Support NeoGAF

[Bubba_Sparks]

Most people will tell you they don't view phones as a luxury item. They need them for work, contacting people, so on. You can make them iterative because they break, get lost, and people like shiny new upgrades for stuff they have to have anyway.

Consoles are not phones. They do a ton of stuff, but you don't "need" them. You buy it as a luxury item and expect it to last 5-7 years. The only people that don't are people who've become overly tech conscious, and they don't make up a large enough number for Sony to change how they do things entirely.

A new iteration doesn't break software support, just look at PS4 Pro and Xbox One X - oh, and smartphones!

 

[Shin]

Most people will tell you they don't view phones as a luxury item. They need them for work, contacting people, so on. You can make them iterative because they break, get lost, and people like shiny new upgrades for stuff they have to have anyway.

Consoles are not phones. They do a ton of stuff, but you don't "need" them.

The mindset is different, you don't need to buy a $800 smart phone every year or every other year, yet they do it.
People would probably hate the phone contract model, it could get us stronger consoles though.

 

[Renekton]

Hmmm... All games CAN be 60 fps already, though. I don't see why this will change with Zen.

Sure, though I'm guessing with tradeoffs forcing the dev to fall short of design goals.

A new iteration doesn't break software support, just look at PS4 Pro and Xbox One X - oh, and smartphones!

The Pro and XoX are still Jaguars and old GCN.

Meanwhile Android smartphones have virtualization layers to maintain compatibility across different vendors, at hefty cost to performance (correct if wrong).

 

[Some Nobody]

The mindset is different, you don't need to buy a $800 smart phone every year or every other year, yet they do it.
People would probably hate the phone contract model, it could get us stronger consoles though.

Like I said. People like shiny upgrades for shit they already needed to begin with. Cars were the thing in the 80's/90's, now it's phones because we're all comparatively poor lol.

And I want clean breaks, I don't want games held back by old tech. The PS5 comes out, you got like 12-15 months of cross-gen and then it's over with fam. Play old games or buy the new hotness.

 

[Shin]

Like I said. People like shiny upgrades for shit they already needed to begin with.

It's not a question of need, it's wanting, I worked in sales, specifically mobile phones. People will take/pay for the highest subscription as long as they don't have to pay a single dollar or as low as possible in the store.
It's a thing having and wanting the newest and greatest, cost be damned (even if they end up screwing their finances and credit).
Console space is different in that regard, maybe a small demographic - Pro.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

Imo the only way it slips in 2020 is if AMD can't produce enough of their latest stuff by fall 2019.

Everything otherwise seems to be geared for fall 2019, from Sony's usual plan (6/10) to the Pro "mid gen" refresh and even the planned evolution in AMD's product timeline (Vega, 7nm mass production, etc.).

The problem with 2019 in my mind is that the technology won't necessarily facilitate what people expect of a new generation. I base this on the assumption that after the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X have been on the market, Sony will be unwilling to launch a new console that operates at a lower resolution than these two, and if anything will be under pressure to provide native 4k when possible. Ultimately it will still be at the discretion of individual developers, but if all they can pull off is 12-13 TF in 2019 using a shrunk Vega+Ryzen Mobile, only being 2x the power of Xbox One X will make for an underwhelming system (even if the CPU improvements will be very nice too).

 

[KOHIPEET]

Imo, 449 or 499 is perfectly reasonable. I mean, I consider myself as an early adopter and I know that I could get it cheaper if I would wait 2-3 years, I just don't care.

I believe early adopters are far less price sensitive, but of course this stands only if the price is justified by hardware strength.

This is why I believe that Sony will land around the 13-15 TF mark with the gpu. It should be more than feasible for 499 around the end of 2020.

(Shit I just realized I'll probably have a child by then...)

 

[Shin]

Finally we have something very interesting to share. The details you are about to read are coming from a very good source. The same source confirmed mobile Polaris specs weeks before it was released. It all turned out to be true. The only thing that you need to know, is that information is from internal server roadmap.

AMD VEGA 10

Vega 10 will be released in first quarter of 2017, it has 64 Compute Units and 24TF 16-bit computing power. Vega 10 is based on 14nm GFX9 architecture. It comes with 16GB of HBM2 memory with a bandwidth of 512 GB/s. The TBP is currently expected at around 225W. Meanwhile, dual Vega 10 will be released in second quarter of 2017 and TBP should be around 300W.

AMD VEGA 20

Now here's something interesting that we didn't know yet. Vega20 will use 7nm GFX9 architecture. It will feature 32GB of HBM2 memory with 1 TB/s of bandwidth. TBP is around 150W and it will support PCI-Express 4.0. It will also have 64 Compute Units.

So what does GFX9 really mean? It's an internal codename for architecture, for instance Hawaii was GFX7 and Polaris was GFX8.

AMD VEGA 11 and NAVI 10 & 11

We have also learned that AMD is planning to replace Polaris 10 with Vega 11 next year. The specs were not released and we can only expect Vega 11 to share the same fabrication node with Vega 10 (14nm).

If our source has correct information then Navi 10 and 11 are currently planned for 2019. It means that roadmap has changed and Navi is pushed back one year in the schedule.

We will keep you updated if we learn more.

News is 9 months old, but Navi was indeed pushed back to 2019 as we now know (reflective on AMD roadmap).
We can probably forget about seeing AMD's next-gen GPU in PS5, because that GPU will probably be out in 2021.
It's rather bothersome that a GPU that's 1 year off already got pushed back by a whole year, doesn't bode well.
Could see it maybe in a PS5 Pro with features of the GPU after that...

 

[jdstorm]

The problem with 2019 in my mind is that the technology won't necessarily facilitate what people expect of a new generation. I base this on the assumption that after the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X have been on the market, Sony will be unwilling to launch a new console that operates at a lower resolution than these two, and if anything will be under pressure to provide native 4k when possible. Ultimately it will still be at the discretion of individual developers, but if all they can pull off is 12-13 TF in 2019 using a shrunk Vega+Ryzen Mobile, only being 2x the power of Xbox One X will make for an underwhelming system.

But then Sony Launch the PS5 Pro in 2021 with the new wonderful 20TF GPU people are waiting for, and those that want higher end graphics get it then.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

The problem with 2019 in my mind is that the technology won't necessarily facilitate what people expect of a new generation. I base this on the assumption that after the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X have been on the market, Sony will be unwilling to launch a new console that operates at a lower resolution than these two, and if anything will be under pressure to provide native 4k when possible. Ultimately it will still be at the discretion of individual developers, but if all they can pull off is 12-13 TF in 2019 using a shrunk Vega+Ryzen Mobile, only being 2x the power of Xbox One X will make for an underwhelming system (even if the CPU improvements will be very nice too).

If they wait until 2020, they'll probably reach 2,5x the power of an XOX (15 TF). It doesn't really make a difference, unless a disruptive APU or memory solution isn't ready-to-use before 2020.

But then Sony Launch the PS5 Pro in 2021 with the new wonderful 20TF GPU people are waiting for, and those that want higher end graphics get it then.

Or they wait another year (3-year cycle) for a PS5 Pro w/ 25 TF .

 

[Lagspike_exe]

News is 9 months old, but Navi was indeed pushed back to 2019 as we now know (reflective on AMD roadmap).
We can probably forget about seeing AMD's next-gen GPU in PS5, because that GPU will probably be out in 2021.
It's rather bothersome that a GPU that's 1 year off already got pushed back by a whole year, doesn't bode well.
Could see it maybe in a PS5 Pro with features of the GPU after that...

I always thought Navi will be in PS5. They can always customize it and mesh it with parts of next gen architecture like they did with the PS4 and PS4 Pro.

 

[Some Nobody]

Imo, 449 or 499 is perfectly reasonable. I mean, I consider myself as an early adopter and I know that I could get it cheaper if I would wait 2-3 years, I just don't care.

I believe early adopters are far less price sensitive, but of course this stands only if the price is justified by hardware strength.

This is why I believe that Sony will land around the 13-15 TF mark with the gpu. It should be more than feasible for 499 around the end of 2020.

(Shit I just realized I'll probably have a child by then...)

If the One X does poorly you can forget the $499 price point. You can only see the same thing flop so many times before you just decide it's not worth trying.

They saw high levels of success with $399, and likely aren't eager to change if they can get similar numbers on the PS5.

 

[Renekton]

If the One X does poorly you can forget the $499 price point. You can only see the same thing flop so many times before you just decide it's not worth trying.

You can't solely base on XoX price in a vacuum, it is a mid-gen with the same baggage and momentum of the entire X1 platform since 2013.

 

[AmyS]

I think that just because this generation is getting mid-gen upgraded consoles, doesn't automatically mean next-gen will also.

Both PS4 and Xbox One were underpowered at launch in 2013, combined with the increasing sales of 4K TVs over the last few years, it made sense for Sony and Microsoft to have upgraded consoles, this time.

Sure, iterative consoles could well be normal going forward, but then, they also might not.

Lets see what PS5 brings to the table in 3 years or so, before expecting a PS5 Pro.

 

[beril]

I doubt Sony would switch to ARM. I mean unless they wanted to make a Switch like system then maybe. They could use Nvidia tegra with a Geforce gpu inside the machine as well as the tegra cores. Might work but AMD is pretty good at offering their chips at a good price. I doubt anyone will go with Intel, although Intel does need something to get themselves into the consumer market besides notebooks and gaming desktops.

I see what you are saying about ARM and MS wanting to emulate x86. The thing is, MS probably wants to do that for the surface line of devices so that you can essentially run Windows 10 on a device that is similar in size, thinness and probability of an ipad. A serious conversation will start taking place on whether an ipad can replace a laptop once ios 11 hits.

There's still a decent chance they go with ARM. You're not geting a desktop level CPU in a console, and in the target range ARM is likely more efficient, especially in a few years. They can still go with AMD if they want. The main reasons to stick with x86 would be BC or if AMD will give them a better deal on one of their own CPU designs.

 

[Militaratus]

Maybe it's a dumb question, but what if they decide to go with x64 (64-bit) architecture for the PS5? Would backwards compatibility with the PS4+Pro still be a sure thing like 64-bit Windows can still easily run 32-bit programs, or would that jeopardize compatibility?

 

[v1oz]

Well that is obvious, for both platform holders. You can't keep making AAA games for a 2011 netbook CPU. A clean break next time is a must.

What gives you that idea? They're not limited to using 2011 netbook CPUs. They can use any compatible modern CPU they want.

Sony and Microsoft were just being very frugal in over clocking an old CPU.

 

[beril]

Maybe it's a dumb question, but what if they decide to go with x64 (64-bit) architecture for the PS5? Would backwards compatibility with the PS4+Pro still be a sure thing like 64-bit Windows can still easily run 32-bit programs, or would that jeopardize compatibility?

ps4 is already x64; but that term isn't really that widely accepted so people still call it x86

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

But then Sony Launch the PS5 Pro in 2021 with the new wonderful 20TF GPU people are waiting for, and those that want higher end graphics get it then.

You need the baseline to be high enough to wow people. The Pro made sense for offering a resolution bump, that's not really true in the case of what you're proposing and that's a tougher pill for developers to swallow.

Sony doesn't actually need to launch a new generation in 2019 unless they start to experience flagging sales or Microsoft somehow becomes resurgent. They might as well wait longer to produce a system that can convincingly pass as a truly next generation experience, not just "The PS4 Pro Pro, now featuring a CPU that isn't total dung".

If they wait until 2020, they'll probably reach 2,5x the power of an XOX (15 TF). It doesn't really make a difference, unless a disruptive APU or memory solution isn't ready-to-use before 2020.

I'm hoping for 16+, possibly even 20 at a stretch if they can wait until 2020-2021. It's a balancing act - they want to launch as powerful as they can at a good price, but they can't launch too soon or the tech won't be ready for that. They can't wait too long or their own sales will tank. The idea of another 8 year gen is not pleasant to me as a consumer, but the existence of the Pro/1X throw an unusual spanner in the works of the product planning.

 

[Quasar]

I doubt Sony would switch to ARM. I mean unless they wanted to make a Switch like system then maybe.

That's going to be the interesting thing. I find it hard to believe Sony would ever abandon their strategy of building the most powerful thing they can, but still..how Switch plays out and its impact on the market could push them.

I could see how a Switch like hybrid would be attractive, given various international markets, but it is pretty much at odds with Sony history. Even if PS4 sales collapse (further) in Japan and Switch eat up 80% of the home console market I have trouble seeing em following. They'd probably rather waste resources on a Japan only PSP3.

 

[IKizzLE]

12 TF is entirely too low for the ps5 and next generation of consoles. I'm expecting 15-18 TF by 2020.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

That's going to be the interesting thing. I find it hard to believe Sony would ever abandon their strategy of building the most powerful thing they can, but still..how Switch plays out and its impact on the market could push them.

I could see how a Switch like hybrid would be attractive, given various international markets, but it is pretty much at odds with Sony history. Even if PS4 sales collapse (further) in Japan and Switch eat up 80% of the home console market I have trouble seeing em following. They'd probably rather waste resources on a Japan only PSP3.

Sony won't waste time with a PSP3 since it make no sense to go after a dying market .
They will focus on the west like now and the hardcore will buy the console in Japan .
With the growth is Asia helping them also .
I mean they already trying to bring out mobile games in Japan .

For PS5 specs i hoping we get around 15 to 18 TF and at least 24 GB of RAM .
We already know what the CPU going to be cause i don't see them moving from AMD since they have the best APU for what they want .

 

[Wollan]

12 TF is entirely too low for the ps5 and next generation of consoles. I'm expecting 15-18 TF by 2020.

12TF would be more than enough, it's very much into diminishing returns territory. Budgets are already the biggest limiting factor in visuals produced.
CPU reaching PC plateau levels and HDMI 2.1 variable framerate sync are the most important additions for next gen.

 

[Inuhanyou]

There's still a decent chance they go with ARM. You're not geting a desktop level CPU in a console, and in the target range ARM is likely more efficient, especially in a few years. They can still go with AMD if they want. The main reasons to stick with x86 would be BC or if AMD will give them a better deal on one of their own CPU designs.

they likely have already locked down deals with Zen architecture. There's no way they are using arm

People need to understand that GPU power is the least of next gen console's issues as there is already plenty of it, and whatever they use will still be a multiple of times more powerful than original PS4, which is what PS5 will be replacing.

Even 'just' a doubling of PSPro's GPU would give a credible baseline jump for the next generation.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

12TF would be more than enough, it's very much into diminishing returns territory. Budgets are already the biggest limiting factor in visuals produced.
CPU reaching PC plateau levels and HDMI 2.1 variable framerate sync are the most important additions for next gen.

12 TF and a 2-3x faster CPU means that if a game was making good use of the Xbox One X's hardware capabilities in both CPU and GPU terms, targeting 30fps, it can now run at 60fps on PS5 (assuming bandwidth holds up and such), with a bit of CPU headroom for modest improvements of other sorts. Then you have some better textures with more VRAM which is nice, but not earthshattering since they're already good on average this gen.

While that's still obviously capable of producing great looking games at high resolutions, that's not what most people imagine as "the next generation", presumably. True, they could make a game look a fair bit better at 30fps using that power instead (and most games probably still will target 30hz, or perhaps irregular ones like 40hz using VRR capabilities), but I feel like you may be overestimating where 12TF gets us. If as you say diminishing returns have set in to a considerable degree, then making a much smaller generational jump than you usually would just makes it even more disappointing than it would otherwise have been.

 

[McCHitman]

Yes it will have to

No it won't. People kept saying the same thing about the PS4 and the Xbox One. They don't have to do anything especially if they think it will somehow hamper the performance of the new hotness.

 

[Inuhanyou]

12 TF and a 2-3x faster CPU means that if a game was making good use of the Xbox One X's hardware capabilities in both CPU and GPU terms, targeting 30fps, it can now run at 60fps on PS5 (assuming bandwidth holds up and such), with a bit of CPU headroom for modest improvements of other sorts. Then you have some better textures with more VRAM which is nice, but not earthshattering since they're already good on average this gen.

While that's still obviously capable of producing great looking games at high resolutions, that's not what most people imagine as "the next generation", presumably. True, they could make a game look a fair bit better at 30fps using that power instead (and most games probably still will target 30hz, or perhaps irregular ones like 40hz using VRR capabilities), but I feel like you may be overestimating where 12TF gets us. If as you say diminishing returns have set in to a considerable degree, then making a much smaller generational jump than you usually would just makes it even more disappointing than it would otherwise have been.

Your making it seem like what the Xbox One X will be doing with Xbox one games as a baseline is all it could possibly achieve in a vacuum. Not the case. And it would not be the case for a prospective PS5

 

[PantsuJo]

Scorpio

GAF Official meme ©

 

[Carn82]

they likely have already locked down deals with Zen architecture. There's no way they are using arm.

Yep. Anandtech interview with AMD-CEO:

Q13: AMD currently has a very active semi-custom business, particularly when it comes to silicon design partnerships and when it comes to millions of Consoles. Speaking of custom silicon in consoles, current generation platforms currently use AMD’s low power ‘cat’ cores. Now that AMD has a small x86 core in Zen, and I know you won’t tell me what exactly is coming in the future, but obviously future consoles will exist, so can we potentially see Zen in consoles?

LS: I think you know our console are always very secretive about what they are trying to do, but hypothetically yes I would expect Zen to show up in semi-custom opportunities including perhaps consoles at a certain point in time.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11170...-review-a-deep-dive-on-1800x-1700x-and-1700/2

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

Your making it seem like what the Xbox One X will be doing with Xbox one games as a baseline is all it could possibly achieve in a vacuum. Not the case. And it would not be the case for a prospective PS5

The Xbox One X wouldn't be some crazy next gen console if it wasn't working with XBO as a baseline. If it was still targeting 4k, the games would still look more or less the same as they will on the system. The only way it would be blowing away XBO games would be if it was targeting 1080p, and could make use of it's extra power to dramatically improve the basic image being rendered, instead of simply rendering it at a much higher resolution.

The upgrade from 1.3 -> 6 TF was sufficient to cover going from 900p (on average) to 4k, whether that's native or using reconstruction techniques. 4k is a hecking lot of pixels. Mark Cerny believes that 8TF is roughly the number you'd need to actually render PS4/XBO titles at native 4k consistently, and that's probably not far from the mark.

You can't stuff the genie back into the bottle - PS5 and Xbox Two are going to need to render at these high resolutions too, and therefore even though 12 TFLOPS is a nearly 10x increase over Xbox One, most of that power is going to be vacuumed up by the need to render at 4k or at least Faux-K. ~4.2 Tflops can render PS4 quality games at 1800p with checkerboarding. ~6Tflops is sufficient to render them at 2160p with checkerboarding or full 2160p if the game isn't too demanding (or is extremely well optimized for resolution like Forza). These two figures are the baseline for comparison that a PS5 is going to have to live with. Nobody is going to say 'woah this res is so much better than baseline ps4' in 2020. What they'll be comparing it to is the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, which it will enjoy either little or no resolution advantage over depending on the game.

 

[Carn82]

The Xbox One X wouldn't be some crazy next gen console if it wasn't working with XBO as a baseline. If it was still targeting 4k, the games would still look more or less the same as they will on the system. The only way it would be blowing away XBO games would be if it was targeting 1080p, and could make use of it's extra power to dramatically improve the basic image being rendered, instead of simply rendering it at a much higher resolution.

The upgrade from 1.3 -> 6 TF was sufficient to cover going from 900p (on average) to 4k, whether that's native or using reconstruction techniques. 4k is a hecking lot of pixels. Mark Cerny believes that 8TF is roughly the number you'd need to actually render PS4/XBO titles at native 4k consistently, and that's probably not far from the mark.

You can't stuff the genie back into the bottle - PS5 and Xbox Two are going to need to render at these high resolutions too, and therefore even though 12 TFLOPS is a nearly 10x increase over Xbox One, most of that power is going to be vacuumed up by the need to render at 4k or at least Faux-K. ~4.2 Tflops can render PS4 quality games at 1800p with checkerboarding. ~6Tflops is sufficient to render them at 2160p with checkerboarding or full 2160p if the game isn't too demanding (or is extremely well optimized for resolution like Forza). These two figures are the baseline for comparison that a PS5 is going to have to live with. Nobody is going to say 'woah this res is so much better than baseline ps4' in 2020. What they'll be comparing it to is the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, which it will enjoy either little or no resolution advantage over depending on the game.

My thoughts as well. But 4K will probably still be "the norm" for atleast the next 5 or 6 (or more) years. I hope PS5 makes that the baseline-resolution, and takes a note from Microsofts book to automatically downsample that output if you're still rocking a 1080p screen. Would be funny since 1080p wasnt a baseline this gen in the console-space. Personally I hope for more 60fps games, even if that means using checkboarding / temporal injection / etc on PS5. It wouldnt surprise me if they will have some talks with the developers that delivered the best PS4 Pro games and take some of that knowledge with them for PS5.

 

[Darklor01]

4K assets take up a lot of storage. Do you think PS5 should come with a 2TB HDD minimum?

 

[Inuhanyou]

I'm pretty sure without a doubt that devs will still be doing sub 4K games even next gen, 1440p or maybe even below.

We already have a lot of devs who have said that 4K is a waste of resources that they could put to other things. Checkerboarding and temporal injection are clever ways of saving GPU power while putting out good image quality as well

 

[Lagspike_exe]

4K assets take up a lot of storage. Do you think PS5 should come with a 2TB HDD minimum?

I hope it'll come with flash storage. If not completely flash, at least as a cache.

 

[Carn82]

4K assets take up a lot of storage. Do you think PS5 should come with a 2TB HDD minimum?

I was thinking about this the other day. I'm really hoping for some sort of SSD/HDD combo (with the OS and your 'most played games' running on the SSD). But my guess is that we`ll be getting a 2TB HDD, hopefully 7200 but possibly 5400 again.

 

[Dee Dah Dave]

What gives you that idea? They're not limited to using 2011 netbook CPUs. They can use any compatible modern CPU they want.

Sony and Microsoft were just being very frugal in over clocking an old CPU.

Of course they are limited to the Jaguar if games have to work on PS4 and PS5. Due to tech advances the PS5 will have a 2X more powerful CPU at a minimum. So if a AAA dev made a game which is CPU limited at 30fps on PS5, it simply would not run sufficiently on PS4.

So I'm sure there will be more cross gen stuff next time around for 3 main reasons -

1) We will get some AAA cross gen titles for a year or two, just like this time.

2) Many Indie games can be cross gen because they typically dont max out the hardware

3) The rise of GaaS / service games means certain games are played for many years


But other than that, AAA development is going to have to move on to the new platform, because the PS4 / Pro CPU wont be able to compete with the one in PS5. Plus there needs to be good motivation for people to buy the new hardware, and that is shiny new AAA generation exclusive games.

 

[Laplasakos]

Sony was able to deliver a 4,2 TF console for $399 in 2016, MS delivers 6 TF one year later - for $499. We all hope for the best, but something in the 10-12 TF ballpark is what we should expect, and anything above hope for.

If it's raven ridge (zen/vega APU) it will probably run circles around the x1x. 10 tf sounds doable. Raven ridge APUs will launch later this year so they should be a good benchmark to see what's possible. And given the time frame, a 'boosted' raven ridge (with zen2 and navi features) is an option for Sony.

Xbox One X
8 Core 2.3GHz custom CPU (Jaguar)
12GB RAM (9GB available for games)
6 Tflop GPU.

PS5
8 Core 3.2GHz CPU (Zen 2 - much faster)
16GB RAM (12-13GB available for games)
10-12 TFlop GPU.

Even a modest boost like that would be a good step up from the X for a number of reasons. Newer more efficient hardware, faster CPU, more powerful GPU, plus it won't be held back by old hardware like the Pro and X are, because games will be made exclusively for the system, not for older hardware first.

I see. I guess 10-12TF is the most likely scenario assuming it hits 2019. Thanks for the insight.

 

[beril]

they likely have already locked down deals with Zen architecture. There's no way they are using arm

People need to understand that GPU power is the least of next gen console's issues as there is already plenty of it, and whatever they use will still be a multiple of times more powerful than original PS4, which is what PS5 will be replacing.

Even 'just' a doubling of PSPro's GPU would give a credible baseline jump for the next generation.

No, the CPU is by far the least important of the main components these days (which is why we got shitty jaguar cores in the first place); but if they can get better performance out of the same silicon/power budget with ARM there's no reason not to go with it. I'm not really sure if there are any real benchmark for Zen and the newest ARM cores at comparable specs, but I would imagine there's a good chance that a73 would win in the console range. I'm mostly just really sick of hearing people hyping up x86

 

[Yautja_Warrior]

I see. I guess 10-12TF is the most likely scenario assuming it hits 2019. Thanks for the insight.

It's a good bet for around a $399 price anyway and with specs like that, we would be in decent PC territory.

A 10-12 TFlop GPU is around GTX 1080 Ti levels of power and a decent CPU would allow for 60fps games, not juat in racing games but bigger, open world games too.

 

[Graphics Horse]

Once Cerny uttered the words supercharged PC architecture people have insisted that x86 cores are both essential, yet also crap for what they chose, it's a little maddening.

 

[Carn82]

No, the CPU is by far the least important of the main components these days (which is why we got shitty jaguar cores in the first place); but if they can get better performance out of the same silicon/power budget with ARM there's no reason not to go with it. I'm not really if there are any real benchmark for Zen and the newest ARM cores at comparable specs, but I would imagine there's a good chance that a73 would win in the console range. I'm mostly just really sick of hearing people hyping up x86

There are 'leaked' raven ridge benchmarks that puts the specific preview sample in the same ballpark as a recent mobile Intel Core i5 chip.

AMD are promising Raven Ridge will offer 50% greater CPU performance and 40% higher GPU performance all with 50% less power compared with their most recent Bristol Ridge APUs. Those numbers would seem to confirm the earlier speculation that we’re talking about a quad-core Ryzen part as a 50% performance improvement over a 7th Gen APU puts it in the same ballpark as a modern mobile Intel Core i5 chip.

https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/amd-raven-ridge-apu
http://www.fudzilla.com/news/processors/43613-amd-quad-core-raven-ridge-apu-spotted

I guess we'll know in a few weeks or months.

 

[c0de]

No, the CPU is by far the least important of the main components these days (which is why we got shitty jaguar cores in the first place); but if they can get better performance out of the same silicon/power budget with ARM there's no reason not to go with it. I'm not really sure if there are any real benchmark for Zen and the newest ARM cores at comparable specs, but I would imagine there's a good chance that a73 would win in the console range. I'm mostly just really sick of hearing people hyping up x86

No, we got Jaguas because that was what AMD could offer at a reasonable price and with a reasonable TDP.
That CPU is by far the least important component is just nonsense because it is the major factor for framerate. Yes, with console games, 30 fps is common but don't forget VR which has a higher demand for fps.
All the talk of GPGPU didn't do anything major in terms of savings for the CPU - we are still mostly at 30 fps with console games.
ARM is good for mobile but I don't see any reason to put them into a console.

 

[Carn82]

Since I'm a bit bored at work, some predictions:

2019-launch
- Raven Ridge (zen/vega) based APU
- 8 cores, but lower clocked than retail Raven Ridge APUs
- DDR4 memory

2020-launch
- Raven Ridge (zen/vega) based APU, but with zen+ / navi "improvements"
- again 8 cores, but lower clocked than retail Raven Ridge APUs.
- HBM2 memory (but I'm still thinking that it will be DDR4).

 

[Darklor01]

I was thinking about this the other day. I'm really hoping for some sort of SSD/HDD combo (with the OS and your 'most played games' running on the SSD). But my guess is that we`ll be getting a 2TB HDD, hopefully 7200 but possibly 5400 again.

I'm want to believe that it will be a 2TB HDD because of lowering costs by the time the system comes out, and Sony wanting to keep the consumer price as low as possible. I would like it to be a 4TB HDD, but I don't think that is realistic. The thing that concerns me a bit is that the XBOX One X only has a 1TB HDD with a game like Forza Motorsports 7 using up 100GB of space. That's a lot of space.

IMO, consumers aren't truly saving money if they need to use external HDDs, but in the end, I guess that's not really the manufacturers issue.

Edit: I also would love for a hybrid HDD, but I think that would increase cost. I think that when it comes to HDD Storage, anything they can do to keep the price down for the retail box with storage they will do.

 

[Carn82]

IMO, consumers aren't truly saving money if they need to use external HDDs, but in the end, I guess that's not really the manufacturers issue.

yeah, my guess as well. I do hope for external HD support out of the box, and that they make sure to leverage the full usb3 bus speed.

 

[beril]

No, we got Jaguas because that was what AMD could offer at a reasonable price and with a reasonable TDP.
That CPU is by far the least important component is just nonsense because it is the major factor for framerate. Yes, with console games, 30 fps is common but don't forget VR which has a higher demand for fps.
All the talk of GPGPU didn't do anything major in terms of savings for the CPU - we are still mostly at 30 fps with console games.
ARM is good for mobile but I don't see any reason to put them into a console.

Look at the design of any modern console and the CPU is absolutely tiny compared to the GPU or the RAM chips. 90% of games are still GPU limited. Most games don't really do anything that complex on the CPU while the GPU has to do complex lighting calculations on some 120 million pixels per second (or 500 million in 4K).

Sure with the PS4 Pro giving the GPU a massive boost and almost none to the CPU means that the CPU becomes more of a bottleneck if you want 60fps at 1080p in a game otherwise designed for 30fps, but that's a because it's mainly designed as a 4K upgrade and not a new generation.

 

[Darklor01]

yeah, my guess as well. I do hope for external HD support out of the box, and that they make sure to leverage the full usb3 bus speed.

Yes, and that should be there. It's in the PS4 OS at this point, though, I do hope they have some of it's issues sorted by the time PS5 rolls out. There should be no sleep/resume issue with external hard drives which says they were disconnected every time you put the console into sleep mode.

 

[c0de]

Look at the design of any modern console and the CPU is absolutely tiny compared to the GPU or the RAM chips. 90% of games are still GPU limited. Most games don't really do anything that complex on the CPU while the GPU has to do complex lighting calculations on some 120 million pixels per second (or 500 million in 4K).

Sure with the PS4 Pro giving the GPU a massive boost and almost none to the CPU means that the CPU becomes more of a bottleneck if you want 60fps at 1080p in a game otherwise designed for 30fps, but that's a because it's mainly designed as a 4K upgrade and not a new generation.

I don't know why you mention RAM but yes, the GPU is a complex part of the system but especially then you want to use the space for the CPU the best way you can.
And the reason why the Pro didn't get an even bigger upgrade in CPU is not that the CPU isn't a huge factor nowadays but the options were limited.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

It's a good bet for around a $399 price anyway and with specs like that, we would be in decent PC territory.

A 10-12 TFlop GPU is around GTX 1080 Ti levels of power and a decent CPU would allow for 60fps games, not juat in racing games but bigger, open world games too.

To clarify, although a 1080ti is at 11.3 tflops stock, an AMD chip of the same performance would generally have more floating point performance. 12 t-flop PS5 would be a bit behind an 11.3 1080ti.

 

[Darklor01]

To clarify, although a 1080ti is at 11.3 tflops stock, an AMD chip of the same performance would generally have more floating point performance. 12 t-flop PS5 would be a bit behind an 11.3 1080ti.

This is something I never understood, mostly because I'm not that tech genius person. In general, to my understanding, for the last, forever, AMD cards and even CPUs have had higher floating point performance than Nvidia. Isn't performance (on PC) usually favoring Nvidia cards, or is my perception wayyyyy off?