AbsoluteBeginner
Regular
It says native clock though, and comment by engineer says "full chip test" 18WGP 2.0GHZ.
Baseless Next Generation Rumors with no Technical Merits [post E3 2019, pre GDC 2020] [XBSX, PS5]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
Betanumerical
Veteran
2Ghz boost mode for what.
BC. So the BC modes are 800,911 and 2ghz depending on the game. I don't think it holds water, but its an idea.
The native comprehensive tests for Oberon shows 18WGP, 36CUS. It is what it is.
9.2 TF with much lower bandwidth next to 12 TF with much higher bandwidth is disgustingly low, can't believe Sony would prioritize BC and compromise the CU count, the same amount of CUs as PS4 Pro on their nextgen system..shake my head in full disappointment. The more I read each day the more I think Klee got it all wrong or just not up to date. I wonder how fast a 12 TF RDNA XsX compares to a 2080, maybe on equal footing if not beating it most of time in a console space.
AbsoluteBeginner
Regular
Its not much lower BW. It also has advantage in pixel fillrate and geometry. I think difference will be very small, each having their own advantage and XSX having a bit advantage (but not as suggested TF say).
Why does no-one factor in price? Surely Sony have aimed for a notably lower price than XBsX if it pans out as described? If the machines are the same price, yeah, complain bitterly, but until we know what they costs, people shouldn't be trying to make apple-to-apple comparisons. What if, for example, MS offers a 4 TF Lockhart for $300, and a 12 TF Anaconda for $600, and Sony offers a 9 TF PS5 for $400?
These threads should be about trying to determine what the boxes are. Judgement calls on business choices cannot be made until the full business plans are laid out.
Yes i think the same Ps5 is more a Ps4 Pro plus than a new Generation, a Product with a shorter Lifespan than the older Consoles before. A low investment Product for Sony to create maximum Profit with it.
BC is important when you got a 100+ million userbase on ps4's. 5700xt level (abit less then) is still double one x performance. I wonder more about VRS, cause that could up performannce alot. Also, price is a thing, in special with a single sku launch.
I think the difference will be monumental all things considered. A 25% raw compute advantage plus most likely similar % of bandwidth advantage is nothing to scoff at. The small pixel and geometry advantage PS5 has would not be nearly enough to close the gap, at least in multiplat titles. I can easily see XsX going 4k native while PS5 using dynamic res with lower settings or just plain 1440p same settings. This is almost like Xbone vs PS4 all over again but situation reversed. And folks been saying this time the difference would not be anywhere near that large, how naive, ok aside from a few 720p vs 1080p situation. The visual difference in exclusives would show the most simply because they're designing games using 9.2 and 12 TF as base respectively, unlike the midgen upgrades where consoles are still tied to the base system.
No way in hell would MS sell Anaconda for $599 or even $550, it's DOA. $499 is the most likely choice. PS5 with specs like that should be $399, $450 just doesn't justify the value proposition. Besides I can see 1X drops down to $399 when next gen launches, so PS5 would absolutely not sit at the same price as that. Sony better throw in some sweet deals I say.
Tkumpathenurple
Veteran
I'm kind of conflicted over this rumour, assuming it turns out to be true.
Many moons ago, the only thing that I really wanted from this coming generation is Vega 64 levels of power. This rumoured 9.x TF PS5 would provide that. In conjunction with ray tracing, a much better CPU, and a souped-up SSD (at least compared to that which is currently available,) this coming generation is certainly going to satisfy. As Shifty said, this rumoured PS5 should be able to release at a mass market price. So, tens of millions of PS4 gamers will be able to experience a generational leap for their 4K TV, without having to break the bank.
This is satisfactory and perfunctory: ~3GHz 8 core Zen 2, a 9.x TF RDNA GPU, 16GB of GDDR6, and a fast SSD. But it's like a tedious Dell PC, when I was really hoping for something more exciting. Hence my conflict.
I don't even mind this bland system builder's PS5 if it's the base model. I understand that it's preferable to have a system composed of affordable components, which are going to predictably come down in price over the next 6-10 years. But, if they're going to target the casuals with the base console, I want something a bit bonkers for those willing to plonk down a few extra quid. Something like a higher TF GPU paired with HBM.
I suppose what I really want is for sensible engineers to create the base PS5, and for Ken Kuturagi to make a "mad as a bag of cats" edition.
Many moons ago, the only thing that I really wanted from this coming generation is Vega 64 levels of power. This rumoured 9.x TF PS5 would provide that. In conjunction with ray tracing, a much better CPU, and a souped-up SSD (at least compared to that which is currently available,) this coming generation is certainly going to satisfy. As Shifty said, this rumoured PS5 should be able to release at a mass market price. So, tens of millions of PS4 gamers will be able to experience a generational leap for their 4K TV, without having to break the bank.
This is satisfactory and perfunctory: ~3GHz 8 core Zen 2, a 9.x TF RDNA GPU, 16GB of GDDR6, and a fast SSD. But it's like a tedious Dell PC, when I was really hoping for something more exciting. Hence my conflict.
I don't even mind this bland system builder's PS5 if it's the base model. I understand that it's preferable to have a system composed of affordable components, which are going to predictably come down in price over the next 6-10 years. But, if they're going to target the casuals with the base console, I want something a bit bonkers for those willing to plonk down a few extra quid. Something like a higher TF GPU paired with HBM.
I suppose what I really want is for sensible engineers to create the base PS5, and for Ken Kuturagi to make a "mad as a bag of cats" edition.
I'm sure Sony's strategy has its merit, specifically to the general casual crowd and that's probably the smart choice all things accounted for. But I just don't like the direction they're taking this time in comparison to the competition. I'm still waiting for the final reveal to make the final judgement but so far it doesn't bode too well for my liking.
MS has more reasons to have something more powerfull, they also can in a 2 SKU launch, as a 500 dollar or more system is a risk. Sony just does the middleway, which seems a good if not the best choice. Think off it, 99% of ps users dont care at all about TF numbers or even specs. They just see PS5 that can play their whole previous PS library, at a 399 price tag.Graphics will show a generational leap however with 9TF and loading is much faster/instant with an SSD.
The og xbox was much more powerfull then PS2 yet it sold 160m units versus 24m. Power is not all.
Also, i can imagine that Sony would opt to go for a more 'traditional' console design/shape, as they always have done. If anyone, i would think of MS going for a bigger box so they can house more powerfull components. The OG xbox was also kinda bulkey and pc like, a huge difference to what the PS2 and GC where.
AbsoluteBeginner
Regular
Hmm seems to be more X vs Pro situation, only smaller. So, definitely close I would say. Compute and BW advantage for XSX (although BW per TF will be higher forPS5), pixel and geometry advantage for PS5 duo to higher clocks and same amount of ROPs.
Wouldn't be impossible if final clock adjustments could be abit lower, seeing the high-ish clocks. 8 to 9TF, which many talked about last spring. Would put it somewhere 5700XT level, abit lower in raw performance but if its rnda2 it could match it. That would put it below a vanilla 2080, seems NV wasn't too far off then.
AbsoluteBeginner
Regular
I think this is a reason why Sony pushed clocks. Because they get most of their chip for relatively smaller die size. As bonus you get higher pixel fillrate duo to same number of ROPs.
They were up against the wall with their BC method so 36 Navi CUs clocked very high were always a way to achieve all 3.
Chip that is perfomer but also not too small.
Big leap and maximum you would expect from console factor.
Advantage over MS in certain areas, while still remaining competitive everywere else.
Its pretty much halving X vs Pro difference. Only problem for Sony would be PR (TF war) and fact that even though chip is smaller, such high clocks will mean yields will not be much better then Arden.
Good share there. I retract my statement, I am wrong. At least that is responsible [of them] to post that, i suspect not everyone there has ever read that or knows that, but that is normal for selective reading.This is not the problem. Klee isn't a verified industry insider; quoting ZhugeEX from resertera: "Just a quick note to say that we were able to verify the poster [Klee] above as someone who worked in the industry and would be able to access certain levels of information. That being said, it's near impossible to verify whether the above description [specifications] is true or not, so please keep in mind that we can't verify whether all the information in each post is correct, just the details i posted above."
You know ZhugeEX is a senior analyst at Niko Partners right? Don't be so quick to throw stones, plenty of posters here are ready to believe what is being posted on resetera or days-old Twitter accounts because it suits their preferred narrative.
There is plenty of discussion in this "baseless" thread that is way more batshit crazy than anything being posted on resetera. People need to get a grip.There are credibly-sourced statements made about the nextgen consoles, I'm looking in the direction of Kotaku's Jason Schreier - somebody with a solid track record of having access to insiders who do know what they're talking about. But if people want to believe crazy nonsense, sure, folks can do that.
Last edited:
Tkumpathenurple
Veteran
Then a console doesn't seem the perfect choice for you
Haha, I get what you're saying, but I disagree. One of the things I like the most about consoles is the fact that they're gaming focused, bespoke hardware. Little esoteric boxes that have more performance extracted from them over the course of their lives. Gaming PC's are sort of the other way around: upgrade your components for better performance.
Obviously, both are fine. Both are fun to observe. But I just find the console space more exciting, especially Sony with the EE, GSX, and Cell.
For MS to stick with a gaming focused PC makes sense given their commitment to unifying their XBox ecosystem across PC and console. Sony don't have that same commitment, so I was hoping they'd have something a bit more wild.
AbsoluteBeginner
Regular
Oberon A0 has 512GB/s max BW
https://www.resetera.com/threads/ne...-see-staff-post.159131/page-295#post-27759154
That is higher then Ariel B0 (perhaps these were "slow" dev kits).
So 256bit bus 16Gbps chips.
I expect Anaconda to be 16Gbps on 320bit bus if 12TF.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/ne...-see-staff-post.159131/page-295#post-27759154
That is higher then Ariel B0 (perhaps these were "slow" dev kits).
So 256bit bus 16Gbps chips.
I expect Anaconda to be 16Gbps on 320bit bus if 12TF.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
