They are not winning because they have a faster SSD. 7700k 4.8Ghz, EVGA GTX 1080ti FTW3, 16GB 3200MHZ RAM, 1440p All Settings Ultra EXCEPT - Motion blur off completely and no Volumetric Fog Average FPS - 82.42 Average Frametime - 12.13 1 level 1 3 yr. It is all about the games, and Sony is winning in that department with the PS5. So stop pretending that the SSD is a differentiator today because it really isn't. Would you buy a console X that had 50 AAA exclusive games and slower load times by 3-5 seconds or console Y that had 5 AAA exclusive games and faster load times by 3-5 seconds? The answer would probably be "I will suffer for the 3-5 seconds of load times to play better and more exclusive games". I am not going to make a decision on whether to buy an XSX or PS5 based on SSD performance when the difference is 3 seconds on load times. but right now it is as irrelevant as the extra tfps on XSX GPU. Does it really matter that instead of 12 secs, something on XB is loading in 15 secs? I am sure that Sony will find a way to apply this, and it will be good. YES 3 DAYS! Regular hard drives load games from seconds to minutes today. The first time I transferred 5 GB (not TB) to another hard drive with more capacity back in the 1990's it took 3 days. NeoGamer232 684d ago (Edited 684d ago don't deny PS5 has a faster SSD then SX.īut just like the 12 vs 10 tfps argument, this is really falls under the laws of diminishing returns. Hopefully things trend more towards the former than the latter as devs get more familiar with it. I think the fact the memory bandwidth is 40% of X's bandwidth makes the overall power gap between the S and X larger than the 2/3 drop in GPU power would indicate, and is why we see some titles like B元 perform great at good settings, while AC:V can only perform well at underwhelming settings. That said, I can't help but wonder that if this is what we're seeing from cross-gen games, that games targeting next-gen may struggle even further on the S. 3rd party games like AC:V hitting 720p the majority of the time at 60fps (though, weirdly, closer to 1440p at 30fps), WD:L 900p-1080p30, Dirt 5 's not awful for a $300 machine (save 720p.that should have died with the base XBO), and in the case of B元 it's solid performance for the money. Forza 4, an in house game, was a last gen title with light visual polish that only hit 1080p60. DF has covered a good number of games on "next-gen" now, and the trend for S - in my opinion - is a bit worrying. Then again, we're now seeing sub 1080p in some circumstances, so it's not even a guaranteed 1080p machine either. Richard has said "The 1440p target MS was talking about seems optimistic based on what we're seeing so far" in the Dirt 5 video - though he also says "And I'm fine with that If 1080p is the target, so be it, I just think the marketing from MS needs to be a bit clearer about that". I think it lies somewhere in the middle, as many things do, between you and ABizzel.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |