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

[JoeJ]

So why you think Sony and MS would say hardware RT, the average consumer doesn't know or even care anyway (the biggest market share is them).

Good point. Maybe because there would be no reason to mention 'software' RT at all, and there was RTX out already. Average consumers did not care about RTX either, but journalists would.

I guess the 'doubt' comes from RT being a new HW feature, and many (including myself) thought it would be no time to get this into consoles.
Also, MS shown net gen stuff does not show evidence of RT, and Sony has not sowing anything at all, feeding the doubts.
But for MS the explanation seems focus on cross gen. So we have to wait on Sonys presentation to get rid of doubts.

 

[JoeJ]

You can't claim hardware accelerated is "something running on the CPU because the CPU is hardware." That's nonsensical

I agree. But one could use those terms, bend their believed meaning a bit and say so, for marketing reasons. It would not be worse than saying one 1 Navi TF > 1 GCN TF without context. And the short one liner statements we have lack enough context to say there's zero ambiguity left.
Personally i'm convinced both will have FF RT acceleration. But as long as they do not say 'fixed function', people doing such speculations still makes sense, especially in baseless thread.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I agree. But one could use those terms, bend their believed meaning a bit and say so, for marketing reasons.

I can't argue for the validity of the PR statement, but if one won't believe it for XBSX, they shouldn't for PS5 either. If Sony has HWRT because they said they did, and that's either their own solution or RDNA2, then XBSX also has HWRT because they said they did, which means RDNA2 (or something proprietary, against all rumours and speculation). I don't really care which interpretation people use as long as they are consistent and either believe or disbelieve both parties with equal prejudice.

 

[mrcorbo]

I'm choosing to believe that neither MS or Sony would spotlight RT as one of their features unless it could be delivered in a performant way and that for RT do be delivered in a performant way, fixed-function hardware is all but guaranteed.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Which was pretty much bullshit, there is no 4K blue ray player on PS4Pro and Deep Down never saw the light of day.

We can choose parts that became true and parts that didn't. Games get canceled pretty often, or enter development hell and Deep Down was one of them.
Regardless, before release a lot of things seemed to be still pretty much up in the air.

He says they were trying to keep the console at $399, which is what happened. After that meeting, ideas might have been shelved to keep that price point, such as adopting the UHD drive.
The GPU is on point, by claiming 2x PS4 + higher clocks, as well as claiming there would be no boost mode at launch:

It was also made very clear that current games would not be getting any type of performance upgrades by being played on the system and any benefits to older games would come via patch per game and per developer. When asked if this was going to happen the response was "Its a possibility but doubtful with the exception of a handful of games."

Not only is it relatively wrong, especially part about CPU upgrade 6 months before console is coming out

Who wrote "only the predicted GPU TFLOPs matter" just a couple of pages ago?

Oh right, here it is:

Well, our own Proelite has posted relatively correct specs back in June 2012.
(...)
I mean, wide of the mark, perhaps, but all we care about is what he was right about - TF

I guess that logic only goes one way.

These last two posts really highlight how subjective language is and how different people interpret the same info different ways!

Everyone has a stake on fake internet points. Everyone wants to be right.
There's also some people who really, really want the PS5 to be substantially slower than SeriesX, despite the overwhelming amount of known insiders stating they're very close in performance.

Perhaps because if their platform of choice has the prettier graphics / framerates, its chances of selling more units are higher and then they get to secure more interesting exclusivity deals. (Though it seems we're leaving the era of exclusivity deals and entering the era of not-on-my-direct-competitor deals, since the PC is bound to get them all.)
Not to mention faster console = bigger ePeen, of course.

 

[iroboto]

it’s a fairly weak argument.
We have more proof that is it dedicated silicon than we don’t.
The proof that it is compute based is nothing more than interpretation of PR; which on several occasions I have already proved it was their incorrect interpretation of it.
We have evidence from the GitHub leaks that there is ray box and ray triangle intersection that are showing up on a hardware test.

all of this is non-sensical and the possibility that MS is somehow faking hardware RT acceleration to 95% of the population who don’t understand what ray tracing even is; is appalling. You may as well not mention it. And Cerny wouldn’t have r had to go back and say: “ I think the term you are looking for is Hardware Accelerated” when questioned on what hardware based meant.

both have dedicated silicon for ray tracing. This is the highest probability by far. Followed by MS has dedicated silicon (as per github leaks). Then followed by only Sony has dedicated silicon (???) and then none have dedicated silicon.

of the discussion we are having I am shocked that people would insinuate the lowest probability options as being good discussion with the level of evidence there is but also at a lack of new evidence. People just seem to be making new evidence points from PR interpretation.

 

[RDGoodla]

But for MS the explanation seems focus on cross gen. So we have to wait on Sonys presentation to get rid of doubts.

Sony Ariel is a 2017 SOC so it is probably based on 5700XT which has no HW ray tracing.

We also don’t see any evidence of HW ray tracing in OBR A0/B0 so imo there is no HW RT neither.

Sony’s PS5 APU with HW RT is likely to be OBR C0 or D0/E0.

As for xbox there is some RT info in github data, and we already know the RT tech is based on AMD. On the other hand AMD doesn’t announce PS5 using HW RT. It’s a sign that SONY uses other solution such as POWER VR.

 

[AbsoluteBeginner]

Who wrote "only the predicted GPU TFLOPs matter" just a couple of pages ago?

Oh right, here it is:



I guess that logic only goes one way.

I mean, I guess there is a difference between saying "PS4 GPU is expected to have 1152 cores and 1.84TF" 18 months before release, thus providing 1:1 specs of GPU, and saying "GPU should be 2x stronger then PS4" (its 2.3x but anyway..) after this was not only rumored days before by big sites such as DF and Arstechnica, but you are also claiming to have insider knowledge.

I would have nothing against of him posting exact specs, codenames or anything for that matter, but all he provides is :

Lockart > PS4Pro < XSX <PS5

5 > 2
How's the weather?
2.1 = 5

Whats that supposed to mean? Some kind of riddle for 12 year olds on GAF?

Sony Ariel is a 2017 SOC so it is probably based on 5700XT which has no HW ray tracing.

We also don’t see any evidence of HW ray tracing in OBR A0/B0 so imo there is no HW RT neither.

Sony’s PS5 APU with HW RT is likely to be OBR C0 or D0/E0.

As for xbox there is some RT info in github data, and we already know the RT tech is based on AMD. On the other hand AMD doesn’t announce PS5 using HW RT. It’s a sign that SONY uses other solution such as POWER VR.

Oberon native regression test has specific blocks tested in native, which match up to Ariel native tests. Oberon refs are pulled from /Ariel_iGPU/ folder. So, all it tells us blocks which contain RT/VRS have not been tested, nothing more nothing less.

Also, nothing there is older then June 2018 (I think Navi 10 is oldest), thus I doubt Ariel is 2017 design. Perhaps it was used as early "bench" as it seems to have originated from Navi 10, and Oberon is iGPU with RT, I dunno, but Oberon is clearly PS5 chip (as per aquariusZi, as per Flute benchmark from July). We have no other codename from AMD of another "hidden" SOC chip...

 

[RDGoodla]

Everyone has a stake on fake internet points. Everyone wants to be right.
There's also some people who really, really want the PS5 to be substantially slower than SeriesX, despite the overwhelming amount of known insiders stating they're very close in performance.

Perhaps because if their platform of choice has the prettier graphics / framerates, its chances of selling more units are higher and then they get to secure more interesting exclusivity deals.

I remember one of them have said he works in Microsoft. This reason can explain everything.

 

[mrcorbo]

Can we try applying Occam's Razor to everything and stop looking for convoluted explanations to create a desired narrative?

The specs are going to be what they are going to be. Nothing people are saying now will matter in the end. I'm baffled by what people are seeing as the value in choosing to respond to (what could be perceived as) bad faith arguments with (what could be perceived as) opposite bad faith arguments to counter them in some game of one-upmanship of who can construct the most unflattering scenario for the "other side".

 

[JoeJ]

As for xbox there is some RT info in github data, and we already know the RT tech is based on AMD. On the other hand AMD doesn’t announce PS5 using HW RT. It’s a sign that SONY uses other solution such as POWER VR.

Yeah, i had forgotten it's mentioned in github leak, so there is not much doubt left other than conspiracy theories. Also agree about Sonys RT probably different.

 

[AlNom]

Can we try applying Occam's Razor to everything and stop looking for convoluted explanations to create a desired narrative?

The specs are going to be what they are going to be. Nothing people are saying now will matter in the end. I'm baffled by what people are seeing as the value in choosing to respond to (what could be perceived as) bad faith arguments with (what could be perceived as) opposite bad faith arguments to counter them in some game of one-upmanship of who can construct the most unflattering scenario for the "other side".

Tempered reconstruction pls.

 

[iroboto]

I'm baffled by what people are seeing as the value in choosing to respond to (what could be perceived as) bad faith arguments with (what could be perceived as) opposite bad faith arguments to counter them in some game of one-upmanship of who can construct the most unflattering scenario for the "other side".

I had once believed this was the mature thing to do (to not respond). And I guess because nothing changes the outcome, this is perhaps the thing to do. But if the world did nothing against the anti-vax movement, and nothing against flat earthers, eventually they would gain more and more followers and have a strong movement. Despite the fact that believing those things won't change the outcome.

The realities of the statement about good people doing nothing is all it takes for evil to win is very much true. People will just keep recite garbage repeatedly until everyone else jumps on the bandwagon. Then you have the misterxmedia movement.
I don't mind exploring these possibilities if new information is introduced (and proves otherwise from what we have), that's fine. But I'm not seeing any

 

[mrcorbo]

I had once believed this was the mature thing to do (to not respond). And I guess because nothing changes the outcome, this is perhaps the thing to do. But if the world did nothing against the anti-vax movement, and nothing against flat earthers, eventually they would gain more and more followers and have a strong movement. Despite the fact that believing those things won't change the outcome.

The realities of the statement about good people doing nothing is all it takes for evil to win is very much true. People will just keep recite garbage repeatedly until everyone else jumps on the bandwagon. Then you have the misterxmedia movement.
I don't mind exploring these possibilites if new information is introduced, that's fine. But I'm not seeing any

I'm not saying don't challenge bad faith arguments. I'm saying don't try to balance the scales by making more bad faith arguments with opposite polarity.

 

[anexanhume]

Can we try applying Occam's Razor to everything and stop looking for convoluted explanations to create a desired narrative?

The specs are going to be what they are going to be. Nothing people are saying now will matter in the end. I'm baffled by what people are seeing as the value in choosing to respond to (what could be perceived as) bad faith arguments with (what could be perceived as) opposite bad faith arguments to counter them in some game of one-upmanship of who can construct the most unflattering scenario for the "other side".

I understand the point that you’re getting at, but you’ve constructed it in such a way that it’s reductive and basically says “why bother speculating?” Well, you’re in the wrong thread then friend

 

[mrcorbo]

I understand the point that you’re getting at, but you’ve constructed it in such a way that it’s reductive and basically says “why bother speculating?” Well, you’re in the wrong thread then friend

See the follow up. I'm fine with speculating. I'm not fine with speculation that is deliberate trolling as opposed to speculation that is based on a genuine attempt to construct a reasonable result.

 

[MrFox]

I understand the point that you’re getting at, but you’ve constructed it in such a way that it’s reductive and basically says “why bother speculating?” Well, you’re in the wrong thread then friend

Speculation is the most fun part of a console launch, the problem is that the technically well informed speculation is drowned by rumor mongering and selective bias about rumors. The foundation for speculation should be technical knowledge, not the latest crap from the internet.

(I'm aware of the irony of my post versus the thread title)

 

[upnorthsox]

I had once believed this was the mature thing to do (to not respond). And I guess because nothing changes the outcome, this is perhaps the thing to do. But if the world did nothing against the anti-vax movement, and nothing against flat earthers, eventually they would gain more and more followers and have a strong movement. Despite the fact that believing those things won't change the outcome.

The realities of the statement about good people doing nothing is all it takes for evil to win is very much true. People will just keep recite garbage repeatedly until everyone else jumps on the bandwagon. Then you have the misterxmedia movement.
I don't mind exploring these possibilities if new information is introduced (and proves otherwise from what we have), that's fine. But I'm not seeing any

You mean, like the "Github Leak" which has reached a level of obsession that borders on jihad? Where 9.2TFLPs or 36CU or 2.0Ghz has been repeated on practically every one of the last 100 pages of this thread as if they were fact? I too don't mind exploring these possibilities but hopefully this is all over soon.

 

[KirkSi]

You mean, like the "Github Leak" which has reached a level of obsession that borders on jihad? Where 9.2TFLPs or 36CU or 2.0Ghz has been repeated on practically every one of the last 100 pages of this thread as if they were fact? I too don't mind exploring these possibilities but hopefully this is all over soon.

In terms of actual data from a confirmed source though the 'Github Leak' is all we've got, unless you know of anything else? Everything else is 'an unnamed source told me.....'. There's a lot missing on the Github leak,we know the data but don't know exactly what they were testing and at what stage the chips were tested at, but it is cold hard data rather than hearsay.

 

[AbsoluteBeginner]

In terms of actual data from a confirmed source though the 'Github Leak' is all we've got, unless you know of anything else? Everything else is 'an unnamed source told me.....'. There's a lot missing on the Github leak,we know the data but don't know exactly what they were testing and at what stage the chips were tested at, but it is cold hard data rather than hearsay.

We also have :

• Flute benchmark from July
  • Showing custom SOC (BL5 socket - so semi custom)
  • 13F9 iGPU (Oberon A0)
  • 3.2GHz 8 core Zen2 CPU with 1/4th of L3
  • 16GB of RAM on 256bit bus
• Gonzalo benchmark from April
  • 20K+ Firestrike score
  • 3.2GHz 8 core Zen2 CPU
  • 13F8 iGPU (Ariel/Oberon?)