Shmunter
Member
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The PlayStation 5 GPU Will Be Supported By Better Hardware Solutions, In Depth Analysis Suggests
- Thread starter sonomamashine
- Start date
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Call it whatever you at the end of the day PS5 has the ram advantage.
DynamiteCop!
Banned
Kenpachii
Member
Eurogamer.
Xbox series X memory setup is superior towards PS5. That box will never use more than 10gb of v-ram, the same goes for PS5.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
PS5's 16-whatever the OS uses will still be more likely a few gigs more.
More is better.
12.1>10.3
XSX memory setup that someone on beyond3d.com forums posted, translate from Spanish, XSX gets it's full bandwidth: http://disruptiveludens.com/ps5-y-xsx-gddr6-y-acceso-a-memoria
Last edited:
The way games are designed. no unskippable cutscene to allow loading, no crack to crawl through while the rest of the level loads, your max speed in open world games. Things like that.
bitbydeath
Member
Did MS say why they went that route?
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Not that im aware of but my guess is cost.
rnlval
Member
Inside Xbox Series X: the full specs
This is it. After months of teaser trailers, blog posts and even the occasional leak, we can finally reveal firm, hard …
www.eurogamer.net
"Memory performance is asymmetrical - it's not something we could have done with the PC," explains Andrew Goossen "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. GPU optimal and standard offer identical performance for CPU audio and file IO. The only hardware component that sees a difference in the GPU."
In terms of how the memory is allocated, games get a total of 13.5GB in total, which encompasses all 10GB of GPU optimal memory and 3.5GB of standard memory. This leaves 2.5GB of GDDR6 memory from the slower pool for the operating system and the front-end shell.
XSX's CPU, audio and file IO pipes wouldn't notice extra memory bandwidth above 336.1 GB/s.
OS reserve is located in 6GB 336 GB/s memory address range.
Last edited:
rnlval
Member
It's actually 12.1472 vs 10.275
(52 x 64) x 1.825 x 2 = 12,147.2 GFLOPS or 12.1472 TFLOPS
(36 x 64) x 2.230 x 2 = 10,275.84 GFLOPS or 10.27584 TFLOPS
Trainsmove
Banned
The PS5 is a glorified RX5700XT with RDNa 2 cus. With the same BW of 446GB/S. Sad.
Shmunter
Member
They engineered something faster by gimping 6/16 of the memory speed slower than a PS5 and everything is just perfect? I’ve seen a unicorn shooting rainbows out it’s ass, now I’ve heard one talk tech too.....lol
Nah, bro you’re alright, nothing wrong with unbridled optimism.
Last edited:
Hawking Radiation
Member
Agreed mate.
I don't know anything regarding memory and how its setup or operates and i will not pretend to know either. I'd rather the more informed users here explain that to me. This is why i'm on a gaming forum. Because its fascinating to me to know how these consoles work but sometimes that discussions cannot be had because users have to console war or troll.
sendit
Member
Fully agree with this statement. *Points and laughs at PS5s unified sustained ram bandwidth solution*.
Microsoft has made the impossible --> possible. They took the bandwidth of a RX 5600 XT (192-bit bus at 336 GB/s) and tacked on a an extra set of blistering fast ram with a 320-bit bus @560 GB/s.
Last edited:
Horizon Zero Dawn MAP.
Sosokrates
Report me if I continue to console war
It would be cheaper for them to do what Sony did and buy 8 2gb chips.
Johnny Silver
Banned
I disagree. And I fail to see the point where "sad" fits into the equation. Gives the impression that you're writing this with ill intent.
With the IPC increase between RDNA 1 and RDNA 2 and the slight Tflop increase in comparison with the 5700XT, we may see an increase of 10-20% in favour of the PS5.
If the console is sold at 399€ then we are seeing a performance level greater than a 5700xt or a 2070 super for a price lower than either of them, especially if we have in mind all the other components (CPU/sound/drive/sdd) etc that fit the bill of materials of the PS5.
For 399€ this is very impressive so no, it's not "sad". If anything the correct word to be used is "impressive".
Last edited:
Eliciel
Member
this is pure gold of comedy, right there. The play of words is spectacular.
ZywyPL
Banned
We shall se the end results, but as past two generations clearly showed, unified pool of RAM <<< split pool of RAM, it just makes the developers life so much easier. The XBX RAM works in a similar fashion as it does on PC, where we have slower RAM for the CPU and faster RAM for the GPU, so its efficiency will come down to how much of the games data is for CPU-only, GPU-only, and shared between the two, if the CPU-only data will take 3.5GB or more, there won't be much of an issue, otherwise the devs will have to figure out which of the shared or GPU-only data to put into the slower memory.
Leyasu
Banned
Basically loading times. The way people keep talking, I was expecting major gameplay changes.
Those would be gameplay changes. How is being able to walk into every building, being able to traverse faster, and not having to do some boring gameplay section where you walk through a crevice to facilitate the game being able to keep up not gameplay changes?
Leyasu
Banned
? Those things you just mentioned are just filler to hide the loading screen. Now, things will become more seamless without the filler. That is it in your example. I am not criticizing anything or anyone. More seamless and less loading screens is going to be amazing.
But the continued pushing of it’s going to change how games are designed is way over exaggerated.
megreotsugua
Banned
Insane details and high resolution textures everywhere at every turn. A developer has talked about this already. Some just don't want to listen because it sounds like the PS5 has a big advantage. I guess to doubt is reasonable. We will see when the games are shown.
So it will have PC ultra textures?
Leyasu
Banned
Waiting for the goods is best. How much longer will they take to load on the xsx?
You can compare quite well a 5700 XT to the 5700. Same number of CUs, 36 instead of 40 (10% less). However, to compensate the 10% CU difference between XT and non XT you need to overclock the chip by around 20%. Same goes for the XT overclocked and non overclocked, 20% overclock results in 10% more performance. Which shows clearly how strong RDNA 1.0 depends on CU and associated ROPs. You can find a plenty of overclock reports on the web, all pointing to the same scheme.
I suppose, that performance per clock will get some slight gains with RDNA 2.0. I doubt that the console will sustain 2,23 GHz but let's wait and see. In every case Performance should be around 10-15% over the 5700 XT plus all the RDNA 2.0 features, which are more important. When we make the calculation this way, XsX should be positioned between 2080 Super and 2080 Ti. XsX bandwith advantage equals more or less the compute power advantage, so nothing wrong here. Both went with a proper soluation for their chips. The bandwith parallels to RDNA 1.0 prove both right with their solution.
Anyway both systems have plently of proccesing power and I'm more excited to see how AMDs equivalent to Nvidia tensor core competes, as this could result in a limiting factor. i really doubt we are going to see the consoles for 399. PS5 has a smaller APU but they I/O solution is costly, also their fast NAND chips. And that's why we "only" got 36 CUs with high frequency on the PS5. They had to cut costs at one point to realize their vision of fast SSD implementation. A small, smaller APU was the logical decision here. To compensate, they pushed the clock to the maximum and beyond what I still doubt.
XsX on the other side has a big die and 2,4 Gb/s NAND isn't cheap either. I suspect that both companies will try to sell the systems without any loss but considering the actual pandemic crisis and the resulting financial troubles they can't go much further than 499. So system should be launch between 450 and 520. Which is very cheap compared to PCs with comparable power.
Finally, assuming that 2x theoretical speed will result in 2x practical speed is simply utopic. This may work under perfect laboratory conditions but not in reality. For good reason the loading time of the Spiderman demo was "only" 10x faster and not 50x> faster as it could be theoretically. At some point the practical limitations of the other components take effect and here the XsX is ahead. Whether the developers on the PS5 will be able to compensate this ... to be seen in the next years. I don't think, the difference will be as big as some suppose.
I suppose, that performance per clock will get some slight gains with RDNA 2.0. I doubt that the console will sustain 2,23 GHz but let's wait and see. In every case Performance should be around 10-15% over the 5700 XT plus all the RDNA 2.0 features, which are more important. When we make the calculation this way, XsX should be positioned between 2080 Super and 2080 Ti. XsX bandwith advantage equals more or less the compute power advantage, so nothing wrong here. Both went with a proper soluation for their chips. The bandwith parallels to RDNA 1.0 prove both right with their solution.
Anyway both systems have plently of proccesing power and I'm more excited to see how AMDs equivalent to Nvidia tensor core competes, as this could result in a limiting factor. i really doubt we are going to see the consoles for 399. PS5 has a smaller APU but they I/O solution is costly, also their fast NAND chips. And that's why we "only" got 36 CUs with high frequency on the PS5. They had to cut costs at one point to realize their vision of fast SSD implementation. A small, smaller APU was the logical decision here. To compensate, they pushed the clock to the maximum and beyond what I still doubt.
XsX on the other side has a big die and 2,4 Gb/s NAND isn't cheap either. I suspect that both companies will try to sell the systems without any loss but considering the actual pandemic crisis and the resulting financial troubles they can't go much further than 499. So system should be launch between 450 and 520. Which is very cheap compared to PCs with comparable power.
Finally, assuming that 2x theoretical speed will result in 2x practical speed is simply utopic. This may work under perfect laboratory conditions but not in reality. For good reason the loading time of the Spiderman demo was "only" 10x faster and not 50x> faster as it could be theoretically. At some point the practical limitations of the other components take effect and here the XsX is ahead. Whether the developers on the PS5 will be able to compensate this ... to be seen in the next years. I don't think, the difference will be as big as some suppose.
Last edited:
megreotsugua
Banned
More than that. PS5 SSD and I/O throughput is unprecedented. Cerny specifically targeted streaming of LARGE assets on the fly because he has a specific goal in mind. We will find out when games are shown.
Last edited:
megreotsugua
Banned
We'll find out if XSeX I/O throughput can do what the PS5 can do. It's not only about raw SSD speed.
Megatextures everywhere. Insane details everywhere.
Last edited:
Shmunter
Member
Shared memory offers benefits beyond GPU memory here and CPU memory there. All processors can work on a single shared data without need to duplicate and push data over a bus.
And when we introduce further dedicated processors like for sound, then intermingling becomes even more so. Now we’re even talking ray traced sound, so gfx card needs to work on sound data etc.
Putting things into memory categories is not so clear cut, less so than ever.
ShadowWolf712
Member
Nnnno, pretty sure that was the source of Xbox dudes insisting the GPU was RDNA1To my best knowledge no, what is written here in the Eurogamer / DF article is pretty much the same thing as was revealed by Sony, except for the clocks:
PS5 and Xbox Series X GPU specs leak: how powerful is next-gen?
A remarkable story unfolded last April where it seemed that an intrepid explorer of the 3DMark benchmark database stumb…www.eurogamer.net
treemk
Banned
No because the PCs will still use the same architecture and run the same software, there's no way to make it have "more coordination" like a console would.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
As far as I know that was the "techpowerup" leak which also got the amount of RAM and the speed of the memory bus wrong. So basically it extended the Github leak with a bunch of bullshit. The Github leak itself was fine though.
GamingKaiju
Member
I must say this thread has delivered.
It's good to see the console warring hasn't stopped but for me and my salt and pepper beard my fanboy days are behind me. Just enjoy dem games!!!
It's good to see the console warring hasn't stopped but for me and my salt and pepper beard my fanboy days are behind me. Just enjoy dem games!!!
mitchman
Gold Member
The performance per watt is the real kicker with RDNA2 with its 50% reduction. This is why PS5 can clock so high and still remain within the power budget.
Shmunter
Member
No they’re not. You’ll get sucked in. Lol, just jokes.
GamingKaiju
Member
10 years ago I would have been knee deep in this shit but now it just doesn't concern me, enjoy the games have fun on whatever platform you own but it's always best to be a multiplat owner Slings and Arrows
Banned
Wait i'm confused.
Off-the-shelf PC parts, put in a console, are more powerful than the same parts placed in to a PC?
So, the same hardware can be more or less powerful than the baseline, depending on the software used?
B_Boss
Member
I observe your thinking and I’d say that it’s not necessarily about the power per se, but engineering said power so that it works and performs the best it possibly can alongside other hardware components within the same environment.
Consoles traditionally seems to excel at this (please tech-wizards of Gaf correct me if I’m wrong
!) and in particular, nextgen consoles.Slings and Arrows
Banned
In theory then, could an 'off-the-shelf' console with more powerful components, be less... Powerful/able than a console with bespoke parts that are rated comparatively lower?I observe your thinking and I’d say that it’s not necessarily about the power per se, but engineering said power so that it works and performs the best it possibly can alongside other hardware components within the same environment.
Consoles traditionally seems to excel at this (please tech-wizards of Gaf correct me if I’m wrong
NathanDiego
Member
Yes, it is.
ANIMAL1975
Member
Hey, which one of you guys necrobump this old crazy thread?
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
Sony should be able to enhance their BC then.
regawdless
Banned
Reading some of the old posts is really funny. So many eaten crows.
BlueXImpulse
Banned
The smugness from Xbox fans in this thread
assurdum
Banned
The irony.
Thirty7ven
Banned
This thread ahahaba, rough times for X warriors.
