PS5 Die Shot has been revealed

Plus as a general rule, wouldn't geometry culling always be a bigger performance saver than a technique like VRS or even DLSS?

Any idea on what specific things Sony could have theoretically changed in the Geometry Engine to squeeze out additional performance?
As a general rule one can't say this.

1.) We don't know if and how much the geometry process is more efficient on the PS5, so we don't know if it's 1% better, 2%, 5, 10 or 20%.
2.) Every game is different, geometry density, pixels per triangle and order of drawing always varies and so would the potential performance improvement from a better geometry engine.
3.) VRS also depends on the pixel shader cost and resolution of the surfaces, performance increase can be minimal or quite sizeable.
4.) Same is true for reconstruction techniques like DLSS, it depends on how good the trained algorithm works and if the underlying hardware can execute it fast enough.

I don't know what could be done, which wasn't already done under RDNA1/2 and Mesh Shaders and I did not read any patents but on the DirectX side of things, Nvidia supports view instancing tier 3 for VR applications while AMD is still only at Tier 1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_levels_in_Direct3D

For VR there might be more potential to increase the performance by geometry reprojection and a more efficient rasterization process.
 
Last edited:
I do want to say that as far as ML support goes, it's probably a well-educated and probable guess to assume Sony's support for it on PS5 extends to FP16 and INT16; PS4 Pro supported FP16 so there's no reason PS5 shouldn't. However, that is probably to what specific extent ML support goes on PS5, and I think that's fair to say considering ML in particular isn't something with relatively "immediate" benefits to console gaming and I don't think a lot of Sony's 1P content relies on things that are heavily dependent on extensive ML support or anything that can't already be handled through FP16 and INT16 support generically on the GPU.

From that though we already know that MS's support for lower-precision includes FP16, INT16, INT8 and INT4. RDNA 2 GPUs have the capability of supporting this but it would require adding in some silicon components, which seems like what MS has done. Makes sense, because they also want their design in Azure where it will be leveraged for things aside from gaming, such as raw data computation. I'm just curious if that is the extent of MS's customizations for extended low-precision in relation to ML, or if they did a few other things because looking back at the Hot Chips presentation there's this:


ML inference acceleration for game (character behavior, resolution scaling)
Very small area cost, .....

What exactly does the "very small area cost" refer to? Is it just adding in the support for INT8 and INT4, or some small bit of additional hardware acceleration for a specific task similar to the mip-blending hardware in the GPU for aiding SFS? Maybe a few people've already touched on this with x-rays of Series X APU and I missed them :p.

As a general rule one can't say this.

1.) We don't know if and how much the geometry process is more efficient on the PS5, so we don't know if it's 1% better, 2%, 5, 10 or 20%.
2.) Every game is different, geometry density, pixels per triangle and order of drawing always varies and so would the potential performance improvement from a better geometry engine.
3.) VRS also depends on the pixel shader cost and resolution of the surfaces, performance increase can be minimal or quite sizeable.
4.) Same is true for reconstruction techniques like DLSS, it depends on how good the trained algorithm works and if the underlying hardware can execute it fast enough.

I don't know what could be done, which wasn't already done under RDNA1/2 and Mesh Shaders and I did not read any patents but on the DirectX side of things, Nvidia supports view instancing tier 3 for VR applications while AMD is still only at Tier 1.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_levels_in_Direct3D

For VR there might be more potential to increase the performance by geometry reprojection and a more efficient rasterization process.

Interesting; I think your speculation here is on the right track pretty much. So most probable case is, if Sony've done any customizations with the GE it could most likely be in relation for enabling better VR with some version of Tier 3 view instancing, as you've mentioned. Maybe also a thing or two in relation to extending/improving foveated rendering on the system through the GE, if that could be done.

Considering there's some analysis I've seen on the die shot pointing out a very likely USB Type-C port (not sure if it's Gen 3 or Gen 4) in Alt Mode likely intended for PSVR2, it may lend credence to the idea that their GE customizations are in relation to those two things (more advanced view instancing, improved foveated rendering), which could have some benefit for non-VR games as well, probably at a reduced rate though but that depends a lot on the game's needs.

And with that in mind, if their GE customizations are in that style, we probably won't hear too much more about them until PSVR2 is ready to launch, that's probably going to be sometime 2022. So maybe we have a couple interesting nuggets to look forward there after all, but hopefully by then some folks temper down any "megaton" expectations or whatnot.
 
Last edited:
Here's the problem: see how far back you need to go just to pluck that out? Literally 2019. What confirmation has there been since then from anyone at Sony? Any of its architects? It's pretty weak evidence, whereas evidence on the Xbox side is pretty overwhelming. Why didn't Mark Cerny ever speak on this, not even at the deep dive? I find that awfully strange. All signs suggest that EA person misspoke or may have been thinking about something else entirely when they made those remarks and applied it to Playstation 5, but no evidence since supports hardware accelerated machine learning on Playstation 5.

You have former Playstation only developers who have already confirmed that Xbox Series X's Compute Units are more suited to Machine Learning. Why is that? It can't be because there are more of them. It must be because there is capability in a Series X shader core that isn't in a Playstation 5 shader core.


"The shader cores of the Xbox are also more suitable to machine learning, which could be an advantage if Microsoft succeeds in implementing an equivalent to Nvidia's DLSS (an advanced neural network solution for AI)."

As for blueisviolet on twitter, since you mentioned him, I see his posts from time to time and I've never known him to fake anything. He will literally take information from either official or highly public sources, and then from there you would be right in saying he will make all kinds of wild guesses and assumptions that are either impossible to prove or likely to not be as he thinks, and then sometimes he appears like he might actually be onto something due to how things line up and the way he presents it (who really knows though till confirmed) plus there's a language barrier that's obvious. English is not his primary language. He has been much more right than people like RGT and Moore's Law have been though, that's for certain. So depending on what you think about him, that should tell you something about people trusting Moores Law and RGT when it comes to either console :messenger_tears_of_joy:.

But accusing him of literally faking a tweet from a sony employee? That's a bridge too far. Never known him to make up a tweet. I recall actually seeing that tweet back when it was made and making the rounds. If it's impossible to find now, it's because it's been deleted. Even the poster he was responding to has largely deleted most of their tweets, possibly a request by the individual. I've been on the receiving end of requests by employees (always respectfully, never hostile) to delete specific tweets as it can create issues for them if left up, and I've done so. You think there aren't statements I have screenshotted, I'd love to use in these discussions, but sometimes people slip and say a little too much, and then reach out to have it pulled for sake of their job.
Bruh, that guy had nothing to do with the development of PS5.
Why haven't he been featured on anything PlayStation?
Why did he deleted the tweets after he realized he said something wrong?
Why you taking his word over official statements?
Why you acting like you know what your talking about?
Why you such a big fanboy?
Why you believing blueisviolet?
You know he's haven proven anything right?

I mean look at this. pure fanboy nonsense.
Man vise XBSX is RDNA3+ :messenger_tears_of_joy:
Eeg0ky9.png

You and him are two seeds in the same pod.
 
As for blueisviolet on twitter, since you mentioned him, I see his posts from time to time and I've never known him to fake anything. He will literally take information from either official or highly public sources, and then from there you would be right in saying he will make all kinds of wild guesses and assumptions that are either impossible to prove or likely to not be as he thinks, and then sometimes he appears like he might actually be onto something due to how things line up and the way he presents it (who really knows though till confirmed) plus there's a language barrier that's obvious. English is not his primary language. He has been much more right than people like RGT and Moore's Law have been though

You must be joking! But i guess not.
 
Last edited:
Bruh, that guy had nothing to do with the development of PS5.
Why haven't he been featured on anything PlayStation?
Why did he deleted the tweets after he realized he said something wrong?
Why you taking his word over official statements?
Why you acting like you know what your talking about?
Why you such a big fanboy?
Why you believing blueisviolet?
You know he's haven proven anything right?

I mean look at this. pure fanboy nonsense.
Man vise XBSX is RDNA3+ :messenger_tears_of_joy:
Eeg0ky9.png

You and him are two seeds in the same pod.

I like this weak distraction by you. It's almost clever.

Show me where Mark Cerny or anyone at Sony is officially confirming Machine Learning, Variable Rate Shading, Mesh Shaders, Sampler Feedback on the PS5 GPU? You keep focusing on that other guy or focusing on a specific twitter use's post. I'm waiting.

Wanna know the difference between specific xbox fans like myself and many of you acolytes of Moores law and RGT? We don't actually believe any of the RDNA 3 crap. We were always talking up the features that Microsoft ACTUALLY talked about and revealed. Just because you're able to find a tweet of someone speculating RDNA 3 for Series X, it means people who thought PS5 was RDNA 3, believed it had the unified L3 cache of Zen 3, and believed it had Infinity Cache and people who were happy to see Series X's GPU features are one and the same? Come on now.

And that featured on anything playstation is meaningless. Has James Stanford for Microsoft been featured in any of the pre-launch and post launch build up for Xbox Series X? No, and yet he's a confirmed high level member of their team that worked on Series X. So that statement is pretty much meaningless. You point to a tweet, so now tell me how many RGT and Moores law videos have so many of you obsessed over believing every lie about the Playstation 5? :)
 
Last edited:
I hear PS5 doesn't even have HW RT, Cerny is a fucking liar.
*Cough*
I very vocally casted doubt on it, they seemed not as confident as Microsoft was and I read into why they appeared not as bullish, said I needed to see it in a released title, it's been shown above and beyond my initial assumptions, it's impressive, I was wrong.

See how easy that is to do? Some of you should try it. :)
 
For a DirectX12U spec-ed machine, yes, you are right. As a current generation console, I have my doubts, but the games will do the talking.

Only thing that matters in the end. I'm excited about the specs and what Microsoft says the machine can and will be able to do, but I need to see it. We're pretty much certain Sony is going to deliver, as they have done the past two generations. Xbox has delivered every gen, and has some gems in the Xbox One gen, but I feel they truly dropped the ball with Xbox One. Right now based on what's been announced it looks like a total turnaround from last gen, but the games have to come, they need to release, they need to be impressive.
 
Show me where Mark Cerny or anyone at Sony is officially confirming Machine Learning, Variable Rate Shading, Mesh Shaders, Sampler Feedback on the PS5 GPU? You keep focusing on that other guy or focusing on a specific twitter use's post. I'm waiting.

I think you'll wait indefinitely long till Mark Cernys announcemenet of DX12 features on GNMX
 
PS5 vs. the better designed console
v1AqDDD.jpg
EPFREcI.jpg
VHLYf7B.jpg
DPuWPHm.jpg
8T9qmdO.png

v1AqDDD.jpg


EPFREcI.jpg


VHLYf7B.jpg


DPuWPHm.jpg


8T9qmdO.png

How cute, ignoring 3 of 4 modes in DMC where Series X clearly outperformed PS5 and picking out one of the worst case scenarios from the heap (Series X performed better overall in normal mode 4K, in RT quality mode & RT Perf mode, when they ran the averages across the entire high performance mode clip, they came away with the same 100fps average for both consoles) ignoring the patched version of Assassin's Creed where performance is better on Series X (not sure what it's like now), ignoring the update to Dirt 5 matching visuals, showing a different location in cyberpunk that's running at higher resolution on series x than the ps5 version andddd it's BC mode.

You did your best though. Props.

Ha Ha Smile GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon
 
I like this weak distraction by you. It's almost clever.

Show me where Mark Cerny or anyone at Sony is officially confirming Machine Learning, Variable Rate Shading, Mesh Shaders, Sampler Feedback on the PS5 GPU? You keep focusing on that other guy or focusing on a specific twitter use's post. I'm waiting.

Wanna know the difference between specific xbox fans like myself and many of you acolytes of Moores law and RGT? We don't actually believe any of the RDNA 3 crap. We were always talking up the features that Microsoft ACTUALLY talked about and revealed. Just because you're able to find a tweet of someone speculating RDNA 3 for Series X, it means people who thought PS5 was RDNA 3, believed it had the unified L3 cache of Zen 3, and believed it had Infinity Cache and people who were happy to see Series X's GPU features are one and the same? Come on now.

And that featured on anything playstation is meaningless. Has James Stanford for Microsoft been featured in any of the pre-launch and post launch build up for Xbox Series X? No, and yet he's a confirmed high level member of their team that worked on Series X. So that statement is pretty much meaningless. You point to a tweet, so now tell me how many RGT and Moores law videos have so many of you obsessed over believing every lie about the Playstation 5? :)
DirectX
Microsoft DirectX is a collection of application programming interfaces (APIs) for handling tasks related to multimedia, especially game programming and video, on Microsoft platforms.

Microsoft revealed DirectX 12 Ultimate in March 2020. DirectX 12 Ultimate will unify to a common library on both Windows 10 computers and the Xbox Series X and other ninth-generation Xbox consoles. Among the new features in Ultimate includes DirectX Raytracing 1.1, Variable Rate Shading, which gives programmers control over the level of detail of shading depending on design choices, Mesh Shaders, and Sampler Feedback.

PS5 doesn't use DirectX API as it belongs to Microsoft.
Sony have their own API for PS5, so you will never hear those names unless it a common naming scheme like Ray-Tracing.

Plus, if it an article interviewing Mark Cerny The Lead Architect for the PS5.
And you see them talking about ML, isn't it obvious Mark gave the reporter the ok to add it in.
Even PlayStation had a role in the article.

And one reason Cerny don't repeat his self, is because you Xbox fanboys made him had to reconfirm features in the second Wired article because you all could believe the PS5 had rat tracing after the GitHub leak. Even DF of all people was saying the PS5 doesn't have ray tracing and look how that turned out.
All this is, is the same time over and over.
What's next, the PS5 has Zen 1 cores?

You talk about RGT and Moore's law, but those guys always say, "believe with a grain of salt".
Unlike Dealer, Colt Eastwood and the gang that says everything as fact.
 
I think they fixed the Ass Creed thing (though did they do it by lowering the dynamic res? I don't remember).
Yep, made dynamic res more aggressive on Series X, but due to the worse performance on PS5 it was pretty clear PS5 wasn't handling the more aggressive DRS window that well. But, as I said, for people who had VRR from the get go, Series X version was always the best version of the game. But VRR is no excuse for bad optimization, though, so PS5 to me was the initially superior version, but since the patch I felt Xbox had PS5 beat.
 
I think they fixed the Ass Creed thing (though did they do it by lowering the dynamic res? I don't remember).
Yep. they significantly reduced the resolution on XSX. The framerate is now a bit better than on PS5 but in some instances the res is almost 60% higher on PS5 according to VGTech (1080p vs 1368p).

Some people actually noticed how blurry it was after the patch on XSX. But I think XSX should perform better than in this game (and it does in most others games).
 
Last edited:
the PS5 is not a more advanced piece of kit than Xbox Series X, and it's pretty clear based on all the mounting evidence from official sources.

2 questions though

1. How can you be so sure of that when you don't know how good the results from the customizations to the geometry engine and the cache scrubbers are.

2. Has always jumping to conclusions managed to keep your legs in shape?
 
PS5 vs. the better designed console
DPuWPHm.jpg
Look at the excellent VRS in action in the Series X shot, gives a lovely bit of context to this whole argument.

Sure it's exacerbated by the lower resolution, but this is what it does folks, please for the love of Cerny, don't have this shite in PS5. (although it's actually hella useful for VR if the headset has built in eye tracking so it's probs in there unfortunately)
 
2 questions though

1. How can you be so sure of that when you don't know how good the results from the customizations to the geometry engine and the cache scrubbers are.

2. Has always jumping to conclusions managed to keep your legs in shape?

Tell me about these customizations in the geometry engine. Where have you heard that there were customizations over and beyond the geometry engine already in RX 5700XT that already supports the most advanced Geometry Engine feature on PS5, which is Primitive Shaders? Point me to the source. Cache Scrubbers as explained by Cerny sound very useful, we will see.

Sony's greatest weapon has always been their first party studios, and the best things they pump out will stand up very favorably next to anything that is released on Xbox and even PC, but they simply do not appear to have the more advanced or more powerful console of the two. I feel as developers dig deeper into the full capabilities of the two boxes, the Series X's advantage will be more clear. And if a single thing they mention about ML upsampling becomes reality... time will tell.
 
Still using launch code shots when games have been patched, those comparisons are irrelevant now.

GJBYeMh.jpg

EmyK2yc.jpg


Add in VRR and it's not even close.

That stage in Dirt 5 ( and others with 120fps comparison) has a fps fluctuation like hell. In some instances you can catch higher fps on PS5 if you want. Bur of course, you don't want.

Then i guess tested patch 1.04 for Valhalla is irrelevant to because there is a patch 1.1.2 now. :/

Anyway curios to see size of the patches. XSX/S have roughly till date size of the patches 38.6 GB, while PS5 has size of the patches 18.1 GB

uPP7JcJ.png


EC1rCbt.png
Rpa38dM.png
O8wNZUs.png
 
Last edited:
I don't see where or how that is anything like VRS - do you have the patent link.
There are multiple patents on the subject/related topics - just search Cerny's patents - it's easy to find.
Anyway it's a functional superset - the paragraph in question describes an implementation that can vary every rasterization parameter - that includes things like target viewport, render-target dimensions, and a bunch of other things, of course also - sample-rate.
So you get equivalent control to super/sub-sample(but also more, since you can also vary resolution and other parameters, not just shading rate) on a per-region basis which are rectangle-elements, not unlike the VRS blocks.
 
But you are always trying to paint PS5 into a bad light in every possible way and category where the is no way that PS5 can have a single advantage over XSX. Always. You saying that PS5 isn't a bad system it's like you trying to play a nice, but you actually have a poker face.



It is the best of the best, bestest, and beyond everything. So much beyond that i'm pretty lost in speaking the best epithets for XSX. :/

I'm sorry your feelings are hurt, but the PS5 is a less advanced console than the Xbox Series X based on the facts as we have them. It, to me, has no meaningful advantage outside of the faster SSD. Boost clock? plz. Take it how you want, but Sony has explained what kind of console they built, and Microsoft has done the same.

If you think the early games are evidence that I'm wrong, then explain the much hyped PS5 SSD not doing at all what it was claimed to in those same early titles that are shared between both? You'll say that Sony's devs will use the tech better right? Guess what? You would be correct. I've seen examples of that! Same goes for Microsoft's devs, such as what Coalition is doing on the system early on. If the PS5 SSD so far isn't smoking Series X's like it was suppose to, and that "takes time" then certainly Xbox Series X's more advanced GPU with newer features should also reasonably get some time too. Fair? Get mad and take it however you want, if the PS5 were the one with Series X's specs and Xbox had the PS5 specs, not a single person in here would be claiming that the Xbox is more advanced and we all know it.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry your feelings are hurt, but the PS5 is a less advanced console than the Xbox Series X based on the facts as we have them.

Based on what? On what scale or measure? Just because it doesn't support DirectX12U it doesn't make it less advanced.

Man, you are just making fanboy statements without a hint of a fact to back them up. It's like if I were to say that XSX is less advanced just because it doesn't have fast I/O, cache scrubbers and it uses an outdated GE.
 
Last edited:
Tell me about these customizations in the geometry engine. Where have you heard that there were customizations over and beyond the geometry engine already in RX 5700XT that already supports the most advanced Geometry Engine feature on PS5, which is Primitive Shaders? Point me to the source. Cache Scrubbers as explained by Cerny sound very useful, we will see.

Cerny doesn't need to tell you shit if there are patents, which is enough.

LNY3doJ.png




Ciyz03i.png


IlefWvW.png



I'm sorry your feelings are hurt, but the PS5 is a less advanced console than the Xbox Series X based on the facts as we have them. It, to me, has no meaningful advantage outside of the faster SSD. Boost clock? plz. Take it how you want, but Sony has explained what kind of console they built, and Microsoft has done the same.

If you think the early games are evidence that I'm wrong, then explain the much hyped PS5 SSD not doing at all what it was claimed to in those same early titles that are shared between both? You'll say that Sony's devs will use the tech better right? Guess what? You would be correct. I've seen examples of that! Same goes for Microsoft's devs, such as what Coalition is doing on the system early on. If the PS5 SSD so far isn't smoking Series X's like it was suppose to, and that "takes time" then certainly Xbox Series X's more advanced GPU with newer features should also reasonably get some time too. Fair? Get mad and take it however you want, if the PS5 were the one with Series X's specs and Xbox had the PS5 specs, not a single person in here would be claiming that the Xbox is more advanced and we all know it.

PS5 GPU clock isn't boosted. It is capped at 2.23 Ghz. Boost clock you say. So, you straight up implied that PS5 is a 9 TF console.

No wonder why you defending Blueisviolet. Shit, man!
 
Last edited:
Said what I said. Series X looks to be the better overall designed console.

For Xbox standards maybe, same as their games. If the XSX had advantages from the beginning in MP games, you would jump around and shit on everything that is Sony. Screaming "I was right and MS was right". You wouldn't say "meh these are just launch titles".
 
Last edited:
Now SenjutsuSage doesn't see anything fake from Blueisviolet. His twitter account is a goldmine for false information. it doesn't surprise me that he would be in the corner of some of the biggest Xbox fanboys on twitter, even the ones who are known for posting false information.

 
Cerny doesn't need to tell you shit if there are patents, which is enough.

LNY3doJ.png


HIU2MAL.png


Ciyz03i.png


IlefWvW.png
Not doubting these patents but people need to remember that patents do not necessarily get incorporated into products. Just like the double sided cooling patent using through die vias ....

The first patent listed appears to be specifically about a form of implementation of VRS - it was filed in mid 2020. idk what that means for the likelyhood of it having been though of in time for the final spec of the PS5..


tbh I'm not sure what the issue is here - are people claiming PS5 doesn't have VRS or something ?
 
Even some of the things people talk about most on PS5, like the Geometry Engine, it's most powerful and advanced feature is Primitive Shaders. It's primary feature is a feature designed to perform best and benefit more from compute power, more streaming processors aka more compute units.

The thing that people are making out to be this big thing on PS5, Series X also has, but Series X's version appears more advanced since RX 5700 XT also supported Primitive Shaders, but didn't support Mesh Shaders.

Series X also has the additional compute to make the most of it. And according to Microsoft, Series X's Mesh Shader capability actually goes beyond the Mesh Shader or DX12 Ultimate spec. We can watch a mesh shaders video on youtube of Series X doing at 4K resolution what a 2080 Ti is only doing at just under 1440p. Yes, I know, it was just a demo, but the demo was real. We have these tangible things to look at, not hearsay on youtube or rumors. So why would I even look at the PS5 and think it's MORE impressive when evidence suggests otherwise?

Someone brings up cache scrubbers, and how big a deal it can be. I think it sounds very useful, but we just don't have a metric of measurement for what it can actually do, and how much better things become. Meanwhile for Sampler Feedback Streaming we know it improves RAM efficiency by up to 2.5x at a minimum, freeing up more actual memory for developers. Why would I think cache scrubbers as described by Cerny has an advantage over a feature that will literally give developers 2.5x better RAM utilization while offering up the same visual result as if that 2.5x benefit wasn't there? We know PS5 will produce incredible games, but there's no argument that can be made that it's actually the better piece of hardware.

Give Sony's developers Series X instead of PS5 with the familiar PS5 API, not DirectX. What do you seriously think they produce superior results on if that helps better get my point across? Do any of us doubt those Sony first party devs would make the Series X soc smoke the PS5 soc? Which brings me back to my core point. Sony's best weapon isn't their hardware this gen, it's their developers.
Well, MS should have learn from Sony to let the games talk, instead throwing buzzwords around and brainwash their fans with it.
 
I think you'll wait indefinitely long till Mark Cernys announcemenet of DX12 features on GNMX
My hunch, going by reading that tweet from Matt, again and all the things that are seemingly vanilla in the die shot that should mean the games we are already seeing defying the hardware, is that the GE is a descendant of the Cell BE 2 R&D - that was supposed to be 4 PPC cores with 32 SPEs.

A GE that is easy to use out the box doing standard opengl functionality for anyone uninterested - because a chip intelligence is built on top of a modern SPURS(?) library to hide the complexity of the underlying hardware. Hardware that probably has new 256bit instruction SPUs - for Ray Packet tracing, making AVX2 unneeded at desktop level - and have a new ringbus (new EiB) that presumably directly interfaces to the IO complex by the direct DMA controller - presumably the IO complex is also a ringbus given the 6 level priorities, low latency/high throughput.

It would certainly explain why Demon's Souls as a PS3 port was used, and why it looks so breath taking, and performance so well- as it had custom geometry culling on SPUs IIRC, reading the PS3 emulator thread here on GAF. It would also explain why Sony are coy about the GE specifics, as the PS3 is a polarising console for gamers IMHO, but would also explain why AI,/ML, VRS, Mesh shading, RT and everything else is no problem for the future of PS5 -Sony ignores the demand for info - because such powerful and versatile hardware for the GE at the heart of 10TFs of custom-vanilla RDNA2 entourage, would certainly be able to deliver UE5 type results, and better - as software matured -, and with results so impressive, would likely be something AMD would want to license for their next generation of products IMO.

It would also make sense for Sony's PS Now situation, as a modern product to emulate PS3 game streaming would serve that purpose too.

/if the GE isn't something as crazy advanced as that, and AVX2 performance has been nerfed on PS5, then I'm slightly in awe of how UE5's demo looked the way it did - if the die shot interpretation is accurate.
 
Last edited:
Even some of the things people talk about most on PS5, like the Geometry Engine, it's most powerful and advanced feature is Primitive Shaders. It's primary feature is a feature designed to perform best and benefit more from compute power, more streaming processors aka more compute units.

The thing that people are making out to be this big thing on PS5, Series X also has, but Series X's version appears more advanced since RX 5700 XT also supported Primitive Shaders, but didn't support Mesh Shaders.

Series X also has the additional compute to make the most of it. And according to Microsoft, Series X's Mesh Shader capability actually goes beyond the Mesh Shader or DX12 Ultimate spec. We can watch a mesh shaders video on youtube of Series X doing at 4K resolution what a 2080 Ti is only doing at just under 1440p. Yes, I know, it was just a demo, but the demo was real. We have these tangible things to look at, not hearsay on youtube or rumors. So why would I even look at the PS5 and think it's MORE impressive when evidence suggests otherwise?

Someone brings up cache scrubbers, and how big a deal it can be. I think it sounds very useful, but we just don't have a metric of measurement for what it can actually do, and how much better things become. Meanwhile for Sampler Feedback Streaming we know it improves RAM efficiency by up to 2.5x at a minimum, freeing up more actual memory for developers. Why would I think cache scrubbers as described by Cerny has an advantage over a feature that will literally give developers 2.5x better RAM utilization while offering up the same visual result as if that 2.5x benefit wasn't there? We know PS5 will produce incredible games, but there's no argument that can be made that it's actually the better piece of hardware.

Give Sony's developers Series X instead of PS5 with the familiar PS5 API, not DirectX. What do you seriously think they produce superior results on if that helps better get my point across? Do any of us doubt those Sony first party devs would make the Series X soc smoke the PS5 soc? Which brings me back to my core point. Sony's best weapon isn't their hardware this gen, it's their developers.
You keep on talking about stuff that you know nothing about, making statements while you didn't even work on the PS5. You are simply slandering and spreading rumors to win an argument that, at the end of the day, boils down to: does it run the games?

Short answer: yes, the PS5 runs games with stable and high frame rate, with more details than the competition and when code is decently written, it can push RT at 60FPS. Meanwhile, on the other side of the fence, we have Craig.

You should invest your energy in supporting and pushing MS' developers to provide quality products, because better games for the XSX mean a good challenge for the PS5. Instead you are wasting our time, running around and screaming nonsense, trying to win an argument that isn't even there. Move on and play games on your preferred plastic toy.
 
Look at the excellent VRS in action in the Series X shot, gives a lovely bit of context to this whole argument.

Sure it's exacerbated by the lower resolution, but this is what it does folks, please for the love of Cerny, don't have this shite in PS5. (although it's actually hella useful for VR if the headset has built in eye tracking so it's probs in there unfortunately)
Who the hell says you can "see" vrs in that shot. You have no idea that what you see has any direct relationship to vrs. Some of you keep going back to the well on that stupid argument without any evidence to back it up.
 
Bruh, that guy had nothing to do with the development of PS5.
Why haven't he been featured on anything PlayStation?
Why did he deleted the tweets after he realized he said something wrong?
Why you taking his word over official statements?
Why you acting like you know what your talking about?
Why you such a big fanboy?
Why you believing blueisviolet?
You know he's haven proven anything right?

I mean look at this. pure fanboy nonsense.
Man vise XBSX is RDNA3+ :messenger_tears_of_joy:
Eeg0ky9.png

You and him are two seeds in the same pod.
I'd bid that the PS5 is RDNA 5 ... I mean, get the clue guys, it's in the name! 😎

will anyone outbid me with the RDNA version number?
 
We know PS5 will produce incredible games, but there's no argument that can be made that it's actually the better piece of hardware.
Wait until Phil deliver the performance we shall see, until then the conversation we should have is analytical and it explains what we know so far (I.E. they perform pretty close to one another, and one did it one way, the other company attained its goals in a different manner).

The day we see AI powered games (assuming this is not all cloud level BS)... and it breaks the PS5 all this is non sense.
 
That stage in Dirt 5 ( and others with 120fps comparison) has a fps fluctuation like hell. In some instances you can catch higher fps on PS5 if you want. Bur of course, you don't want.

Then i guess tested patch 1.04 for Valhalla is irrelevant to because there is a patch 1.1.2 now. :/

Anyway curios to see size of the patches. XSX/S have roughly till date size of the patches 38.6 GB, while PS5 has size of the patches 18.1 GB

uPP7JcJ.png


EC1rCbt.png
Rpa38dM.png
O8wNZUs.png
Hold onto your hats console warrioring fans.

We've reached patch size comparisons.
 
Top Bottom