• 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.

raul3d

Member
No need for the abuse, grow up.

The system reserve and CPU will use the 6gb, it doesn't need to be any faster for those purposes.

The very fast 10gb will be for the GPU.
What he is telling you is this: The "slow" and "fast" RAM share the same address pool, so it is one pool of memory, visible to both the CPU and GPU. However, when the "slow" RAM is accessed the full 320bit bus is occupied and blocks the "fast" RAM from being accessed at the same time. So in a sense, the "slow" RAM is consuming bandwith as if it would be the "fast" RAM.
 

demigod

Member
I called you a liar where?

I said developers see it as one pool, this is detailed by MS, they see 13.5gb of available ram. The slower 6gb is used for the OS reserve and the rest the CPU. The higher bandwidth ram is for GPU. The PS3 ram was split 50/50 so that was the problem for the GPU as it couldn't be shared. Not the case here so not the same situation.

Lmfao are you serious, you told him to stop spreading FUD. What do you think a person that spreads FUD is?
 

geordiemp

Member
Right, and I edited the Yuko tweet into my post. The new diagrams just add some more credibility to that rumor.

PS5 will be missing the DX12U implementations of mesh shaders, VRS, etc but will have their own API's to support the same or similar features.

As for Infinity Cache, I think PS5 could still have ~32MB L3/Infinity cache shared between the CPU/GPU acting in the same or similar way. Just not the full 128MB cache for the PC cards.

VRS is AMD so is Mesh shaders, the API in DX12U is Microsoft.

Ps5 will likely ahve VRS and we know they are doing their own custom GE.

Also sony tweeted they have 1 customised RDNA1 feature, not 2. Thats GE I bet.
 
Last edited:

geordiemp

Member
The title of the article says "A Closer Look at How Xbox Series X|S Integrates Full AMD RDNA 2 Architecture".
The body of the article says "Xbox Series X|S are the only next-generation consoles with full hardware support for all the RDNA 2 capabilities AMD showcased today"

XSX does not have the below from hotchips, die shots or frequency of GPU unless they lied at Hotchips ? Take your pick.


MUJhxuT.png
 
Last edited:
Guys did you remember when DF (Richard) insist what will happen to the PS5 if the
CPU and GPU work using the 100% for long period and Cerny replied that kind of workload
is not realistic as console clock limited will shutdown.

But many people still not believing this, well here is an example of
what happens if this kind of workload happens in a game:



Oh look is considered a critical issue for a reason.
 
Last edited:

kyliethicc

Member
I called you a liar where?

I said developers see it as one pool, this is detailed by MS, they see 13.5gb of available ram. The slower 6gb is used for the OS reserve and the rest the CPU. The higher bandwidth ram is for GPU. The PS3 ram was split 50/50 so that was the problem for the GPU as it couldn't be shared. Not the case here so not the same situation.
You accused me of FUD. I am not a liar. The thing you fail to understand is that devs have access to 1 pool of 13.5 GB of RAM, but can only feed the SoC at different speeds. Its split. This is a bottleneck. Literally every developer would want all the RAM to be at the same speed so they can use it how they want. The Xbox split bandwidth will limit them.

I guarantee in the next 7 years, a game developer will say that the memory configuration on the XSX/S is a bottleneck. I guarantee it.

A major Xbox Studios first party developer has already agreed with me. As does a dev from Remedy.
Both Xboxes have this flawed design.

"Billy Khan, a lead engine programmer at id Software, shared Gneiting’s concerns. “The memory situation is a big issue on the S,” said Khan in another deleted tweet. “The much lower amount of memory and the split memory banks with drastically slower speeds will be a major issue. Aggressively lowering the render resolutions will marginally help but will not completely counteract the deficiencies.”

Sasan Sepehr, a senior technical producer at Remedy Entertainment, also shared a brief concern. “As a consumer, I love this,” said Sepher on Twitter.
“As a Technical Producer, I see trouble.”"

 
Last edited:

Riky

$MSFT
Lmfao are you serious, you told him to stop spreading FUD. What do you think a person that spreads FUD is?

He's comparing it to the PS3 which had actually split ram for the GPU, that is not the same case here as developers see it as one pool, that wasn't the case on PS3.
 

jose4gg

Member
Guys did you remember when DF (Richard) insist what will happen to the PS5 if the
CPU and GPU work using the 100% for long period and Cerny replied that kind of workload
is not realistic as console clock limited will shutdown.

But many people still not believing this, well here is an example of
what happens if this kind of workload happens in game:



Oh look is considered a critical issue for a reason.


Mark Cerny counters. "I think you're asking what happens if there is a piece of code intentionally written so that every transistor (or the maximum number of transistors possible) in the CPU and GPU flip on every cycle.
That's a pretty abstract question, games aren't anywhere near that amount of power consumption. In fact, if such a piece of code were to run on existing consoles, the power consumption would be well out of the intended operating range and it's even possible that the console would go into thermal shutdown. PS5 would handle such an unrealistic piece of code more gracefully."
 
Last edited:

3liteDragon

Member
Aside this ridiculous console war.

People we have a real insider with RedGamingTech that infinite cache wow.
He also said before today's showcase in a video, that AMD's perf-per-watt target (+50%) for RDNA 2 was surpassed and it was actually a bit higher than 50%.



Well...
RX6800_11.jpg




Regarding Infinity Cache on the consoles, he mentioned on Twitter that his sources were hinting at something along the lines of the PS5 having a variant of the Infinity Cache implementation.





Do they actually wanna put more fire on the ongoing console war ? This shit is embarrassing, coming officially from Xbox. We already knew that Series X/S is closer to standard RDNA 2, while PS5 will use a custom RDNA 2 with unique added tech into it by Sony. We don't even know what Sony has added into it.
The blog post pretty much confirms that the Series X and S have the standard RDNA 2 implementation (don't know about Infinity Cache) and that the PS5 implements RDNA 2, BUT it has customizations made by Sony that have not been revealed yet (rumors of PS5 not using the standard RDNA 2 VRS implementation in favor of a customized solution that Sony has patented, RGT saying that the PS5 has better geometry handling than the standard RDNA 2 geometry engine which might influence the AMD architecture roadmap for RDNA 3). But you know exactly why MS worded it the way they did lol, not surprising coming from them anyway.









And RGT tweeted something interesting after today's presentation.

 
Last edited:

Riky

$MSFT
You accused me of FUD. I am not a liar. The thing you fail to understand is that devs have access to 1 pool of 13.5 GB of RAM, but can only feed the SoC at different speeds. Its split. This is a bottleneck. Literally every developer would want all the RAM to be at the same speed so they can use it how they want. The Xbox split bandwidth will limit them.

I guarantee in the next 7 years, a game developer will say that the memory configuration on the XSX/S is a bottleneck. I guarantee it.

A major Xbox Studios first party developer has already agreed with me. As does a dev from Remedy.
Both Xboxes have this flawed design.

"Billy Khan, a lead engine programmer at id Software, shared Gneiting’s concerns. “The memory situation is a big issue on the S,” said Khan in another deleted tweet. “The much lower amount of memory and the split memory banks with drastically slower speeds will be a major issue. Aggressively lowering the render resolutions will marginally help but will not completely counteract the deficiencies.”

Sasan Sepehr, a senior technical producer at Remedy Entertainment, also shared a brief concern. “As a consumer, I love this,” said Sepher on Twitter. “As a Technical Producer, I see trouble.”"


MS say different, they say developers wanted the fastest bandwidth possible for the GPU, I presume that means they asked them. The way to do this was to have this and be cost effective was the path they have taken. Time will tell if they were wrong but their reasoning seems solid to me.
 

kyliethicc

Member
He's comparing it to the PS3 which had actually split ram for the GPU, that is not the same case here as developers see it as one pool, that wasn't the case on PS3.
I said both have split bandwidths. Sure the PS3 had a split pool too, but thats my point. No other console has split bandwidth. Except maybe? the One S which sorta does due to its own weird bottleneck of using DDR3 and ESRAM. Its a stupid design choice.

I never said the Series X has a split pool of ram.
 
Last edited:

mejin

Member
I agree but I found annoying is the people believe anything the PR says without think for a moment like this:

If this is full RDNA 2 why you told us was customized ? or was only regarding the CU number because that is not customized

Where is the Infinite cache ?

Why your clock are so different ? after all are an essential part of the cache design

This means the XSX is a weak console? of course not, is great console but that doesn't mean that do not exist differences between the things they said
and the info is out there.

when you talk about green people you should've known it is all about faith, not facts.

Later MS will come back to explain what they meant.
 

kyliethicc

Member
MS say different, they say developers wanted the fastest bandwidth possible for the GPU, I presume that means they asked them. The way to do this was to have this and be cost effective was the path they have taken. Time will tell if they were wrong but their reasoning seems solid to me.
Billy Khan works for Xbox now lol. And he says its a "major issue". And we know Xbox GDK is giving some devs issues too.

Go ahead and burry your head in the sand. I'm sure it'll be fine. You know more than game developers, sure.
 
Last edited:

Riky

$MSFT
I said both have split bandwidths. Sure the PS3 had a split pool too, but thats my point. No other console has split bandwidth. Except maybe? the One S which sorta does due to its own weird bottleneck of using DDR3 and ESRAM. Its a stupid design choice.

I never said the Series X has a split pool of ram.

No other console? How about the Xbox 360, that had ESRAM too.
 

Nubulax

Member
Can you read? I said ustained clocks, none of the game clocks on any of the Radeon 6000 GPUs is higher than 2.04Ghz. Boost clocks are higher, that's true but those are not sustained clocks.
How does this square with the presentation from Cerny though. It seemed they only stopped at the.. 2.25? Ghz because the logic fell apart after that, not because they couldnt
 

Nowcry

Member
Why exactly we assume now, that PS5 has no infinity cache?

I assume the opposite, I think that PS5 has an infinity cache but smaller according to what it needs. However, the Coherency engine cannot control all the caches. It would not know how to execute the connections, I believe that the Coherency engine and the cache correctors are connected to infinity cache and they are cascaded down.
 

Nowcry

Member
How does this square with the presentation from Cerny though. It seemed they only stopped at the.. 2.25? Ghz because the logic fell apart after that, not because they couldnt

Maybe the coherence engines and the cache checkers, or the whole IO / tempest system can't get that high without messing up the logic.
 

kyliethicc

Member
No other console? How about the Xbox 360, that had ESRAM too.
360 had eDRAM which is different. Same with the One's eSRAM. Technically the eDRAM or eSRAM is its own pool of RAM with its own bandwidth. Its basically a tiny cache. Thats a different kind of memory setup. Different from the Series X/S and also not the same as the PS3, or PS4 or PS5 or One X.

The One (S) still has 1 pool of 8 GB unified bandwidth. It just has to be funneled through the eSRAM to the SoC. It was a work around (that failed) to allow for using slow DDR3 instead of fast GDDR5.

PS4 has 1 pool of 8 GB unified. Same with PS4 Pro. (Both had some extra DDR3 on the motherboard to be used for OS tasks, but that did not affect the SoC or the system RAM.) PS5 is the same, unified pool with unified speed. Same as PS4 and Xbox One X.

Series X/S have 1 pool of RAM, but the chips are not evenly interleaved across the interface. Thus limiting the bandwidth speeds of both consoles.
 
Last edited:

duhmetree

Member
Can you read? I said ustained clocks, none of the game clocks on any of the Radeon 6000 GPUs is higher than 2.04Ghz. Boost clocks are higher, that's true but those are not sustained clocks.
The rumored sustained clocks of Navi 22 ( 2.5ghz ) are higher but with less CUs

If PS5 is using RDNA2 CUs, Navi 22 would be the comparable, no?
 
Last edited:

kyliethicc

Member
The rumored sustained clocks of Navi 22 ( 2.5ghz ) are higher but with less CUs
Thats likely the peak boost, same as Navi 21 @ 2.2 GHz rumor.
6800 XT / 6900 XT stock have peak boost of 2.25 GHz but game clocks around 2.0 GHz.

Navi 22 game clock will likely be around 2.3 GHz.

But Navi 22 and PS5 both have 40 CUs so they are comparable. Navi 22 just has a larger power budget, 192 bit bus, and L3 cache (infinity cache.)
 
Last edited:
Yup, both consoles wont have full RDNA2.

RDNA2 CU - Ps5
Shared L1 and optimsied - Ps5
Ray tacing - both
VRS Both
Mesh shaders - XSX only (Ps5 will use their own modified RDNA1 GE thats customised)

Take from that what you will. Not surprising, nice that its confirmed.

Also Paul from RGT was correct on all his assumptions and leaks so far. Well done RGT.
Custom mesh shading is probably due in part to their SSD optimizations
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom