Baseless Next Generation Rumors with no Technical Merits [post E3 2019, pre GDC 2020] [XBSX, PS5]

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think disabling CUs is only for random defects? Speed yield would be more related to the process strength and variation on large areas if not the entire wafer. After all that's why binning entire chips produces such a nice bell curve.
But not all chips will have random defects. In fact, most won't have any defects at all.
In a chip with no defects, which CUs do you disable?


Well I am just speculating of course. But between the die shot and Cerny's words:
"First, we doubled the GPU size by essentially placing it next to a mirrored version of itself, sort of like the wings of a butterfly. That gives us an extremely clean way to support the existing 700 titles," Cerny explains, detailing how the Pro switches into its 'base' compatibility mode. "We just turn off half the GPU and run it at something quite close to the original GPU."


If I had to wager I'd say it's left vs right.
Isn't the front-end usually placed at the middle, between groups of CUs? Wasn't that the case with Liverpool?
If so, then the aforementioned mirror that doubled everything symmetrically happened from top to bottom, not from right to left (or you'd have two distinct front-end zones).

Regardless, I don't think we should expect Cerny's statements that were obviously trying to oversimplify a complicated concept as very strong clues on how the iGPU was implemented.
 
Isn't the front-end usually placed at the middle, between groups of CUs? Wasn't that the case with Liverpool?
If so, then the aforementioned mirror that doubled everything symmetrically happened from top to bottom, not from right to left (or you'd have two distinct front-end zones).

Well yeah this depends on which way you are viewing the chip I guess. I am saying left/right based on that die shot I posted via DF. If it were rotated then I would be saying top/bottom..
 
Maybe half of the pro was plain ole PS4 CUs and the other half Vega-based.

The PS4 Pro's advertised 2xFP16 throughput wouldn't be reachable if half the GPU didn't support rapid packed math.
If we consider some of the data from the github leak valid, there are Vega-era instructions that the BC mode for both PS4 and PS4 Pro explicitly states are not supported.
It seems odd to make half the CUs support features that cannot be used due to non-support by the other half.

But not all chips will have random defects. In fact, most won't have any defects at all.
In a chip with no defects, which CUs do you disable?
There can still be faults in patterning outside of the wafer-level random defects, or discards due to parametric yields.
It's possible they have the granularity in testing to know the power consumption of individual CUs or blocks of them, and functional tests would know if one or more CUs are failing tests at required clocks. Error-prone CUs would be targets for inactivation, and the most power-hungry CUs in each SE could be targets if deactivating them can get the chip under TDP.


Isn't the front-end usually placed at the middle, between groups of CUs? Wasn't that the case with Liverpool?
My interpretation of the die shots of the 2013 consoles is that the CU arrays are a single block.
https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/...ered-reveals-sram-as-the-reason-for-small-gpu

For the PS4, I think there's some logic on the side of the CU arrays nearest the CPUs and uncore that have some symmetry with the two halves of the CU section, which makes me think there's SE front end logic there.
For the Xbox One, I think there's similar placement, in part because the ESRAM on the other side seems like it dominates that region with its size, interface, and ROPs.

The PS4 has a cluster of SRAM along the mid-line of the CU block on the far side, which I think is part or all of the L2, and the Pro has something similar. While I'm speculating on this point, I think there may be some benefit when activating/deactivating CUs that the array deactivation happen such that whatever portion of the GPU that is active is symmetric relative to the data paths coming out of the L2.

I think generally, there's some choice on whether the CU arrays are split up based on the overall die size of the solution. I think the tendency is to keep things symmetric on both sides of the front ends if there's an even number of SEs, but it seems like there can be a choice on whether two individual SEs are neighbors or separated since the 4-SE GPUs appear to split SEs such that there are two adjacent SEs in one half of the strip and two adjacent in the other.
I'm not sure I've seen die shots of the smallest GCN GPUs to know how they are laid out.

Limited die area gives most APUs one SE and so only one CU block. The console APUs have 2 or 4 SEs, with the 2-SE consoles having one block. This might be encouraged by the layout challenge of fitting in the CPU and uncore blocks, as stretching the GPU further along that dimension may make it difficult to fill in the die or fit the rectangle efficiently onto the wafer.
At 4 SE (33+ CUs), I think there's less of an option since there needs to be 4 SEs and GCN seems to prefer their front ends be reasonably close--possibly due to their needing to swap geometry data.

For RDNA, the RX 5500 has one SE and reverts to having one block of CUs and the front end off to the side.
 
Maybe half of the pro was plain ole PS4 CUs and the other half Vega-based.
sasuke_vs_deidara_by_123123rocio-d50ps9f.jpg
 
http://boards.4channel.org/v/thread/495766007

37 KB JPG
I am currently working as game tester in a 3rd party studio we are now working on Devkit 2
PS5
1.12.6Tflops RDNA 1.5
2. AMD ZEN 2 @3.6Ghz
3. 18GB GDDR6+4GB ddr4
4. SSD@5.5GB/S 500GB
5. Dedicated cores for RT and 3D Audio
6. Bandwidth 576GB/S
DS5 on Devkit 3 has a alot of new "tweaks" (my friend reported me working at WWS). No information on Price, Design, reveal and BC
XSX~.
1. 11.8Tflops Rdna 1.5
2. AMD Zen 2@3.7Ghz
3. 16GB GDDR6+4GB ddr4
4. SSD@3.8 GB/s 1TB
5. Dedicated RT cores (<PS5)
6. Bandwidth 596GB/S
XSX is almost final can expect GPU Tflops to be around 12.1 or more and some changes in Ram.
 
Some fresh BS from Reddit for your entertainment pleasure since things are getting kinda dry.

It's all the salt.

I think someone took the list of reasons given to use chiplets from AMD threadripper/epyc presentations, and used it to write that ps5 rumor.

RedGamingTech had a new video a couple of days back that specifically talked about "Reticle Limits". Wouldn't surprise me if they got the term straight from that video.
 
IDK, what would he be testing games on, a devkit?
How many 3P are making exclusive next gen titles for launch?
otherwise I would expect them to be play testing on Scorpio and 4Pro kits.

Not to say I don’t expect them to eventually test on the new hardware, but they can let them in after the hardware is announced.
Right now; AAA studios should be locking down NDA zones until more information is released.
 
Last edited:

That is the wettest of wet dreams from some Sony fanboy.

Sudden revelation that the PS5 has a more flops and more RT, but that's not all folks : whilst the XsX is set in stone Sony will deliver even more with the next kit.

In fact its starting to smell more like the setup for a scam, are Sony feeling the pinch with all these changes,? should we sent the poster our Pre order deposit to secure devkit 3 specs can be reached.
 
I give up, don't care about the TFs any more as long as it's somewhat adequate. Just show me those next gen exclusives with enough visual leap to splinter my jaws. Been playing god of War again and man that game still looks absolutely stunning for what a 1.84 Polaris TF console could achieve, I guess even at 9 TF the sequel would still blow it away visually and that's enough for me at this point. I feel foolish that I've been drowning in this ridiculous TF obsession when I should be hyped for the impending next gen experience like people have suggested to me here.
Stupid Sony just reveal the damn thing already, your next gen logo can only quench our thirst for so long.
 
I give up, don't care about the TFs any more as long as it's somewhat adequate. Just show me those next gen exclusives with enough visual leap to splinter my jaws. Been playing god of War again and man that game still looks absolutely stunning for what a 1.84 Polaris TF console could achieve, I guess even at 9 TF the sequel would still blow it away visually and that's enough for me at this point. I feel foolish that I've been drowning in this ridiculous TF obsession when I should be hyped for the impending next gen experience like people have suggested to me here.
Stupid Sony just reveal the damn thing already, your next gen logo can only quench our thirst for so long.

Wow. Finally a breakthrough. I’m so happy for your recovery.
 
Isnt it a bit strange how Sony has yet to announce anything?
When is the Playstation event going to happen? Or has Sony not said anything about that either?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top