1%Any chance xbox x is 12tf GCN which would be a bit less than 10tf RDNA and ps5 is a bit lower 9-9.2 tf?
No.Any chance xbox x is 12tf GCN which would be a bit less than 10tf RDNA and ps5 is a bit lower 9-9.2 tf?
What i mean is when they said Next xbox is 2x more powerful than xbox 1x they actually meant in GCN arch not RDNA?
Does anyone have a link for Brad Sams hinting Xbox will show up at the AMD conference?
Don't expect anything other than TVs, phones and stuff.
Well, this should be the thread where all the big stuff drops.
Looking forward to it.
I'll be leading Team HBM to the promised lands.
After making the mistake of reading way too many pages of the last thread yesterday, this is the most logical thing i've read. At the very least people should hold off from declaring that mess of a leak an absolute certainty.Since you snuck this in at the end of the last OT, figured i'd respond here. There are some reasons NOT to put weight into the Github leak
There are 3 reasons to question the implications of the leaked documents:
1. They are full of mistakes and inaccuracies
However confident you are that PS5 is 36 CUs, must must be equally confident that Lockhart is 56CUs. Or the other way around, how ever skeptical you are that these leaks confirm Lockhart is 56CUs, you must be equally skeptical these leaks confirm PS5 is 36CUs.
- There are files in wrong folders, there are sub folders and wrong folders. Again, when people say these are legitimate, they mean that this is what is legitimately in the files, not that the files are correct or accurate all the time.
- The biggest issue is that they claim Spakrman (Lockhart) is 56CUs. Every reason you have to believe Oberon is PS5, you have to believe that Sparkman is Lockhart. Sparkman BC mode indicates it can replicate a One S.
2. The leaks if taken at face value, fly in the face of every credible insider we have, including develeper sources and industry sources, that say the Series X and PS5 are very close in power.
So, Actual insiders who actually know about the target specs of the PS5 and Xbox Series X (rather than drawing conclusions from indirect and uncontextualized data points) with a network of sources (instead of an interns notepad) are saying something to the contrary of what the leak indicates at face value.
- We've had Jason Schreier News Editor of Kotaku, Andrew Reiner Executive Editor at Game Informer, Our own Mods, and Vetted industry insider and veteran Klee, and other insiders all say the consoles are close in power.
- They specifically claim PS5 and Scarlett were close in power according to those sources. And All of that is in the same time window these leaks are from, which according to DF is the point where it's too late to make changes. None of them have come out and said the the tables have turned. The Github leaks are new to us, but they are actually older than the leaks we've gotten from insiders.
3. The documents, if taken at face value, don't pass the sniff test, and an alternative makes more sense
The leaks makes little sense as the Full PS5 hardware, indicating you shouldn't take it as a certainty of the PS5s total performance, and a lot of sense that it's a boost mode PS4 Pro compatibility test so that possibility can't be dismissed.
- The test were done without VRR and RT, when we know that at the very least PS5 has RT. This means that the tests we have access to are not the full PS5 in at least one way.
- 36CUs at 2GHz, is not a reasonable way to hit 9.2TFs, if that's the target. Every bit of historical and contextual data we have for consoles points to a wide and slow approach to console APUs. Efficiencies, Thermals, Cooling Costs, and reliability have all proven to be reasons that trump a lower sized and faster APU. Why would Sony feel any different? What technology would change the equation? I'm not aware of any, so I don't expect that approach to change.
- 36CUs would also make this the smallest APU Sony has made in a decade. In a world where Sony is dominating in terms of sales and profitability, where they've come out and aid that PS5 is going to be Niche product aimed at the hardcore who what the best and latest, where that is corroborated by their rumoured bleeding edge SSD tech, a small APU doesn't make sense.
- Digital Foundry Stated in the article that many BC test are being done. If that's true, this could be a BC test right? Well, what would that look like. Presumably, they would want to test a Native PS4 mode, a PS4 Pro mode, and like the PS4 Pro had.... A PS4 Pro Boost mode. What would the Boost mode test look like?
- A PS4 Pro Boost mode compatibility test would look like this: Exactly the same CUs as the PS4 Pro, An unlocked "full" clock, no RT or VRS hardware activated. What do we have in the leak? 36CUs (exactly the same as the PS4 Pro), 2Ghz, the rumoured full clock of the PS5, No RT and no VRS indicated.
AMD will show or mention RDNA2 as well. May have some implications on consoles.
Ah that makes sense.Probably in some "unprecedented partnership" capacity. No details.
Since you snuck this in at the end of the last OT, figured i'd respond here. There are some reasons NOT to put weight into the Github leak
There are 3 reasons to question the implications of the leaked documents:
1. They are full of mistakes and inaccuracies
However confident you are that PS5 is 36 CUs, must must be equally confident that Lockhart is 56CUs. Or the other way around, how ever skeptical you are that these leaks confirm Lockhart is 56CUs, you must be equally skeptical these leaks confirm PS5 is 36CUs.
- There are files in wrong folders, there are sub folders and wrong folders. Again, when people say these are legitimate, they mean that this is what is legitimately in the files, not that the files are correct or accurate all the time.
- The biggest issue is that they claim Spakrman (Lockhart) is 56CUs. Every reason you have to believe Oberon is PS5, you have to believe that Sparkman is Lockhart. Sparkman BC mode indicates it can replicate a One S.
2. The leaks if taken at face value, fly in the face of every credible insider we have, including develeper sources and industry sources, that say the Series X and PS5 are very close in power.
So, Actual insiders who actually know about the target specs of the PS5 and Xbox Series X (rather than drawing conclusions from indirect and uncontextualized data points) with a network of sources (instead of an interns notepad) are saying something to the contrary of what the leak indicates at face value.
- We've had Jason Schreier News Editor of Kotaku, Andrew Reiner Executive Editor at Game Informer, Our own Mods, and Vetted industry insider and veteran Klee, and other insiders all say the consoles are close in power.
- They specifically claim PS5 and Scarlett were close in power according to those sources. And All of that is in the same time window these leaks are from, which according to DF is the point where it's too late to make changes. None of them have come out and said the the tables have turned. The Github leaks are new to us, but they are actually older than the leaks we've gotten from insiders.
3. The documents, if taken at face value, don't pass the sniff test, and an alternative makes more sense
The leaks makes little sense as the Full PS5 hardware, indicating you shouldn't take it as a certainty of the PS5s total performance, and a lot of sense that it's a boost mode PS4 Pro compatibility test so that possibility can't be dismissed.
- The test were done without VRR and RT, when we know that at the very least PS5 has RT. This means that the tests we have access to are not the full PS5 in at least one way.
- 36CUs at 2GHz, is not a reasonable way to hit 9.2TFs, if that's the target. Every bit of historical and contextual data we have for consoles points to a wide and slow approach to console APUs. Efficiencies, Thermals, Cooling Costs, and reliability have all proven to be reasons that trump a lower sized and faster APU. Why would Sony feel any different? What technology would change the equation? I'm not aware of any, so I don't expect that approach to change.
- 36CUs would also make this the smallest APU Sony has made in a decade. In a world where Sony is dominating in terms of sales and profitability, where they've come out and aid that PS5 is going to be Niche product aimed at the hardcore who what the best and latest, where that is corroborated by their rumoured bleeding edge SSD tech, a small APU doesn't make sense.
- Digital Foundry Stated in the article that many BC test are being done. If that's true, this could be a BC test right? Well, what would that look like. Presumably, they would want to test a Native PS4 mode, a PS4 Pro mode, and like the PS4 Pro had.... A PS4 Pro Boost mode. What would the Boost mode test look like?
- A PS4 Pro Boost mode compatibility test would look like this: Exactly the same CUs as the PS4 Pro, An unlocked "full" clock, no RT or VRS hardware activated. What do we have in the leak? 36CUs (exactly the same as the PS4 Pro), 2Ghz, the rumoured full clock of the PS5, No RT and no VRS indicated.
Man, even when all the exact details are made official (with multiple Digital Foundry analysis, Mark Cerny literally opening the box in your house and going through each chip in a 3h walkthrough, etc) people will keep coming here, because it's consoles-war the thread at the end of the day.Bad title but thats okay.
Hopefully we won't need these threads much longer.
AegonSnake
if both have the same arch. it will be 30% weaker in computing, ray tracing, texture fillrate and 18% better in pixel fillrate, probably faster ssd, nothing spectacular. And remebmer sony exlusives don't have to run on lockhart ;)
so whats the current amount of teraflops for both machines?
PS5 > 10TF RDNA?
XEX > 12TF RDNA?
Getting closer to OT10 (when PS Meeting will finally be announced).
so whats the current amount of teraflops for both machines?
PS5 > 10TF RDNA?
XEX > 12TF RDNA?
👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾Since you snuck this in at the end of the last OT, figured i'd respond here. There are some reasons NOT to put weight into the Github leak
There are 3 reasons to question the implications of the leaked documents:
1. They are full of mistakes and inaccuracies
However confident you are that PS5 is 36 CUs, must must be equally confident that Lockhart is 56CUs. Or the other way around, how ever skeptical you are that these leaks confirm Lockhart is 56CUs, you must be equally skeptical these leaks confirm PS5 is 36CUs.
- There are files in wrong folders, there are sub folders and wrong folders. Again, when people say these are legitimate, they mean that this is what is legitimately in the files, not that the files are correct or accurate all the time.
- The biggest issue is that they claim Spakrman (Lockhart) is 56CUs. Every reason you have to believe Oberon is PS5, you have to believe that Sparkman is Lockhart. Sparkman BC mode indicates it can replicate a One S.
2. The leaks if taken at face value, fly in the face of every credible insider we have, including develeper sources and industry sources, that say the Series X and PS5 are very close in power.
So, Actual insiders who actually know about the target specs of the PS5 and Xbox Series X (rather than drawing conclusions from indirect and uncontextualized data points) with a network of sources (instead of an interns notepad) are saying something to the contrary of what the leak indicates at face value.
- We've had Jason Schreier News Editor of Kotaku, Andrew Reiner Executive Editor at Game Informer, Our own Mods, and Vetted industry insider and veteran Klee, and other insiders all say the consoles are close in power.
- They specifically claim PS5 and Scarlett were close in power according to those sources. And All of that is in the same time window these leaks are from, which according to DF is the point where it's too late to make changes. None of them have come out and said the the tables have turned. The Github leaks are new to us, but they are actually older than the leaks we've gotten from insiders.
3. The documents, if taken at face value, don't pass the sniff test, and an alternative makes more sense
The leaks makes little sense as the Full PS5 hardware, indicating you shouldn't take it as a certainty of the PS5s total performance, and a lot of sense that it's a boost mode PS4 Pro compatibility test so that possibility can't be dismissed.
- The test were done without VRR and RT, when we know that at the very least PS5 has RT. This means that the tests we have access to are not the full PS5 in at least one way.
- 36CUs at 2GHz, is not a reasonable way to hit 9.2TFs, if that's the target. Every bit of historical and contextual data we have for consoles points to a wide and slow approach to console APUs. Efficiencies, Thermals, Cooling Costs, and reliability have all proven to be reasons that trump a lower sized and faster APU. Why would Sony feel any different? What technology would change the equation? I'm not aware of any, so I don't expect that approach to change.
- 36CUs would also make this the smallest APU Sony has made in a decade. In a world where Sony is dominating in terms of sales and profitability, where they've come out and aid that PS5 is going to be Niche product aimed at the hardcore who what the best and latest, where that is corroborated by their rumoured bleeding edge SSD tech, a small APU doesn't make sense.
- Digital Foundry Stated in the article that many BC test are being done. If that's true, this could be a BC test right? Well, what would that look like. Presumably, they would want to test a Native PS4 mode, a PS4 Pro mode, and like the PS4 Pro had.... A PS4 Pro Boost mode. What would the Boost mode test look like?
- A PS4 Pro Boost mode compatibility test would look like this: Exactly the same CUs as the PS4 Pro, An unlocked "full" clock, no RT or VRS hardware activated. What do we have in the leak? 36CUs (exactly the same as the PS4 Pro), 2Ghz, the rumoured full clock of the PS5, No RT and no VRS indicated.
Doesn't mean it's PlayStation. Sony makes a LOT of things. Like cameras.
Same. I'll either be content, or pleasantly surprised.
Second page already. Mecha, you're insane for keeping up this quality with this pace.
Thankfully, each 40 pages or so, something smart comes up, like this post.Since you snuck this in at the end of the last OT, figured i'd respond here. There are some reasons NOT to put weight into the Github leak
There are 3 reasons to question the implications of the leaked documents:
1. They are full of mistakes and inaccuracies
However confident you are that PS5 is 36 CUs, must must be equally confident that Lockhart is 56CUs. Or the other way around, how ever skeptical you are that these leaks confirm Lockhart is 56CUs, you must be equally skeptical these leaks confirm PS5 is 36CUs.
- There are files in wrong folders, there are sub folders and wrong folders. Again, when people say these are legitimate, they mean that this is what is legitimately in the files, not that the files are correct or accurate all the time.
- The biggest issue is that they claim Spakrman (Lockhart) is 56CUs. Every reason you have to believe Oberon is PS5, you have to believe that Sparkman is Lockhart. Sparkman BC mode indicates it can replicate a One S.
2. The leaks if taken at face value, fly in the face of every credible insider we have, including develeper sources and industry sources, that say the Series X and PS5 are very close in power.
So, Actual insiders who actually know about the target specs of the PS5 and Xbox Series X (rather than drawing conclusions from indirect and uncontextualized data points) with a network of sources (instead of an interns notepad) are saying something to the contrary of what the leak indicates at face value.
- We've had Jason Schreier News Editor of Kotaku, Andrew Reiner Executive Editor at Game Informer, Our own Mods, and Vetted industry insider and veteran Klee, and other insiders all say the consoles are close in power.
- They specifically claim PS5 and Scarlett were close in power according to those sources. And All of that is in the same time window these leaks are from, which according to DF is the point where it's too late to make changes. None of them have come out and said the the tables have turned. The Github leaks are new to us, but they are actually older than the leaks we've gotten from insiders.
3. The documents, if taken at face value, don't pass the sniff test, and an alternative makes more sense
The leaks makes little sense as the Full PS5 hardware, indicating you shouldn't take it as a certainty of the PS5s total performance, and a lot of sense that it's a boost mode PS4 Pro compatibility test so that possibility can't be dismissed.
- The test were done without VRR and RT, when we know that at the very least PS5 has RT. This means that the tests we have access to are not the full PS5 in at least one way.
- 36CUs at 2GHz, is not a reasonable way to hit 9.2TFs, if that's the target. Every bit of historical and contextual data we have for consoles points to a wide and slow approach to console APUs. Efficiencies, Thermals, Cooling Costs, and reliability have all proven to be reasons that trump a lower sized and faster APU. Why would Sony feel any different? What technology would change the equation? I'm not aware of any, so I don't expect that approach to change.
- 36CUs would also make this the smallest APU Sony has made in a decade. In a world where Sony is dominating in terms of sales and profitability, where they've come out and aid that PS5 is going to be Niche product aimed at the hardcore who what the best and latest, where that is corroborated by their rumoured bleeding edge SSD tech, a small APU doesn't make sense.
- Digital Foundry Stated in the article that many BC test are being done. If that's true, this could be a BC test right? Well, what would that look like. Presumably, they would want to test a Native PS4 mode, a PS4 Pro mode, and like the PS4 Pro had.... A PS4 Pro Boost mode. What would the Boost mode test look like?
- A PS4 Pro Boost mode compatibility test would look like this: Exactly the same CUs as the PS4 Pro, An unlocked "full" clock, no RT or VRS hardware activated. What do we have in the leak? 36CUs (exactly the same as the PS4 Pro), 2Ghz, the rumoured full clock of the PS5, No RT and no VRS indicated.
You're awesome and amazing post.Since you snuck this in at the end of the last OT, figured i'd respond here. There are some reasons NOT to put weight into the Github leak
There are 3 reasons to question the implications of the leaked documents:
1. They are full of mistakes and inaccuracies
However confident you are that PS5 is 36 CUs, must must be equally confident that Lockhart is 56CUs. Or the other way around, how ever skeptical you are that these leaks confirm Lockhart is 56CUs, you must be equally skeptical these leaks confirm PS5 is 36CUs.
- There are files in wrong folders, there are sub folders and wrong folders. Again, when people say these are legitimate, they mean that this is what is legitimately in the files, not that the files are correct or accurate all the time.
- The biggest issue is that they claim Spakrman (Lockhart) is 56CUs. Every reason you have to believe Oberon is PS5, you have to believe that Sparkman is Lockhart. Sparkman BC mode indicates it can replicate a One S.
2. The leaks if taken at face value, fly in the face of every credible insider we have, including develeper sources and industry sources, that say the Series X and PS5 are very close in power.
So, Actual insiders who actually know about the target specs of the PS5 and Xbox Series X (rather than drawing conclusions from indirect and uncontextualized data points) with a network of sources (instead of an interns notepad) are saying something to the contrary of what the leak indicates at face value.
- We've had Jason Schreier News Editor of Kotaku, Andrew Reiner Executive Editor at Game Informer, Our own Mods, and Vetted industry insider and veteran Klee, and other insiders all say the consoles are close in power.
- They specifically claim PS5 and Scarlett were close in power according to those sources. And All of that is in the same time window these leaks are from, which according to DF is the point where it's too late to make changes. None of them have come out and said the the tables have turned. The Github leaks are new to us, but they are actually older than the leaks we've gotten from insiders.
3. The documents, if taken at face value, don't pass the sniff test, and an alternative makes more sense
The leaks makes little sense as the Full PS5 hardware, indicating you shouldn't take it as a certainty of the PS5s total performance, and a lot of sense that it's a boost mode PS4 Pro compatibility test so that possibility can't be dismissed.
- The test were done without VRR and RT, when we know that at the very least PS5 has RT. This means that the tests we have access to are not the full PS5 in at least one way.
- 36CUs at 2GHz, is not a reasonable way to hit 9.2TFs, if that's the target. Every bit of historical and contextual data we have for consoles points to a wide and slow approach to console APUs. Efficiencies, Thermals, Cooling Costs, and reliability have all proven to be reasons that trump a lower sized and faster APU. Why would Sony feel any different? What technology would change the equation? I'm not aware of any, so I don't expect that approach to change.
- 36CUs would also make this the smallest APU Sony has made in a decade. In a world where Sony is dominating in terms of sales and profitability, where they've come out and aid that PS5 is going to be Niche product aimed at the hardcore who what the best and latest, where that is corroborated by their rumoured bleeding edge SSD tech, a small APU doesn't make sense.
- Digital Foundry Stated in the article that many BC test are being done. If that's true, this could be a BC test right? Well, what would that look like. Presumably, they would want to test a Native PS4 mode, a PS4 Pro mode, and like the PS4 Pro had.... A PS4 Pro Boost mode. What would the Boost mode test look like?
- A PS4 Pro Boost mode compatibility test would look like this: Exactly the same CUs as the PS4 Pro, An unlocked "full" clock, no RT or VRS hardware activated. What do we have in the leak? 36CUs (exactly the same as the PS4 Pro), 2Ghz, the rumoured full clock of the PS5, No RT and no VRS indicated.
Great compilation of what we learnt during the weekend, that some people promptly forgot after DF posted their video.Since you snuck this in at the end of the last OT, figured i'd respond here. There are some reasons NOT to put weight into the Github leak
There are 3 reasons to question the implications of the leaked documents:
1. They are full of mistakes and inaccuracies
However confident you are that PS5 is 36 CUs, must must be equally confident that Lockhart is 56CUs. Or the other way around, how ever skeptical you are that these leaks confirm Lockhart is 56CUs, you must be equally skeptical these leaks confirm PS5 is 36CUs.
- There are files in wrong folders, there are sub folders and wrong folders. Again, when people say these are legitimate, they mean that this is what is legitimately in the files, not that the files are correct or accurate all the time.
- The biggest issue is that they claim Spakrman (Lockhart) is 56CUs. Every reason you have to believe Oberon is PS5, you have to believe that Sparkman is Lockhart. Sparkman BC mode indicates it can replicate a One S.
2. The leaks if taken at face value, fly in the face of every credible insider we have, including develeper sources and industry sources, that say the Series X and PS5 are very close in power.
So, Actual insiders who actually know about the target specs of the PS5 and Xbox Series X (rather than drawing conclusions from indirect and uncontextualized data points) with a network of sources (instead of an interns notepad) are saying something to the contrary of what the leak indicates at face value.
- We've had Jason Schreier News Editor of Kotaku, Andrew Reiner Executive Editor at Game Informer, Our own Mods, and Vetted industry insider and veteran Klee, and other insiders all say the consoles are close in power.
- They specifically claim PS5 and Scarlett were close in power according to those sources. And All of that is in the same time window these leaks are from, which according to DF is the point where it's too late to make changes. None of them have come out and said the the tables have turned. The Github leaks are new to us, but they are actually older than the leaks we've gotten from insiders.
3. The documents, if taken at face value, don't pass the sniff test, and an alternative makes more sense
The leaks makes little sense as the Full PS5 hardware, indicating you shouldn't take it as a certainty of the PS5s total performance, and a lot of sense that it's a boost mode PS4 Pro compatibility test so that possibility can't be dismissed.
- The test were done without VRR and RT, when we know that at the very least PS5 has RT. This means that the tests we have access to are not the full PS5 in at least one way.
- 36CUs at 2GHz, is not a reasonable way to hit 9.2TFs, if that's the target. Every bit of historical and contextual data we have for consoles points to a wide and slow approach to console APUs. Efficiencies, Thermals, Cooling Costs, and reliability have all proven to be reasons that trump a lower sized and faster APU. Why would Sony feel any different? What technology would change the equation? I'm not aware of any, so I don't expect that approach to change.
- 36CUs would also make this the smallest APU Sony has made in a decade. In a world where Sony is dominating in terms of sales and profitability, where they've come out and aid that PS5 is going to be Niche product aimed at the hardcore who what the best and latest, where that is corroborated by their rumoured bleeding edge SSD tech, a small APU doesn't make sense.
- Digital Foundry Stated in the article that many BC test are being done. If that's true, this could be a BC test right? Well, what would that look like. Presumably, they would want to test a Native PS4 mode, a PS4 Pro mode, and like the PS4 Pro had.... A PS4 Pro Boost mode. What would the Boost mode test look like?
- A PS4 Pro Boost mode compatibility test would look like this: Exactly the same CUs as the PS4 Pro, An unlocked "full" clock, no RT or VRS hardware activated. What do we have in the leak? 36CUs (exactly the same as the PS4 Pro), 2Ghz, the rumoured full clock of the PS5, No RT and no VRS indicated.
Since you snuck this in at the end of the last OT, figured i'd respond here. There are some reasons NOT to put weight into the Github leak
There are 3 reasons to question the implications of the leaked documents:
1. They are full of mistakes and inaccuracies
However confident you are that PS5 is 36 CUs, must must be equally confident that Lockhart is 56CUs. Or the other way around, how ever skeptical you are that these leaks confirm Lockhart is 56CUs, you must be equally skeptical these leaks confirm PS5 is 36CUs.
- There are files in wrong folders, there are sub folders and wrong folders. Again, when people say these are legitimate, they mean that this is what is legitimately in the files, not that the files are correct or accurate all the time.
- The biggest issue is that they claim Spakrman (Lockhart) is 56CUs. Every reason you have to believe Oberon is PS5, you have to believe that Sparkman is Lockhart. Sparkman BC mode indicates it can replicate a One S.
2. The leaks if taken at face value, fly in the face of every credible insider we have, including develeper sources and industry sources, that say the Series X and PS5 are very close in power.
So, Actual insiders who actually know about the target specs of the PS5 and Xbox Series X (rather than drawing conclusions from indirect and uncontextualized data points) with a network of sources (instead of an interns notepad) are saying something to the contrary of what the leak indicates at face value.
- We've had Jason Schreier News Editor of Kotaku, Andrew Reiner Executive Editor at Game Informer, Our own Mods, and Vetted industry insider and veteran Klee, and other insiders all say the consoles are close in power.
- They specifically claim PS5 and Scarlett were close in power according to those sources. And All of that is in the same time window these leaks are from, which according to DF is the point where it's too late to make changes. None of them have come out and said the the tables have turned. The Github leaks are new to us, but they are actually older than the leaks we've gotten from insiders.
3. The documents, if taken at face value, don't pass the sniff test, and an alternative makes more sense
The leaks makes little sense as the Full PS5 hardware, indicating you shouldn't take it as a certainty of the PS5s total performance, and a lot of sense that it's a boost mode PS4 Pro compatibility test so that possibility can't be dismissed.
- The test were done without VRR and RT, when we know that at the very least PS5 has RT. This means that the tests we have access to are not the full PS5 in at least one way.
- 36CUs at 2GHz, is not a reasonable way to hit 9.2TFs, if that's the target. Every bit of historical and contextual data we have for consoles points to a wide and slow approach to console APUs. Efficiencies, Thermals, Cooling Costs, and reliability have all proven to be reasons that trump a lower sized and faster APU. Why would Sony feel any different? What technology would change the equation? I'm not aware of any, so I don't expect that approach to change.
- 36CUs would also make this the smallest APU Sony has made in a decade. In a world where Sony is dominating in terms of sales and profitability, where they've come out and aid that PS5 is going to be Niche product aimed at the hardcore who what the best and latest, where that is corroborated by their rumoured bleeding edge SSD tech, a small APU doesn't make sense.
- Digital Foundry Stated in the article that many BC test are being done. If that's true, this could be a BC test right? Well, what would that look like. Presumably, they would want to test a Native PS4 mode, a PS4 Pro mode, and like the PS4 Pro had.... A PS4 Pro Boost mode. What would the Boost mode test look like?
- A PS4 Pro Boost mode compatibility test would look like this: Exactly the same CUs as the PS4 Pro, An unlocked "full" clock, no RT or VRS hardware activated. What do we have in the leak? 36CUs (exactly the same as the PS4 Pro), 2Ghz, the rumoured full clock of the PS5, No RT and no VRS indicated.