Sony May Be Adding Hardware V-Sync Support to the PlayStation 5

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
In yet another PlayStation 5 rumor spurred by a patent filed this year by Sony, the inevitable upgrade will supposedly boast hardware-based V-Sync. While this concept is nothing new for the PC crowd, console folks and developers should be pleased to know that an alternative to capping frame rates may be on the way for eliminating screen tearing.

One of the main reasons consoles haven’t properly implemented V-Sync yet is the process is very taxing on the GPU. Sony may have something up their sleeves if they’re confident enough to implement it in the PlayStation 5. Some games on consoles like Street Fighter V do support V-Sync but that’s software, where the output frame is buffered until the display is ready to accept it.
 
With all this news it looks like new consoles are coming next year. Honestly thought it would be 2020. I think Sony wanted it to be 2020, but they know Microsoft is itching to release a new generation. I assume Sony doesn't want to be a year later like they were with the PS3.
 
With all this news it looks like new consoles are coming next year. Honestly thought it would be 2020. I think Sony wanted it to be 2020, but they know Microsoft is itching to release a new generation. I assume Sony doesn't want to be a year later like they were with the PS3.

If that's the case though then they can see what specs Xbox has and then beat them, like Microsoft did when Sony announced the PS4 Pro.
 
I thought they would be adding variable V-Sync (i.e. HDMI adaptive sync), but their just thirty+ years behind in implementing V-Sync?
 
Honestly i don`t mind a new gen every 4 years tops , Xbox proved they can do proper backwards comparability , no more throwing away tons of games when upgrading.
 
Honestly i don`t mind a new gen every 4 years tops , Xbox proved they can do proper backwards comparability , no more throwing away tons of games when upgrading.

Really hitching up to a desperate AMD did most of that; now they have a single vendor for CPU and GPU. Of course, if AMD decides their products are worth more than Sony and/or Microsoft are willing to pay, that can go out the window like has for most previous generations.
 
I miss the days when consoles had unique tech instead of just being compact PCs. It was much more interesting.
 
I miss the days when consoles had unique tech instead of just being compact PCs. It was much more interesting.

I don't miss the lower power of said 'unique tech', and like with phones, there's nothing stopping AMD adding stuff at the request of MS and/or Sony, or even the developers themselves adding stuff off of the PCIe bus where needed.
 
This doesn't make any sense

Somehow we could wait for vsync in DOS and shit like the Megadrive and even every other Playstation, but we've since lost the ability on the PS4.
 
With all this news it looks like new consoles are coming next year. Honestly thought it would be 2020. I think Sony wanted it to be 2020, but they know Microsoft is itching to release a new generation. I assume Sony doesn't want to be a year later like they were with the PS3.


I don't see why this should matter though. Playstation has always out sold XBox in total units regardless if they released a new gen system first or second.
 
When you're 3 for 3 with outselling your competitor, I'd say maybe not a guarantee, but definitely better chances of doing so again than the other guy.

I agree, sorry for being terse above :)

Sony has a record of delivering, and generally ship the more gaming-focused box with more and better first-party games, but Microsoft is more agile here and as gaming becomes more connected, they may have more to offer.
 
I'd be very disappointed if PS5 comes out before 2023, I'd prefer later than earlier, given the snails pace at which technology is progressing nowadays. I think we need to get beyond silicon before things improve and the sad state of affairs of getting 25% or so better performance each 1.5 years improves. I remember when computers got faster at such a rate you'd never be comfortable buying a new PC because in one year it was twice the speed or half the price.
 
I don't see why this should matter though. Playstation has always out sold XBox in total units regardless if they released a new gen system first or second.

Actually the Xbox 360 outsold the PS3, by a tiny number. Microsoft screwed up the marketing, forcing Kinnect raising the price for the One. That along with underwhelming exclusives made the One sell poorly. Factor in the weaker specs and the One really didn't have much going for it. Exclusives may still be an issue next year, but they might be able to fix their marketing and pricing this go around. That should gain MS more market share.
 
Loads up a game of Quake 3 @ 900fps with no v-sync g-sync or any sync and doesnt care about the sync.
 
Actually the Xbox 360 outsold the PS3, by a tiny number. Microsoft screwed up the marketing, forcing Kinnect raising the price for the One. That along with underwhelming exclusives made the One sell poorly. Factor in the weaker specs and the One really didn't have much going for it. Exclusives may still be an issue next year, but they might be able to fix their marketing and pricing this go around. That should gain MS more market share.

They are going to have to pay for exclusives. They don't have a hardware problem, they have a no games problem.
 
we need to get beyond silicon before things improve and the sad state of affairs of getting 25% or so better performance each 1.5 years improves
we're on a tech forum here and don't wanna accept the idea of moore's law coming to an end and things slowing down :D
 
Last edited:
If they do this and not Adaptive sync (either disabled) or by not supporting HDMI 2.1 on purpose, I would be PISSED. These consoles will never have the power to drive 1440P @ 60fps ultra, let alone 4K without all the upscaling crap they do now to get "4K" so Adaptive Sync is the best possible option (considering you have a fixed GPU speed that cannot be overclocked or swapped out.)
 
I miss the days when consoles had unique tech instead of just being compact PCs. It was much more interesting.
haha, it always makes me laugh when people think that anything other than Intel/AMD x86-64 based equipment is "unique" - good times! :D
The only reason the PS3 lasted as long as it did was because of the IBM PowerPC based Cell CPU - only recent many-core high-end CPUs are finally catching up and surpassing its processing power (FPU/vector processing-only) in the last few years.
 
Weird. I always figured they opted to not use vsync for performance and memory usage reasons - not because it wasn't technically possible on the consoles. Their graphics APIs are supposedly nearly identical to DirectX and OpenGL - why leave out something as simple as double-buffered vsync? Sounds like marketing bullshit: "Look! Special new hardware you pay extra for now!"
 
I doubt it was marketing, but something to save costs or they thought it wouldn't be noticable to most gamers so they dedicated that part of memory/buffer to some other task
 
Actually the Xbox 360 outsold the PS3, by a tiny number.
Yeah but it didn't hurt the sales numbers that MS was selling multiple 360's to each customer because of RROD. I know I owned FIVE of the damn things, and 2 of those were bought new at retail. Never mind the money lost on warranty replacements.

Edit - fixed
 
Back
Top