I believe both are using Radeon VII chip as a platform (and that's why it's been discontinued very quickly), Xbox with 56 CU (4 deactivated) and Sony 54 CU (4 deactivated with more room for RT or Sound tracing). Probably that what made numbers like 14.2TF, 13.8TF floating around more than a year for the PS5, more likely as well they were testing how far they can push it. Plus the HBM2 speculations, I won't let that out as Sony could gamble and put that in as it should be cooler and more capable as HBM2 and GDDR6 are closer to each in terms of pricing lately as I've read. It can as well that Sony stroke a deal and salvaged them cheaper as plans for next gen started earlier than Xbox.
Only speculation any, a more professional person would debunk or approve such thoughts.
Interesting, but a few caveats. Radeon VII is Vega II IIRC, which is effectively GCN 5. Which would definitely mean in this instance both systems being RDNA1 as RDNA2 has no GCN features and is full-blown Navi. And with that in mind, it makes the TF numbers floating around more difficult to ascertain because they could've been referencing GCN, if the base chips for both systems are the Radeon VII's GPU (in this hypothetical example).
As far as HBM2, I really can't see it. For starters it's probably in less production than HBM2E. There's also the fact that the die complexity and costs would increase to place in the interposer for the memory. Theoretically a system could just do a single stack of 16GB on a 1024-bit bus, but I don't think actual selling prices are at a price per GB competitive with GDDR6 just yet. I know analysts have speculated a per GB price, but both Samsung and SK Hynix have said that clients purchasing theirs so far have been happy with paying premiums. Dunno how much off that premium a company like Sony or MS would get; I would suspect even if willing to give bulk discounts, Samsung and SK Hynix would like to keep some of that premium regardless.
Honestly have no idea how much HBM2 (not HBM2E) is even in production tbh. It's probably not to the amount of HBM2E, for certain, so it would be scarcer and more costly despite being less efficient.
sorry man, i just cannot see sony letting the power go, i might be typing this in denial i just can't see it happening.
Sony's never been about "ze POWWAAHH" historically speaking. PS4 was a bit of a luck out because of how badly MS botched XBO. Other than that, however, they traditionally have never had the out-and-out most powerful system for a given generation.
PS1 suffered in some areas the Saturn and N64 bested it in. PS2 suffered in areas Xbox, Gamecube and even Dreamcast bested it in. PS3 suffered in areas the 360 bested it in. In all cases, rather notable areas, whether it be GPU features, memory amount, bandwidth, CPU speed, etc. The PS4 is an anomaly in that case, and a fair amount of that is thanks to MS losing their focus on developing a gaming-first console that generation.
So while it's possible the PS5 could be "ze mooah POWWAAHFUUL!!", I won't be surprised whatsoever if it isn't, because that would be more in line historically with their systems than not.
Before anyone mentions something about other PS systems launching earlier than competitors, there's a few caveats with that. First is that it isn't actually always true. PS1 and Saturn launched at the same time, for example. PS3 was intended for 2005 but issues with Blu-Ray and Cell being a useful GPU forced a 2006 delay, and even with the delay the RSX GPU wasn't as good as the 360's. PS2 is probably the one example where a PS console launching earlier than competitors can be valid in describing its lesser overall power for that generation, but even in that case there are some things the Dreamcast handles better such as resolution output and deferred rendering, and that was a 1998 system.
Just saying folks shouldn't be that surprised if it goes one way or the other in this case.
OsirisBlack
Tommy Fisher
serves. Gimme something
:
.
