Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation launch thread |OT5| - It's in RDNA

What do you think could be the memory setup of your preferred console, or one of the new consoles?


  • Total voters
    1,379
Status
Not open for further replies.

AegonSnake

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,626
I asked ths before and you conveniently ignored it so I wil ask it again.

Has it occurred to you that waiting till 2020 was the only way they could get to sell a system like what the PS5 is shaping out to be for $499?

Has it crossed your mind that $499 is what they get when they give the current gen a year extra so prices can go down a bit more on next-gen components?
Maybe they delayed it for 7nm EUV.

Spinning bird kick redeemed.
 

VX1

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,018
Europe
I asked ths before and you conveniently ignored it so I wil ask it again.

Has it occurred to you that waiting till 2020 was the only way they could get to sell a system like what the PS5 is shaping out to be for $499?

Has it crossed your mind that $499 is what they get when they give the current gen a year extra so prices can go down a bit more on next-gen components?
Of course that's possible.But i just don't think it's likely.Remains to be seen.
 

BitsandBytes

Member
Dec 16, 2017
2,502
Maybe they delayed it for 7nm EUV.

Spinning bird kick redeemed.
Unless I completely misunderstand how these things work:

1, 7nm EUV would mean a brand new design
2, Would be impossible to achieve in 1 additional year

I asked ths before and you conveniently ignored it so I wil ask it again.

Has it occurred to you that waiting till 2020 was the only way they could get to sell a system like what the PS5 is shaping out to be for $499?

Has it crossed your mind that $499 is what they get when they give the current gen a year extra so prices can go down a bit more on next-gen components
Wouldn't this suggest that Sony were planning a $600+ BOM system to sell for $500? I seriously doubt that.
 

Metalane

Member
Jun 30, 2019
353
Massachusetts, USA
wasnt there a theory going around that the actual SSD would be smaller than 1TB and an actual HDD would be used for storing game data?

More so since the mention of using the SSD as "virtual ram" instead of just noting larger storage?

IDK why i can see bullet points where it shows off the size of the SSD and speed and then an additional option of how much Hard Drive space is available, like 1tb or 2tb.
Yea to me it looks like what ever Gonzalo is , it's minimum 5700xt level or stronger and let's not forget those Gonzalo results are for engineering samples.final versions most probably will improve even further
So like 15-16 Vega FLOPS?
 

Snakeeee

Member
Jan 20, 2019
1,307
Unless I completely misunderstand how these things work:

1, 7nm EUV would mean a brand new design
2, Would be impossible to achieve in 1 additional year



Wouldn't this suggest that Sony were planning a $600+ BOM system to sell for $500? I seriously doubt that.
That might be why they delayed from 2019 to 2020? Maybe, if the rumor is in fact true.
 

BitsandBytes

Member
Dec 16, 2017
2,502
That might be why they delayed from 2019 to 2020? Maybe, if the rumor is in fact true.
I'm suggesting Sony would never have even been designing the console to that high a cost in the first place.

Also the design and price target decisions would've been made back in 2015/16 when work on next-gen started as I'm sure Albert has explained previously?
 

Snakeeee

Member
Jan 20, 2019
1,307
I'm suggesting Sony would never have even been designing the console to that high a cost in the first place.

Also the design and price target decisions would've been made back in 2015/16 when work on next-gen started as I'm sure Albert has explained previously?
Sure, but peopel were saying that the Navi had a lot of problems and that might be why they delayed or they just had soo much sucess with the ps4 that they decided to delayed the ps5 because of that.
 

Gamer17

Member
Oct 30, 2017
5,425
Ya all these performance multipliers and different architectures are confusing me. I’m still hoping for around 2080 level performance. That would probably be huge jump from the PS4/XB1 GPU’s anyway.
I feel we fall between 2070 and 2080. I LL be pleasantly surprised if we hit above 2080 as that's a 800$ gpu releasing this year
 

BitsandBytes

Member
Dec 16, 2017
2,502
Sure, but peopel were saying that the Navi had a lot of problems and that might be why they delayed or they just had soo much sucess with the ps4 that they decided to delayed the ps5 because of that.
I guess it is possible but if Gonzalo really is PS5 then it seemed to be going fine with those Jan/Apr ES/QS chips and I doubt Sony would choose to delay a year just because PS4 was doing better than expected. Especially because it puts them releasing the same time as the direct competition and will allow a full year on the market for new competition in Stadia.

Then again maybe 2019 release was never the plan in the first place ergo there has been no delay. We'll likely never know now.
 

Gamer17

Member
Oct 30, 2017
5,425
So say it’s in between a 2070 and a 2080 (non-super) do you think it would an 8-10x (similar to PS3-PS4) increase over the base PS4? I still don’t know how to calculate GPU power that well.
No, more like 7 to 7.5 time base PS4 not around 9 or 10. But just look what naughty dog is doing with last of us part 2 on 1.8 TF machine as base. Now imagine what they would do with a cpu 400% stonger and gpu about 7.5 time as powerful mixed with ultra fats SSD and 20 gb of ram for games . They will melt our eyes hehe
 

AegonSnake

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,626
Unless I completely misunderstand how these things work:

1, 7nm EUV would mean a brand new design
2, Would be impossible to achieve in 1 additional year
it would seem they did do a redesign.

there were rumors of a 2019 launch back in 2018. MS was certain they were going with an 8 tflops GPU. Panello was at MS back then and was sure the PS5 was 8 tflops.

Then something changed. Console seemed to have been delayed to 2020. Now Sony somehow has the more powerful console. 7nm EUV should give a 10-15% reduction in die size allowing them to push clockspeeds higher. its a likely explanation for this sudden shift in tflops wars.

Or MS was always using 7nm EUV as well since they were always targetting holiday 2020 and thats why Phil was so sure of xbox being more powerful. Then Sony saw that and said might as well go with 7nm EUV as well.

Lastly, RDNA2 cards are on 7nm+. We know RDNA2 cards will have RT. We know consoles have RT. Makes sense consoles will be on 7nm+ just like RDNA2 cards which were always designed with EUV/7nm+ in mind.

 

Metalane

Member
Jun 30, 2019
353
Massachusetts, USA
No, more like 7 to 7.5 time base PS4 not around 9 or 10. But just look what naughty dog is doing with last of us part 2 on 1.8 TF machine as base. Now imagine what they would do with a cpu 400% stonger and gpu about 7.5 time as powerful mixed with ultra fats SSD and 20 gb of ram for games . They will melt our eyes hehe
Ya, it’s gonna be crazy. I was just asking because each generation the leap in GPU power gets smaller. I was hoping that maybe this gen could break that trend.
 

dgrdsv

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,546
Msk / SPb, Russia
But then an SSD data cache will require data copied between the two storage devices by definition... so how is that any better?

So if it's big SSD it's basically that and no external option at all?
It's better because it can be unified and transparent for all storage sources, external or internal (or even network maybe?)

If there will be one big SSD and the system will require for a game to remain on this SSD to be ran then you will have to copy a game from external HDD to SSD. The details of how exactly this will be handled can be wildly different of course. But assuming that the system itself doesn't copy anything anywhere when running a game off its SSD would mean that the user will have to perform some actions to make a game stored on external HDD playable off the system's SSD. So it likely won't be completely transparent.
 

Metalane

Member
Jun 30, 2019
353
Massachusetts, USA
better to just look at Polaris flops to do a much more accurate comparison to current gen and mid gen GPUs.

Navi seems to be 40% more efficient than Polaris per flop. So 10 tflops Navi is 14 tflops Polaris or ~2.5x X1X and ~3.5x Pro.
Doesn’t the difference in architecture matter when comparing performance to older cards as well? Each PlayStation generation had a different architecture for each GPU.

Edit: Sorry if I’m not making much sense I’m just trying to compare this GPU leap to other generations.
 

AegonSnake

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,626
No, more like 7 to 7.5 time base PS4 not around 9 or 10. But just look what naughty dog is doing with last of us part 2 on 1.8 TF machine as base. Now imagine what they would do with a cpu 400% stonger and gpu about 7.5 time as powerful mixed with ultra fats SSD and 20 gb of ram for games . They will melt our eyes hehe
i know this is just a cutscene but this is the most insane thing ive seen this gen.

Doesn’t the difference in architecture matter when comparing performance to older cards as well? Each PlayStation generation had a different architecture for each GPU.
it does matter which is precisely why we are saying 10 Navi Tflops are equivalent to 14 polaris tflops.
 

Metalane

Member
Jun 30, 2019
353
Massachusetts, USA
i know this is just a cutscene but this is the most insane thing ive seen this gen.



it does matter which is precisely why we are saying 10 Navi Tflops are equivalent to 14 polaris tflops.
Yes, but comparing FLOP count isn’t apples to apples.

The PS3 for example had a 230 GFLOP GPU.

The PS4 had a 1.8 TFLOP GPU.

Each architecture has its own “equivalent” to another. So numerically that was an 8x fold increase. So, would a 14.2 TFLOP Polaris GPU still be an 8x over a GCN card?
 
Last edited:

anexanhume

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,298
it would seem they did do a redesign.

there were rumors of a 2019 launch back in 2018. MS was certain they were going with an 8 tflops GPU. Panello was at MS back then and was sure the PS5 was 8 tflops.

Then something changed. Console seemed to have been delayed to 2020. Now Sony somehow has the more powerful console. 7nm EUV should give a 10-15% reduction in die size allowing them to push clockspeeds higher. its a likely explanation for this sudden shift in tflops wars.

Or MS was always using 7nm EUV as well since they were always targetting holiday 2020 and thats why Phil was so sure of xbox being more powerful. Then Sony saw that and said might as well go with 7nm EUV as well.

Lastly, RDNA2 cards are on 7nm+. We know RDNA2 cards will have RT. We know consoles have RT. Makes sense consoles will be on 7nm+ just like RDNA2 cards which were always designed with EUV/7nm+ in mind.

Devil’s advocate:

Chiplet Zen 2 on 7nm with GPU + IO on 7nm EUV.

FWIW, I think consoles will be monolithic 7nm DUV 2nd gen.
 

Snakeeee

Member
Jan 20, 2019
1,307
Yes, but comparing FLOP counting isn’t apples to apples.

The PS3 for example had a 230 GFLOP GPU.

The PS4 had a 1.8 TFLOP GPU.

Each architecture has its own “equivalent” to another. So numerically that was an 8x fold increase. So, would a 14.2 TFLOP Polaris GPU still be an 8x over a GCN card?
If we use the 1.8TF of the base ps4 and if 14 TF is indeed the range, that whould be around 7x.
 

sncvsrtoip

Member
Apr 18, 2019
647
Yes, but comparing FLOP counting isn’t apples to apples.

The PS3 for example had a 230 GFLOP GPU.

The PS4 had a 1.8 TFLOP GPU.

Each architecture has its own “equivalent” to another. So numerically that was an 8x fold increase. So, would a 14.2 TFLOP Polaris GPU still be an 8x over a GCN card?
230 gflop has cell, rsx (ps3 gpu) has 192gflops with very old architecture (before unified shader), so the jump to 1.84tf modern gpu was huge.
 

AegonSnake

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,626
Yes, but comparing FLOP counting isn’t apples to apples.

The PS3 for example had a 230 GFLOP GPU.

The PS4 had a 1.8 TFLOP GPU.

Each architecture has its own “equivalent” to another. So numerically that was an 8x fold increase. So, would a 14.2 TFLOP Polaris GPU still be an 8x over a GCN card?
Polaris is GCN.

I dont know how efficient polaris was compared to the base PS4 GCN GPU which is why i gave you the comparison to the Pro and X1X which were both based on Polaris GPU.

To reiterate, Navi tflops offer 40% better performance compared to Polaris. Since Pro and X1X are polaris, we can assume a 10 tflops Navi GPU in a next gen console would offer 14 Polaris tflops performance. Thats 2.5x x1x and 3.5x over the Pro.
 

BitsandBytes

Member
Dec 16, 2017
2,502
it would seem they did do a redesign.

there were rumors of a 2019 launch back in 2018. MS was certain they were going with an 8 tflops GPU. Panello was at MS back then and was sure the PS5 was 8 tflops.

Then something changed. Console seemed to have been delayed to 2020. Now Sony somehow has the more powerful console. 7nm EUV should give a 10-15% reduction in die size allowing them to push clockspeeds higher. its a likely explanation for this sudden shift in tflops wars.

Or MS was always using 7nm EUV as well since they were always targetting holiday 2020 and thats why Phil was so sure of xbox being more powerful. Then Sony saw that and said might as well go with 7nm EUV as well.

Lastly, RDNA2 cards are on 7nm+. We know RDNA2 cards will have RT. We know consoles have RT. Makes sense consoles will be on 7nm+ just like RDNA2 cards which were always designed with EUV/7nm+ in mind.


Unless/until one of ZhugeEX, Matt or Jason say otherwise I can't believe there has been any redesign.
 

Metalane

Member
Jun 30, 2019
353
Massachusetts, USA
Polaris is GCN.

I dont know how efficient polaris was compared to the base PS4 GCN GPU which is why i gave you the comparison to the Pro and X1X which were both based on Polaris GPU.

To reiterate, Navi tflops offer 40% better performance compared to Polaris. Since Pro and X1X are polaris, we can assume a 10 tflops Navi GPU in a next gen console would offer 14 Polaris tflops performance. Thats 2.5x x1x and 3.5x over the Pro.
Sorry, I was being an idiot. I should’ve done my research.

That sounds good still. I was worried that with a slowdown in GPU progress we would be in trouble, but it looks to be pretty steady.
 

Metalane

Member
Jun 30, 2019
353
Massachusetts, USA
The PS4 and XB1 GPU’s were GCN based. The next gen consoles are part of a new architecture known as RDNA. So from what I understand the RDNA arch has a 1.25-1.4x performance multiplier over GCN. An example would be a 10 RDNA TFLOP card having equal performance to a 12.5-14 TFLOP GCN card. Not that it matters much because I’ve recently learnt that TFLOPS is a pretty useless way of comparing performance.
 
Last edited:

Pheonix

Member
Dec 14, 2018
1,226
St Kitts
Unless I completely misunderstand how these things work:

1, 7nm EUV would mean a brand new design
2, Would be impossible to achieve in 1 additional year



Wouldn't this suggest that Sony were planning a $600+ BOM system to sell for $500? I seriously doubt that.
Nope, it could mean that sony initially set out to launch in 2019 and looking at the system they would be building realized that it would end up costing them an estimated $600+ (like maybe $620 using their most optimistic estimates if launching the system in 2019) but if they waited till 2020 the prices on a number of the components they are using would have dropped (fab maturity, increased supply...etc) and that would make it possible for them to make the same system for like $530.

I believe that there are multiple design lines for possible systems during the design phase. And as time goes on resources and time are focused into the one that makes the most sense or is decided upon. So some time 2018 their 2019 plans were shelved and then they moved onto the 2020 plan. Not that they couldn't release it in 209, but that if they did it would cost them too much.
 

Andromeda

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,830
better to just look at Polaris flops to do a much more accurate comparison to current gen and mid gen GPUs.

Navi seems to be 40% more efficient than Polaris per flop. So 10 tflops Navi is 14 tflops Polaris or ~2.5x X1X and ~3.5x Pro.
More like 30% (max) if we compare with same number of CUs. We'll know more when they release RDNA GPU with more CUs.
 

DrKeo

Member
Mar 3, 2019
590
Israel
The price of a HDD is 35 $ incompressible. The only difference is storage size growing during the time. One day it can be 3 or 4 TB for the same price.

All mechanical and eltecro mechanical part + optical drive and HDDD of PS4 were 100 dollars of PS4 cost at launch and because of mechanical part there is an incompressible price as much as the SOC... I am sure using a custom SSD 256 GB like in patent + a 2TB HDD against a 1TB SSD is probably a little bit more expensive at launch and the cost difference grows in time...

I was talking about Microsoft only, not Sony, I do think Sony is using a one big 1TB SSD. Microsoft can't use that patent so anything regarding the patent is irrelevant.

According to the table you've brought in this post, the One had in 2013 a 500GB HDD with 8MB cache for 37$. In 2016 the One S had a 1TB HDD with 32MB cache for 32$ and the 2TB HDD with 8MB was 55$. Today, a 256GB NVMe SSD cost ~1/4 the price of a 1TB NVMe SSD. The total BOM at launch should be more or less the same for a 256GB SSD cache drive + 2TB HDD VS 1TB SSD.

Cost after launch is irrelevant. Consoles go through revisions all the time, they switch HDD models all the time. If your system knows who to work with a cache SSD + HDD, it also knows how to work with a pure SSD storage solution. If after two years having a single 2TB SSD is cheaper than using 256GB SSD + 2TB HDD, they will just use a pure SSD solution at that time-frame. There is no need for future proofing your machine storage wise as long as you upgrade your storage and never downgrade. I'm pretty sure that a pure SSD solution is an upgrade, so no problem there.

Regarding repair and warranty costs, the HDD doesn't have to be included in the warranty. A lot of appliances cover only certain parts of the warranty. If you have an easily replaceable HDD, anyone can go to the store and buy a new one for 40$ or just use an external HDD so no real problem there. If you want to worry about anything, worry about the SSD soldered to the motherboard. If anything happens to it, they have to replace the whole thing.

Okay, so this would mean actual HW design alteration at CU level to do something like that. From what I have read, Tensor Cores are something akin to Blackbox and so there is no actual breakdown of how nVidia designed it beyond documentations provided by them that show how to make it work efficiently (afaik).

On the AMD side of things, I think they had a patent about some "Hybrid" version of the RT. Now whether that would necessitate in apportionment of existing CUs into something akin to tensor cores or having separate set of CUs in their own cluster dedicated to RT or something else is unknown to me.

Whatever the case may be, the die size will most likely not be 251mm2.
If I remember correctly, and chris 1515 probably read the patent much more thoroughly than me, in the AMD RT patent they want to take the TMUs and change them into something called Texture Processor which will also have a BVH intersection check unit. There are 4 TMUs inside each CU so if the PS5 will have 40CUs, it will have 160 Texture Processors (which also does what Turing is doing in order to accelerat RT) with each additional CU adding 4 more Texture Processors.

This is an RDNA CU, the lower part is grayed out because that's the second CU that share its' resources. The yellow part on the right are the four TMUs which should be replaced with something larger called TP (Texture Processor) that does both the TMU's job and RT BVH intersection checks:


Again, if I got something wrong please correct me because I read this patent weeks ago without diving too deep.
 

AegonSnake

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,626
But thsoe are high clocks for gpu.we should see if anyone done 1.8 GHz for gpu and 3.2 for cpu and see with those two if we get over 20000 overall firestrike
It would be nice if the CPU was downclocked to 3GHz and the 5700 to ~1700MHz and 5700XT to ~1600 and run the tests again.
Looky here what i found on the other forum.




a 5700 overclocked to 1.8 ghz (36 CU at 1.8 = 8.29 tflops)

and a 6 core/12 thread Ryzen 5 at 3.6 ghz. should be slightly less powerful than a 3.2 ghz zen 2.

Regardless, graphics score for an 8 tflops 36 CU GPU is 24.3k which is roughly on par with rtx 2070's graphics score of 24.1k paired with a ryzen 5.
 

BitsandBytes

Member
Dec 16, 2017
2,502
Nope, it could mean that sony initially set out to launch in 2019 and looking at the system they would be building realized that it would end up costing them an estimated $600+ (like maybe $620 using their most optimistic estimates if launching the system in 2019) but if they waited till 2020 the prices on a number of the components they are using would have dropped (fab maturity, increased supply...etc) and that would make it possible for them to make the same system for like $530.

I believe that there are multiple design lines for possible systems during the design phase. And as time goes on resources and time are focused into the one that makes the most sense or is decided upon. So some time 2018 their 2019 plans were shelved and then they moved onto the 2020 plan. Not that they couldn't release it in 209, but that if they did it would cost them too much.
Albert Penello explained this in one of the previous threads. A lot of what you say here isn't how it works.

Albert Penello said:
I'm not going to comment on the specs of course. But there are couple things in here that I felt Brad took a pretty hard stance on which would be counter to my experience.

First, Sony and Microsoft know exactly the prices and specs they intend to launch, and they know it before a contract with AMD is ever signed. An enormous amount of diligence is done on a process like this internally - and figuring out the pricing and specifications of what you can build are, like, fundamental to the whole process. It's literally Step 1.

The reason is they have modeled the entire architecture and are building system components in parallel - not in series. So they have to know roughly where everything will land so that the motherboard, cooling system, case design, fan speeds, radio antennas, and countless other components all land to support the intended price and performance targets. Margins on console are super thin so there is not a ton of room to make major changes late in the program.

Now - things can change. But those changes are almost always in the margins. In the case of the Xbox One for instance, the entire case and cooling system was way overdesigned (obviously given the size!) which allowed the team to increase the clock speeds after the initial parts were tested. This was not part of the plan, and had the case been designed to precisely hit the target there would not have been the headroom to change the clock speed. And on top of that, there was a huge amount of time spent calculating the cost of that change - because even something as small as a 10% clock increase could have more than a 10% yield implication both at launch, and over the long term. So these things are not taken lightly.

So I think it's important to know that specs and prices are set pretty early in the process. Yes, things can change and evolve, but it's generally small tweaks because the implications of doing a major change late in the process are very risky. This is why any idea that Xbox One X made any change or reaction based on the Pro shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the timelines HW works on.
 

Gamer17

Member
Oct 30, 2017
5,425
Looky here what i found on the other forum.




a 5700 overclocked to 1.8 ghz (36 CU at 1.8 = 8.29 tflops)

and a 6 core/12 thread Ryzen 5 at 3.6 ghz. should be slightly less powerful than a 3.2 ghz zen 2.

Regardless, graphics score for an 8 tflops 36 CU GPU is 24.3k which is roughly on par with rtx 2070's graphics score of 24.1k paired with a ryzen 5.
It's a great score but I just wish we would hit that 10 TF Navi .hehe give me that double digits Navi TF
 

sncvsrtoip

Member
Apr 18, 2019
647
Looky here what i found on the other forum.




a 5700 overclocked to 1.8 ghz (36 CU at 1.8 = 8.29 tflops)

and a 6 core/12 thread Ryzen 5 at 3.6 ghz. should be slightly less powerful than a 3.2 ghz zen 2.

Regardless, graphics score for an 8 tflops 36 CU GPU is 24.3k which is roughly on par with rtx 2070's graphics score of 24.1k paired with a ryzen 5.
boost of this ryzen is 4.2ghz but not bad representation of 3.2ghz 8c zen2
 

Metalane

Member
Jun 30, 2019
353
Massachusetts, USA
Looky here what i found on the other forum.




a 5700 overclocked to 1.8 ghz (36 CU at 1.8 = 8.29 tflops)

and a 6 core/12 thread Ryzen 5 at 3.6 ghz. should be slightly less powerful than a 3.2 ghz zen 2.

Regardless, graphics score for an 8 tflops 36 CU GPU is 24.3k which is roughly on par with rtx 2070's graphics score of 24.1k paired with a ryzen 5.
So if 8 RDNA TFLOPS = 2070 performance

10 RDNA TFLOPS = 2080?
 

gundamkyoukai

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,846
There is no way to know what Sony plan was since we have no idea when the delay happen ( not even certain if you can call it a delay )
We hear about it mid 2018 for all we know they decide not to in 2017 .
It really make no sense to think about what if .
 

AegonSnake

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,626
So if 8 RDNA TFLOPS = 2070 performance

10 RDNA TFLOPS = 2080?
Yes. See below.
ryzen 5 3600 6c 3600mhz(no boost) with 5700xt
So thats a 40 CU 1.93 ghz 9.88 tflops GPU scoring a 26.3k score.

My RTX 2080 and i7-8700 3.2 ghz gave me a 26.5k score. (core clock was 1.5 ghz but i saw it stay in the 1.9 ghz range pretty much the entire going up to 2.05 ghz at times.

I will be ok with a 10 tflops RDNA gpu in this case.
 

Metalane

Member
Jun 30, 2019
353
Massachusetts, USA
Yes. See below.


So thats a 40 CU 1.93 ghz 9.88 tflops GPU scoring a 26.3k score.

My RTX 2080 and i7-8700 3.2 ghz gave me a 26.5k score. (core clock was 1.5 ghz but i saw it stay in the 1.9 ghz range pretty much the entire going up to 2.05 ghz at times.

I will be ok with a 10 tflops RDNA gpu in this case.
Wow, that would be amazing! Your prediction for 12.9 TFLOPS would probably be like a 2080 TI.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.