Do you remember when the last generation started? Xbox One was bigger and less powerful. Yes it was and we all know it. It was a huge weak VCR player, right?
Now, there are happier news for Xbox fans so I thought it would be nice to share them in case somebody missed something.
These are Series X specifications and how they compare to PS5. Since the PS5 GPU clocks vary, both the official and leaked numbers are listed because the advertised 10.28 TFLOPS are said to go down to 9.2 sustained TFLOPS according to multiple sources and leaked data. PS5 uses a capped and common power pool so only when the CPU is not using much power the GPU clocks all the way up and vice versa. Series X does 12 TFLOPS under any circumstances and has two fixed CPU figures.
The vs. thing is just because of the lack of format and to pay tribute to Street Fighter and Killer Instinct.
SERIES X vs. PS5
CPU AMD Zen2 based 8-core vs. AMD Zen2 based 8-core
CPU clock speed 3.8 GHz (+9%) or 3.66 with simultaneous multithreading vs. up to 3.5 GHz (? with SMT)
I think its wrong to speculate on what the PS5 will offer on average or sustained - that is not confirmed at all so pure speculation. For all you know, the GPU could run at max clock speed for as long as needed - especially if there isn't much demand on the CPU at that point. For all we know, the GPU could run at what ever speed is necessary for the demand - at up to max speed.
As anyone knows, a GPU isn't maxing out at 100% utilisation for a LOT of the time and, at its most demanding scenes, only then may operate at 100% - much more demanding and you start to get dropped frames. Therefore, the GPU doesn't need to run at 'full' speed all the time. If the PS5 operates at what ever speed is needed, it may only peak at max speed to power through the issue and drop back down as soon as it can to reduce the amount of heat generated. Point is, It could average very different speeds depending on the game and what's going on - even be much lower in some games - the proverbial looking at the ground or sky which is not very demanding at all.
Until we know for sure what the CPU and GPU can run at - sustained if BOTH the CPU and GPU are being pushed to the maximum for a prolonged period of time, its wrong to speculate. It could, for example run at 3.3GHz & 2Ghz respectively and drop to 3.1Ghz and boost the GPU to 2.23 for example (or some other figures) - boosting one at the expense of the other. However, it could also be capable of running at 3.5GHz and 2.23GHz for a prolonged period because at other points, the CPU may drop to 2GHz and the GPU to 1.5GHz because the game isn't particularly demanding at that point and so not generating much heat at all. Most games don't demand 100% from both CPU and GPU simultaneously and for extended periods anyway and the PS5 could run long enough at maximum clock speeds for the vast majority of gaming situations. At the same point in the game, the Series X will still be running at 'full speed', still generating more heat. Point is we really don't know yet and probably won't know until someone finds a way to measure the CPU/GPU frequencies.
I know where the 9.2 comes from - that was what the PS5 was rumoured to run at before the GDC presentation, some leak - although other leaks had a figure of 11+ TFlops and another at 13+Tflops - and then everyone was surprised by Sony's revelation on the maximum speed they had achieved. To me, this seems like people are assuming that the 9.2TFlop leak was accurate and that must be what the PS5 runs at under normal load - but can boost up to 10.2 to power through a demanding sequence if it has to but at the same time would need to drop its CPU down to balance the power draw. Its not confirmed at all so I think its wrong to base any comparison at all on that figure.
Its clear the Series X has a faster CPU, a larger GPU with obviously many more shaders and some higher bandwidth RAM - as well as some slower RAM of which 2.5GB will be dedicated to the OS. Its clear that Sony has a much more impressive SSD with many more channels too. It appears though that the SSD isn't expandable as you have indicated - but that you will be able to replace the internal SSD with a larger SSD - like you can replace the HDD with a larger one on PS4/Pro. That's not 'expandable' in my opinion. You are not 'expanding' on the supplied but replacing it. The Series X is expandable because you can plug in an extra 1TB for example expanding on the 1TB internal supplied. Not only that, you can keep buying new Expansion cards and swap them out - essentially having unlimited Storage - even if you can only have up to 2TB's at most connected at any one time with as many Expansion cards as you want. You can have 16TB external HDD storage connected to an XB1 at any time but if you needed more, you could have another 8TB external HDD to swap over if you wanted to play something on that HDD. Unless the PS5 has an Expansion slot, you may find that you cannot have more than a certain amount due to size of the bay and the heat management of that internal SSD.
I think its OK to do a comparison of specs, but I think it should ONLY be specs that have been officially confirmed. There is still months to go and maybe we will get some confirmation of certain specs but right now, its better to only include the specs that are confirmed otherwise you end up looking like a fanboy and bragging about 'higher' numbers and then look like a fool if your information is wrong...
A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!
Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??
Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...
@BlueOcean It will be interesting to see whether the different choices made have a significant impact when it comes to resolution and frame rate for multi platform games.
@BAMozzy What a stupid comment, I stated both the advertised number by Sony (which is the peak) and the leaked clocks and made it very clear. I didn't write any subjective information and didn't make anything up. I'm free to speculate as much as I want but haven't done that yet. The information above is real and interesting and I'm not the only one that has posted it, if you don't like it sorry and look elsewhere. I love seeing all the numbers there and I'm not a fanboy, I got a PS4 before the Xbox One but if you want to think that I'm a fanboy because I gathered all the information together more power for you. I don't care.
@Ryall Yes. It will be interesting to see how that common pool of power for CPU and GPU that Sony explained will work. One thing is true, CPU and GPU won't be able to run at peak frequencies on PS5 and I wonder how developers will deal with variable figures when Series X has a more powerful CPU and a fixed and higher figure for TFLOPS because of the much higher number of CUs running at a lower and sustained frequency. As I said on the first post, PS5 has 10.28 TFLOPS only when running GPU at full speed. I can't wait for those Digital Foundry analyses and I can't wait to see how games will compare in terms of frame rate and resolution.
@BlueOcean It was NOT a stupid comment at all. There is absolutely no confirmed information about the way the PS5 operates. It is entirely possible that the PS5 GPU runs at a 'fixed' 2GHz under normal/balanced power load - hence giving a 9.2Tflop GPU and, if it suddenly becomes overwhelmed, it can 'boost' the GPU frequency to 2.23GHz to give it that 10.28Tflop maximum figure that Sony has confirmed - dropping the CPU frequency and thus its power draw to use that power to speed up the frequency of the GPU
However, it could also be completely variable and fluctuate based on load. If it only needs to run at 1.8GHz for example, it could drop to that, drop to 1.5GHz if that's all that's all that's demanded or run at 2.15GHz or 2.23GHz for as long as needed - sustain that clock frequency for some time - even if that means that the CPU, which also is variable runs at say 3.0GHz for that duration. If this is the case, then it could vary from 7Tflops to 10.28Tflops in that specific title. If a game is particularly GPU heavy, that could mean the PS5 is operating at an average much closer to the quoted 10.28Tflops - the average could very well depend on the game - whether one is particularly CPU heavy or particularly GPU heavy. It could be that the cap is more Power related and once it hits its maximum power draw, if the GPU needs more power, it then has to take from the CPU but in some parts of the game, the power could be lower because both the CPU and GPU are running at lower frequencies as the game doesn't need them to run faster - thus not generating as much heat and managing its Thermals better - another thing Sony said they had been working on to minimise console noise. If a Console is running - whether that's fixed frequencies or constant balanced power draw (whether is both CPU and GPU running at a fixed figure or one running faster and the other slower) - its generating heat. If you can reduce the power draw or frequencies when its not needed for example, you reduce the heat generation without affecting the game - no thermal throttling or unnecessary fan usage.
No where has it been stated that the PS5 will operate at a set figure until such a time as it requires a 'boost' to get through a particularly heavy GPU load. No where has it said that Sony has a couple of different states (ie a 3.3GHz CPU and 2GHz GPU, a 3.1GHz CPU and 2.23GHz GPU for heavy GPU areas or a 3.5GHz CPU and a 1.8GHz GPU for heavy CPU areas) to keep the power draw 'consistent'. It states that the CPU and GPU are 'variable' and that the max speed for both is 3.5GHz and 2.23GHz. Those are its 'capped' limits and we don't know exactly how those frequencies will vary, how the frequency of one affects the other, whether or not one could run at 'maximum' boost - even if the other cannot run at its maximum if the other is. I am NOT saying that the PS5 doesn't operate in this way at all, just saying that it has not been confirmed to be running in this way and therefore it cannot be assumed or rumours believed that it will run this way.
It is entirely possible that the PS5 could run at 3.3GHz and 2GHz (9.2Tflops) in a 'balanced' mode for example with the option to boost one or the other but have to drop the other to facilitate that boost. If that is the case, then it may also be able to run a sustained 2.23GHz but the CPU would have to be limited to just 3.1GHz - thus delivering the full 10.28TFlops throughout as a 'high GPU mode and have a High CPU mode that maybe runs the GPU at 1.8GHz - meaning that the GPU is then running at 8.3TFlops. In other words, it could sustain 10.28Tflops for the entire duration of a game - just as long a the CPU operates at a reduced frequency throughout too - but that still means the PS5 can sustain 10.28Tflops - albeit with a larger compromise to the CPU frequency.
Its true that there is quite a difference between the Series X and PS5 but we really do not know how the PS5 may operate. Its entirely possible that in some games, the PS5 could well be running consistently at 10.28TFlops - even if the CPU is limited to say 3.1GHz through out so its not operating at the 9.2TFlops you mention. If it has some 'fixed' rate modes - like balanced, high CPU and high GPU - the devs could pick high GPU for example because their game doesn't need the CPU frequency and would rather push the GPU to its maximum - using Dynamic resolution scaling to manage the more demanding scenes without dropping frame rates - the GPU still running at full capacity throughout. Essentially letting the Devs decide the way the PS5 runs - a bit like some devs can on the Switch. It could also very easily vary on demand so both the CPU and GPU could well be running at much lower frequency, for example if the game is paused and not requiring very much CPU/GPU processing power so the console drops the frequencies of both to stop or at least significantly reduce any heat. In some games that may well mean the Series X has a much bigger advantage in either CPU or GPU than Sony are willing to state. If the GPU is running at a sustained 10.28TF for example, it could mean Series X has a much bigger CPU advantage or if the PS5 is operating its CPU at its maximum frequency, the GPU difference could be doubled - from ~2TF to ~4TF difference.
You stated that the PS5 runs at 9.2Tflops sustained but if a game only demands upto 3.1GHz CPU for example, then theoretically, it could run at a sustained 10.28Tflops as its balanced in terms of power draw - something that Sony said the console will be governed by power draw. If the CPU isn't drawing the power, then it could run at a sustained 10.28Tflops to keep within the power draw limitation. The PS5 could have many different settings ranging from say 8.2Tflops to 10.28Tfops and sustain any of those figures as long as the CPU doesn't change its 'power' requirements to remain at an equilibrium. Of course if the game demands more from one or the other, it could switch to a different set of parameters to get through that section but based on actual information Sony themselves have stated, its entirely possible the PS5 could run at a sustained 10.28Tflops even if that means the CPU cannot exceed a significantly reduced clock frequency that would necessitate the GPU to drop in frequency.
All I was saying is that its not right to use rumours and quote those - make out that the PS5 can only sustain 9.2TF when it could maintain the full 10.28TF if a game doesn't require the CPU to operate above a certain frequency because the power draw would allow that scenario to occur. Even if a game does require the GPU to drop to allow the CPU to speed up for a moment or two, it could still average over 10TF throughout. Therefore stating the PS5 runs at a sustained 9.2TF could very well be wrong - even if it runs at 9.2TF in a 'balanced' mode.
It seemed to me that this was 'gloating', using rumour to make the Series X appear to be more superior, trying to indicate that the PS5 could not sustain more than 9.2Tflops for any length of time - which hasn't been stated anywhere officially. It does seem that power draw itself will govern the Max speeds that both can operate at and we don't know whether other aspects of the APU also factor in - if the Audio processor isn't being fully utilised for example, will that affect the max clock speeds - if its not drawing the maximum power, can that power be used to increase the CPU or GPU a bit? If the Processors for Asset management and decompression are not being fully utilised, can that help boost the CPU/GPU a bit? There are still to many unknowns to make a sweeping statement based on rumours...
A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!
Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??
Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...
@BAMozzy You manipulated the meaning of my post when all I did was to compile all the information that has been revealed this far.
It is a stupid comment(s) indeed because I never stated the leaked clocks as confirmed but as estimated and because I mentioned the peak and the estimated figures clearly.
It was Sony and not me who revealed the power pool for both CPU and GPU and that the console won't be able to sustain the peak clocks for both CPU and GPU. Sony, not me. Therefore, we have the peak numbers that use a common power pool (confirmed by Sony) AND we have estimated/leaked sustained figures. End of the discussion.
@BAMozzy You manipulated the meaning of my post when all I did was to compile all the information that has been revealed this far.
As the sustained clock speeds have NOT been revealed at all, and these are just rumoured as to how the PS5 may well operate, you have opted to use those figures in your post. I wouldn't have any issue with your opening paragraphs but then when you use these figures (whether you put 'estimated' or not) that is where I think you are wrong - at least until those figures are proven or confirmed as fact. Therefore you have not compile all the information that has been revealed this far as you state but also opted to include rumoured figures which could be entirely inaccurate.
Like I said, the PS5 could run at a Sustained 2.23GHz GPU or a Sustained 3.5GHz CPU (maybe not sustain BOTH) but it could still sustain those maximum Clock speeds indefinitely if required because its governed by Power Draw and if the CPU doesn't need to run as fast, it could use the power saved by running the CPU lower to run the GPU faster indefinitely. It may well run at the 'estimated' 2GHz and boost up if and when needed but it could also run at various other frequencies as it is 'variable'.
Nowhere has it been stated that the GPU can run at a sustained 'fixed' frequency but Sony have stated that the Frequency is variable. It may not run at any 'fixed' frequency at all and vary purely depending on load - meaning it could be constantly fluctuating up and down depending on the demand. It may not sustain a frequency at all because it is constantly changing its frequency to suit the demand - but the point I am making is that it could also run at a sustained 2.23GHz IF the CPU doesn't also need to run at a sustained 3.5GHz - for example, it could run at a sustained 2.23GHz if the CPU doesn't need to run at more than 3.1GHz - assuming that the power draw is only linked to CPU and GPU and not other parts of the APU - like Audio for example.
Its wrong to present 'estimated' and rumoured figures in my opinion. Its much better to leave those out of the comparison and certainly not include them in a 'head to head' chart as you have. The Sustained figures have no place in this at all at this point and, like I point out, the PS5 could sustain 2.23GHz and 10.28TF under certain conditions - like a CPU lighter game. Of course in that situation, you would expect the Xbox to have a bigger CPU advantage BUT it probably won't mean anything other than the fact that a lot of its processing power is not being used.
It is possible that the PS5 runs at a 'fixed' speed - like 2GHz unless it needs to 'boost' up for select moments but that has NOT been confirmed or proven. You can't say its 'estimated' either because its just based on a rumour. Its entirely possible that until Sony found out exactly how fast the Series X was going to be, they opted to use a locked 2Ghz giving that 9.2TF figure and where the rumour started BUT found a work around way to boost the GPU up to 2.23GHz by also making the CPU variable frequency, meaning that instead of giving a constant 9.2TF, it could give a constant 10.28 IF the CPU runs at a constant 'lower' clock frequency - maybe even give developers the choice to 'fix' clock speeds - pick a setting that suits their game - meaning that they could pick a high frequency GPU and low frequency CPU or vice versa. If that's the case, then you could find a high CPU demanding game resulting in a much bigger GPU gap. In other words, the Sustained frequency could vary depending on the game - whether its a GPU intensive or CPU intensive game.
Because its unknown, and because its totally possible that the PS5 can sustain more than 2GHz, its wrong to use that as a point of comparison. Its wrong to go by rumours and put 'estimated' as a way to use those rumours in the comparison. The Sustained figures shouldn't be used in this at all or at least the PS5's figures for these shouldn't be until its confirmed or proven by an independent and reliable source.
That is not 'silly' at all and I am NOT manipulating anything. You are the one who has opted to use rumour in your comparison and present the information as if its 'fact'. No where has it been stated or proven that the PS5 could not sustain 2.23GHz/10.28TF if needed. How long does a GPU need to run at its boosted speed to be considered able to Sustain that speed? Not all games will need to push the GPU consistently as the demands will vary constantly so as long as it can sustain the speed as long as necessary - like for a few seconds whilst a big explosion blows hundreds of particles in around for example, its sustained 'long' enough to handle that without having to drop before the demand on it does. The difference with the Xbox is that it may well have times when its only working at 80%, 20% of its power is not being utilised because the game isn't demanding and that same explosion pushes it up to 90% for a few seconds before dropping back down to 80%. On PS5, it could be running at 95% and that explosion would push it over 100% so boosts its speed for a few seconds to stop any bottleneck affecting frame rate and then drop back down after a few seconds - not because it can't sustain it for longer if needed, but more because it doesn't need to run at max speed and generate more heat that needs to be extracted.
There are several possibilities of how the PS5 could run - a set of 'fixed' frequencies the devs could pick - so they could pick to run the PS5 at a fixed 2.23GHz if they don't need the CPU frequency to be so high, It could run at a 'fixed' frequency (like 2GHz) and boost for a few seconds or so as and when required or it could be totally variable - change based on demand and capped at a max limit - which if the demand is equal on both CPU may well mean that the GPU is at 2GHz and say 3.3GHz CPU because the demand is such on both that it can't boost one without slowing down the other - although that would mean the GPU and CPU are constantly changing - not running at any 'sustained' frequency because the game is constantly changing. Which would really help with cooling as you don't need both CPU and GPU running flat out if you are playing a PS4 game but on Xbox, the CPU and GPU will be running flat out regardless.
I am not saying one method is better either, but merely pointing out that the PS5 has a different approach and that approach does mean that Sustained clock frequencies may not be relevant at all - because its constantly varying its Frequency based on demand. It also means that it could run at 'various' sustained frequencies as set by the developer - they could 'choose' to run the PS5 at a fixed frequency - like a Max GPU, low CPU (or vice versa) and thus sustain a 2.23GHz throughout, or it could well run at a 'fixed' frequency (like 2GHz) and boost up for 'short' moments to power through certain sequences before dropping back to a 'fixed' frequency. Until its known though, its wrong to go by rumour and use that as a point of reference for a comparison. Its better to leave the sustained figures out of the comparison.
@BAMozzy Firstly, don't quote part of my comment so you can manipulate them. Secondly, don't answer me anymore because the first post is clear enough for any sensible mind. Thank you.
@BlueOcean First - Don't tell me what I can or cannot do!! I am NOT manipulating anything, you are obviously not making a point clear enough that it leaves it open for interpretation if you feel that what you said is being manipulated. You clearly stated that you used the information that has been revealed so far but nowhere has it been revealed how the PS5 will operate or what it can or cannot run at sustained. Sony themselves have stated that the CPU and GPU are variable and that they are dependent more on power draw than thermals - meaning that they don't throttle back if the system gets hot but that also means that the GPU and CPU could run at max frequency sustained for as long as required - although chances are that both cannot run at full frequency together because the power draw would be too high for the system. Point is, you cannot categorically state that the PS5 will run at a 'sustained' 2GHz/9.2TF - regardless of whether you add 'estimated' after it or not. Its pure rumour and speculation by people who are guessing.
Secondly - the first post is clear enough if you want to come across as an Xbox Fanboy to make out the Series X has a much bigger advantage. Its true that it could have some 'bigger' advantages in some games in some areas. But if the PS5 can run at 10.28TF consistently - maybe because its not CPU intensive, that advantage is much smaller. Even if the Series X has a 'bigger' advantage on CPU, if the game isn't CPU intensive, that means a lot of the Series X processing power is not being used - the CPU is only working at say 60% whilst the PS5 would be working at 95% - both more than capable of completing the same tasks in time for each frame - no bottlenecks that impact the frame rate. Graphically, there maybe an advantage on Xbox due to the difference in available GPU processing power but it won't be as big a difference as say a 9.2TF vs 12.1TF.
The way you have presented this comparison, using pure speculation, It appears that the PS5 will be running at a 'fixed' frequency for the vast majority of the time - Say 3.3GHz CPU (although you haven't used rumours to indicate sustained CPU frequency) and 2ghz/9.2TF GPU and when needed, can boost the GPU up for a limited time (maybe at the expense of CPU frequency) before having to drop back down to 9.2TF - that it couldn't sustain 2.23GHz if the demands on the GPU were sustained for a longer period of time. This of course maybe the case BUT its not been revealed at all so I really don't understand why you feel you have to use Rumour/Speculation when it would make much more sense to leave that part of the comparison out - at least until FACTS are known. That is the 'sensible' course of action. You have put TBC elsewhere. You also talk about 'expandable' storage - yet all that is known is that the PS5 will have a replaceable internal HDD where as MS will offer a Slot to use external storage cards - I think external solutions that 'expand' on the supplied/internal storage count as 'expandable' where as being able to replace the internal (albeit with larger capacity) isn't 'expandable', but replaceable storage.
I am NOT trying to manipulate anything - just pointing out that your post is not an accurate comparison and compiled using a mix of fact, rumour and/or speculation. It would be much better to remove ANY unconfirmed points in the head to head comparison - even if you want to state those rumours/speculations in your opening paragraph for whatever reason. It doesn't come across as a 'fair' comparison because you are using unconfirmed speculation in what seems like a way to undermine what the PS5 could do to make the Series X seem even better - like a Fanboy would do. I have no doubt that the Xbox has a CPU/GPU advantage but to what extent - particularly in a 'sustained' section of gameplay, we don't yet know so its unfair to use rumour/speculation.
As I stated, maybe the PS5 can run at a Sustained 10.28TF - maybe for a 'high quality visual mode' and run at a much lower than 9.2TF for example, for a 'high frame rate' mode. Maybe opt to choose a high frequency GPU setting because the game isn't CPU intensive - after all a lot of games have managed to run well on incredibly mediocre CPU's for the last 7yrs and with tasks being offloaded to other areas - like Audio, decompression etc - the CPU may not need to run at even 3GHz so the PS5 uses that power saving to boost its GPU to max and runs at 10.28TF sustained throughout. IF it can do that, then it does make your post inaccurate and comes across as being somewhat 'fanboyish' to make the PS5 seem even less capable than it is. Any sensible person would NOT include speculation or rumours unless they have an agenda, an ulterior motive!!
A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!
Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??
Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...
@BlueOcean you haven’t understood how the PS5’s power management system works. @BAMozzy has given a clearly explained why Sony’s approach should give a better result for the same area of silicon and waste less power racing to Idle in less intensive areas. Of course the Xbox Series X has a far greater silicon area than the PS5.
The PS5 CPU also supports simultaneous multithreading and given the performance gains it offers I would expect all NextGen exclusive to make use of it. It doesn’t have the same increased clock rate for single threaded applications as the series X but that decision is only likely to improve the performance of last gen CPU limited games being played through backwards compatibility.
@Ryall If someone manipulated my post and quoted just a line it's not my fault. All I said was that the CPU and GPU won't be able to run at full speed at the same time because of the power pool, that's what Sony said. I understood that perfectly well.
GPU 52 CUs RDNA 2 GPU vs. 36 CUs RDNA 2 GPU
Peak GPU clock speed 1.825 GHz (capped) vs. up to 2.23 GHz (advertised)
Peak FP32 perf. 12.1472 TFLOPS (sustained) vs. up to 10.28 TFLOPS (advertised)
How do you think PS5 will be able to run 36CUs at 2.23 GHz and get the 10.28 TFLOPS figure consistently? That's impossible as posted by one hundred websites. It's not just me, you know.
@BlueOcean I would expect it to vary from game to game. For the next Final Fantasy I would be very surprised if it wasn’t at a consistent 10.28 TFLOPS figure with the CPU less utilised to allow for a focus on graphics. Whereas for next Just Cause there is a high chance of the 9.2 TFLOPS when lots of things start exploding. 9.2 TFLOPS isn’t quite the worst case but it certainly isn’t going to be an average. If we discount the fact that it doesn’t race to idle, I would expect it to be at of 10.28 TFLOPS most of the time.
That's NOT what I have stated at all and certainly haven't manipulated anything!! You are using RUMOUR as if its fact and even use rumours in your comparison - something you haven't used in you latest post and opted to use the FACTS that I have absolutely no problem at all with. Its the Sustained aspect that I have constantly stated should NOT be used because you have NO confirmed or accurate information.
How do you think PS5 will be able to run 36CUs at 2.23 GHz and get the 10.28 TFLOPS figure consistently? That's impossible as posted by one hundred websites.
Its NOT impossible because of the fact that the PS5 is relying on power draw to determine its frequency as stated by Sony themselves. Therefore they could Sustain 2.23GHz to get the 10.28TF consistently IF required by dropping the CPU down to a lower frequency. For example, they could drop the frequency to 3.1GHz on its CPU for as long as necessary - a whole game if required and run the GPU at the 2.23GHz consistently - therefore sustaining 10.28TF. Its not drawing anymore power than running at say 2GHz GPU and 3.3GHz CPU because they have lowered the CPU frequency and therefore the power draw to run the GPU at a consistent 2.23GHz - the power draw is the same and therefore its not contravening ANYTHING that Sony themselves stated.
Its entirely possible that 2GHz is a 'balance' point - that if the GPU needs to run faster, the CPU has to drop in frequency. Essentially move the power freed up by dropping the CPU to increase the power to the GPU to run at 2.23GHz but it could sustain that frequency indefinitely.
What Sony said is that the Console has a max frequency for both CPU and GPU and the only thing that determines how that speed is affected is power draw. Therefore its entirely feasible that the console could run consistently at the max GPU frequency IF the CPU doesn't require more power to increase the Frequency it has to now run at. There is NO reason - at least NONE given by any official source - why the PS5 couldn't run at its maximum GPU frequency for a sustained period. If the CPU doesn't need the power to run at a 'higher' frequency, then there is NO reason (at least not yet) that the GPU can't use that power to run consistently at its maximum speed!! The one reason it may not is the potential heat that could generate (although the CPU would be generating less of course) but we don't know whether the heat management could cope and Sony themselves said heat isn't a factor - its also why its so big.
The issues I have is that you are combining the official figures with rumours/speculation. The issue is with the Sustained figures that you are using!! Where does it say anywhere officially that the PS5 runs at 2GHz sustained? It states everywhere the console runs with a variable frequency so it could run at 2.23GHz sustained if the CPU isn't required to run very fast with Audio and Decompression being handled elsewhere. There is NOTHING else on the market yet that uses the same approach to Frequencies of CPU and GPU so there is NOTHING that can be compared - its ALL speculation and rumour on what the PS5 may do but until its officially confirmed how it runs, its WRONG to use Speculation in a compiled comparison.
To reiterate, the frequencies are related to power draw - as Sony stated, so it could run at a sustained max clock speed as long as the CPU doesn't require the power to run 'faster' than whatever max it can run at IF the GPU is running at max.
To try and put that into another way, lets say the CPU and GPU can only draw upto 60W of power and at 3.3GHz CPU and 2GHz as you say, the power is split 30W to each, If a game comes out that doesn't need more than 3.1GHz CPU, the PS5 could drop the CPU power down to say 25W and run at 3.1GHz and use that extra 5W to run the GPU at 2.23GHz so instead of the split being 30W to both, the split is now 25W and 35W - both still combine to draw 60W so the GPU can maintain that 2.23GHz indefinitely - therefore it is possible and therefore your 'argument' is completely wrong and why you shouldn't use rumour or speculation in this comparison. Its better to leave out the sustained figures - at least until it is known how the PS5 will operate. The fact that the limitations is power, it means it could sustain a max 3.5GHz or 2.23GHz indefinitely - as long as the other doesn't need the power to raise its (now more limited) frequency. The sustained frequency could vary on a game by game basis - games that are perhaps more GPU heavy running at max frequency more often than not and those more CPU intensive limiting the GPU to less than 9.2GHz more frequently because the PS5 is about using the Power the most efficient way rather than just running flat out at fixed frequencies. For all we know, the PS5 may not run at any frequency for more than a few seconds - constantly varying depending on the load so its always running at 100% efficiency and not generating unnecessary heat - after all, Sony stated it was variable and therefore could vary consistently - like an unlocked frame rate.
A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!
Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??
Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...
@BlueOcean And I told you not to tell me what to do - I can't help it if you want to act like a fanboy and get upset when you get called out for behaving like one. I am not the one accusing someone of manipulation yet actually manipulating the facts for some ulterior motive by using rumour/speculation as if its 'fact'.
I will call you out if I think you are wrong and couldn't care less what you 'tell' me I can or cannot do! Don't behave like a child or a worse, a fanboy and then I would have no need to say anything!! If you can't back up your claims with facts, then your post is invalid - maybe not entirely but certain aspects are and its NOT an ACCURATE comparison!!
A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!
Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??
Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...
@BlueOcean And there you go again - having rely on insults!! Just proves my point about your behaviour - acting like a Childish Fanboy... That is not calling you a childish fanboy, that's saying you are acting like one in case you misunderstood yet again....
All you had to do was accept that its wrong to use rumour and amend your post to be factually correct and none of this would have been necessary. How can you claim this is a comparison of the specs as you yourself titled this post when you choose to use unconfirmed specs?? Its not a comparison of specs as they are based on accurate facts not rumour or speculation!
And by the way, editing your previous post doesn't stop the moderators or owners knowing EXACTLY what you typed before so calling me 'paranoid' now after insulting me - can still be visible to the Moderators - they have a record of EVERY post before it gets edited and everyone else will see you edited it afterwards too...
@FraserG I think this thread needs to be deleted as it doesn't contain factual information and to prevent it degenerating further as someone seems incapable of differentiating between fact and fiction...
@Ryall I guess we'll see when the consoles are out and DF and other websites start analysing hardware and software. The common pool of power and variable clocks for both the CPU and GPU were totally unexpected! Of course, we already knew that PS5 has backwards compatible mode but running variable clocks for PS5 games is... interesting.
Like you said, some games will use more CPU and others more GPU. It won't be as powerful as Series X even running at full speed but of course both will be much more powerful than the current-gen consoles. Actually, I posted a similar thread comparing Xbox One and PS4 when they launched and I got a PS4 before an Xbox One. I'm always interested in performance and I'm really curious about how developers are going to deal with PS5 peculiar configuration. We'll have to wait to see that.
@BlueOcean@BAMozzy right... I think both of you need to take a step back a minute, you're clearly not seeing eye to eye on the subject — you ARE allowed to disagree without throwing insults at each other.
On paper series x is more powerful. We will see how that turns out in reality. However, a lot of developers have mentioned that the PS5 is superior in ways that we haven't seen yet.
Forums
Topic: Series X specifications compared to PS5
Posts 1 to 20 of 20
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.