General Next Generation Rumors and Discussions [Post GDC 2020]

although this is not a prediction thread i would like to make one. before ps5 launches sony will downclock their gpu. i bet my acount on it.
 
How do you design a game around requiring these theoretical streaming assets that require the Sony SSD tech and then release it on PC?
Simple: require significantly more RAM or a fast enough SSD or both. Also you can try chopping your port of the game a little so it can fit better into different hardware.
 
gt1kS3y.png
 
CPU: equal
GPU: xbox by 20-30% moderately calculated.
RT: xbox, 44 % more CUs means 44% more "RT cores" even with faster clocks xbox will have an advantage here.
RAM: equal
SSD: Sony

If the XSX cpu can run at 3.8Ghz on all 8 of it's cores, it has the faster CPU. It also has a sustained 3.66ghz against a 3.5ghz boost.
RAM, not sure but if the XSX has higher bandwith, that could be an advantage.

I think someone else here already pointed it out, but he said that a couple of percent reduction in clockspeed results in a 10% reduction in power draw.

It remains to be seen what the bottom clocks will be for both the GPU and CPU. Cerney didn't provide us with any hard data, he could have been saying it in context.That leaves it open for discussions. It's not logical to upclock it just by 2% to begin with, just to go with dynamic speeds for that.

Rest assured 2TF and more BW will come in handy, like it did with Pro v XBX.

2/3TF ballpark, BW, and finally the CPU, 3.8Ghz on 8 cores might come in handy. Also there's a reason MS was boastin' (lol) about consistent/no variable clocks.
 
I really see this PS5 as the Wii U + XB1 + PS3 bis arrogant moment of Sony.

Because of the stupid BC requirements Cerny had to design the PS5 around 36 CUs using a very power innefficient fast and narrow design:
- 36CUs requirement for BC is like the TV TV TV of XB1 leading to 8GB of DDR3 and reduced number of CUs or the Wii BC hardware requirements leading to a super weak Wii U APU
- Because of the very power innefficient design (but still underpowered system because 10tf GPU and low ram bandwidth), it'll still be expensive APU + cooling + PSU leading to high price
- Custom 3D audio (that most players don't care about and most developers won't use) = Shape audio on XB1. But that will definitely increase the BOM.
- SSD tech. Again it will only be used on first party games and it won't make the multiplat games look better. This the Cell moment of PS5: exotic tech great for first party (once they will have mastered it), but totally useless on multiplat games. That will increase the BOM the most.

Result: expensive to make PS5, maybe even more expensive than Xbox Series X, but 20% weaker system (for most players).
Bonus: Their BC program is currently treated as a joke (2 different statements with no clarification whatsoever), 100 games available (not even all of them, "almost 100"), and they probably are going to completely drop the program because Jim Ryan, the anti-BC guy, is the boss. Just how they dropped their PS2 classic program on PS4.
 
The most likely explanation is they'll ignore the PC until such time as they intend to port, either by which time PC will have caught up, or where the PC version can be cut down on storage access requirements.
A very good scenario in favor of Sony is a combination of faith on PS5's success and developers' delight to finally work on an environment where previous game design headaches are no longer in existence. This best (or not) case scenario may encourage many developers to design on the PS5 as a lead platform and who knows make many of their titles exclusives or timed exclusives until the right hardware is available. Not saying it will happen but sometimes I wonder if a time when the PS1 and PS2 were getting a ton of third party exclusives may repeat itself under the right conditions. This would be interesting as for the first time since the 128 bit gen, consoles may manage to gain back their status as a partly more differentiated platform. Unlike the PS4 and One where they were essentially PC gaming experiences minus some first party exclusives
 
It does and was quoted as using the equivalent 8 Zen2 cores where as PS5 was quoted as using the equivalent of 9 Zen2 cores in practice. People thinking the PS5's SSD is going to make up for lack of raw power remind me of myself thinking Esram, and move engines were going to do the same last gen. Looking back now it's hard to think that I believed that but I did.

Remember the SHAPE Audio block? It's like reversed now with the PS5 audio CU lol.

Here's an easy way to know the SSD speed is only going to go so far. Take it to extremes to illustrate, imagine a PC with 128GB Ram or other extreme figure, fastest SSD known to man, and ask it to run Gears 5...on a total shit GPU like an integrated graphics. It would look/run terrible.

It doesn't matter how much RAM or how fast the SSD IO, the GPU actually has to render the game. GPU is a bottleneck and differences there matter.
 
A very good scenario in favor of Sony is a combination of faith on PS5's success and developers' delight to finally work on an environment where previous game design headaches are no longer in existence. This best (or not) case scenario may encourage many developers to design on the PS5 as a lead platform...
Honestly, the biggest deciding factor for lead platform will probably be build time unless things have changed. It was the case one of these generations that Sony's build times were vastly faster than on Xbox. When iterating a game, that's more important than everything else put together. Having had experience of that myself now, I appreciate how important that is. A build for PC (to deploy on Steam) takes maybe a minute, whereas for Xbox One it was ten. As such, all my development is based on creating a testing a PC version. I can then test it on Android quite quickly. Once that's done, I can try it on XBox and see how it fairs. Same with iOS; that takes forever and you don't want to be bogged down waiting for a frickin' 10 minute build to happen in between each one or two lines of code changes!
 
I really see this PS5 as the Wii U + XB1 + PS3 bis arrogant moment of Sony.

Because of the stupid BC requirements Cerny had to design the PS5 around 36 CUs using a very power innefficient fast and narrow design:
- 36CUs requirement for BC is like the TV TV TV of XB1 leading to 8GB of DDR3 and reduced number of CUs or the Wii BC hardware requirements leading to a super weak Wii U APU
- Because of the very power innefficient design (but still underpowered system because 10tf GPU and low ram bandwidth), it'll still be expensive APU + cooling + PSU leading to high price
- Custom 3D audio (that most players don't care about and most developers won't use) = Shape audio on XB1. But that will definitely increase the BOM.
- SSD tech. Again it will only be used on first party games and it won't make the multiplat games look better. This the Cell moment of PS5: exotic tech great for first party (once they will have mastered it), but totally useless on multiplat games. That will increase the BOM the most.

Result: expensive to make PS5, maybe even more expensive than Xbox Series X, but 20% weaker system (for most players).
Bonus: Their BC program is currently treated as a joke (2 different statements with no clarification whatsoever), 100 games available (not even all of them, "almost 100"), and they probably are going to completely drop the program because Jim Ryan, the anti-BC guy, is the boss. Just how they dropped their PS2 classic program on PS4.

I wouldn't go that far.

I'll wait until I see the games, but I do suspect that the SSD has been over-engineered and may drive up the costs unintentionally high. I don't think the audio is a big deal one way or another, nor do I think it's probably a big cost adder either. It seems like something they wanted to talk about because they couldn't really talk about the GPU/CPU advantages.

I'm a little bummed by the PS5, but not enough to not buy it.
 
I really see this PS5 as the Wii U + XB1 + PS3 bis arrogant moment of Sony.

Because of the stupid BC requirements Cerny had to design the PS5 around 36 CUs using a very power innefficient fast and narrow design:
- 36CUs requirement for BC is like the TV TV TV of XB1 leading to 8GB of DDR3 and reduced number of CUs or the Wii BC hardware requirements leading to a super weak Wii U APU
- Because of the very power innefficient design (but still underpowered system because 10tf GPU and low ram bandwidth), it'll still be expensive APU + cooling + PSU leading to high price
- Custom 3D audio (that most players don't care about and most developers won't use) = Shape audio on XB1. But that will definitely increase the BOM.
- SSD tech. Again it will only be used on first party games and it won't make the multiplat games look better. This the Cell moment of PS5: exotic tech great for first party (once they will have mastered it), but totally useless on multiplat games. That will increase the BOM the most.

Result: expensive to make PS5, maybe even more expensive than Xbox Series X, but 20% weaker system (for most players).
Bonus: Their BC program is currently treated as a joke (2 different statements with no clarification whatsoever), 100 games available (not even all of them, "almost 100"), and they probably are going to completely drop the program because Jim Ryan, the anti-BC guy, is the boss. Just how they dropped their PS2 classic program on PS4.

Buy the PS5 for the games, not for the hardware, and be happy. I'm going XSX, and keep my pc and see how many sony exclusives land there in the long run.
 
About design philosophy of PS5:

Sony spends a lot of money on SSD, because developers especially SONY's first-party studios need it.

It reminds me Ninendo. They also design the console for their first-party, because Nintendo's first party games are very strong and these games are the main differentiator.

IMO SONY expects the worldwide studio can produce more 10-million system sellers. If Sony's first party can reach 60% or even 70% of sales of Nintendo games then SONY first party games will also become the differentiator between PS5 and PC/xbox. So it it worthy to spend so much BOM on the SSD for their first party, even multi-platform games may just use SSD to achieve zero loading time.
 
I think Sony could do 10 million sellers anyway, if the read speed is 40GB/s or just 4GB/s, a tad faster here and there isn't going to stop fans from buying the next hdz.
 
Because of the stupid BC requirements Cerny had to design the PS5 around 36 CUs using a very power innefficient fast and narrow design:
(...)
- Because of the very power innefficient design (but still underpowered system because 10tf GPU and low ram bandwidth), it'll still be expensive APU + cooling + PSU leading to high price
Do you have power measurements on both consoles to back up this claim?

- 36CUs requirement for BC is like the TV TV TV of XB1 leading to 8GB of DDR3 and reduced number of CUs or the Wii BC hardware requirements leading to a super weak Wii U APU
The XB1 using DDR3 had nothing to do with TV TV SPORTS TV.
Microsoft went the safer route for achieving 8GB system RAM. GDDR5 wasn't a safe route to achieve that, during the console's conception.

- Custom 3D audio (that most players don't care about and most developers won't use) = Shape audio on XB1. But that will definitely increase the BOM.
SHAPE is 15GFLOPs worth of Tensilica DSPs that were used mostly for voice processing for Kinect commands and some reverb effects IIRC. The Tempest audio engine is a RDNA2 CU with stripped down caches probably working at the GPU's 2.23GHz, so it's 285 GFLOPs (almost 20x more powerful), and its purpose is to process object-based audio sources, reverb effects and head related transfer functions.
It'll work with everything from headphones to TV speakers to provide surround effects, on top of the 3D positional audio.
Its range of effect is a lot larger than shape's.


- SSD tech. Again it will only be used on first party games and it won't make the multiplat games look better. This the Cell moment of PS5: exotic tech great for first party (once they will have mastered it), but totally useless on multiplat games. That will increase the BOM the most.
Every dev will have access to a 5.5GB/s raw transfer rate from the SSD. Sony isn't capping the raw transfer rate for 3rd parties (why would they?).
Then if the devs adopt the industry-standard ZLIB compression they get access to an effective 8GB/s due to the hardware decompression. And if they adopt the recent Kraken from RAD Game Tools that number goes up to 9GB/s (or probably 8.8GB/s).

Who suggested this will only be used on first party games?
Sounds counter-intuitive. And untrue.
Beware of the concern trolling going around twitter on stuff like this.
 
Back
Top