Xbox One's games runs within a virtual machine (AMD's VT extensions) for enhanced DRM protection and backward compatibility (on Xbox One X). Virtual machine keeps game programmers within a sandbox i.e. game programmers doesn't have full control over the machine's DRM.
Xbox One X can virtualized (duplicate behavior) Xbox One for maximum backward compatibility. There's a custom Hyper-V with AMD extensions for Xbox One.
PS5's virtual machine capability and usage are unknown. PS4 backward compatibility has been confirmed for PS5.
@zaryia: So every single pc out there has shorter loading times then the ps4? Lol, delusional as always.
This is why you are so bad at debates. I literally never said "every single pc out there", Susan.
I'm talking a modern gaming PCs, as most people do here when they just type "PC". Just as GS (and several other sites) does in many of its reviews. It's pretty much implied here, and it's been that way since 2001. I'm not going to literally type "high end" in front of PC just because one forum poster here is dumb as a brick. I mean even anti-PC nutjobs like Giovela and reCloud accept this simple concept, are you really this slow?
Now go play your shitty load time crap version of most games.
@zaryia: So every single pc out there has shorter loading times then the ps4? Lol, delusional as always.
Nope! But they refer to PC gaming as if its static configuration which is dumb.
It's not dumb, we're referring to a modern gaming PC when we say PC. We assume people aren't complete and total idiots and don't have literally type that description every single time we say PC. Just like GS, among other sites, does for most of its reviews - they just say "PC".
One would think since this is a GAMING forum we are talking about GAMING PCs (Like GS Reviews do). Which is why the objection you two brought up is rare and almost never mentioned here.
It's not dumb, we're referring to a modern gaming PC when we say PC. We assume people aren't complete and total idiots and don't have literally type that description every single time we say PC. Just like GS, among other sites, does for most of its PC reviews - they just say PC.
Which is why the objection you two brought up is almost never brought up on this GAMING board for almost a decade unless the person is trolling or the thread is specifically talking about low end PCs. It's a given.
Its dumb. PC is a generic term which NEVER indicates specifications or performance. Using the term as if its a representation of static hardware is dumb and simply inaccurate. To state "I game on PC." comes with absolutely no specification but a lot of assumptions.
It's not dumb, we're referring to a modern gaming PC when we say PC. We assume people aren't complete and total idiots and don't have literally type that description every single time we say PC. Just like GS, among other sites, does for most of its PC reviews - they just say PC.
Which is why the objection you two brought up is almost never brought up on this GAMING board for almost a decade unless the person is trolling or the thread is specifically talking about low end PCs. It's a given.
Its dumb. PC is a generic term which NEVER indicates specifications or performance. Using the term as if its a representation of static hardware is dumb and simply inaccurate. To state "I game on PC." comes with absolutely no specification but a lot of assumptions.
Then GS is dumb. Tell this to most major review sites that just say "PC" instead of having to say "High end gaming PC", which is a given considering its a GAMING site.
High end gaming PCs are what we talk about by default here, unless the thread states otherwise.Since that is what the GS main site does. Since that is what most threads here since 2001 have done.
If it makes you happy ask a moderator to turn this into a SW Rule to say exactly what PC before saying PC. I'll gladly add the words "high end gaming" in front of PC every single time if it makes you two less of Susans.
@zaryia: You are making this much bigger than it needs be. Just as folks like yourself have to perpetually talk about how game A is unplayable at 30fps and the rest of us just deal with it, you will have to do the same when someone calls out the use of PC as if its a static hardware configuration.
@zaryia: You are making this much bigger than it needs be. Just as folks like yourself have to perpetually talk about how game A is unplayable at 30fps and the rest of us just deal with it, you will have to do the same when someone calls out the use of PC as if its a static hardware configuration.
If I see you in the thread i'll put "High end gaming" in front of PC even though the main site doesn't do it for the reviews since it's pretty much a given at a GAMING website.
Right so its not relevant to PS5 SSD solutions at this point.
NAVI has significant differences from GCN, hence PS5's PS4 BC would need to present PS4 behavior to PS4 games which includes run-time timings on data resource arrivals.
PS4 Pro's "butterfly" design which doubles the layout of PS4 and down clocking indicates PS4 games are less robust on running scaling hardware.
Significant parts of DirectX includes resource tracking which enable games to scale up or down on different hardware. Different hardware has different resource arrival timings which can create glitches when data resource didn't arrive at expected time.
Right so its not relevant to PS5 SSD solutions at this point.
NAVI has significant differences from GCN, hence PS5's PS4 BC would need to present PS4 behavior to PS4 games which includes run-time timings on data resource arrivals.
PS4 Pro's "butterfly" design which doubles the layout of PS4 and down clocking indicates PS4 games are less robust on running scaling hardware.
Significant parts of DirectX includes resource tracking which enable games to scale up or down on different hardware. Different hardware has different resource arrival timings which can create glitches when data resource didn't arrive at expected time.
At this point, there's many unknowns with PS5.
Yes this is why may have Sony filed a patent based on CPU spoofing rather than straight sandbox emulation.
With the increasing demand and necessity of backward compatibility in newer consoles, the machines are desired to run previous-gen games without any synchronisation errors, processing incapabilities and other issues. Cerny and Pilgrim’s patent claims to have fixed these problems.
“In order to deal with problems arising from differences in the behaviour of CPUs to legacy devices, new devices may mimic the specific capabilities of legacy device CPUs when executing legacy applications”, the patent page included. “An important function of the ability to mimic legacy devices is to trick legacy applications to behave as if legacy applications are running on legacy devices. As many applications are designed to run on different processors, modern processors often implement opcodes or registers that allow software applications to discover processor details. To facilitate backwards compatibility, the processor on the new device can execute the opcode in such a way that the information of the different processors is returned in response to the call from the legacy application, or the register value can be provided. Different information is referred to herein as “spoofing processor ID”. The spoofing processor ID selectively identifies the particular capabilities of the new device either differently than actually supported or not at all when it is actually supported.”
Log in to comment