There were rumors that PS5 was originally targeting 2019 and then got moved to 2020.
Those rumors said because of software reasons, not hardware.
There were rumors that PS5 was originally targeting 2019 and then got moved to 2020.
Didn't sound hypobolic to me. It's easy to imagine people wanting to get something out the door so they can move on if they've had enough of it, when nothing seems to be going right. Happens all the time.I'm not really sure I trust the source that this YouTube guy is using. The words being used like the engineers just want to get Navi out there so they can move on sounds hyperbolic to me and that it's performing worse than Vega.
So if you think navi can't be worse than Vega (depending on how you measure) don't be so sure!
While there could obviously be some problems with Navi causing them to miss targets, power draw/frequency problems that are worse than Vega20/RadeonVII would be quite strange. It would seem reasonable to assume this would improve a bit with Navi (or at the very least stay unchanged), not the other way around. What could possibly cause that?
On 7 nm compared to Vega on 14nm I am pretty sure unless they have really screwed the pooch somehow.
Those rumors said because of software reasons, not hardware.
*fixed it for youIt could be due to both, but we the initial baseless rumor we got were from the dev side and now we're getting baseless rumors from the AMD side.
This is the baseless thread so I can theorize as I fit, sir.
That's what she saidThose rumors said because of software reasons, not hardware.
That's what she said
All things being equal I would tend to agree and have debated that point, example 4k compared to 1800p would be more than close enough to make it a wash in actual use.Regardless, 30% in a over 10 Tflops card may not be as meaningfull as 30 % on Current Gen with an average of 1.5 Tflops cards.
I assume he just means Xbox exec's.Using language like Xbox heads comes across as some fan boy. I wouldn't believe that rumour at all.
There really aren't any other realistic options for the CPU though. Clockspeed could be varied a bit, perhaps. Otherwise, if you were going to make a spec up trying to be believable, you'd have to pick Zen 2, and likely 8 cores at that, as the only sane option AMD can provide. It's not going to be ARM or some Intel CPU plus AMD GPU or some bizarro new creation like a 64 core MIPS thing.Funnily enough everyone all seem to agree on the CPU as Zen 2, 8 core 3.2GHZ, what is it with that?
Some time back, on resetera, klobrille insisted that he/she didn't say there wouldn't be hardware ray tracing in Anaconda. Today, I found out, after watching RedGamingTech, that Navi 20 will have hardware ray tracing. The top of the line card, 3090 XT, will have a 64CU Navi. This is the same spec as the hypothetical 64CU Navi in Anaconda.
That's true enough, but gpu wise it just feels like a whole bunch of people are guessing around and hope one of them hits the jackpot. Maybe someone already did.There really aren't any other realistic options for the CPU though. Clockspeed could be varied a bit, perhaps. Otherwise, if you were going to make a spec up trying to be believable, you'd have to pick Zen 2, and likely 8 cores at that, as the only sane option AMD can provide. It's not going to be ARM or some Intel CPU plus AMD GPU or some bizarro new creation like a 64 core MIPS thing.
That's because anything but the CPU is anyone's guess.That's true enough, but gpu wise it just feels like a whole bunch of people are guessing around and hope one of them hits the jackpot. Maybe someone already did.