NX Gamer: PS5 Full Spec Analysis | A new generation is Born

2Blackcats

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,188
And racing games are typically not very demanding to render, so there's more possibility to spend budget on RT without impacting the rest of the presentation.


Lockhart would also be rendering much lower resolution, which will reduce the calculations needed. Even if it's only 4TF as rumored, number of rays should be about 1/3rd of XSX. If resolution is only 1/4 (1080p vs. 2160p), there shouldn't be much problem. This rough number does seem to indicate lowered RT quality if Lockhart renders at 1440p, or if XSX is rendering below full 4K.


It's confirmed. The way Microsoft promoted their RT performance is by saying XSX can do 380 billion intersections per second. This number is amount of TMUs times clockspeed. (TMU is Texture Mapping Unit, of which there are 4 per CU.) This gives an exact figure of 379.6; doing the same calculation for PS5 gives a value of 321.1. That's 15% lower, the exact same gap as general compute...which makes sense, since it's dependent on the same two things, amount of CUs and clock.

In other words, if a PS5 game is 15% lower resolution, then it should have the same quality of RT. Or, XSX could have 15% better RT, but then the two games would run at the same resolution. (In general, logical terms only, of course; real results will differ slightly from game to game.)


The GPU operates on data stored in its local caches. When those calculations are done, the results are sent back to RAM and new source data is loaded from there. When the GPU clockspeed is high, calculations finish faster so you need to refill the RAM more often. But GPU clockspeed doesn't apply to RAM, which has its own invariant bandwidth. That means the windows where RAM will accept requests are farther apart, compared to the amount of math you're doing.

This is why people with technical know-how think the RAM bandwidth may be a limiting factor for both PS5 and XSX performance. The way both platforms might not be bandwidth-starved is if they can keep as much data in the local caches as possible, reducing trips to RAM. But also, AMD has worked to reduce bandwidth needs for the same amount of work by changing the architecture.



This may also be ameliorated by the fact that PS5 is likely to have more L2 cache per CU than XSX.


Please stop this. Mr. Battaglia has been part of our community for years prior to his employment at DF, as a level-headed and reasonable contributor. Of course he may well have personal biases, but the public statements he makes are grounded in expertise and knowledge, with an obvious intent to be informative, not divisive. You've heard him mostly talking about XSX because Microsoft has simply given more detail about the tech inside their machine. (And perhaps also because through DirectX more of it will apply to PC, which has always been his platform of choice.)
Thanks
 

Dictator

Digital Foundry
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
2,742
Berlin, 'SCHLAND
He literally said, "if the GPU is at 10.2TF (2.23GHz), the CPU is not at 3.5GHz."

Don't know how much clearer he can be.

And, I have a hard time listening to his opinions on this specific subject, to be honest, as he has not said a single positive thing about PS5, nor a single negative thing about Series X. People are allowed to have biases (and that doesn't mean the business as a whole, ie Digital Foundry, present things from a biased point of view, because I believe their videos are pretty objective), and I just believe the guy has a strong bias.
Why do I have to say positive things about a piece of hardware, when I am trying to clear up misconceptions that I read here on the forum about said hardware? Would you prefer I type "Actually, you cannot run path tracing on the ssd. But PS5 has a nice GPU". That would be sycophantic and non-sequitor.

I have been clearing up misconceptions in postings about Xbox Series X as well regarding it's RT or Raster performance... Based on the video work I have done on it. You should see the hell I get there for my apparent biases against the Xbox Series X for telling people it did not perform like an RTX 2080 Ti or better in Gears 5!

If you are curious as to how I view the consoles since the information came out: I just think the GPU and CPU setup is nicer in Xbox Series X, carrying the exact same line of thinking that my employer has basically also stated. It is a % amount that we can talk about. It is not nebulous and unproven (like Power of the Cloud was, for example). I also think the PS5 and Xbox Series X are gonna be great performance wise, be very similar in performance aand resolution in games that use rasterisation, and I am incredibly happy they are both targeting unique high specs in comparison to the Xbox One and PS4. Regarding the PS5 - I am so happy they are already targetting games with RT as Cerny Mentioned. Just wish he showed it actually running RT.

Sadly, console wars on this forum make it so that people feel the need to prove weird nonsensical theories as to why one of these boxes is game changingly better than one or the other... with absolutely no evidence. So yeah, I feel compelled to ground posts in reality that are filled with baseless conjecture about the SSD/GPU/CPU/RAM in the PS5/XSX. Especially since most if not all of such posts exist to just try and raise one of these consoles above the other... for console war reasons.
The thing is, based on just what was actually said, the implication is that Dictator is wrong about this, though it could still be a case of Cerny messing up delivery of messaging.

The actual transcript reads as the following.

"Running a GPU at 2Ghz was looking like an unreachable target with the old fixed frequency strategy. With this new paradigm we're able to run way over that, infact we have to cap the GPU frequency at 2.23Ghz so that we can guarantee the on chip logic operates properly.

36 CUs at 2.23Ghz is 10.3 Tflops and we expect the GPU to spend most of its time at our close to that frequency and performance.

Similarly running the CPU at 3 GHz was causing headaches with the old strategy but now we can run it as high as 3.5 GHz, infact it spends most of its time at that frequency"

So based on the above, we're told that both the CPU and GPU will spend most of their time at the subsequent max frequency clocks. That's the first implication that they can both run at max frequencies simultaneously.

Then he says the following.

"That doesn't mean all games will be running at 2.23 GHz and 3.5 GHz. When that worst case arrives, it will run at a lower clockspeed, but not too much lower. To reduce power by 10%, it only takes a couple of percent reduction in frequency, so I'd expect any downclocking to be pretty minor"

This next part, once again, implies it can indeed run both the GPU and CPU at max frequencies, since saying he doesn't expect all games to, implies there will be games that do. Add to that, using the term worst case, again implies it'll be a rarer occurance that causes them to not both run at their potential max clocks.

Now of course, perhaps Cerny minced his words and Dictator is right, but I'm not so sure based on the language, and everything else Cerny said. My guess is that hitting max frequencies on both the CPU and GPU simultaneously, is not enough to hit their set power limit, and instead it's more so the types of tasks or instructions being carried out (some are more power hungry than others) that is likely the potential limiting factor. But I could be wrong.
Thanks for posting this - and all your bolded parts are namely exactly why it is important. Sony and Mark Cerny talking about the variable clock was to highlight that it can and will. Otherwise they would just leave that information unknown and opaque to the audience and only tell developers if it was a 99.98% thing. Developers need to know how and why frequency will drop and a "priority mode" is IMO a super smart way to do it. A game can get a constantly and reliably faster GPU if the CPU isn't important to the game anyway. That is good design.
 
Last edited:

disco_potato

Banned
Nov 16, 2017
1,580
True, it will... they both will. I am deeply concerned about memory bandwidth though. It seems like such an obvious potential bottleneck and its also such an easy (albeit more expensive) fix.

I just don't see how 448GB/s is enough for the CPU + GPU (that does so much more) would be enough.
It's an odd oversight as the pro suffered from the same issue, which you and others have pointed out repeatedly.
 

VanWinkle

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,931
Why do I have to say positive things about a piece of hardware, when I am trying to clear up misconceptions that I read here on the forum about said hardware? Would you prefer I type "Actually, you cannot run path tracing on the ssd. But PS5 has a nice GPU". That would be sycophantic and non-sequitor.

I have been clearing up misconceptions in postings about Xbox Series X as well regarding it's RT or Raster performance... Based on the video work I have done on it. You should see the hell I get there for my apparent biases against the Xbox Series X for telling people it did not perform like an RTX 2080 Ti or better in Gears 5!

If you are curious as to how I view the consoles since the information came out: I just think the GPU and CPU setup is nicer in Xbox Series X, carrying the exact same line of thinking that my employer has basically also stated. It is a % amount that we can talk about. It is not nebulous and unproven (like Power of the Cloud was, for example). I also think the PS5 and Xbox Series X are gonna be great performance wise, be extremely similar performance aand resolution in games that use rasterisation, and I am incredibly happy they are both targeting unique high specs in comparison to the Xbox One and PS4. Regarding the PS5 - I am so happy they are already targetting games with RT as Cerny Mentioned. Just wish he showed it actually running RT.

Sadly, console wars on this forum make it so that people feel the need to prove weird nonsensical theories as to why one of these boxes is game changingly better than one or the other... with absolutely no evidence. So yeah, I feel compelled to ground posts in reality that are filled with baseless conjecture about the SSD/GPU/CPU/RAM in the PS5/XSX. Especially since most if not all of such posts exist to just try and raise one of these consoles above the other... for console war reasons.
I understand your need to dispel misinformation. But misinformation is coming from all directions and you choose only to defend the Series X from that which makes it sound inferior in any way. Surely all the developers that are excited about specifically PS5's SSD setup care more about it than just the fact it will be able to load a little bit faster than the SSD setup Series X went with, and yet you claimed that a slight decrease in loading WOULD be the only difference. You've said unequivocally that if CPU runs at Max frequencies on PS5, that GPU cannot, and vice-versa. This directly contradicts Mark Cerny's talk saying that BOTH the CPU and GPU spend most of their time at max speed. Both cannot spend most of their time on max speeds if only one can do it at a time. But you haven't clarified why you are saying something different than Mark Cerny is. Either both run at max speeds most of the time or one does while the other doesn't.

I'm a big fan of your DF videos. Don't get me wrong. You're very knowledgeable and are part of a great team. And I agree that Series X has a better CPU/GPU setup, as anybody would. I think Series X will usually have the slightly better versions of multiplat games. But your narrative thus far is that the only advantage PS5 has is slightly better loading speeds. Maybe that's because Series X falls closer in line with traditional PC design philosophy, and PC is your system of choice; I don't know. Developers seem a lot more excited about the PS5's SSD setup than you do.
 

Dictator

Digital Foundry
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
2,742
Berlin, 'SCHLAND
I'm a big fan of your DF videos. Don't get me wrong. You're very knowledgeable and are part of a great team. And I agree that Series X has a better CPU/GPU setup, as anybody would. I think Series X will usually have the slightly better versions of multiplat games. But your narrative thus far is that the only advantage PS5 has is slightly better loading speeds. Maybe that's because Series X falls closer in line with traditional PC design philosophy, and PC is your system of choice; I don't know. Developers seem a lot more excited about the PS5's SSD setup than you do.
Me talking about loading being the only difference is the only provable point of data that we have to work from. The rest of what people are purporting the PS5 ssd enables in comparison to that SSD in the xbox series X is very much so in the realm of exotic speculation. Can you think of a visual/graphical thing that exists at all which works only at the arbitrary 5.5 GB/s and not 2.5 GB/s? They are both arbitrary numbers until we are talking about a real system doing X thing.

As I see it, BOTH the Xbox Series X and PS5 SSDs will enable entirely new game designs that were not possible before... as seen by something like Star Citizen which requires an SSDs Random 4K speeds and its large file bandwidth. And interestingly, the 4K random read speed of both these boxes will be similar enough, and so importantly slow in comparison to system RAM, which is where gameplay actually needs to be.
 

Alexandros

Member
Oct 26, 2017
8,609
Sadly, console wars on this forum make it so that people feel the need to prove weird nonsensical theories as to why one of these boxes is game changingly better than one or the other... with absolutely no evidence. So yeah, I feel compelled to ground posts in reality that are filled with baseless conjecture about the SSD/GPU/CPU/RAM in the PS5/XSX. Especially since most if not all of such posts exist to just try and raise one of these consoles above the other... for console war reasons.
I just wanted to say that the rest of us really appreciate your insight. Thank you.
 

Gohlad

Avenger
Oct 28, 2017
295
Me talking about loading being the only difference is the only provable point of data that we have to work from. The rest of what people are purporting the PS5 ssd enables in comparison to that SSD in the xbox series X is very much so in the realm of exotic speculation. Can you think of a visual/graphical thing that exists at all which works only at the arbitrary 5.5 GB/s and not 2.5 GB/s? They are both arbitrary numbers until we are talking about a real system doing X thing.

As I see it, BOTH the Xbox Series X and PS5 SSDs will enable entirely new game designs that were not possible before... as seen by something like Star Citizen which requires an SSDs Random 4K speeds and its large file bandwidth. And interestingly, the 4K random read speed of both these boxes will be similar enough, and so importantly slow in comparison to system RAM, which is where gameplay actually needs to be.
Sorry to ask, but where do you have the information for the 4k random read speed of both consoles from? Was it stated somewhere?
 
Aug 9, 2018
208
Why do I have to say positive things about a piece of hardware, when I am trying to clear up misconceptions that I read here on the forum about said hardware? Would you prefer I type "Actually, you cannot run path tracing on the ssd. But PS5 has a nice GPU". That would be sycophantic and non-sequitor.
Just to be clear, the thing about the PS5's CPU and GPU both reaching their top frequencies at the same time is a misconception?
 

Dictator

Digital Foundry
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
2,742
Berlin, 'SCHLAND
Sorry to ask, but where do you have the information for the 4k random read speed of both consoles from? Was it stated somewhere?
We do not know the exact numbers. But they are NVMEs and connected via PCI-E, by their very nature they will be in a certain class of latency and 4k random performance which is decidedly below system ram. That is why you have entirely different types of large memory storage like Optane or ReRAM offering the real magnitudinal differences there.
 

Deto

Banned
Feb 13, 2018
89
User Banned (2 weeks): Antagonizing other members; account in junior phase
Me talking about loading being the only difference is the only provable point of data that we have to work from.
cool


I would like you to prove that the CPU and GPU cannot stay on the maximum clock simultaneously most of the time.
 

Belvedere

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,376
I think we can all agree that it's a good thing that the consoles are as closely matched from a hardware perspective as what we're seeing, though fundamentally different. I was worried we'd have near carbon copies of the same technology which would make for boring performance comparisons.
 

gundamkyoukai

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,441
Me talking about loading being the only difference is the only provable point of data that we have to work from. The rest of what people are purporting the PS5 ssd enables in comparison to that SSD in the xbox series X is very much so in the realm of exotic speculation. Can you think of a visual/graphical thing that exists at all which works only at the arbitrary 5.5 GB/s and not 2.5 GB/s? They are both arbitrary numbers until we are talking about a real system doing X thing.

As I see it, BOTH the Xbox Series X and PS5 SSDs will enable entirely new game designs that were not possible before... as seen by something like Star Citizen which requires an SSDs Random 4K speeds and its large file bandwidth. And interestingly, the 4K random read speed of both these boxes will be similar enough, and so importantly slow in comparison to system RAM, which is where gameplay actually needs to be.
A lot of this comes down to ram management which is what the SSD suppose to help with .
So i guess we will see what having twice the speed will do when it comes to those subs systems .
Reading a few things devs are saying people trying to piece together what effect it can have since it faster .
Time will tell when we see more games in action.
 

cyenz

Member
Oct 27, 2017
588
cool


I would like you to prove that the CPU and GPU cannot stay on the maximum clock simultaneously
I can be on windows 10 with full frequency on a 2080ti and ryzen 3700x, as soon as workloads start throtlle due to power limits happen. This will happen for sure on a PS5, otherwise they would be variable but fixed.
 

Chettlar

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,614
Why do I have to say positive things about a piece of hardware, when I am trying to clear up misconceptions that I read here on the forum about said hardware? Would you prefer I type "Actually, you cannot run path tracing on the ssd. But PS5 has a nice GPU". That would be sycophantic and non-sequitor.

I have been clearing up misconceptions in postings about Xbox Series X as well regarding it's RT or Raster performance... Based on the video work I have done on it. You should see the hell I get there for my apparent biases against the Xbox Series X for telling people it did not perform like an RTX 2080 Ti or better in Gears 5!

If you are curious as to how I view the consoles since the information came out: I just think the GPU and CPU setup is nicer in Xbox Series X, carrying the exact same line of thinking that my employer has basically also stated. It is a % amount that we can talk about. It is not nebulous and unproven (like Power of the Cloud was, for example). I also think the PS5 and Xbox Series X are gonna be great performance wise, be very similar in performance aand resolution in games that use rasterisation, and I am incredibly happy they are both targeting unique high specs in comparison to the Xbox One and PS4. Regarding the PS5 - I am so happy they are already targetting games with RT as Cerny Mentioned. Just wish he showed it actually running RT.

Sadly, console wars on this forum make it so that people feel the need to prove weird nonsensical theories as to why one of these boxes is game changingly better than one or the other... with absolutely no evidence. So yeah, I feel compelled to ground posts in reality that are filled with baseless conjecture about the SSD/GPU/CPU/RAM in the PS5/XSX. Especially since most if not all of such posts exist to just try and raise one of these consoles above the other... for console war reasons.


Thanks for posting this - and all your bolded parts are namely exactly why it is important. Sony and Mark Cerny talking about the variable clock was to highlight that it can and will. Otherwise they would just leave that information unknown and opaque to the audience and only tell developers if it was a 99.98% thing. Developers need to know how and why frequency will drop and a "priority mode" is IMO a super smart way to do it. A game can get a constantly and reliably faster GPU if the CPU isn't important to the game anyway. That is good design.
Those of us interesting in learning how this stuff works appreciate your posts, man.
 

Deto

Banned
Feb 13, 2018
89
I can be on windows 10 with full frequency on a 2080ti and ryzen 3700x, as soon as workloads start throtlle due to power limits happen. This will happen for sure on a PS5, otherwise they would be variable but fixed.
My fiat car gets hot in the summer.
This proves that the BMW car too.


"Let's change the subject to forget the hypocrisy."
 

Rumpestump

Member
Dec 8, 2018
907
We do not know the exact numbers. But they are NVMEs and connected via PCI-E, by their very nature they will be in a certain class of latency and 4k random performance which is decidedly below system ram. That is why you have entirely different types of large memory storage like Optane or ReRAM offering the real magnitudinal differences there.
Don’t know if its 100% accurate to what ended up in the PS5 but this patent from Sony have some numbers in them that you or perhaps other tech savvy people can use at least for PS5?

Credit to gofreak

https://www.resetera.com/threads/ps5-a-patent-dive-into-what-might-be-the-tech-behind-sonys-ssd-customisations-technical.118587/
 

Dictator

Digital Foundry
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
2,742
Berlin, 'SCHLAND
cool


I would like you to prove that the CPU and GPU cannot stay on the maximum clock simultaneously most of the time.
Your flippant sarcasm is duely noted.

I cannot of course post anything of directly provable information: that does not exist and is not in my hands. I do not have a devkit of course. I do not have a document in writing where anything is said like what I typed. I have only talked to people who worked on the box who talked of the priority thing. So yeah, just hearsay.

You can choose not to believe that hearsay and therefore my post where I talk about the hearsay.
 

Liabe Brave

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,134
Can you think of a visual/graphical thing that exists at all which works only at the arbitrary 5.5 GB/s and not 2.5 GB/s?
Actually, Mr. Cerny gave a possible example of just this. He pointed out that the PS5 I/O speed may be sufficient to completely exchange data at the same pace typical for camera movement. That is, the total GPU resources could be concentrated solely in the view frustum. This would result in greater visual detail within FOV than the same amount of compute power could provide without such high I/O speed. Series X, being lower on the continuum, might either need to render less detail overall, or else have visible pop-in.

This depends on the just-in-time multiplier provided by the I/O, of course; no matter how fast the data comes through, the GPU still has to compute with it. The XSX with its greater resources will do that faster. The open question is how these two advantages stack up, and I agree we'll need to see actual software to start forming an opinion about that. Maybe such streaming will be too difficult in practice. But it's a logically plausible differentiation.
 

Deto

Banned
Feb 13, 2018
89
Your flippant sarcasm is duely noted.

I cannot of course post anything of directly provable information: that does not exist and is not in my hands. I do not have a devkit of course. I do not have a document in writing where anything is said like what I typed. I have only talked to people who worked on the box who talked of the priority thing. So yeah, just hearsay.

You can choose not to believe that hearsay and therefore my post where I talk about the hearsay.
I don't want you to prove anything, you don't have to.

Only that both, SSD for loading only and maximum clock not simultaneous, are what you suppose to be the reality.

Process priorities is a good way to save energy and not prove that the CPU and GPU do not run at maximum clock simultaneously
 
Last edited:

Zedark

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,662
The Netherlands
Me talking about loading being the only difference is the only provable point of data that we have to work from. The rest of what people are purporting the PS5 ssd enables in comparison to that SSD in the xbox series X is very much so in the realm of exotic speculation. Can you think of a visual/graphical thing that exists at all which works only at the arbitrary 5.5 GB/s and not 2.5 GB/s? They are both arbitrary numbers until we are talking about a real system doing X thing.

As I see it, BOTH the Xbox Series X and PS5 SSDs will enable entirely new game designs that were not possible before... as seen by something like Star Citizen which requires an SSDs Random 4K speeds and its large file bandwidth. And interestingly, the 4K random read speed of both these boxes will be similar enough, and so importantly slow in comparison to system RAM, which is where gameplay actually needs to be.
I will echo the sentiment: appreciate your posts in these threads a lot! We have two very powerful consoles, and to my only partially informed eyes, it seems that the two systems should only have minor differences between them in different areas (2000p vs. 2160p, 2 sec of loading vs. 5 sec of loading, minor stuff like that). And on top of that, the two systems perform near the top of the line of gaming hardware available, which is very impressive and should keep these systems relevant in terms of power even into late generation, which PS4 and especially XB1 are having some issues with right now. It produces a great baseline for next gen 4K game presentations I think.

(And I'm actually low-key relieved that someone with actual knowledge finally has said they do not know how the PS5's SSD will concretely boost games beyond the quality possible with the XSX's SSD outside of faster loading. It's a much-discussed topic but people had so far only talked in vague generalities about what the PS5's SSD will allow devs to do - or stated scenario that are very nice but not something that explains why the 5.5 GB/s is needed instead of the 2.4 GB/s. It's been a tough landscape to navigate.)
 

Somnia

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,375
Is Sony not allowing normal USB HDDs to backup games and xfer to the ssd? Maybe I missed that.
 

2Blackcats

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,188
Actually, Mr. Cerny gave a possible example of just this. He pointed out that the PS5 I/O speed may be sufficient to completely exchange data at the same pace typical for camera movement. That is, the total GPU resources could be concentrated solely in the view frustum. This would result in greater visual detail within FOV than the same amount of compute power could provide without such high I/O speed. Series X, being lower on the continuum, might either need to render less detail overall, or else have visible pop-in.

This depends on the just-in-time multiplier provided by the I/O, of course; no matter how fast the data comes through, the GPU still has to compute with it. The XSX with its greater resources will do that faster. The open question is how these two advantages stack up, and I agree we'll need to see actual software to start forming an opinion about that. Maybe such streaming will be too difficult in practice. But it's a logically plausible differentiation.
That was the most interesting part of the talk.

I wonder if it's based on work they've already done with their engines.
 

gundamkyoukai

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,441
Actually, Mr. Cerny gave a possible example of just this. He pointed out that the PS5 I/O speed may be sufficient to completely exchange data at the same pace typical for camera movement. That is, the total GPU resources could be concentrated solely in the view frustum. This would result in greater visual detail within FOV than the same amount of compute power could provide without such high I/O speed. Series X, being lower on the continuum, might either need to render less detail overall, or else have visible pop-in.

This depends on the just-in-time multiplier provided by the I/O, of course; no matter how fast the data comes through, the GPU still has to compute with it. The XSX with its greater resources will do that faster. The open question is how these two advantages stack up, and I agree we'll need to see actual software to start forming an opinion about that. Maybe such streaming will be too difficult in practice. But it's a logically plausible differentiation.
Wondering if he going to make a game to show off those aspect of Sony SSD speed.
He did it with PS4 ( not saying how good the game is lol) or maybe this time one of the games he on as a consultant will do for eg spiderman 2.
Since he also software guy he most likely test out certain things already .
 

EBomb

Member
Oct 25, 2017
394
Actually, Mr. Cerny gave a possible example of just this. He pointed out that the PS5 I/O speed may be sufficient to completely exchange data at the same pace typical for camera movement. That is, the total GPU resources could be concentrated solely in the view frustum. This would result in greater visual detail within FOV than the same amount of compute power could provide without such high I/O speed. Series X, being lower on the continuum, might either need to render less detail overall, or else have visible pop-in.

This depends on the just-in-time multiplier provided by the I/O, of course; no matter how fast the data comes through, the GPU still has to compute with it. The XSX with its greater resources will do that faster. The open question is how these two advantages stack up, and I agree we'll need to see actual software to start forming an opinion about that. Maybe such streaming will be too difficult in practice. But it's a logically plausible differentiation.
Mr. Cerny, lol, what is this, an Economist editorial.

Cerny cited a benefit but he didn't cite a minimum threshold IO speed ("X") needed to do this. Why do you assume, in a simplified analogy, 2.5 < X < 5.5?
 

cb1115

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,487
this thread turned real rotten but i just want to chime in and say that i'm glad both consoles seem to be beefcakes this time around

i can't wait to see Spider-Man 2 and whatever Naughty Dog's new thing end up being (space opera pls) running on this thing
 

tzare

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,499
Catalunya
He literally said, "if the GPU is at 10.2TF (2.23GHz), the CPU is not at 3.5GHz."

Don't know how much clearer he can be.

And, I have a hard time listening to his opinions on this specific subject, to be honest, as he has not said a single positive thing about PS5, nor a single negative thing about Series X. People are allowed to have biases (and that doesn't mean the business as a whole, ie Digital Foundry, present things from a biased point of view, because I believe their videos are pretty objective), and I just believe the guy has a strong bias.
You are not alone thinking that
 

VanWinkle

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,931
Mr. Cerny, lol, what is this, an Economist editorial.

Cerny cited a benefit but he didn't cite a minimum threshold IO speed ("X") needed to do this. Why do you assume, in a simplified analogy, 2.5 < X < 5.5?
Yeah, that's a good point. We don't know specifically what tangible benefits 5.5 will have besides loading. We have only heard from some developers that they're happy Sony went the way they did (presumably for reasons other than just slightly better loading).
 

Zedark

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,662
The Netherlands
Mr. Cerny, lol, what is this, an Economist editorial.

Cerny cited a benefit but he didn't cite a minimum threshold IO speed ("X") needed to do this. Why do you assume, in a simplified analogy, 2.5 < X < 5.5?
Well, Cerny does explicitly say that the reason for the 5 GB/s target was to allow for this fast streaming effect. Of course, that only says that 5 GB/s is enough to do this: it doesn't say it's the absolute minimum for being able to do this in a next gen setting.
 

Belvedere

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,376
That was the most interesting part of the talk.

I wonder if it's based on work they've already done with their engines.
And didn't other developers on twitter, various insiders/devs at B3D, RGT as well as NX Gamer mention use cases like offloading tasks typically suited for RAM to the SSD also freeing up certain GPU cycles? There's more to the story than just the throughput speeds of Sony's SSD solution from what I remember hearing/reading.
 

Binabik15

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,623
The video was good, but a bit too much XSX talk for my liking. I get that cutting that out and making a PS5 vs XSX wouls draw the countless legions on fanboys, though.

I like Sony's slightly more exotic configuration as it might be just what devs wanted. PS5 seems to have enough GPU and CPU grunt relative to XSX that it's not a complete bust as a (first) next-gen console if it turns out that the SSD is overkill and nobody uses the audio stuff 🤷‍♀️ They can add more regular upgrades in a Pro version - at that point I'd switch to that and will probably have bought a XSX after a price cut or two.
 

Zedark

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,662
The Netherlands
And didn't other developers on twitter, various insiders/devs at B3D, RGT as well as NX Gamer mention use cases like offloading tasks typically suited for RAM to the SSD also freeing up certain GPU cycles? There's more to the story than just the throughput speeds of Sony's SSD solution from what I remember hearing/reading.
They did mention that, but at least for the case that NX Gamer mentioned (offloading the OS to the SSD while running the game) it's not clear why that requires 5.5 GB/s, and why it would not be possible with the XSX's 2.4 GB/s.

I don't know if other devs mentioned use cases that can be done with PS5 SSD speed but not with XSX's.
 
Oct 27, 2017
595
San Francisco, Ca
Isn't the most likely thing that happens is that multi platforms just use dynamic res which will usually resolve a little lower on PS5? Seems to be the general way the tech is trending and makes the most sense, as it also allows a "Pro" version later to have automatic upgrades.

RT effects might be a little more on XBX, but I highly doubt its going to be anything too mind blowing either way, as I don't really think either console will have the muscle to do too much with it.
 

Gemüsepizza

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,449
Me talking about loading being the only difference is the only provable point of data that we have to work from. The rest of what people are purporting the PS5 ssd enables in comparison to that SSD in the xbox series X is very much so in the realm of exotic speculation. Can you think of a visual/graphical thing that exists at all which works only at the arbitrary 5.5 GB/s and not 2.5 GB/s? They are both arbitrary numbers until we are talking about a real system doing X thing.

As I see it, BOTH the Xbox Series X and PS5 SSDs will enable entirely new game designs that were not possible before... as seen by something like Star Citizen which requires an SSDs Random 4K speeds and its large file bandwidth. And interestingly, the 4K random read speed of both these boxes will be similar enough, and so importantly slow in comparison to system RAM, which is where gameplay actually needs to be.
That the PS5 SSD will allow much more data for streaming is hardly "exotic speculation". And nobody claims that there is a visual/graphical feature that is only possible on PS5. What people claimed was that there are game design decisions, that will only be able on PS5. And that is a fact. You could build a game with faster movement speed on PS5 than XSX. You could build a game where you can teleport in certain situations, while you can't on XSX.

Of course those features will be mostly limited to exclusive games. But we will also see massive improvements in 3rd party titles. After all, the PS5 SSD is 129% better than the XSX SSD. This means that every aspect that relies on SSD bandwidth will be better on PS5. And this will also affect graphics, because PS5 will be able to stream higher quality assets, and also more varied assets. Saying that the only difference between PS5 and XSX is "loading times" is simply not true.
 

SnatcherHunter

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
7,199
That the PS5 SSD will allow much more data for streaming is hardly "exotic speculation". And nobody claims that there is a visual/graphical feature that is only possible on PS5. What people claimed was that there are game design decisions, that will only be able on PS5. And that is a fact. You could build a game with faster movement speed on PS5 than XSX. You could build a game where you can teleport in certain situations, while you can't on XSX.

Of course those features will be mostly limited to exclusive games. But we will also see massive improvements in 3rd party titles. After all, the PS5 SSD is 129% better than the XSX SSD. This means that every aspect that relies on SSD bandwidth will be better on PS5. And this will also affect graphics, because PS5 will be able to stream higher quality assets, and also more varied assets. Saying that the only difference between PS5 and XSX is "loading times" is simply not true.
Blast Processing
 

gofreak

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,836
Me talking about loading being the only difference is the only provable point of data that we have to work from.

We kind of talk speculatively and on paper about all these things.

Talking about the impact of IO on data streaming is more complicated than talking about an easily calculable time to fill RAM, but I wouldn't say it's exotic speculation.

We've had at least one developer here talk about the impact of the SSD wrt visuals.

I don't think the link between streaming IO and memory usage, and thus potential visual knocks-ons, is speculative - what's speculative is in the XSX comparison, and the extent to which PS5 would or wouldn't be offering diminishing returns vs it in that equation.
 

Belvedere

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,376
They did mention that, but at least for the case that NX Gamer mentioned (offloading the OS to the SSD while running the game) it's not clear why that requires 5.5 GB/s, and why it would not be possible with the XSX's 2.4 GB/s.

I don't know if other devs mentioned use cases that can be done with PS5 SSD speed but not with XSX's.
I'll see if I can dig it up (the link was posted in one of the numerous next-gen threads) but the B3D poster in question laid out multiple use cases that would exclusively benefit PS5 pipelines. He did mention other similar solutions for XSX but the fundamental design oriented improvements were specific to his PS5 examples.

Also it's interesting reading the impressions of B3D members. They seem a bit baffled by Microsoft's split memory solution. There seems to be more discourse around that than PS5's variable clock rates.
 
That the PS5 SSD will allow much more data for streaming is hardly "exotic speculation". And nobody claims that there is a visual/graphical feature that is only possible on PS5. What people claimed was that there are game design decisions, that will only be able on PS5. And that is a fact. You could build a game with faster movement speed on PS5 than XSX. You could build a game where you can teleport in certain situations, while you can't on XSX.

Of course those features will be mostly limited to exclusive games. But we will also see massive improvements in 3rd party titles. After all, the PS5 SSD is 129% better than the XSX SSD. This means that every aspect that relies on SSD bandwidth will be better on PS5. And this will also affect graphics, because PS5 will be able to stream higher quality assets, and also more varied assets. Saying that the only difference between PS5 and XSX is "loading times" is simply not true.
Yikes! Perhaps it is time to stop posting, you are to heavily invested in the “superiority” of the SSD. Yes, SSD will allow for cool things in game design but just because Sony’s SSD is above a certain number does not mean it passed a magic “oh shit now we can make unicorns happen” stuff..
 

kostacurtas

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,229
And didn't other developers on twitter, various insiders/devs at B3D, RGT as well as NX Gamer mention use cases like offloading tasks typically suited for RAM to the SSD also freeing up certain GPU cycles? There's more to the story than just the throughput speeds of Sony's SSD solution from what I remember hearing/reading.
You don't choose for a console a 5.5 GB/s custom SSD just for fast loading times.

I saw yesterday a really interesting analysis on Beyond3D of how both next gen consoles can/will use their SSD and RAM.
 

TuMekeNZ

Member
Oct 27, 2017
897
Auckland, New Zealand
Hope we don't have to wait too long for Sony to decide to drop more info about the system. Will be good to get a more consumer friendly presentation with pretty visuals and vroom vroom, bang bang sounds...
 

Binabik15

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,623
I'll see if I can dig it up (the link was posted in one of the numerous next-gen threads) but the B3D poster in question laid out multiple use cases that would exclusively benefit PS5 pipelines. He did mention other similar solutions for XSX but the fundamental design oriented improvements were specific to his PS5 examples.

Also it's interesting reading the impressions of B3D members. They seem a bit baffled by Microsoft's split memory solution. There seems to be more discourse around that than PS5's variable clock rates.
*snip*

I hope the link works. Surfing on your phone pro: finding this only took me typing "beyond". Con: ERA's UI can be tricky.

Edit: And new posts containing your links don't automatically show up before you post 😄
 
Last edited:

Gohlad

Avenger
Oct 28, 2017
295
Mr. Cerny, lol, what is this, an Economist editorial.

Cerny cited a benefit but he didn't cite a minimum threshold IO speed ("X") needed to do this. Why do you assume, in a simplified analogy, 2.5 < X < 5.5?
He actually did. In the video (at 10:10 min) he explains that the 5,5GB/s (8-9GBsec compressed) target is for asset streaming while the player turns around to be instantaneous. He said that it takes 0,5sec to turn around and that is 4GB of compressed data you could load in the field of view of the player.
 

PJV3

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,249
London
Hope we don't have to wait too long for Sony to decide to drop more info about the system. Will be good to get a more consumer friendly presentation with pretty visuals and vroom vroom, bang bang sounds...
That's what i'm waiting for now.
Shame there probably won't be any drunk cameraman stuff, i hope they can still do a good showing off of the system.
 

Talus

Member
Dec 9, 2017
1,260
He actually did. In the video (at 10:10 min) he explains that the 5,5GB/s (8-9GBsec compressed) target is for asset streaming while the player turns around to be instantaneous. He said that it takes 0,5sec to turn around and that is 4GB of compressed data you could load in the field of view of the player.
And yet... with MS' superior BCPack texture compression and SFS/Texture space shading they could literally reduce the amount of data needed to stream over that bandwidth... thus accomplishing the same thing.
 

Dictator

Digital Foundry
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
2,742
Berlin, 'SCHLAND
That the PS5 SSD will allow much more data for streaming is hardly "exotic speculation". And nobody claims that there is a visual/graphical feature that is only possible on PS5. What people claimed was that there are game design decisions, that will only be able on PS5. And that is a fact.
Which game design is that please?
You could build a game with faster movement speed on PS5 than XSX. You could build a game where you can teleport in certain situations, while you can't on XSX.
one frame is 33 milliseconds or 16.6. You are not teleporting on one frame with 100% different data from the SSD in memory on PS5 either. If a game is tying its streaming of detail to a certain pop in distance in front of the camera at a speed, then you could actually just reduce that distance of the threshhold to make the in game world speed possible on an ssd of lower throughput. The magnitude of difference between the PS5 and XSX SSD is not the same insane magnitude of speed distance between that of a 5400 RPM HDD and an NVME where things are just flat out impossible.
And this will also affect graphics, because PS5 will be able to stream higher quality assets, and also more varied assets. Saying that the only difference between PS5 and XSX is "loading times" is simply not true.
Explain this please. I can see well how you could have higher quality baked shadows and baked indirect lighting so that its texel size increases, but in which way does improve the quality of the geometry in the current frame? Is the current limit of geometry in game engines as a result of VRAM storage space or some function of the GPU of triangle size shading/culling and geometry throughput?
 

Gemüsepizza

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,449
This is in no way comparable to Blast Processing, which required extensive low-level optimization and for developers to go out of their way. The PS5 SSD is very simple. There is nothing to optimize, it's 129% faster. Period. But great contribution, mate.

Yikes! Perhaps it is time to stop posting, you are to heavily invested in the “superiority” of the SSD. Yes, SSD will allow for cool things in game design but just because Sony’s SSD is above a certain number does not mean it passed a magic “oh shit now we can make unicorns happen” stuff..
Have you read my post? There is no magic. There are no unicorns. There are just facts. I don't know where you get the impression that there has to be a certain number. There is no threshold. Every improvement in performance will allow more possibilities for game developers. It just so happens to be, that the PS5 SSD is 129% better than the competition, which means that there will be significant improvements possible.
 

Belvedere

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,376
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/next-generation-hardware-speculation-with-a-technical-spin-post-gdc-2020-xbsx-ps5.61641/page-33#post-2112883

I hope the link works. Surfing on your phone pro: finding this only took me typing "beyond". Con: ERA's UI can be tricky.

Edit: And new posts containing your links don't automatically show up before you post 😄
Awesome thank you! There's other posts but this was the most comprehensive post that I was referring to.

I was searching for "beyond3d" and could only find recent non-related stuff or things mostly dating back to December.
 

Zedark

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,662
The Netherlands
Yikes! Perhaps it is time to stop posting, you are to heavily invested in the “superiority” of the SSD. Yes, SSD will allow for cool things in game design but just because Sony’s SSD is above a certain number does not mean it passed a magic “oh shit now we can make unicorns happen” stuff..
I mean, those are some interesting use cases he mentions. It's just not at all obvious that those would be possible on PS5 while they wouldn't be possible on XSX. Same with the rendering stuff: will the difference between 5 GB/s and 2.4 GB/s be a significant difference for streaming in data from the SSD to RAM, or would you be hard pressed to craft a scene that requires a faster streaming speed than that offered XSX? If the 2.4 GB/s is enough for the scenes they will be expecting to create, then rendering wouldn't see additional benefits I'd think. Considering we are working with 4K textures and probably won't be using 8K ones (at least not at 60 fps or higher), I am skeptical that an IO throughput beyond 2.4 GB/s is necessary to keep the rendering pipeline from being bottlenecked by it.

Edit: Thanks for the Beyond3D links, folks, I will go and read them!