wait and see)
-
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.
- Status
prinz_valium
Member
I mean it's not really hard to comprehend.
Just imagine 10 or 20GB on the same 320bit bus. Would that somehow magically be faster or slower just because the size of the ICs is different?
No of course not.
That graphic is so stupid
Last edited:
geordiemp
Member
Why ? Everything you posted is flat out wrong for an APU with shared bandwidth, its not a GPU sharing bandwidth between pools, so where do you start ?
CPU needs to read memory to tell GPU what to do, its a constant contention all the time, GPU shared is totally different.
Handy Fake
Member
New David Cage game confirmed.
Let's start with the fact that before that we did not discuss the issue of total bandwidth usage between CPU and GPU...
You just meant it by keeping this information in your mind, while I was talking about sharing bandwidth between the two pools
Last edited:
geordiemp
Member
Go read the REsetera thread on next gen, they talking about relative L3 cache and CPU write back and how it could also effect bandwidth after the bandwidth discusuion was put to bed. So XSX might have a better design yet, so dont sweat yet.
I cant be arsed, you have your agenda and just dont want to learn,
Last edited:
For many, representations based on their faith seem preferable and believable.
Burrito Bandito
Banned
1. its an ign poll.....i mean, actual pollsters in politics have hard times being accurate
2. 90% consumers dont actually know that both console specs have been released and that the xbox is more powerful.
3. no pricing yet
4. no lockhart news yet
this poll is entirely based on brand loyalty. ps4 users voted ps5 and xb1 users voted xbox, simple.
I do not need in-depth knowledge here and now. I do not need to defend a dissertation... In any case, I answered your complaints.
Last edited:
Lunatic_Gamer
Gold Member
PS5 Cosmic Horror Quantum Error Targeting 4K, 60FPS with 'Beautiful' Raytracing
Lovecrafty
www.pushsquare.com
Cosmic Horror FPS Quantum Error to Run at 4K@60FPS on PS5 With Full Ray Tracing
Quantum Error, one of the first independent games announced for PS5, has been confirmed to be targeting 4K@60FPS with 'full ray tracing'.
wccftech.com
60fps should be the standard this upcoming console generation. If the developer wants to push for eye candy visuals @30fps at least give us the option to lower the resolution in order to achieve 60fps aka “performance mode”.
Last edited:
Metroiddarks
Member
Is most probably the first party will change the main purpose of the Tempest chip to do another things as
happens in PS3.
happens in PS3.
VanSiriusGabriel
Member
It should, yes. Fluidity is the baseline of interactivity, not visual fidelity at this point.PS5 Cosmic Horror Quantum Error Targeting 4K, 60FPS with 'Beautiful' Raytracing
Lovecrafty
Cosmic Horror FPS Quantum Error to Run at 4K@60FPS on PS5 With Full Ray Tracing
Quantum Error, one of the first independent games announced for PS5, has been confirmed to be targeting 4K@60FPS with 'full ray tracing'.
60fps should be the standard this upcoming console generation. If the developer wants to push for eye candy visuals @30fps at least give us the option to lower the resolution in order to achieve 60fps aka “performance mode”.
EliteSmurf
Member
Orphan Of The Machine Gameplay video from Dynamic Voltage Games
Coming to XBOX Series X at 4k 120fps .
Coming to XBOX Series X at 4k 120fps .
Clintizzle
Lord of Edge.
Anyone think both these consoles are going to cost $600+
BluRayHiDef
Banned
INC
Member
Stuart360
Member
VanSiriusGabriel
Member
99% no. Consoles are not PCs, maybe PS3 was pricey, but it was sold at a huge loss of 200 dollars instead of pumping the price even higher.
B_Boss
Member
Damn, i thought that was an Ecco remake then.
Same here man....pissed.
Metroiddarks
Member
Deeper Underground
Member
An Ecco/Metroidvania game? If you couldn’t hit 4K/120FPS on that, I’d be surprised.
Neo Blaster
Member
SegaSnatcher
Member
PS5 Cosmic Horror Quantum Error Targeting 4K, 60FPS with 'Beautiful' Raytracing
Lovecrafty
Cosmic Horror FPS Quantum Error to Run at 4K@60FPS on PS5 With Full Ray Tracing
Quantum Error, one of the first independent games announced for PS5, has been confirmed to be targeting 4K@60FPS with 'full ray tracing'.
60fps should be the standard this upcoming console generation. If the developer wants to push for eye candy visuals @30fps at least give us the option to lower the resolution in order to achieve 60fps aka “performance mode”.
Technically I don't see any reason why every game can't have a 60fps mode come next-gen. Just drop the resolution and or use dynamic resolution scaling. The CPU and GPU have enough grunt to make this a possibility. Even if devs had to drop down to 1080p I doubt people would mind for the better frame rate. Not adding a 60fps mode is just either straight up laziness or limited development time to optimize for such a mode.
Devs at least had a legit excuse why they couldn't do this with current gen consoles because of the weak ass CPUs.
Last edited:
01011001
Banned
this ☝
01011001
Banned
well it already looks like it has better gameplay than any naughty dog game of the last decade
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Because by bumping up a game to 60 fps, it'll make the textures worse. Which every game designer at the studio will go haywire as gamers won't be able to notice the ingredients list on a rusty soup can on the ground.
Never mind a solid 60 fps. Some games can't even hold 30. We had PS1 3D polygon games at 30 in 1995. It's now 2020, and some games are still 30.
Funny how most console games don't have performance/res options (some games you get 2-3 choices), yet on PC they don't have a problem finding the resources to ensure a million configs work where there are 20-30 sliders to fiddle with to help a gamer adjust performance.
A console game might have visual and audio settings, yet they don't do anything to performance unless there are dedicated perf/res modes.
Last edited:
SegaSnatcher
Member
You don't have to make the textures much worse, just dropping resolutions gains huge performance increases. And if you are using a lower resolution anyways then you can get by going from Ultra to High textures. Its not like a 60fps mode is gonna make it look like a Switch port.
PaintTinJr
Member
I suspect the 16 less CUs will be a moot point with the advent of RT, which I suspect favours higher clocks instead of wider CU count.
Thinking about it, the current-gen rasterization visuals are composited from many 2D deferred textures, that are updated constantly for things like shadow maps and cube mapping etc. These unit tasks are typically at resolutions (4096x4096) that exceed the final 1080p or 4K framebuffer. From the GPU’s perspective the deferred textures provide good workloads to bin pack a large CU count with constant work. By comparison, marching the path of the composited light that gives colour to a pixel in the 1080p framebuffer seems like if you don’t treat each pixel as an atomic workload to be bin-packed in the frequency domain then you either duplicate workloads in CUs or incur redundancy even when splitting partial pixel ray marches across multiple CUs – and then have the additional work of collating and summing the result. From what I can see, the PS5 2230Mhz clock divided by a target frame-rate (say 30fps) results in each CU getting 74M clocks per frame (looking like more than 1M clock per WGP thread of the 64 threads) to bin-pack as many conclusive path trace workloads in as possible. On the lower clock of 1860Mhz each WGP would drop to 62M, giving each of the 64threads less than 1M clocks per frame which could become wasteful as scene complexity and bounce count increased – if it lead to an excess of marched rays almost finishing but not quite concluding.
thebigmanjosh
Member
Why does this developer keep getting so much attention?
I would be shocked if this didn’t hit 4K/120fps on XB1X let alone XBSX.
thelastword
Banned
I know these guys are top tier devs who think the PS5 is unbalanced, afterall it's SSD will be slowed down significantly by it's CPU, and I know Orphan of the Machine is going to wrap up all the best graphics awards later this year, but I really wished they spent as much time on sound as they did on graphics...Orphan of the Machine sound effects comes straight out of a 90's MS-DOS game....
BluRayHiDef
Banned
LOL, the PS5'S CPU is only 100Mhz slower than that of the XSX, which is a negligible difference. And yes, it will run at that speed most of the time while the GPU runs at 2.23Ghz most of the time. The console is designed to sustain both components at their maximum speeds simultaneously.
thelastword
Banned
I told folk we would be getting lots of 4k 60fps games next gen.....Expect the same from SWWS just the same...Physics and 4K 60 fps
Maybe it's just this game but higher framerates seems a general target this gen. Fucking finally.
44alltheway
Member
oof this thread died. I guess relying on a bunch of fake insiders will do that
Tiago07
Member
ph33rknot
Banned
They actually had to patch AC and remove some NPC's to help the PS4
BluRayHiDef
Banned
lepermessiah
Member
Muh flop metric though.
lepermessiah
Member
thelastword
Banned
Physics. AI, Sound should all be huge next gen...….We should definitely be excited....Ohhhh!!!!! Textures and Loadtimes as well....
Vroadstar
Member
So this is the game of the "Real Dev" according to X fans. OK
Metroiddarks
Member
Both will work similar the thing is if PS5 can use its SSD bandwidth and geometry engine to be able to match XSX?
Last edited:
Vroadstar
Member
Because some out of there X fans believe they are the only "real dev" worth listening to regarding the PS5
Metroiddarks
Member
ZywyPL
Banned
Last edited:
Neo_game
Member
Let me put this bluntly - the memory configuration on the Series X is sub-optimal.
I understand there are rumours that the SX had 24 GB or 20 GB at some point early in its design process but the credible leaks have always pointed to 16 GB which means that, if this was the case, it was very early on in the development of the console. So what are we (and developers) stuck with? 16 GB of GDDR6 @ 14 GHz connected to a 320-bit bus (that's 5 x 64-bit memory controllers).
Microsoft is touting the 10 GB @ 560 GB/s and 6 GB @ 336 GB/s asymmetric configuration as a bonus but it's sort-of not. We've had this specific situation at least once before in the form of the NVidia GTX 650 Ti and a similar situation in the form of the 660 Ti. Both of those cards suffered from an asymmetrical configuration, affecting memory once the "symmetrical" portion of the interface was "full".
Now, you may be asking what I mean by "full". Well, it comes down to two things: first is that, unlike some commentators might believe, the maximum bandwidth of the interface is limited to the 320-bit controllers and the matching 10 chips x 32 bit/pin x 14 GHz/Gbps interface of the GDDR6 memory.
That means that the maximum theoretical bandwidth is 560 GB/s, not 896 GB/s (560 + 336). Secondly, memory has to be interleaved in order to function on a given clock timing to improve the parallelism of the configuration. Interleaving is why you don't get a single 16 GB RAM chip, instead we get multiple 1 GB or 2 GB chips because it's vastly more efficient. HBM is a different story because the dies are parallel with multiple channels per pin and multiple frequencies are possible to be run across each chip in a stack, unlike DDR/GDDR which has to have all chips run at the same frequency.
However, what this means is that you need to have address space symmetry in order have interleaving of the RAM, i.e. you need to have all your chips presenting the same "capacity" of memory in order for it to work. Looking at the diagram above, you can see the SX's configuration, the first 1 GB of each RAM chip is interleaved across the entire 320-bit memory interface, giving rise to 10 GB operating with a bandwidth of 560 GB/s but what about the other 6 GB of RAM?
Those two banks of three chips either side of the processor house 2 GB per chip. How does that extra 1 GB get accessed? It can't be accessed at the same time as the first 1 GB because the memory interface is saturated. What happens, instead, is that the memory controller must instead "switch" to the interleaved addressable space covered by those 6x 1 GB portions. This means that, for the 6 GB "slower" memory (in reality, it's not slower but less wide) the memory interface must address that on a separate clock cycle if it wants to be accessed at the full width of the available bus.
The fallout of this can be quite complicated depending on how Microsoft have worked out their memory bus architecture. It could be a complete "switch" whereby on one clock cycle the memory interface uses the interleaved 10 GB portion and on the following clock cycle it accesses the 6 GB portion. This implementation would have the effect of averaging the effective bandwidth for all the memory. If you average this access, you get 392 GB/s for the 10 GB portion and 168 GB/s for the 6 GB portion for a given time frame but individual cycles would be counted at their full bandwidth.
However, there is another scenario with memory being assigned to each portion based on availability. In this configuration, the memory bandwidth (and access) is dependent on how much RAM is in use. Below 10 GB, the RAM will always operate at 560 GB/s. Above 10 GB utilisation, the memory interface must start switching or splitting the access to the memory portions. I don't know if it's technically possible to actually access two different interleaved portions of memory simultaneously by using the two 16-bit channels of the GDDR6 chip but if it were (and the standard appears to allow for it), you'd end up with the same memory bandwidths as the "averaged" scenario mentioned above.
If Microsoft were able to simultaneously access and decouple individual chips from the interleaved portions of memory through their memory controller then you could theoretically push the access to an asymmetric balance, being able to switch between a pure 560 GB/s for 10 GB RAM and a mixed 224 GB/s from 4 GB of that same portion and the full 336 GB/s of the 6 GB portion (also pictured above). This seems unlikely to my understanding of how things work and undesirable from a technical standpoint in terms of game memory access and also architecture design.
In comparison, the PS5 has a static 448 GB/s bandwidth for the entire 16 GB of GDDR6 (also operating at 14 GHz, across a 256-bit interface). Yes, the SX has 2.5 GB reserved for system functions and we don't know how much the PS5 reserves for that similar functionality but it doesn't matter - the Xbox SX either has only 7.5 GB of interleaved memory operating at 560 GB/s for game utilisation before it has to start "lowering" the effective bandwidth of the memory below that of the PS5... or the SX has an averaged mixed memory bandwidth that is always below that of the baseline PS4. Either option puts the SX at a disadvantage to the PS5 for more memory intensive games and the latter puts it at a disadvantage all of the time.
Analyse This: The Next Gen Consoles (Part 9) [UPDATED]
So, the Xbox Series X is mostly unveiled at this point, with only some questions regarding audio implementation and underlying graphics...hole-in-my-head.blogspot.com
Wow, thanks for posting this. Very interesting read.
So it seems that Xbox is not having that big of advantage in RAM that I thought. The difference between the console seems less and less as the days go by. lol
I do not understand why some people still compare consoles with some PC components. On paper you can compare, but not in reality! Don't be surprised if the PS5 and XSX will have better performance on the new next-gen games than the 2080ti and I'm not exaggerating when I say that. Remember, the consoles are totally different from a PC, and the specifications in the new consoles are extremely powerful!
Another problem, where's that concern with 4K 60fps ?! All games will run smoothly at 4K 60fps (this will be the standard).
Another problem, where's that concern with 4K 60fps ?! All games will run smoothly at 4K 60fps (this will be the standard).
Metroiddarks
Member
The 4k 60 fps not will be an standard on console for the simple reason the AAA games want to have more details in screen of course some of them will have 60 fps.
But when start to use RT in many parts the 4k 30 fps will be more common.
No, the optimization is better on console, dont forget that, and dont forget that all the power from a console is dedicated to the Games. Man, this is new hardware, dont put the NexT gen Games to the hardware that is avaible today.
And, Even now there are new tools like DLSS that can increase the FPS, it can double the FPS with RT ON. RT will evolve and will not be a killer like in the first year of His life.
Last edited:
Metroiddarks
Member
Is not about the optimization, is about the way developer or even the business people want to present something.
When some leader of engine of some big studio usually try to hit so high as they can, always has been in this way. Even with all technologies you want to push more and more.
Just imagine in the middle of a presentation of for example Ubisoft show to their VPs Assassin Creed of new gen which do you think they will prefer 4k 60 fps or 4k 30 fps even if both use
all the reconstructions techniques is probably they will choose 30 fps, is not like they now they are not able to make is game to 60 fps is all about objectives of each studio and publisher.
- Status