Support NeoGAF

[SatansReverence]

And finally in answering you've pointed out I was correct.

As you rightly say, MS could have got more out of their system and chose not to (although they only talked about variable clocks - not smartshift). Exactly what I said in my first point posted.

Sony did chose to get the power.

QED thanks for your time.

Stop talking as if Smartshift is some sort of Sony secret sauce. It is little more than a basic part of modern AMD Apus.

And that "power" isn't free, or always available either. It is an il-optomised way of increasing the on paper performance of a system. It is objectively worse than fixed performance on a closed system and you don't magically get to apply its boost twice like the member you're attempting to defend claimed in the beginning.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Stop talking as if Smartshift is some sort of Sony secret sauce. It is little more than a basic part of modern AMD Apus.

And that "power" isn't free, or always available either. It is an il-optomised way of increasing the on paper performance of a system. It is objectively worse than fixed performance on a closed system and you don't magically get to apply its boost twice like the member you're attempting to defend claimed in the beginning.

Wasn't aware that a variable solution that lets the GPU reach up to 2.23GHz is objectively worse than using a fixed solution that would put their clocks at <2GHz

Fascinating

 

[SatansReverence]

Wasn't aware that a variable solution that lets the GPU reach up to 2.23GHz is objectively worse than using a fixed solution that would put their clocks at <2GHz

Fascinating

Damn, just realised my gtx 1070 is more powerful than a titan RTX because it has higher clocks!

Fascinating.

 

[Handy Fake]

Stop talking as if Smartshift is some sort of Sony secret sauce. It is little more than a basic part of modern AMD Apus.

And that "power" isn't free, or always available either. It is an il-optomised way of increasing the on paper performance of a system. It is objectively worse than fixed performance on a closed system and you don't magically get to apply its boost twice like the member you're attempting to defend claimed in the beginning.

Wahey! We're back to 1000 pages ago.
I'm glad I just finished watching Dark so my brain is entirely prepared for this time travel malarkey.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Damn, just realised my gtx 1070 is more powerful than a titan RTX because it has higher clocks!

Fascinating.

Lmao nice change of the goal post

 

[Great Hair]

Such a horrible name.

Still better than "this, lococycle"

 

[SatansReverence]

Lmao nice change of the goal post

No goalpost was moved.

The fact that you bring up clockspeed in a vacuum tells everyone just how little you understand about the subject.

 

[Setsuna Mudou]

No reason to be salty, you'll be able to play it on PC.

Might need a quantum computer and brain implants to deal with the sheer awesomeness of a quadruple A game whenever it does come out.

@me getting ready for it

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

No goalpost was moved.

The fact that you bring up clockspeed in a vacuum tells everyone just how little you understand about the subject.

Oh right so you didn't just go from comparing fixed and variable clocks to just comparing different GPUs outright

You lost the argument before you even began

Go compare your standard GTX 1070 to an overclocked GTX 1070 and then see which one is better

 

[bhunachicken]

It's a title and a subtitle, Horizon: Forbidden West, like Horizon: Zero Dawn. But many just skip those ":".

Like Star Trek Into Darkness

 

[SatansReverence]

Oh right so you didn't just go from comparing fixed and variable clocks to just comparing different GPUs outright

You lost the argument before you even began

Go compare your standard GTX 1070 to an overclocked GTX 1070 and then see which one is better

Yea, ok, sure. Yup, 2.23 > 1.8 and absolutely nothing at all has any bearing on that. Nope. Nothing! Clock speed is everything!

And just so everyone knows, yes, variable performance is objectively worse than fixed performance.

Fixed performance, a dev can know, every single frame, how much they can compute. Optimisation is relatively easy.

Variable performance they cannot. They don't know how much the GPU can perform, they don't know how much the CPU can perform. If they wan't consistent game performance, they will need to leave more headroom for those swings in performance. And as we know from Sony themselves, if they want to have that performance locked, the delta between the 2 consoles will only get wider.

 

[IntentionalPun]

And as we know from Sony themselves, if they want to have that performance locked, the delta between the 2 consoles will only get wider.

They don't have the option to lock performance of either CPU/GPU.

Only on a dev machine for testing purposes.

Honestly would have to see what real console game devs say about the variable clocks; but it is certainly a complication. Better/worse? That depends. If the complication is minor and allows for improvements then it would be worth it, but that's really up to an individual dev to decide.

I do think Cerny kind of has talked out of both sides of his mouth on the issue of optimization though. I've changed my mind on that after re-reading his comments; it's like he's trying to claim there's no need to optimize for the variable clocks while also claiming they are offering tools for optimization (that SPECIFICALLY relate to variable clocks.)

 

[xacto]

Sounds like a generic dev.

Probably this one wasn't paid by Sony

 

[LED Guy?]

There is something that I haven't seen many talking about, and that is Cyberpunk 2077 and how it will be on PS4/XB1, Because when I saw the 2018 gameplay I said to myself it wouldn't fit PS4/XB1, it'd be downgraded, but the game now is actually UPGRADED, but all the footage we've seen so far was on a PC, we have 4 months till its release & we haven't seen any PS4/XB1 footage.

What do you guys think? Here's the tweet which I have made comparison both builds.

 

[xacto]

Wahey! We're back to 1000 pages ago.
I'm glad I just finished watching Dark so my brain is entirely prepared for this time travel malarkey.

Some people just got back from a long vacation, you know... so it's understandable.

 

[xacto]

There is something that I haven't seen many talking about, and that is Cyberpunk 2077 and how it will be on PS4/XB1, Because when I saw the 2018 gameplay I said to myself it wouldn't fit PS4/XB1, it'd be downgraded, but the game now is actually UPGRADED, but all the footage we've seen so far was on a PC, we have 4 months till its release & we haven't seen any PS4/XB1 footage.

What do you guys think? Here's the tweet which I have made comparison both builds.

Honestly, a game like Cyberpunk, I am not even slightly thinking to play it on PS4.

 

[SatansReverence]

They don't have the option to lock performance of either CPU/GPU.

Only on a dev machine for testing purposes.

The dev machine was what I was referring too.

Honestly would have to see what real console game devs say about the variable clocks; but it is certainly a complication. Better/worse? That depends. If the complication is minor and allows for improvements then it would be worth it, but that's really up to an individual dev to decide.

The reality is, it's going to be years before we find out the actual variance in performance in some obscure 2 hour long GDC talk

I do think Cerny kind of has talked out of both sides of his mouth on the issue of optimization though. I've changed my mind on that after re-reading his comments; it's like he's trying to claim there's no need to optimize for the variable clocks while also claiming they are offering tools for optimization (that SPECIFICALLY relate to variable clocks.)

The entire announcement was full of marketing double speak. Particularly when it came to these variable clocks. The system architect could only qualify the variance with words like "a couple" and "a few". That tells you they don't want everyone to know the actual range of variation.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Yea, ok, sure. Yup, 2.23 > 1.8 and absolutely nothing at all has any bearing on that. Nope. Nothing! Clock speed is everything!

And just so everyone knows, yes, variable performance is objectively worse than fixed performance.

Fixed performance, a dev can know, every single frame, how much they can compute. Optimisation is relatively easy.

Variable performance they cannot. They don't know how much the GPU can perform, they don't know how much the CPU can perform. If they wan't consistent game performance, they will need to leave more headroom for those swings in performance. And as we know from Sony themselves, if they want to have that performance locked, the delta between the 2 consoles will only get wider.

Except Devs can utulise fixed profiles with the dev kits for optimization, so once again you're wrong.

Even if that was the case with the PS5, that'd just be one disadvantage in the face of the advantages (higher clocking potential). That's not what I'd call objectively worse but hey I won't argue with whoever your English tutor was

But sure, try and argue that the same GPU with lower clocks will perform better than the same GPU with higher clocks, just so everyone can have a laugh

 

[SatansReverence]

>>>if they want to have that performance locked, the delta between the 2 consoles will only get wider.<<<

Except Devs can utulise fixed profiles with the dev kits for optimization, so once again you're wrong.

We're done here.

 

[IntentionalPun]

The entire announcement was full of marketing double speak. Particularly when it came to these variable clocks. The system architect could only qualify the variance with words like "a couple" and "a few". That tells you they don't want everyone to know the actual range of variation.

Yeah it was carefully worded; I initially thought he'd said that both CPU/GPU would be maxed most of the time but when i went back to re-read he said "at or near max clocks" (paraphrasing). Rather meaningless statement.

But I feel like if it was a problem we'd be hearing about it; we get nothing but praise from devs on the PS5 at this point. Games will continue to have random performance issues on next-gen consoles locked clocks or not simply due to the nature of modern games (particularly large open world games) but it will be interesting to see if PS5 has any specific issues.

On that same front someone designing for high I/O could run into issues on XSX... we'll see.

 

[Bladed Thesis]

We're done here.

He's obviously joking.

 

[PaintTinJr]

They don't have the option to lock performance of either CPU/GPU.

Only on a dev machine for testing purposes.

Honestly would have to see what real console game devs say about the variable clocks; but it is certainly a complication. Better/worse? That depends. If the complication is minor and allows for improvements then it would be worth it, but that's really up to an individual dev to decide.

I do think Cerny kind of has talked out of both sides of his mouth on the issue of optimization though. I've changed my mind on that after re-reading his comments; it's like he's trying to claim there's no need to optimize for the variable clocks while also claiming they are offering tools for optimization (that SPECIFICALLY relate to variable clocks.)

I think that is a completely unfair assessment of what he said between the Road to PS5 and follow up interview with DF.

He is correct in saying that developers don't need to optimize for the variable clocks to get the performance of the system. unoptimized code will just result in code that has lower occupancy and therefore gets fully boosted to maintain constant power draw.

By contrast higher occupancy code will do more work (overall) but run with a lower clock to stay within the power draw envelope.

And finally, optimized code will be solutions that find a way to save power(watts) for doing full occupancy solutions without full occupancy, so the same work gets done, but with more headroom for power, so the system can stay in constant boost rather than reduce clocks.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

We're done here.

The gap isn't going to get wider

Optimizing their game using a fixed profile doesn't change the fact that clocks are still variable and the game will scale

But hey, it's not like we haven't heard countless times about how easy it is to develop with the PS5, but i'll just believe some random gaffer who can't even remember his own argument

 

[Geruda065]

The truth is power of ps5 is big unknown. Which we as customers should be worried about. We dont know how low cpu needs to go for gpu to sustain 2.2ghz or vice versa. Whole variable clock thing is so missleading or am i missing something?

 

[IntentionalPun]

Except Devs can utulise fixed profiles with the dev kits for optimization, so once again you're wrong.

Which is only for testing purposes though; and that specifically exists BECAUSE of the need for optimizing code at variable speeds as there are no locked clocks outside of dev kits.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Which is only for testing purposes though; and that specifically exists BECAUSE of the need for optimizing code at variable speeds as there are no locked clocks outside of dev kits.

If they test a game using locked profiles there's no need to account for the variability. It will scale seamlessly

 

[IntentionalPun]

He is correct in saying that developers don't need to optimize for the variable clocks to get the performance of the system. unoptimized code will just result in code that has lower occupancy and therefore gets fully boosted to maintain constant power draw.

By contrast higher occupancy code will do more work (overall) but run with a lower clock to stay within the power draw envelope.

And finally, optimized code will be solutions that find a way to save power(watts) for doing full occupancy solutions without full occupancy, so the same work gets done, but with more headroom for power, so the system can stay in constant boost rather than reduce clocks.

And this is just more double speak.

 

[IntentionalPun]

If they test a game using locked profiles there's no need to account for the variability. It will scale seamlessly

That testing IS the accounting for variability. If there was no need to account for variability, there'd be no need to lock your clocks lower to see how a specific piece of code performs under the variable conditions.

 

[Bladed Thesis]

.

That testing IS the accounting for variability. If there was no need to account for variability, there'd be no need to lock your clocks lower to see how a specific piece of code performs under the variable conditions.

Dude, he's joking.

 

[anothertech]

PS5 will have a $399 price point in some iteration at launch. The question is will Xbox be able to match them.

 

[MasterCornholio]

But I feel like if it was a problem we'd be hearing about it; we get nothing but praise from devs on the PS5 at this point.

I asked about PS5 Dev kits vs Series X dev kits and which console has the upper hand?

"PS5 dev kit is a bit easier to work with. Its well thought out and designed in ways that make it a bit easier to tweak and change things vs Anaconda. To say I prefer one over the other isn't' really fair because both are very good, but its just a bit easier to work with PS5.

Some people are claiming that the PS5 is difficult to make games for due to the variable clocks. But I haven't heard any actual developer say that.

SatansReverence if you look at the vetted leak that Nikana gave us you can see that the Borderlands 3 developers isn't having any issue developing games for the PS5 due to the variable clocks. If it was such a tremendous problem we would be hearing about it. Heck it appears that the PS5 is even easier to make games for than the PS4 and that system has fixed clocks.

I think at this point we can safely discard the theory that developers are struggling with the system due to its variable clocks.

Nikana again thank you for the leak.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

That testing IS the accounting for variability. If there was no need to account for variability, there'd be no need to lock your clocks lower to see how a specific piece of code performs under the variable conditions.

No, it isn;'t. They test their games using fixed profiles, they find sweet spot, and the system will do the rest for them. They don't need to worry about how high or low the clocks can go.

 

[Dibils2k]

variable speeds wont make it hard to code for it... cause they will just program to the highest static value lol so the variable speeds are just their for marketing

 

[SatansReverence]

Some people are claiming that the PS5 is difficult to make games for due to the variable clocks. But I haven't heard any actual developer say that.

SatansReverence if you look at the vetted leak that Nikana gave us you can see that the Borderlands 3 developers isn't having any issue developing games for the PS5 due to the variable clocks. If it was such a tremendous problem we would be hearing about it. Heck it appears that the PS5 is even easier to make games for than the PS4 and that system has fixed clocks.

I think at this point we can safely discard the theory that developers are struggling with the system due to its variable clocks.

Nikana again thank you for the leak.

Do quote me where I said the PS5 is difficult to make games for.

You can't.

 

[IntentionalPun]

No, it isn;'t. They test their games using fixed profiles, they find sweet spot, and the system will do the rest for them. They don't need to worry about how high or low the clocks can go.

Yes it literally is. If it weren't for the variability, there'd be no need to test their code at lower clocks.

It's literally the only reason for that kind of testing; to account for variability.

B Bladed Thesis : I fail to see any "jokes" here.. if he's just a troll. then.. well.. I'd assume mods would take care of it.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Yes it literally is. If it weren't for the variability, there'd be no need to test their code at lower clocks.

It's literally the only reason for that kind of testing; to account for variability.

B Bladed Thesis : I fail to see any "jokes" here.. if he's just a troll. then.. well.. I'd assume mods would take care of it.

They're not testing for variability they're testing to find the sweet spot where the game can run without issues using with a fixed clock speed

 

[Brudda26]

I see this thread has gained a uneducated FUD spreader

 

[MasterCornholio]

Do quote me where I said the PS5 is difficult to make games for.

You can't.

Fixed performance, a dev can know, every single frame, how much they can compute. Optimisation is relatively easy.

Variable performance they cannot. They don't know how much the GPU can perform, they don't know how much the CPU can perform. If they wan't consistent game performance, they will need to leave more headroom for those swings in performance. And as we know from Sony themselves, if they want to have that performance locked, the delta between the 2 consoles will only get wider.

Variable Performance = PS5

PS5 = Optimization isn't easy due to the variable clocks.

Are you saying that optimization isn't difficult on the PS5 even though it has variable clocks?

 

[IntentionalPun]

They're not testing for variability they're testing to find the sweet spot where the game can run without issues using with a fixed clock speed

You really just have no clue what you are talking about. The entire point of the testing involving locked profiles exists BECAUSE of the variable clocks.

There's no other reason for a dev to do that. And no it's not some "sweet spot"; it's testing to see what happens to X piece of code if the processor lowers it's clocks since they can't 100% predict that a piece of code will always run at the same clock speed. (A workload is predictable, but games workloads aren't predictable)

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

You really just have no clue what you are talking about. The entire point of the testing involving locked profiles exists BECAUSE of the variable clocks.

There's no other reason for a dev to do that. And no it's not some "sweet spot"; it's testing to see what happens to X piece of code if the processor lowers it's clocks since they can't 100% predict that a piece of code will always run at the same clock speed. (A workload is predictable, but games workloads aren't predictable)

If they test the entire game using a fixed profile, and it runs without issues, they're not going to run into any issues just because the clocks will fluctuate

Not hard to understand

 

[IntentionalPun]

If they test the entire game using a fixed profile, and it runs without issues, they're not going to run into any issues just because the clocks will fluctuate

Not hard to understand

WHY do they have to do that in the first place?

To account for variable clocks.

DERPY DOOO

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

WHY do they have to do that in the first place?

To account for variable clocks.

DERPY DOOO

They have multiple profiles to choose from and optimise based on those clocks.

If they can't guarantee stability with a specific profile, they'll scale it back until they do.

Theydon'tneedtoworryaboutthevariables

 

[Apollo Helios]

My advice would be to stop engaging these people who really do not know what they are talking about and do not show an inkling of accepting proofs and facts when presented. Some do not seem to be interested in learning but just argue their points without any possibility of accepting the other side's, so it is best to not engage since it is not our job or our duty to educate them, previous page button is just there for people looking to read back because we already had countless arguments about exact same topic.

 

[SatansReverence]

Variable Performance = PS5

PS5 = Optimization isn't easy due to the variable clocks.

Are you saying that optimization isn't difficult on the PS5 even though it has variable clocks?

1. How much do you think optimisation has to do with the entirety of game development.

2. Do you think being harder than something else automatically equals being incredibly difficult in and of itself?

 

[bitbydeath]

Stop talking as if Smartshift is some sort of Sony secret sauce. It is little more than a basic part of modern AMD Apus.

And that "power" isn't free, or always available either. It is an il-optomised way of increasing the on paper performance of a system. It is objectively worse than fixed performance on a closed system and you don't magically get to apply its boost twice like the member you're attempting to defend claimed in the beginning.

Imagine complaining about an RDNA3 feature.

 

[MasterCornholio]

1. How much do you think optimisation has to do with the entirety of game development.

2. Do you think being harder than something else automatically equals being incredibly difficult in and of itself?

Overall that leak says that development is easier on the PS5. So I conclusion I wouldn't worry about the variable clocks giving developers a hard time.

I haven't seen any proof that it makes development difficult on the PS5. From my experience with the PS3 if development is difficult then we will hear about it from developers.

 

[Games Dean]

 

[Apollo Helios]

So a little distraction with an upcoming banger of a game that is GoT. Only on PlayStation 4

 

[Metroiddarks]

Stop talking as if Smartshift is some sort of Sony secret sauce. It is little more than a basic part of modern AMD Apus.

And that "power" isn't free, or always available either. It is an il-optomised way of increasing the on paper performance of a system. It is objectively worse than fixed performance on a closed system and you don't magically get to apply its boost twice like the member you're attempting to defend claimed in the beginning.

The only way is "objectively worse" is if with that smarshift you reach a similar speed than using the traditional approach
and if you don't care waste energy even during idle time.

Sony use that for basically two reasons:
-Save money
-Reach a higher frequency without increase the power consumption

Both approach has its disadvantages and advantages.

In a ideal world the SoC should has locked clocks running so fast as the each architecture can do it without worried about the cooling
solution and price of the power supply.

 

[Neo Blaster]

There is something that I haven't seen many talking about, and that is Cyberpunk 2077 and how it will be on PS4/XB1, Because when I saw the 2018 gameplay I said to myself it wouldn't fit PS4/XB1, it'd be downgraded, but the game now is actually UPGRADED, but all the footage we've seen so far was on a PC, we have 4 months till its release & we haven't seen any PS4/XB1 footage.

What do you guys think? Here's the tweet which I have made comparison both builds.

More and more I think it's better to wait for next gen versions.