All Future Sony first-party PlayStation games coming to PC

[PSman1700]

What you're missing here is that traditionally it has been higher framerate and resolution that have absorbed much of the PC's performance advantage.

With consoles games now running at 60fps / 4K (reconstructed or not), even mid range PC's have power to spare in providing console games at resolutions and framerates expected by PC gamers (given that reconstruction is becoming common on the PC as well). Hence developers should be able to offer a lot more on the core graphical elements while remaining confident that their games will remain playable of a wide range of hardware. And this generation RT should offer a relatively straight forward upgrade path. Metro Enhanced and Watch Dogs Legion are good examples of that.

He's also missing that PS5 is actually farther behind the pc then any PS prior. Ray tracing and reconstruction tech take a large part in that, but also the 10TF vs 22+TF in raw compute + IC (36TF in nv's case) and other RDNA2+ features. CPUs are a gen or two behind and aswell a whole ghz lower clocked, ram amounts at 16gb is kinda low aswell, coupled with a paltry BW throughput, last gen they had a better ram amount vs the pc then this time.
Raw nvme speeds are faster aswell at 7gb/s and with decompression on gpus that gap is going to grow even larger. Hardware wise, their far and far behind already now.
With in mind that scaling has become a real thing these days, there are enough reasons to have your games on that platform aswell. Youl always get the best versions, not just higher framerates, resolutions, but also graphical settings, aside from ray tracing etc.

But per the forum title, yes, sony is seemingly getting more and more of their games on pc, and as of late, is quite open about it aswell. I see some trying to spin it into something else, but your in for some dissapointments if you truly believe those theories.

 

[goonergaz]

Well if Sony release all games on PC they will;

• get less of a cut from my digital purchases because I’m buying through a different store and also PC games are generally cheaper
• Make nothing from me regarding high margin accessories which I usually buy quite a bit of
• Have me buying less Sony made games because I’ll have the pick of all games that come out and not just those on their system
• One less PS+ Sub

Not sure how this is spun into a positive but what do I know!?

 

[PSman1700]

Or view it from a different angle. Playstation users wont be playing on pc or vice versa anyways (the vast majority). Sony could actually be capturing both markets, no losses on the PS5 and the PC versions as an extra bonus on top.

The pc gaming and console gaming market seem two different ones. I doubt that playstation users care if theres a better version out there on pc anyway (aside from platfrom warrers ofcourse).

 

[chris1515]

He's also missing that PS5 is actually farther behind the pc then any PS prior. Ray tracing and reconstruction tech take a large part in that, but also the 10TF vs 22+TF in raw compute + IC (36TF in nv's case) and other RDNA2+ features. CPUs are a gen or two behind and aswell a whole ghz lower clocked, ram amounts at 16gb is kinda low aswell, coupled with a paltry BW throughput, last gen they had a better ram amount vs the pc then this time.
Raw nvme speeds are faster aswell at 7gb/s and with decompression on gpus that gap is going to grow even larger. Hardware wise, their far and far behind already now.
With in mind that scaling has become a real thing these days, there are enough reasons to have your games on that platform aswell. Youl always get the best versions, not just higher framerates, resolutions, but also graphical settings, aside from ray tracing etc.

But per the forum title, yes, sony is seemingly getting more and more of their games on pc, and as of late, is quite open about it aswell. I see some trying to spin it into something else, but your in for some dissapointments if you truly believe those theories.

Jaguar was comparable in 2013 to a 2008 Intel CPU mid range CPU. Jaguar 4 cores PC version had trouble to run Windows. It was not a custom gaming laptop CPU like current gen. It was a tablet CPU. It was the first time CPU did not fully improve because in some workload Jaguar was slower than SPU, at least the CPU was better than in order Power PC core and much easier for developer to use. When Mark Cerny did a tour of dev just after PS4 release they complained to him about the weak CPU from the get go, less than one year later they complained about slow storage.

Current gen consoles solved CPU and slow storage problem, again you post here but it seems you don't even understand streaming technology or virtualisation technology texture or geometry. Basically all engine will begin to use it and it means pressure is on storage speed more than RAM size, 16 GB is enough for the moment. 8 GB was good but it was useful because storage was so slow and it didn't solve slow speed with long loading, sub quality of assets compared to what the GPU can render. LOD 1 or 2 when the GPU would be capable to render LOD0.

And current gen console add some DSP or programmable coprocessor for I/O or 3D audio, less things to do on CPU or GPU.

Same theoretical number aren't important, realworld game performance are good on current gen consoles better than last gen where 60 fps mode were impossible because of subpar CPU. The main weakness of current gen consoles is probably memory bandwidth. If one day 3d staked IC is GPU compatible maybe they can solve it next generation or next next generation or never if it can't work together.

Next generation with bigger GI or raytracing datastructure more memory will be needed maybe 24 GB and faster SSD.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Not sure how this is spun into a positive but what do I know!?

Yup, you have to look at the big picture. Sony make a lot of money from licensing fees, and a retailer sales cut for all PSN sales, for every publisher selling titles on PlayStation. And people buy high-margin accessories like controllers for PlayStation, along with service subscriptions - which is also Microsoft's number one aim for Xbox.

Currently, it's almost certainly in Sony's interest for this status quo to continue because when you look at the the actual platform sales numbers of cross-platform games in many genres, PlayStation punches above it's weight. To diminish the appeal of the platform as a whole by Sony releasing games on more platforms would likely result in this changing but it's hard to see that revenue would increase to compensate.

 

[PSman1700]

Jaguar was comparable in 2013 to a 2008 Intel CPU mid range CPU. Jaguar 4 cores PC version had trouble to run Windows. It was not a custom gaming laptop CPU like current gen. It was a tablet CPU. It was the first time CPU did not fully improve because in some workload Jaguar was slower than SPU, at least the CPU was better than in order Power PC core and much easier for developer to use. When Mark Cerny did a tour of dev just after PS4 release they complained to him about the weak CPU from the get go, less than one year later they complained about slow storage.

Current gen consoles solved CPU and slow storage problem, again you post here but it seems you don't even understand streaming technology or virtualisation technology texture or geometry. Basically all engine will begin to use it and it means pressure is on storage speed more than RAM size, 16 GB is enough for the moment. 8 GB was good but it was useful because storage was so slow and it didn't solve slow speed with long loading, sub quality of assets compared to what the GPU can render. LOD 1 or 2 when the GPU would be capable to render LOD0.

And current gen console add some DSP or programmable coprocessor for I/O or 3D audio, less things to do on CPU or GPU.

Same theoretical number aren't important, realworld game performance are good on current gen consoles better than last gen where 60 fps mode were impossible because of subpar CPU. The main weakness of current gen consoles is probably memory bandwidth. If one day 3d staked IC is GPU compatible maybe they can solve it next generation or next next generation or never if it can't work together.

Next generation with bigger GI or raytracing datastructure more memory will be needed maybe 24 GB and faster SSD.

What matters now is whats available today. PS5 is a full generation behind in the CPU area, aswell as being a full Ghz lower clocked as opposed to its zen2 counterpart, aswell as cutdown cache, trade power with the gpu etc.

PS5 did get a faster/better CPU, but thats kinda a given seven years later. The faster storage should have happened in 2013 or before that perhaps. Still, GDDR or main ram is always going to be gobs amounts faster all the while offering lower latencies aswell compared to SSD's. With todays nvme speeds its trivial that more ram wont hurt.
The day SSD's become as fast as GDDR or HBM memory you'd need no more ram.

On PC, the IO is helped out by using the GPU, it might not be a dedicated block, but its both much faster aswell as more flexible, all the while consuming basically nothing from the GPU if NV is to believe (RTX IO)

If theoretical numbers arent important, that applies to every metric being thrown around, including the ssd drives. Regarding your 60fps quote, it seems thats still kinda a problem when going full graphics balls to the walls. Yet again were there lowering resolutions, offering performance modes etc to obtain that holy 60fps. No different then last generations OneX and Pro.

As per the topic, bringing your exclusives to PC means the games can stretch its legs. The PS5 is sporting a lower-end mid range GPU by AMD standards, thats without delving into ray tracing and reconstruction tech. I would say GPU wise, the PS4 stood a better chance at the time vs the PC. The PS5 is also lacking IC, and some other RDNA2 features.
The Zen2 as said is a generation behind of whats available, aswell it being downclocked by a whole Ghz and cut down cache pools. For ram, the PS4 offered a more generous amount aswell (devs asked for it back in the day, sony responded). 16GB aint all that much, a single GPU has that all for itself these days (any mid to higher range AMD gpu).

 

[Deleted member 11852]

He's also missing that PS5 is actually farther behind the pc then any PS prior. Ray tracing and reconstruction tech take a large part in that, but also the 10TF vs 22+TF in raw compute + IC (36TF in nv's case) and other RDNA2+ features. CPUs are a gen or two behind and aswell a whole ghz lower clocked, ram amounts at 16gb is kinda low aswell, coupled with a paltry BW throughput, last gen they had a better ram amount vs the pc then this time.

No, this is the dumb-ass PCMR mentality I mentioned where PCMR-types like to compare console tech specs to the more expensive, higher-end PC configurations even when they're the 1% of typical PC configurations.

I was wondering who was going to make this point. Well done.

 

[PSman1700]

And thats the thing, you dont need to have the highest of the highest end gaming pc systems to exceed the PS5's capabilities. A 3060Ti (16.2TF)/6700XT will do that just fine, and those are todays mid range GPU offerings in the new line from NV/AMD. In case going with the 3060Ti, you'd have the ability to enjoy much more capable ray tracing and gain alot of performance using DLSS.
More expensive the pc is and always has been, you get what you pay for. Theres a market for it and it shows. Sony has shown great intrest in bringing over more and more of their games to the platform.
No need to join the 36TF 3090 24gb club for that.

Talking percentages, i'd hazard a guess that gaming pc's that atleast match the PS5's capabilities arent far off of the amount of PS5 users out there. Most PS users are still left on PS4's and that for a long while to come. Hence the crossy generation sony is offering us today.

Its a nice balance, both games from sony and MS, while offering the potentional for the best versions aswell. With the ever evolving hardware, users are free to upgrade if they wish so.

 

[chris1515]

What matters now is whats available today. PS5 is a full generation behind in the CPU area, aswell as being a full Ghz lower clocked as opposed to its zen2 counterpart, aswell as cutdown cache, trade power with the gpu etc.

PS5 did get a faster/better CPU, but thats kinda a given seven years later. The faster storage should have happened in 2013 or before that perhaps. Still, GDDR or main ram is always going to be gobs amounts faster all the while offering lower latencies aswell compared to SSD's. With todays nvme speeds its trivial that more ram wont hurt.
The day SSD's become as fast as GDDR or HBM memory you'd need no more ram.

On PC, the IO is helped out by using the GPU, it might not be a dedicated block, but its both much faster aswell as more flexible, all the while consuming basically nothing from the GPU if NV is to believe (RTX IO)

If theoretical numbers arent important, that applies to every metric being thrown around, including the ssd drives. Regarding your 60fps quote, it seems thats still kinda a problem when going full graphics balls to the walls. Yet again were there lowering resolutions, offering performance modes etc to obtain that holy 60fps. No different then last generations OneX and Pro.

As per the topic, bringing your exclusives to PC means the games can stretch its legs. The PS5 is sporting a lower-end mid range GPU by AMD standards, thats without delving into ray tracing and reconstruction tech. I would say GPU wise, the PS4 stood a better chance at the time vs the PC. The PS5 is also lacking IC, and some other RDNA2 features.
The Zen2 as said is a generation behind of whats available, aswell it being downclocked by a whole Ghz and cut down cache pools. For ram, the PS4 offered a more generous amount aswell (devs asked for it back in the day, sony responded). 16GB aint all that much, a single GPU has that all for itself these days (any mid to higher range AMD gpu).

You said than current gen console are worse than other generation and this is false.

He's also missing that PS5 is actually farther behind the pc then any PS prior.

First CPU for the same number of core and thread find a CPU two times faster than console CPU is hard this time. I am not a specialist but I don't think it exist. And I know 12 cores CPU or more exist on PC but after this gen I think it will be from many dev the same they will tailor the game around the number of core and CPU thread of consoles. Like this gen I don't think it wil scale above I was naively thinking last gen they will push CPU with more cores and thread than Jaguar and it was false. I don't think 12 cores and more cores will be efficiently use on PC.

Console CPU is under a 4700G(mobile 8 core, 8MB L3 like console CPU) but here turbo clock is 4.1 Ghz and probaby around 13% less than a zen 2 3700X desktop it means on average around 35/37% slower than the desktop Zen 3 CPU 5700X
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-7-4700G-vs-AMD-Ryzen-7-3700X/m1135003vs4043

This is ok and far from the moment the Jaguar was 4 to 5 times slower than any 8 cores on market and much slower than any 4 cores PC CPU AMD or Intel.

For DirectStorage we will verify when it will be avaiblable and if it is so efficient to decompress using the GPU and why AMD and Nvidia want to include a hardware decompressor in future GPU.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/pap...kano/6eca44be96dcf1156c047656b9286485eeb51316

In this paper it is fast but the power is not negligible. This is a 1 GB/s SSD and a full 980 GPU. This case only show the loading phase, not the case when you need to decompress streaming data. Here the full power of the GPU is used.

It was on Nvidia GTC 2015 using CUDA for LZW decompression
https://on-demand.gputechconf.com/gtc/2016/posters/GTC_2016_Algorithms_AL_11_P6128_WEB.pdf

Again many One X and PS4 Pro games doesn't have 60 fps mode because Jaguar CPU was not powerful enough.

And again you don't understand what is streaming, what is active memory, how much memory you need to reserved for a level and so on.

A very simple explanation in layman term.

https://www.popoptiq.com/what-is-texture-streaming/

If the article above is enough to understand the concept of texture streaming. Technical explanation of virtual texturing in Unreal Engine documentation.
https://docs.unrealengine.com/4.26/en-US/RenderingAndGraphics/VirtualTexturing/

Virtual Texture support for your project enables you to create and use large-sized textures for a lower—and more consistent—memory footprint at runtime.

And a good number for understand impact of virtualisation without optimization the Nanite buffer is only 768 MB

Virtual texturing and virtual geometry(Nanite) reduce the streaming pool for texture and Geometry in Ram and by extension it means you can use less RAM. Same it is possible to stream audio.

But there is runtime data for games and it takes place on RAM framebuffer, Gbuffer, BVH for raytracing or SDF for GI depending of what you use 3d textures for voxel cone tracing and so on.

If PS4 and XB1 had a SATA SSD they could have gone with less RAM if games were design around it.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

And thats the thing, you dont need to have the highest of the highest end gaming pc systems to exceed the PS5's capabilities.

And this is what Steam users are actually using.

 

[chris1515]

And this is what Steam users are actually using.

And in Europe PC are more expensive than in US.

https://www.pccomponentes.com/tarje...wQsRNSAMiSS3nznJ7ydNlRY92rLCbyeBoCKrYQAvD_BwE

a 6700XT(887,36 euros) more than the full console, add a zen 2 3700 X(274.87 euros), 16GB of DDR4(89.99), a good motherboard supporting PCIE 4(66.49), a PCIE4 SSD(171.99), PC tower(64.99) and a XSX controller(66.99) and it cost three times more than a PS5. Here it is 1.595.68 euros and this is discount day currently in Spain if it was not the case it would be more expensive. If I don't count XSX Controller because I have an Xbox 360 controller this continue to be more than three times more expensive than a PS5 but this is a bit more powerful than a PS5 or an XSX.

https://www.pccomponentes.com/wd-black-sn850-1tb-ssd-nvme-m2-pcie-40-sin-disipador-termico

https://www.pccomponentes.com/nox-hummer-quantum-cristal-templado-usb-30-argb

EDIT: I don't have a gaming PC, this is what I need to pay to have one after I can connect it to my TV. I would not use it for work or web browsing just game.

 

[PSman1700]

dumb-ass PCMR mentality

No idea but you come across as someone in their teens. If you can get away with this kind of wording il guess il also join the club of bad behaviour.

You said than current gen console are worse than other generation and this is false.

Not 100% what you mean, but the PS4 stood stronger in the memory and GPU department vs what was available on PC backthen as opposed to the PS5.
PS5 stands better with its CPU vs whats available, but that doesnt mean its going to keep up, its already behind, maybe not as much as the jaguar, but it is.

First CPU for the same number of core and thread find a CPU two times faster than console CPU is hard this time. I am not a specialist but I don't think it exist. And I know 12 cores CPU or more exist on PC but after this gen I think it will be from many dev the same they will tailor the game around the number of core and CPU thread of consoles. Like this gen I don't think it wil scale above I was naively thinking last gen they will push CPU with more cores and thread than Jaguar and it was false. I don't think 12 cores and more cores wil be efficiently use on PC.

We have been going more and more cores as time moves on. A mere Zen2 3700X is the same arch/cores as the PS5 cpu, but clocked much higher and more cache. But where at 12 core zen3 systems now, while clocked much higher, too. A 12 core zen3 is simply much more capable as opposed to a downclocked, gutted Zen2 part.

Console CPU is under a 4700G(mobile 8 core 8MB L3) like console CPU but here turbo clock is 4.1 Ghz and probaby around 13% less than a zen 2 3700X desktop it means on average around 35/37% slower than the desktop Zen 3 CPU 5700X

Yeah, about. Like i noted, PS5 CPU stands better this time around, but a close to 40% behind a 5700X. Were at 5800X, 5900X and higher.

For DirectStorage we will verify when it will be avaiblable and if it is so efficient to decompress using the GPU and why AMD and Nvidia want to include a hardware decompressor in future GPU.

Nvidia claimed their throughput wont affect GPU performance all that much. GPUs are excellent and just decompression/compression tasks. With gobs of TF's to spare, i doubt its a problem for RTX IO enabled hardware to atleast match what the PS5 is doing. Raw speeds today without decompression are around 7gb/s, above what the PS5 does.

I highly doubt that 2015 research on a GTX980 have much to bring to this discussion. Theres probably a reason why you need a RTX gpu.

Again many One X and PS4 Pro games doesn't have 60 fps mode because Jaguar CPU was not powerful enough.

Not all that many games on PS5 can go without some kind of performance mode to achieve 60fps, even for the non next gen ones. If this is a CPU or GPU problem, no idea, but stating that soley because theres a zen cpu inside doesnt mean were getting 4k60 at the highest fidelity. No, were still left with 30fps if you want the highest settings.

If PS4 and XB1 had a SATA SSD they could have gone with less RAM if games were design around it.

Maybe, maybe not. All that storage on the SSD has to go to ram, since the SSD alone wouldnt even come close to cope with what GDDR6 (or even DDR4) can offer.More ram would simply mean you can flex that nvme drive even more so. Imagine having 1tb of GDDR6-like storage, with all its advantages.

And this is what Steam users are actually using.

It has been argued before that Steam stats arent the number one place to go for when gauging component install base. Anyway, the amount of PS5 users aint that huge either, most are stuck on lowly PS4s aswell. Theres a reason why Sony went crossy gen head on this time around.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

It has been argued before that Steam stats arent the number one place to go for when gauging component install base.

Yes it has, usually by people with a view inconsistent with facts.

What alternative source of PC configurations used for gaming are you suggesting, over the non-partisan information from the largest gaming platform on PC are you suggesting? What value Steam client hardware surveys offers is that it negates all the the components bought for non-gaming reasons, such as crypto-mining.

 

[chris1515]

Yes it has, usually by people with a view inconsistent with facts.

What alternative source of PC configurations used for gaming are you suggesting, over the non-partisan information from the largest gaming platform on PC are you suggesting? What value Steam client hardware surveys offers is that it negates all the the components bought for non-gaming reasons, such as crypto-mining.

This is not my quote. I think you quote PS1700.

 

[PSman1700]

What alternative source of PC configurations used for gaming are you suggesting, over the non-partisan information from the largest gaming platform on PC are you suggesting? What value Steam client hardware surveys offers is that it negates all the the components bought for non-gaming reasons, such as crypto-mining.

The amount of gaming GPUs sold by both NV and AMD. The mining/scalpers spin can be applied to PS5 aswell.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

This is not my quote. I think you quote PS1700.

My bad, man. Sorry.

The amount of gaming GPUs sold by both NV and AMD. The mining/scalpers spin can be applied to PS5 aswell.

Nobody is buying hundreds of thousands (or millions) of consoles for crypto mining, or professional rendering applications.

 

[chris1515]

No idea but you come across as someone in their teens. If you can get away with this kind of wording il guess il also join the club of bad behaviour.



Not 100% what you mean, but the PS4 stood stronger in the memory and GPU department vs what was available on PC backthen as opposed to the PS5.
PS5 stands better with its CPU vs whats available, but that doesnt mean its going to keep up, its already behind, maybe not as much as the jaguar, but it is.



We have been going more and more cores as time moves on. A mere Zen2 3700X is the same arch/cores as the PS5 cpu, but clocked much higher and more cache. But where at 12 core zen3 systems now, while clocked much higher, too. A 12 core zen3 is simply much more capable as opposed to a downclocked, gutted Zen2 part.



Yeah, about. Like i noted, PS5 CPU stands better this time around, but a close to 40% behind a 5700X. Were at 5800X, 5900X and higher.



Nvidia claimed their throughput wont affect GPU performance all that much. GPUs are excellent and just decompression/compression tasks. With gobs of TF's to spare, i doubt its a problem for RTX IO enabled hardware to atleast match what the PS5 is doing. Raw speeds today without decompression are around 7gb/s, above what the PS5 does.

I highly doubt that 2015 research on a GTX980 have much to bring to this discussion. Theres probably a reason why you need a RTX gpu.



Not all that many games on PS5 can go without some kind of performance mode to achieve 60fps, even for the non next gen ones. If this is a CPU or GPU problem, no idea, but stating that soley because theres a zen cpu inside doesnt mean were getting 4k60 at the highest fidelity. No, were still left with 30fps if you want the highest settings.



Maybe, maybe not. All that storage on the SSD has to go to ram, since the SSD alone wouldnt even come close to cope with what GDDR6 (or even DDR4) can offer.More ram would simply mean you can flex that nvme drive even more so. Imagine having 1tb of GDDR6-like storage, with all its advantages.



It has been argued before that Steam stats arent the number one place to go for when gauging component install base. Anyway, the amount of PS5 users aint that huge either, most are stuck on lowly PS4s aswell. Theres a reason why Sony went crossy gen head on this time around.

I don't think GPU was better on PS4 compared to PC than PS5 compared to PC. The best AMD offer was AMD 7970 and it was more than two times more powerful like the best AMD offer on the market. I think this is the same.

Again RAM size and storage speed are linked. The faster storage is the less RAM you need. There is a reason in Unreal engine 5 Valley of the ancient demo, they need less than 4 GB of VRAM. I would say than on storage PC is late until Direct Storage.

Where did I talk about 4k and highest fidelity? I speak about 60 fps.

RTX GPU is not a requirement for DirectStorage it work on all Nvida GPU since Kepler and all AMD GPU since GCN 1.0.

EDIT: And you will wait a very long time before they do CPU scaling it did not arrive this gen and I am sure the dev will tailor the core around the number of core and CPU thread of consoles.

12 cores and more CPU will not be pushed exactly like this generation and before being good in single thread performance AMD CPU were trounced by Intel CPU.

At least until consoles CPU have more than 8 cores maybe next generation.

 

[PSman1700]

I don't think GPU was better on PS4 compared to PC than PS5 compared to PC. The best AMD offer was AMD 7970 and it was more than two times more powerful like the best AMD offer on the market. I think this is the same.

Just on raw power alone, GPUs sit close to three times the rendering power of what the PS5's has to offer. Thats aside things as IC, memory bw, and amounts of vram available. Include ray tracing and reconstruction tech (which enhances performance alot), and your sitting quite much lower than the PS4 back in the day.

Again RAM size and storage speed are linked. The faster storage is the less RAM you need. There is a reason in Unreal engine 5 Valley of the ancient demo, they need less than 4 GB of VRAM. I would say than on storage PC is late until Direct Storage.

For the tech demo, 4gb yes. Wait and see what full production games with that kind of quality will do. Theres a reason Sony went with more than 4GB ram.
The SSD doesnt substitute RAM, its aiding it. You need both, but saying for example 24gb wouldnt have been better sounds abit strange.

Where did I talk about 4k and highest fidelity? I speak about 60 fps.

And i speak about the need to still sacrifice graphics and resolutions to obtain that 60fps.

RTX GPU is not a requirement for DirectStorage it work on all Nvida GPU since Kepler and all AMD GPU since GCN 1.0.

Ofcourse not. But you probably need it for the higher speeds that RTX IO has to offer over just DS.

Nobody is buying hundreds of thousands (or millions) of consoles for crypto mining, or professional rendering applications.

Except for Scalpers, then.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Except for Scalpers, then.

In the realm of consoles, scalpers are buying at most tens-of-thousands of units of product to resell. In the PC world, who knows because neither AMD or Nvidia have indicated production volumes and nobody knows what components are going to be used for. Consoles have limited uses, GPUs and CPUs can end up in graphics rendering farms, crypto-mining farms, or more generalised farms - none of which are relating to gaming.

 

[PSman1700]

In the realm of consoles, scalpers are buying at most tens-of-thousands of units of product to resell. In the PC world, who knows because neither AMD or Nvidia have indicated production volumes and nobody knows what components are going to be used for. Consoles have limited uses, GPUs and CPUs can end up in graphics rendering farms, crypto-mining farms, or more generalised farms - none of which are relating to gaming.

Those miners could be gamers, too, dual purpose. We have no idea how many of those gpus will be used for gaming or not, in special now the mining craze is slowing down.
its just to look how many gaming gpus are being sold. PS5's could also be in the hands of scalpers for a very, very long time.