Next-Gen PS5 & XSX |OT| Console tEch threaD

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bo_Hazem said:
Your screenshots aren't in 4K, I guess, yet impressive. Here are some 4K screenshote:



















147731.jpg
Click to expand...
They are not even near 4K.
Damn that's some resolution. Look at how clean "ONLY ON PLAYSTATION" is.
 
Last edited:
DJ12 said:
Struggling to see how any of this has proven your 11.6 figure.

It only confirms the github leak is irrelevant, not what the final console will ship with.

It could be 11.5 as your guy told you, it could be 11.6 as you revised it to, it could also be 12.4 which Osisris has been saying for months, or it could be 13.3 like Tommy said when he told everyone both were using RDNA 2.

Time will tell, nothing will be proven until Sony reveal, and maybe not even then.
Click to expand...
Please don't forget pastebin Subere's 14.2.
 
it_wasn't_me said:
You know better than MS how much TFLOPS has XSX. Mind you that rumored 12,08 TF is also a +12TF

EDIT :

btw, it's not your first post here. Check your post history
Click to expand...

Haha, you are right. It was my second.

After all, we are just speculating. But there are ton of reasons why minor difference in tflops doesn't mean difference in performance. Aside from RT and SSD Decompression:
- API and other tools;
- Base platform. IF PS5 is the base platform for developers, other ports may suffer... a little bit.

Another speculations. If Sony has some expensive and secret cooling solution, i doubt that they are using it in first devkits (big V-SHAPE).
 
Mriverz said:
Wait. After all this people still believe its 9.2tf? Smh.
Click to expand...

Why would Sony chase the power crown? The one time they did it cost them (ps3).
Playstation has never been about being the most powerful, they are about delivering a very capable box at a great price. 9.2 RDNA2 Tflops is by no means weak, especially in the hands of there Devs. It wont even make a difference to there business, what will make a difference is if they launch @ $399 and outsell the competition again. They will not be as successful @ $499!
 
X-Fighter said:
The issue is that these people had a very shitty current gen, so they were very much looking forward to this new gen. Then some leaks were starting to come in about the XSX being an absolute beast, 12TF console which no one really expected because they didn't know this was possible. Microsoft's drip marketing campaign puts more fuel to the fire. Those Xbox fanboys need a win. Once it was starting to get clear that the XSX is practically the same system as the PS5, they start clinging on to these ridiculous things like PS5 RDNA1, PS5 9.2TF, DXR co-developed with AMD, etc. to just have an edge on the PS5 that they can boast about. It makes much more sense to just ignore them, then to ridicule them. The same goes for team PS5 > 13TF camp, people who want the PS5 to be much better because they have this weird affinity with Sony, and want to make sure everyone knows their console is the best no matter how much fun other people can have on theirs. People should focus on the games and services. Sony is doing very well in games, Microsoft tries to catch up, we'll see if that works. Microsoft has great services and keeps pushing for new things, Sony just has to follow if people really like it.

In the end gamers win thanks to the competition between these two companies.
Click to expand...

It's not the same. Before Reiner tweet, the vast majority had accepted that PS5 will be weaker because rumored MSs 2 SKU strategy and how MS need that power crown. It was widely accepted. It was even a blasphemy to think that PS5 will be more powerful. After Reiner's tweet everything changed ( Colin's also ) And after that tweet and Klee's info, bunch of PS owners are hoping that PS5 will be 12+ TF just to have powerful console as XSX or more. Xbox fans get their 12 TF for XSX. But also Xbox fans still spreading FUD how PS5 MUST be and will be weaker and they trust that shitty Github leak and of course, MisterXmedia, TimDog. Blue Nugroho, Dealer, Jez, Klob. Colbert and bunch of others
 
Last edited:
What if Oberon is base PS5 and Arden is PS5 Pro and Xbox series X chip? What if both "Pro" consoles uses same APU? That wolud explain why Oberon and Arden were tested together.
 
Sosokrates said:
Why would Sony chase the power crown? The one time they did it cost them (ps3).
Playstation has never been about being the most powerful, they are about delivering a very capable box at a great price. 9.2 RDNA2 Tflops is by no means weak, especially in the hands of there Devs. It wont even make a difference to there business, what will make a difference is if they launch @ $399 and outsell the competition again. They will not be as successful @ $499!
Click to expand...
Ps has always been the strongest console at the time they launch .
 
Sosokrates said:
Why would Sony chase the power crown? The one time they did it cost them (ps3).
Playstation has never been about being the most powerful, they are about delivering a very capable box at a great price. 9.2 RDNA2 Tflops is by no means weak, especially in the hands of there Devs. It wont even make a difference to there business, what will make a difference is if they launch @ $399 and outsell the competition again. They will not be as successful @ $499!
Click to expand...

I toss all hope to the wind. Saying they will not be successful at 499 is your opinion not fact. Should we bring Apple and Samsung into this and their 1k+$ phones every year? Consumers will pay if they truly want it.

Not even bringing up the information we been getting from all different sorts of people in different parts of the world + a game dev.
 
Last edited:
DrDamn said:
I quite like the design, but it you compare to the disc slot that's tiny. I do think design wise it links up with hints about other capabilities we don't know about yet and them being that the PS5 will act as a smart hub maybe.
Click to expand...
Nowhere near enough airflow to be viable in a high performance console.
 
Sosokrates said:
But why would the number of apples stay at 150?, I thought the original number of apples was 100?
Click to expand...

It is just a demonstration, as others have done after me, in mathematical terms that 50% better perf/watt improvements are a 33% performance increase for the same watt.

The way AMD is wording it makes some people believe that a chip which has a gaming performance of 100fps for 100 watt now has 150fps for 100 watt but in reality it would result in 133fps for 100 watt.
 
Agnostic2020 said:
Ps has always been the strongest console at the time they launch .
Click to expand...
That maybe so, but its because of circumstance, and I'm not saying Sony don't aim for a powerful machine, they do, but the PS1,PS2 and PS4 where conservative machines in terms of power draw. PS3 was an anomaly and it proved to be problematic for them.

I just think Sony will make more money selling a $399 machine then a $499 one.
 
Nadojay said:
So 54 x 3 @ 1680? Is my math right?
Click to expand...

Yoo can throw any numbets at the wall you like and make them fit. Let's just go crazy and say it has 80 compute units with 32 cores at 4000mhz. Hell if you dream it, why not?

The problem, as keeps being reported, isn't so much a single thing you can deduce. You have people here outright going "yeah, it's like, super fast, nearly 14tf, ans it's SDD is the fastest on the planet, on and it has 24gb ddr6, oh yeah and its tiny! And cold! And for four hundred bucks!"

Think of a console, a closed unit, as a series of scales full of ingredients, all of which have to balance. You don't want to put too too much of one thing in, because it will over balance another. For example, what use is sticking too much memory in, when you need cpu grunt to use it to its potential? What good is a higher clocked cpu, when it will produce too much heat and need expensive cooling? What good is a fast SSD, if you can't pass the data to and form it quick enough? There are so many things you have to get right, for a system to be balanced.

But then there is the biggest one, and this one matters more than anything else. Anything is possible... anything. You want a PS5 that's 10x faster than anything on the planet? You got it sir.

Anything is possible... but it will cost you.

Now here is where people get a little crazy. They start saying "but how come Xbox do X, why is it impossible for Sony, it' *only* 1.x tf more?!"

The problem is cost. Chips have something called yields. You make a chip, and that chip is almost never used to its full potential, I.e. it's CU count. Several of these are locked off, disabled. This means that if you have a chip that's 20 CUs, and your target is 12, you need to disable 8. Simple, BUT, more often than not, you will have bad CU counts anyway. So, you may have 4 CUs that are simply not worth the time. That means now your max CU count is 16, not 20.

Now let's use it in a more realistic situation.

If you Cu count is 56 per chip, and you want to aim for 56 (which a lot of these ps5 theories do) that means you will need to bin any chop that has a single problem. Let's say you drop that to 54 and increase your yields? Well you still only have 2 there to play with. If you have bad yields, this eats into cost massively. The lower your compute units, the more chance of a successful yield.

But then there's another thing... you can just use lower CU counts at faster speed... right? Well no. Because this produces heat. Lots of it. And without a very good cooling setup, it will eat into your power AND heat up your console to a point it won't last long.

And the issue is that people are just throwing not just a high Cu count, but also a high speed into the mix. Can you see the problem...?

Now the reason the what Xbox has done is ok, is because they are (presumably I may add) at the higher end of what's possible on the silicone. They are already pushing the boundaries of what's possible physically, but also financially.

And there in lies the problem. Sony and Microsoft? They are NOT your friend. They are here to make money. This is a business.

And to make money, they need a system that will A) not eat up money before it's even left the production line, B) not sell at a massive loss, and C) also not sell for such a high price people will not buy it.

And that's your final scale, the lost important one of all. Because people, despite what you may think, really do vote with their wallet. And if they see an SX at 12tf for let's say $500, and a PS5 at 13.xtf for let's say $700 (because I won't lie, this sort of thing eats ip costs a LOT for tiny gains), and yet they see they look identically (again, a previous post talks about how you need more power the higher your baseline is for better visuals).... it's an easy choice.

This is why I find it so funny. People just don't stop and think about it, and essentially throw wish lists at their screens without thinking about it logically.

Your PS5 will be 11.6-12.4tf range. It's memory, SSD and everything else will be comparable to the SX. Some will be better. Some will be worse. The systems will be as on par as you like.

And that's the best conclusion to come to.
 
Sosokrates said:
That maybe so, but its because of circumstance, and I'm not saying Sony don't aim for a powerful machine, they do, but the PS1,PS2 and PS4 where conservative machines in terms of power draw. PS3 was an anomaly and it proved to be problematic for them.

I just think Sony will make more money selling a $399 machine then a $499 one.
Click to expand...
You were wrong, just accept it with dignity instead of moving the goalpost.
 
ElleryJamesRoberts said:
It is just a demonstration, as others have done after me, in mathematical terms that 50% better perf/watt improvements are a 33% performance increase for the same watt.

The way AMD is wording it makes some people believe that a chip which has a gaming performance of 100fps for 100 watt now has 150fps for 100 watt but in reality it would result in 133fps for 100 watt.
Click to expand...

So 12tflop rDNA 2 would draw a a peak of about 175watt? If 12tflop RDNA1 would be about 250w?

If this is the case it makes me wonder why the sxs is such a different and large design if the GPU draw the same power as the x1x's GPU.
 
o'dium said:
Yoo can throw any numbets at the wall you like and make them fit. Let's just go crazy and say it has 80 compute units with 32 cores at 4000mhz. Hell if you dream it, why not?

The problem, as keeps being reported, isn't so much a single thing you can deduce. You have people here outright going "yeah, it's like, super fast, nearly 14tf, ans it's SDD is the fastest on the planet, on and it has 24gb ddr6, oh yeah and its tiny! And cold! And for four hundred bucks!"

Think of a console, a closed unit, as a series of scales full of ingredients, all of which have to balance. You don't want to put too too much of one thing in, because it will over balance another. For example, what use is sticking too much memory in, when you need cpu grunt to use it to its potential? What good is a higher clocked cpu, when it will produce too much heat and need expensive cooling? What good is a fast SSD, if you can't pass the data to and form it quick enough? There are so many things you have to get right, for a system to be balanced.

But then there is the biggest one, and this one matters more than anything else. Anything is possible... anything. You want a PS5 that's 10x faster than anything on the planet? You got it sir.

Anything is possible... but it will cost you.

Now here is where people get a little crazy. They start saying "but how come Xbox do X, why is it impossible for Sony, it' *only* 1.x tf more?!"

The problem is cost. Chips have something called yields. You make a chip, and that chip is almost never used to its full potential, I.e. it's CU count. Several of these are locked off, disabled. This means that if you have a chip that's 20 CUs, and your target is 12, you need to disable 8. Simple, BUT, more often than not, you will have bad CU counts anyway. So, you may have 4 CUs that are simply not worth the time. That means now your max CU count is 16, not 20.

Now let's use it in a more realistic situation.

If you Cu count is 56 per chip, and you want to aim for 56 (which a lot of these ps5 theories do) that means you will need to bin any chop that has a single problem. Let's say you drop that to 54 and increase your yields? Well you still only have 2 there to play with. If you have bad yields, this eats into cost massively. The lower your compute units, the more chance of a successful yield.

But then there's another thing... you can just use lower CU counts at faster speed... right? Well no. Because this produces heat. Lots of it. And without a very good cooling setup, it will eat into your power AND heat up your console to a point it won't last long.

And the issue is that people are just throwing not just a high Cu count, but also a high speed into the mix. Can you see the problem...?

Now the reason the what Xbox has done is ok, is because they are (presumably I may add) at the higher end of what's possible on the silicone. They are already pushing the boundaries of what's possible physically, but also financially.

And there in lies the problem. Sony and Microsoft? They are NOT your friend. They are here to make money. This is a business.

And to make money, they need a system that will A) not eat up money before it's even left the production line, B) not sell at a massive loss, and C) also not sell for such a high price people will not buy it.

And that's your final scale, the lost important one of all. Because people, despite what you may think, really do vote with their wallet. And if they see an SX at 12tf for let's say $500, and a PS5 at 13.xtf for let's say $700 (because I won't lie, this sort of thing eats ip costs a LOT for tiny gains), and yet they see they look identically (again, a previous post talks about how you need more power the higher your baseline is for better visuals).... it's an easy choice.

This is why I find it so funny. People just don't stop and think about it, and essentially throw wish lists at their screens without thinking about it logically.

Your PS5 will be 11.6-12.4tf range. It's memory, SSD and everything else will be comparable to the SX. Some will be better. Some will be worse. The systems will be as on par as you like.

And that's the best conclusion to come to.
Click to expand...
Google translate actually saves my life. :messenger_neutral:
 
Sosokrates said:
So 12tflop rDNA 2 would draw a a peak of about 175watt? If 12tflop RDNA1 would be about 250w?

If this is the case it makes me wonder why the sxs is such a different and large design if the GPU draw the same power as the x1x's GPU.
Click to expand...

That sounds about right.

(Edit: I would guess around 165-167W yes)

As far as design goes there might be a lot of headroom and there is always a chance that the Xbox Series X is clocked conservatively with a lot of headroom. Also you have the CPU and RayTracing cores on that APU chip aswell which produce heat that has to be dissipated aswell.
If the GPU part alone consumes 175W then it could be that the whole chip is more than 200W at full load and that is definitely a lot of heat for a small console and the design of the Xbox Series X makes sense.

I don't have the power consumption numbers of the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X at hand, but they are lower than 170W I think.
 
Last edited:
o'dium said:
Yoo can throw any numbets at the wall you like and make them fit. Let's just go crazy and say it has 80 compute units with 32 cores at 4000mhz. Hell if you dream it, why not?

The problem, as keeps being reported, isn't so much a single thing you can deduce. You have people here outright going "yeah, it's like, super fast, nearly 14tf, ans it's SDD is the fastest on the planet, on and it has 24gb ddr6, oh yeah and its tiny! And cold! And for four hundred bucks!"

Think of a console, a closed unit, as a series of scales full of ingredients, all of which have to balance. You don't want to put too too much of one thing in, because it will over balance another. For example, what use is sticking too much memory in, when you need cpu grunt to use it to its potential? What good is a higher clocked cpu, when it will produce too much heat and need expensive cooling? What good is a fast SSD, if you can't pass the data to and form it quick enough? There are so many things you have to get right, for a system to be balanced.

But then there is the biggest one, and this one matters more than anything else. Anything is possible... anything. You want a PS5 that's 10x faster than anything on the planet? You got it sir.

Anything is possible... but it will cost you.

Now here is where people get a little crazy. They start saying "but how come Xbox do X, why is it impossible for Sony, it' *only* 1.x tf more?!"

The problem is cost. Chips have something called yields. You make a chip, and that chip is almost never used to its full potential, I.e. it's CU count. Several of these are locked off, disabled. This means that if you have a chip that's 20 CUs, and your target is 12, you need to disable 8. Simple, BUT, more often than not, you will have bad CU counts anyway. So, you may have 4 CUs that are simply not worth the time. That means now your max CU count is 16, not 20.

Now let's use it in a more realistic situation.

If you Cu count is 56 per chip, and you want to aim for 56 (which a lot of these ps5 theories do) that means you will need to bin any chop that has a single problem. Let's say you drop that to 54 and increase your yields? Well you still only have 2 there to play with. If you have bad yields, this eats into cost massively. The lower your compute units, the more chance of a successful yield.

But then there's another thing... you can just use lower CU counts at faster speed... right? Well no. Because this produces heat. Lots of it. And without a very good cooling setup, it will eat into your power AND heat up your console to a point it won't last long.

And the issue is that people are just throwing not just a high Cu count, but also a high speed into the mix. Can you see the problem...?

Now the reason the what Xbox has done is ok, is because they are (presumably I may add) at the higher end of what's possible on the silicone. They are already pushing the boundaries of what's possible physically, but also financially.

And there in lies the problem. Sony and Microsoft? They are NOT your friend. They are here to make money. This is a business.

And to make money, they need a system that will A) not eat up money before it's even left the production line, B) not sell at a massive loss, and C) also not sell for such a high price people will not buy it.

And that's your final scale, the lost important one of all. Because people, despite what you may think, really do vote with their wallet. And if they see an SX at 12tf for let's say $500, and a PS5 at 13.xtf for let's say $700 (because I won't lie, this sort of thing eats ip costs a LOT for tiny gains), and yet they see they look identically (again, a previous post talks about how you need more power the higher your baseline is for better visuals).... it's an easy choice.

This is why I find it so funny. People just don't stop and think about it, and essentially throw wish lists at their screens without thinking about it logically.

Your PS5 will be 11.6-12.4tf range. It's memory, SSD and everything else will be comparable to the SX. Some will be better. Some will be worse. The systems will be as on par as you like.

And that's the best conclusion to come to.
Click to expand...
Well said. I'll be getting both anyway. I can't imagine Sony disappointing us considering the games they make, and Xbox finally has Studios. Gonna be a good generation.
 
o'dium said:
Now here is where people get a little crazy. They start saying "but how come Xbox do X, why is it impossible for Sony, it' *only* 1.x tf more?!"
Click to expand...
People just think in the way they want.
For me, I just need to know that SONY is partnering with AMD and will use their latest tech and that's enough.
For the rest, I trust in Mark Cerny and his team to balance(price and spec).
I BELIEVE THE PROS, THE ONES WHO MAKE A LIVING ON THIS WILL GET IT RIGHT.
 
Last edited:
o'dium said:
Yoo can throw any numbets at the wall you like and make them fit. Let's just go crazy and say it has 80 compute units with 32 cores at 4000mhz. Hell if you dream it, why not?

The problem, as keeps being reported, isn't so much a single thing you can deduce. You have people here outright going "yeah, it's like, super fast, nearly 14tf, ans it's SDD is the fastest on the planet, on and it has 24gb ddr6, oh yeah and its tiny! And cold! And for four hundred bucks!"

Think of a console, a closed unit, as a series of scales full of ingredients, all of which have to balance. You don't want to put too too much of one thing in, because it will over balance another. For example, what use is sticking too much memory in, when you need cpu grunt to use it to its potential? What good is a higher clocked cpu, when it will produce too much heat and need expensive cooling? What good is a fast SSD, if you can't pass the data to and form it quick enough? There are so many things you have to get right, for a system to be balanced.

But then there is the biggest one, and this one matters more than anything else. Anything is possible... anything. You want a PS5 that's 10x faster than anything on the planet? You got it sir.

Anything is possible... but it will cost you.

Now here is where people get a little crazy. They start saying "but how come Xbox do X, why is it impossible for Sony, it' *only* 1.x tf more?!"

The problem is cost. Chips have something called yields. You make a chip, and that chip is almost never used to its full potential, I.e. it's CU count. Several of these are locked off, disabled. This means that if you have a chip that's 20 CUs, and your target is 12, you need to disable 8. Simple, BUT, more often than not, you will have bad CU counts anyway. So, you may have 4 CUs that are simply not worth the time. That means now your max CU count is 16, not 20.

Now let's use it in a more realistic situation.

If you Cu count is 56 per chip, and you want to aim for 56 (which a lot of these ps5 theories do) that means you will need to bin any chop that has a single problem. Let's say you drop that to 54 and increase your yields? Well you still only have 2 there to play with. If you have bad yields, this eats into cost massively. The lower your compute units, the more chance of a successful yield.

But then there's another thing... you can just use lower CU counts at faster speed... right? Well no. Because this produces heat. Lots of it. And without a very good cooling setup, it will eat into your power AND heat up your console to a point it won't last long.

And the issue is that people are just throwing not just a high Cu count, but also a high speed into the mix. Can you see the problem...?

Now the reason the what Xbox has done is ok, is because they are (presumably I may add) at the higher end of what's possible on the silicone. They are already pushing the boundaries of what's possible physically, but also financially.

And there in lies the problem. Sony and Microsoft? They are NOT your friend. They are here to make money. This is a business.

And to make money, they need a system that will A) not eat up money before it's even left the production line, B) not sell at a massive loss, and C) also not sell for such a high price people will not buy it.

And that's your final scale, the lost important one of all. Because people, despite what you may think, really do vote with their wallet. And if they see an SX at 12tf for let's say $500, and a PS5 at 13.xtf for let's say $700 (because I won't lie, this sort of thing eats ip costs a LOT for tiny gains), and yet they see they look identically (again, a previous post talks about how you need more power the higher your baseline is for better visuals).... it's an easy choice.

This is why I find it so funny. People just don't stop and think about it, and essentially throw wish lists at their screens without thinking about it logically.

Your PS5 will be 11.6-12.4tf range. It's memory, SSD and everything else will be comparable to the SX. Some will be better. Some will be worse. The systems will be as on par as you like.

And that's the best conclusion to come to.
Click to expand...

Good write up, I always enjoy your insight, I'm not quite sure why you put the first part in because I was being serious and thought that would be a setup that aligns perfect with your 11.6 while also allowing for hardware bc, I wasn't being a smart arse haha anyways good write up as usual, it's easy to not see what the ramifications of an upclock from say 1700mhz to 2000 would be when all you see is numbers
 
thicc_girls_are_teh_best said:


Last thing I got for tonight. Something interesting came to me: if both systems are targeting 12TF (we at least know one has hit that target but let's just keep it simple say that's what they'll both be), and RDNA2 is 50% more efficient over RDNA1, and the 2080TI is 34% stronger than 5700XT (9.7TF) which is an RDNA1 GPU...

In that case next-gen could be 16% better than 2080TI. And the 2080TI is already 13.45TF, so 12TF RDNA2 should come in around 13.8TF - 13.92TF relative to 2080TI!!

People might've been aiming too low thinking "only" regular 2080 would get lapped here. Very impressive RDNA2 is looking to be 👍

And again, RDNA2 kinda needs it 'cuz like the video says, it's targeting Turing, not Ampere. That's likely what RDNA3 will be for.
Click to expand...

2080ti is 13.4TF only on paper. In reality is 16TF out of the box and 18TF when OCed.
 
Sosokrates said:
Why would Sony chase the power crown? The one time they did it cost them (ps3).
Playstation has never been about being the most powerful, they are about delivering a very capable box at a great price. 9.2 RDNA2 Tflops is by no means weak, especially in the hands of there Devs. It wont even make a difference to there business, what will make a difference is if they launch @ $399 and outsell the competition again. They will not be as successful @ $499!
Click to expand...
But that's really not true. All PS consoles were strong at their release. They clearly overdid it on the PS3.

The PS3 cannot be compared to a 12TF RDNA2 console today either. The BOM cost of the PS3 was around $ 800 at the beginning. You will NOT reach such BOM costs this gen, even with 12TF@RDNA2.

So, there is absolutely no reason to believe sony relases a clearly worse console than the XSX.
 
o'dium said:
Yoo can throw any numbets at the wall you like and make them fit. Let's just go crazy and say it has 80 compute units with 32 cores at 4000mhz. Hell if you dream it, why not?

The problem, as keeps being reported, isn't so much a single thing you can deduce. You have people here outright going "yeah, it's like, super fast, nearly 14tf, ans it's SDD is the fastest on the planet, on and it has 24gb ddr6, oh yeah and its tiny! And cold! And for four hundred bucks!"

Think of a console, a closed unit, as a series of scales full of ingredients, all of which have to balance. You don't want to put too too much of one thing in, because it will over balance another. For example, what use is sticking too much memory in, when you need cpu grunt to use it to its potential? What good is a higher clocked cpu, when it will produce too much heat and need expensive cooling? What good is a fast SSD, if you can't pass the data to and form it quick enough? There are so many things you have to get right, for a system to be balanced.

But then there is the biggest one, and this one matters more than anything else. Anything is possible... anything. You want a PS5 that's 10x faster than anything on the planet? You got it sir.

Anything is possible... but it will cost you.

Now here is where people get a little crazy. They start saying "but how come Xbox do X, why is it impossible for Sony, it' *only* 1.x tf more?!"

The problem is cost. Chips have something called yields. You make a chip, and that chip is almost never used to its full potential, I.e. it's CU count. Several of these are locked off, disabled. This means that if you have a chip that's 20 CUs, and your target is 12, you need to disable 8. Simple, BUT, more often than not, you will have bad CU counts anyway. So, you may have 4 CUs that are simply not worth the time. That means now your max CU count is 16, not 20.

Now let's use it in a more realistic situation.

If you Cu count is 56 per chip, and you want to aim for 56 (which a lot of these ps5 theories do) that means you will need to bin any chop that has a single problem. Let's say you drop that to 54 and increase your yields? Well you still only have 2 there to play with. If you have bad yields, this eats into cost massively. The lower your compute units, the more chance of a successful yield.

But then there's another thing... you can just use lower CU counts at faster speed... right? Well no. Because this produces heat. Lots of it. And without a very good cooling setup, it will eat into your power AND heat up your console to a point it won't last long.

And the issue is that people are just throwing not just a high Cu count, but also a high speed into the mix. Can you see the problem...?

Now the reason the what Xbox has done is ok, is because they are (presumably I may add) at the higher end of what's possible on the silicone. They are already pushing the boundaries of what's possible physically, but also financially.

And there in lies the problem. Sony and Microsoft? They are NOT your friend. They are here to make money. This is a business.

And to make money, they need a system that will A) not eat up money before it's even left the production line, B) not sell at a massive loss, and C) also not sell for such a high price people will not buy it.

And that's your final scale, the lost important one of all. Because people, despite what you may think, really do vote with their wallet. And if they see an SX at 12tf for let's say $500, and a PS5 at 13.xtf for let's say $700 (because I won't lie, this sort of thing eats ip costs a LOT for tiny gains), and yet they see they look identically (again, a previous post talks about how you need more power the higher your baseline is for better visuals).... it's an easy choice.

This is why I find it so funny. People just don't stop and think about it, and essentially throw wish lists at their screens without thinking about it logically.

Your PS5 will be 11.6-12.4tf range. It's memory, SSD and everything else will be comparable to the SX. Some will be better. Some will be worse. The systems will be as on par as you like.

And that's the best conclusion to come to.
Click to expand...

(referring to bold O'd.) Why is that?
 
Sooo, let's get down to figures, shall we.
AMD's +50% perf/watt claim.

5700XT, 9.7TF, 225 watt.
TF/w => 0,0431

RDNA2 => 0,0646
13TF => 201 watt for GPU alone

*Assuming that perf/flop doesn't change significantly.
 
Last edited:
R_Zoro said:
(referring to bold O'd.) Why is that?
Click to expand...

Quite simply, you want to hit the same target for every system out there. If you have 20 CUs and only 12 are active for your console, you essentially lock off 8 compute units on every chip, meaning that every one is exactly the same. These locked off ones will also of course include faulty/dead ones.

You don't want a situation to arise where one system has 12, but another has 13, and another may have 11. You want every system to be exactly the same.
 
o'dium said:
Quite simply, you want to hit the same target for every system out there. If you have 20 CUs and only 12 are active for your console, you essentially lock off 8 compute units on every chip, meaning that every one is exactly the same. These locked off ones will also of course include faulty/dead ones.

You don't want a situation to arise where one system has 12, but another has 13, and another may have 11. You want every system to be exactly the same.
Click to expand...

Ahh ok, thanks dude.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Rust to get next gen patch for X S|X and PS5, previous gen version being discontinued
0
24
cormack12 replied
Sony unveils next-gen RGB mini-LED TV Tech | "OLED Killer?"
2 3
118
7K
dave_d replied
What are your top 3 (non-cross gen) PS5/XSX games this gen?
46
2K
ToneyJ replied
Rocksteady’s Next Batman Game Being Developed Using Unreal Engine 5. Targeting Cross-Gen Launch With PS5, Series S|X, and Next-Gen Consoles!
News Rumor Hype  2
89
3K
Feel Like I'm On 42 replied
Xbox Wants Out of the Console War - (IGN Next-Gen Console Watch Podcast)
2 3 4
194
11K
Viruz replied
Top Bottom