even when we compare pssr vs native (not vs fsr2 or any other upscaling) the math looks like this:
I literally haven't seen the game and neither have you so what are we arguing here?
No. There is nobody else on Rockstar's level. Name a PS360 era game as impressive as GT V or a PS4 game as impressive as RDR2. I don't even like their game but their tech since like GTA IV has been unmatched. No idea what they will do with GTA VI but I sure as hell wouldn't use Spidey 2 as a reference.
If sony is settling for these specs on a premium $600 console with possibly a 250 watt budget then you can be sure Nintendo will settle for much less since they have to cram in everything in a 20 watt handheld AND hit that $300-350 price point.
So spiderman 2 is going to look even better in the 60 fps mode , with much better raytracing. I fail to see where the problem is? Unless people were expecting a pro console to run a 60fps game at 120 fps?
Turning off ray traced GI likely means adopting a system of GI probes to pre-compute lighting at different times of day. It's going to be a lot of work.
Horizon? GTFO with this shit.
Ahh.... One of the usual suspects. Who would have guessed?
HeisenbergFX4
Bruv, we get your hard on for Sony, but that might be on the same level of dumb as your Steam take.
rockstar should. But they also had the same chops in the PS4 era when they took a year to port GTA5 to next gen consoles and still couldnt get a 60 fps mode working. Same thing happeend with RDR2 on the Pro and X1X. All that 2-4x extra GPU and they didnt have the chops to offer a 60 fps mode.
We’re not talking about how good games look or how great they play. I straight up told you I don’t even like Rockstar games. We’re talking about how CPU-intensive they are. Hell, I platinum’d HZD but can’t stand RDR2.
If it's 1440p30 on the PS5/XSX, then 720p - 900p may be viable on the S.
Yeah I think people, just like with the launch of the PS5 itself, are focusing too much on the "only 10% more" part and not thinking at all about what other changes to the hardware may result in less CPU use. Sure it might be only 10% more, but if there are other hardware changes that reduce CPU use by 10-20% over the original PS5 now we are looking at something far more substantial. Like we literally JUST went through this with the actual PS5 launch, why has nobody learned that numbers on paper don't always tell the story.
You are absolutely correct, but their all-in one zen3 APUs (Ryzen 5) generally roll with 4-8 CPU cores and no more than 8 CUs for graphics. An additional 52 GPU CU are also going to make for a big chip which pushes a lot of heat. Something has to give. We haven't seen massive IPC or clock speed gains from Zen2 through Zen4. Zen5 looks like the biggest jumps since Zen1 to Zen2 but you won't be using Zen5 in any chip coming out in the next 18 months unless you want massive shortages and high cost.
I play everywhere, nice try though
Probably not with the same CPU.Who cares about GTAVI or RDR 2. The real test will be, can it play Starfield at 60fps at launch.
Umm no? We are comparing the Pro and the standard, PC is irrelevant. FSR2 on the standard is shader based. PSSR on the PRO is NOT shader based and has dedicated hardware. Thats not to say it has zero cost on the prior resources, but its definitely less than the full FSR2 cost. So whilst it takes 2ms to do the reconstruction resources are freed up as compared to the standard model. The fact that those resources are freed up at the end of the pipeline means that they can't be used for that frame, but I'm guessing various other operations can be carried out that aren't frame locked.
Because spiderman 2 is one of the handful of games that are able to 60 fps in RT. it is not the norm. And again, its only doing RT reflections. They did have the budget to add RTGI or RT shadows. if you want the rest of the gen to play out like this where even the best sony studios settle for RT reflections then great, PS5 pro will run them at higher resolution and 60 fps.
There's nothing on the market that even comes close to the level of detail or open world systems working together the way RDR2 was able to accomplish...and that game was released in 2018.
Where did I mention anything about consoles?
GTA VI looks to be super NPC heavy going from the trailer at least, it's just too early to say. I'm just laughing at your ridiculous quotes about Death stranding and Horizon being on par with R*s efforts. But yea R* really like to push the envelope with their releases. Nothing looked like GTA V on 360/PS3 and nothing looked like RDR2 on XB1/PS4, at that scale. Don't underestimate them you silly goose
Joking aside. I dont know why everyone reckons the current CPU's in the XSX and PS5 are so terrible. And why supposedly everything is now suddenly CPU limited. I can run loads of stuff really well on an ancient i7 7700k if I drop in a top tier GPU. And when we bear in mind what devs were capable of doing with the PS4 and X1X, I'm of the opinion that most stuff should be GPU limited not CPU. Its an 8 core 16 threaded bit of aged, but capable silicon, from my perspective. If we looked at an X1X or PS4 in the same way, in theory they shouldn't have ran anything at all at 30fps. But they did fine considering.
Does Tears of the Kingdom simulate entire ecosystems and food chain hierarchies the way RDR2 does? Do NPCs decompose in TOTK or do they simply disappear once the player character walks out of sight?
Rdr2 has insane latency compared to the other games, they are using that frame time for pushing the visuals at the expense of responsiveness. That being said, this does not change the fact that rdr2 is a damn technical beast.
