I feel like some of you guys expecting a lot from PS5.
We will get a lot from PS5 regardless of CU count and TF
I feel like some of you guys expecting a lot from PS5.
I wonder what kind of problems he ran into and why would there be such problems? With the same exact CU setup, a faster clock should literally just run things faster shouldn't it?It's not the same thing though. You are not pushing a chip that much just for BC...but pushing a 36CU chip for the new generation is at least somewhat believable. I'm not even sure that would work for BC given the instability it would introduce since it's over double the frequency of what the games originally ran on. Cerny even said tinkering with different frequencies introduced problems for BC on Pro.
Some rare race conditions (if somehow the code is coincidentally or not tied to the 1.6ghz frequency). But the rare games released before Pro that had problems have being patched by the devs. I think I only heard about one case that was eventually patched.I wonder what kind of problems he ran into and why would there be such problems? With the same exact CU setup, a faster clock should literally just run things faster shouldn't it?
Despite the needless jab, the latest example in consoles actually happened the other way around.Right, that's reserved for the adjective "Sony's".
Is there any known reason why you couldn't disable half of a WGP?They can't do this because of how the CUs are now grouped by 2 into one WGP. They need to deactivate the whole WGP. One on each sides of the butterfly design so 4CUs in total.
There were no discrepancies because what we saw were official presentation slides dated some 5 months before release.Out of curiosity, when the hardware rumors about PS4 were supposedly leacked, apart from the memory, how close were they? How much was the discrepancy?
I think there was small discrepancy from what we got then, so I suppose it will be now as well.
Nah.Expect your 9.2TF console
Well, our own Proelite has posted relatively correct specs back in June 2012.Out of curiosity, when the hardware rumors about PS4 were supposedly leacked, apart from the memory, how close were they? How much was the discrepancy?
I think there was small discrepancy from what we got then, so I suppose it will be now as well.
Expect your 9.2TF console
Disclaimer: Everything isn't final, but the general range of these system are more or less set in stone.
Durango:
AMD CPU, 6-8 cores
Ram 3-4 GB
AMD GPU
Total processing power 1-1.2 teraflops
Note: I've heard of 8GB ram from reliable people on this form, but a certain, well respected, insider on B3D is certain that 3-4 and 1 teraflops is near final. His information is the most up to date that I've got.
Unreal 4 needing 1 TP is pretty indicative.
It seems that the IGN's 6x more than 360 article isn't that far off, but it's more like 4x 360.
Orbis:
AMD CPU 4 cores x-86
AMD GPU 1150 SPU, 1.8 teraflops, 800 mhz
2GB GDDR5 (unlikely this will be bumped to 4GB)
So we were already getting pretty accurate information with additional "rumors" from inside sources indicating to the final specs. We are missibg those extra leaks that indicate to more than 10tf and higher clocks besides the fanboy wishfull specsWell, our own Proelite has posted relatively correct specs back in June 2012.
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/latest-reliable-orbis-and-durango-specs.478941/#post-38997667
Half of the CPU cores for the PS4, 1/4th of the memory as "set in stone" in June 2012?Well, our own Proelite has posted relatively correct specs back in June 2012.
Pretty broad definition for 'relatively correct' there.Well, our own Proelite has posted relatively correct specs back in June 2012.
Half of the CPU cores for the PS4, 1/4th of the memory as "set in stone" in June 2012?
Pretty broad definition for 'relatively correct' there.
In terms of GPU TFs, he was right. the rest is wide of the mark.
Half of the CPU cores for the PS4, 1/4th of the memory as "set in stone" in June 2012?
That's an information as old as the github leak is from gen9's release, yet it seems it all changed just a little bit from the supposedly "set in stone".
Oh, that or the information was just plain wrong.
VGleaks has beaten him by 10 days on the same 1.84 TF figure. So yeah pretty much everybody knew the specs at that point (June 8th 2012).Well, our own Proelite has posted relatively correct specs back in June 2012.
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/latest-reliable-orbis-and-durango-specs.478941/#post-38997667
Yea, couldn't find VgLeaks but was sure some other info existed before his post.VGleaks has beaten him by 10 days on the same 1.84 TF figure. So yeah pretty much everybody knew the specs at that point (June 8th 2012).
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...n-deep-first-specs/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au
Not saying he's wrong this time but I wouldn't draw conclusion based on all those.
Our source claims that the final specs should be 10x powerful than PS3, due to this info has got 10 months.
Last gen prediction thread...
Just been dipping into this thread. Loads of parallels! Difference cast, same performance. But it's interesting to see claims like "Charlie says the die is massive, like 500 mm²!" and comparing that to what happened. I bet a proper analysis of that 1000-post thread would find the B3D consensus and dismissing of rumours was more right than wrong.
and while 4 core Steamroller is not featured in PS4, arguably its been actual downgrade to Jaguar.
Is this a hypothetical, or did someone actually claim that, and if so, was it that Charlie? The one that said we’re getting PS5 in 2018?Last gen prediction thread...
Just been dipping into this thread. Loads of parallels! Difference cast, same performance. But it's interesting to see claims like "Charlie says the die is massive, like 500 mm²!" and comparing that to what happened. I bet a proper analysis of that 1000-post thread would find the B3D consensus and dismissing of rumours was more right than wrong.
Pretty broad definition for 'relatively correct' there.
In terms of GPU TFs, he was right (well, potentially some 30% low-balled on Durango with the bottom 1TF versus release 1.3 TF, but we can give them 1.2 TF and the last-minute upclock). The rest is wide of the mark.
It is?I mean, wide of the mark, perhaps, but all we care about is what he was right about - TF
Or it could be that because in 2012 we already had Southern Islands covering the full range of performance and price targets, the dev kits of that time could use graphics cards on the GCN architecture that matched the consoles' performance estimates. In 2019 the only RDNA GPU they have is Navi 10, and it has no RT at all.Nobody here is saying system BW is locked, or that RAM amount is (well, XSX can go up to 20GBs anyway). What was the point of discussion has pretty much entire time been - GPU TFs.
Possibly.Its reported in June 2012, but info is 10 months old as per their source.
So, 4 core 3.2GHz Steamroller was replaced by 8 core 1.6GHz Jaguar, and what was 4GB pushed by devs ended up 8GB.
GPU was 1:1 match with info from possibly August 2011!