Been wondering where youve been.
It was yesterday when I noticed that the best deal for FF7 Intergrade is to sub PS+.Of course PS Plus is better with Cloud...
The interesting thing to me about this (from a marketing POV) and seeing how both companies handle announcements/delivery, was the timeline of these features.
I wouldn't claim with any certainty that Xcloud has less latency. We have no idea about the specifics of the test such as distance from the datacenter and what peering his ISP uses. Even if everything was the same you are talking about a difference of less then 10ms.
Thread detail attempt. Can you cover your doomsday predictions on HD2 while you are at it
? No? Well, stop derailing this thread or address the topic… but then you need to deal with again the PR (power of Xcloud, we invented Azure we cannot be beaten, etc…) and the reality (game streaming quality is far from games running locally and worse than the PS Now service xbox propaganda crapped on).
Also 45 ms is still pretty bad input lag. And so even if MS "wins" here, I'd rather have a better image quality and play something not too reliant on split second reflexes. These 10 ms advantage aren't worth it.
It's needs direct X 11 GPUs to run . SONY offering needs a PS 5. X Cloud can run off some TVs and most basic mobile phones . I think that's the difference.
I imagine it's being clever with how cpu resource is managed. We use lots of virtual servers at work so I see the technology in action. Not all software is hammering the cpu at all times and resources are shared dynamically as needed. Some games will be hogging cpu so they will be on servers that also run games that are cpu light.
PS5 cloud gaming runs PS5 versions of games while Xbox cloud gaming uses virtualized Series S hardware.
PS5 cloud input lag difference:
Xbox has lower input lag:
But way worse image quality
But hey it's better than no comparison I guess. 
Grade school Chromebook users?
Heisenberg007
, why u always lyiinnnn Microsoft continues to be all talk but in the end they underdeliver on all fronts.
I still remember people claiming it would be impossible for Sony to compete in cloud because they have to rent the infrastructure while Microsoft has Azure, that Sony was still using a network of PS3 duct taped together and bla bla. That the reason of the XSX shortages was Microsoft focusing on building modern blades
With this being said cloud technology is viable for slow paced games but it's still far far away from local in all other genres.
The less than 10ms difference can be somewhat accounted for by quicker more shitty encoder quality and lower res but you're right.
Nah, man. Shifted from Windows to OSX 10 years ago and have never looked back.Same for Zoom over Teams. Teams is way better for work, Zoom is just for one thing.
I'll also go ahead and add that OSX over Windows is a laughable thing. Linux for people who talk specifically about gaming I can get, but OSX over Windows, come on.
Additionally, and this is just for
No one uses OSX where we're from
"Brutal?"
We are getting the idea from DF, they stated the performance and visual settings are an exact match for Series S. They also state in the video that they spoke with someone at xbox and the SX based blades virtualize 4 Series S instances. I to remember MS referring to 4 One S instances around launch, but maybe that has changed with newer configurations on the server board. Regardless, no one is pulling this out of thin air as it's plainly stated in the video. I'm sure if someone is motivated enough, they could corroborate or disprove DF's claim.
Exactly, there isn't even evidence that they virtualize Series S on those machines they speculate that that may be the case based on the One S statement.
MS announced that they upgraded the xCloud blades to be based on SX and the games they are testing are an exact match for Series S visual settings and performance. I would consider that evidence.
But what's to suggest that a single series X SoC is somehow running two instances of a series S game? There is no evidence of that.
This.
?? MS specifically mentioned that the boards were designed to run multiple instances of lower-power Xbox devices, they gave the example of each SX blade's APU running 4 X1S profiles. I imagine you have asked yourself "Self, why would they not mention Series S if the capability is there?" Well, during the only time period where they were speaking publicly about their SX blade's capabilities, the Xbox Series S was not announced as a product yet. So, considering the fact that the SX blades are clearly virtualizing a Series S and were designed to handle multiple instances of lower-power Xboxes, I believe we do have circumstantial evidence supporting this.
It's impossible to do 4 and people just misunderstood 4 One S for 4 Series S for some reason. If they gave an example of 4 One S being virtualized on a Series X SoC how would it do 4 Series S with the CPU requirements? It might be possible to push 2 with lower CPU requirements for specific games but One S and Series S wouldn't be a match one for one.
Check above, i edited and you responded while i was typing. I corrected myself earlier and stated I do not believe that are virtualizing 4 SS instances. It would be 2 per APU
To clarify again, we are talking about 2 Series S instances. If we look at what the SX cpu has to handle when running 4 X1S instances, it must perform the work for all four of the X1's 8 core @ 1.75 ghz cpu. I am admittedly a lamen in this area, so I ask you if you find it feasible for a stock XS Zen 2 cpu to handle the workload of these 32 cores? I always assumed the SX blades ran with a more powerful configuration of it's Zen 2 cpu.
I do
If you want my opinion I don't think it's actually XSX silicon capable of running multiple instances there either and some MS marketing about new gen server hardware and "4 times the power of previous gen" has turned into a game of telephone even with that claim. It is at least somewhat more plausible though if you take into account IPC gains and it having more than twice the clock.
I was platinuming HD2.
Not at all. I work on Mac, Linux and Windows.
Still it has all the features i need, and is so much more enjoyable to use... I will take it over the "professional" pile of jank ux that is 365 any day.
