PS5 Teraflops Won't Matter - Here's Why

From PSU: "In the next-generation PS5 Teraflops (or indeed, Xbox Scarlett Teraflops) really aren’t going to matter as much as they used to.

Now bear with us, as there is a fair bit of tech waffle coming up."

Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
I_am_Batman33d ago (Edited 33d ago )

I doubt that Sony and Microsoft are gonna use FP32 performance for marketing the power of the next gen consoles this time around. People would compare it to the last gen consoles and would get the wrong idea about how powerful those consoles are.

I haven't finished updating my personal Next gen console spec predictions after Navi's E3 reveal yet because I'm waiting for reviews to shine some light on power and thermals of the Navi GPUs but I think that they'll land somewhere around 8.5-9Tflop/s. That won't sound like a generational leap to many people, especially when compared to the Xbox One X with it's 6Tfop/s but that's just because you can't compare floating point performance across different architectures.

According to AMD, the 5700 XT outperforms the RTX 2070 on average. That would by extension mean that it outperforms VEGA 64 by an even larger margin. So here you have AMDs new ~9Tflop/s GPU outperforming AMDs old ~12.6Tflop/s GPU by quite a bit. Of course we should take these figures with a grain of salt and wait for reviews before making any conclusions on Navis true performance but AMD have put some work into making the graphics pipeline of the new RDNA µarchitecture more efficient so if people compare numbers across µarchitectures they are comparing apples to oranges.

Sony and MS know this of course so I think they'll try to focus on other aspects when marketing their consoles. We can already see that they are focusing on the SSD and CPU performance when advertising the generational leap we'll see.

dumahim32d ago

It's funny how every few generations the measuring stick gets swapped for something else. Early days was bits, then processor speed, then TFLOPs and memory.

nucky6432d ago

remember when any game article told how many polygons made up a character in a game? that was VERY popular at one point.

fr0sty32d ago

I remember reading in GamePro about Battle Arena Toshinden on PS1, and how the final fight took place inside a giant rotating donut made up of over 100k polygons! Amazing! lol...

This time it's hard drive transfer speed and ray tracing.

KillZallthebeast31d ago

I'm just glad they are finally putting larger amounts of RAM in consoles, and faster CPUs. Maybe AI won't have to be brain dead anymore

Sophisticated_Chap32d ago (Edited 32d ago )

Certainly a tough time for any PC gamer looking to upgrade right now. I'm convinced that the new consoles are going to essentially be using the RX 5700XT GPU @10.17 TFLOPS. We're still a year and a half out from launch, so it isn't so far fetched.

The big problem right now, is for anyone looking to upgrade their PC. Graphics cards are ridiculously expensive these days, and with the RX 5700XT coming in at $450.00 USD for the 9.7TFLOP version and $500.00 USD for the 10.17 TFLOP 50th Anniversary version, the value proposition for upgrading your PC verses buying a PS5 or Xbox Two is completely non-existent.

Who the hell wants to buy a $450.00 or $500.00 GPU, when you can buy a new 10 TFLOP console, with a CPU, SSD, PSU, GDDR6 memory and a controller, for what I believe will be $600.00 or even $700.00 USD?? Unfortunately, you really can't beat that. To ensure that you are future proofing your system, you literally need to spend a minimum of $700.00 USD on a Radeon VII or RTX 2080, or around $900.00 for a RTX 2080TI (and I might be low on that last number).

Anyone who upgrades right now to an RX 5700XT, will certainly have a beast of a PC, particularly at 1440p, which is the sweet spot in my opinion, but 4K is supposed to be the new standard, and for some reason, AMD and Nvidia, have made high end gaming on 4K beyond the average person's reach. On top of that, Sony and Microsoft are already talking 8K, and yet, as I said, 4k on PC has barley gotten off the ground in any kind of an affordable way.

The way things are going, PC gaming is going to go down the tubes, and the PC building community is going to begin to dwindle unfortunately. AMD has ensured that next gen consoles will be viable and extremely relevant, by jacking up the cost of GPUs in the PC space. I have no doubt that both Microsoft and Sony have something to do with the way AMD chose to price their new graphics cards.

AMD could have come in and undercut Nvidia, to regain market share, but really, if you think about it, why should they care? If you can't afford to game on a PC, then you'll buy a console, and guess what? They make all of the hardware for all current and next gen Xbox and PlayStation consoles. They essentially have the gaming market cornered.

dontbhatin32d ago


While you do have some fair points, I completely disagree with your beliefs on PC gaming going down the tubes. The same stuff was said at the beginning of the current gen consoles, and PC gaming has been increasing in popularity and market value over the past 10 years and on top of that, it is so much easier to jump into PC gaming now than how it used to be.

Sure PC gaming can be pretty expensive, but you know what you get with the extra cost? A ton of different things compared to a console. I can run Multiple displays running multiple tasks on one screen and playing a game at max fidelity on the other. I have a 4k monitor ($220 on sale) for web browsing and games that don't really need over 60FPS, and a 1080P 144Hz monitor for my competitive shooters, and another 1080p monitor I got for free so i have that hooked up too because why not?

What can a console do while playing games? Party chat, background music, game streaming, downloading.

I personally have a PS4 Pro and a Switch as well, and I am very excited to pick up a PS5. Sony's exclusives are the only reason I still buy a console (besides Nintendo) since from here on out, I wont miss out on any XBOX exclusives.

Cobra95132d ago

First off, the PS5 doesn't exist. As you correctly pointed out, it's maybe 18 months away from existing. That's about as long as an avid PC gamer keeps hardware before thinking of upgrading one thing or another. During that time, much changes, including lower prices for existing silicon, and better silicon.

I certainly wouldn't let the prospect of an exciting new PS5 at the end of 2020 prevent me from getting a better game PC now, if I felt I needed one.

SirBruce32d ago

When consoles have been launched, GPUs similar to the ones inside them use to be in the sub 200$ range. Maybe we are too positive when we think RX 5700XT will be inside PS5 and Scarlett... I hope no. Sony and Microsoft should take the head again, like when Xbox 360 launched, that I needed a very expensive PC to get something really better in Oblivion than what I got on console.

dcbronco32d ago

PCs advantage had been the ability to upgrade at a steady clip. But let's be realistic, 4k is about where the road ends. Most content hast hit 4k yet. Even major events like the Super Bowl aren't broadcast in 4k. The graphics hungry gamer is a very different beast from the average consumer. And the average consumer are the ones that keep prices low. 4k/120 is as far as gaming is really going to go. It's time to focus on other things. Like game play mechanics and AI. We'll soon have as pretty a picture that matters. The people that continue to chase the bigger resolutions will be fewer and fewer.

Master of Unlocking32d ago (Edited 32d ago )

Well, someone who doesn't have a PC anymore, like me, perhaps...? Whatever happened to mine is far beyond my comprehension as I've never been a PC tech-savvy person contrary to a lot of blokes, but I really miss downloading all the movies I want from the internet, among many things that can only be done on a PC.

Plus, when I see all the mods that can be used on PC, along with all the options we for some reason never get on consoles, and the fact that now PCs can be connected to the TV set in the living room with the HDMI socket (I know it's been there for a while, lol), and now the fact that Sony have released a Bluetooth dongle to use the DS4 on PC wirelessly... hey, why not after all? Plus I could really do with a PC that can emulate beyond the PS1. Trouble is, it's probably cost me next to a grand ...

RevXM31d ago

We really dont know what ps5 will be sporting just yet, but I believe it will be sporting some variant of big Navi (Navi 20) which the 5700/5700XT is not.

This I base on the fact that both Sony and MS are talking about Ray-tracing which is possible on the 5700's sure, but not a touted feature. In ms's case they are definitively NOT 5700's. MS most certainly has a variant of big navi and this we can safely extrapolate from the single fact that MS claim the Scarlet has hardware acellerated ray-tracing which the Navi 10 line doesnt have. And these systems are still a year and a half away and we will see Navi 20's in about a years time so they could be sporting big navi.

Until Sony clarifies on wether PS5 has hardware accelerated raytracing or not we cant be entirely sure if it is big or small Navi, in which case it is possible PS5 will have graphics similar to 5700, but big navi is a good step up and I dont think Sony would like to fall behind on raytracing especially since they have seemed invested in the technology since at least that GT demo and also confirming raytracing a couple months back with some details on what the technology can do for games. Hardware raytracing just makes sense as that would make the feature so much more useable and not completely strangle off performance. barely anyone plays with ray-tracing on with RTX cards as it is and if Devs are going to have any interest in it, then it needs to be hardware accelerated or it will only be used in a handful of indies and then just forgotten about as the feature would just bottleneck the entire graphics unit in any AAA scale game and it would have to be paired back a ridiculous amount or run like complete unplayable garbage and no one would be interested.
Nvidias RTX cards arent perfect, but compared to anything else running raytracing it is night and day difference. dedicated hardware is a must or else its just empty marketing jargon with no real basis in reality that is just going to let both developers and gamers down.

That could be the case for Ps5, but I doubdt it. MS is doing it and software base RT is not going to cut it.
Big navi is a must for Sony if they want to be taken seriously and not mocked into oblivion when games come out and RT games looks and runs multiple times better on MS's sytem.If sony is doing Software RT, they must be sweating real hard now that MS have announced hardware accelerated RT.

Small navi doesnt have hardware RT.
Big Navi most certainly will.
RX5700-Rx5700XT = small navi.
MS have Hardware accelerated RT.
Sony would be stupid if they opt for small navi.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 31d ago
Rude-ro32d ago

They are “Chefs”... and the consumers are looking for “food”.
That is all that matters now.
Even with pc.
Yes, you can play any top marketed first person shooter at better frame rates on a pc....
But who has the vision and who is committed?
Period ALL know that the best graphics and performance is on a pc. 100%
But where are those titles coming from that we all are like... “ok... we want to experience”.. from Sony’s backing is where.

That’s next gen. Period.

Princess_Pilfer32d ago

At least *someone* has a good idea ow the tech works.

I was screaming this from the hilltops back when the Xbone was released to make 2 points 1: that you coudln't compare the PS4/XboneX hardware to Nividia hardware based on Tflops, and 2: That we already knew what 6 Tflops looked like on AMDs current archetecture performance wise, and it looks like an RX480/580 with slight overclocks, as an attempt to explian why the Xbone X will very rarily manage 4k/60.

SirBruce32d ago

And cloud based Ray Tracing can make the trick... while connection is live and we pay.

dcbronco32d ago

Uh, yeah. That's called evolution. As architecture changes the characteristics that matter the most change. Like tuning a car for an oval or a road course. Different things matter.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 31d ago
Apocalypse Shadow32d ago (Edited 32d ago )

Back in the past, companies talked about power, l2 cache, flops, cycles and all those things that don't matter to console gamers. A whole lot of hot air on stage with power points and spread sheets when gamers would rather just see what you can do with it. It's why E3 is no longer full of it. We don't care about what graphics card is in it and we don't care what company made the chips.

Show me what you can do with the UI and in gameplay on how developers can deliver more fun and immersive experiences. Show me how I can control games better, how I can feel and hear it better. That's all I really want to know besides on if it's affordable. Ask a Nintendo fan on if they know what technology is in the Switch. They don't care. Ask them what the most fun games are on it and they'll provide you with a list.

In the end, it's about what the developer's vision is and if they can achieve it with better tools that deliver better and more fun games to play. Sony makes great games no matter the power. I expect them to continue that with or without the most advanced hardware.

Nintendo seems to understand that too. Hopefully Microsoft learns this most valuable lesson. Same with Google and any other company trying to get into the game.

I_am_Batman32d ago (Edited 32d ago )

I think we're way past the point where hardware is the main limiting factor on the creative vision. Don't get me wrong it's certainly still a factor (especially with the low end CPUs in the current gen consoles) but as hardware got progressively more powerful other factors have become more prevalent.

Most ambitious projects are limited by budget, manpower and time. Historically the evolution of game development tools and APIs couldn't keep pace with the evolution of processing power. To compensate for that, development budgets were raised, dev teams got scaled up and game development cycles were extended.

The question then becomes how far can you scale those variables before a project becomes unmanagable? How big can a dev team get before effective communication becomes impossible? How long can a project be in development before you need a return of your investment? And how expensive can a project get, using a traditional monetization scheme, before we lose all creativity because only low risks are safe to take? I think we are already starting to reach some of those limits.

Better hardware won't solve those problems but better software might. We need to create the tools for the devs to do more with less.

robtion32d ago

Well said. Then again, I would expect no less from Batman ;)

Last_Boss32d ago

I like exactly what you're saying. I'm not on the tech side but I understand the pieces of pie.


indysurfn32d ago (Edited 32d ago )

All your points are good, but I want to highlight this one :"How long can a project be in development before you need a return of your investment? " This is what Square used as the reason for switching from Turn Based rpg's to Action rpg's. Way back in 1999-2000. Plus releated to that they said they wanted to smooth out earnings. For investors.

I do hope the support and dev tools get a big investment from Sony Microsoft Nintendo, or especially the 3rd party engines like Unreal.

Cobra95132d ago

Yes. Diminishing returns. We already can do everything we used to dream being able to do in virtual worlds. Graphics and sound are as good as they need to be. Improvements are incremental, not revolutionary like going from 2D to 3D.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 32d ago
NXFather32d ago

Let me make this short for your next response. Tell me how you or anyone(Literally anyone ever) has proved I have a number three rank in any(Literally anything that one can have a rank in) context at all period. Or proved it about that guy downtown.

harmny32d ago (Edited 32d ago )

They won't matter because they can't beat PC. And because console gamers are delusional and they want 4k 60fps and an SSD for $400 even though they spend $1000 on their mobile phones.
So they'll sell a reasonable console at a loss that run games well enough and people will buy it. Fine by me. Nothing wrong with that.
Why would you count teraflops?
Will it run all new games? Yes. Will they look better? Yes. That's enough

Ceaser985736132d ago

With the price point next gen will launch can beat PC.. The price will be 499 and 4k 60 fps at that price is amazing. Even PC can't do that at 499.

harmny32d ago

you missed the point. its not possble. not at 400, not at 500, not at 600. a 2080ti cant do 4k 60 on latest titles and that is a 1200 gpu. and only a gpu. without the rest of the pc.
current consoles cant even do 1080p 60 on demanding titles. and you want the new ones to be 4k 60?

1080p 30 - what we have
1080p 60 - 2 times more expensive to render
4k 30 - 4 times more expensive
4k 60 - 8 times more expensive

delusional gamers lol.

Ceaser985736132d ago (Edited 32d ago )

Current gen CPU is weak. You are delusional and you won't accept it.. Console doesn't work like PC you are missing that....The next gen Console comes with a powerful CPU and 4k 60fps will be very much possible...
At 499$ price point Console company still will sell it at a good loss..
Again Console business plans and tech don't work like PC... Hope you understand that instead of being delusional yourself... lol!

The Xbox X ran forza at 4k 60fps.. Gears at native 4k 30fps..
Pro spec was less powerful compared to the X. So if you think Both Companies will stick to this then you are delusional again..
4k 60fps will be mandatory next gen for console and again most PC people don't get this.. Console doesn't work like PC.. price wise and game wise....

Eonjay32d ago


Nvidia's pricing are not based on the performance of the card. Its based on the fact that they know PC gamers are have been tricked into thinking that they have to pay 3x the actual value of what a competitor will sell it for.
That you are quoting Nvidia's price/performance proposition as anything but a rip off is the real problem isn't it.
The real problem is that Nvidia is charging $1200 for something its competitor can obvious do for less than half. So a PS5 will be more powerful than most rigs today at a max of $500 but you thing they are delusional because they haven't rubbed their face with Nvidia's nuts?

You: its not possible because console gamers aren't paying Nvidia's bogus prices.

Thats exactly what you are implying.

starchild32d ago

If you think 4k/60fps is going to be any kind of standard in demanding games you're going to be sorely disappointed. There's going to be a leap in graphics that will use up nearly all the additional performance these next consoles will offer. It's not like we're talking about running current gen games at higher resolutions and framerates.

Every generation some people get these unreasonable expectations. Many people claimed the current consoles would be doing 60fps as a standard and downvoted me when I predicted that most AAA games would run at 30fps.

I predict that 30fps will still be the most common framerate for AAA next gen games. I think 4k will become somewhat more common, but many games will still use checkerboard rendering.

Edito32d ago


You forgot one very important point, on consoles the games are way more optimized than on PC that why even with current gen consoles to get the same result on PC you need a beefier hardware... so agreeing with Ceaser with a 500USD console you will have better results than with a 1000USD PC.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 32d ago
PygmelionHunter32d ago

Downvotes for stating the obvious. you people never cease to amaze.

harmny32d ago

These are the same guys that insult developers because they remove a random puddle from a map

Ceaser985736132d ago

Stating obvious my ass... Comparing PC tech and business plans with Consoles.. That makes no sense... We have seen how console functions over the years and how they keep their price..

nucky6432d ago

i don't buy sony consoles because i think it's better looking than PC - i buy it for the great exclusives they have. and then there is the big players like rockstar - who always put their games out on console before PC (i think PC gamers are STILL waiting for RDR1 and 2).
and btw - my phone is an LG 35$ trac phone - while i could easily afford a 1000$ phone, i don't see the point. all i use it for is to make/receive calls and the LG does that just fine.
i get what you're saying though.

rainslacker32d ago

Console gamers don't really care what PC's can do. They care about what the consoles can do, and comparing the two based on whatever the marketing says matters for that gen, and can potentially be used to say one is better than the other.

Inzo32d ago

The only thing PC is good for is showing off glorified tech demo's because when it comes to actual good games.... it sucks.

dreamyOz32d ago

yo lol fr tho, these guys really be thinking they can get that 4k 60fps for under 600$ haha. These are the console players who have previously said that PCs are overpriced and how PC players are wasting money for better graphic and how they have these "exclusives" and graphics dont matter to them blah blah. They liked the "ciNeMaIic eXpEriEnCe" which is 24-30FPS. And now suddenly everybody is talking about how the next gen will give them 4k 60fps, hell some console players are even believing that they'll get 120fps 8k on next gen lol.

Cobra95132d ago

I get your points. I know even the best PC silicon can't do locked 60 fps at 4K on everything. But why rain on someone else's parade? And why say console performance doesn't matter? Sure it does. I disagree with the article too, but not for your jaded reasons.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 32d ago
awdevoftw32d ago

It doesn't matter, because the consumer will get better looking and running games than the previous gen. What does matter are the first party games, and games in general. The only thing I really dont like seeing is the service based gaming, and digital. If they are an OPTION, then that's fine. When it becomes required, it doesn't matter what comes out for me.

madpuppy32d ago

amen, brother....service based is a non starter for me....I can tollerate digital as long as they are very cheap or until I get the same rights as disc based games.

DarXyde32d ago (Edited 32d ago )

TF are not the end all - be all, but it will grant us a conservative estimate of the new hardware.

With that in mind, I am curious to know the metric Microsoft is using to determine that Scarlett is 4x more powerful than One X... and then there is the matter of addressing the rumors about PS5 being more powerful.

Either way, I am supposing that power will not directly translate into TF. A 24TF console is just not feasible at a console price. Not yet, anyway. I am sure that there are fewer TF and the RDNA architecture likely provides the boost needed to achieve 4x power. But even then, that places the TF at about 18TF (1.5TF short of 24TF with 25% boost), which still seems excessively high. I think that number is based on another metric. Maybe CPU output. Microsoft has been known to be finicky with their language (e.g., advertising the One S before the One X as the only 4k capable console with UHD Blu-Ray playback). I suspect there are specific qualifiers here for power going into next gen, and I am sure that people who look exclusively at TF will be left scratching their heads at how Microsoft arrived at the 4x number.

Sevir31d ago

Floating point performances is not measured by simply multiplying the number shown in front of the "TFLOPs.

That's why the PS4 is only 50% more powerful than the original XBO by being at 1.84tflops.

And why the XBO X is also only 50% more powerful than the PS4 Pro at 6tflops.

The Scarlett is supposed to give 4X the performance the One X... The same order of magnitude of performance over head the One X was over the original XBO X.

The XBO is a 1.3tflop console. The one X is 6tflops, It offers 4x the performance over the Original XBO. And that 6 teraflops number wasn't simply the sum of multiplying 1.3 x4.

That figure is arrived at by the number of cores, in a machine, combined with clock speed, processing threads, and memory bandwidth between the GPU and CPU.

DarXyde31d ago

Which is why I said simply looking at that number is not indicative.

Show all comments (60)
The story is too old to be commented.