Support NeoGAF

[kevboard]

I think you're all arguing custom vs purpose made.

No, the Cell processor was not purpose made specifically for the PS3, but the specific configuration was definitely customized for the PS3. You are right that it wasn't at the level that they're doing with PS5 and PS6.

nope,
the exact configuration used in the PS3 was also used in other systems. mainly medical stuff like MRI machines etc.

only that they used the full chip with all SPEs active.

there were only ever 2 variants of the Cell before it got canned by IBM

That's called binning. Everyone does that, even to this day. Manufacture with more cores than you need for redundancy, bin extra cores.

yes. and it's the only difference from the regular Cell configuration that the PS3 had.

 

[SegaSnatcher]

xbox looking to be way more powerful but i ain't paying 400$ -600$more for the console with no exclusives

How many times are we going to go down this road? Xbox Series X was more powerful on paper, but how many games performed much better on Series X than PS5 vanilla?

The next Xbox is going to be a PC running Windows 11, so its going to need more ram and raw power to brute force the resource heavy OS, but will it outperform PS6 every single time, and even when it does will the advantage be that meaningful? Likely not.

Devs will target the PS6 first. PS6 will also be under $1K, the next Xbox will not be.

 

[Loomy]

Is Project Amethyst already inbuild in this custom made RDNA or something they will add?
Because I remember they said in the last video there are just simulations, nothing real so far.

Amethyst is the name for the project and the collaboration as a whole, not 1 piece of technology. There's also no end point - although there is a general goal.

All that to say bits and pieces of new tech from the collaboration(Project Amethyst) will likely make its way into the next AMD GPUs(including what Sony and Microsoft will use in the next console). If that makes sense.

 

[KeplerL2]

Is Project Amethyst already inbuild in this custom made RDNA or something they will add?
Because I remember they said in the last video there are just simulations, nothing real so far.

"Project Amethyst" is not a HW feature.

 

[onQ123]

"Project Amethyst" is not a HW feature.

Isn't it just Sony & AMD's R&D ?

 

[KeplerL2]

Isn't it just Sony & AMD's R&D ?

Yeah it's just a cute codename for their collaboration. But it doesn't refer to any specific HW or SW feature.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

Defending what exactly? Your posts make less and less sense as time goes by it seems. Between Magnus and the PS6, I am willing to be the latter's GPU will be more customized.

Cerny is pretty good at marketing. Pretty sure he will cook up some bullshit for PS6 reveal as well. While conveniently ignoring missing features.

It being lead platform will get good performing version. While those modern features will remain untapped.

 

[blobber]

Anyway this is actually not comparable to the PS5 situation. As I mentioned before, PS5 was originally RDNA1, and later in development RT support was added. So architecturally it could be considered a "RDNA 1.1" but it had the most important feature of RDNA 2 (RT support).

In this case PS6 just had an earlier feature freeze so it technically doesn't have all the RDNA5 features, but it does have all the most important ones (DGF, Work Graphs, new RT engine, new Matrix Cores + Neural Arrays, Universal Compression, etc.)

The improved VOPD as well right? You've mentioned that was also massively improved with RDNA5

 

[KeplerL2]

The improved VOPD as well right? You've mentioned that was also massively improved with RDNA5

Yeah it has all the big and important stuff.

 

[blobber]

Yeah it has all the big and important stuff.

Awesome, so sounds like the difference will be with relatively minor features AMD added after the fork.

 

[Bojji]

All those sellout journos browsing our neogaf forum like there is no tomorrow, looking for news like vulutures looking for freshly deceased body

And that's the most hilarious thing about all this, hahaha.

Too bad they don't make articles about our opinions on Woke games...

 

[Gubaldo]

Hope this is not true.
i hope they use Cell processor 2.0
Finger crossed !!

 

[kevboard]

Hope this is not true.
i hope they use Cell processor 2.0
Finger crossed !!

there already was a Cell 2.0

it's called PowerXCell 8i,
it had an absolutely insane FP64 performance...
...
but that would of course not really help much as a gaming CPU

 

[DenchDeckard]

"game journalism"

 

[peish]

About time we stop slurping up cerny's magical bathwater memes…

 

[kazuyamishima]

In this case PS6 just had an earlier feature freeze so it technically doesn't have all the RDNA5 features, but it does have all the most important ones (DGF, Work Graphs, new RT engine, new Matrix Cores + Neural Arrays, Universal Compression, etc.)

Despite all your clarifications it seems that GAF (and most of the Internet) will go with the title.

 

[Darius87]

they don't really. like the PS3 was essentially off the shelf.
in fact, the 360 was kinda more custom than the PS3 ironically.

and the PS4 was also not really special in any way. had essentially the exact same hardware as the Xbox One, just, like... more of it.

cell was highly custom and unusual chip even though it wasn't only ps3 that have it,
different memory setup, no ecc, cost-optimized silicon, etc. that's not off the shelf in the traditional sense. the 360 cpu was actually more conventional than cell it's far less radical.
the ps3 gpu also was custom it shared similarities with pc gpu's of the time, but it wasn't just a retail graphics card dropped into a console.
cell probably is most custom chip build ever and if it used in other hw that doesn't mean it wasn't custom if from the start it was made for ps3 it's was supercomputer at the time.

 

[Cakeboxer]

Secret Sauce incoming.

 

[Physiognomonics]

All the RDNA2 features the PS5 doesn't have (hardware VRS) have been proved meaningless. Even better PS5 has the better ROPs from RDNA1 with twice alpha ROPs than XSX and that has been proven a plus in some games/scenes where XSX mysteriously drops frames while PS5 Doesn't.

Finally PS5 has custom I/O with quasi instantaneous downloads in a few games (Demon's Souls, Astro games, Spiderman games) and cache scrubbers / Id Buffer the latter worthwhile in a few games (better CBR, better TAA in some games like in some COD).

My point been the one RDNA5 feature PS5 doesn't have will likely been proven worthless for the whole generation.

 

[J Required]

Anyway this is actually not comparable to the PS5 situation. As I mentioned before, PS5 was originally RDNA1, and later in development RT support was added. So architecturally it could be considered a "RDNA 1.1" but it had the most important feature of RDNA 2 (RT support).

In this case PS6 just had an earlier feature freeze so it technically doesn't have all the RDNA5 features, but it does have all the most important ones (DGF, Work Graphs, new RT engine, new Matrix Cores + Neural Arrays, Universal Compression, etc.)

Fanboys will ignore all of that and fixate on the label instead. But thanks for clarifying.

The PlayStation 5 was masterfully designed — balanced CPU/GPU pairing, a genuinely transformative SSD architecture, strong compression, and forward-looking RT integration. It wasn't about chasing spec sheet headlines; it was about smart system-level engineering.

And I'm 100% confident the PlayStation 6 will be even more refined. Sony's strength has consistently been holistic design — optimizing bandwidth, latency, developer tools, and feature sets around real-world use rather than marketing buzzwords.

Some people will argue over naming conventions.
The rest will judge it by what the games actually look and run like.

 

[J Required]

All the RDNA2 features the PS5 doesn't have (hardware VRS) have been proved meaningless. Even better PS5 has the better ROPs from RDNA1 with twice alpha ROPs than XSX and that has been proven a plus in some games/scenes where XSX mysteriously drops frames while PS5 Doesn't.

Finally PS5 has custom I/O with quasi instantaneous downloads in a few games (Demon's Souls, Astro games, Spiderman games) and cache scrubbers / Id Buffer the latter worthwhile in a few games (better CBR, better TAA in some games like in some COD).

My point been the one RDNA5 feature PS5 doesn't have will likely been proven worthless for the whole generation.

True, PS5 has been outperforming XSX in most cases than not. Sony simply cut the fat and reduced the costs.
You will definitely get some laugh emojis from the usuals, but it means you won the argument

 

[Thebonehead]

Wow MS and Phil hit the jackpot for next gen.

I thought @littlechicken was banned?

 

[RayHell]

Just a friendly reminder of the whole TF and RDNA debacle vs the outcome of this generation.
Price and games win a generation, not the hardware.

 

[ShakenG]

Ghost of @Riky will have something to say about that.

Can we not speak his name. Im still recovering brain cells

 

[bighugeguns]

When you take your car to the GaaS Station, does it really matter how powerful the pumps are?

 

[jm89]

Xbox is saved

 

[bighugeguns]

Xbox is saved

That next xbox will be twice this thing's price because it's going to be a compact gaming pc, console wars are literally over (This is great for both Xbox and Sony, in my opinion).

Unless you want to spend the rest of your life arguing whether PS6 or Switch 2 runs Fortnite the best.

 

[SpokkX]

Xbox is going to need that extra power if they are really just going to run it on a windows os. Way more overhead to deal with

On the gpu side - there is a negligible difference. The cpu and memory matters more

With regards to not full rdnaX - expected. Ps is a mass consumer/cheap device

 

[SplunkyMunkey]

Rdna 5 will be out this year and rdna 6 is rumored to be in 2027. Sony may implement technology from rumored rdna 6 that won't be found in rdna 5 only due to the facts not only was lower bus speeds but the fact is its faster then ps5 pro i know its not much but still faster and packing 30gig of ram. I dont think rdna 4 would pack them kinda features in its gpu

 

[Victhemic]

Fanboys will ignore all of that and fixate on the label instead. But thanks for clarifying.

The PlayStation 5 was masterfully designed — balanced CPU/GPU pairing, a genuinely transformative SSD architecture, strong compression, and forward-looking RT integration. It wasn't about chasing spec sheet headlines; it was about smart system-level engineering.

And I'm 100% confident the PlayStation 6 will be even more refined. Sony's strength has consistently been holistic design — optimizing bandwidth, latency, developer tools, and feature sets around real-world use rather than marketing buzzwords.

Some people will argue over naming conventions.
The rest will judge it by what the games actually look and run like.

Yes but bandwidth has never been good since the PS3 days.

 

[Bojji]

All the RDNA2 features the PS5 doesn't have (hardware VRS) have been proved meaningless. Even better PS5 has the better ROPs from RDNA1 with twice alpha ROPs than XSX and that has been proven a plus in some games/scenes where XSX mysteriously drops frames while PS5 Doesn't.

Finally PS5 has custom I/O with quasi instantaneous downloads in a few games (Demon's Souls, Astro games, Spiderman games) and cache scrubbers / Id Buffer the latter worthwhile in a few games (better CBR, better TAA in some games like in some COD).

My point been the one RDNA5 feature PS5 doesn't have will likely been proven worthless for the whole generation.

So why all those useless and meaningless features are in PS5 Pro. Why did uncle Cerny left them?

Hint: Those features are not used because the most popular console don't support them, it's a self fulfilling prophecy. And it wasn't MS or AMD that invented them but nvidia in 2018 with Turing, AMD was forced to implement them when they became the standard for DX12 Ultimate.

Rdna 5 will be out this year and rdna 6 is rumored to be in 2027. Sony may implement technology from rumored rdna 6 that won't be found in rdna 5 only due to the facts not only was lower bus speeds but the fact is its faster then ps5 pro i know its not much but still faster and packing 30gig of ram. I dont think rdna 4 would pack them kinda features in its gpu

RDNA5 will launch on PC in 2027/2028.

 

[Physiognomonics]

So why all those useless and meaningless features are in PS5 Pro. Why did uncle Cerny left them?

Hint: Those features are not used because the most popular console don't support them, it's a self fulfilling prophecy. And it wasn't MS or AMD that invented them but nvidia in 2018 with Turing, AMD was forced to implement them when they became the standard for DX12 Ultimate.



RDNA5 will launch on PC in 2027/2028.

PS5 Pro is another console entirely with its own designs. My guess is they started using RDNA2 tech as a basis for their APU as it would be much easier to add the RDNA4 features than to start with the fully custom PS5 RDNA1.1 tech and adding RDNA4 RT features from there.

 

[Bojji]

PS5 Pro is another console entirely with its own designs. My guess is they started using RDNA2 tech as a basis for their APU as it would be much easier to add the RDNA4 features than to start with the fully custom PS5 RDNA1.1 tech and adding RDNA4 RT features from there.

Yes. Cerny not used these features because most likely they were not available when they were finishing the design of PS5 GPU. It looks like development of it started sooner and ended before MS wrapped up XSX/XSS APUs.

 

[Botan32]

Frankly, most people don't care about that and don't even know what it means.
All they want are good games.
It reminds me of the beginning of the generation when people were arguing about RDNA1.5 and RDNA2... it was so ridiculous.
We then saw that the difference between the PS5 and XSX was minimal, even though the Xbox was supposedly RDNA2.

 

[Caio]

Frankly, most people don't care about that and don't even know what it means.
All they want are good games.
It reminds me of the beginning of the generation when people were arguing about RDNA1.5 and RDNA2... it was so ridiculous.
We then saw that the difference between the PS5 and XSX was minimal, even though the Xbox was supposedly RDNA2.

Yeah, I completely agree with this take.
Most players genuinely don't care whether a console is "full RDNA5" or some hybrid architecture. They care about one thing: great games that run well. That's it. The whole RDNA1.5 vs RDNA2 debate at the start of this generation was blown way out of proportion, and in the end ? The real-world differences between PS5 and Series X were far smaller than the spec-sheet warriors predicted.
Even if the next Xbox ends up being technically "full RDNA5" and Sony goes with a custom mix of RDNA5 plus proprietary hardware (like they did with PS5), that doesn't automatically translate into a massive gameplay gap. On paper, one machine might look clearly stronger. In practice, optimization, engine maturity, API design, memory architecture, and first-party development tools often matter way more than raw theoretical TFLOPs.
We've already seen how minimal the PS5 vs Series X differences were in most real games, despite the narrative that Xbox had the "true RDNA2 advantage." So yeah, if history repeats itself, the spec comparison will dominate online debates, but the actual performance gap in third-party titles could end up being surprisingly small again.
At the end of the day, the real test won't be the architecture label, it'll be what we actually see on screen.
We'll see, and I can't wait.

 

[Bojji]

Yeah, I completely agree with this take.
Most players genuinely don't care whether a console is "full RDNA5" or some hybrid architecture. They care about one thing: great games that run well. That's it. The whole RDNA1.5 vs RDNA2 debate at the start of this generation was blown way out of proportion, and in the end ? The real-world differences between PS5 and Series X were far smaller than the spec-sheet warriors predicted.
Even if the next Xbox ends up being technically "full RDNA5" and Sony goes with a custom mix of RDNA5 plus proprietary hardware (like they did with PS5), that doesn't automatically translate into a massive gameplay gap. On paper, one machine might look clearly stronger. In practice, optimization, engine maturity, API design, memory architecture, and first-party development tools often matter way more than raw theoretical TFLOPs.
We've already seen how minimal the PS5 vs Series X differences were in most real games, despite the narrative that Xbox had the "true RDNA2 advantage." So yeah, if history repeats itself, the spec comparison will dominate online debates, but the actual performance gap in third-party titles could end up being surprisingly small again.
At the end of the day, the real test won't be the architecture label, it'll be what we actually see on screen.
We'll see, and I can't wait.

I think people are misreading what Kepler said with console war spin on it. He didn't mention Xbox at all, so PS6 not having full RDNA5 feature set doesn't mean that Xbox will have it.

Xbox was always rumored to launch earlier.

 

[winjer]

Yeah, I completely agree with this take.
Most players genuinely don't care whether a console is "full RDNA5" or some hybrid architecture. They care about one thing: great games that run well. That's it. The whole RDNA1.5 vs RDNA2 debate at the start of this generation was blown way out of proportion, and in the end ? The real-world differences between PS5 and Series X were far smaller than the spec-sheet warriors predicted.
Even if the next Xbox ends up being technically "full RDNA5" and Sony goes with a custom mix of RDNA5 plus proprietary hardware (like they did with PS5), that doesn't automatically translate into a massive gameplay gap. On paper, one machine might look clearly stronger. In practice, optimization, engine maturity, API design, memory architecture, and first-party development tools often matter way more than raw theoretical TFLOPs.
We've already seen how minimal the PS5 vs Series X differences were in most real games, despite the narrative that Xbox had the "true RDNA2 advantage." So yeah, if history repeats itself, the spec comparison will dominate online debates, but the actual performance gap in third-party titles could end up being surprisingly small again.
At the end of the day, the real test won't be the architecture label, it'll be what we actually see on screen.
We'll see, and I can't wait.

In this generation, despite the Series X having more features, not even Microsoft first party games used them. Only a handful of games used hardware VRS and the ones that did, the results were mixed.
I don't think any game used Sampler Feedback Streaming. And Microsoft did nothing with DP4A support, which could have been used to run a upscaler similar to XeSS DP4A, which would look much better than FSR2 or TSR.
But Microsoft managed to lose all advantages it could have, by doing nothing.

 

[Caio]

I think people are misreading what Kepler said with console war spin on it. He didn't mention Xbox at all, so PS6 not having full RDNA5 feature set doesn't mean that Xbox will have it.

Xbox was always rumored to launch earlier.

I think people are skipping a few steps in the reasoning here.
From what's been circulating lately, it does seem like Microsoft may be leaning toward a more brute-force approach next gen, at least based on the leaks and roadmap chatter. That would be consistent with their general strategy so far.
But even if that ends up being true, it still doesn't automatically follow that PS6 "lacking full RDNA5" means it's technically behind in a meaningful way. Sony has historically prioritized custom integration and balance rather than just maximizing raw feature checklists.
Different philosophies don't necessarily translate into clear real-world gaps. We've already seen this generation how paper advantages didn't always result in major differences in actual games.
Until we see finalized specs and real software comparisons, it's mostly about interpreting incomplete signals.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

I love when the round of New Gen and next generation stuff starts going but let's remind ourselves as, Moore's law is dead wasn't really as popular in the lead up to PlayStation 5, that even Mark Cerny himself said that you shouldn't really pay attention to the teraflop difference on the new systems and that turned out to be correct.

It's fantasy Town and get excited and stuff but let's not forget That's up system power and whatever numbers on paper exists, the results have been very good for PlayStation 5 and I would expect the same thing for a PlayStation 6 regardless of where we are in terms of graphics power.

I think I've said this before and it's been a while but I think they are next-gen offerings are actually more stable and sound than even this generation. Sony needs to make ground up on the software and I think we can all agree on that.

I'm not paying for Game pass anymore other than the free months that I got with my Xbox rog but I'm more interested in what currently Xbox has recently then I am with Sony's offerings and that has more to do with a lot of their studios having a lot of their games that are not announced. The recent stated play did help and I am personally excited for the console and especially the handheld but I wouldn't worry about what Sony has to offer in this coming generation based on who was at the Helm of the hardware. I think that is in good hands.

 

[Bojji]

I think people are skipping a few steps in the reasoning here.
From what's been circulating lately, it does seem like Microsoft may be leaning toward a more brute-force approach next gen, at least based on the leaks and roadmap chatter. That would be consistent with their general strategy so far.
But even if that ends up being true, it still doesn't automatically follow that PS6 "lacking full RDNA5" means it's technically behind in a meaningful way. Sony has historically prioritized custom integration and balance rather than just maximizing raw feature checklists.
Different philosophies don't necessarily translate into clear real-world gaps. We've already seen this generation how paper advantages didn't always result in major differences in actual games.
Until we see finalized specs and real software comparisons, it's mostly about interpreting incomplete signals.

I agree for the most part.

But those features that PS5 is missing are not brute force at all, they are actually "smart", devs can achieve less memory usage (SFS), better performance with the same image quality with VRS (that's the theory, reality doesn't exactly correspond to that) and Mesh Shaders are a major change to traditional vertex pipeline (PS5 actually supports most of it with primitive shaders).

But like winjer said, barely anyone used them and that includes Xbox studios.

 

[KeplerL2]

I think people are misreading what Kepler said with console war spin on it. He didn't mention Xbox at all, so PS6 not having full RDNA5 feature set doesn't mean that Xbox will have it.

Xbox was always rumored to launch earlier.

Well Xbox is literally using the AT2 chiplet so by definition it is full RDNA5.

 

[Radical_3d]

K KeplerL2 What's the hurry with Sony if they end up releasing at the same time the technology they undercook fully launches at Microsoft consoles and AMD cards?

 

[Insane Metal]

Lol Kepler says thing, internet replicates. Must be boring.

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

Is this the new Teraflops thing for next gen?
Sony will want an affordable piece of hardware...their hardware will be worse than the nich thing MS is doing but will also be much cheaper.

There. Solved it.

 

[Bojji]

Well Xbox is literally using the AT2 chiplet so by definition it is full RDNA5.

Interesting, especially when they planned earlier launch (vs. PS6) from the start (at least that's what the rumors have said).

Is this the new Teraflops thing for next gen?
Sony will want an affordable piece of hardware...their hardware will be worse than the nich thing MS is doing but will also be much cheaper.

There. Solved it.

PS6 will sell far more units. There is no doubt about that.

 

[squallbr]

That bullshit FULL RDNA again VRS VRR GSL, TRR, EOP,VGD, ERT MBR for nothing

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

PS6 will sell far more units. There is no doubt about that.

No one expects anything else at this point. Not even Microsoft who doesn't even have space in stores for their brand anymore lol.

 

[SplunkyMunkey]

So why all those useless and meaningless features are in PS5

 

[Pedro Motta]

Interesting, especially when they planned earlier launch (vs. PS6) from the start (at least that's what the rumors have said).

I still don't understand why people assume if it's not FULL something it's bad. Maybe they have a strategy, a bespoke substitute fot that feature, or they simply don't like it and remove it to cut costs. Worked out well for them in the PS5, way more profitable than the full RDNA 2 XSX.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I agree for the most part.

But those features that PS5 are missing are not brute force at all, they are actually "smart", devs can achieve less memory usage (SFS), better performance with the same image quality with VRS (that's the theory, reality doesn't exactly correspond to that) and Mesh Shaders are a major change to traditional vertex pipeline (PS5 actually supports most of it with primitive shaders).

But like winjer said, barely anyone used them and that includes Xbox studios.

SFS apparently has quite a few performance problems and it is not used a lot on PC either… and something devs were handling already either manually or using PRT and doing the rest of the calculations themselves (the texture filtering new mode was neat). SFS was never really pushed hard against good PRT based rendering engines to see how much memory it saved on top of that.

VRS failed to be a competitive advantage like full AVX512 also failed to in the console environment (PS5 got a redesigned FPU and it was mostly fine) and we do have AMD on record saying that Mesh Shaders on RDNA2 was mapped to primitive shaders anyways so there was not a lot of magic of top anyways. Geometry Engine improvements if they missed them might be partially offset by higher clock rate as the HW units there are essentially the same in number at least (dependent on how many Shader Engines you have for some too).

It seems like they created a console, PS5, with some bets that paid off and that allowed them to have price flexibility, plenty of early dev kits, and focused on what devs could easily use first (the better tools early on "myth" may have grounding in there).

If the console was meant to come out after Magnus, I doubt it is far far off in feature set but after many console designs where they made pretty good bets I think we can give them some benefit of doubt.