• 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.

Next-Gen PS5 & XSX |OT| Console tEch threaD

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fake

Member
Last edited:
Who ever said indirect competition never hurt Sony? Of course the PC is competing with consoles because ummm it plays games and very well I might add on top of being cheaper. Let's not be so naive to the facts, many on this very forum would love for all of Sony's titles to come to pc. That would cripple their ecosystem and I for one love that ecosystem and it ceasing to exist would be detrimental to the gaming industry. Business 101 people, it's a very simple concept.
Cripple their ecosystem? If anything it would strengthen it. The more people playing PlayStation games the better and the stronger the community for each game is. Why stop at 100,000,000 consoles? Let's not forget that they will most likely double down on Playstation Now next-gen considering their competition is more than Microsoft in that space. For them to simply disregard that would be pretty arrogant.
 
Last edited:

bitbydeath

Gold Member
Digital representations of the cartridges.

sony-ps5-ssd-cartridge.jpg


More in the link.

 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Hopefully this won't impact console prices:


IIRC, platform holders do futures contracts to stabilize/lock down component prices.

I remember back in late 2017/early 2018 GDDR5 prices had increased, but the XB1X price had remained stable.

Pricing? Probably not for these consoles due to contracts already in place. Quantity? Possible.
 

semicool

Banned
For all the coding to the metal discussion. I am developer but not a game dev.(Though I have wrote some raytracing and wrote my own 3d engine 19 years ago that ran quake 3 levels). However one of the most innovative, smartest, a true game dev expert amongst the top .1 percent and gifted 3d engine dev ever, John Carmack said this about consoles vs PC's :
 
Last edited:

nowhat

Member
For all the coding to the metal discussion. I am developer but not a game dev.(Though I have wrote some raytracing and wrote my own 3d engine 19 years ago that ran quake 3 levels). However one of the most innovative, smartest, a true game dev expert amongst the top .1 percent and gifted 3d engine dev ever, John Carmack said this about consoles vs PC's :

...and that was written in 2014. Not saying there's no truth to it, there most certainly is. But what relevance does Carmack have to gaming nowadays really? Promoting Oculus?

Coding to a fixed spec has advantages, especially when developers have the time to get used to the hardware. Hell, see some C64 demos done today - they're absolutely mindblowing. Just that you using Carmack as a reference, in this day and age, is quite yawn-inducing.

(And really, Ultima Underworld had a better engine than Doom and it was released over a year before it. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Ultima Underworld is very much underrated.)
 

semicool

Banned
...and that was written in 2014. Not saying there's no truth to it, there most certainly is. But what relevance does Carmack have to gaming nowadays really? Promoting Oculus?

Coding to a fixed spec has advantages, especially when developers have the time to get used to the hardware. Hell, see some C64 demos done today - they're absolutely mindblowing. Just that you using Carmack as a reference, in this day and age, is quite yawn-inducing.

(And really, Ultima Underworld had a better engine than Doom and it was released over a year before it. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Ultima Underworld is very much underrated.)

I'd put my opinion on the line saying that i guarantee his current knowledge wipes the floor with any poster on this message board, and most current game devs, about 3d engines and game development software and hardware....besides Tim Sweeny, Unreal engine Mastermind has said similar things about consoles and PCs. 2014 used amd-64 and that cpu Arch is what we still use today as well as gpu hardware is completely similar to 2014, see Xbox 1x etc.. and ps4 and latest gpus, the only big advancement is raytracing hardware acclereation..not raytracing itself...see my post above, I wrote raytracing software in 2000 and the concepts are similar today, mostly revolves around intersections, the math and calculations have been around for ages. The biggest change , catching up for PC's to consoles in some regard, has been Mantle, DirectX 12 and Vulkan in regards to draw calls...but that's not enough to close the gap too much that was stated by Carmack in 2014
 
Last edited:

semicool

Banned
Besides would you build a PC with an equivalent ps4 gpu, Radeon 265(from 2014 , about 1.8 tf) and Xbox one Jaguar cpu at 1.75 GHz today and expect to see graphics anywhere near ps4 exclusives on said PC? Or do you think they are squeezing out, every bit of power and performance from these 2013 consoles?
 
Last edited:

psorcerer

Banned
I'd put my opinion on the line saying that i guarantee his current knowledge wipes the floor with any poster on this message board, and most current game devs, about 3d engines and game development software and hardware....besides Tim Sweeny, Unreal engine Mastermind has said similar things about consoles and PCs. 2014 used amd-64 and that cpu Arch is what we still use today as well as gpu hardware is completely similar to 2014, see Xbox 1x etc.. and ps4 and latest gpus, the only big advancement is raytracing hardware acclereation..not raytracing itself...see my post above, I wrote raytracing software in 2000 and the concepts are similar today, mostly revolves around intersections, the math and calculations have been around for ages. The biggest change , catching up for PC's to consoles in some regard, has been Mantle, DirectX 12 and Vulkan in regards to draw calls...but that's not enough to close the gap too much that was stated by Carmack in 2014

Couple of things.
1. Appeal to authority is not a good argument.
2. I agree that probably 2x PC hardware is a good approximation. But probably it's smaller.
3. Ray tracing nowdays is all about de-noising.
 

semicool

Banned
Couple of things.
1. Appeal to authority is not a good argument.
2. I agree that probably 2x PC hardware is a good approximation. But probably it's smaller.
3. Ray tracing nowdays is all about de-noising.
I beg to differ on the authority part...at least if it's "good" authority
 
Last edited:

semicool

Banned
Almost none of us has the resources , time or expertise (I'm not saying capability) to research and thoroughly make evident the truth on this subject and present it here. So an appeal to expertise is wise, cost saving and most probably accurate. If you want to benchmark exact, scientific like for like which would be the only better way than an trusted expert who's seen it themselves firsthand by their own experience, then be my guest, I expect your research , benchmarking analysis report when? That be the only other evidence that would trump an experts expertise would be an objective research paper/study, you'd even be able to publish it in a computer science journal I'm sure
 
Last edited:
I just had a stoopid thought (yes, you'll agree it's stoopid):

What if the rumours of Sony producing two PS5 consoles is true, but one will have the standard optical drive (read: Blu-Ray) while the other machine uses those new cartridges that Sony have just patented?

Of course, the cartridges would be expensive as hell. 100GB flash cartridges would probably add $10-$15 onto the price of the game. But, you'd get instant game loading.

So, just for LOLs: would you buy a PS5 with a Blu-Ray drive or one with the cartridge slot?
 

psorcerer

Banned
Almost none of us has the resources , time or expertise (I'm not saying capability) to research and thoroughly make evident the truth on this subject and present it here. So an appeal to expertise is wise, cost saving and most probably accurate. If you want to benchmark exact, scientific like for like which would be the only better way than an trusted expert who's seen it themselves firsthand by their own experience, then be my guest, I expect your research , benchmarking analysis report when? That be the only other evidence that would trump an experts expertise would be an objective research paper/study, you'd even be able to publish it in a computer science journal I'm sure

Any comment on console specifics is under NDA. Therefore there's no way to have exact numbers.
 

semicool

Banned
Any comment on console specifics is under NDA. Therefore there's no way to have exact numbers.
Sure but we have Carmarks roughly 2x, non exact, but striking performance number, which if off 1-5 percent or whatever margin of error that's realistic...it's pretty remarkable. So yeah not exact, but roughly close in terms of relative, overall performance metric results, maybe closer to 110 percent more or 90 percent, rough, but still amazing
 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
I'd put my opinion on the line saying that i guarantee his current knowledge wipes the floor with any poster on this message board, and most current game devs, about 3d engines and game development software and hardware....besides Tim Sweeny, Unreal engine Mastermind has said similar things about consoles and PCs. 2014 used amd-64 and that cpu Arch is what we still use today as well as gpu hardware is completely similar to 2014, see Xbox 1x etc.. and ps4 and latest gpus, the only big advancement is raytracing hardware acclereation..not raytracing itself...see my post above, I wrote raytracing software in 2000 and the concepts are similar today, mostly revolves around intersections, the math and calculations have been around for ages. The biggest change , catching up for PC's to consoles in some regard, has been Mantle, DirectX 12 and Vulkan in regards to draw calls...but that's not enough to close the gap too much that was stated by Carmack in 2014

It will be even harder for PCs to brute force (doubling) frame rate next gen as well, if the consoles are running a 3.2Ghz Zen2 part.

Would probably be a couple of years for more efficient chips to come along to achieve double spec.
 

rəddəM

Member
Even if it's GCN 14TF then we are looking at Radeon 7 and RTX 2080 performance. With GPU power like this in a console we should expect some really stunning looking games, especially when developers will aim at 4K checkerboard and 30fps.
Don't you wish 30fps for next gen, it might happen!
I think next gen will have enough improvements/power/TFs for Dynamic/CB 4K, ray tracing and 60fps. That's the minimum I'm expecting.
At the same time I weaken at the thought of what ND could achieve locking the frame rate to 30fps.
I'm on an endless loop of graphics vs performance whoring, I wish we could have both.
 
Last edited:

Fake

Member
I know third party will spam dynamic resolution like no hell, but first party could create a new version of Checkerboard implementation. Maybe a even better version of Checkerboard Rendering or rather another solution.
 

quest

Not Banned from OT
Don't you wish 30fps for next gen, it might happen!
I think next gen will have enough improvements/power/TFs for Dynamic/CB 4K, ray tracing and 60fps. That's the minimum I'm expecting.
At the same I weaken at the thought of what ND could achieve locking the frame rate to 30fps.
I'm in and endless loop of graphics vs performance whoring, I wish we could have both.

Your expecting to much there will be a decent amount of 30fps games next gen. It will be the RT that will be the main cause. These won't be close to 2080 in RT and that even gets destroyed. I have a bad feeling there will be a huge push to the over use of RT as the next generation look of games. Nvidia and AMD will push the hell out of it to sell cards. The beautiful thing for them is incremental increases in RT each year to sell more cards.
 

Perrott

Gold Member
Is really that hard to notice how fake that pastebin leak is?

>Sony already confirmed that PSVR2 will not appear anytime near the release of the PS5. Also, a VR headset with all those features will not cost around $250.
>EA said that the new Battlefield game will launch during FY22.
>Rockstar insider Yan2295 already said that the next Rockstar game after RDR2 will be Bully 2, while The Know reported that GTA VI will not come out earlier than 2022.
>Most of the stuff that he got right (like the small Q2 2019 reveal) was already posted by the reddit leaker who revealed that Sony won't to E3 2019 more than two weeks in advance.
>There is no way that a "small third party developer from EU" would have access to all these in-depth details about upcoming PS hardware and services as well as Sony's launch plans.
 
Last edited:

CrustyBritches

Gold Member
For all the coding to the metal discussion. I am developer but not a game dev.(Though I have wrote some raytracing and wrote my own 3d engine 19 years ago that ran quake 3 levels). However one of the most innovative, smartest, a true game dev expert amongst the top .1 percent and gifted 3d engine dev ever, John Carmack said this about consoles vs PC's :

I think he's mainly referring to CPU/RAM and maybe GPU in an overall picture sort of deal. I just tested Ryzen 2c/4t @ 3GHz(Ryzen master won't allow me to drop any lower, and I don't have old shitty CPUs anymore) plus RX 480(911MHz core, 1750Mhz mem) at PS4 Pro settings and it does just fine in comparison. On Pro you'll see dynamic res as low as 85% of 1440p, whereas on PC you can't replicate that except by testing at 1440p, then if the scene is too heavy dropping resolution scale. This is at 1440p...


*Please ignore the poor PS4 Pro image quality. I downloaded the DF vid, but it only provides .mkv for 1440p/4K, and I don't have anything that could convert it, so I had to go with 1080p. The framerate counter is the important part anyway.

DOOM makes use of Async compute, shader intrinsics, and frame flip optimizations according to AMD's detailing of it's Vulkan implementation. Having a better CPU on PC is usually a given. Although, I don't think the context of these optimization arguments are based on getting away with a lesser CPU while matching or under-performing the GPU.
 

pawel86ck

Banned
I think he's mainly referring to CPU/RAM and maybe GPU in an overall picture sort of deal. I just tested Ryzen 2c/4t @ 3GHz(Ryzen master won't allow me to drop any lower, and I don't have old shitty CPUs anymore) plus RX 480(911MHz core, 1750Mhz mem) at PS4 Pro settings and it does just fine in comparison. On Pro you'll see dynamic res as low as 85% of 1440p, whereas on PC you can't replicate that except by testing at 1440p, then if the scene is too heavy dropping resolution scale. This is at 1440p...


*Please ignore the poor PS4 Pro image quality. I downloaded the DF vid, but it only provides .mkv for 1440p/4K, and I don't have anything that could convert it, so I had to go with 1080p. The framerate counter is the important part anyway.

DOOM makes use of Async compute, shader intrinsics, and frame flip optimizations according to AMD's detailing of it's Vulkan implementation. Having a better CPU on PC is usually a given. Although, I don't think the context of these optimization arguments are based on getting away with a lesser CPU while matching or under-performing the GPU.

Polaris in PS4P is no way full fat RX 480, far from that because modified RX 580 in xbox x GPU can sometimes double it's performance.

BTW- Doom wasnt so demandig on PC, however I wonder if RX 480 can match PS4P results in RDR2. This game is extremely demanding.
 

MadYarpen

Member
Polaris in PS4P is no way full fat RX 480, far from that because modified RX 580 in xbox x GPU can sometimes double it's performance.

BTW- Doom wasnt so demandig on PC, however I wonder if RX 480 can match PS4P results in RDR2. This game is extremely demanding.

According to the Digital Foundry video, they were able to replicate (well almost) Xbox 1X settings and RX580 had almost 60 fps locked @1080p. I don't remember if they tried this card @4k though.
 

pawel86ck

Banned
According to the Digital Foundry video, they were able to replicate (well almost) Xbox 1X settings and RX580 had almost 60 fps locked @1080p. I don't remember if they tried this card @4k though.
They have RX 580 results in 4K, RX 580 22fps min and 25 average, while xbox x run this game at solid 30fps (so without v-sync probably more than 35 fps on average). Of course these are not exact xbox x settings, but should be not that far at this point, while RX 580 on PC still need 30% performance more in order to match xbox x results. According to digital foundry benchmark chart currently you need vega 56 in order to play at 4K with solid 30fps.

However PS4P GPU is clearly weaker, so maybe PS4 results could be replicated, and especially if RX 480 can run RDR2 at 1080p 60fps with console settings.
 
Last edited:

CrustyBritches

Gold Member
Polaris in PS4P is no way full fat RX 480, far from that because modified RX 580 in xbox x GPU can sometimes double it's performance.

BTW- Doom wasnt so demanding on PC, however I wonder if RX 480 can match PS4P results in RDR2. This game is extremely demanding.
PS4 Pro is indeed a full fat RX 480 with 36CUs, 911MHz core clock, and 1700MHz mem.
It should be noted that it shares some bandwidth with the CPU and I went with 1750MHz, but there's only so far down you can take the card with memory clock before it begins to behave oddly.

DOOM is relevant because the subject is John Carmack and console optimization. It is also probably the closest thing the PC has to "coded to the metal"(async compute, shader intrinsics, frame flip optimization). Lastly, it was PS4 base's best-case scenario against the R7 265, likely because it had 8 ACEs compared to the 7850(R7 265)/7870/Xbox One which have 2. It took R7 265 with oc to 1100MHz to compete with PS4 base, and it still lacked the framerate consistency.

Xbox One X has cache setup more in line with Vega than Polaris(increased render cache, likely coherent pixel/texture memory access) , and higher memory bandwidth. This is why a 6TF Polaris card struggles in certain titles(DOOM, RDR 2) in comparison, and why X1X exhibits such an advantage over PS4 Pro(which chose Vega's RPM as forward feature).

For Xbox One X DOOM DF states:
-only Xbox One X that's capable of hitting native 3840x2160, and even then only in select circumstances.
-most common resolution we found in Doom is 3072x2160
-We've seen Doom on Xbox One X drop to 2880x1620 (a 75 per cent scaling on both axes)
-it can actually drop even lower than that
-At their lowest points, Xbox One X pushes 25 per cent more pixels than the Pro, but the gap in average gameplay rises to a circa 2x increase

For RDR 2, I don't have it yet and won't until it hits ~$25, but I'd guess PS4 Pro and RX 480(911MHz core, 1750MHz mem) will again be a match. RX 480/580 has a harder time against X1X to overcome the memory pipeline alterations and increase bandwidth of the X. That's why even with fat OC and the lowest matching settings from DF, it still will fall a bit short(maybe 5-10%).

tldr: This is hardware customization as opposed to software optimization. The memory configuration is where the honey is at, imo.
 

pawel86ck

Banned
PS4 Pro is indeed a full fat RX 480 with 36CUs, 911MHz core clock, and 1700MHz mem.
With so drastically downclocked GPU speed and limited memory bandwidth this thing in PS4P should be no longer compared to RX 480, although both GPU's has 36 CU's. As you can see doom runs clearly better on your RX 480 compared to PS4P version even with downclocked GPU speed.
 

LordOfChaos

Member
16" MBP uses Navi 14 and GDDR6. Previous top end Vega models used HBM2, now GDDR6 was good enough. Only tangentially related, but hey, we're not flooded with real leaks here either.

 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom