Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation launch thread |OT5| - It's in RDNA
- Thread starter Mecha Meister
- Start date
- OT
- Status
This now seems like a very narrow min-max/9.7-10.7 TF range...?
PS4Pro is 325mm²-ish. PS4 Slim is around 225 to 230mm², IIRC.
X has two extra memory interfaces that take up quite a lot of space (15mm²-ish), besides the extra CUs + RBs (12mm²-ish). There's also probably some difference to some of the support silicon and layout optimization.
Die shot comparison.
Last edited:
nofunallowed.jpeg
Essentially, all electrical power consumed is transferred to heat, light and kinetic energy (e.g. fan rotation). For a computing chip TDP can be taken as the peak power consumption assuming all that power is transferred to heat (which is mostly true).
Edit: Beaten like a piniata
Ledbetter did say he's heard lots of skepitcsm from devs about the lower end SKU. But like....how do you spend all that time and money and not consult with any third party devs? That sounds crazy, and to be frank a mistake
That really does sound like a mistake, iirc according to cerny, they already visited developers on next gen at late 2014 or early 2015.
Your numbers make more sense.
They even show ps4 OG at 348mm^2.
Bullshit. There's genius in all of these machines if you aren't too blinded by platform loyalty to see it. How much additional performance would an additional year and an additional $100 on the price be expected to deliver? What amount of additional performance for the X vs the Pro short of this would be a disappointment? What amount exceeding the baseline expectation would be considered a "genius" level achievement? Think on whether you are at all qualified, based on the amount of technical knowledge you possess, to set those benchmarks and perform that evaluation.
It shouldn't be a huge secret that some third party devs dont want to develop for a second hardware profile. Devs make more money by having to do less work. Devs expressing their desire to make a little more money is expected. But MS isnt building Lockhart for devs, it's building it to serve a spot in the market.
I have a very hard time believing they didn't consult with devs earlier on. I think it's more likely they knew they were down on it but took a gamble that once they saw they final machine they'd be okay with it, and evidently they weren't. Still a gamble but it would make more sense than just flubbing that badly.
It is an excellently designed system, it can put out at 4k, it's small, it's silent, it's stylish. Tell me what's so miraculous about its design without using the word vapour chamber which somehow people became convinced was some sort of exotic custom tech. Hovis method is very innovative, but really it's relevance is in chip yields and power draw
I agree it is hard to believe but that is what Phil clearly says in the video I posted earlier. They started to talk to third-party devs about the platform 9 months ago.
Spend an extra couple bucks on some duct tape and use the PS5 as the Apple monitor stand ;)
Anyways, does anyone else think it may be a bit premature to conclude Lockhart is no longer in the plans? I mean it very well could be gone, but I don't think we've seen anything conclusive or heard from any reliable sources yet to dismiss it. Microsoft are being tight-lipped about the question of multiple consoles when asked, so I think it might be a good idea to assume it's still coming until we get better info.
I agree. I am just talking based on what the general consensus had been. It was that Ana would be $500, PS5 $399 and lock $299. And even back then when that was what most seemed to have been thinking I was insisting that I believe Ana would be the same price with the PS5 and that MS can't put the PS5 in a position where they seem the most balanced and best buy by default. Which is why I also said that's not how I would do it.
Then again, this may all just be MS holding their cards close to their chest and we still get a lock. Cause they can basically make a 32CU lock clocked at 1600mhz......
That is what I hear Phil say in the video I posted earlier starting at 25:55. Everything he says after this is also interesting and detailed too.
Yeah, that just doesn't make sense. Is it really possible that MS would just set off on development of Scarlett, simply assuming that they knew exactly what the devs would want? I mean, I can see how the path for this generation might be a little more obvious when it's so similar to the current one, but Christ.
I question better, at least as an unqualified statement. From a development standpoint you received a target that required more work to get optimal results from and was more restrictive in what you could do given that you had less memory to work with, to realize the benefit of the Pro design you had to re-write shaders to use fp16 (which only benefitted that specific SKU on the console side and a maybe very small percentage of PC users), and had to use the specific reconstruction technique enabled by the hardware, even if another technique mapped better to your engine. This doesn't make the design chosen a worse one either when you take everything into account, but like almost every other design decision made when designing a console there are pros and cons to the choices that were made.
As for why the One X SoC is bigger, that's obvious, more CUs and a wider memory bus.
That's not exactly what you said in the post I quoted. You dismissed the XBone X's power advantage as being down to, again, just having the benefit of time and money. As in my response to console lover, I think most of us are highly unqualified to make that type of judgment.
That the X proves that MS's engineers are better is not an argument I would make or support.
Fair. I guess making it necessary instead of optional did push development forward.
He said around fall so that'll be two years of heads up. Doesn't seem crazy to me at all
My phone contract is £35 a month for 2 years. Gives me the phone and the service. Back of a napkin calculations mean Sony could sell me a brand new PS5, bundled with PS+ and some kind of PS Now/Games pass style service for £30 to £35 a month for two years. I'd have the console and online play and tons of games to play with no big up front free. £30-ish a month basically gives Sony £15 a month for those services and £15 towards the console (£400/$499) or any particular split for them that works. The services obviously make a lot of profit and they have me locked in for years spending more money. I hope they do this.
Also how big of a PR win would it be to instead of first announcing a big ticket price, they can come out with "Only $39/€39/£30 a month*" (* based on 2 year contract, own the console after contract period is up).
Edit: For an entry price like that I honestly think they could sell more consoles at launch than ever, it would be a no brainier for many of those who put off buying a console in the first year or so due to the big up front cost.
I agree for a midgen target the RPM FP16 was probably too much work for dev to be useful, the ID buffer was a good idea...
Isn't this the thing Sony used to do with their consoles that Cerny said absolutely drove devs nuts?
The thing about subsidisation purchases is for phones its different — there are entire retail chains set up for the handling of legal requirements, finance requirements, processes for non-payments etc. They specialise in that and have all aspects of that down.
A lot of stores however sell Playstations and Xboxes, but how many of them are prepared for the overhead of suddenly managing that part of the business? How many of them would even want to add that risk to their books? Whats in it for them vs seeing stock at cost and getting their money back immediately on sale? Sony and MS could do it directly, but again why add the risk to the books when people are buying the hardware and paying upfront already?
A lot of stores however sell Playstations and Xboxes, but how many of them are prepared for the overhead of suddenly managing that part of the business? How many of them would even want to add that risk to their books? Whats in it for them vs seeing stock at cost and getting their money back immediately on sale? Sony and MS could do it directly, but again why add the risk to the books when people are buying the hardware and paying upfront already?
Ya know I was gonna ask about this a few days ago but I thought otherwise because I figured Microsoft just did the same thing Cerny did and do a dev tour at the start when planning the next gen console. It does seem odd they'd wait so long though, maybe they at least sent a survey to third party devs to find out what they want? I dunno...
True, but I think it's just more about getting a larger sample size to better prioritize the desires of as many devs as possible that will be making games on your platform.
My guess they started to talk to devs last year what their plan is. Like Cerny said when they unveiled PS4, they traveled to developers and asked what they wanted but never mentioned the console itself. What they were doing etc. i'm sure MS have done the same
First party devs have different goals than 3rd party. Also at least one less platform to develop for.
6TF, 12GB GDDR5 with 326 GB/s of memory bandwidth in a console smaller than the Pro isn't something that can just be waved away as expected because "time + money". Miraculous? Not the word I would use. Impressive? I find it so. I think people forget that when that spec was annouced, many thought it was fake or some kind of trick. And, TBH, I see Sony fanboys using the vapor chamber cooling (not calling you a fanboy here) to dismiss the Xbox One X's performance advantage far more than I see any Xbox fanboys using it as some sort of crown jewel of technical achievement.
Those two things directly effect the final clocks chosen for the device which significantly effects the final performance of the device. I'm baffled why you don't see this as important.
Like I said, "as far as I'm concerned", partly for the reasons that I got into later regarding pushing the concept in the industry, as well as me just thinking checkerboard is a smarter way to go about things. It would be nice if future hardware enables more techniques, though, and I agree that in the short term, the X is easier for devs to use.
Only 4 more CUs that are something like 15% smaller, which is why I was confused. The bus makes more sense.
Well, I do think that the majority of it was time and money (mature node, more CUs, more expensive cooling, more memory, larger bus). The Hovis Method is the one exception I know of, which I neglected to mention, mainly because it's a single innovation that doesn't make the X a masterful work of engineering genius. The poster I was actually replying to outright said "the X is an engineering wonder and the Pro isn't" and that the PS5 being stronger than Scarlett therefore made no sense, which is what I was arguing against, because it trivialises developers' efforts much more than what you're arguing with me about.
Neither would I. Nice to have common ground.
My thoughts exactly. I even wonder if this was a much bigger part of the Pro's design than we know. Given how they turned out, I can easily imagine an explanation that while Xbox had a short-term goal of making an impressive, powerful console to regain mind share and positivity around their brand, PlayStation had a longer-term goal of using this mid-gen 4K console concept as both a test bed and a driver of certain technological innovations that they thought would be important for the next generation proper. It makes me wonder if the Pro will be looked back on more fondly if this plan is a success.
Some good content here on TSMC's 7nm process.
This talks about identifying yield issues and fixing them. This is important because Sony/MS can apply things learned on Navi and Zen 2 by virtue of debuting next year.
More importantly, there is a 2nd generation 7nm process that has a 5% performance gain with the exact same design rules and toolset (no EUV). This is not 7nm+ EUV or 6nm. I see no reason consoles wouldn't benefit from these enhancements.
What's important here is that the y-delta is bigger than 5% once you get past the mid-point on the x-axis. That is, if you maintain the same speed, you'll get back more than 5% in power. 5% on a 180W GPU would be a total of 8W. David Schor confirmed this is available now. The question is whether Navi and/or Zen 2 already use it.
This talks about identifying yield issues and fixing them. This is important because Sony/MS can apply things learned on Navi and Zen 2 by virtue of debuting next year.
More importantly, there is a 2nd generation 7nm process that has a 5% performance gain with the exact same design rules and toolset (no EUV). This is not 7nm+ EUV or 6nm. I see no reason consoles wouldn't benefit from these enhancements.
What's important here is that the y-delta is bigger than 5% once you get past the mid-point on the x-axis. That is, if you maintain the same speed, you'll get back more than 5% in power. 5% on a 180W GPU would be a total of 8W. David Schor confirmed this is available now. The question is whether Navi and/or Zen 2 already use it.
Last edited:
And they use third party tools. And have staff that have worked at third parties.
they are not talking off the knowledge of next gen consoles. they are guessing their ballpark based off the navi information.
- Status