For testing?
Happens a lot actually. Nintendo had crazy test units back in the day, alot of which were scrapped. And most of them never went beyond their internal engineering team.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
PS5 and Xbox Series speculation launch thread |OT9| - For flops sake!
- Thread starter Mecha Meister
- Start date
- OT
- Status
For testing?
Happens a lot actually. Nintendo had crazy test units back in the day, alot of which were scrapped. And most of them never went beyond their internal engineering team.
For testing sure, for creating next gen games never heard of that
Jim Ryan came on looking like hot shit and left us with a logo and the biggest case of blue balls since that square enix guy told us to be excited for e3. jim wouldnt even confirm a feb ps meeting.
AMD proudly revealed a 6 tflops gpu and a $4,000 cpu. people looked at each other and were like what year is this?
Obviously dozens of fake Xlsm results and python scripts made up by an intern/MS.
Hey mate, first thanks for all the information you have already provided and I appreciate if you do not want to answer this question or if it had already been answered.
Did the specs your friend have, we're they for the dev kit or where they the target for the final consumer unit?.
The github specs doesnt make sense for the final version of PS5 unless people just want to believe that Sony is fumbling and stumbling into next gen. Deluded console war shit.
Hell, just the other day we had AMD presenting their 1080/1440p mobile and desktop chips.... with 36 CU.
Now we are supposed to believe that the PS5 wants to get 4k level visuals with an equivalent GPU, by clocking it at 1.8/2.0Ghz.
Hell, just the other day we had AMD presenting their 1080/1440p mobile and desktop chips.... with 36 CU.
Now we are supposed to believe that the PS5 wants to get 4k level visuals with an equivalent GPU, by clocking it at 1.8/2.0Ghz.
This theory has never made any sense because it isn't how target specs work. Developers aren't running numbers on what is in the devkits
Here is an example of target specs. This was leaked in April 2004, over a year before the 360 was even announced and was certainly available to developers a few months before that
More details in narrative form leaked a short time later: https://web.archive.org/web/20040705082242/http://forums.xbox-scene.com/index.php?showtopic=231928
Sure, the clock speed changed the RAM amount but beyond that everything was well known and communicated to developers
Something like a fantasy gcn->navi FLOPS conversion would make more sense in a document like the one below explaining dev kit differences, not target specs. Note: the new dev kits described within (with a wildly different architecture) weren't delivered until like August or September 2005 (and the clockspeed changed again). The console launched in November 2005
(many people here will probably remember this as it circulated widely ahead of 360 announcement)
They were working on completely different hardware but it doesnt change that everyone knew the 360 specs
You can see the same with the Orbis/Durango leaks, though the timeline was a little later with those. The target specs were very detailed and only clocks and ram ever changed
"Insiders" are being vague only because they want/need to be, or they haven't really seen the target specs and have 2nd hand info. There isn't a scenario where someone has the target specs and is confused because the devkits are old (other than minor changes)
Cool. Give me specs and price so people can yell at each other over 1TF instead of 3TF!
IMO, once the doubt set in about the info it was obvious we don't know the whole story. I was one of those that saw the info and said there it is. I was set going with 9tf until y'all geniuses started finding holes in the info. Honestly it's still up in the air.
lol
holy shit this is a wonderful thing to find. Always wanted to know what they mean by spec sheets. Thanks!This theory has never made any sense because it isn't how target specs work. Developers aren't running numbers on what is in the devkits
Here is an example of target specs. This was leaked in April 2004, over a year before the 360 was even announced and was certainly available to developers a few months before that
More details in narrative form leaked a short time later: https://web.archive.org/web/20040705082242/http://forums.xbox-scene.com/index.php?showtopic=231928
Sure, the clock speed changed the RAM amount but beyond that everything was well known and communicated to developers
Something like a fantasy gcn->navi FLOPS conversion would make more sense in a document like the one below explaining dev kit differences, not target specs. Note: the new dev kits described within (with a wildly different architecture) weren't delivered until like August or September 2005 (and the clockspeed changed again). The console launched in November 2005
(many people here will probably remember this as it circulated widely ahead of 360 announcement)
They were working on completely different hardware but it doesnt change that everyone knew the 360 specs
You can see the same with the Orbis/Durango leaks, though the timeline was a little later with those. The target specs were very detailed and only clocks and ram ever changed
"Insiders" are being vague only because they want/need to be, or they haven't really seen the target specs and have 2nd hand info. There isn't a scenario where someone has the target specs and is confused because the devkits are old (other than minor changes)
We all fine in here. Only you got the blue balls I'd imagine.
Doesn't mean they're fake, if you've been following anything I've been saying about them, I've constantly said that the data could be valid, but nothing about the data officially relates to anything inside PS5 or if it's even still relevant to the system (if it ever was, outside of testing).
I'm not gonna lie, when he started saying "we can't wait to share more" I thought he was going to say "next month." When I heard "in the coming months" my hype tanked. But I'm happy we got a logo, feels like an actual product that we'll have in our hands later this year now.
People like to float that fantasy bullshit like it's really such an easy oversight to make between nodes. Engineers don't make these mistakes, and targets are communicated appropriately. Thanks for hammering that point home.This theory has never made any sense because it isn't how target specs work. Developers aren't running numbers on what is in the devkits
Here is an example of target specs. This was leaked in April 2004, over a year before the 360 was even announced and was certainly available to developers a few months before that
More details in narrative form leaked a short time later: https://web.archive.org/web/20040705082242/http://forums.xbox-scene.com/index.php?showtopic=231928
Sure, the clock speed changed the RAM amount but beyond that everything was well known and communicated to developers
Something like a fantasy gcn->navi FLOPS conversion would make more sense in a document like the one below explaining dev kit differences, not target specs. Note: the new dev kits described within (with a wildly different architecture) weren't delivered until like August or September 2005 (and the clockspeed changed again). The console launched in November 2005
(many people here will probably remember this as it circulated widely ahead of 360 announcement)
They were working on completely different hardware but it doesnt change that everyone knew the 360 specs
You can see the same with the Orbis/Durango leaks, though the timeline was a little later with those. The target specs were very detailed and only clocks and ram ever changed
"Insiders" are being vague only because they want/need to be, or they haven't really seen the target specs and have 2nd hand info. There isn't a scenario where someone has the target specs and is confused because the devkits are old (other than minor changes)
edit: bookmarked
It could still be next month. He just may not have wanted to be pinpoint with it.
Can we get this threadmarked? Mecha MeisterThis theory has never made any sense because it isn't how target specs work. Developers aren't running numbers on what is in the devkits
Here is an example of target specs. This was leaked in April 2004, over a year before the 360 was even announced and was certainly available to developers a few months before that
More details in narrative form leaked a short time later: https://web.archive.org/web/20040705082242/http://forums.xbox-scene.com/index.php?showtopic=231928
Sure, the clock speed changed the RAM amount but beyond that everything was well known and communicated to developers
Something like a fantasy gcn->navi FLOPS conversion would make more sense in a document like the one below explaining dev kit differences, not target specs. Note: the new dev kits described within (with a wildly different architecture) weren't delivered until like August or September 2005 (and the clockspeed changed again). The console launched in November 2005
(many people here will probably remember this as it circulated widely ahead of 360 announcement)
They were working on completely different hardware but it doesnt change that everyone knew the 360 specs
You can see the same with the Orbis/Durango leaks, though the timeline was a little later with those. The target specs were very detailed and only clocks and ram ever changed
"Insiders" are being vague only because they want/need to be, or they haven't really seen the target specs and have 2nd hand info. There isn't a scenario where someone has the target specs and is confused because the devkits are old (other than minor changes)
This seems pretty relevant since this argument comes up a lot.
yes, yes I haven't. That is definitely the case as you can read from that post.
I think they want as much attention as possible, and they are trying to get as many "Pops" as they can, even announcing the date will send people into hype overload it will be the big news story on the day if its on its own or in a state of play
You've never heard of developers getting pre-release hardware???
So....we should at Samsung's CES stream or nah?
Sony gave up on 4K and is going hard at Lockhart. That's that only logical explanation.
/s
Seriously, even tho we didn't get big Navi info, what you said did help reinforce something is missing from the github info. First thing that came to mind when I was watching the stream.
Could be. They might still be finishing up event planning and might not have a full lock and it's easier to say nothing than say something and cancel/move things later in terms of PR management.
Right, CES isn't the place or time for that. A logo essentially blew up. They'll want to be precise with each particular announcement to get more mileage overall.
Agreed.
Feb could be a target but they want to finalize to be absolutely sure it can hit. Announcing February only for it to be delayed would be....unfortunate.
Pre-release HW is different then HW for testing.
Developers won't get HW made for testing purposes only
And if its a state of play they get a few days off announcing that, don't say the stuff about no next gen news eat up a few more days of the new cycle and buy hype, I think they are being calculated because i assume people at both these companies are good at their jobs
I know, I just wanted an official date for the end of speculation. Hopefully by the end of the month!
i think the fact that its THAT big and only 12 tflops tells me that at least one or more things are true.
1) you need a massive 70 cu gpu with 64 active cus clocked at a relatively slow 1.45 ghz to hit 12 tflops.
or
2) MS is going with the full fat zen 2. the full 70mm2 zen 2. they are going to have a 20-30% advantage in cpu performance at the same clocks but also consume up to 3x more power. around 45-50w for the cpu alone.
or
3) RT hardware takes a lot more space than we imagined. github shows 56 cus for arden. but unless ms is going for a 70mm2 zen 2, that is not a 60 cu part. the rt should only be around 20mm2 making the gpu 320mm2 max. which leaves 87mm2 for zen 2 and the rest.
what does this mean for sony?
1) 7nm euv is out of the question. ms wouldve used that instead of making such a large apu.
2) a cut down zen 2 should save 30 mm2. hbm should save some more space on the die, but maybe 10mm2. they need to find a way to cut 10-20 mm2 to get to the 350mm2 size of the ps4 and they should be able to clock it higher to hit the 12 tflops number with a smaller apu with 2-4 fewer cus.
3) if ms is going with 407mm2 then sony isnt going with 300mm2. or 316mm2 on 7nm. they will probably be above 350mm2 and have 40+ cus.
I love this fan-made mock up of a PS5 Box art
That is gorgeous 😍😍😍😍😍😍
Engineering sample doesn't automatically mean for lab testing only. Hell, you can buy ES on ebay and put them in commercial motherboards.
I love this fan-made mock up of a PS5 Box art
Woof. If Sony decides to go from the normal Blue to Black aesthetic, I'm all for it.
Honest question. Do people really care how many watts a device consumes? Like, would someone's purchasing decision change if something took 200 watts vs 400 watts?
I believe he's made it clear before that they are the target specs his developer friend has been told to assume will be in the final consumer product his game will be running on.
Lmao!! 😂😂😂😂
If Im not mistaken, its more about how much heat is produced. More watts = more heat. Which was always a concern given typical console form factor.
Not lab test, but I'm pretty sure it'll be for in-house testing, not 3rd party developer.
I love this fan-made mock up of a PS5 Box art
Anyway we could get a version of this with the old colored PS logo?
I think it's about how realistic a given TDP number can be, when all of these electronics have to fit inside a small form factor, without bursting into flames (even when XSX will be big for a console it's still small compared to a PC case).
- Status