Support NeoGAF

[THE:MILKMAN]

Sony bakes BC into the hardware, and people doubt it will support more than 100 games, a number which was clearly about games that at the moment support boost mode.

The first and second paragraphs in the update Sony posted are fine, but in the third paragraph I would've added the following:

In his presentation, Mark Cerny provided a snapshot into the Top 100 most-played PS4 titles, demonstrating how well our [boosted mode] backward compatibility efforts are going.

 

[Kusarigama]

A livestream for the next Assassin's Creed is now live in which the game's setting is being revealed by digital artist Bosslogic.

"Tune in for the next Assassin's Creed setting reveal from 8AM ET / 5AM PT "

This kind of "teasing" is very annoying. The only reason I keep checking it is to get a glimpse of the sweet sweet next gen graphics/gameplay.

 

[Rusco Da Vino]

This kind of "teasing" is very annoying. The only reason I keep checking it is because I am just like so many here is to get a glimpse of the sweet sweet next gen graphics/gameplay.

There are 21K viewers right now thinking the same. Cut this crap and show us gameplay!

 

[saintjules]

There are 21K viewers right now thinking the same. Cut this crap and show us gameplay!

Lol, I was thinking the same. I guess from time to time it's cool to reveal something differently.

 

[FeiRR]

Because the only statement they actually made about games playable at launch still is about a portion of the top 100 games. Beyond that they said they've tested games, but didn't indicate what that means about play-ability at launch.

As opposed to MS who said thousands playable day one; which.. doesn't help me.. I have no Xbox backlog.

Don't get me wrong, I think Sony will quite possibly have hundreds or thousands of games playable at launch, but just wish they'd make a statement like MS. I think their statements probably apply to a boost mode, that most or all will be BC without it, that they'll unveil more details soon, etc. But they haven't actually said what is playable at launch other than the majority of the top 100 games.

From the very page that I linked in the previous post.

With all of the amazing games in PS4's catalog, we've devoted significant efforts to enable our fans to play their favorites on PS5. We believe that the overwhelming majority of the 4,000+ PS4 titles will be playable on PS5.

We're expecting backward compatible titles will run at a boosted frequency on PS5 so that they can benefit from higher or more stable frame rates and potentially higher resolutions. We're currently evaluating games on a title-by-title basis to spot any issues that need adjustment from the original software developers.

Of course there's no list of games yet. The console will be released in half a year. Silicon is probably finished but OS is far from that. They have a lot of time to improve compatibility until the release.

Stop spreading FUD.

 

[IntentionalPun]

From the very page that I linked in the previous post.


Of course there's no list of games yet. The console will be released in half a year. Silicon is probably finished but OS is far from that. They have a lot of time to improve compatibility until the release.

Stop spreading FUD.

That says nothing about launch. I'm not spreading FUD.

To this day this remains the only statement about games playable at launch:

We recently took a look at the top 100 PS4 titles as ranked by play time, and we're expecting almost all of them to be playable at launch on PS5. With more than 4000 games published on PS4, we will continue the testing process and expand backwards compatibility coverage over time.

And from your quote, this is what concerns me:

We're currently evaluating games on a title-by-title basis to spot any issues that need adjustment from the original software developers.

The hope is this only applies to a boost mode, and not to games in a regular BC mode. But they haven't said that yet.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

IntentionalPun

Did you read my explanation on the previous page? Does it not clear things up for you?

 

[IntentionalPun]

IntentionalPun

Did you read my explanation on the previous page? Does it not clear things up for you?

Did you read my posts?

I'm well aware of the theory that this only applies to a boost mode, and that there is a regular BC mode that has full BC. Sony hasn't describe that yet, and in fact has somewhat contradicted that. (and yes, I read the Wired articles, expected full BC based on Cerny's statements... he then did his presentation + the PS blog post + the blog post update... none of that is actually clearly described.)

Literally said that in every one of my posts....

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Did you read my posts?

I'm well aware of the theory that this only applies to a boost mode, and that there is a regular BC mode that has full BC. Sony hasn't describe that yet, and in fact has somewhat contradicted that. (and yes, I read the Wired articles, expected full BC based on Cerny's statements... he then did his presentation + the PS blog post + the blog post update... none of that is actually clearly described.)

Literally said that in every one of my posts....

I said they word things poorly. Maybe it is a legal CYA thing? In any case at this point if only the top 100 PS4 games are BC at launch then the resulting backlash will be a PR disaster.

Ergo I doubt you're right.

 

[Kusarigama]

PSA: AVOID CHAT ON YOUTUBE AND TWITCH. APPARENTLY SOMEONE POSTED SPOILERS FOR TLOU. COULD HAPPEN AGAIN.

 

[IntentionalPun]

I said they word things poorly. Maybe it is a legal CYA thing? In any case at this point if only the top 100 PS4 games are BC at launch then the resulting backlash will be a PR disaster.

Ergo I doubt you're right.

Well I think they are just being kind of coy and saving full details for a reveal event.

Not sure why you are doubting me "right" or "wrong." All I'm saying is Sony hasn't actually come out and said what people claim they've said; I still think chances are they'll have hundreds or thousands of BC games playable at launch, or even 100% BC (and their words about playability actually mean "playable in boost mode.")

But people just keep putting words in their mouth and claiming they said things they didn't... it's vague to me whether other people think it isn't.

 

[Compsiox]

Apparently the Assassin's Creed reveal may have a tie-in with Xbox. Something along the lines of announcing the game and saying "see more at the Xbox Event" (next week?)

Shinobi has been teasing as much in the last hour or so.

 

[ANIMAL1975]

I didn't write anything like that. I think both consoles will be more than enough for 4K@60 FPS. Except for really bad engines/ports, of course. Those always happen.

That's what i am saying you wrote lol and that we are in agreement!

Also was trying to explain/speculate, why others don't think the same, or are not just yet seeing it. Others, not you.

 

[FeiRR]

All I'm saying is Sony hasn't actually come out and said what people claim they've said; I still think chances are they'll have hundreds or thousands of BC games playable at launch, or even 100% BC (and their words about playability actually mean "playable in boost mode.")

Of course they haven't and they never will because 100% BC is a myth. On any platform, system, hardware, etc. different in any way from the one you're emulating, either on hardware or software level. No console is fully BC with its predecessor.

 

[Gamernyc78]

How is that vague?

Nothing vague and it's been confirmed almost all their thousands of titles will be bc. They are currently testing hundreds for boost mode which is seperate. Only ppl tht I've seen see vagueness are trolls trying to muddy messages (not alluding to the poster BTW).

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Well I think they are just being kind of coy and saving full details for a reveal event.

Not sure why you are doubting me "right" or "wrong." All I'm saying is Sony hasn't actually come out and said what people claim they've said; I still think chances are they'll have hundreds or thousands of BC games playable at launch, or even 100% BC (and their words about playability actually mean "playable in boost mode.")

But people just keep putting words in their mouth and claiming they said things they didn't... it's vague to me whether other people think it isn't.

We'll see soon enough I guess. As FeiRR says they will never claim 100% BC and that is why I suggested a legal CYA thing. I do agree they could have been a little clearer than they were, though. I blame the lawyers....

 

[IntentionalPun]

Of course they haven't and they never will because 100% BC is a myth. On any platform, system, hardware, etc. different in any way from the one you're emulating, either on hardware or software level. No console is fully BC with its predecessor.

Depends on what you believe about their attempt to include the PS4 essentially within the PS5 architecture. They have the full instruction sets of CPU/GPU, so no emulation really required there. I don't think there's any other chips that would need emulated either on PS4, as it wasn't exactly an exotic piece of hardware.

There are certainly loads of people who believe PS5 can run in a mode that is 100% BC with PS4.

 

[schaft0620]

We already know that there can't be 100% BC because of all of the games and servers that have been pulled.

 

[IntentionalPun]

We'll see soon enough I guess. As FeiRR says they will never claim 100% BC and that is why I suggested a legal CYA thing. I do agree they could have been a little clearer than they were, though. I blame the lawyers....

I'm not asking for anyone to claim 100% BC at launch or otherwise.

I'm not really asking for anything; just saying their statements are vague about how much will be playable at launch. We will get more clarity and obviously know for sure by launch.. and I'm buying one either way.. but obviously I'd prefer if they came out and actually said something like "we expect thousands to be playable at launch" which is essentially what MS said IIRC.

We already know that there can't be 100% BC because of all of the games and servers that have been pulled.

Oh give me a break lol.. not what anyone is talking about when they claim 100% BC. IF a game or server is pulled it's not compatbile with the CURRENT system either lol

 

[IntentionalPun]

Nothing vague and it's been confirmed almost all their thousands of titles will be bc. They are currently testing hundreds for boost mode which is seperate. Only ppl tht I've seen see vagueness are trolls trying to muddy messages (not alluding to the poster BTW).

Right I'm a troll, totally.

This forum fucking sucks sometimes.

 

[schaft0620]

I'm not asking for anyone to claim 100% BC at launch or otherwise.

I'm not really asking for anything; just saying their statements are vague about how much will be playable at launch. We will get more clarity and obviously know for sure by launch.. and I'm buying one either way.. but obviously I'd prefer if they came out and actually said something like "we expect thousands to be playable at launch" which is essentially what MS said IIRC.



Oh give me a break lol.. not what anyone is talking about when they claim 100% BC. IF a game or server is pulled it's not compatbile with the CURRENT system either lol

I understand where you are coming from but. You have no idea the PR efforts that go into not getting meme'ed and not looking dumb or saying something that is inaccurate. You also have 3rd party devices with other games and the fact that there are THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF GAMES and it would cost HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF MANHOURS to prove that 100% of these games work without any tech issues.

Shit the Bioshock games don't run if you are playing off an external.

4,000 games X 12 hours is 80 24 hour days of gameplay or 100 work days.

 

[IntentionalPun]

I understand where you are coming from but. You have no idea the PR efforts that go into not getting meme'ed and not looking dumb or saying something that is inaccurate. You also have 3rd party devices with other games and the fact that there are THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF GAMES and it would cost HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF MANHOURS to prove that 100% of these games work without any tech issues.

Shit the Bioshock games don't run if you are playing off an external.

4,000 games X 12 hours is 80 24 hour days of gameplay

I don't know why you guys focus on this 100% thing so much... as soon as it gets mentioned in any BC convo this is the direction it goes.

They don't have to say 100% to be less vague about what they expect to be playable at launch. They also haven't actually described this "boost mode" vs "non boost mode" that everyone assumes is there.. again... because they've been fairly vague.

And either way, look at this convo... and every convo on BC. Most people seem to believe nearly 100% of the catalog will be playable at launch. Most people already believe they've set the same expectation MS has... so I don't see how they've covered their own asses PR wise. I suspect they know that though and are just being coy, as now they can announce the full details of their BC plan and it will be "news." I suspect they are going to show off some awesome BC boost mode stuff and blow people away really.

 

[ArcaneNLSC]

"Tune in for the next Assassin's Creed setting reveal from 8AM ET / 5AM PT by digital artist Bosslogic"

Edit: I removed the video link so you dont waste your time like me and the rest of 21K viewers waching this shit right now. The guy is making this ilustration: No gameplay at the moment.

I'm just waiting for the UBIDowngrades

 

[Neo Blaster]

We already got a date: June 4.
I don't believe that guy.

Anyway, I think Sony could drop a bone in May like they did in March(deep dive) and April(controller).

 

[Neo Blaster]

Fast Resume on the XSX will be huge for those of us that switch between games.

I hope the PS5 will have similar for those who prefer that platform.

According to that Crytek engineer, PS5 will have it too.

 

[DrKeo]

Your comparison with the PS4 and PS5 don't work. They are unified memory systems where all memory controllers connect to both GPU and CPU (on PS5 256bit @ 14GBit/s per line) so the partitioning is not done in hardware, but is a logical abstraction.

On the Ps4/PS4 the API will conceal the fact that data isn't actually sent and received - by dereferencing pointers .

I'm happy for you to explain in detail how you expect the XsX GPU - that is connected to all 10 controllers(straws) and needs to use a packet size of 320bits for maximum throughput can trivially access data on, what appears to be a different physical setup with, 6 controllers striping 192bit, without copying through the 10 controllers back to the 10GB.

From my understanding (factoring 10 and 6 channels to 5 and 3 for my analogy) this is like having 5x HDD channels, each with a HDD attached – except 3 of the 5 have drives that are twice the capacity. You take half the large drive capacities and stripe your C:> drive across three channels, then you take the remaining 5 capacities that are all equal in size and stripe your D:> drive across those. - a solution that compromise performance for storage use. You then compare performance to a system with just 4 channels and 4 identical drives, that has striped an unnamed partition across all four – then used name aliasing and quotas to logically limit usage for C:> and D:> but with no downsides. The second system has middle performance compared to the 3 and 5 channel stripe sets when only one is accessed, but anyone that has used a computer knows that the 4 channel setup in real-world conditions is faster, and faster by a decent margin.

XSX is also a unified memory system, it has a single 320-bit bus as far as we know right now. The only question is if the 4 channels that aren't read while the 6 channels are used are idle or active. If MS didn't do any customization, they will idle which will hurt the average throughput (even though it will still be higher than 448GB/s). If MS did some customization around them, the average throughput will not suffer.

The XSX worst-case scenario right now is that the CPU will eat 66.7% more bandwidth than it should if the 4 channels are idle.

 

[Gamernyc78]

Right I'm a troll, totally.

This forum fucking sucks sometimes.

I think reading comprehension is a little off and your too sensitive so I concur this forum does suck sometimes smfh. Did you not read this part "(not alluding to the poster BTW)" bro i put tht in there so you would know I wasn't calling you a troll  I was talking about other ppl tht have been pushing that narrative.

 

[IntentionalPun]

I think reading comprehension is a little off and your too sensitive so I concur this forum does suck sometimes smfh. Did you not read this part "(not alluding to the poster BTW)" bro i put tht in there so you would know I wasn't calling you a troll  I was talking about other ppl tht have been pushing that narrative.

No I read it. Did you not read the rest of your post? lol

Glad I'm the only person somehow immune from your "only time" statement though I guess lol

But if there's nothing vague about it; any ballpark on how many games will be playable at launch and a quote to go with it? Because.. they've been vague about what's playable at launch.. lol

 

[PaintTinJr]

XSX is also a unified memory system, it has a single 320-bit bus as far as we know right now. The only question is if the 4 channels that aren't read while the 6 channels are used are idle or active. If MS didn't do any customization, they will idle which will hurt the average throughput (even though it will still be higher than 448GB/s). If MS did some customization around them, the average throughput will not suffer.

The XSX worst-case scenario right now is that the CPU will eat 66.7% more bandwidth than it should if the 4 channels are idle.

We do know, or Xbox have misdescribed their solution. They used the word 'asymmetric'. Unified memory is not 'asymmetric', it is a technical data term in the same way : isochronous, asynchronous, bi-directional, half-duplex, full-duplex, etc all are.
GPU memory for efficiency reasons requires data to be (mostly) packed and/or packed and interleaved. Padding 192bits to 320bits just for unified access (at reduced speed for N number of cycles) doesn't sound deterministic or efficient, when a system that is already setup for client/server expects small GPU instruction transmissions in the form of client request, I'm now 99% certain from our discussion that the XsX does have to copy that data.
If you can't prove it isn't the normal way I have described, then (IMHO) it would seem fair – against the known history of GPU hardware and APIs – to agree that what I am inferring is the most probably solution, based on the information we have been given. And that would place the PS5 bandwidth in real workloads ahead of the XsX - as my RAID analogy proves and could be easily tested.

 

[nikolino840]

What about this?

 

[CrysisFreak]

Idk about the next Assassin's Creed.
It's probably cross-gen because Ubi like that moneyyy.
So I wonder if the game will even use next-gen systems efficiently.
Black Flag on release sure as fuck did not (still a good game tho).
I also hope Valhalla gets some of the original identity back but I doubt it ngl.
One thing I can say if the next AC is really cross-gen and that absolutely monstrous CPU upgrade doesn't result in 60fps there's no way I'm getting that piece of shit on release.
And I say that as an original AC hardcore fan since the first minute and big fan of Desmond's story (it's actually quite deep and interesting).

 

[DrKeo]

We do know, or Xbox have misdescribed their solution. They used the word 'asymmetric'. Unified memory is not 'asymmetric', it is a technical data term in the same way : isochronous, asynchronous, bi-directional, half-duplex, full-duplex, etc all are.
GPU memory for efficiency reasons requires data to be (mostly) packed and/or packed and interleaved. Padding 192bits to 320bits just for unified access (at reduced speed for N number of cycles) doesn't sound deterministic or efficient, when a system that is already setup for client/server expects small GPU instruction transmissions in the form of client request, I'm now 99% certain from our discussion that the XsX does have to copy that data.
If you can't prove it isn't the normal way I have described, then (IMHO) it would seem fair – against the known history of GPU hardware and APIs – to agree that what I am inferring is the most probably solution, based on the information we have been given. And that would place the PS5 bandwidth in real workloads ahead of the XsX - as my RAID analogy proves and could be easily tested.

It's asymmetrical because not all chips have a symmetrical address space. What I'm talking about is actually the exact same bus every APU has but with an asymmetrical address space. The GPU has access to all 16GB, the CPU has access to all 16GB, and the data is transferred using 320-bit or 192-bit, depends on the data location. It's up to the developer to place the data in the fast or slow part according to the data type and usage. The only question is if the 128-bit idles while the 192-bit is accessed or not. If it idles, using the 3.5 GB will have a greater effect on the bus. If MS did some customization, it might not. We will have to wait.

What you are describing is ludicrous for a single chip setup system. Do you actually expect data that sits on a chip that the GPU already has access to, to be copied again to another (or even the same) chip on a different address just for fun? So in your opinion MS spent more money on the APU and MB for 320-bit bus just so they will have an inferior solution to the simplest and most straight forward 256-bit solution?

 

[Three Jackdaws]

Idk about the next Assassin's Creed.
It's probably cross-gen because Ubi like that moneyyy.
So I wonder if the game will even use next-gen systems efficiently.
Black Flag on release sure as fuck did not (still a good game tho).
I also hope Valhalla gets some of the original identity back but I doubt it ngl.
One thing I can say if the next AC is really cross-gen and that absolutely monstrous CPU upgrade doesn't result in 60fps there's no way I'm getting that piece of shit on release.
And I say that as an original AC hardcore fan since the first minute and big fan of Desmond's story (it's actually quite deep and interesting).

Everyone always says the CPU's on PS5 and Series X is good, how good though? I actually didn't know know that the PS4 and One CPU's were underpowered even when the consoles released.

 

[Bladed Thesis]

What about this?

I hate this stuff.

Either you have information to tell us or you don't. Like the teasing is just annoying at this part.

Just tell us or don't say anything.

 

[Gamernyc78]

No I read it. Did you not read the rest of your post? lol

Glad I'm the only person somehow immune from your "only time" statement though I guess lol

But if there's nothing vague about it; any ballpark on how many games will be playable at launch and a quote to go with it? Because.. they've been vague about what's playable at launch.. lol

Not immune, I just felt your question was genuine and not troll like. I don't know if you notice but there are alot of ppl on forums tht passive aggresively troll especially on this subject and its obvious.

I don't know how much clearer it can get besides listing every bc title in those thousands which will obviously come when the console is being released. Thyve stated the "overwhelming" majority of titles in their 4000 plus portfolio will be bc. Out of those thousands many will also be boosted

Unveiling New Details of PlayStation 5: Hardware Technical Specs [UPDATED]

Watch live for a deep dive into PS5's system architecture and how it will shape the future of games.

blog.us.playstation.com

UPDATE: A quick update on backward compatibility – With all of the amazing games in PS4's catalog, we've devoted significant efforts to enable our fans to play their favorites on PS5. We believe that the overwhelming majority of the 4,000+ PS4 titles will be playable on PS5.

 

[CrysisFreak]

Everyone always says the CPU's on PS5 and Series X is good, how good though? I actually didn't know know that the PS4 and One CPU's were underpowered even when the consoles released.

I can't give you a multiplier but you can roll with at least 4 times better overall if you consider how advanced next-gen CPUs are.
PS4 and Xbone have shitty netbook CPUs brah.

Edit: Before I forget the PS3 CPU is theoretically more powerful than the PS4 CPU!

 

[scie]

I can't give you a multiplier but you can roll with at least 4 times better overall if you consider how advanced next-gen CPUs are.
PS4 and Xbone have shitty netbook CPUs brah.
[...]

I owned a Samsung NC10, believe me netbooks were the worst and against an Intel Atom N270 the 8 core CPUs in the old consoles were like the 8th wonder of the world...

 

[ZywyPL]

Everyone always says the CPU's on PS5 and Series X is good, how good though? I actually didn't know know that the PS4 and One CPU's were underpowered even when the consoles released.

Just the architecture alone is about twice as powerful than Jaguar, then we have the clocks which are also twice as fast, and on top of that we have double the threads. So we're talking about potentially 8x more capable CPUs.

 

[ethomaz]

Seems like we are back to PS5 RDNA 1.5, no RT and no BC at launch lol

Why people keep creating these FUD when there is official confirmation about all of them

 

[Gediminas]

Seems like we are back to PS5 RDNA 1.5, no RT and no BC at launch lol

Why people keep creating these FUD when there is official confirmation about all of them

just ban them. enough is enough.

 

[PaintTinJr]

It's asymmetrical because not all chips have a symmetrical address space. What I'm talking about is actually the exact same bus every APU has but with an asymmetrical address space. The GPU has access to all 16GB, the CPU has access to all 16GB, and the data is transferred using 320-bit or 192-bit, depends on the data location. It's up to the developer to place the data in the fast or slow part according to the data type and usage. The only question is if the 128-bit idles while the 192-bit is accessed or not. If it idles, using the 3.5 GB will have a greater effect on the bus. If MS did some customization, it might not. We will have to wait.

What you are describing is ludicrous for a single chip setup system. Do you actually expect data that sits on a chip that the GPU already has access to, to be copied again to another (or even the same) chip on a different address just for fun? So in your opinion MS spent more money on the APU and MB for 320-bit bus just so they will have an inferior solution to the simplest and most straight forward 256-bit solution?

Goosen said it was something they couldn't do on PC – mixed module sizes in a laptop with shared memory is exactly what you are describing – so his use of asymmetric is not as you say, he is referring to the GPU and CPU access patterns at different bandwidths.
Your final statement suggests that it is child's play to get an APU at 12TF and +1800Mhz and just throw-in 448GB/s unified bandwidth. It isn't a discrete graphics card, and APU with that type of bandwidth won't exist outside of the console space for this generation, and maybe the 6 channels at 192bit on the CPU of XsX was their original solution for both GPU and CPU - going with faster modules at a bigger size like 4GB/s until the price of GDDR6 spiked and they reacted with 10 channels for the GPU and asymmetric access.

The XsX has a chip capable of doing 5% more work per Core(at highest clocks), so 40% more work to need bandwidth than the PS5 chip, yet provides it with 33% less bandwidth (and asymmetric bandwidth at that) while marketing lower latency inputs on XsX. Surely that tells you something about the engineer capability, in comparison to Playstation?
So, yeah, you answered your own question (IMHO)

 

[SgtCaffran]

The XsX has a chip capable of doing 5% more work per Core(at highest clocks), so 40% more work to need bandwidth than the PS5 chip, yet provides it with 33% less bandwidth (and asymmetric bandwidth at that) while marketing lower latency inputs on XsX. Surely that tells you something about the engineer capability, in comparison to Playstation?
So, yeah, you answered your own question (IMHO)

Percentages don't work like you think they work.

edit: and the CPU difference is 2.9%....

 

[Vaztu]

I don't know why you guys focus on this 100% thing so much... as soon as it gets mentioned in any BC convo this is the direction it goes.

They don't have to say 100% to be less vague about what they expect to be playable at launch. They also haven't actually described this "boost mode" vs "non boost mode" that everyone assumes is there.. again... because they've been fairly vague.

And either way, look at this convo... and every convo on BC. Most people seem to believe nearly 100% of the catalog will be playable at launch. Most people already believe they've set the same expectation MS has... so I don't see how they've covered their own asses PR wise. I suspect they know that though and are just being coy, as now they can announce the full details of their BC plan and it will be "news." I suspect they are going to show off some awesome BC boost mode stuff and blow people away really.

Cerny shows a slide to mention three backwards compatibility modes.

He later talks about running PS4 games in boosted mode (PS5 Native Mode). This is where he mentions Top 100 titles doing good in Native Mode, which got misconstrued by everyone.

Timestamped.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Percentages don't work like you think they work.

edit: and the CPU difference is 2.9%....

Good catch, I meant to say 40% more of another (PS5) core (8x (3.8/3.6 - 1))x100 =44%)

 

[IntentionalPun]

Cerny shows a slide to mention three backwards compatibility modes.

He later talks about running PS4 games in boosted mode (PS5 Native Mode). This is where he mentions Top 100 titles doing good in Native Mode, which got misconstrued by everyone.

Timestamped.

I've watched the presentation multiple times.

You can claim all day that he was talking about PS5 native mode when discussing boosted frequencies. He didn't say that, and the discussion about legacy modes was about instruction sets not frequencies.

He never mentions a boosted mode, a non-boosted mode, etc. I do agree that is the probable explanation, don't get me wrong.. but he didn't say that.. in a detailed presentation, he never bothers to explain that BC games can run in different modes and what that means.

 

[Corndog]

Nothing vague and it's been confirmed almost all their thousands of titles will be bc. They are currently testing hundreds for boost mode which is seperate. Only ppl tht I've seen see vagueness are trolls trying to muddy messages (not alluding to the poster BTW).

Where is it stated they are testing for boost mode. I don't remember that being said. Just the testing top 100 games for launch and thousand eventually available.
Edit: just looked at vatzu comment. I could see how cerny maybe implying boost mode.

 

[SgtCaffran]

Good catch, I meant to say 40% more of another (PS5) core (8x (3.8/3.6 - 1))x100 =44%)

The difference between XsX and PS5 CPU is 3.6 vs 3.5GHz. That means a 2.9% difference between the two. Since they both have eight cores, the total difference stays 2.9%. I'm not sure what you think the 44% represents?

 

[SportsFan581]

Are we really talking about the CPU saturating the bandwidth of GDDR6 when similar desktop CPUs struggle to fully utilize a typical DDR4 setup (not including iGP processing)? I've seen it all now.

 

[DrKeo]

Goosen said it was something they couldn't do on PC – mixed module sizes in a laptop with shared memory is exactly what you are describing – so his use of asymmetric is not as you say, he is referring to the GPU and CPU access patterns at different bandwidths.
Your final statement suggests that it is child's play to get an APU at 12TF and +1800Mhz and just throw-in 448GB/s unified bandwidth. It isn't a discrete graphics card, and APU with that type of bandwidth won't exist outside of the console space for this generation, and maybe the 6 channels at 192bit on the CPU of XsX was their original solution for both GPU and CPU - going with faster modules at a bigger size like 4GB/s until the price of GDDR6 spiked and they reacted with 10 channels for the GPU and asymmetric access.

The XsX has a chip capable of doing 5% more work per Core(at highest clocks), so 40% more work to need bandwidth than the PS5 chip, yet provides it with 33% less bandwidth (and asymmetric bandwidth at that) while marketing lower latency inputs on XsX. Surely that tells you something about the engineer capability, in comparison to Playstation?
So, yeah, you answered your own question (IMHO)

You are reading too much into that quote. It actually says:

Memory performance is asymmetrical - it's not something we could have done with the PC, 10 gigabytes of physical memory [runs at] 560GB/s. We call this GPU optimal memory. Six gigabytes [runs at] 336GB/s. We call this standard memory.

All he is saying is that the performance is asymmetrical (because the different chips have different address space size), some data will be read at 560GB/s and some at 336GB/s. It can't be done on PC without having unexpected behavior because on PC developers are unaware of the VRAM setup (for instance on the 660 ti which suffered from that with its' 2GB version), so as a result an important piece of data might fall in the wrong address space and be limited to 336GB/s. On a console, on the other hand, developers can have full control regarding in which of the "two pools" each piece of data goes. Both the GPU and CPU have access to the same memory address space but when one of them tries to access the first 10GB it will read the data from all 10 channels while if it is trying to read from the other 3.5GB it will do so utilizing only 6 channels.

When both CPU and GPU can access the exact same addresses, copying the data twice isn't necessary.

Regarding GDDR6 prices, no chip design could have reacted to that. In mid-2019 DRAM prices were still falling and in mid-2019 both APUs designs were already done except for small steppings. No one was adding memory controllers to the APU in the summer of 2019. I find it weird that your whole theory is based on "I guess Microsoft engineers are idiots" and wishful thinking.

 

[bitbydeath]

I've watched the presentation multiple times.

You can claim all day that he was talking about PS5 native mode when discussing boosted frequencies. He didn't say that, and the discussion about legacy modes was about instruction sets not frequencies.

He never mentions a boosted mode, a non-boosted mode, etc. I do agree that is the probable explanation, don't get me wrong.. but he didn't say that.. in a detailed presentation, he never bothers to explain that BC games can run in different modes and what that means.

You may have missed this part from the blog.

We have already tested hundreds of titles and are preparing to test thousands more as we move toward launch.

Unveiling New Details of PlayStation 5: Hardware Technical Specs [UPDATED]

Watch live for a deep dive into PS5's system architecture and how it will shape the future of games.

blog.us.playstation.com

Ergo they're expecting thousands of BC titles to be available at launch.