Current Generation Hardware Speculation with a Technical Spin [post GDC 2020] [XBSX, PS5]

[PSman1700]

Perhaps XSS was a backup plan incase the gap in price between XSX and PS5 was too large. Thus we continue to see a delay on XSS announcement.

Thought this too, the only reason for XSS to exist is one thing, price. IF PS5 and XSX are the same price, i don't think they need the XSS as much. They probably wait and see what prices do.

the $399 ship has sailed

It's 399 dollar hardware in performance terms and pay 500/600 for that. Don't thinkso.

 

[BoardBonobo]

MS may land themselves in a pickle by launching two consoles; if the cheapest one isn't cheaper than the Xbox one then there is very little incentive to buy one. You're going to be getting exactly the same games either way. If the Series X is too expensive then what is the incentive to buy that. You have no games that are going to make any use of it that you can't still get on a last gen console. And so far there has been zero display of what the extra money will get you.

They need to choose one to deliver this holiday. And leave the other option for later. And given their current situation they'd be better off launching the cheaper model and leaving the series X until later in the year.

 

[BRiT]

MS may land themselves in a pickle by launching two consoles; if the cheapest one isn't cheaper than the Xbox one then there is very little incentive to buy one.

Agreed.

But ... That won't matter when Xbox One isn't available for purchase anywhere. They already cut back on production of other models of the Xbox One family. They only need to stop production of the One S and let that channel drain.

 

[AzBat]

. They only need to stop production of the One S and let that channel drain.

I believe they have already done that. Microsoft site says you now can't get a One S until Sept 14. I've been keeping any eye on the site & it's been consistently 30 days out every day for the past couple of weeks.

Tommy McClain

 

[Metal_Spirit]

Bad sign

That Dusk Golum... Isn´t he the one who, after those words got ridiculed by Matt on resetera, and by Matt Hagrett on Twitter, losing it´s post as moderator?

 

[iroboto]

That Dusk Golum... Isn´t he the one who, after those words got ridiculed by Matt on resetera, and by Matt Hagrett on Twitter, losing it´s post as moderator?

We investigate all sorts of claims, that's what we do here: we investigate. Unless the person is misterxmedia, like, okay, but we've investigated many more claims that were far more absurd.
We evaluate the arguments and data points at hand, not the anonymous person's credibility. Once you go the credibility route, suddenly we're not B3D. It's just about fighting about credibility, you only let those pass the ones that fit your agenda. And you deny credibility of those that don't.

 

[BoardBonobo]

We investigate all sorts of claims, that's what we do here: we investigate. Unless the person is misterxmedia, like, okay, but we've investigated many more claims that were far more absurd.
We evaluate the arguments and data points at hand, not the anonymous person's credibility. Once you go the credibility route, suddenly we're not B3D. It's just about fighting about credibility, you only let those pass the ones that fit your agenda. And you deny credibility of those that don't.

In that case misterxmedia claims are all perfectly valid. We should investigate those as well. Since credibility is not an issue

 

[GuestLV]

Personally i don't care much about "true 4k" or not,but for the amount i pay for a game, i would like to have same scene complexity and content on the screen on ps5 and xsx in multiplatform games .
Hope Sony don't repeat ps3 mistakes.

 

[goonergaz]

Yeah, both are taking a hit dependent on how much the other is taking.

This is no different to bidding on eBay, I don’t see an item and slap down my biggest bid straight away, I wait until the very last minute when all the other stupid people have done that, then the smarties come in and sniper the item for less than they were happy to pay.

 

[BRiT]

In that case misterxmedia claims are all perfectly valid. We should investigate those as well.

Did you find the hidden and invisible second GPU on current-gen yet?

 

[iroboto]

In that case misterxmedia claims are all perfectly valid. We should investigate those as well. Since credibility is not an issue

we dont' bother with his claims. It's far too stretching to follow along. he has chosen a position and finds data to support that position. Reality will constantly be altered to fit said position.

That's not what this claim is doing. If you look at the data that is right there in front of you, this claim is not impossible nor is it definite. It sits somewhere between improbable to probable.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

If only Sony provided that promised Teardown mentioned in the PS5 reveal we may have a better idea. No idea why they haven't done so yet.

Not saying any of this is true, just listing possibilities for discussion.

Starting with the obvious -- It's fecking huge.

• Costs more to package.
• More to ship.
• More to stock.
• Possibly More to fabricate?
• More to assemble?

Slightly more expensive controller
Additional items integrated for VR support
Yields could be worse.
SOC Cooling could cost more.
NVME Cooling could cost more.
More PSU required?
More complex to set the SOC performance data for dynamic lol-clocks to be consistent behavior?

- (obvious) 12-channel custom SSD controller and NAND with 5.5GB/s theoretical throughput is more expensive than Microsoft's apparently regular 8-channel controller with 2.5GB/s theoretical throughput.
- SoC could be similarly expensive due to actually being close in size to the SeriesX's SoC, because of an I/O block with a "generous amount" of eDRAM and using performance-optimized transistors on the GPU (whereas the SeriesX could be using density optimized ones).
- Presence of an expensive 60GHz WiFi AX modem for untethered PSVR2 (adding on the items integrated for VR support)
- Other, unannounced forms of expandability (Pro mode available through an add-on which could explain the size? tinfoil hattery mode on)
- Secondary GPU on the external power supply haha

Isn't the only source for assuming the SeriesX having a significantly larger SoC that aquariuszi-something, who also said Microsoft was making many SoCs and Sony was cancelling their production and was never going to catch-up? Which is probably made up considering Sony's official predictions for console sales in 2020.

We evaluate the arguments and data points at hand, not the anonymous person's credibility. Once you go the credibility route, suddenly we're not B3D. It's just about fighting about credibility, you only let those pass the ones that fit your agenda. And you deny credibility of those that don't.

So we're supposed to pretend this 360 page thread never existed, with a mod contributing to the dogpiling of attacks on credibility?
Ok then, fine by me.

 

[iroboto]

So we're supposed to pretend this 360 page thread never existed, with a mod contributing to the dogpiling of attacks on credibility?
Ok then, fine by me.

And we didn't explore the claims? Did we not have a moment where we ignored github, which for the most part turned out entirely correct, and explored all other claims?

we didn't do it perfectly, I agree with that, it could have been done better: we should still be better for the future looking back at how we behaved.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

And we didn't explore the claims? Did we not have a moment where we ignored github, which for the most part turned out entirely correct, and explored all other claims?

Nope, attacks on source's credibility and shifting the focus of the conversation on how bad the source was, would always happen within 2 or 3 posts after posting the rumor. Followed by all the reasons the github gospel (which ended up being wrong) had to be right.
I mean the thread is right there, you can just open a random page and see for yourself.

But really, I'm glad if the policy is now the one you described in your previous post. I'm all for it.
As long as it applies for negative or positive rumors to both sides.

I don't think that's the policy being enforced, though. I'm pretty sure I recently had a post removed by a mod because I quoted a source that apparently isn't good enough for B3D.
I didn't even know that source lol, and AFAIK there's no public list of approved/unapproved sources. So with rumors you just post stuff that may or may not be removed according to a list you don't know about.

 

[iroboto]

Nope, attacks on source's credibility and shifting the focus of the conversation on how bad the source was, would always happen within 2 or 3 posts after posting the rumor. Followed by all the reasons the github gospel (which ended up being wrong) had to be right.
I mean the thread is right there, you can just open a random page and see for yourself.

But really, I'm glad if the policy is now the one you described in your previous post. I'm all for it.
As long as it applies for negative or positive rumors to both sides.

I don't think that's the policy being enforced, though. I'm pretty sure I recently had a post removed by a mod because I quoted a source that apparently isn't good enough for B3D.
I didn't even know that source lol, and AFAIK there's no public list of approved/unapproved sources. So with rumors you just post stuff that may or may not be removed according to a list you don't know about.

It ended up being correct except for a clockspeed which no one believed to begin with. 2.0Ghz was already _too high_. Thus people were dismissing the Github leak based on that. It ended up being 2.23 Ghz. Certainly much more correct than other claims. With respect to that thread, his bounds were 1.8 to 2.2Ghz. He lost by 30Mhz. Seriously? He's 1.3% wrong on the bounds.

CUs were correct
Memory bandwidth
Memory capacity

I think it should be a policy, someone will need to decide what is out of bounds. Like if the rumour is going completely against known data, then it doesn't make a lot of sense, if we should democratize it perhaps that makes sense.
Outlier commentary is harder to follow and discuss for us because if we cannot get to a specific conclusion without having to jump and agree to too many unknown data points, it no longer makes sense.

Like you posted earlier, on top of other things that MS has access to, to make XSX cheaper. It leaves open the possibility that both consoles could be the same price. It's not definitive that PS5 has to be cheaper. And we can use a 5700XT as a proxy for PS5 GPU performance, and even with some tolerances understand that it would probably struggle with some titles at 4K60 using it as a benchmark given how close the two are in spec. These are reasonable avenues to provide some validity to the claims. Does it matter that it can't do 4K? Unlikely, I doubt will care to a certain degree. Get it close enough in range and people won't mind.

But if we can't do that, then I think that, yea it's probably best we don't pursue it.

 

[Xbat]

The whole struggling to run at native 4k doesn't tell us anything without some details.

What we do know is that the memory bandwidth of the PS5 is on the low side and that could be a reason for struggling to hit native 4k.

 

[iroboto]

The whole struggling to run at native 4k doesn't tell us anything without some details.

What we do know is that the memory bandwidth of the PS5 is on the low side and that could be a reason for struggling to hit native 4k.

indeed.
By all means the 5700XT is an excellent card. It performs admirably at about 2070/S levels. At a much cheaper cost.
Memory bandwidth is what keeps it from holding 4k60 consistently where the 2080+ series will hold with their increased bandwidth and compute.

it's largest downside to the 5700xT is heat. Ideally RDNA 2 resolves this with better performance per watt, so they can use the majority of it to bring the heat down within reasonable levels and the remaining amount to clockspeed (which I can see is what PS5 chose to do)

 

[Deleted member 13524]

It ended up being correct except for a clockspeed

I.e. it ended up being wrong on raw performance numbers.

Certainly much more correct than other claims.

Less correct than claims that the GPU was around 10.5 TFLOPs (with no reference to CU count), which the github inquisitors promptly ridiculed at the time.

I think it should be a policy, someone will need to decide what is out of bounds. Like if the rumour is going completely against known data, then it doesn't make a lot of sense, if we should democratize it perhaps that makes sense.

This means that if a source would have appeared in July 2012 claiming the Xbox One was going to get a CPU and GPU clock boost over what had already been announced, we couldn't discuss it. It would be completely against known data at the time.
There are rumors going on that Sony is looking at 16Gbps or 18Gbps GDDR6 to put in the PS5, as well as enabling the 4 redundancy CUs for PS5 mode (making them erm.. not redundant anymore). According to your terms, that discussion isn't allowed because it goes against known current data.

And we can use a 5700XT as a proxy for PS5 GPU performance

I'm not sure this is a great idea, considering we don't know what the IPC gains are for the RDNA1->RDNA2 transition, not to mention the substantial difference in core clocks.

Does it matter that it can't do 4K? Unlikely, I doubt will care to a certain degree. Get it close enough in range and people won't mind.

New The whole struggling to run at native 4k doesn't tell us anything without some details.

I'd be more concerned if the SeriesX games were forced to run at real 4K than if the PS5 were to only ever use fake 4K.
TAA reconstruction techniques make real 4K an absurd waste of compute resources.

 

[Xbat]

I'd be more concerned if the SeriesX games were forced to run at real 4K than if the PS5 were to only ever use fake 4K.
TAA reconstruction techniques make real 4K an absurd waste of compute resources.

I've always said running at native 4k is a massive waste of resources.

So yes, I doubt very much that AAA games will run at native 4k after the launch period.

 

[Globalisateur]

Imagine knowing so little of the current state of videogame rendering that you think gatekeeping "true 4K" is a valid point for FUDding the PS5.

Ironically all big AAA PS5 games Sony showed were all true 4K while it isn't the case for MS. Halo is indeed not true 4K IMO. They are just using another kind of reconstruction.