-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation launch thread - MY ANACONDA DON'T WANT NONE
- Thread starter Phoenix Splash
- Start date
- Status
It's kind of funny how it's always just this small part of the "Epsilon" document that's being posted. Probably because the full document doesn't look so good:
"gaming plataform"
"High Dinamic Range"
"Stably rotating games at 60 frames per second"
Idk, looks a bit fishy.
You don't say...LOL
If these are the actual PS5 specs I'll eat my hat.It's kind of funny how it's always just this small part of the "Epsilon" document that's being posted. Probably because the full document doesn't look so good:
"gaming plataform"
"High Dinamic Range"
"Stably rotating games at 60 frames per second"
Idk, looks a bit fishy.
60CU @ 1.85Ghz gives you 14.2 Tflops. ;p
Nope, not the full Navi 20 one. An RX 3080 is 15% faster that a Vega 64 which is a 12.6tflops GPU. That gives us a 14 tflops GPU.
If you dont want to treat the 15% extra performance as an increase to tflops, you can go to the next GPU on the list; The Navi 10 SE. With 8 additional CUs, you should get the 14+ tflops figure at 180W. The 6 Tflops RX 580 was also 180W and yet MS managed to put a 6 tflops APU in the X1X anyway.
The GPUs listed below are not APUs but Desktop GPUs. Their TDPs tend to be much higher than the APUs in console since they include the power usage by VRAM (for all we know these GPUs can have 12GB of GDDR6) and other parts on the card.
That's actually not a bad theory. Seems weird how some parts are perfectly fine, and then someone made these mistakes which could have been prevented by running spell check once.
And companies are really doing stuff like this:
This here also seems interesting. The guy who took this picture put a piece of paper on the QR (?) code. But... what if those lines on the left side are not random?
All the while I remain safe in my 12TF camp. Maybe at the end of the day we end up being the only right ones. Not too optimistic and not too pessimistic.
Interesting.
Maybe it was originally 8TF but Sony changed it to 14TF because of the controversy that 8TF had circling it, I mean let's be real, ever since the original Gonzalo leak revealing the 8TF most fellow speculators all over the internet hated the idea of the next generation PlayStation console only having just double the TF of the Pro, hell even users on ERA have expressed their distaste of 8TF (like you and me) and with even google themselves boasting how their 10.7TF horsepower dwarfs the current gen consoles and even taunts the 8TF rumour, it's a marketing embarrassment, in fact when the PS5's TF are eventually revealed people will judge it harshly if it's 8TF after all.
Maybe Sony asked AMD to beaf up the Gonzalo's clock speeds to achieve a more desirable number that fans will be happy for, to prevent that marketing nightmare that could potentially ensue.
Hi all,
Something that has been playing in my mind regarding the various power targets, and thought I would get your perspective, as I am not as tech savvy as many here.
I understand the benefits the stronger CPU will bring, however from a developers point of you, what would be the better outcome, more Tflops, or more RAM?
E.g
10Tf console, with 32GB RAM with SSD
or
14Tf console with 16GB RAM with SSD
If I were to look at a city in an open world game, would it be better to have 32gb, have much higher res textures loaded and much more of the city and map loaded to eliminate LOD and streaming of assets, and the fake fog in the distance hiding low res textures.
With SSD's being as fast as Cerny claims in the next console, loading the highly detailed area could be quite fast to get the game started, and then in the background the rest of the game map, or as much as needs to be is loaded over the next 20-30 secs, or whatever that takes. Would this would get rid of load times entering/exiting buildings and many other streaming and pop-in issues we currently see?
This is probably not how game development works, but what would be the benefit for the extra teraflops versus the extra ram, outside of ray tracing and post processing?
Something that has been playing in my mind regarding the various power targets, and thought I would get your perspective, as I am not as tech savvy as many here.
I understand the benefits the stronger CPU will bring, however from a developers point of you, what would be the better outcome, more Tflops, or more RAM?
E.g
10Tf console, with 32GB RAM with SSD
or
14Tf console with 16GB RAM with SSD
If I were to look at a city in an open world game, would it be better to have 32gb, have much higher res textures loaded and much more of the city and map loaded to eliminate LOD and streaming of assets, and the fake fog in the distance hiding low res textures.
With SSD's being as fast as Cerny claims in the next console, loading the highly detailed area could be quite fast to get the game started, and then in the background the rest of the game map, or as much as needs to be is loaded over the next 20-30 secs, or whatever that takes. Would this would get rid of load times entering/exiting buildings and many other streaming and pop-in issues we currently see?
This is probably not how game development works, but what would be the benefit for the extra teraflops versus the extra ram, outside of ray tracing and post processing?
You're right, Sony begged AMD for a clock speed increase after reading some video game forums. It couldn't possibly be because Gonzalo was still in heavy development and prototyping stage.
Or the first Gonzolo benchmark was for the 8 tflops Lockheart and not the PS5 like we all originally thought.
14 tflops with 16GB and SSD should be fine.
If the SSD speed rumors are true, they will have speeds of 8 GB/s. You can fill up 16GB of RAM in 2 seconds. thats more than enough even for an open world next gen game.
I am fine 12 tflops if they use the extra space on the die to add RTX cores.
It's kind of funny how it's always just this small part of the "Epsilon" document that's being posted. Probably because the full document doesn't look so good:
"gaming plataform"
"High Dinamic Range"
"Stably rotating games at 60 frames per second"
Idk, looks a bit fishy.
Bad spelling aside, a lot of it is actually accurate lol, but most of that could be guessed by anyone here.
But still, a lot of it is accurate. lol
Also means they are using a 64CU GPU which probably isn't much bigger in size than the 56CU GPU which will no doubt be a 60CU GPU with 4 CUs disabled. The issue with that though is the power draw, only way I see them getting it down to any acceptable levels by downclocking it from 1.8Ghz to around 1680Mhz. Which brings it down to around 13TF. The all round cheaper option will be going with the 56CU GPU and downclocking that to 1680Mhz and ending with 12TF.60CU @ 1.85Ghz gives you 14.2 Tflops. ;p
Nope, not the full Navi 20 one. An RX 3080 is 15% faster that a Vega 64 which is a 12.6tflops GPU. That gives us a 14 tflops GPU.
If you dont want to treat the 15% extra performance as an increase to tflops, you can go to the next GPU on the list; The Navi 10 SE. With 8 additional CUs, you should get the 14+ tflops figure at 180W. The 6 Tflops RX 580 was also 180W and yet MS managed to put a 6 tflops APU in the X1X anyway.
The GPUs listed below are not APUs but Desktop GPUs. Their TDPs tend to be much higher than the APUs in console since they include the power usage by VRAM (for all we know these GPUs can have 12GB of GDDR6) and other parts on the card.
It's definitely a more realistic camp than 14TF, personally I'd be completely satisfied with anything in the double digits.
10TF is such a boring prediction though. It's bang in the middle of the Flat Earth <-> Jesus Planet spectrum. :P
In fact 10TF is less than Stadia. Sorry my dude but I'm not joining your team! :p
or that too, hehe.
well that's another way to put it LOL
SemiAccurate won't put this pdf behind a $1000 paywall if it wasn't well sourced. Why would they open themselves to litigation like that.
This was the quickest flop we did.few hours back we were at 8 and now we r back at 14 haha
That's true, but I find it hard to imagine that Phil Harrison will get to add PS5 to his slide of consoles that Stadia is more powerful than (on paper in titty flips)
I'm still in the 12-13TF camp, same as Bethesda. :p
This is how I see it too. Subscription services are the real money maker now. XBOX Live/Gamepass and PS+/PSNow gives a large incentive to build and maintain their respective audiences. Then on top of that throw in the 30% cut off of Digital sales/DLC/Lootcrate/Battlepasses.
Fortnite revenue alone in 2018 was 2.4 billion. How much was generated on the PS4 or Xbox platforms? Lets make up some numbers and say 1/4 of the revenue was from the PS4. That's potentially $600 million and Sony took their 30%(maybe less if they have a deal with Epic) which would be potentially $180 million. (feel free to punch holes in my numbers). Maybe Sony takes only 15-20% or they are 1/3 of the revenue userbase. Either way it's another revenue stream to help offset the hardware loss. And sony doesn't even charge for online in this scenario.
Both Manufacturer have taken a large loss on hardware in the past and it's important for them from a console launch perspective to build a userbase quickly and more importantly momentum.
Also, Sony and to a lesser extent Microsoft, have not have the same price drops they have had in the past. Sony has maintained their PS4 pricing and has only offered the PS4 for $199 during the last 2 Black Fridays. For the next gen systems, It may take a while to get to hardware profitability but once they do, they won't be passing the saving to customers quickly.
Lastly, users subscribe to Sony or MS represent other potential avenues to generate revenue. Because they have a captive audience, they can continue to explore other services like Sony's PSVue or the Movie sales. This potential is why I believe Microsoft continues the Xbox brand. Apple, Spotify, Netflix, Hulu, Google, etc all have their own version of a walled garden and these companies are always looking to expand. Given the amount of Console warring/evangelizing gamers do, they know they have a captive audience that is willing to listen to when a new service is brought forth.
Honestly as long as it's more than Stadia then I'm more than satisfied and consider it a generational leap, anything more is icing to an already delicious cake.
Let us pretend for a moment your interpretation of the performance column of the above table made by AdoredTV is right - just to make the case. You would need 2280 Mhz clock speed to reach those 14TF (or Vega 64 + 15%) with the 48CUs in the table. Is this really sounding realistic to you? I am talking just PC now not even console!
- The AdoredTv leaked Navi GPU performance chart from last week also gives us 14 tflops for RX 3080 which is something we can expect in a console APU. Vega 64 is a 12.5 tflops console. An Additional 15% would give us 14 tflops. The Special Edition Navi 10 gives us 14 tflops too if you dont want to include the +15% performance improvements directly to the Tflops number.
Some already tried to tell you that you misinterpreting that column completely. Those performance numbers don't reference the synthetic peak performance in TF. That column references to the expected performance in games compared to a current GPU's performance profile.
And if that crazy clock doesn't convince you then it should be the fact that they compare Navi 20, which is a 4096 stream processors GPU, to the RTX 2080, which is a 2944 stream processor GPU. The RTX 2080 runs at 1710 MHz that is 10TF of synthetic peak performance. Navi 20 would end up 20% higher which is 12TF. So you want to tell us the top of the line Navi card is 12TF but the 48CU part is 14TF ???? Does that makes sense? No, it doesn't.
Navi is made to perform better in games with the same or less synthetic peak performance and a lower power consumption than its current AMD counterparts. Expect a 6TF Navi would beat a 6TF Polaris by about 10% to 15% at the same peak performance (at the same teraflops).
In theory this means to reach the levels of performance in games of a Xbox One X you actually would need just over 5TF with a NAVI GPU in it. Or in the sense of my prediction, you will get >10TF todays performance by a Navi GPU with 9TF performance. It would also fit to what Jason Schreier expected if we change the subject away from the raw TF number to the actual game performance.
Joke post? I remember the last claim the PS5 could even launch in 2018 but 2019 latest. This type of well sourced information?
Jason Schreier already debunked that Epsilon "leak".
https://www.resetera.com/threads/se...read-summary-in-op.33810/page-59#post-6623491
https://www.resetera.com/threads/se...read-summary-in-op.33810/page-59#post-6623491
From Digital Foundry's latest video on the Gonzolo rumors:
.
Now I have a question about this particular image.
Is it safe to rule out the first compute unit prediction due to the fact that the PS4 Pro was 36 CU's and that the PS5 will be an improvement to the PS4 Pro's CU?
Klobrille - Rumor: Xbox two SKU strategy
A Navi GPU with 10TF will be better than a Vega GPU with 10.7TF in game performance judging from the AdoredTV table. So yes, 10TF could be exactly that what Jason Schreier was told to expect. The only thing you need to do to change subject from a synthetical peak performance number to the expected performance profile in games.
One of the rare instances you were beaten in breaking news ;)
I wouldn't rule that out. I'd say 36 or 44 cu are more likely than anything else.
Woah everyone's replying to this, what's happening guys?
Is he credible?
So what could the black bar behind the SSD mean: Speed or a second HDD. I bet the info behind the bar is the speed.
- Status