Caporegime
We’re still talking at least a year away. Plenty of time for necessary costs to come down. Besides, you can’t easily compare pricing of integrated console GPU’s to graphics cards.
Poll: *The Official PlayStation 5 (PS5) Thread*
- Thread starter BMox81
- Start date
We’re still talking at least a year away. Plenty of time for necessary costs to come down. Besides, you can’t easily compare pricing of integrated console GPU’s to graphics cards.
Soldato
I'll happily skip the next Xbox, unless there is something really special on it - my Xbone gets turned on a little over a handful of times a year at present, and only then, for the Forza games.
Looking forward to the PS5 though, as the PS4 (imo) has dominated this gen so well, and there's such a huge catalog of great games.
Looking forward to the PS5 though, as the PS4 (imo) has dominated this gen so well, and there's such a huge catalog of great games.
I would like it to play UHD discs. That’s the only reason I went for a One x in the end. Obviously it’s more powerful than a Pro as well, but in terms of games I hardly ever play anything on it! Would rather get one or the other next gen but preferably the PS5.
I think 4K 60 is a good bet, though perhaps it won't be rock-steady 60 fps throughout.
I was looking at Rage 2's X1X settings from Digital Foundry's video & decided to test on my V64 at 4K with them (1650mhz avg clocks, 1100mhz hbm2, ~310w chip).
I got around 45 fps in open world. Assuming proper parity with RX5700 as the chip that will be in the PS5, we can say that it will be somewhere around a 220w guzzling chip & yields ~56 fps on average, that's taking into account 1.25x performance over Vega & 1.5x efficiency.
Clearly, 220w (likely more) would be too much, but! There's room for tweaking when you're doing this with a custom design & games will be better optimised than Rage 2 for PC. In fact, if Navi adds VRS, it would only need a light touch of that setting to get you over the hump and towards 4K 60 as I can hold 60 fps with 80% resolution scaling and higher than X1X settings. If I could have lowered my voltage (card's locked) I could've had much better efficiency gains, so there's a lot more hope for PS5 on that front.
Even if 60 fps locked isn't in the cards for all games, with the addition of VRR this wouldn't matter as much, and either way, you'd get a WAY better experience across the board than what's possible on consoles right now in even the best scenario.
For what's likely going to cost £499, this will be a steal!
I was looking at Rage 2's X1X settings from Digital Foundry's video & decided to test on my V64 at 4K with them (1650mhz avg clocks, 1100mhz hbm2, ~310w chip).
I got around 45 fps in open world. Assuming proper parity with RX5700 as the chip that will be in the PS5, we can say that it will be somewhere around a 220w guzzling chip & yields ~56 fps on average, that's taking into account 1.25x performance over Vega & 1.5x efficiency.
Clearly, 220w (likely more) would be too much, but! There's room for tweaking when you're doing this with a custom design & games will be better optimised than Rage 2 for PC. In fact, if Navi adds VRS, it would only need a light touch of that setting to get you over the hump and towards 4K 60 as I can hold 60 fps with 80% resolution scaling and higher than X1X settings. If I could have lowered my voltage (card's locked) I could've had much better efficiency gains, so there's a lot more hope for PS5 on that front.
Even if 60 fps locked isn't in the cards for all games, with the addition of VRR this wouldn't matter as much, and either way, you'd get a WAY better experience across the board than what's possible on consoles right now in even the best scenario.
For what's likely going to cost £499, this will be a steal!
You are dreaming if you think you will get true 4k at 60fps on the PS5 on all titles or even if not all it will never be native 4k 60fps on AAA games like Rage.
Currently the only thing that can run 60fps at high settings on EVERY title is the 2080ti.
That card is 1.5k and I can't see that price dropping any time soon.
It will be a case of features in the next offering from Sony. It will be more of a multimedia system for streaming, UHD movies and RTX games at uprated filtered 4k (1080p) 60fps.
There is simply no way that the next console from anyone will be released with native 4k 60fps on all titles. Its just not cheap enough to get all that power in a box for under 500-600 quid
I am not pro either of them, and I never said the PS5 wouldn't be a good kit. I am not personally interested in it for myself due to my own preferences in tweaking settings and the like, but I don't let that colour my judgement of the hardware. Consoles are hard to beat value wise for the average joe but with a bit of knowledge & planning it's not too difficult to do. Too many people unfortunately are unable to understand nuance when I say that, so immediately they just see "Anti console" or whatever.
Settings are interesting things. Changing CHS from Ultra to Off in DXMD puts me from 36-37 fps to 54+ @ 4K. On consoles devs can scrutinize each setting's performance impact & tweak.
I've already explained how it can without needing 2080 ti level hardware. Up to you if you can parse that.
Caporegime
Sorry, but imo, that’s utter tosh. PS4 pro already streams at 4K and it already plays uprated 4K games.
You’re basically saying the PS5 will be all about a faster hard drive, a UHD drive and bit of ray tracing. Rubbish, it will be a much faster, more powerful machine capable of native 4K, and will hit 60fps most of the time. It’s also been heavily rumoured to have 2080Ti levels of performance. Sony could not afford to release such a half arsed system as what you’re suggesting and charge £500 for it. It just wouldn’t wash, wouldn’t eat into the PC gamer market and MS would destroy them with the next Xbox. PS5 is gonna be a beast, they couldn’t get away with anything else, and no amount of PC fanboying is gonna change that.
you cant - but what you can do is say for definite that the same cooling in a premium level card in a desktop would not fit into a PS5 (without making the ps5 the size of a medium to large pc - which Sony wont do).
Given that - its highly unlikely the ps5 will get 4k@60fps, especially given they are doing ray tracing of some kind - so something (technology wise) has to give
Not naturally it doesn't - its while checkerboarding (or whatever its called).
Last edited:
Caporegime
You might get options. Ray tracing on = 30fps, ray tracing off = 60fps.
Soldato
Gonna be interesting looking back on this when the thing is released. Consoles rarely live upto the actual hype.
I'm more of a console fan boy myself.
I'm more of a console fan boy myself.
Yes I'm basically saying that.
Well I guess we will have to wait and see my boy but if you think it will have 2080ti performance at a reasonable price range you are in cloud cockoo land.
I hope you are right personally but I just don't see it.
Upscaled 4k is very very different from native 4k. Don't tell me you can't see the difference because you can very easily.
I think we should also consider the way tech companies release hardware these days. Its never a great jump in power anymore even if they have the tech. Its about releasing it slowly to wring as much money out of us as possible. That's where features come in.
Even if you can turn it on and off ( I don't see why not, but you never know ) its not going to double the frame rate
Caporegime
I dont really see that much of a difference tbh, but then I struggle to see the difference between 1440p and 4K on my 27inch IPS monitor.
And that's a good point. Connect your PC to the main tv that is normally 40 inch and above.
You will notice the difference immediately
Associate
It will not need as much power as a 2080ti to run 4k60fps surely. I mean the graphics settings will be dumbed down compared to a game fully maxed out on a PC running 4k anyway. Games that are native 4k now are not as good looking as the PC counterparts, Witcher 3 is a prime example. Although I do not think W3 keeps at 4k all the time on consoles. I am sure this new gen will be 4k60fps, at least I hope anyway.
Soldato
Consoles are aimed at sitting in the living room and bringing entertainment to the couch. Can notice slight differences between my ps pro and xbox 1x on my 55".
Devs will mostly aim for as many bells and whistles as they can at a lower fps on console, it's just the way it is. Some devs will put importance on fps but it's usually racers on console.
The PC crowd are just expected to fiddle and throw more power at the issue to hit higher fps.
There's no chance Sony is going to impose 60fps or bust on devs, and it's unlikely to have the raw power to brute force it.
Agreed. I think most devs will do as they always have done and target max resolution at 30fps, with as many graphical bells and whistles enabled as possible.
Some devs will of course want to target 60fps with some graphical features disabled.
I’m happy with either tbh. 30fps doesn’t detract from the experience for me (as long as it’s stable) And I’d rather have a rock solid stable 30 over a dipping 60
Some devs will of course want to target 60fps with some graphical features disabled.
I’m happy with either tbh. 30fps doesn’t detract from the experience for me (as long as it’s stable) And I’d rather have a rock solid stable 30 over a dipping 60
Soldato
Quite happy with 30fps with lots of eye candy, for games like TLOU, Uncharted etc - as their style of gameplay doesn't need 60fps to feel good (imo of course). Though 60fps does indeed make things feel silky smooth, it's not a deal breaking for me - different story with racing games or 'twitch shooters' like CoD online; 60fps is very welcome then!
Caporegime
I don’t know if it’s just my set up but when you play games at 30fps, there is judder when playing things like Uncharted 4. Isn’t this because the frame rate of the game doesn’t match the display and all motion processing is turned off because of game mode. So I’d be glad to see the back of 30fps.