-
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.
- Status
Star Wars Battlefront 2: Frostbite stress-tested on Xbox One X
There was one crucial aspect of the Xbox One X experience we could not cover in our hardware review: to what extent is …
www.eurogamer.net
pawel86ck
Banned
So according to Digital Foundry battlefront 2 runs at dynamic 4KStar Wars Battlefront 2: Frostbite stress-tested on Xbox One X
There was one crucial aspect of the Xbox One X experience we could not cover in our hardware review: to what extent is …
Like I have said before, there is a difference between dynamic 4K, checkerboard 4K and native 4K.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
22.5 is about 2k below 2070 if it is Firestrike.
Last edited:
Mate, you are splitting hairs. It tells you straight in first paragraph, its 4K native. They scale resolution in hectic situations not to drop to much frames.
My entire point is "4K60fps beast" means nothing when X can run 4K games at 60fps with mobile CPU from 2012 and Polaris. This is direct response to "Anything under 12TF is too little for 4K". Point is, there are 4K60fps games and they dont mean everything you do on console will run at that res and fps, therefore Mr.Cookies sentence has little point in how many TF system has.
This is GPU score for 5700. 2070 is 24K up to 26K if overclocked.
5700XT is 26K.
So these are all just GPU, not overalls.
ResilientBanana
Member
Exactly, personally I find that hugely impressive that the games can even get to 4k with older technology.
pawel86ck
Banned
That's exactly what dynamic resolution does, it scales up sometimes to full fat 2160p, so people call it "dynamic 4K" instead of "4K native". If game runs at 1440-1800p most of the time and only hit 2160p on rare occasions it's not a 4K native game to me
Pretty much on all comparison screenshots you can see a difference in battlefront 2 compared with PC version running at 4K native. Xbox x is powerful enough to run demanding games at 4K dynamic or 1800p upscaled to 4K, but 4K native is a little bit too much for xbox x hardware. I think if xbox X would be using 8TF GPU instead of 6TF even these demanding games would run at 4K native.
Xbox x has problems to run 4K native even in 30fps games, for example gears of war 4. Despite people claims GOW4 is also using dynamic 4K and I have screenshots to prove it from my own walkthrough. When there are no characters on the screen picture quality looks like 2160p, but with characters on the screen picture quality looks like 1800p to me.
But I have to say dynamic 4K still looks good on HDTV and IMO developers dont need to go for full fat 2160p at all costs even on next gen consoles, and especially if you consider RT in games.
Last edited:
Lort
Banned
You heard it here first folks the monster ps5 will play games with 15% higher res than an xbox one x.
Last edited:
pawel86ck
Banned
At 8TF I wouldnt expect too much Lort, so lets's hope PS5 will offer 12-14TF
.
Maybe at 8TF xbox x would run 4K native, but these are still medium settings, while PC on the left is running maxed out settings. So it looks like you need something like 10TF Vega architecture to run battlefront 2 maxed out at 4K native and 60fps.
If PS5 will offer just 8TF Navi architecture, it should equal to around 10TF Vega, so it will be enough to run current games at 4K and 60fps, but developers will probably still aim at 1800p 30fps just to increase graphics fidelity.
Last edited:
ABrokenToy
Member
THAT'S IT! GONZALO IS PS5, SCARLETT IS GONZALO, PS5 IS AN XBOX!
Last edited:
vpance
Member
So Gonzolo GPU should be comfortably above 5700 then?
Again. 8TF Navi is more then 10TF Vega, its 11.TF Vega.At 8TF I wouldnt expect too much Lort, so lets's hope PS5 will offer 12-14TF
Maybe at 8TF xbox x would run 4K native, but these are still medium settings, while PC on the left is running maxed out settings. So it looks like you need something like 10TF Vega architecture to run battlefront 2 maxed out at 4K native and 60fps.
If PS5 will offer just 8TF Navi architecture, it should equal to around 10TF Vega, so it will be enough to run current games at 4K and 60fps, but developers will probably still aim at 1800p 30fps just to increase graphics fidelity.
8.5TF Navi is 12TF Vega.
1.41x in perf/TF is increase of Navi>Vega.
My opinion is, it should be between the two. I think pretty much matching 2070, as they compared Navi to best 2070 versions (FE).
We are not sure how good is Zen2 in Firestrike, but console might have additonal custom things added like AVX 512 extension, which could bring FS score up more then desktop version.
Last edited:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
From AMD E3 slides.
Navi XT TimeSpy proves this by posting 17% better result then Vega64 (12.6TF).
Note that Vega56 compared here is 10.56TF card, and not 9.7TF like XT, therefore score is ~30%, but per TF, its 40%.
Last edited:
Well at least we got improvement from 13-14TF. Glad you guys stopped using it and started accepting less then 10TF. Who estimated it? I have been doing it for weeks here while some of you have ejaculated on stupidest shit pastebin can offer. Now all of the sudden Gonzalo is legit and "its speculated" 9.2TF is magic number. Its up from my because it assumes 40 active CUs instead of 36, thats all difference.
I am using 8.5TF because I do believe for both, 9TF will be tough order (TDP limits). Possible, but very tough.
I am using 8.5TF because it matches 40CU (4 deactivated) x 1800MHZ on 316mm² die.
So again, sorry for actually trying to connect the dots instead drive by posting "Lalala anything below 12TF is embarassment".
Last edited:
demigod
Member
For someone that was done with this thread, you came back over 2 pages spouting the same bs.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Well to be fair if AMD is calculating their numbers differently then does it matter? If a 9.2 TF Navi GPU is equivalent to a 12.9 TF Vega GPU, then we got what we expected. We would be getting a 12.9 TF GPU like we wanted. It's just the numbers are being pushed around to more fit how Nvidia probably calculates their numbers.
Same BS you are coming to terms with, good to know.
We started at ,"Gonzalo is not console" > "Gonzalo is not PS5" > "Consoles will have 12-14TF" to "Gonzalo is 9.2TF, not 8.5"
Only difference between what I have been saying all along, and some others are now speculating is 4CUs. In your case its additional console on top of what we are likely getting.
TFLOPs are always calculated the same, for Nvidia and AMD. Its just question of how much perf/TF its delivering.
Entire time these past 2 week I have been shit on for saying they will be below 10 (8-9TF) but perform like 12+TF Vegas.
Last edited:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
I'm not sure who attacked you and why. But me personally......I just wanted the PS5 to have a GPU that had 11 TFs worth of Vega GPU power. I really could care less about the "ACTUAL" TF number at the end of the day. If AMD does it like this though, it will be hard to explain to casuals why the TF number jump isn't bigger.
xool
Member
Gonzalo was only quoted at 20000+ which suggests 20xxx not 22xxx .. in other words combined score for Gonzalo is ten percent less than GPU score for 5700 .. in other words weaker, and then some after subtract the CPU.
I'd say we have 4-5 months of no news, (excluding seemlingly random digits and numbers from apisak et al) .. 4-5 months to get used to a medium (or mediocre) GPU powered next gen
See Five Stages of Grief
You can see all those here ..
Lol doesnt work like that actually.Gonzalo was only quoted at 20000+ which suggests 20xxx not 22xxx .. in other words combined score for Gonzalo is ten percent less than GPU score for 5700 .. in other words weaker, and then some after subtract the CPU.
I'd say we have 4-5 months of no news, (excluding seemlingly random digits and numbers from apisak et al) .. 4-5 months to get used to a medium (or mediocre) GPU powered next gen
See Five Stages of Grief
You can see all those here ..
2070 is 24K GPU, coupled with 2700X its ~19K overall.
We dont know complete picture, but I am positively sure Gonzalo GPU is stronger then 5700.
We will have to wait for Zen2 3700 at 3.2GHZ benchmarks with Navi to know exact numbers.
Last edited:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Gonzalo was only quoted at 20000+ which suggests 20xxx not 22xxx .. in other words combined score for Gonzalo is ten percent less than GPU score for 5700 .. in other words weaker, and then some after subtract the CPU.
I'd say we have 4-5 months of no news, (excluding seemlingly random digits and numbers from apisak et al) .. 4-5 months to get used to a medium (or mediocre) GPU powered next gen
See Five Stages of Grief
You can see all those here ..
The final dev kits won't even be out until Nov 2019 to Jan 2020. So why are you saying it's medium powered?
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
Dude I love the shifting goal posts. Pretty much everybody was already including the architectural and node jump in their speculation. Also working off AdoredTV charts and using TDP interchangeably with TBP. They meant Navi 12-13TF. Most weren't expecting Vega 56-64/GTX 1080/RTX 2060 perf, they were/are expecting above 5700 XT perf.
The switcheroo with Gonzalo is funny though. Before people saw the FS score they were poo-pooing the idea. Now they've taken ownership and you are the one who doesn't know the true power of Gonzalo. Also, at the same time Gonzalo is Xbox, and Chinese console, but not PS5...unless it's powerful then it's PS5, but not Navi 10, unless it's custom and powerful.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
Combined score is always lower than GPU score lolGonzalo was only quoted at 20000+ which suggests 20xxx not 22xxx .. in other words combined score for Gonzalo is ten percent less than GPU score for 5700 .. in other words weaker, and then some after subtract the CPU.
I'd say we have 4-5 months of no news, (excluding seemlingly random digits and numbers from apisak et al) .. 4-5 months to get used to a medium (or mediocre) GPU powered next gen
See Five Stages of Grief
You can see all those here ..
To 20k combined you need something around 25-26k GPU score.
Its hilarious in here yea. I am just trying to tie everything in, technically, what we know of AMD tech and some palpable leaks here and there and come to the conclusion. Biggest problem is thinking you have right conclusion and then going backwards to confirm it by being biased towards leaks and BS that come your way.
For example, PS5 and Scarlet will have RT hardware and I am pretty sure some + goodies in there that might even push that GFX score up, for same TF number. So, while 90% of GPU should resemble Navi XT, I expect slightly lower clocks in PS5 and 4CUs less, but some additional features they picked from AMD that AMD didnt manage to pack in current Navi lineup.
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
R
R600
Don't forget, PS5 is 30% more powerful than Scarlett according to journos, a real Beast, but also ~9TF Navi, and also Scarlett is ~400mm² which shows PS5 is not ~320mm², and it's 30% more powerful. So Scarlett is a 400mm² APU that performs like 7TF Navi. Looks like I've solved the riddle. Game blouses.
Don't forget, PS5 is 30% more powerful than Scarlett according to journos, a real Beast, but also ~9TF Navi, and also Scarlett is ~400mm² which shows PS5 is not ~320mm², and it's 30% more powerful. So Scarlett is a 400mm² APU that performs like 7TF Navi. Looks like I've solved the riddle. Game blouses.
Aceofspades
Banned
Your tone suggest thats its impossible for PS5 to be more powerful than Scarlet. are we back to pre E3 power scales now when MS was going to reveal their Anaconda beast with Zen3 and post Navi arch?
Also maybe Sony opted for HBM2, thats why they achieved higher clocks and dedicated more power to the GPU?! People are speculating here, why did you get offended?
xool
Member
Because the Gonzalo numbers aren't for a devkit .. they're for the APU - ie final silicon.
vpance
Member
I brought this up before. The only 2 likely ways PS5 can be noticeably more powerful than Scarlett 385mm2 if:
1) MS did not go 7nm EUV and Sony did (No one is going to go above 400nm2)
2) Sony went HBM2 and less RAM which gave them room to fit 10-16 more CU
If you believe in OQA 315nm2 leak, then PS5 >> Scarlett is not likely regardless of EUV.
Last edited:
xool
Member
Mind you, if OQA is believed, Sony is going for 16GB GDDR6 on 256 bit bus and memory of 18Gbps (IMO this is for dev kit, if its 16Gbps it will be impressive).
So bandwidth would be between 512 GB/s and 576GB/s.
MS would be going almost 100% for 320 bit bus and 14Gbps chips which if Scarlet video is true, and it tells you they would be gunning for 560 GB/s. But 320 bit bus is ~16mm² bigger on die.
If they pack 4-8CUs more, I expect MS to have lower clocks. So in case od 4CUs more (40 total) and 100MHZ lower clocks that would result in 0.4TF advantage.
If its 8CUs more, I expect another 50MHZ down which would result in ~0.8TF advantage, but along with additional 16mm² from wider bus, they would have bigger chip with relatiively small compute advantage.
Also, Scarlet calculations go from 330 to 390, and I think its closer to 330 myself. So you could be looking at Scarlet that has wider bus, slower memory, resulting in similar BW. But also only 4-8CUs more at lower clocks, therefore if PS5 is 8.3TF I dont expect Scarlet to be more then 9TF.
Both will go for smaller die IMO, as R&D and designing these 7 chips is 2x as expensive as chip on 16nm node, add to this costs of actual manufacturing and you get the point.
Scarlet die cannot be correctly calculated, IMO it looks narrower then Scorpio, and therefore smaller. This is why Matt I think said both can have advantage in TF, because with 4CUs more and wider bus, MS will have to go for lower clocks and finish close, but not alot faster.
I also doubt they will go for HBM2. It makes chip complexity go up, and you get 4xGB per $ in GDDR6. Biggest issue with wattage is duo to chip running hot, not memory, so having HBM2 wont result in faster chip IMO. Sooo...big fat no IMO.
Last edited:
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
Hardly anybody on here cares about Xbox, they only use it to prop up their speculation on PS5, which I mentioned above.
Another one of my favs is "Matt said...", then he did an about face and said he believes Xbox is more powerful. Now "Matt said..." is sparingly used, and especially not in the context it used to be.
Not aimed at you, so just let it pass.
Last edited:
Super 2070 is 2080 essentially. 2060 will be much closer to 2070, and have price to match.
ethomaz
Banned
I believe the Super won't reach 2080 or 2070 level.
2070 Super will be between 2070 and 2080 (Vega 64 territory).
2060 Super will be between 2060 and 2070 (Vega 64 territory).
5700 XT is supposed to between 2070 and 2080... same 2070 Super is aiming... not 2060 Super.
Last edited:
xPikYx
Member
Honestly I think that gonzalo score is nothing but great, matching rtx2070 level of performance in 2020 is not that great, even though there is HW raytraced,still a good jump, but no way a generation leap, not for me, would be disappointing if this is it, I expect much more than this
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
Seems like 2060 Super is aimed at 5700 Pro, while 2070 Super is aimed at 5700 XT. Probably added just enough CUDA cores and fast enough clocks to edge out aforementioned Navi cards and justify an equal or higher price tag on the basis of HW RT.
Last edited:
vpance
Member
Is the range really that big? I thought 380-400 was supposed to be soild. If that's the case then it's all up in the air comparison wise. I also think Matt's educated guess was based on the APU size.
A large 400mm2 die on 7nm does seem pretty unlikely, I agree. Maybe if MS was trying to rush to market early and launch in Nov 2019 I could see that happening. But in Nov 2020 that sounds like a big mistake.
I think Proelites range was 360-400, but another user on GAF made calculations saying its 338-400 but closer to upper limit.
One thing people omitting is thinking Navi hits thermal limits like we saw in GCN, where you would want more CUs rather then higher clocks. But in Nvidias example, its actually not true, so I wonder if Navi is similar, because if is, I think both would like smaller dies.
There is a chance I am wrong on both, but I can see Sony going with 36, max 40, and boost clocks up to 1.8GHZ.
MS I am not sure but to me that die looks smaller then Scorpio, and with 320bit bus, I dont think there is more then 8CUs more there. Probably 4, and thats why Matt is here nor there.
ResilientBanana
Member
I mean.. he is a developer and the tweet is from a week ago.
Last edited:
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
GAF automatically embeds the Tweets for you, so just use the copy tweet link option and paste it straight into the post.
Last edited:
Fake
Member
And? Gonna wait more 10 pages to post that same tweet again?
That tweet was already posted pages ago.
Last edited:
ResilientBanana
Member
If Both consoles are overall 4 x the Xbox One X in power. I will not be shocked
ResilientBanana
Member
Every rumor and topic here has been repeatedly posted, what’s the matter with a little realism? Does it kill the 40TF dream?
Fake
Member
If you don't have problem with infinite loop info fine, just don't blindly thinking nothing is wrong about posting the same shit over and over again. And that @noobde tweet don't add nothing to the conversation.
And WTF is that '40TF dream'? Are you crazy?
- Status