I just linked you the minimum salary and the average wage of ALL professions.
In the UK is double to those in Spain.
Thanks for ignoring that in your answer btw
Edit: Maybe you thought I was linking you only the tech salaries. If that's so I apologize for the last comment, but point still stands. The difference it's the same across all the professions
I just linked you the minimum salary and the average wage of ALL professions.
In the UK is double to those in Spain.
Thanks for ignoring that in your answer btw
Edit: Maybe you thought I was linking you only the tech salaries. If that's so I apologize for the last comment, but point still stands. The difference it's the same across all the professions
The average salary is skewed terribly by the top 1% earning something like 80% of all the money in the UK. A more representative metric would be the median and modal.
The average person working in the Uk isn't earning anywhere close to nearly 4000 EUROs per month. It's much closer to £2000 - £2200 after tax, NI, pension, student loans and all the other deductions folks often have snatched out of the their pay cheques at the end of each month.
The average salary is skewed terribly by the top 1% earning something like 80% of all the money in the UK. A more representative metric would be the median and modal.
The average person working in the Uk isn't earning anywhere close to nearly 4000 EUROs per month. It's much closer to £2000 - £2200 after tax, NI, pension, student loans and all the other deductions folks often have snatched out of the their pay cheques at the end of each month.
Not a lot of options with HDMI 2.1, VRR and 120 Hz yet. And even those we have aren't "confirmed" to be compatible. I'm waiting on proper HDMI 2.1 receivers personally, only then I'll update my TV.
Not a lot of options with HDMI 2.1, VRR and 120 Hz yet. And even those we have aren't "confirmed" to be compatible. I'm waiting on proper HDMI 2.1 receivers personally, only then I'll update my TV.
Not a lot of options with HDMI 2.1, VRR and 120 Hz yet. And even those we have aren't "confirmed" to be compatible. I'm waiting on proper HDMI 2.1 receivers personally, only then I'll update my TV.
Guys have you ever considered this :
Next gen the updated unreal engine will be glorious due to epic having unlimited funds from Fortnite. Is that a possibility ?tons of next gen multiplatform will be glorious
Guys have you ever considered this :
Next gen the updated unreal engine will be glorious due to epic having unlimited funds from Fortnite. Is that a possibility ?tons of next gen multiplatform will be glorious
Not sure how Epic having more money correlates with Unreal Engine games looking better.
The engine will almost always be able to do more than the hardware can achieve. So the limitation will be hardware performance, not Epic's engine development resources.
I know I'm sure it's been said before, but GTA5 looked pretty amazing even running on consoles designed around 2005 technology. I'm figuring GTA6 is going to be designed for next gen only. That's about 14 years more advanced technology. Years and years in development. It is going to be literally insane, I cannot even imagine the scale, the level of detail, the graphical and gameplay progress we're going to be seeing. Anyone deflated about random TF figures or whatever.. it's going to be insane.
I know I'm sure it's been said before, but GTA5 looked pretty amazing even running on consoles designed around 2005 technology. I'm figuring GTA6 is going to be designed for next gen only. That's about 14 years more advanced technology. Years and years in development. It is going to be literally insane, I cannot even imagine the scale, the level of detail, the graphical and gameplay progress we're going to be seeing. Anyone deflated about random TF figures or whatever.. it's going to be insane.
Problem is that firestrike results depends on cpu and flute cpu benchmark shows it's weaker than 3.2ghz zen2 but if cpu was similar than minimal tflops for >20k is 8.7tf navi and 10tf scores >21k
Yeah, and there might be certain features we will want in our TVs (Like HDMI 2.1 it seems) to have and we won't know what they are until we know all the details are announced.
The LG B8 Oled has continuously dropped to $900 this year. And it's a fantastic Oled tv.
For a few hundreds more, The B9 and C9 were $1200 And $1400 last week in Best Buy. The LG Oled tv's are honestly the best tv's you can get right now on the market.
I have the B8 and C9 and won't have to upgrade for the next 4-5 years. Look into that or see what Black Friday does for ya.
That's a bit more than I want to spend. 1k is my absolute max. I have 1800 right now for tv and ps5. I might have a couple more hundred by next fall but I don't want to assume I will.
Not a lot of options with HDMI 2.1, VRR and 120 Hz yet. And even those we have aren't "confirmed" to be compatible. I'm waiting on proper HDMI 2.1 receivers personally, only then I'll update my TV.
SSD (allegedly faster than PC solutions available at the time of publication)
PS4 Backwards compatibility
Coming Holiday 2020
4K Bluray player
100GB optical disc support for games
Having an SSD removes the need for data duplication, this was used to allow Hard Disc Drives to read the data faster. This consumes more disc space than neccessarily. With an SSD, data duplication is no longer needed, so game developers can save space or use it for other things.
Devkit design is confirmed to be real, no acknowledgement whether the final console will resemble it.
Due to having an SSD, booting and loading times will be faster. World streaming in games will also be faster, and more data can be streamed in.
DualShock 5 Features Revealed so far:
Controller Features:
Adaptive triggers - offering varying levels of resistance which can be used to express tension when uising weapons, etc.
Haptic Feedback (Highly programmable voice-coil actuators)
Can convey the feel of traversing through different terrain.
Sand can feel slow and sluggish, while mud slow and soggy. (as mentioned in the Wired Interview).
The difference between driving on dirt and on a track can also be conveyed.
Improved speaker
USB Type-C Connector
Larger battery capacity
Allegedly lighter than the current Xbox controller with batteries in it.
The one the used in the second Wired Interview looks like the DualShock 4
Operating System Improvements Revealed so far:
Can choose to intall the single player portion of a game, and install the multiplayer later, or install the entire game and delete the portion of the game you want after.
Multiplayer game servers will provide information such as joinable activies.
Single-player cames will provide information such as the available missions you can play and the rewards you can obtain when you complete them. The user interface will also providing the choices of rewards you will have available to you.
Official Xbox Scarlet Specifications Revealed so far:
Zen 2 CPU (Unknown clock-speeds, and whether it will have SMT)
NAVI GPU (Unknown clock-speeds and core count)
GDDR6 Memory: Scarlet is speculated to have around 10memory chips based on images of a PCB shown in the Project Scarlet reveal video, potentially giving it a 320-bit memory bus, ram capacity could range between 10 and 20GB.
On the topic of this, in 2016 Microsoft showcased a render of the Xbox One X's board while the system was in development and the number of chips were able to match up with the number of chips the retail system has. Of-course, things may be subject to change so this is somewhat speculation included with officially revealed information.
Patents
Becareful with patents, don't take everything you read in a patent to mean that it will be implemented in a company's next product, as some things that companies patent don't always come to fruition.
This patent has been discovered under YUSUHIRO OOTOR's name, showcasing a design for an electronic device which is rumoured to be the PlayStation 5's Development KIt.
The existence of this development kit has been confirmed in the second Wired Interview.
Next, a version of Gran Turismo Sport that Sony had ported over to a PS5 devkit—a devkit that on quick glance looks a lot like the one Gizmodo reported on last week. (The company refused to comment on questions about how the devkit's form factor might compare to what's being considered for the consumer product.)
- some hardware changes vs the typical inside the SSD (SRAM for housekeeping and data buffering instead of DRAM)
- some extra hardware and accelerators in the system for handling file IO tasks independent of the main CPU
- at the OS layer, a second file system customised for these changes
all primarily aimed at higher read performance and removing potential bottlenecks for data that is written less often than it is read, like data installed from a game disc or download.
Next Xbox rumours:
There was rumoured to be two models, Codenamed Lockhart and Anaconda, with one being more powerful than the other.
Now only one model known as "Scarlet" has been publicly revealed, while nothing has been mentioned about any other other models.
New Compute Unit Design with improved efficiency and increased IPC offering 1.25x performance per clock
Features higher clock speeds and gaming performance at lower power requirements
First RDNA GPUs available in July, starting with the RX 5700 series GPUs
It is important to note that The PS5 and Project Scarlet are not necessarily going to be using GPUs based on the RX 5700 Series.
The RX 5700 Series GPUs have no hardware ray tracing capabilties, while the PlayStation 5 has been confirmed to have hardware ray tracing capabilties.
RX 5700 Series Reviews - RDNA Details:
Zen 2 - features many improvements such as:
Improved Branch Prediction
Single operation AVX2
Larger L3 Cache (2x size of Zen and Zen+)
15% higher IPC
Zen 2 Details
Digital Foundry: Zen 2/Navi PC vs Xbox One X/PS4 Pro - How Much More Performance Could We Get?
Richard tests a PC that has been built with Zen 2 and NAVI hardware, this serves as a concept of theorhetical Next Generation console performance.
Bare in mind that consoles are designed with strict power, thermal and size constraints, they are unlikely to have the luxury of being able to power hardware that exceeds a 300W envelope.
There's much we don't know about PS5 and Project Scarlett: special GPU features, shader counts, ray-tracing implementation etc. But we do know that the machine is based on Zen 2 CPU and Navi GPU architecture... and with Ryzen 7 3700X, Radeon RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT we can deliver a generational comparison... with some fascinating results. Many thanks to Asus ROG for building this PC for us, and to IO Interactive for sharing the PC equivalent settings for Hitman 2 on every console!
Richard conducts a test using Cinebench R15, and includes projected performance of the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One X's Jaguar CPUs in his testing results.
8 core (Projected Xbox One X equivalent, 100% scaling assumption) - 366
Ryzen 7 3700X at 2.3GHz
1T (Single thread) - 110 (2.24X faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar)
MT (Multi thread) - 618 (3.37x faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar)
Octo-Core Score - 1220 (4.76x faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar)
In the event that a next generation console features a CPU at 2.3GHz:
Single-threaded performance gains are around 2.24x higher than 2.3GHz Jaguar, and 3.14x faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar.
Multi-thread performance of 8 cores is around 3.3x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar, and 4.76x faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar.
Ryzen 7 3700X at 3.2GHz
1T (Single thread) - 152 (3.1x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar)
MT (Multi thread) - 868 (4.74x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar)
Octo-Core Score - 1702 (4.65x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar)
In the event that a next generation console features a CPU at 3.2GHz:
Single-threaded performance gains are around 3.1x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar, and 4.34x faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar.
Multi-threaded performance of 8 cores is around 4.65x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar, and 6.64x faster than Jaguar at 1.6GHz.
Currently, we only know that the PlayStation 5 is going to have a Zen 2 CPU with 8 cores and 16 threads, the clock speed of this CPU is unknown at this point in time.
Gaming Performance
This was performed by using console equivalent settings, Alex contributed in finding the console equivalent settings for Hitman 2, IO Interactive (the developers of the game) helped with this also.
PlayStation 4 PRO - 36 Compute Units at 911MHz (4.2 TF)
Xbox One X - 40 Compute Units at 1172 MHz (6 Teraflops)
5700 - NAVI GPU featuring 36 Compute Units at 1800MHz (8.29 TF)
5700 XT - NAVI GPU featuring 40 Compute Units at 1800MHz (9.2 Teraflops)
Hitman 2
5700 vs PS4 Pro - The 5700 is 126% faster at 1440p (around 2.26x faster)
5700 XT vs Xbox One X - The 5700 XT is 83% faster at 4K (1.83x faster)
Xbox One X vs RX 5700 XT PC Configuration
PlayStation 4 Pro vs RX 5700 PC Configuration
Wolfenstein 2: The New Colossus
5700 vs PS4 Pro - The 5700 is around 3x faster at 1440p
5700 XT vs Xbox One X - The 5700 XT is around 2x faster at 4K
PC configurations vs PlayStation 4 Pro and Xbox One X
PlayStation 4 vs RX 5700 Configuration
Xbox One X vs RX 5700 XT PC Configuration
Power and thermal thermal constraints
I must stress that Digital Foundry have tested a machine with PC components, and consoles are designed around strict power, thermal and size limitations, so it would be unrealistic to expect console hardware to have clock speeds matching their PC derivatives.
I think it is likely that they will be within the range of 2.7-3.2GHz, or even 2.3-2.7GHz as higher clock speeds often require more power and more capable cooling solutions, this can be more expensive or may require a larger surface area.
Thermodynamics isn't my forte but an example of this would be the use of copper heatsinks over aluminum ones, as copper is a better conducter of heat, but can be more expensive to implement.
I think it would be facinating to see someone from Digital Foundry to explore more about the subject of power consumption for PC hardware. Dictator what do you think about this?
In previous reviews of GPUs, the peak system power consumption was something that was observed but I haven't seen much of this lately, perhaps I have missed it? However, power consumption is something that has been explored recently in CPU reviews, such as the Ryzen 5 3600X review.
Here's an example of peak system power consumption the RX 480 review:
Crysis 3 was used to test the power consumption of a system outffited with a i7-6700K and one of 4 GPUs, these were the RX 480, the R9 390, the GTX 970 and the GTX 1070.
The RX 480 system had a peak power consumption of 271 watts, whilst the GTX 1070 system had a peak of 263 watts.
The GTX 1070 is a more powerful GPU, however it is more efficient than the RX 480.
In the more recent NVIDIA Geforce GTX 1660 TI review, Digital Foundry obsered that a system equipped with a 1660 Ti and a overclocked i7-8700K had a peak power draw within the 220-230W range.
Anandtech also touched upon the subject of power consumption in their RX 5700 and 5700 XT review.
Their test system has these specs:
On the topic of power consumption, I mentioned earlier that consoles are unlikely to have the luxury of being able to power hardware that exceeds a 300W envelope. I'll use the PlayStation 4 Pro and Xbox One X as an example of this.
iFixit also did a teardown of the PlayStation 4 Pro and found that it had a 289W PSU
PlayStation 4 Pro's Power Supply
Output:
23.5 Amps x 12 Volts = 282 Watts
1.5 Amps x 4.8V = 7.2 Watts
282 + 7.2 = 289.2
Total = 289.2 Watts
However, even with these PSUs that are rated to output upwards of 245 Watts, Digital Foundry has observed power consumption for the PlayStation 4 Pro and the Xbox One X in the sub 200W range. I think it's possible that there may be some variance to these numbers depending on the game and the load it puts on the hardware.
Looking at the past generation consoles, some PlayStation 3 models had PSUs that were capable of outputting power over 350 watts, but didn't neccessraily consume that much power when in use. This was reduced over time with newer revisions of the console, like the PlayStation 3 Slim with it's 216W PSU, and the Super Slim with it's 156W PSU.
I suppose a console with a 300-400 PSU would be the most we could see, but having more power hungry components means that there is a higher heat output, this will require a capable cooling system which may be more expensive to implement, and/or consume a larger surface area.
iFixit have also performed teardowns of these two machines.
Due to power and thermal constraints, GPUs may priorize higher core counts over higher clock speeds.
Desktop NAVI GPUs:
5700 XT - 40 Compute Units at 1800MHz (9.2 Teraflops)
5700 - 36 Compute Units at 1800MHz (8.29 TF)
An example of this core count prioritization for a GPU would be this:
3072 cores (48 Compute Units)
48 Compute Units at 1400MHz = 8.6 Teraflops (3072 x 1400 x 2)
48 Compute Units at 1500MHz = 9.2 Teraflops (3072 x 1500 x 2)
48 Compute Units at 1500MHz = 10 Teraflops (3072 x 1630 x 2)
As you can see, the theorhetical teraflops are dependent on the clock speed and core count of the GPU, in this example I have reduced the clock speed of this GPU and increased the number of compute units to obtain a target number of teraflops.
Here is are examples of how the RX 5700 series GPUs perform compared to other GPUs:
What can we expect to see from Next Generation Games?
Next Generation consoles are going to have substantially more powerful hardware, and will no longer be shackled to the limitations of the base machines, much the like PlayStation 4 Pro and Xbox One X were.
With signficantly more powerful CPUs we can expect to see more advanced simulations taking place in game worlds, these could be in the form of more advanced physics such more advanced cloth, fluid and destruction simulations. As well as advanced physics based animations.
Longer draw distances are another thing that we are likely to see, as well as NPCs with more advanced AI behaviour which offer more emergent gameplay scenarios.
A technique used to free CPU cycles is to reduce the update rate of animations of characters in the distance, games like Halo 5 and Resident Evil 2 do this.
Theorhetically, with more powerful CPUs there would be more headroom to run animations at higher update rates.
This is a controversial game, but that's not the focus of this video.
I would argue that Star Citizen is undoubtedly the most ambitious and advanced game knowingly in development, it has impressive visuals but what I would argue is most impressive about it would be the gameplay.
This game is very expensive to make, and has acquired over 200 million USD in funding, however I would argue that this game is representative of what can be accomplished when targeting hardware that trascends current generation consoles, and when a development team have the funds to push the boundaries.
This game, even in its current unfinished state is simply in a league of its own on a technological level.
Alex expresses in the video that he's excited about the concept of next generation consoles having Zen 2 CPUs with 8 cores and 16 threads as well as SSDs because of the possiblites that the new minimum specifications of consoles will enable, Star Citizen is currently the shining example of this.
Star Citizen has features such as:
64-bit coordinate system
Space and planetary combat
Highly detailed enviroments
Meticulously detailed ships
Comprehensive simulation of ships and their components, each component consumes power and outputs heat, it is important to manage your ship's power distribution and heat output. Ships have components such as thrusters, power plants, coolers and shield generators.
Bounty hunting
Mining
Synchronised first and third person animations
The list just goes on!
There are colossal ships that you can traverse, these can have many different rooms which you can traverse seamlessly, they are also exceptionally detailed.
Every ship have their their own physics grids simply put:
You can be on a ship that's traveling 1000s of miles per hour and walk around it smoothly, and even interact with other players, as well as engage in combat.
There's so many different scenarios!
Alex talks about the concept of travel in Star Citizen at 5:48 onwards, and physics grids at 7:05 but I recommend watching the entire video!
To get an idea of the scale of things in Star Citizen, here's a ship size comparison:
(Click to enlarge)
You can land something like a Reclaimer (bottom left) on a planet, this is a huge salvage ship that features many rooms and even elevators!
Star Citizen is also an example of a game that has been designed for and greatly benefits from SSDs. As a result of this it suffers from long loading times and performance issues on Hard Disk Drives.
Alex showcases the loading times on an NVME SSD and a 7200 RPM RAID 0 HDD configuration, in his video it took almost 11x more time to load into the game with the Hard Drives. The game is constantly streaming in data for the highly detailed game world and simulations that take place.
(With RAID 0 reads and writes occur concurrently on multiple drives, this increases throughput)
Star Citizen loading times (Universe mode)
RAID 0 HDD - 3:24.47 seconds
XPG SX8200 PRO NVME SSD - 19:32 seconds.
Having seen what Star Citizen is doing makes me incredibly excitedly for Next Generation games, there is so much pottential!
Current affairs regarding Zen 2's performance and Intel's offerings.
Intel's current architecture which has seen widespread use across mobile and desktops is Coffee-Lake, Intel have introduced other architectures to market which are refinements of Coffee-Lake, however these are chips which are focused on the mobile segment and to my knowledge do not reach the performance standards of Coffee-Lake to replace it in the desktop segment.
With Zen 2, it seems that AMD has rectified many of the performance bottlenecks from the first generation Zen CPUs. As a result of this, AMD has pretty much caught up to Intel in the majority of workloads, and are even offering CPUs that deliver competitive performance in their price range, some of which undercut Intel's own chips. However, Intel still maintain a clock speed advantage for their CPUs, this leads to higher performance in gaming workloads in the currently available software.
I found TechReport's review of the 3700X and 3900X to be very telling of this, it's a very comprehensive review and they did a fantastic job reviewing these CPUs, check it out here:
Tech Report - AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 3900X CPUs reviewed
From this review I wanted to bring this section to attention, check out GTA V's performance on the Ryzen 3700X and 2700X here:
That's a 24.7% gain in average fps and signficantly lower frame times, this is great to see as this game has been something the Zen architecture has struggled with since it's inception, and Zen 2 seems to have closed the gap signficantly between it and Intel's offerings.
However, regardless of this improvement in GTA V, Intel still have a sizable lead in gaming performance in other games such as Deus Ex: Mankind Divided and Hitman 2 as featured in this review.
Here we see Intel's 9900K leading by 26.6% against the 3700X, and 34.5% against the 3900X.
Where the third-generation Ryzens traded blows with their Intel competitors in Crysis, Deus Ex is a different story altogether. Both of the new CPUs take a back seat to all three of our Intel CPUs in this title. I'm not qualified to pass judgment on why, but if you forced me to guess I might suspect that it has something to do with memory latency.
Anandtech conducted a test with the SPEC2006 and SPEC2017 benchmark suite in their Ryzen 3700X and 3900X review, these are industry standard benchmarks.
The Ryzen 9 3900X (Zen 2) is compared against AMD's own Ryzen 7 2700X (Zen+) and Intel's i9-9900K (Coffee-Lake)
AMD Ryzen 9 3900x.
The 3900X and i9-9900K used DDR4 3200MHz CL16 memory, whilst the Ryzen 7 2700X used DDR4 2933MHz memory with "similar" CL16 timings.
One big talking point around the new Ryzen 3000 series is the new augmented single-threaded performance of the new Zen 2 core. In order to investigate the topic in a more controlled manner with better documented workloads, we've fallen back to the industry standard SPEC benchmark suite.
We'll be investigating the previous generation SPEC CPU2006 test suite giving us some better context to past platforms, as well as introducing the new SPEC CPU2017 suite. We have to note that SPEC2006 has been deprecated in favour of 2017, and we must also mention that the scores posted today are noted as estimates as they're not officially submitted to the SPEC organisation.
This testing suite features a variety of different tests, these bring to light to the different improvements that have been brought to Zen 2.
From these tests, the reviewers were able to deduce the impacts of things such as Zen 2's improved branch prediction capabilties from things such as the 445.gobmk benchmark as well as the cache improvements. They have also shown how it compares to Intel's i9-9900K and their Coffee-Lake architecture and showcase Zen 2's strengths and weaknesses.
From this testing suite, they concluded that Zen 2 has a higher overall IPC when compared to Intel's Coffee-Lake architecture. IPC is basically the performance of the CPU at the same clock speeds.
Normalising the scores for frequency, we see that AMD has achieved something that the company hasn't been able to claim in over 15 years: It has beat Intel in terms of overall IPC. Overall here, the IPC improvements over Zen+ are 15%, which is a bit lower than the 17% figure for SPEC2006.
This is just a short overview of their findings in the SPEC benchmarks, there is more information available at the source.
TechSpot
TechSpot (Hardware Unboxed) conducted a test featuring the Ryzen 7 1700X, Ryzen 7 2700X, the Ryzen 7 3700X and the Ryzen 9 3900X with 8 cores enabled (down from 12) and tested it against Intel 9900K. Their highest performing mainstream socket desktop CPU. All CPUs were tested at 4GHz.
To my knowledge, the i9-9900K has an all-core turbo of 4.8GHz so this is theorhetically leaving perhaps 20% performance on the table, but the main purpose of this test was to showcase performance differences between the CPUs at the same clock speed.
This is a really interesting test, as it gives us an insight to how AMD's Zen 2 CPUs fair against Intel's own i9-9900K at the same clock speeds.
In their tests, most of the results show the Ryzen 7 3700X performing within 10% of Intel i9-9900K, losing in the gaming test and performing better than i9-9900K in the application tests. AMD have a highly competitive product on their hands.
So far, it seems that Intel still has an advantage in gaming performance in the current software that is available.
I have seen up-to 20-30% performance advantages go to Intel's 9900K when tested against AMD's current best mainstream CPU, the 3900X (some of this could be due to Windows schedular issues as I've seen smaller performance advantages when disabling SMT on AMD CPUs) this is a 12 core 24 thread CPU with a base clock of 3.8GHz and a boost clock of 4.6GHz, while the 9900K is an 8 core 16 thread CPU, with a base clock of 3.6GHz and a boost clock of 5GHz.
Intel does have a clock-speed advantage, as well as more headroom to reach higher overclocks.
The i9-9900K in particular has the ability to boost all 8 of it's cores to 4.8GHz, while the AMD CPUs typically max out at around 4.4GHz. There have been improvements to how AMD CPUs boost due to new BIOs releases, this helps these CPUs to maintain their boost clock speeds.
4GHz CPU Battle
Cinebench R20
Cinebench R20 shows the AMD 3700X leading by 13.4% in multi-core performance, and the 3900X with 8 cores enabled leading by 13.6%
For single-core performance, the 3900X (4 cores disabled) leads by 9.5% against the i9-9900K, and the 3700X leads by 9%
Gaming Performance
In Battlefield V, the I9-9900k leads by 2.5% in average framerates versus the 3900X (4 cores disabled), and 7.3% versus the 3700X.
For minimum framerates, the 9900K leads by 8.7% versus the 3900X and 3700X.
Comparing the 3700X to the 1700X sees the Zen 2 CPU leading by 15.5% for average framerates, and 10.7% for minimum framerates.
In Far Cry New Dawn, the i9-9900K leads by 5.3% versus the 3900X (4 cores disabled), and 9.2% versus the 3700X in average framerates.
For minimum framerates, the i9-9900K leads by 9.5% versus the 3900X and 3700X.
In this AIDA64's latency test, we see that the Zen 2 CPUs have higher latency when compared to Intel's i9-9900K.
In SiSoftware's Multi-Thread Latency test we see that while Zen 2 has higher latency when comparing "Worst Matched Cores" to the i9-9900K, it has lower latency when compared against the Best Matched Cores. However, we also see that the latency between the "Best Matched Cores" is lower than the i9-9900K.
Zen 2 has made notable improvements with in regard to multi-thread latency, as the first generation Zen CPUs see 53% higher latency when comparing the "Worst Matched Cores" latency to the Ryzen 7 3700X, while the Ryzen 7 2700X sees 35% higher latency when comparing the latency of the "Worst Matched Cores" to the 3700X.
For "Best Matched Cores" the Ryzen 7 1700X has 43.9% higher latency when compared to the Ryzen 7 3700X, and the 2700X has 42% higher latency when compared to the 3700X as well.
SSD (allegedly faster than PC solutions available at the time of publication)
PS4 Backwards compatibility
Coming Holiday 2020
4K Bluray player
100GB optical disc support for games
Having an SSD removes the need for data duplication, this was used to allow Hard Disc Drives to read the data faster. This consumes more disc space than neccessariy. With an SSD, data duplication is no longer needed, so game developers can save space or use it for other things.
Devkit design is confirmed to be real, no acknowledgement whether the final console will resemble it.
Due to having an SSD, booting and loading times will be faster. World streaming in games will also be faster, and more data can be streamed in.
DualShock 5 Features Revealed so far:
Controller Features:
Adaptive triggers - offering varying levels of resistance which can be used to express tension when uising weapons, etc.
Haptic Feedback (Highly programmable voice-coil actuators)
Can convey the feel of traversing through different terrain.
Sand can feel slow and sluggish, while mud slow and soggy. (as mentioned in the Wired Interview).
The difference between driving on dirt and on a track can also be conveyed.
Improved speaker
USB Type-C Connector
Larger battery capacity
Allegedly lighter than the current Xbox controller with batteries in it.
The one the used in the second Wired Interview looks like the DualShock 4
Operating System Improvements Revealed so far:
Can choose to intall the single player portion of a game, and install the multiplayer later, or install the entire game and delete the portion of the game you want after.
Multiplayer game servers will provide information such as joinable activies.
Single-player cames will provide information such as the available missions you can play and the rewards you can obtain when you complete them. The user interface will also providing the choices of rewards you will have available to you.
Official Xbox Scarlet Specifications Revealed so far:
Zen 2 CPU (Unknown clock-speeds, and whether it will have SMT)
NAVI GPU (Unknown clock-speeds and core count)
GDDR6 Memory: Scarlet is speculated to have around 10memory chips based on images of a PCB shown in the Project Scarlet reveal video, potentially giving it a 320-bit memory bus, ram capacity could range between 10 and 20GB.
On the topic of this, in 2016 Microsoft showcased a render of the Xbox One X's board while the system was in development and the number of chips were able to match up with the number of chips the retail system has. Of-course, things may be subject to change so this is somewhat speculation included with officially revealed information.
Patents
Becareful with patents, don't take everything you read in a patent to mean that it will be implemented in a company's next product, as some things that companies patent don't always come to fruition.
This patent has been discovered under YUSUHIRO OOTOR's name, showcasing a design for an electronic device which is rumoured to be the PlayStation 5's Development KIt.
The existence of this development kit has been confirmed in the second Wired Interview.
Next Xbox rumours:
There was rumoured to be two models, Codenamed Lockhart and Anaconda, with one being more powerful than the other.
Now only one model known as "Scarlet" has been publicly revealed, while nothing has been mentioned about any other other models.
New Compute Unit Design with improved efficiency and increased IPC offering 1.25x performance per clock
Features higher clock speeds and gaming performance at lower power requirements
First RDNA GPUs available in July, starting with the RX 5700 series GPUs
It is important to note that The PS5 and Project Scarlet are not necessarily going to be using GPUs based on the RX 5700 Series.
The RX 5700 Series GPUs have no hardware ray tracing capabilties, while the PlayStation 5 has been confirmed to have hardware ray tracing capabilties.
RX 5700 Series Reviews - RDNA Details:
Zen 2
Improved Branch Prediction
Single operation AVX2
Larger L3 Cache (2x Zen and Zen+)
Zen 2 Details
Digital Foundry uploaded a video where they test a PC with Zen 2 and NAVI hardware, this serves as a concept of theorhetical Next Generation console performance.
Digital Foundry: Zen 2/Navi PC vs Xbox One X/PS4 Pro - How Much More Performance Could We Get?
Richard conducts a test using Cinebench R15, and includes projected performance of the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One X's Jaguar CPUs in his testing results.
Cinebench R15
equivalent Athlon 5370 at 1.6GHz (Jaguar CPU Core x 4)
8 core (Projected Xbox One X equivalent, 100% scaling assumption) - 366
Ryzen 7 3700X at 2.3GHz
1T (Single thread) - 110 (2.24X faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar)
MT (Multi thread) - 618 (3.37x faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar)
Octo-Core Score - 1220 (4.76x faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar)
In the event that a next generation console feature a CPU at 2.3GHz:
Single-threaded performance gains are around 2.24x higher than 2.3GHz Jaguar, and 3.14x faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar.
Multi-thread performance of 8 cores is around 4.76x than 2.3GHz Jaguar, and 4.76x faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar.
Ryzen 7 3700X at 3.2GHz
1T (Single thread) - 152 (3.1x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar)
MT (Multi thread) - 868 (4.74x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar)
Octo-Core Score - 1702 (4.65x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar)
In the event that a next generation console feature a CPU at 3.2GHz:
Single-threaded performance gains are around 3.1x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar, and 4.34x faster than 1.6GHz Jaguar.
Multi-threaded performance of 8 cores is around 4.65x faster than 2.3GHz Jaguar, and 6.64x faster than Jaguar at 1.6GHz.
Currently, we only know that the PlayStation 5 is going to have a Zen 2 CPU with 8 cores and 16 threads, the clock speed of this CPU is unknown at this point in time.
I must stress that Digital Foundry are testing a machine with PC components, and consoles are designed around strict power, thermal and size limitations, so it would be unrealistic to expect console hardware to have clock speeds matching their PC derivatives.
I think it is likely that they will be within the range of 2.7-3.2GHz, or even 2.3-2.7GHz as higher clock speeds often require more power and more capable cooling solutions, this can be more expensive or may require a larger surface area.
Thermodynamics isn't my forte but an example of this would be the use of copper heatsinks over aluminum ones, as copper conducts heat better but can be more expensive to implement.
Current affairs regarding Zen 2's performance and Intel's offerings.
Intel's current architecture which has seen widespread use across mobile and desktops is Coffee-Lake, Intel have introduced other architectures to market which are refinements of Coffee-Lake, however these are chips which are focused on the mobile segment and to my knowledge do not reach the performance standards of Coffee-Lake to replace it in the desktop segment.
With Zen 2, it seems that AMD has rectified many of the performance bottlenecks from the first generation Zen CPUs. As a result of this, AMD has pretty much caught up to Intel in the majority of workloads, and are even offering CPUs that deliver competitive performance in their price range, some of which undercut Intel's own chips. However, Intel still maintain a clock speed advantage for their CPUs, this leads to higher performance in gaming workloads in the currently available software.
I found TechReport's review of the 3700X and 3900X to be very telling of this, it's a very comprehensive review and they did a fantastic job reviewing these CPUs, check it out here:
Tech Report - AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 3900X CPUs reviewed
From this review I wanted to bring this section to attention, check out GTA V's performance on the Ryzen 3700X and 2700X here:
That's a 24.7% gain in average fps and signficantly lower frame times, this is great to see as this game has been something the Zen architecture has struggled with since it's inception, and Zen 2 seems to have closed the gap signficantly between it and Intel's offerings.
However, regardless of this improvement in GTA V, Intel still have a sizable lead in gaming performance in other games such as Deus Ex: Mankind Divided and Hitman 2 as featured in this review.
Here we see Intel's 9900K leading by 26.6% against the 3700X, and 34.5% against the 3900X.
Anandtech
Anandtech conducted a test with the SPEC2006 and SPEC2017 benchmark suite in their Ryzen 3700X and 3900X review, these are industry standard benchmarks.
The Ryzen 9 3900X (Zen 2) is compared against AMD's own Ryzen 7 2700X (Zen+) and Intel's i9-9900K (Coffee-Lake)
AMD Ryzen 9 3900x.
The 3900X and i9-9900K used DDR4 3200MHz CL16 memory, whilst the Ryzen 7 2700X used DDR4 2933MHz memory with "similar" CL16 timings.
This testing suite features a variety of different tests, these bring to light to the different improvements that have brought to Zen 2. From these tests, the reviewers were able to deduce the impacts of things such as Zen 2's improved branch prediction capabilties from things such as the 445.gobmk benchmark as well as the cache improvements. They have also shown how it compares to Intel's i9-9900K and their Coffee-Lake architecture and showcase Zen 2's strengths and weaknesses.
From this testing suite, they concluded that Zen 2 has a higher overall IPC when compared to Intel's Coffee-Lake architecture. IPC is basically the performance of the CPU at the same clock speeds.
This is just a short overview of their findings in the SPEC benchmarks, there is more information available at the source.
TechSpot
TechSpot (Hardware Unboxed) conducted a test featuring the Ryzen 7 1700X, Ryzen 7 2700X, the Ryzen 7 3700X and the Ryzen 9 3900X with 8 cores enabled (down from 12) and tested it against Intel 9900K. Their highest performing mainstream socket desktop CPU. All CPUs were tested at 4GHz.
To my knowledge, the i9-9900K has an all-core turbo of 4.8GHz so this is theorhetically leaving perhaps 20% performance on the table, but the main purpose of this test was to showcase performance differences between the CPUs at the same clock speed.
This is a really interesting test, as it gives us an insight to how AMD's Zen 2 CPUs fair against Intel's own i9-9900K at the same clock speeds.
In their tests, most of the results show the Ryzen 7 3700X performing within 10% of Intel i9-9900K, losing in the gaming test and performing better than i9-9900K in the application tests. AMD have a highly competitive product on their hands.
So far, it seems that Intel still has an advantage in gaming performance in the current software that is available.
I have seen up-to 20-30% performance advantages go to Intel's 9900K when tested against AMD's current best mainstream CPU, the 3900X (some of this could be due to Windows schedular issues as I've seen smaller performance advantages when disabling SMT on AMD CPUs) this is a 12 core 24 thread CPU with a base clock of 3.8GHz and a boost clock of 4.6GHz, while the 9900K is an 8 core 16 thread CPU, with a base clock of 3.6GHz and a boost clock of 5GHz.
Intel does have a clock-speed advantage, as well as more headroom to reach higher overclocks.
The i9-9900K in particular has the ability to boost all 8 of it's cores to 4.8GHz, while the AMD CPUs typically max out at around 4.4GHz. There have been improvements to how AMD CPUs boost due to new BIOs releases, this helps these CPUs to maintain their boost clock speeds.
TechSpot - 4GHz CPU Battle
Cinebench R20
Cinebench R20 shows the AMD 3700X leading by 13.4% in multi-core performance, and the 3900X with 8 cores enabled leading by 13.6%
For single-core performance, the 3900X (4 cores disabled) leads by 9.5% against the i9-9900K, and the 3700X leads by 9%
Gaming Performance
In Battlefield V, the I9-9900k leads by 2.5% in average framerates versus the 3900X (4 cores disabled), and 7.3% versus the 3700X.
For minimum framerates, the 9900K leads by 8.7% versus the 3900X and 3700X.
Comparing the 3700X to the 1700X sees the Zen 2 CPU leading by 15.5% for average framerates, and 10.7% for minimum framerates.
In Far Cry New Dawn, the i9-9900K leads by 5.3% versus the 3900X (4 cores disabled), and 9.2% versus the 3700X in average framerates.
For minimum framerates, the i9-9900K leads by 9.5% versus the 3900X and 3700X.
In this AIDA64's latency test, we see that the Zen 2 CPUs have higher latency when compared to Intel's i9-9900K.
In SiSoftware's Multi-Thread Latency test we see that while Zen 2 has higher latency when comparing "Worst Matched Cores" to the i9-9900K, it has lower latency when compared against the Best Matched Cores. However, we also see that the latency between the "Best Matched Cores" is lower than the i9-9900K.
Zen 2 has made notable improvements with in regard to multi-thread latency, as the first generation Zen CPUs see 53% higher latency when comparing the "Worst Matched Cores" latency to the Ryzen 7 3700X, while the Ryzen 7 2700X sees 35% higher latency when comparing the latency of the "Worst Matched Cores" to the 3700X.
For "Best Matched Cores" the Ryzen 7 1700X has 43.9% higher latency when compared to the Ryzen 7 3700X, and the 2700X has 42% higher latency when compared to the 3700X as well.
These GPUs are based on AMD RDNA's architecture, these GPUs may be a solid basis of what to expect from Next Generation Consoles.
Specifications:
The 5700 XT has 40 Compute Units and the 5700 has 36.
RX 5700 XT (2560 x 1823 x 2 = 9.3 Teraflops)
RX 5700 (2304 x 1671 x 2 = 7.69 Teraflops)
(Air-cooled Vega 64 Performance level, sometimes slightly faster than the Vega 64)
As I mentioned earlier, it is important to note that consoles are designed around fairly signficant power and thermal limitations versus PCs which can afford to have hardware that consumes signficantly more power and can be more powerful, as a result of this it is unrealistic to expect clock-speeds matching those that are found in things such as AMD's desktop products which can see clock-speeds boosting up-to 4.7GHz on single cores.
The consoles CPUs are likely to be within the range of 2.7, - 3.2GHz or even 2.3 - 2.7GHz to keep the power consumption and thermal output down, the GPUs may also prioritize core count over clock-speeds.
For example, we may see a a GPU configuration such as this in a console:
3072 cores (48 Compute Units)
3072 x 1400 x 2 = 8.6 Teraflops
3072 x 1500 x 2 = 9.2 Teraflops
Compared to the clock-speeds that can be found in NAVI desktop parts, the 5700 and 5700 XT have clock speeds in the range of 1600-1900MHz
given how much emphasis both Sony and MS have put on the speed of the ssds both the PS5 and Scarlett will have, anything less that NVME PCIe 4.0 would be surprising.
given how much emphasis both Sony and MS have put on the speed of the ssds both the PS5 and Scarlett will have, anything less that NVME PCIe 4.0 would be surprising.
Great news! At a conservative 3GB/sec that means the consoles must have at least 1800GB of RAM available to games. Thankfully, I think we can safely assume that games taking minutes to load is going to be a thing of the past In all but the worst implemented loading schemes.
Great news! At a conservative 3GB/sec that means the consoles must have at least 1800GB of RAM available to games. Thankfully, I think we can safely assume that games taking minutes to load is going to be a thing of the past In all but the worst implemented loading schemes.
Playing Dreams and switching between creations feels like magic. No longer than 5 seconds between them. Would love it if it was remotely like that for changing games.
Playing Dreams and switching between creations feels like magic. No longer than 5 seconds between them. Would love it if it was remotely like that for changing games.
Sounds like it won't be far off. Like 10 seconds switching from one game to the next (as in literally being able to jump into playing another game in 10 seconds.) That would be a game changer, pardon the pun.
