• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

AMD: Both XSX and PS5 RDNA2 based and have Hardware RT

ethomaz

Banned
This post from you right here is perpetuating this surety delusion from you guys.

It's all vague, could it be RDNA 2.0? Yes, is it likely it's RDNA 2.0? Yes, do we actually know that it is? No, no we do not, and that's inarguable.

It's that simple, and it's not even remotely outside of the bounds of reality that in this semi-custom SoC that it's a custom design mixing the two architectures and features of them.
RDNA 2 confirmed!!!
There is no doubt about that anymore.
Unless you want to discuss that with AMD :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Last edited:
My best argument is a fact... AMD confirmed RDNA 2 on PS5.

You always had issues to accept the reality.
I never expect you to grow up that easy.
You have no argument. Here are the facts.

Is it highly probable that the PlayStation 5 is RDNA 2.0?

Yes.

Is it possible that it's a hybrid of RDNA 1.0 and RDNA 2.0?

Yes.

Do we know for a fact the PlayStation 5 is purely RDNA 2.0?

No.


-----------------------------------------

Why is it so hard for you guys to come to grips with this? I'm the only person being open here when vague statements don't solidify a hard pressed reality. There is literally nothing, no document or statement whatsoever which says explicitly that the PlayStation 5 is RDNA 2.0, not one.

There's a few assumption forming statements which support the speculation that it is RDNA 2.0, but nothing which solidifies that it is. Where is the confusion here for you?

You're being irrational.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
You have no argument. Here are the facts.

Is it highly probably that the PlayStation 5 is RDNA 2.0?

Yes.

Is it possible that it's a hybrid of RDNA 1.0 and RDNA 2.0?

Yes.

Do we know for a fact the PlayStation 5 is purely RDNA 2.0?

No.


-----------------------------------------

Why is it so hard for you guys to come to grips with this? I'm the only person being open here when vague statements don't solidify a hard pressed reality. There is literally nothing, no document or statement whatsoever which says explicitly that the PlayStation 5 is RDNA 2.0, not one.

There's a few assumption forming statements which support the speculation that it is RDNA 2.0, but nothing which solidifies that it is. Where is the confusion here for you?

You're being irrational.
And no proof PS5 is 12tf either.

It was PS5 = ~12tf

Then AMD stage show says PS5 is RDNA 2??? Sony never said so.

And with that, it's now crept up to 13tf?

So being RDNA 2 (assumption) makes the console increase a tf?
 

ethomaz

Banned
You have no argument. Here are the facts.

Is it highly probable that the PlayStation 5 is RDNA 2.0?

Yes.

Is it possible that it's a hybrid of RDNA 1.0 and RDNA 2.0?

Yes.

Do we know for a fact the PlayStation 5 is purely RDNA 2.0?

No.


-----------------------------------------

Why is it so hard for you guys to come to grips with this? I'm the only person being open here when vague statements don't solidify a hard pressed reality. There is literally nothing, no document or statement whatsoever which says explicitly that the PlayStation 5 is RDNA 2.0, not one.

There's a few assumption forming statements which support the speculation that it is RDNA 2.0, but nothing which solidifies that it is. Where is the confusion here for you?

You're being irrational.
AMD already confirmed both consoles are using RDNA 2.

Deny a fact is what you can call irrational lol
 

ethomaz

Banned
It's a bald face lie, they never said that. There's a very keen reason as to why you're not accompanying your post with evidence and it's because it doesn't exist.
AMD said yesterday both consoles are using RDNA 2 not one but dozen of times.
The evidences were posted dozen of times here for any crying denial dude that can’t believe the reality.

AMD didn’t lie about that.
I don’t know why you keep saying they lied lol
 
Last edited:
AMD said yesterday both consoles are using RDNA 2 not one but dozen of times.
The evidences were posted dozen of times here for any crying denial dude that can’t believe the reality.

AMD didn’t lie about that.
I don’t know why you keep saying they lied lol
No they said "consoles", not "both consoles" or "Microsoft and Sony's consoles", and even in the event they said "both consoles" there's no implication as to what that refers to.

If the Series X and Series S both exist those are "consoles", and "both consoles" would be RDNA 2.0.

Think for just a second. If this were a staged debate you'd be getting thrown off.
 
Last edited:

Heinrich

Banned
AMD said yesterday both consoles are using RDNA 2 not one but dozen of times.
The evidences were posted dozen of times here for any crying denial dude that can’t believe the reality.

AMD didn’t lie about that.
I don’t know why you keep saying they lied lol

he didn’t say AMD Lied.
So again, where are the slides and the audio that amd said:

„PS5 is using RDNA 2.0“ where? I only hear people saying that they said that, but I NEVER see the proof. Because they never actually said that. They only „implied“ that and you guys happily interpreted it that way.
otherwise, show me the proof. 😉
 
Yes.
They showed PS5 and Xbox logo.

Navi_Features_575px.png

ps5-xbox-series-x-amd-conferma-architettura-rdna-2-comune-piattaforme-v6-431714-1280x720.jpg


More than that they talked about RDNA 2 powering both next-gen consoles.
No, that's two Separate slides with RDNA2 on one without Sony but with MS, and the other one without RDNA2 with both.
So you're adding your Conjecture to it.
 
he didn’t say AMD Lied.
So again, where are the slides and the audio that amd said:

„PS5 is using RDNA 2.0“ where? I only hear people saying that they said that, but I NEVER see the proof. Because they never actually said that. They only „implied“ that and you guys happily interpreted it that way.
otherwise, show me the proof. 😉
They think I'm arguing that it's not RDNA 2.0, that's the level of delusion here where they can't even make out what I'm clearly saying.

It's unclear, it's likely RDNA 2.0, it probably will be, but there's a chance that it's not purely that. What's so hard to understand about that?
 

ethomaz

Banned
No they said "consoles", not "both consoles" or "Microsoft and Sony's consoles", and even in the event they said "both consoles" there's no implication as to what that refers to.

If the Series X and Series S both exist those are "consoles", and "both consoles" would be RDNA 2.0.

Think for just a second. If this were a staged debate you'd be getting thrown off.
They actually said “next-gen consoles” and “both next-gen consoles”.

There is no room for confusion this time.
 
Last edited:
They actually said “consoles” and “both consoles”.
Which both consoles?

The Series X and the Series S?

Do you not see the dilemma here? You're inferring and extrapolating on a lack of information, and applying that assumption to be a fact when the underlying reality is that it's still unclear.

P.S. Post this video with time stamps.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
Which both consoles?

The Series X and the Series S?

Do you not see the dilemma here? You're inferring and extrapolating on a lack of information, and applying that assumption to be a fact when the underlying reality is that it's still unclear.

P.S. Post this video with time stamps.
Xbox Series X and PS5.
There is no dilema at all.

AMD never talked about Xbox Series S... it is not even clear if it exits lol

Wait are you creating an Xbox Series S to cover your denial?
 
Last edited:
They confirmed both are using rdna2. If you can’t accept that then you’ll have to accept xsx is rdna 1. The bet would be that when Sony confirms its rdna 2, you lose, rdna 1 you win.
Where is this evidence? I see 3-4 of you talking but zero of you posting it. This isn't a win or lose situation because I'm not hedging a bet either way. I want real confirmation of what exactly the hardware makeup is.

You guys are so wrapped up in your fanboy embroilment that you can't see the forest for the trees.
 
Last edited:

demigod

Member
Where is this evidence? I see 3-4 of you talking but zero of you posting it. This isn't a win or lose situation because I'm not hedging a bet either way. I want real confirmation of what exactly the hardware makeup is.

You guys are so wrapped up in your fanboy embroilment that you can't see the forest for the trees.

Someone linked it yesterday at the exact timeframe, I don’t have it handy.
 

ethomaz

Banned
Of course you don't, why on Earth would you have something which vindicates you and confirms what you're saying.

Did it get deleted from the internet? Did it walk away? Post it, it's that simple. The burden of proof falls at your feet.
I’m pretty sure the streaming is on YouTube and others video services.
 

demigod

Member
Of course you don't, why on Earth would you have something which vindicates you and confirms what you're saying.

Did it get deleted from the internet? Did it walk away? Post it, it's that simple. The burden of proof falls at your feet.

I knew you would be petty so i looked for it. Now suck it up cupcake.

 
Which both consoles?

The Series X and the Series S?

Do you not see the dilemma here? You're inferring and extrapolating on a lack of information, and applying that assumption to be a fact when the underlying reality is that it's still unclear.

P.S. Post this video with time stamps.


dude think about this for a second they are telling investors next gen consoles will use the latest technology. clearly talking about PS5 and X series, and more importantly ps5, is where they get majority of there chip sales since it's out selling xbox by over 60 million. you think they are gonna exclude the dominating market leader when talking about nextgen consoles then you are delusional.
 
Last edited:
I knew you would be petty so i looked for it. Now suck it up cupcake.

That's still cryptic and vague, why I have to even explain to you why it's vague is hilarious.

If the PlayStation 5 has a base RDNA 1.0 architecture but is using RDNA 2.0 hardware features, would it not being using "the latest RDNA technology"?

Yes, yes it would. You guys are really having a lot of trouble here....
 

ethomaz

Banned
That's still cryptic and vague, why I have to even explain to you why it's vague is hilarious.

If the PlayStation 5 has a base RDNA 1.0 architecture but is using RDNA 2.0 hardware features, would it not being using "the latest RDNA technology"?

Yes, yes it would. You guys are really having a lot of trouble here....
Do you speak English?

Because it is hilarious your lack of comprehension.
 
Last edited:

demigod

Member
That's still cryptic and vague, why I have to even explain to you why it's vague is hilarious.

If the PlayStation 5 has a base RDNA 1.0 architecture but is using RDNA 2.0 hardware features, would it not being using "the latest RDNA technology"?

Yes, yes it would. You guys are really having a lot of trouble here....

Just do avatar bet, what’s the harm in it?
 
Just do avatar bet, what’s the harm in it?
Because I have nothing to bet, I'm not saying it's one or the other, I'm saying we need explicit confirmation before I soak up the assumption punch. I deal in solidified inalienable facts, not statements which have multiple interpretations.

I don't know how many different ways this could be reiterated, I have no dog in this fight. I just want someone from Sony or AMD to say in one manner or another that "The PlayStation 5's GPU is RDNA 2.0", and as of yet that has not happened.
 
That's still cryptic and vague, why I have to even explain to you why it's vague is hilarious.

If the PlayStation 5 has a base RDNA 1.0 architecture but is using RDNA 2.0 hardware features, would it not being using "the latest RDNA technology"?

Yes, yes it would. You guys are really having a lot of trouble here....

They clearly state RDNA 2.0 will power nextgen consoles, and why would they do that? when they wanna push RDNA 2.0 as there next big thing.
 
Last edited:
This post from you right here is perpetuating this surety delusion from you guys.

It's all vague, could it be RDNA 2.0? Yes, is it likely it's RDNA 2.0? Yes, do we actually know that it is? No, no we do not, and that's inarguable.

It's that simple, and it's not even remotely outside of the bounds of reality that in this semi-custom SoC that it's a custom design mixing the two architectures and features of them.
You're literally arguing semantics at this point. That's all you have. And to top it off, you're trying to use that to justify the overt denial from others.

At this point, I think it's safe to say you're about as unserious a person as they come and leave it at that.
 
You're literally arguing semantics at this point. That's all you have. And to top it off, you're trying to use that to justify the overt denial from others.

At this point, I think it's safe to say you're about as unserious a person as they come and leave it at that.
I'm completely serious, and the only people who are taking any of this seriously or with any modicum of tact are in the "they haven't conclusively specified yet" camp.

Anyone else is just full of crap, flat out.
 
Top Bottom