Panaphonics
Banned
but according to you guys AMD announced it so it is announced so they should change it like MS did.
-
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
- Thread starter Agnostic2020
- Start date
ShadowWolf712
Member
We do know what else, but AMD has literally come out and said one of the main reasons RDNA2 exists is because RDNA1 cannot support HW RT. Outright said it. And one of the reasons RDNA2 does IS the other features it has. The power efficiency, the performance boost that allows implementation without dropping stupid amounts of frames.
So what you're suggesting is they brute-forced the tech, and PS5 will have it, but run like crap if it ever tries to use it? And they expect companies to keep working with them after that.
Do you think these things through?
Snake29
Banned
When they announce more specs, then they will change the website for sure.
DynamiteCop!
Banned
Where do they say that hardware accelerated RT cannot work on RDNA 1.0? Where has anyone implied that the PS5's solution if a hybrid would run like crap or be performatively lesser?
Where? You guys have turned a simple tech conversation into a console war as if people are attacking the PS5, no one is doing that. Why are you so defensive like IT HAS TO BE RDNA 2.0!
If it's a hybrid, what's the big deal? Insecurity through the roof around here.
ShadowWolf712
Member
Because they literally said both are using it, and the utterly insane levels of lawyering you guys are using to dance around it is a disservice to the record of human intelligence.
DynamiteCop!
Banned
Holy hell, you guys are impossible to talk to.
siekro1983
Banned
logically think for a second. sony is the by far has the biggest console market share for amd. they said RDAN 2 will power nextgen consoles with nextgen consoles being referred as ps5/x-series in the presentation material, so what the fuck else can it mean?
Md Ray
Member
This.
Also,
DynamiteCop!
- you still haven't addressed this:The one at the bottom is from Sony two months ago. Seriously this alone should be enough to tell you what's inside PS5. If it's RDNA 2 then there is actual hardware to accelerate RT. If it's RDNA 1, then it can't have hardware-based ray-tracing just like we don't in RX 5700 XT.
Your quote:
If that's the case then they would have said "Next-Gen Microsoft Consoles". Why didn't they? Because it means Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5.
I'm gonna reiterate one of my posts again. Go through this:
It's clear at this point.
RDNA 2, a common architecture for PC, PS5 & XSX. We have CDNA for their partners who do compute, non-gaming tasks. If you still say PS5 is RDNA 1 despite all the clear pieces of evidence then I don't know what to tell you. That'd be like saying XSX is RDNA 1 with RDNA 2 features, but it's not.
EDIT: They also say RDNA 2 across all platforms is here to "Simplify Development and Speed Adoption". If they want to do this then they can't complicate things with PS5 (one of the next-gen consoles with RT) by giving it RDNA 1 as a base. Further pointing towards PS5 to be clearly RDNA 2.
Last edited:
DynamiteCop!
Banned
I did address it, you guys trying to chain a bunch of loose statements and vagaries together like connect the dots gets you no closer to a definitive confirmation.
I said this like two pages back.
Md Ray
Member
By your logic, XSX would be RDNA 1 with RT and VRS then. They clearly mention "Consoles", in the plural, there.
thelastword
Banned
As far as I'm concerned, the argument makes little sense...…Though if you are a logical human being, you can infer that Hardware raytracing and RDNA 2 are one and of the same......You can also infer that PS5 is on RDNA 2 because they said both consoles will be using AMD's latest technology......They really don't have to spell it out......
What you guys are forgetting is that MS just recently gave a spec sheet on basic Series X features, Sony has not responded, and AMD did clue you in as to what to expect when Sony actually says something…….At this pointy, the evidence of PS5 being RDNA 2 is heavier than it being RDNA 1, especially with AMD's latest tidbits and deep down I think you guys know that...….And if you guys were avid followers of the industry, you would realize Sony never compromises on tech in their launch year, they go with the best features they can put in their device at the time of release, they even put tech that's not even yet available to the mainstream or in PC circles......So you can probably expect even some RDNA 3 features on PS5.....
Sony has a high focus on engineering and custom feature sets, this is what I'm most looking forward to...…..I have no problem with Series X being a good piece of kit, but it's like some of you guys want MS to be on RDNA 2 and if it were possible I'm suspecting some of you would even wish PS5 was on Polaris still......It's not a good way to think.....I see one thing happening, if the Series X and PS5 is close, we will see the prowess of the first party studios or not.....There will be little excuse that PS4 was 40% faster or vice versa......In the end, you may have good kit, but that conversation goes out the window if developers can't make that piece of hardware sing…...I look at the recent trailers on LOU and Tshushima on 1.84TF, and all I can say is that I'm excited for next gen...….I do think MS should focus on higher quality titles and variety as opposed to focusing on fanning some hardware e-peen online......MS did the same last gen and Cerny was able to hit the MS hardware ball for a homerun when he revealed PS4......Yet, hardware was not MS's chief problem last gen, as reception to the XBONEX clearly reveals...…..
DynamiteCop!
Banned
You can infer a lot of things but like an implication it's a supposition, there's really nothing left to be said.
Md Ray
Member
There's multiple evidence that suggests PS5 is def RDNA 2. I want you to refute to each of my claims with evidence/slides from AMD/Sony to back up your RDNA 1 with RT feature claims. I'll wait.
Last edited:
thelastword
Banned
Are you saying AMD/Sony would do a separate hardware RT solution on RDNA1 when they already have a hardware solution that puts an enhanced and more efficient RDNA1+Raytracing -> which they call RDNA 2? Why would Sony/AMD rollback all that hardwork and reinvent the will......If that is the case well maybe Sony should have done their entire console in-house......
What's most logical is that Sony used RDNA 2 as a base and Cerny worked on more efficient solutions on top of what AMD had in their pure RDNA solution.....So he might call for some hardware redesigns on RDNA 2 that fits the console pipeline a bit better.......And as he has done before, he may even inject a few advanced features from RDNA 3 just as PRO had Vega feature's before Vega launched.......That's looking more likely what has happened here, but I realize you won't concede based on the evidence we have before us, so perhaps we should wait till Sony gives a spread on tech, where it will be given to you in ABC form.....
DynamiteCop!
Banned
It really is, it's like science versus religion.
One has a confirmation process with proven theory, the other does not.
Snake29
Banned
bUt bUt...gIThUb 9.2tF, cErNy lIeD
DynamiteCop!
Banned
Yes, it's a possibility because it could drive down unit cost as an RDNA 1.0 GPU with high clock speeds and less compute units would be substantially more affordable while netting them the performance they seek and RT function.
I'm not saying "Yeah, it's RDNA 1.0 with RDNA 2.0 features", I'm mere stating that it's not out of the realm of possibility. I'm the only one here who is not being definitive, that's the only unbiased position until definitive architectural confirmation..
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Exactly.
So until Sony actually says stuff (like MS clarified with their latest SeX specs list), making AMD's stage show info as concrete evidence shouldn't be done.
Just like MS saying SeX is "double the power of X". And some people still didn't even believe it, even though it came right from MS. So if some people don't want to believe the actual console maker, why should anyone believe AMD?
Now if Sony comes out and says PS5 is RDNA 2 at 12 or 13tf, then that's different. It's right from the source.
Remember when Nvidia had that slide saying PS3 was 2TF? You're telling me PS3 has more TF than PS4?
Last edited:
DynamiteCop!
Banned
Benji is a nobody, he gets information about US game sales. Running to an "authority figure" who's not even an authority figure isn't going to do you any good.
thelastword
Banned
Nice logic Streets, but you guys never doubted Series X was 12 TF before the official reveal.....Also, you guys have no problem believing PS5 is 9.2TF when Sony has not said a thing about that.....How does it work exactly?
siekro1983
Banned
it really doesn't matter who he is. he's stating facts. not delusional hope for reasons why' there might BE a 1% chance of not being RDNA2
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
How about this?
MS stated last year SeX was "double the power of X" and at the same time they said it was RDNA. They didn't say RDNA 1 or 2, so nobody knew which one but doesn't matter. Some people were unsure if it meant 12tf at RDNA, or 12tf GCN (which is double X) using RDNA. So maybe it's more like 10tf RDNA.
I even said myself in some old post it might be 12tf GCN because that is the literal meaning of "double X". 12tf RDNA 2 is probably more like 2.5 or 3x X (whatever people say RDNA 2.0 boosts GCN).
Same assumption can be made with PS5.
Maybe it's 9.2tf RDNA 2. Maybe it's 12-13 tf RDNA 2. Nobody knows yet.
But you can how specs can be minsterpreted (on purpose or not on purpose).
Last edited:
DynamiteCop!
Banned
He's not stating any facts, he's suppositioning the same vague slides and statements you people are here.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
The last graph there states RDNA 2 is common to "Consoles". How do you explain that?
Snake29
Banned
So AMD is lying about their own products now? whats next?
siekro1983
Banned
So AMD is not stating facts? i really don't understand whats vague about AMD saying RDNA 2.0 architecture being in nextgen consoles, while AMD clearly shows and tells us next gen consoles they are talking about is X series and ps5 in in the slides. its like you are trying to find a loophole why it's not . if RDNA 2.0 wasn't for PS5 they would have just said X series and PC
Md Ray
Member
It doesn't matter. What matters is that he's stating facts.
We are providing legit slides provided by Sony and AMD to back up our claims. You can provide yours to back up your RDNA 1 claim. Waiting.
Last edited:
Evilms
Banned
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
If he is a nobody then imagine you
AMD meant Lockhart.
An unreleased, yet to be revealed console.
Maybe it's Stadia 2.
Oh, I know. It's the future, possible mid gen refresh from Sony.
It can't possibly be PS5.
Last edited:
policestationx
Banned
Good to see next gen consoles XSX and XSS to be RDNA2 while it's mystery for PS5.
Snake29
Banned
I cant wait for the PS6, and looking back at:
- 2013: Xbox One dGPU, Power of Cloud will help en destroy PlayStation.
- 2020: Cerny lied about hardware RT, Github 9.2TF claims, Xbros ignoring RDNA2 for PS5 because they have seen a whole different stream then everyone else, RDNA2 created for Xbox, Sony hasn't confirmed it so AMD slides are "vague", with other words, AMD is also "lying" about their own presentation and products, These consoles they mentioned are SeX and Sad edition. "How could this ever be PS5"? They only talked about Sony for fun, not because they are part of the new architecture...
- 2013: Xbox One dGPU, Power of Cloud will help en destroy PlayStation.
- 2020: Cerny lied about hardware RT, Github 9.2TF claims, Xbros ignoring RDNA2 for PS5 because they have seen a whole different stream then everyone else, RDNA2 created for Xbox, Sony hasn't confirmed it so AMD slides are "vague", with other words, AMD is also "lying" about their own presentation and products, These consoles they mentioned are SeX and Sad edition. "How could this ever be PS5"? They only talked about Sony for fun, not because they are part of the new architecture...
Last edited:
Self_Destructive
Member
Then maybe you should stop acting like AMD's RT technology is going to be better than Nvidia's. Stop acting like you're in the know, you're not
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
DynamiteCop!
Banned
Don't bring your salt here lolThen maybe you should stop acting like AMD's RT technology is going to be better than Nvidia's. Stop acting like you're in the know, you're not
01011001
Banned
we had Microsoft saying 2x as powerful as the One X, 2x 6TF = 12TF
there was doubt about it because 12TF was seen as crazy high and PR speak can never be trusted.
but then came the GitHub leaks, which showed 2 AMD APUs, one that could get to 12TF easily at a 1.7ghz clock (which is a pretty standard gpu clock nowadays)
and one that had clockrates attached that would end up being 9.2TF at the tested clock rates.
we now can be pretty sure that the 1.7ghz 12TF one is actually the SX, which wasn't as easy to directly tie to Microsoft because it didn't have back compat tests (might not need it).
so we can then expect the other one, which is easily linked to Sony to also be accurate to a degree.
we know the chip isn't some experiment that got thrown out because we have new revisions of it and we even know what these revisions did to some degree.
so it all checks out so far.
is there still room to doubt how final or detailed the leaks are, yes, but these metric have always been the most likely ones out of all the leaks and rumours.
and now with RDNA2 2ghz is more manageable, and we now also heard about Sony's more expensive cooling solution which also matches the leak pretty neatly.
Last edited:
demigod
Member
Damn, i wonder who removed his tag.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
What was it?
Self_Destructive
Member
lol <3
Md Ray
Member
So according to your weird logic, AMD is also making an assumption... And they're wrong about their own product.
Your lies keep getting exposed.
cc:
SoloKingRobert
Last edited:
demigod
Member
Platforms, lets see how y’all spin it this time.
“With that, you will greatly simplify the content development – developers can develop on one platform and easily port it to the other platform. This will definitely help speed up the adoption [of ray tracing].”
Note that the plural of ‘consoles’ is used, suggesting that both the next-gen Xbox and PlayStation will make use of AMD’s RDNA 2 architecture.
Port for thought
The fact that Wang talks about porting from one platform to the other – presumably meaning across both consoles, given the context of the statement – further reinforces the suggestion of the PS5 coming with RDNA 2 running through its GPU veins.
“With that, you will greatly simplify the content development – developers can develop on one platform and easily port it to the other platform. This will definitely help speed up the adoption [of ray tracing].”
Note that the plural of ‘consoles’ is used, suggesting that both the next-gen Xbox and PlayStation will make use of AMD’s RDNA 2 architecture.
Port for thought
The fact that Wang talks about porting from one platform to the other – presumably meaning across both consoles, given the context of the statement – further reinforces the suggestion of the PS5 coming with RDNA 2 running through its GPU veins.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
So according to your weird logic, AMD is also making an assumption... And they're wrong about their own products.
Your lies keep getting exposed.
It never ceases to amaze me how even this one two screenshots punch sees people circling back to “HW based is very different than HW accelerated” so quickly.
Dontero
Banned
The better question is "how much" accelerated. Just because something is accelerated it doesn't mean that huge resources were put into RT. Much like Nvidia chips have different level of RT depending on GPU type it also means that consoles will have some level of RT.
I wouldn't be shocked if RT in consoles is just afterthought.
Agnostic2020
Member
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Good point on consoles RT vs nVIDIA RT Corea. Ultimately it depends on the amount of compute units and HW customisations and reusability of the RT specific bits and bobs.
Like with VS vs Unified Shader ALU’s, I think we are headed towards unified shader ALU’s and very small HW features accelerating what does not make sense to do in software (like the fixed function parts of modern GPU’s). nVIDIA went for much more custom HW blocks because of timing and technology availability IMHO. The trade-off of a fixed RT implementation vs a more programmable one made sense for that.
Last edited: