I think they were referring to current gen consoles, not next gen. I wonder if they'll aim for 4K/60 on next gen.
-
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.
Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation launch thread |OT5| - It's in RDNA
- Thread starter Mecha Meister
- Start date
- Status
I think this is just speculation by TechRadar that PS5/XBS versions are in the works. CDPR has already commented that they are focusing on current consoles for now and haven't confirmed any plans for nextgen. Just that the current gen versions should technically work via BC on nextgen.
I mean I doubt they won't make nextgen console versions of CP2077 but the article just seems like speculation and wishful thinking at the moment and trying to pass it off as confirmation for clicks with that headline.
Well yeah,i thought the same about RDR2 and in the end i was pleasantly surprised.
CDPR is not R*,of course,but i'll give them the benefit of the doubt.I hope they learned a lot from Witcher 3 experience.
I heard relation of person that watched new gamplay after e3 2019 of Cyberpunk. Graphic is ok but it's not new quality at all(there are better looking games), is curentgen title so will look ok on ps4 and xone.
So Gonzalo is probably based on 5700xt but that CPU is 4.4 GHz and not 3.2.
Finding it hard to believe that no one has taken a ryzen 7 CPU, downclocked it to 3.2Ghz or even 3Ghz, pair it to a 5700/5700XT and run that fire strike test.
I'm looking at you DF. Do this for us instead of giving us comparison videos of hoe journey runs on PC
I'm looking at you DF. Do this for us instead of giving us comparison videos of hoe journey runs on PC
eh. i dont trust them at all. they completely changed the renderer for witcher 3 after the initial showing. the first gameplay footage of cyberpunk looks way too good to be true. i refuse to believe that can be done on current gen consoles. it will be downgraded to hell and back.
what will be interesting to see is if they will also downgrade the pc version like they did with witcher 3 by changing the renderer for the pc version as well. with next gen consoles coming out, i hope they keep the pc version looking as good as last year's footage and aim to port that version to the ps5 and x2.
this only bodes well for gonzolo though. if the overall score of gonzolo was over 20k with a 3.2 ghz CPU that means the gpu is at least just as strong as the 5700 XT or much more stronger than that.
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.
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.
Haha exactly, Dictator DF check firestirke 1080p general score with ryzen 7 3700x downclocked to 3.2ghz with 5700 and 5700xt
I meant something similar to NVIDIA's solution in the RTX series, a small part of the CU is designed to handle RT and most of the CU is the usual rasterization machine that we are used to seeing. Every CU has some part which is dedicated to RT, just like NVIDIA's SM:
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.
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
The most realistic specs/price so far. Don't be surprised if it gets some features a little higher like the Tflops and/or the SSD size.
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.
Outside of taking a massive loss, I don't see how Sony could possibly sell the PS5 for $400.
From inflation alone, the $400 USD that the PS4 cost at launch would be $440 today (not to mention fall 2020!). To keep up the appearance of price parity, this supposed super console would sell for $40 less than the PS4. Then you add in the threat of crazy trump tariffs, the likelihood of taking a loss even at $450+ with the rumored specs, the outrageously high marketing cost during US presidential election season, the advantageous position they hold over their direct competitor, etc. etc.
I would think 449 with three months of Plus or something would maybe be a compromise, but that feels way too messy for Sony. (Can you imagine how challenging it would be to communicate that value? Plus they will have already lost the benefit of the 3 at the start of 399.)
So, maybe they are exploring the possibility of $399 and trying to make it work with their engineering. But, again, unless they take a substantial loss (and I mean substantial), I don't get how they could make this console for that price.
Now, if Sony wants to shoulder that much of the cost, be my guest. I certainly wouldn't mind a $400 machine, as long as it isn't built as a $400 machine
From inflation alone, the $400 USD that the PS4 cost at launch would be $440 today (not to mention fall 2020!). To keep up the appearance of price parity, this supposed super console would sell for $40 less than the PS4. Then you add in the threat of crazy trump tariffs, the likelihood of taking a loss even at $450+ with the rumored specs, the outrageously high marketing cost during US presidential election season, the advantageous position they hold over their direct competitor, etc. etc.
I would think 449 with three months of Plus or something would maybe be a compromise, but that feels way too messy for Sony. (Can you imagine how challenging it would be to communicate that value? Plus they will have already lost the benefit of the 3 at the start of 399.)
So, maybe they are exploring the possibility of $399 and trying to make it work with their engineering. But, again, unless they take a substantial loss (and I mean substantial), I don't get how they could make this console for that price.
Now, if Sony wants to shoulder that much of the cost, be my guest. I certainly wouldn't mind a $400 machine, as long as it isn't built as a $400 machine
OP
OP
On the topic of thread title names:
Clocks Rule Everything Around Me
Hehe Speedy Gonzalo!
This one is really good!
Clocks Rule Everything Around Me
Hehe Speedy Gonzalo!
This one is really good!
Page files suck as a rule. Even if on an SSD. Bragging about needing virtual RAM in Scarlett is a bizarre flex for MS. It suggests to me they expect the PS5 to have more RAM. Devs will absolutely prefer greater read speed. You don't need to resort to virtual RAM when you can load data on demand more efficiently.
The french gamesite I follow (gamekult) clearly state that the e3 demo 2019 doesn't match the e3 demo 2018. He thinks the 2018 version was a vertical slice.
I agree ,if they kept late 2019 launch there is no way they could avoid 499 price with Zen2+Navi 10+SSD+GDDR6.
But we are talking now about late 2020 launch and that is a different story,none of the tech in PS5 will be new by then-next year this time AMD will have Zen3,Navi 20 or whatever,price of SSD and memory will go down,so i think 399 price (with some smallish 50-100 loss) will be possible.
It's not bizarre. It's a diversion. Hey our SSD is not a relatively slow PC SSD (compared to fully custom PS5 SSD with x GB of dedicated cache + custom file system ) : it's a "custom" SSD. Custom, like PS5 custom SSD.
I am curious if AMD's lag reduction will get increased focus on consoles. With this feature, VRR, QFT, ALLM, 240 Hz and esports all being buzzwords, this area may see some increased focus too. I don't think I've ever seen PS4 compared to XB1 lag.
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.
Exactly .ryzen 3700 x(8 core 16thread) down clocked to 3.2ghz and 5700xt clocked at 1.8ghz and let's do the fire strike for total score.at the same time let's see what's the power draw of this configuration
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 $500? I seriously doubt that.
So like 15-16 Vega FLOPS?
Haha well Vega is kinda garbage for gaming to be honest so it doesn't mean much .I m hoping Sony and MS hit double digits for Navi TF(10 Navi TF at the minimum)
That might be why they delayed from 2019 to 2020? Maybe, if the rumor is in fact true.
I hope the rumors of MS partnering up with Rift is true. The new CPUs should make VR very viable, and I want to see what https://www.xbox.com/en-US/developers/creators-program/ can come up with.
Ya all these performance multipliers and different architectures are confusing me. I'm still hoping for around 2080 level performance. That would probably be huge jump from the PS4/XB1 GPU's anyway.
I'm suggesting Sony would never have even been designing the console to that high a cost in the first place.
Also the design and price target decisions would've been made back in 2015/16 when work on next-gen started as I'm sure Albert has explained previously?
Sure, but peopel were saying that the Navi had a lot of problems and that might be why they delayed or they just had soo much sucess with the ps4 that they decided to delayed the ps5 because of that.
I feel we fall between 2070 and 2080. I LL be pleasantly surprised if we hit above 2080 as that's a 800$ gpu releasing this year
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
- Status