Supposed PS5 specs from random Beyond3D member (Silly but this is also how the 1st Wii U specs was leaked)
- Thread starter onQ123
- Start date
Freeman454
Member
Oh ok its the ray tracing their so upset about, RT probably not being on next gen. One mod even suggested banning all ray tracing discussions untill it lands on ps5.
Personally i dont care what will be in ps5, it will look fine no matter what for the exclusives. Even though i think exclusivety isnt allways a good thing.
Just be realistic, dont hope for massive TF, 32gb, 16 cores and large ssds.
ThaMonkeyClaw
Member
I am really hoping for M.2 SSD drives in the next gen (which I am pretty sure they will end up going with some type of SSD), hopefully they will be NVMe which would be amazing! I have a NVMe drive on my PC and after having that speed I don't see myself ever going back to SATA III for my main drive.
Insane Metal
Member
I also think it's possible. See
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/coul...-on-current-amd-tech-instead-of-navi.1472831/
Maybe I am wrong and Sony, MS have been working alongside AMD during the development of Navi architecture and those APUs based on Zen+Navi are in the works. But then again, I don't see it being under 500$. I would expect PS3 type launch all over again with 599$ console and 2020 Q4 release.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It won't be Vega based. Navi minspec just for thermals and wattage efficiency alone.
Negotiator
Banned
The PS3 didn't benefit from faster storage (speeds are capped):
Regarding cutscenes, all PS3 ND games use MPEG-2 video files straight from the Blu-Ray disc (no HDD install). If it's stuttering, then your Blu-Ray laser is dying.
What happened there? Is it like QQera?
Polaris (2016 tech) on a 2020 console? Are you out of your mind?
https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...ineers-away-from-vega-forbes-article.2548845/
No, Vega will be old news in 2020 and it won't be as efficient as Navi either way.
Rumors say that Navi will add tons of SRAM to improve rasterization efficiency...
nVidia uses the L2 cache for tiling purposes since the Maxwell era to reduce power consumption and memory bandwidth requirements:
https://www.techpowerup.com/231129/on-nvidias-tile-based-rendering
I don't think this is true anymore:
Consoles always had a low-level API. PCs tend to favor high-level, inefficient APIs like DX9/DX11.
That's why people say that nV vs AMD flops are not the same.
It's because nVidia favors DX11 performance, while AMD GCN favors DX12 performance.
DX12 (which is a Mantle derivative, just like Vulkan) hasn't caught as fast as AMD would hope for many reasons (PC-focused devs hate low-level coding, Win7 still has a huge market share compared to Win10).
Progress of change is very slow, but if anything, I think it's the next-gen of consoles where AMD will reap huge rewards. It's a long-term strategy if you will.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
The PS3 didn't benefit from faster storage (speeds are capped):
Regarding cutscenes, all PS3 ND games use MPEG-2 video files straight from the Blu-Ray disc (no HDD install). If it's stuttering, then your Blu-Ray laser is dying.
What happened there? Is it like QQera?
Polaris (2016 tech) on a 2020 console? Are you out of your mind?
https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...ineers-away-from-vega-forbes-article.2548845/
No, Vega will be old news in 2020 and it won't be as efficient as Navi either way.
Rumors say that Navi will add tons of SRAM to improve rasterization efficiency...
nVidia uses the L2 cache for tiling purposes since the Maxwell era to reduce power consumption and memory bandwidth requirements:
https://www.techpowerup.com/231129/on-nvidias-tile-based-rendering
I don't think this is true anymore:
Consoles always had a low-level API. PCs tend to favor high-level, inefficient APIs like DX9/DX11.
That's why people say that nV vs AMD flops are not the same.
It's because nVidia favors DX11 performance, while AMD GCN favors DX12 performance.
DX12 (which is a Mantle derivative, just like Vulkan) hasn't caught as fast as AMD would hope for many reasons (PC-focused devs hate low-level coding, Win7 still has a huge market share compared to Win10).
Progress of change is very slow, but if anything, I think it's the next-gen of consoles where AMD will reap huge rewards. It's a long-term strategy if you will.
That makes no sense, because I compared two PS3s next to each other with a stock drive and my upgrade, and install times were much faster, trophy list syncing loaded much faster and I actually launched games and got in them quicker, as well as some load times.
I noticed when I bought a Super Slim this year to finally plat Demon Souls because my BC Phat was starting to overheat, the stock Drive was much slower picking up right where I left off. So I'm going to eventually swap out to the 7200 that's in my OG.
The stuttering was a known issue even on Naughty Dog forums when they used to have them before they combined it with the Sony Community forums, and there was a firmware update that I believe corrected it. Since it went away after that update.
People even swapped back to the stock drive in the stuttering went away and when they swapped back to 7200 it persisted again. This was literally a brand new system I got and it happened as soon as the drive swap but the firmware update corrected it and the drive still works till this day no problem.
Last edited:
Negotiator
Banned
Maybe I should rephrase what I said: consoles don't benefit from faster storage (HDD, SSD) as much as a PC does.
A PS4 with an SSD is the same: you'll notice improved loading times, but nothing drastic. DF has already done some measurements that proves this.
That's why we need SSDs to become the next-gen baseline: all next-gen games will take SSD performance for granted.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Oh yeah, I definitely agree there. The current consoles are limited by their SATA bus. I don't even think they're using SATA3, which is why USB drives load games faster than the internal, due to that bus interface being faster than the SATA interface I believe.
Negotiator
Banned
Not really. SATA bus has nothing to do with speed caps (PS4 is capped at 30-45 MB/s, while the 2.5" 500GB 5400 RPM laptop HDD can go up to 100 MB/s).
SATA2 offers up to 300 MB/s. SATA3 can go up to 600 MB/s.
USB3 offers 5 Gbps (625 MB/s).
USB HDDs tend to have higher density platters, which increases the transfer rate (up to 200 MB/s). 200 MB/s is way below SATA2 specs to claim that it saturates the SATA bus...
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Interesting, why do you think they would cap it slower than the bus allows for?
Insane Metal
Member
Limited resources on the CPU/RAM side?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Yeah but that CPU is used in laptops, and the ram is also used on graphics cards in PCs which doesn't cap the HDD bus. The ram feeds a CPU at a much higher rate than it's receiving from the hard drive.
Then again both consoles seem to do this.
Negotiator
Banned
You mean slower than the HDD head can perform (HDD bottlenecks are always mechanical, not electronics-related).
The reason is pretty simple: console manufacturers always reserve resources for the OS (CPU, GPU, RAM, storage transfer rate).
When you're playing a game on the PS4, the OS also has to download games/patches from the PSN servers and install retail games from the BD-ROM transparently without hitches (PlayGo).
The OS reserves 1.5 Jaguar CPU cores and 3-3.5GB of RAM for the OS.
There's also a dedicated co-processor (LZ/Zlib engine) to decompress assets on-the-fly, so the CPU doesn't have to do that.
Chozofication_
Banned
No doubt something has to give, but I bet real money on ssds as standard. Personally I expect 20gb minimum ram, 8 zen 2 cores (pretty much guaranteed) and 10tf for ps5. I would actually not be completely shocked if we get 32gb ram though, in a ps4 scenario where they planned on 16gb gddr6 (plus ddr4 for OS) but doubled that at the last minute.
For the record this is based on a 500 dollar price point, if sony insists on $399 then either 20gb ram max or hybrid storage of some sort.
Last edited:
No, externals are faster because they are used only for read access while the internal also does the operating system stuff. Add to that that both Sony and Microsoft limit the amount of bandwidth games can use and add to that the CPUs are shit and take a lot of time to decompress the data.
Insane Metal
Member
Well what matters is:
- 7nm is ready
- RAM is getting much cheaper
- SSDs are getting cheaper as well
- Navi is probably ready (said to release around October)
- Zen+/Zen2 is basically a lock, which will upgrade these consoles CPUs exponencially compared to Jaguar
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Ah ok, that makes sense.
Negotiator
Banned
External HDDs have higher platter density, that's why.
Regarding the OS, XB1 has 8GB of NAND storage exclusively for the OS. PS4 has a faster OS (NAND is 32MB only), so internal HDDs have nothing to do with that.
Why does everyone keep repeating this like it's true?
Both consoles have dedicated co-processors to decompress data:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_4_technical_specifications#Hardware_modules
http://vgleaks.com/world-exclusive-durangos-move-engines/
http://www.redgamingtech.com/xbox-o...s-memory-bandwidth-performance-tech-tribunal/
It wouldn't make sense to use Jaguar for that. Same for video decoding/encoding.
Last edited:
Insane Metal
Member
Oh so that's one of the reasons those Jaguars were able to perform some miracles on these consoles.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
What would make an external have a thicker platter density if they are essentially the same drive just in a different case? Comparing 1TB to 1TB?
Negotiator
Banned
It's a different philosophy compared to PCs where the CPU has to do all the "chores". DF keeps repeating this CPU/decompression "mantra" and people think it's true. It's not.
Do you think that the PS5 Zen2 CPU will do compression/decompression just because it's faster compared to Jaguar?
No, it's going to have an upgraded set of dedicated co-processors with better compression algorithms.
A 500GB/1TB external hard drive will yield zero improvement in loading times.
People tend to use 4-8 TB external HDDs. 500GB-1TB makes sense only if you use an SSD.
Chozofication_
Banned
I don't think that's true though, jaguar does impact loading. After all you have faster loading on 4pro vs. 4 thanks to the cpu clock being higher on pro. I've also never heard of external storage being faster than internal, if both drives are equal then internal Should be faster or at least just as fast. Internal ssd is the fastest solution for ps4. I don't know maybe one of you has benchmarks on this.
Negotiator
Banned
Or perhaps the Zlib decoder is clocked higher as well... same for the Move engines.
Chozofication_
Banned
I'm no engineer but I do know you get massively faster loading times on PC with the same drive in the consoles. Just compare kingdom come load times on pc vs ps4 both with ssd... Sata does play a role but even a mechanical drive on PC with a good cpu blitzes consoles + ssd. You definitely get higher load times on pcs with much weaker cpus compared to the high end.
Negotiator
Banned
Comparing PCs to consoles is a fallacy and I've already explained why (a CPU on a PC is supposed to perform everything, from decompression to audio calculations). Consoles don't do that.
When you overclock a console (whether it's a PS4 or an XBOX), then all processors are clocked higher, since everything is tied to the system clock. It's as simple as that.
Endless Fluff
Banned
Chozofication_
Banned
That's interesting but in the end you just said everything is clocked higher because of the cpu upclock, So its kind of tomayto tomato. There's still a correlation between console clocks and load times, in other words.
Also, not having a special bus or whatever certainly doesn't hurt pc in comparison to consoles so perhaps with Zen 2 cores the cup could handle everything just like pc?
Last edited:
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
Yes, especially the bold. Can't wait
Negotiator
Banned
Should I explain how mechanical drives work and why density matters for transfer rates?
Do you also want an analysis of stuff like PMR, HAMR etc?
I think that's beyond the scope of this thread, but I'm pretty sure you'll find plenty of articles if you're genuinely interested on HDD technology.
Correlation does not imply causation.
Just because the CPU processor (among other things) is clocked higher, it does not mean that the CPU handles decompression.
I suggest to study the architecture of both consoles if you want to have an informed opinion. It's public info since... 2013.
Again: consoles (even if they're PC-based) have a different philosophy of programming compared to PCs.
You have dedicated co-processors for audio, video, compression etc. It makes ZERO sense to use the CPU for dedicated tasks.
Chozofication_
Banned
It makes sense to me to save money on limiting the amount of processors on board and motherboard complexity if the cpu is good enough to do everything anyways.
Endless Fluff
Banned
The point is that you are saying that an external drive has a higher areal density than an internal drive, which is a ridiculous statement.
You need to be more clear when you throw something like that around, because modern internal and external drives are pretty much the same when it comes to areal density. There is no difference between an external 4TB 2.5" HDD and an internal 4TB 2.5" HDD.
Negotiator
Banned
No, it doesn't make sense and you'll understand why if you study the die/chip diagram.
We're talking about a single chip (APU), where did you see multiple on board processors and motherboard complexity? We're not talking about Saturn.
It's because tha majority of the transistor budget goes to the CPU/GPU. Dedicated co-processors (ASICs) don't consume a lot of die space on the APU. They're dirt cheap and very power efficient.
Negotiator
Banned
Show me an internal 4TB HDD that fits inside a PS4?
AFAIK, all PS4s require a 9.5mm HDD. 12.5mm won't fit.
So yeah, the max internal you can put is 2TB and the max external you can use is 8TB.
Guess which one has higher platter density?
Chozofication_
Banned
Do PC gpus have these and if not do you actually know how much these co processors cost or are you just guessing?
Same as all the other Sony rumors. They always sound way too good to be true.
On the other hand Xbox rumors in this thread are always bad.
SlashBringingHasher
Banned
The PS3 didn't benefit from faster storage (speeds are capped):
Regarding cutscenes, all PS3 ND games use MPEG-2 video files straight from the Blu-Ray disc (no HDD install). If it's stuttering, then your Blu-Ray laser is dying.
What happened there? Is it like QQera?
Polaris (2016 tech) on a 2020 console? Are you out of your mind?
https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...ineers-away-from-vega-forbes-article.2548845/
No, Vega will be old news in 2020 and it won't be as efficient as Navi either way.
Rumors say that Navi will add tons of SRAM to improve rasterization efficiency...
nVidia uses the L2 cache for tiling purposes since the Maxwell era to reduce power consumption and memory bandwidth requirements:
https://www.techpowerup.com/231129/on-nvidias-tile-based-rendering
I don't think this is true anymore:
Consoles always had a low-level API. PCs tend to favor high-level, inefficient APIs like DX9/DX11.
That's why people say that nV vs AMD flops are not the same.
It's because nVidia favors DX11 performance, while AMD GCN favors DX12 performance.
DX12 (which is a Mantle derivative, just like Vulkan) hasn't caught as fast as AMD would hope for many reasons (PC-focused devs hate low-level coding, Win7 still has a huge market share compared to Win10).
Progress of change is very slow, but if anything, I think it's the next-gen of consoles where AMD will reap huge rewards. It's a long-term strategy if you will.
i disagre with the 2x number. that was true when he was relevant in game making. around PS2 era.
nowdays since the achitecture is the same. its more like. I'd say 25-35% more performance for same on paper specs.
Negotiator
Banned
Early AMD GCN GPUs had an audio DSP, but few games (Mantle ones) utilized it. It's not a baseline feature on PCs.
There's no Zlib decoder AFAIK. Video decoding/encoding exists and it's being utilized in some apps (same for mobile SoCs).
And yes, they actually cost pennies in terms of transistor budget. They pay more for royalties (if it's licenced tech like Tensilica).
It was also true during the PS360 era.
PCs didn't have Mantle-like APIs (DX12/Vulkan) back then.
TheKingKRoach
Member
That depends on if developers start implementing options to disable 30FPS caps in their games as an option.
I highly doubt developers will update their games many years later, so they can take advantage of current hardware.
Beerman462
Member
Yes they can. We literally have over a decades worth of proof at this point. Go watch any of thousands of comparisons on You Tube. I did a comparison myself with an 8800GT(half core clock)vs Xbox 360 on Bioshock Infinite and Alan Wake.
Negotiator
Banned
Major AAA games like RDR2 and TLOU2 will get 60 fps patches, I would bet money on that.
Endless Fluff
Banned
Seagate Firecuda 2TB avg. 1327 Gb/in², PS4 compatible 2.5" HDD.Show me an internal 4TB HDD that fits inside a PS4?
AFAIK, all PS4s require a 9.5mm HDD. 12.5mm won't fit.
So yeah, the max internal you can put is 2TB and the max external you can use is 8TB.
Guess which one has higher platter density?
Seagate ST8000AS0002 8TB drive avg. 848 Gb/in², 3.5" HDD.
Yeah, guess which has higher areal density.
Last edited:
Negotiator
Banned
I don't see any internal 2.5" 4TB HDD in your list. Where's that?
I'm genuinely asking, because I want to upgrade my 2TB HDD (chugging along since 2014) and I cannot find anything...
Endless Fluff
Banned
Stop moving goalposts. You made that comparison. You pulled the 2TB vs 8TB ("hurr durr, 8TB is denser!!!111 I got ya!") out of your arse and asked me to guess which has higher density. I've just shown you that the internal 2.5" platters are tighter packed than 8TB 3.5" ones... which means your "external drives have higher density and that is why they're faster" is flat out wrong if you compare modern drives with each other.
There is no 4TB drive which fits the PS4, this was the first time you've moved the goalpost, because that wasn't even on the table. I've said that a 4TB external is the same as a 4TB internal as long as they're the same form factor, because an external drive is just an internal drive with a case. This is why your statement made no sense to me to begin with and why I've asked you to explain that to me, but instead you told me to do some google-fu and educate myself.
btw: the HGST Travelstar 5k1000 that comes with most Pros has 1Gb/in² areal density.
An external drive is usually faster because they have more platters and thus more heads, not because of areal density.
Negotiator
Banned
No friendo, you started moving the goalposts and being passive aggressive for no apparent reason (I guess you had a bad day and you decided to vent on the internet, right?).
I'm only here for honest & friendly discussion, not dealing with passive aggressive jerks. I'll do you one last favor and address your post, sentence by sentence.
No, I didn't. What I said is that the internal limit is 2TB and the external limit is 8TB.
You said this:
And I asked where I can buy an internal 4TB HDD to put in my PS4... then you moved the goalposts. Pot/kettle/black.
You need to start comparing apples to apples, not apples to oranges.
A 3.5" HDD can have bigger platters (shocker, I know!) with more tracks and more platters & read/write heads.
Assuming that everything else is the same (platter diameter, number of platters/heads, RPM speed), then a HDD with higher areal density will yield higher transfer rates. As simple as that. Use your brain next time (not going to hold my breath though).
But you mentioned an internal 4TB 2.5" HDD in a console-specific context. Not my fault if you haven't done your research. I have a 2TB HDD on my PS4 since 2014 and there's no upgrade option for that.
You should. Knowledge is power. Being an ignoramus is not.
Doesn't really matter, 500GB 5400 RPM is the baseline of this gen for both consoles.
You can also put an 1TB SSD, but the benefits are not going to be huge (as it should).
You forget the fact that constantly increasing platter sizes, amount of platters/heads and RPM (we're still stuck at 5400-7200 RPM, minus 10-15K server HDDs) is not viable.
What is viable is drastically increasing the platter density and that's what they've being doing for over 4 decades:
https://blog.seagate.com/craftsman-ship/hamr-next-leap-forward-now/
This is my last post towards you, now you can enjoy your place in my ignore list.
Last edited:
Silver Wattle
Gold Member
not on a single die, but it will have Zen 2 and navi, easily.
Freeman454
Member
I dont know what QQera is
What happens there is the usual that happens on all forums, users have their preffered platforms, nothing wrong with that. But when the mods have theirs and filter out anything thats negative to their favourite platform, thats just wrong.An exempel is Nvidias RTX line of GPU's, yes theres much wrong with them in special price, but downplaying/bashing just about anything regarding RT because of it is the wrong direction a pro tech forum should take. When someone thinks a PS4 game isnt really pushing any boundries tech wise, that results in perm ban, insulting the devs. On the other side its totally okay to negate anything A4 has done with Metro, thats not insulting the devs.
Thats why mentioning B3D here or anywhere doesnt really give any credibility in any way. I think that tech discussion forums shouldnt be having bias moderators, or they should keep it to themselfs.