The PlayStation 5 GPU Will Be Supported By Better Hardware Solutions, In Depth Analysis Suggests

SleepDoctor said:
Very possible but also they may not want to have the same $100 price gap. If Sony was able to take a $200 loss with the Ps3, I don't see ms not being able to do the same.
Click to expand...
Don't you think Sony will do the same ? how fare MS is going to cut the price of their console, at the end of the day it's a business not a charity.
That's why i think it will be perf/$.
 
I get the urge to call a winner based on specs alone. But I for one is looking forward to the games, and thinking about getting to enjoy sonys first party titles in a console 2-2.5x faster than my pro is enough for me.
Just like when I bought a GTX 1070, and not 1080 or Titan, yes I would be able to game with graphics a little better, and sometimes the difference would be so small that I probably would have to go to a youtube comparison video to tell the difference, and only if they pause and crop the image.

MS first party titles I can play on my pc, the few that interests me.

What I dont get is MS plans to keep games supporting last gen for quite some time. Dont they have plans to release some Xbox series X only games??
 
MacReady13 said:
This is hilarious to me! People so desperate for info they're listening to all different sites claiming 1 thing, then another site claiming another, then certain "devs" saying this is more powerful and that is better designed... Seriously, can we all just cool down until we actually get proper specs on the PS5? Obviously both consoles will be fantastic pieces of equipment ready to satiate the desires of their respective fanboys! For me, games are where it's at and that is where i'll go. Bicker all you want about specs. It didn't matter in the PS2 era and it don't matter now!
Click to expand...
So you're getting a PS5?
 
mckmas8808 said:
I'm sorry if it hurts your feelings, but a console isn't "ONLY" about the GPU's TF power.



Again, I apologize that the PS5 isn't as weak as you want it to be. The GPU comparison alone will make the PS5 to XSX closer than the XBO was to the PS4. If you need me to buy you some tissues, PM me your address and I'll have Amazon ship some to you in a week. :p
Click to expand...
Since you're generous in sending him tissues, please send me some Pringles and hand sanitizer! I ran out of those vital supplies! 😁
 
sonomamashine said:
Don't you think Sony will do the same ? how fare MS is going to cut the price of their console, at the end of the day it's a business not a charity.
That's why i think it will be perf/$.
Click to expand...

I agree but if Sony does hit the $399 mark I'd imagine they already at a loss as is. The Ps4 was sold at a slight loss. Now imagine with the specs of the Ps5 what kind of loss $399 could already be.

I don't see any of the going lower than $399. Expecting nothing lower than $499 from ms but with how aggressive they are being about their console, they may actually try to match Sony.

And if the rumors about the manufacturing for Ps5 being $450 is true, then $399 is already significant loss per console. But again they make most their money on subscriptions too. So its really hard to pinpoint a price.
 
SleepDoctor said:
I agree but if Sony does hit the $399 mark I'd imagine they already at a loss as is. The Ps4 was sold at a slight loss. Now imagine with the specs of the Ps5 what kind of loss $399 could already be.

I don't see any of the going lower than $399. Expecting nothing lower than $499 from ms but with how aggressive they are being about their console, they may actually try to match Sony.

And if the rumors about the manufacturing for Ps5 being $450 is true, then $399 is already significant loss per console. But again they make most their money on subscriptions too. So its really hard to pinpoint a price.
Click to expand...
I hope so, at the end of the day it's good for the consumer.
 
Ok after reading the blog post, the out of context 7.5GB quote makes more sense
Disclaimer: Im explaining the contents of the post. The accuracy of this info is unknown and would be great if people from the field would chime in
Those two banks of three chips either side of the processor house 2 GB per chip. How does that extra 1 GB get accessed? It can't be accessed at the same time as the first 1 GB because the memory interface is saturated. What happens, instead, is that the memory controller must instead "switch" to the interleaved addressable space covered by those 6x 1 GB portions. This means that, for the 6 GB "slower" memory (in reality, it's not slower but less wide) the memory interface must address that on a separate clock cycle if it wants to be accessed at the full width of the available bus.
Click to expand...
From what i understand he claims that memory from the fast & slow pool can't be accessed simultaneously i.e GPU (fast) & CPU (slow) can't access their respective pools simultaneously
The fallout of this can be quite complicated depending on how Microsoft have worked out their memory bus architecture. It could be a complete "switch" whereby on one clock cycle the memory interface uses the interleaved 10 GB portion and on the following clock cycle it accesses the 6 GB portion. This implementation would have the effect of averaging the effective bandwidth for all the memory. If you average this access, you get 392 GB/s for the 10 GB portion and 168 GB/s for the 6 GB portion for a given time frame but individual cycles would be counted at their full bandwidth.
Click to expand...
However, there is another scenario with memory being assigned to each portion based on availability. In this configuration, the memory bandwidth (and access) is dependent on how much RAM is in use. Below 10 GB, the RAM will always operate at 560 GB/s. Above 10 GB utilisation, the memory interface must start switching or splitting the access to the memory portions. I don't know if it's technically possible to actually access two different interleaved portions of memory simultaneously by using the two 16-bit channels of the GDDR6 chip but if it were (and the standard appears to allow for it), you'd end up with the same memory bandwidths as the "averaged" scenario mentioned above.
Click to expand...
He claims than in order to use the full bandwidth total memory use must remain within the 10GB limit including system memory (CPU)
If Microsoft were able to simultaneously access and decouple individual chips from the interleaved portions of memory through their memory controller then you could theoretically push the access to an asymmetric balance, being able to switch between a pure 560 GB/s for 10 GB RAM and a mixed 224 GB/s from 4 GB of that same portion and the full 336 GB/s of the 6 GB portion (also pictured above). This seems unlikely to my understanding of how things work and undesirable from a technical standpoint in terms of game memory access and also architecture design.
Click to expand...
In this config bandwidth would be distributed as follows:
6GB @560GB/s
4GB @224GB/s
6GB @336GB/S

Now we can better understand the out of context quote from the article
In comparison, the PS5 has a static 448 GB/s bandwidth for the entire 16 GB of GDDR6 (also operating at 14 GHz, across a 256-bit interface). Yes, the SX has 2.5 GB reserved for system functions and we don't know how much the PS5 reserves for that similar functionality but it doesn't matter - the Xbox SX either has only 7.5 GB of interleaved memory operating at 560 GB/s for game utilisation before it has to start "lowering" the effective bandwidth of the memory below that of the PS5... or the SX has an averaged mixed memory bandwidth that is always below that of the baseline PS4. Either option puts the SX at a disadvantage to the PS5 for more memory intensive games and the latter puts it at a disadvantage all of the time.
Click to expand...
He comes to the conclusion that to get the best performance possible out of this configuration all data reads/writes must be limited to the 10GB pool
Now I don't think MS would have designed the system with this limitation just to advertise 560GB/s. They either designed a system (separate buses?) to circumvent this limitation or the info from this post is inaccurate

PS: sonomamashine sonomamashine It would be great if you made threads from the source instead of using second hand info from clickbait sites
 
Last edited:
Neofire said:
So Microsoft could eat a loss but Sony can't? There is a reason why Sony didn't push for more CUs other then backwards compatibility and I think it has to do with hitting that 400 dollar price point.
Click to expand...
To play the devil's advocate, they spent quite a dough on I/O, SSD and audio. If it's tit-for-tat, then don't expect 399.
 
SonGoku said:
Ok after reading the blog post, the out of context 7.5GB quote makes more sense
Disclaimer: Im explaining the contents of the post. The accuracy of this info is unknown and would be great if people from the field would chime in

From what i understand he claims that memory from the fast & slow pool can't be accessed simultaneously i.e GPU (fast) & CPU (slow) can't access their respective pools simultaneously


He claims than in order to use the full bandwidth total memory use must remain within the 10GB limit including system memory (CPU)

In this config bandwidth would be distributed as follows:
6GB @560GB/s
4GB @224GB/s
6GB @336GB/S

Now we can better understand the out of context quote from the article

He comes to the conclusion that to get the best performance possible out of this configuration all data reads/writes must be limited to the 10GB pool
Now I don't think MS would have designed the system with this limitation just to advertise 560GB/s. They either designed a system (separate buses?) to circumvent this limitation or the info from this post is inaccurate
Click to expand...
So, is it either 'fill the faster 10GB first then go to the slower 6GB after that' or 'access both simultaneously but at average speed'? That's what I understood to make 'OS is using 2.5GB from faster pool' claim makes sense. If it's the first case, maybe XSX could copy OS to the the slower RAM to free faster RAM when it fills up.
 
Last edited:
sircaw said:
I agree, i have already stated in a couple of my posts that i think the new xbox will be more powerful than the ps5, i just think the ps5 is/will be a better designed unit.

In the end their both great, although very different.
Click to expand...

I mean every gen the weaker console tries to market itself as more balanced and better designed... I will take the raw power. Also, I don't think Sony having to clock the PS5 GPU so ridiculously high is more thought out or better designed.
 
Last edited:
ThatGuy707 said:
I mean every gen the weaker console tries to market itself as more balanced and better designed... Raw Power always wins out. Also, I don't think Sony having to clock the PS5 GPU so ridiculously high is more thought out or better designed.
Click to expand...
It's not, it's taking something which shouldn't be operating in said manner and pushing its limitations.
 
Orta said:
Why are excuses being made for Sony on a daily basis? Show the fucking thing and show some games instead of force feeding us this pandering bs praising its super secret powers.
Click to expand...
Sony have blockbusters coming for PS4 in April, May and June, why would they want to divert attention from those? If what they have to show is jaw dropping, they'll probably wait till July.
 
TheGreatYosh said:
So you're getting a PS5?
Click to expand...

Yeah. I'm fairly well ingrained into the Sony ecosystem, plus I'm not all that interested in speculation on specifications. They haven't mattered in the past and will make not 1 iota of a difference this coming gen. If it did, the Switch would be fucked.
 
Does anyone know how much ram the PS5's OS is reserving?

On the XSX, we've got 2.5GB reserved, so 16 - 2.5 = 13.5GB application ram.

On the PS5? Maybe the PS5's OS actually has its own pool..?
 
Neo Blaster said:
So, is it either 'fill the faster 10GB first then go to the slower 6GB after that' or 'access both simultaneously but at average speed'? That's what I understood to make 'OS is using 2.5GB from faster pool' claim makes sense. If it's the first case, maybe XSX could copy OS to the the slower RAM to free faster RAM when it fills up.
Click to expand...
Thought the same, keep most of the OS in the 6GB pool and only the critical functions that must run in the background on the 10GB pool
That would leave close to 10GB available for games at full 560GB/s but the problem is they'd be forced to share that 10GB with CPU. Meaning games would only have 10GB available, if they go over it bandwidth will incur a performance penalty (averaging 392 GB/s for the 10 GB portion and 168 GB/s for the 6 GB portion)


I'll repeat just in case: im merely making sense of the blog post, its contents could be entirely false or MS designed a workaround it.
 
MacReady13 said:
Yeah. I'm fairly well ingrained into the Sony ecosystem, plus I'm not all that interested in speculation on specifications. They haven't mattered in the past and will make not 1 iota of a difference this coming gen. If it did, the Switch would be fucked.
Click to expand...

Exactly. They have never failed to always have a stellar library of games.

Since its inception in 2006 Sony WWS have been a force in the gaming industry. MS finally sees this as they went on a spending spree for studios., now they just have to prove themselves.

I am as excited for PSVR2 as I am the PS5. VR is such a difference maker it feels like its a console by itself.
 
ShaDowDaNcA said:
PS5 exclusives won't be limited by parity with XSX.
The strengths of PS5 will be shown and put out better looking exclusives.
Click to expand...

So if PS5 underperforms vs XsX in multiplat games will it be blamed on XsX's SSD holding the game back? This PS5 storage bandwidth is just gonna magically enhance rendering power of the 36 CUs and RT by itself?

One page back:


Cult of FartNoise said:
There will be a group on either side that echos the same thing:

If PS5 wins it will be because of "poor optimization on XsX," if XsX wins it will be "because XsX's storage bandwidth held the game back," or similar nonsense
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Bumblebeetuna said:
Oh I see, you're just mistaken and putting words into people's mouths. Carry on.
Click to expand...

You said this was the 104th thread on the topic so of course that makes this info true. Clearly you were being sarcastic as to say this info is false. You were pretty clear there.
 
Ascend said:
"The SX has 2.5 GB reserved for system functions and we don't know how much the PS5 reserves for that similar functionality but it doesn't matter - the Xbox SX either has only 7.5 GB of interleaved memory operating at 560 GB/s for game utilisation before it has to start "lowering" the effective bandwidth of the memory below that of the PS5... or the SX has an averaged mixed memory bandwidth that is always below that of the baseline PS4. Either option puts the SX at a disadvantage to the PS5 for more memory intensive games and the latter puts it at a disadvantage all of the time. "

That's pure BS.
If this was actually said by developers, they could have clearly said whether the PS5 or the XSX has the larger memory pool reserved for the OS. They already have access to both after all, don't they? And if they don't their views are moot.
Where does that 7.5GB of interleaved memory operating at 560 GB/s come from? It was said from the start that the full 10GB of the fast RAM is available for games. The OS uses the slower RAM.
The averaged mixed memory bandwidth is another useless metric. If developers can't keep RAM usage below 10GB for fast stuff even with an SSD, they are simply doing a poor job.

This is yet another desperate hail mary attempt to try and redeem the weaker PS5. Even after all the mumbo jumbo, they are still saying that the XSX is 10% faster in practice. The PS5 is weaker. Live with it. And stop these retarded threads.
Click to expand...
That was going to be my exact point. If he didn't know PS5 OS size, nor that the XSX OS will be on the slower RAM pool as described by MS, then he aint no developer.
The push by Sony fans everywhere, from forums, to Sony Devs to Sony assets in the media like Schreier, to paint this picture of PS5 is just as powerful as XSX is amazing to watch.
 
tenor.gif
 
ThatGuy707 said:
I mean every gen the weaker console tries to market itself as more balanced and better designed... I will take the raw power. Also, I don't think Sony having to clock the PS5 GPU so ridiculously high is more thought out or better designed.
Click to expand...

That's why in my original post i did not mention cpu or gpu. (Look what they are doing with all the bandwith ,ssd, triggers, audio etc, )

As for the Gpu being ridiculously high, some one can correct me if i am wrong here but its the wafer that costs the most and microsofts is much bigger than sonys, hence costing so much more. Getting high speed out of a smaller gpu is a good thing for costs if the cooling system is up to scratch.

When i look at the microsoft approach i almost feel they could of pushed their gpu more if they had a better cooling solution.

I am not an expert on graphics cards for pcs but i image the pc graphics cards using rdn2 will go so much higher than the what we are seeing on consoles.

but if any of what i said does not seem right, please feel to correct it, i am always up for learning something new.
 
Fun Fanboy said:
It's more than flops that the new Xbox is better at. Almost the whole thing, every way you look at it it's stronger and faster. It will be ok.
Click to expand...
Except PS5 has the faster GPU clockspeed, the faster SSD and possibly less bottlenecks
 
Last edited:
sircaw said:
That's why in my original post i did not mention cpu or gpu. (Look what they are doing with all the bandwith ,ssd, triggers, audio etc, )

As for the Gpu being ridiculously high, some one can correct me if i am wrong here but its the wafer that costs the most and microsofts is much bigger than sonys, hence costing so much more. Getting high speed out of a smaller gpu is a good thing for costs if the cooling system is up to scratch.

When i look at the microsoft approach i almost feel they could of pushed their gpu more if they had a better cooling solution.

I am not an expert on graphics cards for pcs but i image the pc graphics cards using rdn2 will go so much higher than the what we are seeing on consoles.

but if any of what i said does not seem right, please feel to correct it, i am always up for learning something new.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't make sense to push the GPU with that bandwidth: only 10GB of fast memory for the GPU. And the bandwith can and will be reduced because of the slow 6GB that will slow down the high speed memory.
 
Hendrick's said:
So why are the PS5 features more interesting?
Click to expand...

Because people like shady corporation B over shady corporation A.

They like shady corporation B so much more that they are willing to put themselves in whatever mindset allows that shady corporation to be more interesting and superior to them.
 
Rightisright said:
That was going to be my exact point. If he didn't know PS5 OS size, nor that the XSX OS will be on the slower RAM pool as described by MS, then he aint no developer.
The push by Sony fans everywhere, from forums, to Sony Devs to Sony assets in the media like Schreier, to paint this picture of PS5 is just as powerful as XSX is amazing to watch.
Click to expand...

What if I told you the PS5 would be able to run games equally as well, but at a 13% reduced resolution?
 
sonomamashine said:
Don't you think Sony will do the same ? how fare MS is going to cut the price of their console, at the end of the day it's a business not a charity.
That's why i think it will be perf/$.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day Microsoft can give away their consoles and be fine. Sony will never be able to win a price war if Microsoft wants to win it.
 
The PS5 hardware seems like Sony is trying to create something very innovative after the rather safe PS4. This was out of necessity as they were on the verge of bankruptcy and had no room for error.

So the PS5 seems like they are stretching their wings again and trying to create a small revolution here. All Xbox fans can talk about it 'teraflops' which is a futile game and misses the wood for the trees.
 
Last edited:
mckmas8808 said:
What if I told you the PS5 would be able to run games equally as well, but at a 13% reduced resolution?
Click to expand...
Well they believe the 4tf Lockhart will run games as equally as SX, just at 1080p. But PS5 not allowed. Maybe it's weaker than the Lockhart.
 
Cult of FartNoise said:
So if PS5 underperforms vs XsX in multiplat games will it be blamed on XsX's SSD holding the game back? This PS5 storage bandwidth is just gonna magically enhance rendering power of the 36 CUs and RT by itself?

One page back:
Click to expand...
I think you are making a disingenuous post, 1st party games will always be more hardware specific and fully exploit the hw
To give you an example: 1st party SEX games can focus on asynchronous compute to more effectively fill the CUs and 1st party PS5 games can design their games around the faster SSD, It will be interesting to see how platform exclusive strengths translate in first party games
 
A lot of misinformation here, the xsx ram setup provides superior performance, otherwise ms could of gone for the same 448gb/s setup as the PS5.

The OP is basically is just someones speculation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hardware Unboxed - FSR4 is even better at 4K
Analysis  2
76
3K
winjer replied
Forza Horizon 5 | PlayStation 5 Review Thread
Analysis Review  2
82
563
DeepEnigma replied
There will be no GeForce RTX 5060 analysis/reviews for launch on May 19, 2025
News Hardware 
0
46
Draugoth replied
HELP!!! Need Information on the Fujitsu MB8696/MB9696S GPU
Analysis Retro Hardware 
0
369
thicc_girls_are_teh_best replied
PlayStation 5 Pro Unboxed, 16.7 TFLOPs GPU Compute Confirmed
Hardware  3 4 5 6 7
328
24K
Gaiff replied
Top Bottom