• 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.

DrKeo

Member
Of course it is... there is RX 5500 with all disabled CUs in the same SA.

There is no point in use redundant CUs to increase yields if only these with 1 CU defect in each SA fits.
5500 only has one SE, because RDNA has dual CU units called WGP then every 5500 has only one SA with disabled CUs (a single WGP). PS5, XSX, 5700 and 5700XT have two SEs, so when you disable one WGP (two CUs) in one SE, you have to disable one WGP (two CUs) in the other SE. That’s why PS5 and XSX will never have all 4 disabled CUs in the same SE (or SA).
 
Last edited:
Developers, even third party developers, will optimize for the SSD pretty soon into the new generation.

This isn't a situation where a Dev is targeting a thousand different PC specs. This is the PS5. The console most of the third party games sell on. That will be *THE* Primary development platform. The SSD will be used to great effect. Games are developed with very high quality assets created and then scaled down accordingly. The EAs, Activisions, and Ubisofts of the world will have their specific optimized engine for PS5 hardware. They will structure their engines to stream in higher quality assets thanks to the SSD.

Any comparisons to unoptimized PC games can be completely thrown out the window. However, what they won't optimize for is game design...that will have to take into account the slower SSD speeds of the XSX,
 
Last edited:

SonGoku

Member
I think M2 SSD / PCiE 3.0 SSD drives will become recommended mimimum specs for PC games very quickly once next gen gets going. They only need the drive for the games, so it doesn't need to be huge capacity. It's like a $50-100 upgrade to reach Series X performance. Peanuts for PC_Master_Race.

They pay more for Keyboards and Mice..
For reference a PC with a 1GB/s SSD will need a 23GB DDR4 buffer to match XSX 4.8GB/s throughput. Probably closer to 16GB if they dedicate CPU resources to decompression. Those 12 core CPUs will come in handy then
 

Dodkrake

Banned
sony needs to take a long hard look at the xbox one numbers and stop porting their games to pc.

with xbox games being available on pc on day 1 for a dollar or five dollars if you cant get a deal, there is zero reason to invest in an xbox console.

Why wouldnt Sony port games? You act like every single Sony exclusive is coming day 1 into the PC market, when it has been shown that, if the games are ported, it's years after release.
 

Fake

Member
Why wouldnt Sony port games? You act like every single Sony exclusive is coming day 1 into the PC market, when it has been shown that, if the games are ported, it's years after release.

Its a possibility we can't discart. Was a time when Playstation games never get out of Playstation, was a time when Playstation games was never go to PC as well. So, only time will tell. I never expected Horizon coming to PC one day, but here we are.
Unless you can prove this will never going to happen.
 
Last edited:

DrKeo

Member
For reference a PC with a 1GB/s SSD will need a 23GB DDR4 buffer to match XSX 4.8GB/s throughput. Probably closer to 16GB if they dedicate CPU resources to decompression. Those 12 core CPUs will come in handy then
Or just lower the graphical settings and have less data stream from the SSD because the assets are smaller. Lowering texture resolution alone will probably allow a much slower SSD run XSX games well.

PC gamers will have to accept that a pretty good NVMe will be required very soon and that’s fine. PC gamers had to upgrade every time a new generation came out. This last generation was the odd one out because PS4 and X1 were, well, I guess the word “pathetic” describes them pretty well.
 
Last edited:

Thirty7ven

Banned
How Horizon does on PC and depending on what the metrics show in terms of what kind of effects it has on the interest generated for the sequel will be paramount. If it comes out and simply sells well without meaning much for the sequel on the PS5, then I don't expect much to change.

Sony isn't releasing Horizon on PC just to get some more sales. Hopefully it's good news for everybody.
 

ethomaz

Banned
5500 only has one SE, because RDNA has dual CU units called WGP then every 5500 has only one SA with disabled CUs (a single WGP). PS5, XSX, 5700 and 5700XT have two SEs, so when you disable one WGP (two CUs) in one SE, you have to disable one WGP (two CUs) in the other SE. That’s why PS5 and XSX will never have all 4 disabled CUs in the same SE (or SA).
That defect the goal of increase the yields.
 

DrKeo

Member
That defect the goal of increase the yields.
You are missing the point. Most disabled CUs in the PS5 and XSX are actually just fine and not defective and there isn’t going to be a single PS5 or XSX with all 4 disabled CUs in the same SA.
 
Last edited:

44alltheway

Member
More into it:




It's suggesting that the company that Sony was trying to strike a deal with to implement software-based ray-tracing for current PS4 games might be Crytek. This could represent the HDR implementation/emulation on SDR, non-HDR games. Pretty interesting stuff, and could as well help to minimize the ray tracing penalty in future next gen gaming to have a hybrid solution.


Why do you always post these you tubers that try to imply they are insiders. this guy doesn't know jack.
 

SonGoku

Member
Its a possibility we can't discart. Was a time when Playstation games never get out of Playstation, was a time when Playstation games was never go to PC as well. So, only time will tell. I never expected Horizon coming to PC one day, but here we are.
Unless you can prove this will never going to happen.
I think the reasonable assumption is Sony will release last gen games on PC. They did it this gen with PS3 games and they'll do it next gen with PS4 games. That way they can expand reach and give old games a second wind without diminishing value of the current console
 
Last edited:
How do you know that?
Because Sony said so. They are not releasing HZD on PC just for cash.
PSB: PlayStation is no stranger to publishing titles on the PC, but Horizon: Zero Dawn is one of the largest games to make that leap. Is there anything you would say to PlayStation fans? What does it mean for the future?

HH:
Sure. I think it’s important that we stay open to new ideas of how to introduce more people to PlayStation, and show people maybe what they’ve been missing out on.

And to maybe put a few minds at ease, releasing one first-party AAA title to PC doesn’t necessarily mean that every game now will come to PC. In my mind, Horizon Zero Dawn was just a great fit in this particular instance. We don’t have plans for day and date [PC releases], and we remain 100% committed to dedicated hardware.

Source:
 
Last edited:

Fake

Member
I think the reasonable assumption is Sony will release last gen games on PC. They did it this gen with PS3 games and they'll do it next gen with PS4 games. That way they can expand reach and give old games a second wind without diminishing value of the current console
Thats is a business decision I can't deny. Saying this don't make money is ludicrous.
Because Sony said so. They are not releasing HZD just for cash.

Source:



Fair point.
 
Last edited:
My point is they're not waiting for the PC lot to take out their wallets, same applies for the PS4 and One owners. Once we're passed the first year of launch, outside of the money milking franchises, we're going to see plenty of next-gen exclusive games just like last gen.

How do you seriously expect people to adopt tech if you don't make content exclusive for that tech?
That's Sonys and MSs job, not EAs, not Ubisofts, or anyone else's job for that matter. Publishers don't care about "new tech" they care about sales, and they will put their games on the system that makes the most money
 

temroi

Neo Member
Mostly confirmation of smooth sailing ahead for next-gen consoles from a number of developers.

Brand new (post-RDNA2) features in the GPU is a first, though. I guess Sony and MS are being extra secretive this time around because it's a new generation.

Pause and Resume like the XBOX has it.
 
So, for you BOTH SSDs are useless due to the lowest common denominator HDDs? Don't forget SX will be much more affected by this problem cause even its first party games will have to run on old hardware for some time, while PS5 first party games can thrive from the start.

For multis, your point can be considered while third parties make crossgen and PC titles which are bound by mechanical HDDs, but you're ignoring the bar has been raised by the consoles. Sometime in the next gen, devs will begin to mandate SSDs for PC configurations and stop making crossgen games. That's the only way game design can evolve.
Correct, although I don't expect all of PS5's games to be next-gen only for some time, just like XSX. By "sometime in the next-gen" I think you mean "3 to 5 years from now" which would be accurate.
 
That's Sonys and MSs job, not EAs, not Ubisofts, or anyone else's job for that matter. Publishers don't care about "new tech" they care about sales, and they will put their games on the system that makes the most money

So why didn't the publishers decide to put the current-gen exclusives on the PS3/360 after the 1st year then if all they give a shit about is going where the most money is?
 

ethomaz

Banned
You are missing the point. Most disabled CUs in the PS5 and XSX are actually just fine and not defective and there isn’t going to be a single PS5 or XSX with all 4 disabled CUs in the same SA.
If that is the case they may go with 40/56 CUs and not 36/52 CUs.

They are trying to increase yields using chips up to random 4 defectives CUs.

Any chip with 5 or more defective CUs go to recycle.
 
Last edited:
sony needs to take a long hard look at the xbox one numbers and stop porting their games to pc.

with xbox games being available on pc on day 1 for a dollar or five dollars if you cant get a deal, there is zero reason to invest in an xbox console.
If their plan is to strategically release some exclusives to PC (and they confirmed again only Horizon and DS are coming) at the end of each generation, the more units selled and the bigger interest on sequels is more than worth it.
Basically no one is gonna go from PS4 to PC because of Horizon, it's not that easy, console users are just different and viceversa.
 
This is the exception, not the norm.
To clarify: your take is that games are developed on PC first and consoles second?
If so, ok. Proof? I mean an actual proof. Someone with a relevant position in the industry confirming that, documents by devs?
Because to me seems a stupid way of doing things, especially on the long term. Why should you develop for the less important platform in terms of money, where there are configurations that only the 10% of PC gamers has? And after five years most of the configurations are pretty different and/or more powerful than base consoles.
 
Last edited:
the difference is that PS5 will have them displayed for for example 3-5s, XBX for 5-7s, and PC anything from half a second to 2min, depending on the specs
The only one loading games in less than a second is ps5. PCs until they get newer custom i/o are likely to just load a few times faster than hdd and no more. We're seeing minute+ load times on some games designed for ssd on pc.
I'm ok if the load screen on PS5 lasts 1 second compared to 10 seconds on the other platforms.
star citizen a game designed for ssd loads in 1minute+ on ssd vs 2minute+ on hdd. It might load in 1.4 seconds on ps5. And 1minute+ at least on pc.
If it is a separate and totally unique component relative to the standard CUs, then how can Sony assure tolerable yield rates for the APU, since the odds of producing an APU with one fully functional Tempest Engine out of only one Tempest Engine would be low? Do you suppose that there are redundant Tempest Engines in the APU, so that the odd of producing an APU with at least one fully functional Tempest Engine would be high?
Do you think the custom i/o and the decompressor are also duplicated? Doubtful. These things are small enough and unlikely to have defects most of the time.
That 22GB is theoretical peak of the hardware. Probably only obtainable if the texture is 1GB of zeros... The real number is 9.6
You think a 1:4 ratio of decompression needs a 1GB of zeros? Nope, some real workloads will see that,
The one I already asked. How can only an API change reduce CPU performance from 3 cores to less than 1/10th of a core? Where they simply lazy all these years? Why wasn't this done earlier on the Xbox One which is known to be extremely underpowered in the CPU department?
There is something else going on here.
Isn't that also due to the h/w decompressor?
 
Last edited:
To clarify: your take is that games are developed on PC first and consoles second?
If so, ok. Proof? I mean an actual proof. Someone with a relevant position in the industry confirming that, documents by devs?
Because to me seems a stupid way of doing things, especially on the long term. Why should you develop for the less important platform in terms of money, where there are configurations that only the 10% of PC gamers has? And after five years most of the configurations are pretty different and/or more powerful than base consoles.
 

ethomaz

Banned
You think a 1:4 ratio of decompression needs a 1GB of zeros? Nope, some real workloads will see that,
For lossless it is really hard to archive a decompression in less than half second with a 1:4 ratio.
Kraken is lossless and reaches in average 30-40% compression with less than half a second decompression and that is really great.

Now with lossy compression like BCPack is pretty easy.
 
Last edited:

DrKeo

Member
Of course it is... there is RX 5500 with all disabled CUs in the same SA... one SA with 14CUs and the other with 1

There is no point in use redundant CUs to increase yields if only these with 1 CU defect in each SA fits.

PS5 will probably have units with the 10, 10, 10 and 6 CUs per SA.

Edit - Fixed the 20 lol
If that is the case they may go with 40/56 CUs and not 36/52 CUs.

They are trying to increase yields using chips up to random 4 defectives CUs.

Any chip with 5 or more defective CUs go to recycle.

That’s not how RDNA works. Sony and MS don’t disable 4 CUs for yields, 1 or 2 CUs are actually enough in order to get almost the exact same yields considering the extreme limitations 4 specific CUs will have to follow (more on that at the end), but they have to disable 4 CUs even if all they will ever need is just to disable 1 CU, because their GPU has 2 SEs.

In RDNA you don’t disable a single CU, you disable a full WPG and a WGP contains 2 CUs. If your GPU also has more than 1 SE, you have to keep the WGP count in each of them the same. So if you disable a WGP in one SE, you have to disable one WGP in the other SE.

If one CU is defective, just a single one, you have to disable the WGP that contains it, right off the bat, you’ve disabled two CUs. Then, because you've disabled a WGP in one SE, you have to disable one WGP in each of the other SEs. Because PS5 and XSX both have 2 SEs, if they want to disable a single CU, they have to disable a full WGP and another WGP in the other SE. That's why you will never have a PS5 with 4 disabled CUs in the same SA - Because the SA is inside the SE and if you have one disabled WGP in that SA, the second WGP you disable must be in the other SE. So a GPU with 4 defective CUs in the same SA goes to the trash bin.

Now that we've laid out the rules, just think how little PS5 GPUs will actually have 4 defective CUs:
0 defective CUs - 100% of these cases will become a PS5 GPU (obviously).
1 defective CUs - 100% of these cases will become a PS5 GPU (because you can disable that WGP and another random WGP in the other SE).
2 defective CUs - 53.8% of these cases will become a PS5 GPU (the second defective CU has to be in the other SE (51.28%, 20 our of 39), or in the WGP you've just disabled (2.56%,1 out of 39) and you just disable another WGP randomly in the other SE).
3 defective CUs - 4.04% of these cases will become a PS5 GPU (the previous rules apply and on top of them the third CU has to be in one of the two already disabled WGPs (5.26%, 2 out of 38), or if the first two are already in the same WGP, then it has to be in the other SE (52.63%. 20 out of 38))
4 defective CUs - 0.11% of these cases will become a PS5 GPU (the previous rules apply and on top of them the fourth CU has to be in the WGP that already has 1 disabled CU (2.7%, 1 out of 37))

That means that only 1 out of ~25 APUs that come out of the fab with 3 defective CUs will actually become a PS5 APU and only 1 out of ~1000 APUs with 4 defective CUs become a PS5. So as you can see, disabling the third and fourth CUs does little in terms of improving yields, I'm sure that if Sony and MS could have had 38 CUs (10.85TF) and 54CU (12.62TF) active, they would have gladly done so.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
That’s not how RDNA works. Sony and MS don’t disable 4 CUs for yields, 1 or 2 CUs are actually enough in order to get almost the exact same yields considering the extreme limitations 4 specific CUs will have to follow (more on that at the end), but they have to disable 4 CUs even if all they will ever need is just to disable 1 CU, because their GPU has 2 SEs.

In RDNA you don’t disable a single CU, you disable a full WPG and a WGP contains 2 CUs. If your GPU also has more than 1 SE, you have to keep the WGP count in each of them the same. So if you disable a WGP in one SE, you have to disable one WGP in the other SE.

If one CU is defective, just a single one, you have to disable the WGP that contains it, right off the bat, you’ve disabled two CUs. Then, because you've disabled a WGP in one SE, you have to disable one WGP in each of the other SEs. Because PS5 and XSX both have 2 SEs, if they want to disable a single CU, they have to disable a full WGP and another WGP in the other SE. That's why you will never have a PS5 with 4 disabled CUs in the same SA - Because the SA is inside the SE and if you have one disabled WGP in that SA, the second WGP you disable must be in the other SE. So a GPU with 4 defective CUs in the same SA goes to the trash bin.

Now that we've laid out the rules, just think how little PS5 GPUs will actually have 4 defective CUs:
0 defective CUs - 100% of these cases will become a PS5 GPU (obviously).
1 defective CUs - 100% of these cases will become a PS5 GPU (because you can disable that WGP and another random WGP in the other SE).
2 defective CUs - 53.8% of these cases will become a PS5 GPU (the second defective CU has to be in the other SE (51.28%, 20 our of 39), or in the WGP you've just disabled (2.56%,1 out of 39) and you just disable another WGP randomly in the other SE).
3 defective CUs - 4.04% of these cases will become a PS5 GPU (the previous rules apply and on top of them the third CU has to be in one of the two already disabled WGPs (5.26%, 2 out of 38), or if the first two are already in the same WGP, then it has to be in the other SE (52.63%. 20 out of 38))
4 defective CUs - 0.11% of these cases will become a PS5 GPU (the previous rules apply and on top of them the fourth CU has to be in the WGP that already has 1 disabled CU (2.7%, 1 out of 37))

That means that only 1 out of ~25 APUs that come out of the fab with 3 defective CUs will actually become a PS5 APU and only 1 out of ~1000 APUs with 4 defective CUs become a PS5. So as you can see, disabling the third and fourth CUs does little in terms of improving yields, I'm sure that if Sony and MS could have had 38 CUs (10.85TF) and 54CU (12.62TF) active, they would have gladly done so.
The CUs are disabled for yields purpose.
That is why exists RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT.

C’mon.
 
Sorry, but it looks a bit like wishful thinking if you answer with this.
First of all, a pool from a tech site is not representative of the general world of development, it's at least known how much people partecipated?
Secondly, and this is really an overlook from your part (and I'm gonna ask you to be a bit more honest), the pool simply asked on which platform are you working for your project. There are thousands of devs that develop ONLY on PC and never come on consoles, take a look of Steam and then watch the PS Store.
Developing ONLY on PC and on PC first are two different things, a lot of those games are not gonna come on consoles.
 
Last edited:

DrKeo

Member
The CUs are disabled for yields purpose.
That is why exists RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT.

C’mon.
Read my post again. CUs are disabled for yields but disabling more than 2 CUs is a waste in RDNA's case. Sony, MS and AMD have to disable 4 CUs because that's the minimum for an RDNA GPU with 2 SEs. It doesn't mean that they want to disable 4, they might want to disable just 1 or 2, but you can't disable a single CU in an RDNA 2 GPU. The minimum CU you can disable on an RDNA GPU follows this formula - (number of SE) * 2, or in PS5's case, 2*2 = 4. You are making a false assumption that Sony and MS need 4 disabled CUs for yields while in reality, they need only 1 or 2 while the 3rd and 4th disabled CUs are forced on them by AMD's architecture. It's either 4 or nothing while the 4th disabled CU isn't really helping yields.

If you reply with another "The CUs are disabled for yields" post, that will be borderline trolling.
 
Last edited:
I have no idea of how many of those 4000 devs were developing only on PC and which instead actually chose to develop first on PC while developing also on consoles, so to me that pool means nothing, I've absolutely no problem in believing that the majority of those devs where actually working on PC, because most games come out on PC in one form or another.
I find unsure what you say and I asked proof. That pool do not descern specific datas, so it's far from stupidity to doubt it. Having no data myself, just my opinion on the matter, I asked you that seems so sure about it, and you are not presenting an hard proof of this.
 
I have no idea of how many of those 4000 devs were developing only on PC and which instead actually chose to develop first on PC while developing also on consoles, so to me that pool means nothing, I've absolutely no problem in believing that the majority of those devs where actually working on PC, because most games come out on PC in one form or another.
I find unsure what you say and I asked proof. That pool do not descern specific datas, so it's far from stupidity to doubt it. Having no data myself, just my opinion on the matter, I asked you that seems so sure about it, and you are not presenting an hard proof of this.
I already told you, game development takes place on Pcs. If you develop games on Pc FOR consoles (Like GTA5, RDR2) that's a different topic, but you don't use a PS4 for game development, aside from optimization, all of that takes place on Pc, its a fact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom