Crayon
Member
Wtf. I got an envelope full of goldfish crackers.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
HW| does Xbox Series X really have 12 Teraflops ?
- Thread starter Bernoulli
- Start date
Wtf. I got an envelope full of goldfish crackers.
T-Cake
Member
Obviously I can spout a complete load of bollocks because I know nothing about hardware or software development.
But my theory is that the Xbox's hypervisor / virtual environment is why "most" games perform worse on XSX than on PS5. This overhead is ensuring backwards compatibility with future hardware. I think the PS6 might come unstuck in this regard and Sony will have to drop support for PS4 games (at least) whereas the next Xbox will continue to play even OG Xbox/360 games.
Now, back to my pint of Guinness.
But my theory is that the Xbox's hypervisor / virtual environment is why "most" games perform worse on XSX than on PS5. This overhead is ensuring backwards compatibility with future hardware. I think the PS6 might come unstuck in this regard and Sony will have to drop support for PS4 games (at least) whereas the next Xbox will continue to play even OG Xbox/360 games.
Now, back to my pint of Guinness.
Neo_game
Member
This has been discussed many times lol. SX should be faster in compute heavy, shader intensive, RT stuff. Approx 18% advatange which TBH is not much anyways. Moreover we are not sure about the bottlenecks of the console as well. There is no use having little more power if there are bottlenecks. Bigger does not mean better. lol.
PaintTinJr
Member
In compute shader heavy tasks (FP16 RPM that is the bedrock of console first engines) the PS5 has a huge advantage from having far more ACEs so at half flops with async it is theoretically faster than the XsX, too.
At FP16 the higher GPU clock difference between XsX and PS5 is also doubled for FP16 RPM calculations and magnified because of the narrower 36CUs, which in equivalent FP32 is actually 72CU wide. So taking FP16 RM on XsX is the equivalent of 104 CUs(52 x 2) at FP32, so would also be harder to fill to get the same scaled efficiency of PS5.
To be fair I think the XsX is looking competitive in HW terms to PS5 currently, but purely because we are still in cross-gen and most of the hw design advantages of the PS5 that need additional custom effort aren't being used yet.
In Cold Blood
Banned
Yes it does have 12tflops.
Software will have a bigger influence on performance than hardware will this generation.
As an example, look at how Unreal Engine 5 is a massive boost over Unreal Engine 4. Game engines are all software.
APIs and development tools play a massive part in the developers ability to get the most out of the hardware.
MS released new APIs this generation for the XSX, while Sony kept not only the same GPU configuration of 32CUs, but they had the mature tools and APIs coming off the PS4 generation. It's something Mark Cerny put alot of effort into. It was what he called time to triangle.
Sony has the far more well known development environment and it shows.
Software will have a bigger influence on performance than hardware will this generation.
As an example, look at how Unreal Engine 5 is a massive boost over Unreal Engine 4. Game engines are all software.
APIs and development tools play a massive part in the developers ability to get the most out of the hardware.
MS released new APIs this generation for the XSX, while Sony kept not only the same GPU configuration of 32CUs, but they had the mature tools and APIs coming off the PS4 generation. It's something Mark Cerny put alot of effort into. It was what he called time to triangle.
Sony has the far more well known development environment and it shows.
Captain Toad
Banned
I don't how much Mark Cerny makes, but it isn't enough.
Lysandros
Member
Regarding compute in isolation (with PS5's ~20% GPU fixed function advantage withstanding), the 18% figure doesn't take things like inner GPU bandwidth (L1 cache and Scrubbers), ACEs per CU/compute, faster Command Processor, HWS block into account. All these aspects favoring PS5 should contribute to higher to CU saturation on this machine to varying degrees. The real world differencial in compute throughput should be meaningfully smaller than 18%.
As to RT performance PS5 has his own set of hardware advantages there like being able to calculate ray bounces faster due to higher frequency and higher local bandwidth which can be significant depending on the implementation. And of course, 'having a little more power' isn't exclusive to XSX, depending on which (GPU) facets we are talking exactly the same can be said about PS5.
Last edited:
Hawking Radiation
Member
Because MS focused on the 12TF number just like they did with Xbox One X's 6TF's.
They know the gaming population would respond to the bigger TF numbers they had over PS so they played directly into that.
There were a few devs that stated TF numbers as not being a good measurement of total system performance with these custom designs from both Xbox and PS. Now we're a couple years into the generation and you don't see that 12TF advantage over PS5.
Unless I'm wrong and someone can correct me on that last sentence ^^
M1chl
Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Yes, working currently on Metal 3 (macOS) and there are some striking similarity to Playstation SDK and it works sort...it is familiar, outside of language, but how you bundle stuff and what kind of calls you are doing, it is really close.
digoutyoursoul
Member
Sounds more like a quote from a viagra ad
CLW
Member
Im typing this from my own private island as we speak while bikini clad super models bring me umbrella drinks
Dr.brain64
Member
Xbox sx STILL uses the same os from xbox one. The same windows 10 architecture that we all know is utter crap. No matter how big your gpu.
That's the bottleneck.
That's the bottleneck.
SolidQ
Member
Picture slightly unrelated of current development
Lysandros
Member
You are talking about 4 ACEs for 36 CUs compared to 4 ACEs for 52 CUs here right? Or do you think PS5 has 8 ACEs like PS4?
Arm chair analysis: Split memory, lower GPU clock speeds, lower GPU clock speeds, and lower GPU clock speeds. I think Sony's GPU is boosted by ~400Mhz over Xbox's, and operates in this mode almost all the time. Probably only translates to a few more FPS in practical testing, but it seems to be the difference between PS5 riding the 60FPS line closer than Series X in almost every game. I'm guessing the Series X additional CUs help close the gap a little in other areas (raytracing or some other functions mabye) but clock speed still seems to be a difference maker. I remember reading somewhere that the more CUs you have, the lower the headroom is for extra clock speed/overclocking. I wonder if MS has tried internally testing a higher limit on the GPU or enabling periodic boosting to see if the box blows up or not.
As in most cases, being the platform with the largest installed base, the games are developed with playstastion in mind. Nothing to do with power. Cases like Lego Star Wars and A plague Tale, for exemple, where Xbox has great advantage or games where PC struggles prove that the problem is in the software, not the hardware.
Only exclusive games will be able to make the most of each platafomr and with the Series S, it's difficult for the XSX to reach its full potential.
Lysandros
Member
Didn't Playstation 'have the largest install base' when One X routinely pushed up to 75% higher resolutions compared to PS4 PRO when the games were 'developed with PlayStation in mind'?.. We just can not conveniently dismiss hardware side of things, software even 'unoptimized' is running within the confines of a set hardware. Neither console is close to reaching its full potential.
Last edited:
01011001
Banned
how is it that noone actually just accepts the simplest and most logical answer?
Publishers sell less copies on Xbox.
Publishers therefore put less time into Xbox versions.
Less time spent optimising, with less motivation to optimise = worse performance.
in a world were games exist that literally ran worse on One X compared to PS4 Pro, it shouldn't be hard to see how once the consoles are even closer in power, that this would happen from time to time.
additionally developers simply don't care.
if a game happens to run 5% faster on one system compared to the other, they don't give a shit as long as it reaches what they deem to be acceptable.
if they run a benchmark that has an average framerate of 58.5fps and their internal goal was 57fps, then they don't give a shit to further optimise the game on one system over the other, as long as both systems are above 57fps average in their internal tests.
so to them one system running 58.5fps and the other 59.8fps, is enough.
further futhermore it's also very obvious by now that there is sometimes missing communication between the various people that work on different versions of the game.
and we can use examples for that that don't have anything to do with performance as well, just to show it's not a hardware issue.
The Deadzones in RE4 remake, to this day, are not the same on PC, Xbox and PS5, and for absolutely no reason... they even patched the deadzone on Xbox TWICE now and still have a discrepancy... but at least the shape of the deadzone is now the same as on PS5 I guess
the fact is, these 2 consoles are as close as no other console generation before them.
seeing differences here is almost always due to time spent on one version and simply the developers being way more lenient than people think.
both of which can be proven by how quickly sometimes the performance increases with post launch patches.
similarly how the post launch patch for TLOU on PC has proven that 8GB GPUs are just fine if the game is actually using the memory correctly... nothing prevented the game from looking good on 8GB cards other than the developers initially launching a bad port.
how fortunate that the last gen version of Hogwarts Legacy just came out...
now, before watching, which version do you think is the most polished one, and which version is the least polished one?
if you guessed that PS4 Pro is the best version, you are correct, as that version is based on the decently polished PS4 version.
and if you guessed that the One X version is clearly the most neglected one, you are correct again!
it's almost like developers don't put the same amount of effort into every version!
what you see in that video is the One X version looking worse than base PS4, having loading time issues compared to base PS4, and running at a lower framerate than base PS4.
The Xbox One X, a console objectively superior in every single aspect, bigger and faster GPU, faster CPU, massively bigger RAM pool, huge bandwidth advantage, falls short of base PS4 in almost every aspect aside from resolution.
why? because what the developers cleadly did here is simply use the base Xbox One port as a starting point, increased the resolution to 1440p, and did nothing else to it... but somehow even doing this little, managed to break something about how the game streams data on the One X, where the One X loads the same assets as base One slower
Last edited:
how fortunate that the last gen version of Hogwarts Legacy just came out...
now, before watching, which version do you think is the mkst polished one, and which version is the least polished one?
if you guessed that PS4 Pro is the best version, you are correct, as that version is based on the decently polished PS4 version.
and if you guessed that the One X version is clearly the most neglected one, you are correct again!
it's almost like developers don't put the same amount of effort into every version!
what you see in that video is the One X version looking worse than base PS4, having loading time issues compared to base PS4, and running at a lower framerate than base PS4.
The Xbox One X, a console objectively superior in every single aspect, bigger and faster GPU, faster CPU, massively bigger RAM pool, huge bandwidth advantage, falls short of base PS4 in almost every aspect aside from resolution.
why? because what the developers cleadly did here is simply use the base Xbox One port as a starting point, increased the resolution to 1440p, and did nothing else to it... but somehow even doing this little, managed to break something about how the game streams data on the One X, where the One X loads the same assets as base One slower
Poor little Xbox
devs not giving it the love & optimizations that it need to be the best it can be.Stop it they pushed a higher resolution as a quick & dirty enhancement for a last Gen enhanced console that not many people care about anymore this has nothing to do with the state of Series X
Last edited:
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
how fortunate that the last gen version of Hogwarts Legacy just came out...
now, before watching, which version do you think is the most polished one, and which version is the least polished one?
if you guessed that PS4 Pro is the best version, you are correct, as that version is based on the decently polished PS4 version.
and if you guessed that the One X version is clearly the most neglected one, you are correct again!
it's almost like developers don't put the same amount of effort into every version!
what you see in that video is the One X version looking worse than base PS4, having loading time issues compared to base PS4, and running at a lower framerate than base PS4.
The Xbox One X, a console objectively superior in every single aspect, bigger and faster GPU, faster CPU, massively bigger RAM pool, huge bandwidth advantage, falls short of base PS4 in almost every aspect aside from resolution.
why? because what the developers cleadly did here is simply use the base Xbox One port as a starting point, increased the resolution to 1440p, and did nothing else to it... but somehow even doing this little, managed to break something about how the game streams data on the One X, where the One X loads the same assets as base One slower
One X destroys the PS4 pro, that's all we need as evidence of what is going on with Playstation VS other platforms. It's just a fact at this point.
Now, is it to do with install base, yes. is it to do with marketing deals, probably to some extent. But, IMO. Developers should not be able to sell games, and make profits off PC and Xbox, Switch...if they are not doing the absolute best job they can.
So yeah. Xbox is 12TF but it's probably never going to get the development resources required to see that small uptick in power over the competition.
The compute power difference between PS4 pro and One X was much bigger. Also, both were reiteration of hardware already consolidated and whose developers were already familiar with.
Yes, neither has reached its potential, but the difference between the two is not so great that brute force alone makes a difference. Anyway, as this developer illustrated, the PS5 will be a priority in most cases. Nevertheless, even with the PS5 as the leader plataform to develop, the games are very close.
The problem with this excuse is that even when PS5 isn't involved Series X still haven't flexed it's muscles.
Lysandros
Member
I am well aware of this (not only compute by the way) and this is exactly my point; this time around both systems have the edge depending on the GPU throughput be it fill rate, rasterization and compute so they end up being about equal in overall capabilities 'based on specs'. Hence my refusal to dismiss the hardware as a core factor.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Sony doesn't need to pay, MS and Phil Spencer are providing that ammo all on their own.
The fact that people still ignore the fact that PS5 actually has the straight forward rendering advantage over Xbox Series X is beyond me . We are back to it being tools & neglect instead of going with the facts
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/if-m...e-else-using-it-to-compare-it-to-ps5.1562061/
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
Xbox has had some flops this generation.
PaintTinJr
Member
I wasn't, but even without the difference in ACEs between the two consoles and higher clock benefit on PS5, in a best case scenario the XsX could schedule 69% (or 71% if taking account of the Tempest CU, too) of to its 52CUs that identical ACEs would schedule to the 36CUs, of PS5.
So taking the theoretical limits of 20.46@FP16 and 24.3@FP16, in optimal theoretical conditions the XsX is getting 13-14% less throughput with RPM under nanite type loads, and in reality will be getting a lot less in optimal real world software by the end of the generation, when factoring in the advantages for ROPs, the unified memory, the storage acceleration, and the cache scrubbers and paradigm shift for the GPU power versus clock.
I personally don't believe the ACEs in the two consoles are identical, and that the ACEs in the PS5 are custom and far more effective based on Cerny bringing focus to the comparative size of CUs from PS4 to PS5, and the way the ACEs will be integral to the PS5's custom Geometry engine.
Hardware is of course a major factor but what I meant is, so far, the biggest performance differences seem to have more to do with optimization than hardware capability. None reached their limit and the PC problems illustrate that even with a lot of power, without time and optimization, the result is precarious.
I might have expressed myself wrong. I am a big fan of hardware design and wouldn't dismiss it. For instance, I think that the Series X was very well built machine. Even though it has similar performance to the PS5, it has a reduced size, quieter, and most importantly, consumes much less energy while running the same games. It's very efficient machine.
MikeM
Member
PS5 had its node shrunk recently so power consumption is down to 170w I believe. Has MS done the same?
Also- my PS5 is silent. I guess this is in relation to the potential fan lottery?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
They sure did, didn't they? Oh wait, goalposts were moved and narratives were narrated.The fact that people still ignore the fact that PS5 actually has the straight forward rendering advantage over Xbox Series X is beyond me . We are back to it being tools & neglect instead of going with the facts
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/if-m...e-else-using-it-to-compare-it-to-ps5.1562061/
PaintTinJr
Member
But yet again, the FLOPs (FP32) are quite misleading, because the PS4 Pro actually has superior throughput when using FP16 RPM, and it showed it in a few multi-plats and in almost every platform exclusive by the end of the generation.
Console first software engines begin with FP16 RPM as the solution. No surprise that Hogwarts with a PlayStation marketing contract exploits FP16 RPM well on PS5, PS4 and PS4 Pro, versus the Xbox last-gen hardware that didn't do FP16 and didn't care so much for Async compute (by ACE count) as a side effect too.
skneogaf
Member
Xbox needs to pay a Sony engineer to find out what their plan is each console and just increase something/stuff on their box as developers use the playstation to lead their development as it sells more. Split ram, slower speed and more compute means 3rd party games needs tweaking and developers can't even release games without issues on the ps5 nevermind the 2 xbox consoles.
Iced Arcade
Member
I didn't find comparisons for the newest PS5 models and don't know if Microsoft has also done revisions on the SX (it's know they reduced the energy consumption while in sleep mode).
About the launch models, according to this Eurogamer report (here's how much power your consoles use) XSX consumes less power when running the same game (sometimes much less), when iddle and when using media applications. In sleep mode, mode in which PS5 consume less, Xbox is more efficient while downloading a game.
Last edited:
I remember all the chaos fp16 caused around here a few years ago
cash_longfellow
Member
I’d be WAY more worried about the state of Xbox exclusive games right now more than anything else.
Thirty7ven
Banned
So devs should be spending more resources on a platform that not only has a much smaller userbase but… sells disproportionally less software? Why?
digital_ghost
Member
i agree.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Because if developers are putting a game out on a platform, it doesn't matter if its selling 1, 100, 1000 or a million copies. Any one parting with their hard earned money deserves to get the best version of a game possible for the hardware.
But yeah, that's cool...you take the side of the developer...
Next, you should say that anyone on the xbox platform is even lucky to get the games and we should be happy to spend 70 dollars for an inferior product.
Last edited:
CLW
Member
Cause it hurts my butthole that’s why
Thirty7ven
Banned
It’s not the third party’s job to play the first party role. They aim for a consistent version across skus, that’s it.
Your 70$ on Xbox isn’t worth more than 70$ on PS5. But a userbase might be worth less than another.
Last edited:
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Exactly and that 70 dollars shouldn't be worth less. Consistent is completely fair, I agree.
West Texas CEO
GAF's Nicest Lunch Thief and Nosiest Dildo Archeologist
This is legit one of the funniest memes I've seen in a while.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Damn shame that developers have to address fuckwads on twitter directly, but ah well.
Last edited: