be something flashy and obvious in gameplay footage, as it always is.

Agree on VRAM and memory in general. Agree 4k will be a big selling point like it was for the Xbox One X, but I bet a lot of it will still be dynamic or recontructed, and of course 30fps, because again... flashy graphics in commercials are more important, and always have been.

As for ray tracing, Microsoft specifically said hardware enhanced, so unless they're lying their asses off I'd guess AMD have something for the consoles they're just not putting out on PC yet. How much it ends up mattering is another question, but flashy shit like that sells upgrades.

 

[Makabb]

Even the 5700XT is beaten in most games by a $400 nVidia card, and I doubt the PS5 has a straight equivalent in it that matches the 5700XT anyway. Not at normal console prices, surely, which is what you're banking your whole theory on. Thinking a $400-500 console will beat a high-end gaming PC at any time, even 2020 is silly in the extreme. If they go full crazy and sell an $800 console then they're killing their own market, and you might as well upgrade your PC anyway.

Also this "war" people insist on having every time new consoles come out is silly from the start anyway. I'm a PC gamer, which means I upgrade my PC. There is no console deal that exists which would make me switch everything over to consoles, deal with all their other faults from controller limitations to closed systems and 30fps caps, and abandon my extensive and largely unplayed PC library. It's a silly notion from the get-go. Even if PCs are "behind" for a year or so who really cares? I certainly don't care enough to stop being a PC gamer after 30 years.

that's like, your opinion man, and not facts

 

[Makabb]

The big question is where does the sudden removal of a Jaguar shaped grip around the balls of developers go to? Do they do what Assassin's creed did with the new console generation and have the same games but "with a shitload more NPCs onscreen in the crowds?" Or do we see other basic stuff like more 100 player multiplayer on console.

The big question is how will the consoles actually scale to 16 threads and use all that CPU overhead, because they got bugger all last time in terms of single thread and still barely utilised threads 5 6 7 and 8.

And how does that reflect in the games?

Navi and RDNA is an abject disappointment compared to NVIDIA and it'll be a minor leap forward, but I don't expect a leap forward in GPU logic workloads because Sony will *demand* 4k games to sell televisions.

The big change for the GPU will be in the VRAM, because suddenly that much extra VRAM means games can load a lot more into memory.

Ray tracing seems like an urban myth for consoles, like the idea there is hardware ray tracing for AMD is silly considering they have nothing atm, and to do hardware ray tracing you need *drivers* with API hooks to support the on die ASICs for it. And AMD can barely get their shit together with shaders, and I mean barely.

we will see we will see, but it should get interesting

 

[Wirdschowerdn]

Console "wars" are a thing of the past, and last seen in the X360/PS3 era.

MS and Sony have ever since expressed their mutual admiration, MS doesn't even give a shit about world-wide XBO sale numbers, and now they're even teaming up for cloud gaming.

 

[Zarniwoop]

Even the 5700XT is beaten in most games by a $400 nVidia card,

Fake news. 5700XT performs at par or better than Nvidia competition at the same or lower price.

I just spent quite a bit of time reading today's new reviews and the 2060 Super beats it in several games, and the 2070 basic (which is now discounted to just over $400 most places) beats it in pretty much everything except highly AMD focused titles like Battlefield. With the 2060 and 2070 having hardware ray tracing I can't imagine why anyone in their right mind would choose the 5700. I don't want (or care) to get into nVidia and AMD battles though, my point is that I doubt the PS5 has that strong a card in it and yet it's being beaten at a "mid-range" price today.

The PS5 won't have anything near 5700XT levels.

Probably more on the level of a mobile GPU from 1 to 2 generations ago, with some cores disabled. Because that's what every single console has been since they started using PC hardware (since the first XBAWX).

Think a GTX 980M with about a third of it disabled.

Which would be a massive incline over the PS4 yes but not exactly earth-shattering.

 

[Zarniwoop]

Not sure what reviews you are reading, ones from Nvidia.com?
The 5700 performs equal, better or only marginally worse compared to the 2060 Super from most of what I saw while costing $50 less, 5700xt was also better, equal or marginally worse than the 2070 Super which is $100 more.
Sure there are titles where AMD performs well, just as there are Gameworks titles that will inevitably give Nvidia the lead, but overall is all that matters.
Nvidia has very mature drivers for the RTX series at this point as well, which gives them a lead on the software side. I'd like to see it tested again in 6 months to see if the ~4 frame gap it has in some benchmarks will be closed.

You seem hell-bent on an nVidia and AMD pissing match I don't care about at all or want anything to do with.The point is I doubt whatever is in the PS5 is better than the 5700xt, and nVidia has cards that beat it or are comparable around the same price point. So I don't see the PS5 making "keeping up" hard for a PC gamer in the raw GPU power front. To me, from everything I'm reading, the way the consoles are heading is dramatic increases in memory and memory speed, so we might need more dramatic improvements in those areas.

Because zero fucking games have ray tracing. Tell me 5 off the top of your head, I can only recall Battlefield 5 and Metro Exodus, two very subpar games.

Whether you care about those games or not it's obviously the future, and both console makers have focused on it in their presentations. Unless you're buying a $400 card without any care at all about future games, which seems like a silly thing to do, it's a factor. Considering the cards are at least comparable at the same price points, why the hell NOT get the one with hardware built-in to handle the ray tracing that will be more and more prominent in the next few years? It's especially compelling in Metro 3 where it changes the whole look of the game in a dramatic way. If "next-gen" games follow suit it's going to be something you want.

Those memory increases are to prepare them for the grim darkness of the very near future where everything will be streamed from somewhere in Silicon Valley, you have to pay daily/monthly just to have access, any independent thought and content will be verboten and you will be deplatformed from Assassins Creed 29 for calling someone by their real gender on Twitter.

 

[anvi]

Exclusive screenshot of the latest games console and gaming chair!

 

[Makabb]

Even the 5700XT is beaten in most games by a $400 nVidia card

Dude, you just made me check this, what were you smoking?

5700XT beats 2080 TI, benchamrks from guru3d

A ps5 will have beefed up 5700, so it will have a card more powerfull than a 1080 TI, closing in on 2080 TI.

For the price of 500$ of full package, a 2080 TI is alone 800$.


These are FACTS