raytracing on console. i just cant. this gimick needs to die. what about vr? if these consoles do it well we could finnaly see some developers focus on it.
I think you're short sighted. The technology is valid and useful. I'm envisioning it's use in VR for 3D sound. Sound rays are emitted by sources, bounce around the environment, get absorbed, modified, filtered, diffused, and then reach the listener. If we start calculating the speed of sound, the velocity of the source and the velocity of the listener, as well as the objects and area around them, we can start applying doppler effects to the sound too.
It would use similar hardware as photon ray tracing.
What you are describing is patented, called A3D(Aureal), and was buried by Creative Labs. We had this in the late 90s and it eviscerated the garbage sound we have now.
You want to really get mad? Creative Labs sued Aureal for patent infringement in March 1998, and Aureal countersued for patent infringement and deceptive trade practices. Aureal won the lawsuit brought by Creative in December 1999. However, the cost of the legal battle caused Aureal's investors to cease funding operations, forcing Aureal into bankruptcy. Creative then acquired Aureal's assets in September 2000 through the bankruptcy court with the specific provision that Creative Labs would be released from all claims of past infringement by Creative Labs upon Aureal's A3D technology. Creative Labs has not chosen to support the A3D API.
I was thinking about this while I was reading the info about the new sound features.
We really have kind of gone backwards over the last couple of decades and I was wondering what the deal was with that.
Previous old two speaker hardware had provisions to set the locations for your speakers in a 360* area around your desktop so that you'd get correct positional audio regardless of where your speakers were actually located. That was even in SoundBlaster 16 on Windows 3.11. I played with that quite a bit.
I would love to have those features on a modern, 7.1 audio system. It's stupid that we don't. We already had various reflections and other effects that would actually emulate surround with a two speaker setup. I seriously considered digging out an old PC just to hook it up to my current sound system just to see what it would do.
I don't know exactly what you played with, but the DSP capabilities of the SB16 can't have been terribly advanced. Most likely, it was just tweaking with delay and cross-feed.
The 3d audio they're talking about was only available on the Soundblaster Live cards and later, not the soundblaster 16 which was much weaker. Did the 16 even have a dsp? Also, I think you are greatly overestimating how much power is needed to do 3d environmental audio. It's actually very modest by modern standards and was attainable even 20 years ago with ~$150 hardware.
The SoundBlaster 16, in its 'ASP' version, indeed had a dsp. One of its main gimmicks was precisely the ability to render 3D audio on a pair of stereo speakers, using a technology called 'QSound'. Not all Sb16 had the ASP by default, but it could be bought as an add-on. Besides QSound, the ASP could also be used for hardware-assisted realtime audio compression (ADPCM) and text to speech. It was generally ignored by the industry, and it was finally dropped in newer products.
What you're describing with 360 sound regardless of where the actual speakers are sounds like dolby atmos. No not the atmos "branded" soundbars and such, a real AV receiver driven 5.1.4 or 7.1.2 speaker setup. It's mind blowing for games that support it.
If the patent was really issued around the 1990s than it should be expired. Patents only last 20 years (which is why they are vastly superior for society than the broken copyright system with its 100+ year terms)
Any newcomers who are actually discouraged by such a patent are fools that deserve to lose out. You cannot successfully patent a process that is just the instantiation of physics. Anyone could build this from the ground up with a basic knowledge of wave propagation, reflection, and interference.
the probem is that the hardware needs to be implemented in a way where it is somewhat abstract and highly programmable. techniques like the audio one you describe are great and they are built upon programmable hardware. the real revolution in gpu hardware is still the one that happened over 10 years ago when we got pixel shaders then vertex shaders as well as supporting functions and then more and more programability that turned the fixed function pipeline into something where creativity in programming happened.
but the modern features put on these cards really dont make sense. why waste silicon for something that cuts your framerate down to 60 on a 2080 ti and really doesn't look that impressive? ive worked with rayracing before and when i heard one trace per pixel and ai denoising i KNEW it was going to suck. it seems like its just a ploy to put ai and non realtime rendering hardware on "gaming" cards. and the worst part is nobody is even trying to use it in a novel way. i fear that we have an obsession with something; the thought of movie like graphics in games. and we wont get it anytime soon. definately not on next gen consoles. when we could have 30%+ more performance for vr and 4k games if we lost the gimick
Want to beat on graphics then why stop there? Why not call PBR Physically based rendering/shaders a gimmick as well?
Where creatives can continue to reach into their bag of work around hacks to achieve the same fidelity instead of technologies like PBR and DXR ray tracing that achieve realism by simulating the world with a physically based strategy? Do not understand how our old bag of hacks are not the actual "gimmick" here?? But if the past heritage of long expensive development budgets spent of the graphic hacks are preferable to simply adopting physically based technologies that give the same effects without the same blood sweat and tears.. virtually for free. Then I am in.. Lets call fidelity in graphics "A Hack".
What they're using is more of a simulation of raytracing than the actual technique, it's much less processing intensive so could be used to add more realistic details to things in games.
I want to see how backwards compatible the PS5 will be before jumping on the bandwagon. If it has a painless "it just works for everything currently on the PS4" thing going for it, I'm all in as well. I'm so sick and tired of messing with gaming on a PC anyway.
What kind of messing with the PC do you have to do for PC gaming? The only thing that still irritates me is having to sit through a startup sequence where you have to keep pressing a button to make it go to the next step. I wish it would just load to the game world.
Driver updates, patching, anti-virus, hardware upgrades, sitting at a desk with a keyboard and mouse versus on a couch with a controller, Steam, tinkering with the OS to get it to run a game, older software not running or running with glitches, finding hardware that isn't festooned with RGB, finding a computer that doesn't have Killer NICs, game patches and feature updates upping system requirements, outstanding bugs that are never fixed (Bethesda), tweaking display settings to get something to run smoothly... I grant you that some of those problems are just inherent to PCs in general, but many of them that are end up amplified by attempting to play video games. I really want to just sit down, insert a disc/cart/download something once, and play a game when I get a free moment between taking care of my kids and doing all of the chores.
I have an old PC from 2012 with a good semi-old GPU (SSD, i5 3570K, GTX 980 Ti STRIX DC3OC) directly attached to my TV that boots directly into Steam Big Picture Mode. No Keyboard/Mouse, just only two steam controllers attached. It can run even new games like AC Odyssey in VERY HIGH or ULTRA settings. It just works, runs any kind of game (I also played Pathfinder: Kingmaker and Pillars of Eternity 2 Deadfire) with steam ontrollers and has the advantage of the steam store - most games are 5-20$ if you wait for a sale, and loading times are much better than any console despite the outdated hardware. Best Sofa Gaming experience.
I'm not trying to move the goalposts here, but that 980 costs more than a PS4 and it doesn't factor in the other components in the system you're using. I'm sure that's okay for a lot of people, but I want to keep pushing cash into my retirement and investment accounts and the lower cost of software doesn't fully offset the higher costs of hardware. Plus, whereas all games on a console are designed for a controller, that isn't the case with all PC games so a system setup like that can't be the only gaming PC if PC gaming is your thing, otherwise a keyboard and mouse are sometimes a necessity. It's great that your setup works for you, but I've had my fill of dealing with general purpose computing hardware as a gaming platform. Even my $30 phone is an easier to use gaming system than my PC -- though the PC is an excellent platform for my novels, replying to e-mail, and paying bills -- it just doesn't hold up well when compared to a dedicated entertainment device or, as I already mentioned, a pocket-friendly phone.
PeachNCream if doing all that bothers you for playing comp games.. then consoles and phones.. are for you... i have been playing games on a comp since DOS 6.1 i think.. having to install, update the game, drivers and other things.. is just part of it... " whereas all games on a console are designed for a controller " this is a little false... FPS's.. even though i dont play them any more.. are MUCH MUCH better with a keyboard and mouse.. the friends i have that do play FPS's, wouldnt touch one with a controller...
My first computer was a C64 and I have a long history with computer gaming as well. In the past decade, I feel as though we are taking significant steps backwards due to the rising cost of hardware, increased market segmentation, inflated power demands and waste heat output at the upper end of the performance curve, an acceptance of the disposable nature of hardware (especially NAND storage), and a constant push to make things look better while somewhat ignoring the potential to use additional compute power to enhance other aspects of gaming entertainment. Certainly, I would never disagree with you that FPS sorts are better suited to keyboard and mouse play. However, as I've gotten older and had a variety of life experiences, I shy away from the violence typically associated with FPS gaming. Killing people in a game has never been all that appealing, but I very much steer well away from that sort of thing if it gets to visceral and too realistic. Because of that, at least in my case, I don't feel like I'm losing much by having my fun on other platforms. For people that are less sensitive to that sort of thing, sure go for the PC gaming. Your money, your life, your choice. I respect that even if I would prefer something else.
I'm curious as well. I upgraded from a base PS4 to a Pro a few years ago, and the PS ecosystem let me transfer all my games and files over fairly seamlessly (ethernet connected between the two systems). I would *think* the PS4->PS5 would utilize the same approach, since it's just digital files being moved, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.
I know it's just marketing but I do find humor in the expression "quantum leap in core execution capability". They have finally been able to make the smallest improvement physically possible!
I do find humor when some sub-genius makes this observation. Do you realize that a quantum leap is also a discrete and instantaneous transition? Did it ever occur to you that their analogy might be to this respect, rather than its magnitude?
1440p60 is ~GTX 1070 performance, and I'd be surprised if the PS5 didn't exceed that, seeing as the (current gen) Xbox One X already matches the 1070, roughly.
Hybrid rendering would allow doing things like UI (minimaps) at 8K while doing checkerboars upscalings for actual scene. Things like raytraced global illuminations are anyway world space calculations (independent of screen resolution).
I think you're missing the point? VR requires rendering twice as much, and optimally at least 2K per eye for a 4K minimum. However, you will need more detail in front of your retina than in the periphery, so it actually makes sense to target 4K per eye even if the software renders most of it in 2K, which means you will need 8K raw.
And given the next gen APUs are easily 3 or 4 times more powerful than the PS4Pro, it's not impossible that they aim for 8K
Oculus Go with a split 2560x1440 panel at 90Hz does approach 4Kp60 in terms of pixel fill rate though (332 million pixels per second versus 498 million. Most headsets are at least 2160x1080 split, with the PSVR actually being the lowest at 1920x1080 split. Interestingly, that new HP Reverb headset with dual 2160x2160 panels at 90Hz actually hits 840 million pixels per second.
So while I agree that 1080p60 is a quarter of 2160p60, designing your GPU hardware for dual 1080p60 would be a mistake for a VR system. 4K (2160p) is a better comparison.
Which gpu's on the pc can run 4k@60fps? Let alone get close to 8k? How much do those gpu's cost again? It's a pipe dream imo... Unless they dial down the detail, forgot about that console trick.
You are assuming they will target 8K60. 8K30 with checkerboard could very well be doable on a console where your engine can be tailored for performance instead of compatibility. The PS4 Pro can already do 4K60 with checkerboard at reasonable geometry counts with 36 compute units at only 911 MHz. Part of that is due to the use of FP16 instead of FP32 wherever high precision isn't necessary (hint: a lot of places). If the PS5 has twice the GPU compute power (achievable on 7nm), 8k30 checkerboard is definitely within grasp. Low-poly titles may even be able to manage 4k80 reliably. Being able to offload certain lighting effects to dedicated ray-tracing hardware would be another way to get a decent boost for a small area increase.
Not really. Read through that list carefully. Most games are dynamic resolution, which almost always means well under 4K most of the time, and 30fps. There are some that are 4K all the time, but it's probably around a quarter of the games on that list.
Honestly, it does not matter if they only do it for some games - this shows that they can do it. And as many other posters have said, on hardware with much lower specs than what we can expect to see in the next gen consoles.
The current PS4 Pro (and Xbox one X) already support 4k HDR games on much lower specced hardware. Their lesser brethren are perfectly fine with 1080p gaming. No PC comes close at the same price point (total system price).
Going to SSD is no brainer today. But the choice GPU is questionable and likely in the future so is CPU. Last PlayStation I had was PlayStation 3 and Xbox One was because 4k video and it is not used currently
Both choices are fine given that they most likely want an APU solution and x86 backwards compatibility, leaving them with AMD. Even the GPU is probably better compatible than others would be.
The reason PS4 was x86 and not custom like Cell was because of all the complaints from developers. It was way too hard to optimize for and their biggest complaint to Sony was that cpu. Sony will be x86 from now on.
What? PS4 use AMD's CPU and GPU. Why it's questionable? You want them to use Intel CPU and iGPU or what? Since Intel & Nvidia combination would probably cost them atrocious load of money because of different companies and technologies. The development cost also will be higher too.
I don't think either MS or Sony went with x86 for its own sake - they went for the best CPU + GPU they could get for the $ and power budget. Until recently, x86 was the best option. Only now do we see ARM really mount a credible threat.
Sony is doing great with regards to their console plans. No console is ever using the latest high end CPU or GPU when it comes out. That isnt how this works.
It's funny how you say that, because this is slated for Zen 2 + Navi, which will be the latest CPU and GPU architecture at the time of launch.
For a time, consoles would be competitive with high-end gaming PCs, at launch. I think that really changed with PS4 and XBox One. PS 5 won't fully reverse that trend, but I think it'll close the gap better than PS4 did.
ITs still not going to be a "high end" Zen 2/NAvi. Also, Z2 is coming out this summer. I dont think we will see PS5 until late 2020... With that said, I see your point, it might close that gap a good amount.
When the original Xbox launched using the Intel 733MHz Pentium III in 2001, the top CPUs were the Athlon XP 2000+ and the Pentium 4 2.2GHz Northwood. The 733MHz P3 was "trash" in comparison.
When the Xbone/PS4 launched with the Jaguar cores, the top CPUs was the i7-4770K. The Jaguar APU was "trash" in comparison.
Now consider that the PS5 (and presumably the Xbone X2+ Two) will be running with an 8-core Zen 2. That's current-gen CPU architecture in a console for about the first time ever, it's a different scenario entirely.
But the PS5 hasn't launched yet and wont launch until late 2020 at best... And again, it's not going to have the high end 32 core Zen 2 threadripper CPU. It will have an 8 core mid ranger in 2020.
Well, how did the GPUs compare? That was my focus. It's true that until PS3/XBox 360, consoles' CPUs lagged PCs'. For that one generation, the CPUs were unusually competitive.
But prior to PS4/XBox One, consoles' GPUs were actually pretty high-end.
The jump to Zen is likely to tide them over for a good long while as there won't be substantially beefier single core designs available in the next 5 years, and the GPU is likely to match the value high-end option for PCs when it comes out. The biggest difference is likely to be memory locality as the very tightly integrated ram pool on existing consoles performs much better than what a typical desktop using DIMMS can deliver. They can also do better general purpose caches with Zen than with Jaguar cores.
I think the push for Xbox and PlayStation is more of political, AMD did lower cost for it and they bought - AMD is probably to take a lost in consoles so they can say they have consoles for marketing purposes.
AMD makes a (low-ish) profit on each custom APU they provide to Sony and Microsoft. But, even a low per-unit margin adds up if you're moving millions of them every year.
And if they are using the same dies as Adored suggested, the extra benefit would be binning - there's be more high performing dies to be sold as Ryzen 3xxxx.
Man, you sure are sore that they're not using Intel, eh?
No, I assure you AMD cannot "take a loss on consoles". Its shareholders would not stand for that. If you look at their quarterly reports, you can see that the group doing their console work is profitable.
I hope the new console comes with an internal slot to install a 2nd NVMe drive in it. Hoping they use standard PC drives instead of going proprietary as well.
The problem with consoles is that development time is too long to be a top notch product by the time it's released. This new console will probably see the day of light in the fall of 2021. By then we are already using Zen 3 and Navi+ on 5nm with PCIe4 on the PC side.
Probably a late 2020 launch, but this has always been true.
They have to set a hardware baseline at some point. New consoles are good news for PC gamers because it increases the target configuration used by developers.
This is why they can never compete with a truly high-end PC.
But, the main thing I would point out is upper-midrange GPUs costing more than the entire console. It's impossible for consoles to compete with such GPUs, although developers can do quite a bit to wring every bit of performance out of what capabilities consoles do provide.
But do they have to compete with high end PCs in the first place.
When my kid wanted to play more demanding games, the choice to go for a €160 XBox One S black friday deal (including a game and a controller) was a no brainer, since I would not have gotten very far with the same money on the PC side.
This is why they can never compete with a truly high-end PC.
But, the main thing I would point out is upper-midrange GPUs costing more than the entire console. It's impossible for consoles to compete with such GPUs, although developers can do quite a bit to wring every bit of performance out of what capabilities consoles do provide.
It doesn't run on the same Windows 10, there is a lot less overhead, hence a similar spec'ed PC to an Xbox One X will run the same game at same resolution and details at a lower FPS.
of course it will... because the game is made for xbox, then ported over to the comp.. good example of this, is Supreme Commander 2..... wouldn't be the same if the game was made for a comp.. then ported to console
It does. Original xbox one had windows 8 on it. All modern consoles run some sort of nearly full fledge os. However, they have less over heard because a lot of unecessary modules are left out. Still more overhead than old school consoles like the NES with no os.
They have optimized operating systems, hence a similar spec'ed PC to an Xbox One X will run the same game at same resolution and details at a lower FPS.
I think you overestimate the amount of overhead typically introduced by the OS.
Console ports often drastically differ from the PC version, with the porting work usually carried out by an entirely different team than the one that wrote it.
Oh, you know it's going to be some cheap, DRAM-less, QLC model. Probably the only thing that'll be faster than a PC is its peak read speeds vs. a SATA SSD.
I doubt it. I put a SSD in my PS3 and load times went from like 30 seconds down to like 3 or 5. You have to remember that loading is not 100% I/O, but there's also some CPU time in the mix.
The other thing to keep in mind is that the faster the hardware gets, the more heavily developers will lean on it (and the less they'll optimize it). If they know gamers are willing to accept 15 second load times, they probably won't bother to optimize load times to get them much below that, even with faster hardware.
This is what I've been waiting for. Not to buy directly, but to buy the same hardware that I know will be used as a baseline for major games and video processing in the next five-to-ten years.
It *is* a big leap vs. the base PS4. The problem is that half-generations, like PS4 Pro and XBox One X shift the baseline. You just need to remember that those were half-generations, and maybe we will get *another* half generation like what you describe.
While they may not have specified I would wager they are using dedicated hardware, fixed function, for ray tracing. In theory a PS3 could've handled ray tracing using general hardware(actually, Cell probably would've excelled there). The PS4 also could handle ray tracing. Without dedicated hardware, why mention it?
Looks like Sony is going full PS3 mode with a tech heavy but expensive console. They do this every time they get a lead. This will cost $600+ and bomb on release forcing them to cut prices and take a bath just like they did a dozen years ago.
It actually was for the first few years that that system was on the market state side. It did do better in Europe and Japan but was over shadowed by the Wii in terms of sales in those regions. It really wasn't until the RRoD started to hit Xbox 360 users and several price cuts later that the real shift in sales momentum started to happen. It did not help that Sony had the most expensive console the market with expensive development tools and an arcane architecture that was released right before the Great Recession. The idea that Sony was able to claw back market share over time goes to show just how much MS was able to fumble their initial lead.
At the end of their life cycle before their replacements arrived, the PS3 and Xbox 360 had reached sales parity while Nintendo had checked out before then.
Thanks Ryan! Yes, the Wired article was light on details, but at least we got a slightly better idea now. Probably also means that SONY has slowed down the manufacturing of the PS4/Pro, as any release like this will give people (including me) a strong reason to wait with buying any console until 2020. Two thoughts on the "PS 5": 8K sounds great, but probably also means 8K pricing. Wouldn't be surprised if this ends up being the first >$ 1,000 console. In addition to the custom APU, this thing will need oodles of VRAM to do anything close to 8K; my guess is 32Gb and up. And here a crazy thought: what if the "faster than current SSDs" storage is Optane, or an Optane-like solution, at least as boot and work/play-from disk, with a larger SSD as cheaper 2nd storage ? That'd be plenty fast, make resuming a game almost instantaneous, and could even function as additional, slower RAM as needed. I said it's crazy, but then, we now have Intel selling CPUs packaged with AMD VEGA graphics, so hell has frozen over already.
If the specs are anywhere near what the Wired interview hinted at, the PS 5 will be, if not $ 1,000 or more, at least much closer to $ 1,000 than to $ 499. I wouldn't be surprised if the Wired interview was also to test the waters as to how much people might be willing to pay for what is more than double the PS 4 performance and capabilities.
Well more than 1000$ is very low here. Assuming 8K means 8K video output and 8K UI not native 8K rendering (which would be incredibly improbable since not even 2 2080Tis can do that at playable framerates) you'd probably do something like 4K upscaling. Then add ray tracing to that. The graphics card you'd need here for 30-60fps is around 800$ and up. Now 32 GB of VRAM (more than on a 4000$ Quadro 6000). That adds a fair bit of money to that. Then you need a proper cooling solution for all that heat since that checks in at around 300W. Not exactly cheap. Next up Zen 2 CPU (let's say 8 Core) around 300$+. Then the SSD which for 1 TB checks in around 100-200$. That is not optane that would be much more expensive and optane acceleration with SSDs which is cheaper is not really worth it. Okay now add 8-16GB of system RAM another 70$+. Add PSU, Chassis, Motherboard, Design costs, Software Development, Marketing etc. That's another big bump. You're looking at 2000$+ even if AMD Zen 2 and Navi offer incredible performance for cheap (which they very likely won't) manufacturing costs alone would be incredibly high. Sony won't do that. Right now it's just hyping the new console but it's best to have realistic expectations. Console isn't the market for this and most likely never will be.
P.S.: I'm not hating on the PS5 here. I love that they're finally doing SSDs even if they probably won't do 4GB/s which would be the theoretical limit of PCIe 3.0. Switching to PCIe 4.0 is a nice move but it makes it sound like the storage will be faster than anything available for PCs which it won't. The Zen 2 and Navi upgrade means we may see native 4k30fps (maybe even 60 in some not very demanding titles) with not to demanding graphics settings (with no ray tracing it just wouldn't make sense they should do higher details first) which is also a welcome upgrade. If they do their job well they can deliver a very very decent gaming for a reasonable price here which is great news especially for console fans.
eastcoast_pete/The Real Mathematician are you factoring the volume discount thing in these estimates ? if the PS5 is more then say $600 US.. then this will be a flop from the start.... i dont want to know what it would cost for the Canadian customers....
The more I think about it, the more I believe that this Wired interview is also about Sony testing the waters for how much people are willing to spend for a console that would be significantly more than twice as good/fast than the PS4 Pro. Just for the graphics alone (full 4K 10bit HDR @ 60 fps even with just "raytracing lite"), you'd need more oomph than the Radeon VIII currently has; we might finally see 64 or more ROPs in a consumer unit, albeit in a console.
And Quadro pricing is highly inflated. They don't reflect what the actual hardware would cost, in volume. So, you really can't use that as a cost basis for estimating a high-volume product, like this, Mathematician.
Oh, and the whole reason I'm even in the comments is to point out that the article assumes they're going to use 8 Zen2 cores. I call BS. Mark my words: this will be a 4-core / 8-thread implementation.
mode_13h Jaguar ( current cpu in the xbox and PS4 ) is a " 8 core " cpu... to go to a full real 8 core, maybe 8 core 16 thread ) would make sense for the next playstation and maybe the next xbox..... and why u call BS ??? zen 2 may not even come in a 4 core version....
This is a custom SoC, so it will have as many cores as Sony wants and will pay for.
As for what would make sense, you have to look at the number of cores typically required by games. If we assume the PS5's GPU will be roughly comparable to a RTX 2070, then you can probably go and find CPU scaling benchmarks to find out what's actually needed for games to be GPU-limited.
Yeah, I see that. I doubt it's still too late to change their mind, though. Maybe they're just trying to fake-out Microsoft. Have a look at this scaling data:
Intel / Vega was a temporary thing - mostly importantly it was able to show that EMiB can used a totally differently manufactured chip in conjunction with Intel CPU. Intel Gen 11 integrated graphics will be faster than AMD GPU in my Dell XPS 15 2in1.
I don't think 2019 is "clearly out of the question". It is soon, but not insane. The only problematic bit is getting AMD to integrate everything in a single chip. Assuming (and that is a huge assumption) Zen2 can add Navi in that blank spot, it wouldn't be that much of a work - significantly less than making the APUs, where integration happens inside a single die. Furthermore, if all required connections are present, Sony can even have separate CPU and GPU for now and only make chiplets/APUs with update.
The main (but not only) thing in favor of 2019 is "why would Sony hype a 2020+ console now?"
Though... after reading Wired story, it is explicitly stated it is not coming 2019: >>The “next-gen console,“ as he refers to it repeatedly, won’t be landing in stores anytime in 2019.<<
They should add mouse support, and there you have it, no more issues. The PS4 controller is the only main reason I don't use a PS4. They need to introduce an ergonomic Switch Pro Controller type controller also. But mouse support would do it.
You can always plug it into a monitor, plus some of the 2019 TVs have super low lag and free synch support, so by 2020 it isn't a big jump to see TVs performing as well as monitors.
A little too bold for Sony and AMD to be bolstering SSD support, let alone 8K support on the PS5 when that feature isn't even widely adopted or remotely available mainstream as of yet, and it's not even trending in the PC Master Race space.
My video card already supports 8k output via Displayport, and every decent computer has had an SSD for the last 5 years, so not really sure what your point is...
But nobody is using 8k for gaming. That's the point.
Regarding SSD, I think that comment was about a "faster than PC" SSD. But it's probably just using SATA as a basis for comparison (i.e. "faster than the typical PC SSD").
Please stop censoring video games. We aren't living in the 90's anymore. I don't own or play any Playstation games, but if someone's cool with nudity in their video game, let them have it.
Not sure why people want uncensored games. Once you've had real life interaction of an adult nature, video games seem corny and childish. Once you've had extensive real life adult interaction of that sort, you stop making a big deal out of it even in the meat world. It's literally just a sack of meat, organs, and fat. Who cares?
Ryan Smith> even a Zen 1 processor is 3-4x faster than a Jaguar processor with the same number of cores; and this likely underestimates what Zen 2 can do.
Your logical fallacy is to assume they'll hold the core count at 8. I call BS. Remember that Jaguar cores are small and single-threaded, which is why they could (or had to) use 8 of them. They won't use 8 Zen2 cores, because it's not necessary and because it would inflate the price too much and/or starve Navi of die space.
Mark my words: this will be a 4-core / 8-thread implementation.
mode_13h " Your logical fallacy is to assume they'll hold the core count at 8 " and Your logical fallacy is to assume they'll hold the core count at 4 :-) jaguar used 2 modules with 4 cores each. which equates to 8 cores... just not real 8 cores.... also like pepone1234 said.. mark cerny mentioned 8 cores of Zen 2 .
I'm just looking at what would be needed to balance the CPU and GPU capacity of the system. You simply don't need an 8-core Zen2 CPU to drive a RTX 2070-class GPU.
Again, remember that CPU cores (particularly "big" ones, like Zen/Zen2) not only add licensing costs, but necessarily push up die size or compete for die space with GPU cores. The bigger the die, the more expensive. Also, the more power-hungry, which means a bigger cooling solution and PSU. And that means a bigger cabinet and a larger box, which takes up more shelf space and drives up shipping costs.
So, all the pressures are for them to use die area efficiently, which means we can expect a carefully-balanced SoC. How many cores they'll need will have something to do with the horsepower of the GPU, but you can go look at some scaling articles and see how many cores are really needed for most games to be GPU-limited on a mid-range graphics card.
Keep in mind that they might be trying to "fake out" Microsoft. They certainly have reasons to talk up their console, and there's not really a downside for them to stretch the truth, at this stage.
Except there is, a cost, that is. Talking about a much, much better successor to your currently available product (PS 4 Pro) coming soon makes me and many others put any PS4 purchases on hold. I, for one, will now certainly hold out for the next generation of consoles before I buy an outdated model less than 12 months before the new, much better one comes out.
" (particularly "big" ones, like Zen/Zen2) not only add licensing costs " what licensing costs ???
keep in mind.. it was stated that PS5.. would have 8 zen 2 cores...... if thats true.. then what you are talking about.. is moot.. still.. what a console has for hardware.. doesnt dictate what console i will buy.. its the games... if console A has 16 zen 2 cores, and RTX 2080TI for the video card, and 64 gigs of ram for the whole console.. ... console B has 4 zen 2 cores, GTX 1660TI class video card and 32 gigs of ram... and console B has the games i would like to play.. ill be getting console B...
guru3d REALLY needs to change the colors they use for their graphs... practically using different shades of blue.. the graphs are ok, but specially in the bottom where it shows what color is for what res.. makes it a little hard to tell which is which, when you have say a 3 mm square box to tell which is which...
how well does farcry use more then one core ?? i dont.. er cant, play FPS, and dont pay much attention to them, so i dont know how well it uses multi core...
Except it probably won't be that expensive, because they'll almost certainly use the same 8C/16T 7nm Zen2 chiplet that AMD will have been producing for their own stuff. So they'll be taking advantage of the design work and process maturity that AMD have already paid for.
95% sure the PS5 will be chiplet based. Not a monolithic APU. Because to get the performance levels they're suggesting would require a huge 7nm monolithic die. Which really would make the thing super expensive.
Pentium4 was 32-bit, with 128-bit SSE. When they went to 64-bit, they also doubled the size of the GP and SSE register files. Then, those vector registers doubled again, with AVX.
Add to that the shadow registers, which have gotten quite numerous, and you're now talking about some significant amount of machine state to replicate per SMT.
Amd gpu's so low performing even on a per square millimeter basis. Disappointing that they didn't go with nvidia which is the only other option unfortunately.
If you want to use Nvidia's CPU that is ARM... Then okay, use Nvidia. I can see them using Intel CPU and GPU, but not with Nvidia. Also AMD's aren't low performing on mid end, which what this console target on. Navi performance looks pretty good from the leaks tho, let's see their releases later.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
186 Comments
Back to Article
deil - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Should I say finally?Opencg - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
raytracing on console. i just cant. this gimick needs to die. what about vr? if these consoles do it well we could finnaly see some developers focus on it.michael2k - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I think you're short sighted. The technology is valid and useful. I'm envisioning it's use in VR for 3D sound. Sound rays are emitted by sources, bounce around the environment, get absorbed, modified, filtered, diffused, and then reach the listener. If we start calculating the speed of sound, the velocity of the source and the velocity of the listener, as well as the objects and area around them, we can start applying doppler effects to the sound too.It would use similar hardware as photon ray tracing.
BenSkywalker - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
What you are describing is patented, called A3D(Aureal), and was buried by Creative Labs. We had this in the late 90s and it eviscerated the garbage sound we have now.andychow - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
You want to really get mad? Creative Labs sued Aureal for patent infringement in March 1998, and Aureal countersued for patent infringement and deceptive trade practices. Aureal won the lawsuit brought by Creative in December 1999. However, the cost of the legal battle caused Aureal's investors to cease funding operations, forcing Aureal into bankruptcy. Creative then acquired Aureal's assets in September 2000 through the bankruptcy court with the specific provision that Creative Labs would be released from all claims of past infringement by Creative Labs upon Aureal's A3D technology. Creative Labs has not chosen to support the A3D API.Lawyers suck.
0ldman79 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I was thinking about this while I was reading the info about the new sound features.We really have kind of gone backwards over the last couple of decades and I was wondering what the deal was with that.
Previous old two speaker hardware had provisions to set the locations for your speakers in a 360* area around your desktop so that you'd get correct positional audio regardless of where your speakers were actually located. That was even in SoundBlaster 16 on Windows 3.11. I played with that quite a bit.
I would love to have those features on a modern, 7.1 audio system. It's stupid that we don't. We already had various reflections and other effects that would actually emulate surround with a two speaker setup. I seriously considered digging out an old PC just to hook it up to my current sound system just to see what it would do.
mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
I don't know exactly what you played with, but the DSP capabilities of the SB16 can't have been terribly advanced. Most likely, it was just tweaking with delay and cross-feed.zephyrprime - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
The 3d audio they're talking about was only available on the Soundblaster Live cards and later, not the soundblaster 16 which was much weaker. Did the 16 even have a dsp? Also, I think you are greatly overestimating how much power is needed to do 3d environmental audio. It's actually very modest by modern standards and was attainable even 20 years ago with ~$150 hardware.kkilobyte - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
The SoundBlaster 16, in its 'ASP' version, indeed had a dsp. One of its main gimmicks was precisely the ability to render 3D audio on a pair of stereo speakers, using a technology called 'QSound'.Not all Sb16 had the ASP by default, but it could be bought as an add-on. Besides QSound, the ASP could also be used for hardware-assisted realtime audio compression (ADPCM) and text to speech. It was generally ignored by the industry, and it was finally dropped in newer products.
Ej24 - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
What you're describing with 360 sound regardless of where the actual speakers are sounds like dolby atmos. No not the atmos "branded" soundbars and such, a real AV receiver driven 5.1.4 or 7.1.2 speaker setup. It's mind blowing for games that support it.Threska - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
They may "suck", but the corporations that pay their salaries suck more.nathanddrews - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
I would argue that a company that steals and profits off another's IP sucks the most. The lawyers are necessary.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Too bad somebody else didn't swoop in and buy them out from under Creative's nose.Anyone else remember the Gravis Ultrasound?
SeleniumGlow - Monday, May 6, 2019 - link
Oh man. The memories. It was an absolute legend of a card for MIDI playback.Bp_968 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
If the patent was really issued around the 1990s than it should be expired. Patents only last 20 years (which is why they are vastly superior for society than the broken copyright system with its 100+ year terms)Senpuu - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Any newcomers who are actually discouraged by such a patent are fools that deserve to lose out. You cannot successfully patent a process that is just the instantiation of physics. Anyone could build this from the ground up with a basic knowledge of wave propagation, reflection, and interference.zephyrprime - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
It's been so long since then that the patents would all be expired by now.Opencg - Sunday, April 21, 2019 - link
the probem is that the hardware needs to be implemented in a way where it is somewhat abstract and highly programmable. techniques like the audio one you describe are great and they are built upon programmable hardware. the real revolution in gpu hardware is still the one that happened over 10 years ago when we got pixel shaders then vertex shaders as well as supporting functions and then more and more programability that turned the fixed function pipeline into something where creativity in programming happened.but the modern features put on these cards really dont make sense. why waste silicon for something that cuts your framerate down to 60 on a 2080 ti and really doesn't look that impressive? ive worked with rayracing before and when i heard one trace per pixel and ai denoising i KNEW it was going to suck. it seems like its just a ploy to put ai and non realtime rendering hardware on "gaming" cards. and the worst part is nobody is even trying to use it in a novel way. i fear that we have an obsession with something; the thought of movie like graphics in games. and we wont get it anytime soon. definately not on next gen consoles. when we could have 30%+ more performance for vr and 4k games if we lost the gimick
theuglyman0war - Wednesday, May 1, 2019 - link
Want to beat on graphics then why stop there? Why not call PBR Physically based rendering/shaders a gimmick as well?Where creatives can continue to reach into their bag of work around hacks to achieve the same fidelity instead of technologies like PBR and DXR ray tracing that achieve realism by simulating the world with a physically based strategy? Do not understand how our old bag of hacks are not the actual "gimmick" here??
But if the past heritage of long expensive development budgets spent of the graphic hacks are preferable to simply adopting physically based technologies that give the same effects without the same blood sweat and tears.. virtually for free.
Then I am in.. Lets call fidelity in graphics "A Hack".
Am I an edgy angry knee jerk lemming fan boy yet?
Flunk - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
What they're using is more of a simulation of raytracing than the actual technique, it's much less processing intensive so could be used to add more realistic details to things in games.Flunk - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Hey, it's backwards compatible so I'm in. Maybe this one will actually manage 4K properly.PeachNCream - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
I want to see how backwards compatible the PS5 will be before jumping on the bandwagon. If it has a painless "it just works for everything currently on the PS4" thing going for it, I'm all in as well. I'm so sick and tired of messing with gaming on a PC anyway.tipoo - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
I also wonder if it will run PS4 Pro mode patches, or just the base console. Also if it would allow patching past the Pro.Fergy - Monday, April 22, 2019 - link
What kind of messing with the PC do you have to do for PC gaming? The only thing that still irritates me is having to sit through a startup sequence where you have to keep pressing a button to make it go to the next step. I wish it would just load to the game world.PeachNCream - Monday, April 22, 2019 - link
Driver updates, patching, anti-virus, hardware upgrades, sitting at a desk with a keyboard and mouse versus on a couch with a controller, Steam, tinkering with the OS to get it to run a game, older software not running or running with glitches, finding hardware that isn't festooned with RGB, finding a computer that doesn't have Killer NICs, game patches and feature updates upping system requirements, outstanding bugs that are never fixed (Bethesda), tweaking display settings to get something to run smoothly... I grant you that some of those problems are just inherent to PCs in general, but many of them that are end up amplified by attempting to play video games. I really want to just sit down, insert a disc/cart/download something once, and play a game when I get a free moment between taking care of my kids and doing all of the chores.l3m - Monday, April 22, 2019 - link
I have an old PC from 2012 with a good semi-old GPU (SSD, i5 3570K, GTX 980 Ti STRIX DC3OC) directly attached to my TV that boots directly into Steam Big Picture Mode. No Keyboard/Mouse, just only two steam controllers attached. It can run even new games like AC Odyssey in VERY HIGH or ULTRA settings. It just works, runs any kind of game (I also played Pathfinder: Kingmaker and Pillars of Eternity 2 Deadfire) with steam ontrollers and has the advantage of the steam store - most games are 5-20$ if you wait for a sale, and loading times are much better than any console despite the outdated hardware. Best Sofa Gaming experience.PeachNCream - Monday, April 22, 2019 - link
I'm not trying to move the goalposts here, but that 980 costs more than a PS4 and it doesn't factor in the other components in the system you're using. I'm sure that's okay for a lot of people, but I want to keep pushing cash into my retirement and investment accounts and the lower cost of software doesn't fully offset the higher costs of hardware. Plus, whereas all games on a console are designed for a controller, that isn't the case with all PC games so a system setup like that can't be the only gaming PC if PC gaming is your thing, otherwise a keyboard and mouse are sometimes a necessity. It's great that your setup works for you, but I've had my fill of dealing with general purpose computing hardware as a gaming platform. Even my $30 phone is an easier to use gaming system than my PC -- though the PC is an excellent platform for my novels, replying to e-mail, and paying bills -- it just doesn't hold up well when compared to a dedicated entertainment device or, as I already mentioned, a pocket-friendly phone.Korguz - Monday, April 22, 2019 - link
PeachNCreamif doing all that bothers you for playing comp games.. then consoles and phones.. are for you...
i have been playing games on a comp since DOS 6.1 i think.. having to install, update the game, drivers and other things.. is just part of it...
" whereas all games on a console are designed for a controller " this is a little false... FPS's.. even though i dont play them any more.. are MUCH MUCH better with a keyboard and mouse.. the friends i have that do play FPS's, wouldnt touch one with a controller...
PeachNCream - Tuesday, April 23, 2019 - link
My first computer was a C64 and I have a long history with computer gaming as well. In the past decade, I feel as though we are taking significant steps backwards due to the rising cost of hardware, increased market segmentation, inflated power demands and waste heat output at the upper end of the performance curve, an acceptance of the disposable nature of hardware (especially NAND storage), and a constant push to make things look better while somewhat ignoring the potential to use additional compute power to enhance other aspects of gaming entertainment. Certainly, I would never disagree with you that FPS sorts are better suited to keyboard and mouse play. However, as I've gotten older and had a variety of life experiences, I shy away from the violence typically associated with FPS gaming. Killing people in a game has never been all that appealing, but I very much steer well away from that sort of thing if it gets to visceral and too realistic. Because of that, at least in my case, I don't feel like I'm losing much by having my fun on other platforms. For people that are less sensitive to that sort of thing, sure go for the PC gaming. Your money, your life, your choice. I respect that even if I would prefer something else.milkywayer - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
I'm curious how sincere Sony is with backward compatibility.Can I play my currently bought digital PS4 games or I'd have to buy them again to be able to play on PS5?
I gave up on discs in PS3 days so pretty much my whole ps4 library is digital.
Trackster - Wednesday, April 24, 2019 - link
I'm curious as well. I upgraded from a base PS4 to a Pro a few years ago, and the PS ecosystem let me transfer all my games and files over fairly seamlessly (ethernet connected between the two systems). I would *think* the PS4->PS5 would utilize the same approach, since it's just digital files being moved, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.willis936 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I know it's just marketing but I do find humor in the expression "quantum leap in core execution capability". They have finally been able to make the smallest improvement physically possible!Metroid - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
"quantum leap in core execution capability". They want to sound smart but they aren't.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Perhaps you want to sound smart ...boozed - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
"It's just marketing" should never be an excuse for mangling the English language!mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
I do find humor when some sub-genius makes this observation. Do you realize that a quantum leap is also a discrete and instantaneous transition? Did it ever occur to you that their analogy might be to this respect, rather than its magnitude?Dug - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
Besides the fact that it's neither discrete or instantaneous.mode_13h - Saturday, April 20, 2019 - link
According to wikipedia "It appears discontinuous as the electron "jumps" from one energy level to another, typically in a few nanoseconds or less."agent2099 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
They haven't even come out with a Last of Us game yet.shabby - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
8K.... ahahahahaha ok there sony, enough with the jokes please. We'll be happy if it can do 4k at 60fps.Chaitanya - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I would be happy if it did 1440p 60fps.zephyrprime - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
Yeah considering how strong the gpu on this thing will be, 1440p@60fps is all it can realistically do.jkh - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
1440p60 is ~GTX 1070 performance, and I'd be surprised if the PS5 didn't exceed that, seeing as the (current gen) Xbox One X already matches the 1070, roughly.zepi - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Hybrid rendering would allow doing things like UI (minimaps) at 8K while doing checkerboars upscalings for actual scene. Things like raytraced global illuminations are anyway world space calculations (independent of screen resolution).michael2k - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I think you're missing the point? VR requires rendering twice as much, and optimally at least 2K per eye for a 4K minimum. However, you will need more detail in front of your retina than in the periphery, so it actually makes sense to target 4K per eye even if the software renders most of it in 2K, which means you will need 8K raw.And given the next gen APUs are easily 3 or 4 times more powerful than the PS4Pro, it's not impossible that they aim for 8K
Meaker10 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
2k is a quarter of 4k so two 2k displays is only half 4k.michael2k - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Haha, you're right.SaberKOG91 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Oculus Go with a split 2560x1440 panel at 90Hz does approach 4Kp60 in terms of pixel fill rate though (332 million pixels per second versus 498 million. Most headsets are at least 2160x1080 split, with the PSVR actually being the lowest at 1920x1080 split. Interestingly, that new HP Reverb headset with dual 2160x2160 panels at 90Hz actually hits 840 million pixels per second.So while I agree that 1080p60 is a quarter of 2160p60, designing your GPU hardware for dual 1080p60 would be a mistake for a VR system. 4K (2160p) is a better comparison.
zephyrprime - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
Yeah but look at the graphics quality you get on the occulus go. It sucks. It looks like ps2 graphics but at a higher resolution.shabby - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Which gpu's on the pc can run 4k@60fps? Let alone get close to 8k? How much do those gpu's cost again? It's a pipe dream imo... Unless they dial down the detail, forgot about that console trick.SaberKOG91 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
You are assuming they will target 8K60. 8K30 with checkerboard could very well be doable on a console where your engine can be tailored for performance instead of compatibility. The PS4 Pro can already do 4K60 with checkerboard at reasonable geometry counts with 36 compute units at only 911 MHz. Part of that is due to the use of FP16 instead of FP32 wherever high precision isn't necessary (hint: a lot of places). If the PS5 has twice the GPU compute power (achievable on 7nm), 8k30 checkerboard is definitely within grasp. Low-poly titles may even be able to manage 4k80 reliably. Being able to offload certain lighting effects to dedicated ray-tracing hardware would be another way to get a decent boost for a small area increase.dudedud - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
"4K60 with checkerboard"In some if not very few games. Most are just 1600-1800p@30
SaberKOG91 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
This list begs to differ: https://www.gamesradar.com/ps4-pro-confirmed-games...cfenton - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Not really. Read through that list carefully. Most games are dynamic resolution, which almost always means well under 4K most of the time, and 30fps. There are some that are 4K all the time, but it's probably around a quarter of the games on that list.Irata - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Honestly, it does not matter if they only do it for some games - this shows that they can do it. And as many other posters have said, on hardware with much lower specs than what we can expect to see in the next gen consoles.Threska - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
One would think Turing would be better in the FP16 dept.Irata - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
The current PS4 Pro (and Xbox one X) already support 4k HDR games on much lower specced hardware.Their lesser brethren are perfectly fine with 1080p gaming. No PC comes close at the same price point (total system price).
mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
> And given the next gen APUs are easily 3 or 4 times more powerful than the PS4ProAnd who gave you that? I wouldn't assume so. Even 2x would be pretty good.
HStewart - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Going to SSD is no brainer today. But the choice GPU is questionable and likely in the future so is CPU. Last PlayStation I had was PlayStation 3 and Xbox One was because 4k video and it is not used currentlytipoo - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Both choices are fine given that they most likely want an APU solution and x86 backwards compatibility, leaving them with AMD. Even the GPU is probably better compatible than others would be.HStewart - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I could see for XBOX and Windows, the need for x86 compatibility. But for PlayStation - I see no reason .DigitalFreak - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Except that it's a hell of a lot easier to do backwards compatibility when you're using the same architecture (x86 / AMD64).HStewart - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
That would be likely true with Xbox and windows - but I would think PlayStation does not matter - except for cross platform development.Shlong - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
The reason PS4 was x86 and not custom like Cell was because of all the complaints from developers. It was way too hard to optimize for and their biggest complaint to Sony was that cpu. Sony will be x86 from now on.Lord of the Bored - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
It is useful as heck if you want to be back-compatible with the PS4 and PS4 Pro, which also use AMD64 processors.tipoo - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
The PS4 was x86, so it does matter for BC...Fritzkier - Tuesday, April 23, 2019 - link
What? PS4 use AMD's CPU and GPU. Why it's questionable? You want them to use Intel CPU and iGPU or what? Since Intel & Nvidia combination would probably cost them atrocious load of money because of different companies and technologies. The development cost also will be higher too.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
I don't think either MS or Sony went with x86 for its own sake - they went for the best CPU + GPU they could get for the $ and power budget. Until recently, x86 was the best option. Only now do we see ARM really mount a credible threat.HStewart - Saturday, April 20, 2019 - link
You know that Xbox 360 was a risc processor similar to ARM - why didn't they continue it.Korguz - Sunday, April 21, 2019 - link
maybe because of this article :http://www.redgamingtech.com/why-ps4-and-xbox-one-...
mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Oh, he just wants everything to be Intel. That's his *real* problem with the CPU.PeachNCream - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Hah, sad but true. Some people are blindly brand loyal to a fault.goatfajitas - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Sony is doing great with regards to their console plans. No console is ever using the latest high end CPU or GPU when it comes out. That isnt how this works.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
It's funny how you say that, because this is slated for Zen 2 + Navi, which will be the latest CPU and GPU architecture at the time of launch.For a time, consoles would be competitive with high-end gaming PCs, at launch. I think that really changed with PS4 and XBox One. PS 5 won't fully reverse that trend, but I think it'll close the gap better than PS4 did.
goatfajitas - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
ITs still not going to be a "high end" Zen 2/NAvi. Also, Z2 is coming out this summer. I dont think we will see PS5 until late 2020... With that said, I see your point, it might close that gap a good amount.nathanddrews - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
When the original Xbox launched using the Intel 733MHz Pentium III in 2001, the top CPUs were the Athlon XP 2000+ and the Pentium 4 2.2GHz Northwood. The 733MHz P3 was "trash" in comparison.When the Xbone/PS4 launched with the Jaguar cores, the top CPUs was the i7-4770K. The Jaguar APU was "trash" in comparison.
Now consider that the PS5 (and presumably the Xbone X2+ Two) will be running with an 8-core Zen 2. That's current-gen CPU architecture in a console for about the first time ever, it's a different scenario entirely.
goatfajitas - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
But the PS5 hasn't launched yet and wont launch until late 2020 at best... And again, it's not going to have the high end 32 core Zen 2 threadripper CPU. It will have an 8 core mid ranger in 2020.mode_13h - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
How do you know "late 2020"? I thought the article only said not in 2019. It could actually be in early/mid 2020.mode_13h - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
Well, how did the GPUs compare? That was my focus. It's true that until PS3/XBox 360, consoles' CPUs lagged PCs'. For that one generation, the CPUs were unusually competitive.But prior to PS4/XBox One, consoles' GPUs were actually pretty high-end.
Raqia - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
The jump to Zen is likely to tide them over for a good long while as there won't be substantially beefier single core designs available in the next 5 years, and the GPU is likely to match the value high-end option for PCs when it comes out. The biggest difference is likely to be memory locality as the very tightly integrated ram pool on existing consoles performs much better than what a typical desktop using DIMMS can deliver. They can also do better general purpose caches with Zen than with Jaguar cores.HStewart - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I think the push for Xbox and PlayStation is more of political, AMD did lower cost for it and they bought - AMD is probably to take a lost in consoles so they can say they have consoles for marketing purposes.A5 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
AMD makes a profit on their console designs. It's a whole section of their earning report, even.porcupineLTD - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Got to love seeing the shill sweat at AMD's success.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
I think he's sitting on a small pile of Intel stock. We know he worked there, so he probably at least has a bunch in his 401(k).Fritzkier - Tuesday, April 23, 2019 - link
Well, HSteward as usual.eastcoast_pete - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
AMD makes a (low-ish) profit on each custom APU they provide to Sony and Microsoft. But, even a low per-unit margin adds up if you're moving millions of them every year.Irata - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
And if they are using the same dies as Adored suggested, the extra benefit would be binning - there's be more high performing dies to be sold as Ryzen 3xxxx.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Man, you sure are sore that they're not using Intel, eh?No, I assure you AMD cannot "take a loss on consoles". Its shareholders would not stand for that. If you look at their quarterly reports, you can see that the group doing their console work is profitable.
mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
GPUs don't use DIMMs, and the CPU cores have to share memory bandwidth with the GPU.So, you can only say this thing will outperform PC APUs, but that would also be true based on relative die sizes.
What I want to know is whether they'll truly go with a monolithic die, or will they go with chiplets for CPU, GPU, and maybe other hardware.
Golgatha777 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I hope the new console comes with an internal slot to install a 2nd NVMe drive in it. Hoping they use standard PC drives instead of going proprietary as well.A5 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I'd bet decent money that it will be soldered on.I'm sure they have data saying how many people actually replaced their drives in the PS4.
Midwayman - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
God. Lets hope they spend the extra nickle and make it socketed even if not 'user accessible' for warranty replacement purposes.Shlong - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Doubt it's going to be soldered. People will complain and Sony has been avoiding going this route.zephyrprime - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
No chance of having a second slot. They may or may not use a standard slot because they might just solder in the flash like with a phone.5080 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
The problem with consoles is that development time is too long to be a top notch product by the time it's released. This new console will probably see the day of light in the fall of 2021. By then we are already using Zen 3 and Navi+ on 5nm with PCIe4 on the PC side.A5 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Probably a late 2020 launch, but this has always been true.They have to set a hardware baseline at some point. New consoles are good news for PC gamers because it increases the target configuration used by developers.
Midwayman - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I have to say thank god for the zen2 cores. GPU related tasks are easy enough to scale, but being limited by the Jaguar cpu is painfulmode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Too true.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Too true.Zingam - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
The problem with consoles is they have to be cheap and with a fixed price and plug and play. Some PC gamers pay more for a case than a console costs.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Too true.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
This is why they can never compete with a truly high-end PC.But, the main thing I would point out is upper-midrange GPUs costing more than the entire console. It's impossible for consoles to compete with such GPUs, although developers can do quite a bit to wring every bit of performance out of what capabilities consoles do provide.
Irata - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
But do they have to compete with high end PCs in the first place.When my kid wanted to play more demanding games, the choice to go for a €160 XBox One S black friday deal (including a game and a controller) was a no brainer, since I would not have gotten very far with the same money on the PC side.
mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
No doubt, consoles are good value for money.Just remarking about how consoles have fallen from their leading-edge status, last held back at the launch of PS3 / XBox 360.
mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
This is why they can never compete with a truly high-end PC.But, the main thing I would point out is upper-midrange GPUs costing more than the entire console. It's impossible for consoles to compete with such GPUs, although developers can do quite a bit to wring every bit of performance out of what capabilities consoles do provide.
Shlong - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
But consoles have the advantage of not having the Windows / operating system overhead. They also have mid-cycle refreshes (PS4 Pro, Xbox One X).Korguz - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Shlong doesnt xbox one.. run on windows 10 ???Shlong - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
It doesn't run on the same Windows 10, there is a lot less overhead, hence a similar spec'ed PC to an Xbox One X will run the same game at same resolution and details at a lower FPS.Korguz - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
of course it will... because the game is made for xbox, then ported over to the comp.. good example of this, is Supreme Commander 2..... wouldn't be the same if the game was made for a comp.. then ported to consolezephyrprime - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
It does. Original xbox one had windows 8 on it. All modern consoles run some sort of nearly full fledge os. However, they have less over heard because a lot of unecessary modules are left out. Still more overhead than old school consoles like the NES with no os.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
That's not true. They have operating systems, but not crap like antivirus running in the background.Shlong - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
They have optimized operating systems, hence a similar spec'ed PC to an Xbox One X will run the same game at same resolution and details at a lower FPS.mode_13h - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
I think you overestimate the amount of overhead typically introduced by the OS.Console ports often drastically differ from the PC version, with the porting work usually carried out by an entirely different team than the one that wrote it.
Rudde - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Or Zen 4 with DDR5 and post-navi with PCIe5.Wardrive86 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Sounds like a beast!tipoo - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
He also said the SSD has a faster transfer speed than current PC ones, so that has to be an NVMe PCI-E one, possibly 4.0Guessing this will move the console price target up from the PS4, 500 maybe.
mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Oh, you know it's going to be some cheap, DRAM-less, QLC model. Probably the only thing that'll be faster than a PC is its peak read speeds vs. a SATA SSD.tipoo - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
If that leads to 0.8 second load times in a real PS4 game instead of 15, whatever works.mode_13h - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
I doubt it. I put a SSD in my PS3 and load times went from like 30 seconds down to like 3 or 5. You have to remember that loading is not 100% I/O, but there's also some CPU time in the mix.The other thing to keep in mind is that the faster the hardware gets, the more heavily developers will lean on it (and the less they'll optimize it). If they know gamers are willing to accept 15 second load times, they probably won't bother to optimize load times to get them much below that, even with faster hardware.
GreenReaper - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
This is what I've been waiting for. Not to buy directly, but to buy the same hardware that I know will be used as a baseline for major games and video processing in the next five-to-ten years.Vitor - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I actually wanted for the next gen to take long, wait for 5nm so we can have a big leap.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
It *is* a big leap vs. the base PS4. The problem is that half-generations, like PS4 Pro and XBox One X shift the baseline. You just need to remember that those were half-generations, and maybe we will get *another* half generation like what you describe.BenSkywalker - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
While they may not have specified I would wager they are using dedicated hardware, fixed function, for ray tracing. In theory a PS3 could've handled ray tracing using general hardware(actually, Cell probably would've excelled there). The PS4 also could handle ray tracing. Without dedicated hardware, why mention it?Jumangi - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Looks like Sony is going full PS3 mode with a tech heavy but expensive console. They do this every time they get a lead. This will cost $600+ and bomb on release forcing them to cut prices and take a bath just like they did a dozen years ago.porcupineLTD - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Yeah, the PS3 was a total failure.Kevin G - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
It actually was for the first few years that that system was on the market state side. It did do better in Europe and Japan but was over shadowed by the Wii in terms of sales in those regions. It really wasn't until the RRoD started to hit Xbox 360 users and several price cuts later that the real shift in sales momentum started to happen. It did not help that Sony had the most expensive console the market with expensive development tools and an arcane architecture that was released right before the Great Recession. The idea that Sony was able to claw back market share over time goes to show just how much MS was able to fumble their initial lead.At the end of their life cycle before their replacements arrived, the PS3 and Xbox 360 had reached sales parity while Nintendo had checked out before then.
mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
The PS3 comparison is off. There's nothing exotic in what they describe that would be akin to The Cell.That they're using Zen2 and Navi tells us nothing about cost. That's a matter of die size, memory size, and memory bus width.
eastcoast_pete - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Thanks Ryan! Yes, the Wired article was light on details, but at least we got a slightly better idea now. Probably also means that SONY has slowed down the manufacturing of the PS4/Pro, as any release like this will give people (including me) a strong reason to wait with buying any console until 2020. Two thoughts on the "PS 5": 8K sounds great, but probably also means 8K pricing. Wouldn't be surprised if this ends up being the first >$ 1,000 console. In addition to the custom APU, this thing will need oodles of VRAM to do anything close to 8K; my guess is 32Gb and up.And here a crazy thought: what if the "faster than current SSDs" storage is Optane, or an Optane-like solution, at least as boot and work/play-from disk, with a larger SSD as cheaper 2nd storage ? That'd be plenty fast, make resuming a game almost instantaneous, and could even function as additional, slower RAM as needed. I said it's crazy, but then, we now have Intel selling CPUs packaged with AMD VEGA graphics, so hell has frozen over already.
A5 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
This thing will not cost $1000. Sony knows the limit for the console market is $499.eastcoast_pete - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
If the specs are anywhere near what the Wired interview hinted at, the PS 5 will be, if not $ 1,000 or more, at least much closer to $ 1,000 than to $ 499. I wouldn't be surprised if the Wired interview was also to test the waters as to how much people might be willing to pay for what is more than double the PS 4 performance and capabilities.The Real Mathematician - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Well more than 1000$ is very low here. Assuming 8K means 8K video output and 8K UI not native 8K rendering (which would be incredibly improbable since not even 2 2080Tis can do that at playable framerates) you'd probably do something like 4K upscaling. Then add ray tracing to that. The graphics card you'd need here for 30-60fps is around 800$ and up. Now 32 GB of VRAM (more than on a 4000$ Quadro 6000). That adds a fair bit of money to that. Then you need a proper cooling solution for all that heat since that checks in at around 300W. Not exactly cheap. Next up Zen 2 CPU (let's say 8 Core) around 300$+. Then the SSD which for 1 TB checks in around 100-200$. That is not optane that would be much more expensive and optane acceleration with SSDs which is cheaper is not really worth it. Okay now add 8-16GB of system RAM another 70$+. Add PSU, Chassis, Motherboard, Design costs, Software Development, Marketing etc. That's another big bump. You're looking at 2000$+ even if AMD Zen 2 and Navi offer incredible performance for cheap (which they very likely won't) manufacturing costs alone would be incredibly high. Sony won't do that. Right now it's just hyping the new console but it's best to have realistic expectations. Console isn't the market for this and most likely never will be.The Real Mathematician - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
P.S.: I'm not hating on the PS5 here. I love that they're finally doing SSDs even if they probably won't do 4GB/s which would be the theoretical limit of PCIe 3.0. Switching to PCIe 4.0 is a nice move but it makes it sound like the storage will be faster than anything available for PCs which it won't. The Zen 2 and Navi upgrade means we may see native 4k30fps (maybe even 60 in some not very demanding titles) with not to demanding graphics settings (with no ray tracing it just wouldn't make sense they should do higher details first) which is also a welcome upgrade. If they do their job well they can deliver a very very decent gaming for a reasonable price here which is great news especially for console fans.Korguz - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
eastcoast_pete/The Real Mathematician are you factoring the volume discount thing in these estimates ? if the PS5 is more then say $600 US.. then this will be a flop from the start.... i dont want to know what it would cost for the Canadian customers....eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
The more I think about it, the more I believe that this Wired interview is also about Sony testing the waters for how much people are willing to spend for a console that would be significantly more than twice as good/fast than the PS4 Pro. Just for the graphics alone (full 4K 10bit HDR @ 60 fps even with just "raytracing lite"), you'd need more oomph than the Radeon VIII currently has; we might finally see 64 or more ROPs in a consumer unit, albeit in a console.Korguz - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
too bad the " PS5 " is said to have Navi.. not Radeon VIImode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
There's no market for 8k! Why are you guys even taking that seriously? It's just going to upscale to 8k, if anything.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
And Quadro pricing is highly inflated. They don't reflect what the actual hardware would cost, in volume. So, you really can't use that as a cost basis for estimating a high-volume product, like this, Mathematician.Oh, and the whole reason I'm even in the comments is to point out that the article assumes they're going to use 8 Zen2 cores. I call BS. Mark my words: this will be a 4-core / 8-thread implementation.
Korguz - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
mode_13h Jaguar ( current cpu in the xbox and PS4 ) is a " 8 core " cpu... to go to a full real 8 core, maybe 8 core 16 thread ) would make sense for the next playstation and maybe the next xbox..... and why u call BS ??? zen 2 may not even come in a 4 core version....mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
This is a custom SoC, so it will have as many cores as Sony wants and will pay for.As for what would make sense, you have to look at the number of cores typically required by games. If we assume the PS5's GPU will be roughly comparable to a RTX 2070, then you can probably go and find CPU scaling benchmarks to find out what's actually needed for games to be GPU-limited.
Korguz - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
it was already stated in the article that the " PS5 would be 8 cores of zen 2....mode_13h - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
Yeah, I see that. I doubt it's still too late to change their mind, though. Maybe they're just trying to fake-out Microsoft. Have a look at this scaling data:https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/far-cry-5-pc...
HStewart - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Intel / Vega was a temporary thing - mostly importantly it was able to show that EMiB can used a totally differently manufactured chip in conjunction with Intel CPU. Intel Gen 11 integrated graphics will be faster than AMD GPU in my Dell XPS 15 2in1.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Competition from game streaming services will help keep a lid on pricing.mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
It's not going to do 8k any better than the original PS4 did 4k, which is to say virtually not at all.And no way is it going to use Optane. There's simply no justification for it.
You're believing way too much of their bluster and marketing hype.
Zizy - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
I don't think 2019 is "clearly out of the question". It is soon, but not insane. The only problematic bit is getting AMD to integrate everything in a single chip. Assuming (and that is a huge assumption) Zen2 can add Navi in that blank spot, it wouldn't be that much of a work - significantly less than making the APUs, where integration happens inside a single die. Furthermore, if all required connections are present, Sony can even have separate CPU and GPU for now and only make chiplets/APUs with update.The main (but not only) thing in favor of 2019 is "why would Sony hype a 2020+ console now?"
Zizy - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
Though... after reading Wired story, it is explicitly stated it is not coming 2019: >>The “next-gen console,“ as he refers to it repeatedly, won’t be landing in stores anytime in 2019.<<imaheadcase - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
You can have the fasted gaming device known to man...but its still handicapped by a controller and a TV set. lolAlistair - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
They should add mouse support, and there you have it, no more issues. The PS4 controller is the only main reason I don't use a PS4. They need to introduce an ergonomic Switch Pro Controller type controller also. But mouse support would do it.The Real Mathematician - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
As long as we're in it please do other resolutions than 720p, 1080p, 2160p in 16:9 too. 1440p or ultrawide support would be much appreciatedMakaveli - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
lol so true about the controller and TV set handicap.myxelflig - Friday, April 26, 2019 - link
You can always plug it into a monitor, plus some of the 2019 TVs have super low lag and free synch support, so by 2020 it isn't a big jump to see TVs performing as well as monitors.urbanman2004 - Tuesday, April 16, 2019 - link
A little too bold for Sony and AMD to be bolstering SSD support, let alone 8K support on the PS5 when that feature isn't even widely adopted or remotely available mainstream as of yet, and it's not even trending in the PC Master Race space.Alistair - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
My video card already supports 8k output via Displayport, and every decent computer has had an SSD for the last 5 years, so not really sure what your point is...mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
But nobody is using 8k for gaming. That's the point.Regarding SSD, I think that comment was about a "faster than PC" SSD. But it's probably just using SATA as a basis for comparison (i.e. "faster than the typical PC SSD").
zephyrprime - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
8k support will suck but having an ssd only makes sense.JoeyJoJo123 - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Please stop censoring video games. We aren't living in the 90's anymore. I don't own or play any Playstation games, but if someone's cool with nudity in their video game, let them have it.PeachNCream - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
Not sure why people want uncensored games. Once you've had real life interaction of an adult nature, video games seem corny and childish. Once you've had extensive real life adult interaction of that sort, you stop making a big deal out of it even in the meat world. It's literally just a sack of meat, organs, and fat. Who cares?mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Ryan Smith> even a Zen 1 processor is 3-4x faster than a Jaguar processor with the same number of cores; and this likely underestimates what Zen 2 can do.Your logical fallacy is to assume they'll hold the core count at 8. I call BS. Remember that Jaguar cores are small and single-threaded, which is why they could (or had to) use 8 of them. They won't use 8 Zen2 cores, because it's not necessary and because it would inflate the price too much and/or starve Navi of die space.
Mark my words: this will be a 4-core / 8-thread implementation.
pepone1234 - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Maybe you could simpy read the article. The part in which Mark Cerny says "contains eight cores of the company’s new 7nm Zen 2 microarchitecture"mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
True. The Wired article does say that. Thanks for pointing that out.Korguz - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
mode_13h" Your logical fallacy is to assume they'll hold the core count at 8 "
and Your logical fallacy is to assume they'll hold the core count at 4 :-) jaguar used 2 modules with 4 cores each. which equates to 8 cores... just not real 8 cores.... also like pepone1234 said.. mark cerny mentioned 8 cores of Zen 2 .
mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
I'm just looking at what would be needed to balance the CPU and GPU capacity of the system. You simply don't need an 8-core Zen2 CPU to drive a RTX 2070-class GPU.Again, remember that CPU cores (particularly "big" ones, like Zen/Zen2) not only add licensing costs, but necessarily push up die size or compete for die space with GPU cores. The bigger the die, the more expensive. Also, the more power-hungry, which means a bigger cooling solution and PSU. And that means a bigger cabinet and a larger box, which takes up more shelf space and drives up shipping costs.
So, all the pressures are for them to use die area efficiently, which means we can expect a carefully-balanced SoC. How many cores they'll need will have something to do with the horsepower of the GPU, but you can go look at some scaling articles and see how many cores are really needed for most games to be GPU-limited on a mid-range graphics card.
Keep in mind that they might be trying to "fake out" Microsoft. They certainly have reasons to talk up their console, and there's not really a downside for them to stretch the truth, at this stage.
eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Except there is, a cost, that is. Talking about a much, much better successor to your currently available product (PS 4 Pro) coming soon makes me and many others put any PS4 purchases on hold. I, for one, will now certainly hold out for the next generation of consoles before I buy an outdated model less than 12 months before the new, much better one comes out.Korguz - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
the same can be said every day about a comp :-) in which case.. very few would either upgrade or buy a new comp......Korguz - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
" (particularly "big" ones, like Zen/Zen2) not only add licensing costs " what licensing costs ???keep in mind.. it was stated that PS5.. would have 8 zen 2 cores...... if thats true.. then what you are talking about.. is moot.. still.. what a console has for hardware.. doesnt dictate what console i will buy.. its the games... if console A has 16 zen 2 cores, and RTX 2080TI for the video card, and 64 gigs of ram for the whole console.. ... console B has 4 zen 2 cores, GTX 1660TI class video card and 32 gigs of ram... and console B has the games i would like to play.. ill be getting console B...
mode_13h - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
True. Anyway, here's some core scaling benchmarks to consider:https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/far-cry-5-pc...
Korguz - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
guru3d REALLY needs to change the colors they use for their graphs... practically using different shades of blue.. the graphs are ok, but specially in the bottom where it shows what color is for what res.. makes it a little hard to tell which is which, when you have say a 3 mm square box to tell which is which...how well does farcry use more then one core ?? i dont.. er cant, play FPS, and dont pay much attention to them, so i dont know how well it uses multi core...
Haawser - Thursday, April 25, 2019 - link
Except it probably won't be that expensive, because they'll almost certainly use the same 8C/16T 7nm Zen2 chiplet that AMD will have been producing for their own stuff. So they'll be taking advantage of the design work and process maturity that AMD have already paid for.95% sure the PS5 will be chiplet based. Not a monolithic APU. Because to get the performance levels they're suggesting would require a huge 7nm monolithic die. Which really would make the thing super expensive.
Alistair - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
"mark my words" *chucklesthis guy watches too much tv :)
mode_13h - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
I probably don't watch enough, given that I've no idea what you're talking about.zephyrprime - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
It's completely unremarkable that a console released when the Ps5 will be will have 8 or even more cores. With 7nm process tech, 8 cores is cheap.zephyrprime - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Also adding simultaneous multithreading only increased the die size of the pentium4 by 5%. A single threading core saves only little space.mode_13h - Monday, April 22, 2019 - link
Pentium4 was 32-bit, with 128-bit SSE. When they went to 64-bit, they also doubled the size of the GP and SSE register files. Then, those vector registers doubled again, with AVX.Add to that the shadow registers, which have gotten quite numerous, and you're now talking about some significant amount of machine state to replicate per SMT.
tipoo - Tuesday, April 30, 2019 - link
In terms of Ryzen, the models without SMT just have it fused off, no die savings at all.tipoo - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
The lead architect of the PS5 came out and said it's 8... There's no wiggle room here, it's going to be 8 Ryzen 2 cores.mode_13h - Monday, April 22, 2019 - link
PS3 was supposed to have 8-SPE Cell processor, but the number got cut to effectively 6, by the time it shipped.Nothing is truly set in stone until launch.
tipoo - Tuesday, April 30, 2019 - link
The Cell was, but not the PS3 by the time of the reveal event a year ahead of launch.A year out from launch hardware must be pretty well taped out, and 7nm yields are a known quantity by now.
zephyrprime - Wednesday, April 17, 2019 - link
Amd gpu's so low performing even on a per square millimeter basis. Disappointing that they didn't go with nvidia which is the only other option unfortunately.tipoo - Thursday, April 18, 2019 - link
And it was no option if they want x86 backwards compatibility with the PS4 and an APU.Fritzkier - Tuesday, April 23, 2019 - link
If you want to use Nvidia's CPU that is ARM... Then okay, use Nvidia.I can see them using Intel CPU and GPU, but not with Nvidia.
Also AMD's aren't low performing on mid end, which what this console target on. Navi performance looks pretty good from the leaks tho, let's see their releases later.
blinnbanir - Wednesday, April 24, 2019 - link
The only thing AMD loses on is power drawf4tali - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
If all this is true then it's highly likely one of the following is also true:a) Launch price of 700 euros
or
b) Launch date of 2021
:P
Darcey R. Epperly - Saturday, April 20, 2019 - link
Cut the cache sizes on the die.mode_13h - Monday, April 22, 2019 - link
That would really hurt, if they use unified GDDRx memory, which they're almost certainly going to do.