sncvsrtoip
Member
yes int8
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PS5 Pro devkits arrive at third-party studios, Sony expects Pro specs to leak
- Thread starter Bernoulli
- Start date
King Dazzar
Member
Pro specs are excellent.
Lagspike_exe
Member
And here we go again! Get hyped.
Bojji
Member
I don't know... Raster is and will be the most important metric for GPU power for quite some time. The most exciting thing about this console is new upscaling tech but developers have to care enough to implement it.
Last edited:
TheRedRiders
Member
TH saying the AI features are pretty cool according to developers
Last edited:
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
I didn't believe them eitherOf course the day after I say I think these specs are bullshit.......Tom Henderson confirms them.
Whats worse means MLiD got this right and he went from a booger eater to someone I kind of have to pay attention to
MisterXDTV
Member
I didn't believe them either
Whats worse means MLiD got this right and he went from a booger eater to someone I kind of have to pay attention to
Once I saw the paper screenshots he had, it was clear it was right on to something
He even specified the PlayStation Spectral Super Resolution Upscaling
Only an idiot would make that up only to be proven wrong
Last edited:
M1987
Member
If Tom Henderson says it's real it is.I didn't think there would be a Pro,but I'm day one whenever it releases
Kaiserstark
Member
Tom Henderson is saying from what he heard that the devs are really excited about this AI upscaling solution. So that's a good thing.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Why didn’t you believe him? We’ve been hearing about those months before he made this video.I didn't believe them either
Whats worse means MLiD got this right and he went from a booger eater to someone I kind of have to pay attention to
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
The only thing that threw me in all honesty was the overall TF number as I have been told it was basically half that number, for quite sometime now
This coming from the same person (I totally trust) that gave me the 50% raster performance and 2x TF performance
It is a little odd that is 3x the TF number but only 45% boost in raster?
Am I looking at something wrong here?
See above
Quantum253
Member
The leaking seems suspicious now all this time has gone by. Is this the start of the marketing news cycle for the initial unveiling to be coming up in the next few weeks, with the larger walkthrough and breakdown this summer (miss you E3) for the sweet November launch.
ChiefDada
Gold Member
No. I meant to post earlier. Your number is right in line with MiLD it's just different nomenclature for RDNA 3 architecture. The comparable 16TF number is what you want to focus on. Roughly same number you’ve been saying. Thanks for all your service throughout the crazy speculative period. You can rest now, good sir.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Well, half that would mean you were told the real-world compute performance and not dual-issue. 17 TFLOPs would be how we'd calculate RDNA2 or older archs' compute because their SIMDs don't have dual-issue compute capabilities like RDNA3.
So the information you got sounds accurate.
Last edited:
winjer
Gold Member
I didn't believe them either
Whats worse means MLiD got this right and he went from a booger eater to someone I kind of have to pay attention to
Even a broken clock is right twice a day...
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
No. I meant to post earlier. Your number is right in line with MiLD it's just different nomenclature for RDNA 3 architecture. The comparable 16TF number is what you want to focus on. Roughly same number you’ve been saying. Thanks for all your service throughout the crazy speculative period. You can rest now, good sir.
See, this shit is way above my paygrade
Thank you guys, I feel better, need to erase my wtf text I was sending
Audiophile
Gold Member
I wonder if the "45% Raster Boost" is an oversimplification of the GPU front end being 50% bigger (96 ROP vs vs 64 ROPS) minus a small clock reduction.
Investor9872
Member
We haven't even gotten any confirmation that the PS5 Pro exists, but that may change during next week's GDC.
Last edited:
Ashamam
Member
Pretty disingenuous when his leak is the first to show dev slides. Clearly not a case of throwing mud at the wall until something sticks. Its not his fault if people can't differentiate between speculation and hard information. Whenever I've watched him it has been pretty clear where his leaks stop and his speculation begins, and where it was what he was being told vs what he has seen etc. My advice, pay attention to the detail. He makes his living off this stuff so of course he will stuff content, but that doesn't mean there isn't value in amongst it all.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
With that said, the confusing part is the low clock speed. 2.18GHz sounds incredibly low. I was expecting it to be at least 2.3GHz since Cerny loves his high clocks. In fact, I was expecting it to be closer to 2.4GHz even.See, this shit is way above my paygrade
Thank you guys, I feel better, need to erase my wtf text I was sending
This isn't as wide and as slow as the SX but definitely not as narrow and as fast as the PS5. It's more balanced. 45% performance increase in rasterization isn't much and this could be attributed to the lower than expected clocks. 60 CUs at 2.18GHz means a lot of the components affected by clocks won't see that much of an improvement which I find odd.
Kind of holding out hope that those specs aren't final and that Sony will bump up the clocks. Otherwise, RT and the new upscaling solution will have to do the heavy lifting, which is fine, but it never hurt to have a lot of raw power just to make sure incompetent devs don't fuck it up.
winjer
Gold Member
You forget very quickly all the times he was wrong.
nosoynadie22
Member
I think the prices of the PS5 family will look like this:
PS5 digital: $400
PS5 Pro digital: $600
disc reader: $80
PS5 digital: $400
PS5 Pro digital: $600
disc reader: $80
MisterXDTV
Member
Are we sure the 60 CUs are all active?
If they disable some for yields, the clock will be higher to reach that 33.5 Tflops number
Last edited:
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
That's how I arrived at 16.75 TFLOPs or whatever that figure was. Could probably rework out some napkin table maths and get a higher number but I think I also saw Kepler mention it?
Codeblew
Member
I think the 33 number comes because of "dual issue". I think it is up to the devs to use it (or maybe??? just recompile for PS5 Pro). Divide the 33 by 2 to compare apples to apples with the base PS5.
This isn't just guessing numbers. He has the Sony docs to prove it.
Last edited:
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
I like your numbers as thats the range I hinted at for quite awhile now as this is the numbers I was getting
MisterXDTV
Member
For what it's worth I think you are right: it makes little sense for the PS5 Pro GPU to be clocked lower than the base model considering the "Road to PS5" Presentation
We now know that the target is a 33.5 TF number, but Henderson doesn't talk about clocks at all
I expect some CUs to be disabled on this, just like the PS5 has a 40 CU GPU with only 36 active
Last edited:
Audiophile
Gold Member
Wonder if this is the case, if it'll shut down 24 CUs in base compatibility mode and just clock it up to 2233MHz in those circumstances. Then run at 2180MHz for the Pro mode with the whole chip active.
Alternatively, this may be another case of people reporting the low end of the Continuous Boost scheme just like folks were doing before the base PS5 was released.
For eg. in Pro mode, the vast majority of the time it could run at 2430MHz/18.64TF and then deterministically drop under heavy load/utilisation/power-draw as far as 2180MHz/16.73TF.
Last edited:
SolidQ
Member
64CU, 4 is disabled
MisterXDTV
Member
That would require a chip bigger than the current Navi 32, I'm not so sure
MisterXDTV
Member
If we take the 7800 XT and the 7700 XT as reference:
60 CUs @ 2.18 Ghz = 33.5 TF
54 CUs @ 2.42 Ghz = 33.5 TF
60 CUs @ 2.18 Ghz = 33.5 TF
54 CUs @ 2.42 Ghz = 33.5 TF
Audiophile
Gold Member
Anyway enough of this PS5 Pro malarkey, let's focus on the future: I'm just hoping PS7 has Analogue Tensor Matrix Multiplier Units embedded in its GPU. AI and low precision ops that use <5% power!
SolidQ
Member
Looks at SX, there 52CU, 320 bus etc, console gpu not related DS variant
The ninja farmer
Member
Is the 32 or so teraflop number, not for dual issue instructions ?
So essentially around 17 teraflops, going by the Rdna 2 way of counting them
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
This would make a lot more sense and previous leaks did suggest 60 CUs with 6 disabled for improved yields.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Was this confirmed? Well, not "confirmed" but I don't recall seeing the CU count in the leaks.
MisterXDTV
Member
I saw it as a rumor a couple of months ago, but never actually confirmed
But the point is with PS4 being 18 CUs, PS4 Pro and PS5 being 36 CUs...
54 CUs makes too much sense to me for PS5 Pro. It's just a clever approach
Last edited:
ChiefDada
Gold Member
I don't see much use in comparing to RDNA 3 because of the RT and AI upscaling, which are the highlights of the Pro console. As I said elsewhere, from a final image quality/output perspective, I'd be surprised if even one game with RT implementation looks better on flagship RDNA 3 compared to PS5 Pro.
MisterXDTV
Member
No question, I was just talking about numbers:
TFlops are calculated using CUs and clock
It's just mathematics
Still this GPU will probably be RDNA 3.5 barrowing something from RDNA 4
SolidQ
Member
Kepler?
If it's 60/64CU in 2 Shader Engines it might end up being smaller than Navi 32, but performance per ALU would probably drop as you have the same number of ALU sharing fewer prim units, rasterizers, caches etc.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
The CU count?
SolidQ
Member
Yes
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
You're putting a lot of pressure on that upscaling. The 7900 XTX would still be about 80% faster than the Pro if those leaks are true. There will be no path-traced games where the PS5 Pro would have (maybe relatively speaking) an enormous advantage. They will all be hybrid workloads where the 7900 XTX is to the Pro what the 3080 is to the PS5. Even assuming Sony's upscaling tech is better than FSR2, the 7900 XTX would still start from a much higher base resolution.
I'm also not sure why you're so fixated on high-end desktop parts. You were talking about performance on the level of a 4080 in well-optimized games last time and now you're talking about a final result better than a 7900 XTX. It's a $600 console. Sony isn't aiming to compete against high-end computers. It's meant to be a stopgap that offers nicer features and better performance. It's not there to fight against high-powered PCs.
Last edited:
Loxus
Member
I'll have to agree with you.
Tom Henderson doesn't mention nothing from Kepler here despite him saying the PS5 Pro is Zen2 with 60CUs active .
At this point, I'm starting to think Kepler doesn't know the PS5 Pro specs.
Insane Metal
Member
Last edited: