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

Status
Not open for further replies.
More likely AMD/Sony was targeting 2Ghz before AMD realized that they can't hit those clock speeds on production silicon on 7nm very easily. If they designed for 1.8Ghz and tried to OC to 2GHz, they are going to end up with a extremely hot and maybe unstable console.
 
More likely AMD/Sony was targeting 2Ghz before AMD realized that they can't hit those clock speeds on production silicon on 7nm very easily. If they designed for 1.8Ghz and tried to OC to 2GHz, they are going to end up with a extremely hot and maybe unstable console.

Makes sense, i highly doubt Sony even cares what MS is doing with their console regarding raw TF performance, in special if it is a two tier launch on MS's side. 8 to 10TF for the PS5, with 8 being the lowest and 10 max, is most likely what's in there. It fits the ballpark 9TF narrative that most sources and leaks point to.
 
That butterfly structure is familiar.

I am seriously puzzled by the tiny zen 2 cores in those images, surely they need a lot more supporting circuit around them. Otherwise why not put 16 if it's that easy?
The cache is reduced from 32MB to 8MB. Diminishing returns after 8C is my bet.
 
That butterfly structure is familiar.

I am seriously puzzled by the tiny zen 2 cores in those images, surely they need a lot more supporting circuit around them. Otherwise why not put 16 if it's that easy?
That’s for next , next gen :)
 
why not put 16 if it's that easy?
Some of the uncore will be shared with GPU. The memory phy and IO are all going to be shared with the GPU. The cache will likely be severely reduced like they did on Renior. The cores themselves are tiny but I doubt they want to invest in 16 cores when they could add more GPU if they had space/power budget. 8 zen2 cores seems like a good sweet spot to target for next gen, kind of like 8 Jaguars were the sweet spot this gen.
 
More likely AMD/Sony was targeting 2Ghz before AMD realized that they can't hit those clock speeds on production silicon on 7nm very easily. If they designed for 1.8Ghz and tried to OC to 2GHz, they are going to end up with a extremely hot and maybe unstable console.
What was expected prediction in frequency increase for iso power going from 16nm to 7nm?
 
What was expected prediction in frequency increase for iso power going from 16nm to 7nm?
I seem to remember something like this when AMD was announcing 7nm:
iedm-2017-gf-7nm-power-vs-frequency-2f6t.png


Currently TSMC quotes a 20% improve over 10nm and 15% improvement of 10nm over 16nm. If you do the math, they are claiming about 38% improvement on transistor performance.

AMD has also been trying to get higher clocks GPUs even before 7nm. It's very likely that they were targeting higher frequencies on 7nm originally.
 
This is not like I have said it before. Every rumor with a standard SSD controller are false. Because it is a custom controller by Sony.
We don't know if it's custom or standard, right now it's just speculation.

At no point did Cerny excluded a perfectly standard nvme hardware. It could be standard on an nvme socket, and there would be additional hardware in the SoC or the SB to help decryption and decompression at wire speed, except 40 times more power allocated to that asic section than what the ps4 had for LZ and JPG codecs.

I hope that's what they did, so it would be user replaceable as long as you put an nvme pcie 4.0.
 
No idea why some want it to be custom/exotic, only complicates things and most likely worse performance.
It is exotic hardware. We see a minor improvement on PC with nvme and the load times are still significant, while they literally demoed a 0.8s load time on a "slow" ps5 devkit.

I'm just saying the exotic hardware doesn't have to be inside the nvme controller. The SB and SoC are already custom chips, might as well use that development cost to integrate everything they want there instead of a third custom chip preventing upgradeability.
 
It is exotic hardware. We see a minor improvement on PC with nvme and the load times are still significant, while they literally demoed a 0.8s load time on a "slow" ps5 devkit.

Mostly a software fault. SC does show a larger difference, games need to be optimised for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top