Sony has finally released more information on the PlayStation 5. Up until this point, all we had was a meager (and widely ridiculed) logo. Now, we know all about the […]
Sony has finally released more information on the PlayStation 5. Up until this point, all we had was a meager (and widely ridiculed) logo. Now, we know all about the specs of the upcoming Japanese console. But how does it compare against the American-made Xbox Series X?
Starting with the CPU and GPU, both consoles feature a similar chipset based on AMD technology. The PlayStation 5 will feature a lower CPU clock frequency while it boasts a higher GPU output. The most fundamental difference however, is the fact that Sony decided to design the processing units around a variable frequency. Microsoft does the exact opposite with fixed clock speeds.
That means that the PlayStation 5 will adjust it’s processing output based on the needs at any given moment. The Series X is always running at the same high clock speed. Also note that, while sporting a lower GPU frequency, the Series X does have a huge advantage in terms of computing units as well as raw teraflop output.
Both consoles feature the same amount of RAM, but the Series X takes the cake again. Microsoft’s console sports a split bit rate; of the 16GB, 10 gig is clocked at 560GB/second, while the remaining 6GB only transfers 336GB/s. Still, the average transfer speed is slightly higher than that from the PlayStation 5.
Lastly, if you’re on the fence about which console to buy, the internal storage space is not going to make it easier for you. With 825GB, the PlayStation 5 features almost 200GB less than Microsoft’s console. On the other hand, it does boast a significantly higher transfer speed.
A full comparison:
Article continues below
|PlayStation 5||Xbox Series X|
|CPU||8x Zen 2 Cores at 3.5GHz with SMT (variable frequency)||8x AMD Zen 2 cores at 3.8GHz with SMT (fixed frequency)|
|GPU||10.28 TFLOPs, 36 CUs at 2.23GHz (variable frequency)||12 TFLOPs, 52 CU’s at 1.825 GHz (fixed frequency)|
|GPU Architecture||Custom RDNA 2||Custom RDNA 2|
|Memory/Interface||16GB GDDR6/256-bit||16GB GDDR6/320-bit|
|Memory Bandwidth||448GB/s||10GB @560 GB/s, 6GB @ 336 GB/s Bandwidth|
|Internal Storage||825GB SSD||1TB SSD|
|IO Throughput||5.5GB/s (Raw), Typical 8-9GB/s (Compressed)||2.4 GB/s (Raw), Typical 4.8 GB/s (Compressed)|
|Expandable Storage||M.2 NVMe SSD Slot||1TB Expansion Card|
Of course, one has to take these comparisons with a grain of salt. The specifications, published by the respective companies, are not necessarily indicative of real-world performance. In other words, we’ll have to wait and see which console outperforms the other and by what margin. Well, if we’re lucky because with corona stopping everything but the spin of the earth, we might have to wait a little bit longer.