PS5 Teardown: An inside look at our most transformative console yet

Verge

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 27, 2001
Messages
6,647
I watched the entire video before commenting, so I really have no idea what you're getting at.

A design using a captive screw (with a spring to keep it recessed when not in use) makes WAY more sense to me than their chosen solution (There are plenty of cheap LCD monitors that use this solution for mounting their bases). Also, see bigdogchris's comment above.

Nice try at calling someone out for no reason, though (y)
It has storage for the screw, if you lose it your mother probably still ties your shoes.
 

DukenukemX

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
5,003
Not quite, the 360 had a far more powerful CPU and GPU than any single GPU (non-Crossfire/SLI) configuration for PC back in late 2005 when it released.
It didn't last long, though, as within a year more powerful GPUs were released that eclipsed it, but for that short time, the 360 had the most powerful gaming hardware on the market.
How you figure that? The PowerPC CPU's in both the 360 and PS3 were in-order. Meaning they were the equivalent of a the PowerPC version of a Intel Atom. Sure it was 3Ghz but the Xbox One and PS4 are running at 1.6Ghz. The GPU is comparable to a X1900/X1950 XT or the 7800/7900GTX, which is probably why those consoles did so well for years because those graphic cards weren't cheap back then. The X1900 cards were $250 and more while the GTX 7800 cards were even more money. It was a no brainer to buy a console back then.

This doesn't mean that many PlayStation games will come to the PC, or that the releases will come soon after the console version's launch (Horizon Zero Dawn certainly wasn't). If you end up waiting a year or more, especially if there's just a handful of games that get this treatment, it may be just about scooping up "leftover" revenue and convincing PC gamers that they should get a PlayStation to enjoy those games sooner.
I don't expect to see Sony release any more games on PC, at least not for years anyway. Pretty clear Sony was trying to make a quick buck while trying to open up PC gamers to the idea of the Playstation platform. What I do expect to see is studios that Sony owns to break away and release games to all platforms. PC is one thing but there's also Nintendo as well. PS4 was a big deal for market share but will the PS5 also have a large market presence? I don't think the PS5 will be as popular as the PS4. The $500 cost and the $400 model not able to play used games will deter some people. Lets not forget the $70 price for games. Demon Souls is an 11 year old game that is just made slightly better and costs $70?
Yes, there are some people who won't play on consoles, but the strategy isn't a "huge blow" to living room gaming at this stage. You can make a case for that if a game like God of War 5 arrives on PC shortly after the PS5 release; not if Sony decides to release it long after console gamers have moved on.
If Sony makes a decent profit releasing games on PC then it'll go from 7 years later release to PC, to timed exclusives. We can see how well timed exclusives have worked for the Xbox platform. Why you think Microsoft is buying ZeniMax? Microsoft will force some of their games to either be exclusive to the Xbox platform or at the very least a timed exclusive.

Also stop with the "living room gaming" thing, we all know you can hook up a PC to your living room TV. I do it, grandma does it, everyone does it. It hasn't been a console exclusive thing since the creation of the HDMI port.
 

chameleoneel

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
3,443
How you figure that? The PowerPC CPU's in both the 360 and PS3 were in-order. Meaning they were the equivalent of a the PowerPC version of a Intel Atom. Sure it was 3Ghz but the Xbox One and PS4 are running at 1.6Ghz. The GPU is comparable to a X1900/X1950 XT or the 7800/7900GTX, which is probably why those consoles did so well for years because those graphic cards weren't cheap back then. The X1900 cards were $250 and more while the GTX 7800 cards were even more money. It was a no brainer to buy a console back then.


I don't expect to see Sony release any more games on PC, at least not for years anyway. Pretty clear Sony was trying to make a quick buck while trying to open up PC gamers to the idea of the Playstation platform. What I do expect to see is studios that Sony owns to break away and release games to all platforms. PC is one thing but there's also Nintendo as well. PS4 was a big deal for market share but will the PS5 also have a large market presence? I don't think the PS5 will be as popular as the PS4. The $500 cost and the $400 model not able to play used games will deter some people. Lets not forget the $70 price for games. Demon Souls is an 11 year old game that is just made slightly better and costs $70?

If Sony makes a decent profit releasing games on PC then it'll go from 7 years later release to PC, to timed exclusives. We can see how well timed exclusives have worked for the Xbox platform. Why you think Microsoft is buying ZeniMax? Microsoft will force some of their games to either be exclusive to the Xbox platform or at the very least a timed exclusive.

Also stop with the "living room gaming" thing, we all know you can hook up a PC to your living room TV. I do it, grandma does it, everyone does it. It hasn't been a console exclusive thing since the creation of the HDMI port.
MS has already stated and then acted upon statements, that their exclusives now release simultaneously for PC and console. Depending upon the specific development progress of a couple of the games which they just acquired---there may be a small delay to PC versions. But it will be due to development not exactly being parallel in the workflow at those brands. Not due to MS holding them back. And eventually, MS will inject money and best practices, to get all of their new brands into a workflow which keeps the PC and console versions concurrent with eachother.

As far as your comments about Sony----it sounds like maybe you just don't like Sony? PlayStation is one of the absolute most popular and most mentioned brands in the world. They will not have a large problem, selling PS5's. Indeed, the higher release price tag will keep some people from buying right away. But there are a lot of other factors at play, here. And ultimately, I would expect a price drop next year. Which will soak up the people who waited.

Xbox has never outsold Playstation in world wide sales. 360 did outsell in the U.S. However, MS was not able to keep that momentum with Xbox One. What they are doing now is an interesting tactic. And I do not think the goal is to win the console race, over Sony. I think the tactic is acknowledging that gaming is bigger than ever. PC gaming is bigger than ever. And they are going for that overall cash.

Sony games on PC: I think it will increase. Again, PC gaming is bigger than ever. Sony makes good games. PC gamers want more good games and more types of games. I think sales and also social interest in Death Stranding and Horizon Zero Dawn, will ultimately be a final prove to Sony that it is no longer the days where console ports don't sell on PC. But, I think the reason they are doing it in the first place, is because they dropped the ball on Demon's Souls and now Dark Souls is a major brand and sells really well on PC, too.

At the least, they would be stupid to not actually do a PC port of Demon's Souls remake.

And on that, its a complete remake. Indeed, the general gameplay will be very similar. But everything else about the game is drastically improved. Its not a touched up remaster. Its full budget remake. It warrants a full price. If $70 is the new full price standard, so be it. This remake was not short changed in development. The Demon's Souls remake is a really big deal. As I said, the Souls games are huge, now. There is a ton of interest in this. And this is Sony acting on the fact that they let this slip, years ago.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,683
How you figure that? The PowerPC CPU's in both the 360 and PS3 were in-order. Meaning they were the equivalent of a the PowerPC version of a Intel Atom. Sure it was 3Ghz but the Xbox One and PS4 are running at 1.6Ghz. The GPU is comparable to a X1900/X1950 XT or the 7800/7900GTX, which is probably why those consoles did so well for years because those graphic cards weren't cheap back then.
The 360 released in November of 2005, and the GPU is similar to a Radeon X1900 XT, which at the time bested the 7900 GTX 256MB in both performance and visual quality by a good margin, even though the X1900 wasn't released until January 2006.
Ok, just because a CPU is in-order does not automatically mean that it has Atom-level performance - ffs, we have gone over this before, and I know you know this.

The tri-core Xenon PowerPC CPU was clocked at 3.2GHz, so it had similar performance to 3 IBM 970FX CPUs clocked at 1.6GHz, which is multitudes above 3 Atom cores of any variant.
At the time, x86-64 CPUs were only just becoming dual-cores, so unless it were a multi-socket 2P system, no x86-64 CPU would compare to the Xenon CPU in 2005 and even into 2006.

The Xenon CPU also featured 2-way SMT, which with 3 CPU cores then offered 6 threads.
Again, this is when x86-64 CPUs were only finally allowing for 2 threads or 4 threads with the pathetic excuse of a "dual-core" that the Netburst Pentium D offered with Hyper-threading.
At the original price point of the 360 in 2005 to mid-2006, no PC would even come close to that level of performance for gaming.

The X1900 cards were $250 and more while the GTX 7800 cards were even more money. It was a no brainer to buy a console back then.
Please stop with hypocritic bullshit like this, it is beyond tiresome.
You literally just said:
The only time that ever happened was when the PS1/Saturn/N64 came out and the PC was behind in graphics. When the 3Dfx Voodoo one came out that's a different story but for a short time the consoles had the edge.
...and now you say that buying the 360 at the time was a "no brainer".
So which flip-flop hypocritic bullshit opinion are you going with now???



EDIT:
Sure it was 3Ghz but the Xbox One and PS4 are running at 1.6Ghz.
I totally missed that you made this utterly ridiculous apples-to-oranges statement.
Clock speed means little to nothing when comparing two completely different ISAs, different microarchitectural generations, and when massive IPC differences are present.

So what that one is clocked at 3.2GHz, and the other is clocked at 1.6GHz?
What is the point you are trying to make with that statement???

Meaning they were the equivalent of a the PowerPC version of a Intel Atom.
I'm not letting this go.
Have you ever actually used an Intel Atom for gaming before? Have you???

Let me tell you - I have, and across multiple generations and with and without Hyper-threading.
Pairing an Intel Atom of any kind with even a RTX 3090 GPU, will net less of a gaming experience than what is possible on the 360 and PS3.

For someone proclaiming to be a "PC gamer", and consistently dissing console gaming of any kind (regardless of the user budget), you sure don't know shit about gaming across multiple PC architectures outside of the most mainstream and popular x86-64 CPUs, and certainly know less about console technology and gaming for talking such smack about it all of the time.

There is no shame in not knowing enough, as there is always more to learn.
But, there is extreme shame in talking such utter bullshit while being called out by everyone in multiple threads, and never learning from your mistakes.

Be better than that - I know you are better than that, especially for a Linux PC gamer.
 
Last edited:

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,614
That's right, and it would allow AA to be enabled simultaneously with HDR, which NVIDIA GPUs could not do until the Series 8 nearly a year later.
Good memory!
And it had 10MB of EDRAM with a still fast for today bandwidth of 256GB/s. Something that Infinity Cache seems highly reminiscent of.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,683
And it had 10MB of EDRAM with a still fast for today bandwidth of 256GB/s. Something that Infinity Cache seems highly reminiscent of.
That's right, and that did give the 360 quite the advantage for years over the PS3, until the Cell CPU was finally being fully utilized and optimized for properly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kac77
like this
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
11
first impressions:
The Xbox is a work of art in design compared to this monstrosity
So much plastic! everywhere! plastic panels removed to reveal.. another plastic panel, then under that a metal panel
The motherboard is huge! it looks like some kind of part that a company would make, to run tests and debug with before refining it into something more efficient/compact
That squirrel cage-looking fan is going to be noisy. Even at low rpm you'd probably be able to hear it for 3-4 feet away. But maybe they figure most people are sitting 8ft away from their tv, so nobody would notice it?

I'll wait for the matte, (hopefully non-white), slim, more refined version that they'll come out with in 3 or so years

XBox has always had a simpler design philosophy than PlayStation consoles. Sometimes simpler is better, sometimes it isn’t. Back when xbox’s were overheating with RRODs, simpler wasn’t better. Time will tell who truly has a better design this time around. That said, Sony is notorious for over engineering almost everything they make, unnecessarily at times.
 

Aurelius

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
2,952
I don't expect to see Sony release any more games on PC, at least not for years anyway. Pretty clear Sony was trying to make a quick buck while trying to open up PC gamers to the idea of the Playstation platform. What I do expect to see is studios that Sony owns to break away and release games to all platforms. PC is one thing but there's also Nintendo as well. PS4 was a big deal for market share but will the PS5 also have a large market presence? I don't think the PS5 will be as popular as the PS4. The $500 cost and the $400 model not able to play used games will deter some people. Lets not forget the $70 price for games. Demon Souls is an 11 year old game that is just made slightly better and costs $70?
I'm not so sure about cross-platform releases. Sony is starting from a pretty strong position in the market. The Switch is doing well, clearly, but the gap in hardware means that a studio like Naughty Dog or Santa Monica can't release a PS5 title on that platform. If they split at all, and I wouldn't expect them to, they'd release Switch-specific games that don't break away from the cash cows.

I suspect the PS5 will do fine sales-wise. It's hard to say if it'll do as well as the PS4, but remember that the pandemic is likely to skew numbers even if the price seems too high in some ways.

If Sony makes a decent profit releasing games on PC then it'll go from 7 years later release to PC, to timed exclusives. We can see how well timed exclusives have worked for the Xbox platform. Why you think Microsoft is buying ZeniMax? Microsoft will force some of their games to either be exclusive to the Xbox platform or at the very least a timed exclusive.

Also stop with the "living room gaming" thing, we all know you can hook up a PC to your living room TV. I do it, grandma does it, everyone does it. It hasn't been a console exclusive thing since the creation of the HDMI port.

I could see timed exclusives for a handful of things, but remember that Microsoft is buying Bethesda in no small part because Sony generally had the better exclusives for the outgoing generation. Microsoft is the underdog here — it's the one that needs an added incentive to buy its consoles where Sony is sitting pretty.

Living room gaming is defined by consoles. People certainly hook up computers in the living room, but it's well-established that many more people buy consoles for TV gaming than they do PCs. Please don't conflate what you'd like to see happen with the way things are.
 

scojer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
5,163
I'm not so sure about cross-platform releases. Sony is starting from a pretty strong position in the market. The Switch is doing well, clearly, but the gap in hardware means that a studio like Naughty Dog or Santa Monica can't release a PS5 title on that platform. If they split at all, and I wouldn't expect them to, they'd release Switch-specific games that don't break away from the cash cows.

I suspect the PS5 will do fine sales-wise. It's hard to say if it'll do as well as the PS4, but remember that the pandemic is likely to skew numbers even if the price seems too high in some ways.



I could see timed exclusives for a handful of things, but remember that Microsoft is buying Bethesda in no small part because Sony generally had the better exclusives for the outgoing generation. Microsoft is the underdog here — it's the one that needs an added incentive to buy its consoles where Sony is sitting pretty.

Living room gaming is defined by consoles. People certainly hook up computers in the living room, but it's well-established that many more people buy consoles for TV gaming than they do PCs. Please don't conflate what you'd like to see happen with the way things are.

This.
I CAN hook my PC up to my TV, and, I have in the past, but I prefer not. My PC I primarily play shooters and sims, both are better with keyboard and mouse, and it's not easy to use keyboard and mouse on my couch.

I prefer 3rd person/adventure/platform games on console, and, those are better to play with a controller, and, usually those are made for consoles.

That's my preference, and not everyone's.

Honestly, I don't care what's better, PC vs console, they're both good, they both play games, and everyone uses them differently. Some don't game on either, but will own both. Shocking, right?

It all boils down to the user, if you prefer to game on just PC, that's fine. If you prefer to game on just console, also fine. If you want to game on everything, go for it. If you want to own a PC and console, and, not game, that's fine as well.


Graphically we're getting to the point where it's just minor differences between the platforms, definitely not enough to get your panties in a wad.

Again, for me, it comes down to the gameplay and story. Playstation had the best exclusives of last gen, and, I'm sure they will next gen as well.
 

vegeta535

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
4,831
This.
I CAN hook my PC up to my TV, and, I have in the past, but I prefer not. My PC I primarily play shooters and sims, both are better with keyboard and mouse, and it's not easy to use keyboard and mouse on my couch.

I prefer 3rd person/adventure/platform games on console, and, those are better to play with a controller, and, usually those are made for consoles.

That's my preference, and not everyone's.

Honestly, I don't care what's better, PC vs console, they're both good, they both play games, and everyone uses them differently. Some don't game on either, but will own both. Shocking, right?

It all boils down to the user, if you prefer to game on just PC, that's fine. If you prefer to game on just console, also fine. If you want to game on everything, go for it. If you want to own a PC and console, and, not game, that's fine as well.


Graphically we're getting to the point where it's just minor differences between the platforms, definitely not enough to get your panties in a wad.

Again, for me, it comes down to the gameplay and story. Playstation had the best exclusives of last gen, and, I'm sure they will next gen as well.
This. Graphics is not even the most exciting part of what new consoles bring. The hope minimal to no loading is. As I get older I can't stand loading screens.
 

DukenukemX

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
5,003
MS has already stated and then acted upon statements, that their exclusives now release simultaneously for PC and console. Depending upon the specific development progress of a couple of the games which they just acquired---there may be a small delay to PC versions.
Timed releases. That's the definition of timed releases.
But it will be due to development not exactly being parallel in the workflow at those brands. Not due to MS holding them back.
Pretty sure any game delay on PC is due to priority's and deals with console manufacturers.
As far as your comments about Sony----it sounds like maybe you just don't like Sony? PlayStation is one of the absolute most popular and most mentioned brands in the world. They will not have a large problem, selling PS5's. Indeed, the higher release price tag will keep some people from buying right away. But there are a lot of other factors at play, here. And ultimately, I would expect a price drop next year. Which will soak up the people who waited.
I'm looking at it as a Sega CD kinda blunder here. Both Sony and Microsoft are releasing a "cheaper" but diskless version to the market, with Microsoft's Xbox Series S being far weaker than the X model. Microsoft will run into issues with developers having to develop for two kinds of hardware where Sony will run into issues with used games. Both cheaper consoles won't allow you to buy used games which will really piss off consumers where they usually save more money from used games than the $100 to $200 price decrease of the hardware. When games cost $70 then the $100 to $200 price decrease seems less valuable. Also, consoles priced at $500 have traditionally not done well. If the price of the Xbox Series X and the Disc version of the PS5 do decrease then maybe, but until then they're going to get a lot of hate from customers who thought they were saving money.
Xbox has never outsold Playstation in world wide sales. 360 did outsell in the U.S. However, MS was not able to keep that momentum with Xbox One.
I wonder why.
What they are doing now is an interesting tactic. And I do not think the goal is to win the console race, over Sony. I think the tactic is acknowledging that gaming is bigger than ever. PC gaming is bigger than ever. And they are going for that overall cash.
The "tactic" is to buy studios and force them to make exclusives or timed releases. Also Microsoft had a knee jerk reaction over how the PS4 was more powerful than the Xbox One that they decided to make the Xbox Series X far more powerful, which is not a bad thing when you consider it's the same price as the PS5. The PS5 on the other hand...

And on that, its a complete remake. Indeed, the general gameplay will be very similar. But everything else about the game is drastically improved. Its not a touched up remaster. Its full budget remake. It warrants a full price. If $70 is the new full price standard, so be it. This remake was not short changed in development. The Demon's Souls remake is a really big deal. As I said, the Souls games are huge, now. There is a ton of interest in this. And this is Sony acting on the fact that they let this slip, years ago.
Keep in mind that the remake is just going to be an updated engine with updated models and updated textures. This is not the same thing as making Demon Souls 2 or Dark Souls 4, where everything has to be created from the ground up. This does not deserve $60, let alone $70. It's not like Demon Souls was that old of a game that it needed the same treatment as Final Fantasy 7 Remake. Fire up Demon Souls on RPCS3 and the game still looks very good for 2009. But the point is that Sony is clearly pushing for $70 games with a game that doesn't deserve a $60 price, let alone $70. Also you're like $30 away from $100, which is what you're "saving" from buying the $400 PS5 model. Or you buy the $500 PS5 and wait for used copies of Demon Souls remastered to be bought for $20 because again the PS3 version does still exist and it also still works.
 

DukenukemX

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
5,003
Ok, just because a CPU is in-order does not automatically mean that it has Atom-level performance - ffs, we have gone over this before, and I know you know this.
Firstly, no we haven't. Secondly, then why is the XB1 eight core 1.6Ghz superior to the 3Ghz tri-core 360? The eight core jaguar is based on bulldozer and is far more slower than something like the AMD Trinity CPU's. Bulldozer IPC itself wasn't all that much of an upgrade over the Phenom's and Athlon CPU's around the time of the 360 release. Microsoft is emulating the Xbox 360 on the Xbox One, and we all know that emulation requires 10x more performance than the machine you're looking to emulate. Before you say 8 cores vs 3, keep in mind you can't effectively use 2 cores to increase the performance of emulating 1 core.


Please stop with hypocritic bullshit like this, it is beyond tiresome.
You literally just said:

...and now you say that buying the 360 at the time was a "no brainer".
So which flip-flop hypocritic bullshit opinion are you going with now???
You can still buy faster GPU's than the 360 and PS3, but that also costs more. Where as before the 3Dfx Voodoo, you didn't have a choice when it came to 3D graphics. Why you think the meme "but can it run Crysis" came from? Nvidia and ATI went insane with pricing that it was more affordable to buy a 360 or PS3. Though I argue that since ATI and Nvidia were both involved in the console market that they had no incentive to release cheaper GPU's for a while. That's what I believe is going on with AMD since the release of the PS4 and XB1, since they control the console market besides the Switch, but they did have the Wii U.
 

scojer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
5,163
DukenukemX - Demon's Souls is being remade from the ground up:
https://www.playstation.com/en-us/games/demons-souls/
From PlayStation Studios and Bluepoint Games comes a remake of the PlayStation classic, Demon’s Souls. Entirely rebuilt from the ground up and masterfully enhanced

So, it's not just "an updated engine with updated models and updated textures." It is 100% rebuilt, they just kept the gameplay and feel of the game the same.

I think $70 is fair, for a game that is over a decade old, was only on PS3, and, is getting rebuilt, from scratch.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,683
Firstly, no we haven't. Secondly, then why is the XB1 eight core 1.6Ghz superior to the 3Ghz tri-core 360? The eight core jaguar is based on bulldozer and is far more slower than something like the AMD Trinity CPU's. Bulldozer IPC itself wasn't all that much of an upgrade over the Phenom's and Athlon CPU's around the time of the 360 release. Microsoft is emulating the Xbox 360 on the Xbox One, and we all know that emulation requires 10x more performance than the machine you're looking to emulate. Before you say 8 cores vs 3, keep in mind you can't effectively use 2 cores to increase the performance of emulating 1 core.
No, Jaguar was not based on Bulldozer - those are completely different architectures that have nothing to do with one another, and Jaguar has about 2-3% more IPC that Bulldozer clock-for-clock.
Bulldozer was also a slight downgrade from Phenom II IPC from circa 2009-2010 - it and Jaguar have far more IPC than the original Phenom CPUs from 2007; also, the original Phenoms weren't around in 2005 or 2006 when the 360 and PS3 debuted, respectively.

No, Emulation does not necessarily "require" 10 times more performance - that is way too broad of a statement to make for all emulation, generally speaking.
You are making a lot of assumptions, and nearly everything you just wrote is totally incorrect.

Again, I would really recommend you start listening to others, rather than continuing on with touting information about subjects you obviously have little understanding of.
You can take this from someone who has used Phenom, Phenom II, Jaguar, and Bulldozer microarchitectures extensively, as well as PowerPC/PPC64/Cell, and not just for gaming.
 
Last edited:

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,383
I'm looking at it as a Sega CD kinda blunder here. Both Sony and Microsoft are releasing a "cheaper" but diskless version to the market, with Microsoft's Xbox Series S being far weaker than the X model. Microsoft will run into issues with developers having to develop for two kinds of hardware where Sony will run into issues with used games.

I can't find direct quotes at the moment, but supposedly it's super easy for developers to get games running on the Series S. Microsoft has tailored their dev tools to make it easy on developers. They can develop for the X and then use the provided tools to make it work on the S. Since the S simply uses weaker versions of the exact same hardware I'd imagine the process isn't much different than just scaling down settings like you would on a PC.
 

scojer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
5,163
No, Jaguar was not based on Bulldozer - those are completely different architectures that have nothing to do with one another, and Jaguar has about 2-3% more IPC that Bulldozer clock-for-clock.
Bulldozer was also a slight downgrade from Phenom II IPC from circa 2009-2010 - it and Jaguar have far more IPC than the original Phenom CPUs from 2007; also, the original Phenoms weren't around in 2005 or 2006 when the 360 and PS3 debuted, respectively.

No, Emulation does not necessarily "require" 10 times more performance - that is way too broad of a statement to make for all emulation, generally speaking.
You are making a lot of assumptions, and nearly everything you just wrote is totally incorrect.

Again, I would really recommend you start listening to others, rather than continuing on with touting information about subjects you obviously have little understanding of.
You can take this from someone who has used Phenom, Phenom II, Jaguar, and Bulldozer microarchitectures extensively, as well as PowerPC/PPC64/Cell, and not just for gaming.

1602691436481.png

You definitely know what you're talking about. I wouldn't mess with someone who is using a cluster of PS3s for personal use.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,614
No, Jaguar was not based on Bulldozer - those are completely different architectures that have nothing to do with one another, and Jaguar has about 2-3% more IPC that Bulldozer clock-for-clock.
Bulldozer was also a slight downgrade from Phenom II IPC from circa 2009-2010 - it and Jaguar have far more IPC than the original Phenom CPUs from 2007; also, the original Phenoms weren't around in 2005 or 2006 when the 360 and PS3 debuted, respectively.

No, Emulation does not necessarily "require" 10 times more performance - that is way too broad of a statement to make for all emulation, generally speaking.
You are making a lot of assumptions, and nearly everything you just wrote is totally incorrect.

Again, I would really recommend you start listening to others, rather than continuing on with touting information about subjects you obviously have little understanding of.
You can take this from someone who has used Phenom, Phenom II, Jaguar, and Bulldozer microarchitectures extensively, as well as PowerPC/PPC64/Cell, and not just for gaming.
Thank you for saying that jaguar is not based on bulldozer. In fact some things from jaguar made it into the first Zen.
 

RazorWind

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 11, 2001
Messages
3,746
it's a bit too risky on GPU's until a better design comes up where they can move the capacitors around the chip. laptops and consoles it's fine because they're not "suppose" to be opened..
On a graphics card, you could totally solve all that with conformal coating on the BGA package, and then underfill around it. I'm pretty sure they even did something like this on AMD's HBM-equipped designs in order to protect the interposer.
 

chameleoneel

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
3,443
Timed releases. That's the definition of timed releases.
I see what you are doing there and its not really appreciated. Causing me to have to re-state myself.

While indeed their practices COULD change, MS has already stated and acted upon their exclusives, releasing day and date with PC. Its something they announced in 2016 and remains part of their current practices.

And they have already been quick to state that the existing situations with games which they just acquired, are what they are. and it may not line up with the current goals and direction of the brand. But, we shouldn't expect that, going forward, with later games from those studios.
 
Last edited:

chameleoneel

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
3,443
Firstly, no we haven't. Secondly, then why is the XB1 eight core 1.6Ghz superior to the 3Ghz tri-core 360? The eight core jaguar is based on bulldozer and is far more slower than something like the AMD Trinity CPU's. Bulldozer IPC itself wasn't all that much of an upgrade over the Phenom's and Athlon CPU's around the time of the 360 release. Microsoft is emulating the Xbox 360 on the Xbox One, and we all know that emulation requires 10x more performance than the machine you're looking to emulate. Before you say 8 cores vs 3, keep in mind you can't effectively use 2 cores to increase the performance of emulating 1 core.
MS can emulate 360 on Xbone because they have all of the documentation and inside info about the 360 hardware registers and how software makes calls to it. Half the problem with fan made emulation is that emulators are made by amateurs without inside info. Whom are essentially trying to reverse engineer code and often guess at things, in their free time.

MS on the other hand, can write clean, purpose-built code.
---

And yeah, Demon's Souls remake is in fact, a full on remake. It is not a "remaster" where they are simply upscaling textures and adding polygons to models.

You can look at Bluepoints previous remake of Shadow of The Colossus, to get an idea for how far they are taking things. Although Demon's Souls is a much bigger project than that even was.


It is true that they aren't having to concept a completely original game. However, I think you are splitting hairs here and not understanding the amount of work and detail going into this project. And also, how important it is. This remake is a really big deal.
 
Last edited:

odditory

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
6,482
So, it's not just "an updated engine with updated models and updated textures." It is 100% rebuilt, they just kept the gameplay and feel of the game the same.

I think $70 is fair, for a game that is over a decade old, was only on PS3, and, is getting rebuilt, from scratch.
Shhhh let him believe. Already too many people buying up the PS5 supply just to play Demon's Souls because it looks g.d. incredible.

Wouldn't be surprised if Sony tries to acquire Bluepoint.
 
Last edited:

Chimpee

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2015
Messages
1,642
Shhhh let him believe. Already too many people buying up the PS5 supply just to play Demon's Souls because it looks g.d. incredible.

Wouldn't be surprised if Sony tries to acquire Bluepoint.
Doesn't FromSoftware controls the IP for Demon's Souls? Wouldn't it makes more sense Sony to purchased FromSoftware?
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
19,383
Doesn't FromSoftware controls the IP for Demon's Souls? Wouldn't it makes more sense Sony to purchased FromSoftware?

Sony owns Demon's Souls. The major reason it took so long for Demon's Souls to come to the west during the PS3 era is because Sony had no faith in the title and was refusing to publish it. Then Atlus stepped up and made a publishing agreement, with Sony, to make it happen. If From owned the rights to Demon's Souls they wouldn't have had to make Dark Souls it's own franchise, they could have made sequels instead.
 

DukenukemX

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
5,003
DukenukemX - Demon's Souls is being remade from the ground up:
https://www.playstation.com/en-us/games/demons-souls/


So, it's not just "an updated engine with updated models and updated textures." It is 100% rebuilt, they just kept the gameplay and feel of the game the same.

I think $70 is fair, for a game that is over a decade old, was only on PS3, and, is getting rebuilt, from scratch.
Like I already said, you don't have to design the game from scratch. No new ideas, no new game design. It's just Demon Souls with better graphics. I'd like to see how this compares to a texture repack of Demon Souls on RPCS3. I still remember how they Remastered Dark Souls.

 

scojer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
5,163
Like I already said, you don't have to design the game from scratch. No new ideas, no new game design. It's just Demon Souls with better graphics. I'd like to see how this compares to a texture repack of Demon Souls on RPCS3. I still remember how they Remastered Dark Souls.


The video you posted is very minor differences, and, doesn't really help you out at all.

It's a big difference in the upcoming version.

THIS is how it compares to a "texture repack"


You claimed they're not designing it from scratch. Yet, they are, and they did, and as you can clearly see in the video, it's a big difference, more so than your video.

What are you wanting? Them to change it from 3rd person to isometric?
Add in some turn based gameplay?
 

chameleoneel

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
3,443
The video you posted is very minor differences, and, doesn't really help you out at all.

It's a big difference in the upcoming version.

THIS is how it compares to a "texture repack"


You claimed they're not designing it from scratch. Yet, they are, and they did, and as you can clearly see in the video, it's a big difference, more so than your video.

What are you wanting? Them to change it from 3rd person to isometric?
Add in some turn based gameplay?
Here is a better comparison video.

4K/60 video. comparing Demon's Souls emulated at 4k Vs. the recent footage of the remake. with shot for shot comparisons.
 

Verge

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 27, 2001
Messages
6,647
Thank you - I may not know everything, but I certainly do try, and definitely admit when I'm wrong or don't know!
Rare on the internet my friend! I do the same, and i always leave my wrong posts up for people to mock if they choose. Being wrong is human, and having an opinion opens oneself up to that.
 

Chimpee

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2015
Messages
1,642
Sony owns Demon's Souls. The major reason it took so long for Demon's Souls to come to the west during the PS3 era is because Sony had no faith in the title and was refusing to publish it. Then Atlus stepped up and made a publishing agreement, with Sony, to make it happen. If From owned the rights to Demon's Souls they wouldn't have had to make Dark Souls it's own franchise, they could have made sequels instead.
I didn't realize the IP belongs to Sony, thanks for the info.
 

DukenukemX

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
5,003
No, Jaguar was not based on Bulldozer - those are completely different architectures that have nothing to do with one another, and Jaguar has about 2-3% more IPC that Bulldozer clock-for-clock.
Bulldozer was also a slight downgrade from Phenom II IPC from circa 2009-2010 - it and Jaguar have far more IPC than the original Phenom CPUs from 2007; also, the original Phenoms weren't around in 2005 or 2006 when the 360 and PS3 debuted, respectively.
Whatever the case is, the Jaguar cores are slow in the PS4. If not from the design but also due to clock speed and the use of GDDR5 memory.
No, Emulation does not necessarily "require" 10 times more performance - that is way too broad of a statement to make for all emulation, generally speaking.
It's just a generalization to help people comprehend how difficult it is to translate an alien system to run on a pc. It's not 100% correct but that statement isn't too far off from the truth. A PS3 is much more difficult to emulate than the Switch and requires more processing power, due to the complexity of the hardware, even though the Switch is more powerful. Either way the 1.6Ghz 8 core Jaguar cores are able to emulate the Xbox 360, which should give you an idea in how weak the PowerPC cores in the 360 were.

 

DukenukemX

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
5,003
Thank you for saying that jaguar is not based on bulldozer. In fact some things from jaguar made it into the first Zen.
I thought they were but it turns out they're based on Bobcat. Which means the Jaguar design is actually older compared to bulldozer, like almost K6 old. I was wrong about the Jaguar being based off Bulldozer, but that just reinforces my statement that the Jaguar cores are weak. Credit to Microsoft's team who wrote the emulator, but the 360 CPU was less than impressive. The PS3 Cell CPU was a mistake but impressive from a historical point of view. Horrible CPU but interesting design.
 

DukenukemX

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
5,003
The video you posted is very minor differences, and, doesn't really help you out at all.

It's a big difference in the upcoming version.

THIS is how it compares to a "texture repack"

How about Demon Souls with Ray-Tracing? You can do a lot on PC when it comes to graphic mods. Give it time and someone will mod it to look like the PS5 version.

You claimed they're not designing it from scratch. Yet, they are, and they did, and as you can clearly see in the video, it's a big difference, more so than your video.
Yea graphics, not anything else. Don't see how you're not understand my statement?
What are you wanting? Them to change it from 3rd person to isometric?
Add in some turn based gameplay?
How about Demon Souls 2? How about Blood Borne 2? How about a new IP for $70? Demon Souls on the PS5 is NOT A NEW GAME. Better graphics is not a new game. It's an 11 year old game that nobody cared about until Dark Souls. Demon Souls is $40 at best, because that's the price of Dark Souls remastered.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,683
That does look nice, and it is funny that icons and apps are starting to have more rounded edges - not a bad look!



Whatever the case is, the Jaguar cores are slow in the PS4. If not from the design but also due to clock speed and the use of GDDR5 memory.
The lower clock speed aside (which is standard for all Jaguar CPUs, not just those in the consoles), according to you what part of the design would cause them to be slow and what does the use of GDDR5 have to do with this aspect?
Sincerely asking.

It's just a generalization to help people comprehend how difficult it is to translate an alien system to run on a pc. It's not 100% correct but that statement isn't too far off from the truth. A PS3 is much more difficult to emulate than the Switch and requires more processing power, due to the complexity of the hardware, even though the Switch is more powerful.
You are correct here, and I agree with this.

Either way the 1.6Ghz 8 core Jaguar cores are able to emulate the Xbox 360, which should give you an idea in how weak the PowerPC cores in the 360 were.
Not quite - the Xenon CPU used a much simpler design with a 3-core PPC CPU with 2-way SMT (6 threads), which overall would be much simpler to emulate over the IBM Cell (1 PPE and 7 SPEs) across conventional modern many-core x86-64 CPUs today.
That aspect hardly shows how "weak" the PPC cores were in the Xenon, which they absolutely were not at the time in the mid-2000s.
 
Last edited:

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,683
I thought they were but it turns out they're based on Bobcat. Which means the Jaguar design is actually older compared to bulldozer, like almost K6 old. I was wrong about the Jaguar being based off Bulldozer, but that just reinforces my statement that the Jaguar cores are weak.
Yep, that's correct, they are based on Bobcat, but Jaguar itself was a newer and much improved, and more powerful, design.
Again, Jaguar is about 1-3% faster than Bulldozer clock-for-clock.

I'm well aware Jaguar has weak CPU cores - I've had countless discussions about that very topic on here across numerous threads, so I'm not denying you that aspect.
Jaguar was meant for low-power applications and embedded designs - Sony and Microsoft went with them because, at the time in the early 2010s, ARM was still 32-bit and there were no other single-chip/SoC solutions that were offered by any other company outside of AMD which offered such a great price/performance ratio.

Credit to Microsoft's team who wrote the emulator, but the 360 CPU was less than impressive.
The tri-core Xenon was far more powerful than any x86 single-core, or x86-64 dual-core, on the market in 2005 and 2006.
I would say, at the time at least, that it was more than impressive, wouldn't you? ;)

The PS3 Cell CPU was a mistake but impressive from a historical point of view. Horrible CPU but interesting design.
As for the Cell, it was an extremely powerful CPU for the mid to late 2000s, and while it was not great for, nor meant for, general-purpose computing or gaming, it did exceed at HPC and parallel compute applications, which at the time no x86 or x86-64 CPU was efficient at, especially in the TDP range the Cell operated in.
The Cell was also used in enterprise and HPC applications and servers up until 2012, and lasted even longer in the PS3 itself into the mid-2010s, thus showing what longevity and processing capabilities it truly had, especially when software was optimized to take advantage of its SPE units.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kac77
like this

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
11,318
You're really overstating the case here.

This doesn't mean that many PlayStation games will come to the PC, or that the releases will come soon after the console version's launch (Horizon Zero Dawn certainly wasn't). If you end up waiting a year or more, especially if there's just a handful of games that get this treatment, it may be just about scooping up "leftover" revenue and convincing PC gamers that they should get a PlayStation to enjoy those games sooner.

Yes, there are some people who won't play on consoles, but the strategy isn't a "huge blow" to living room gaming at this stage. You can make a case for that if a game like God of War 5 arrives on PC shortly after the PS5 release; not if Sony decides to release it long after console gamers have moved on.

What sony has convinced me by releasing these games on PC is that I no longer need to struggle in front of a TV with a controller, and more importantly no longer need to buy an expensive console for a handful of games. I can wait. I already wait on PC because of games that are exclusive to the windows store or epic store.

To me every console I owned was a necessary bad, now they removed the necessary part, so what's left is just "bad".

It's not that console gaming will die out because of this. It's that Sony realized that they can make more money by selling games on PC than by trying to force consoles on everyone. And if the rumours are true that they sell consoles at a loss, then they are actually loosing money on people like me.
 
Top