Current Generation Hardware Speculation with a Technical Spin [post GDC 2020] [XBSX, PS5]

And if 36CU is the result of having to reserve some space for holes?

 

That would be killer It's all by design from the beginnig, Sony wanted a cheap(er), over time, to manufacture console. It seems a proven concept also seeing it's rather indentical to a 5700XT (36CU, same bandwith etc).

 

A 5700XT is 40 CUs. This is like a 5700 with 50% perf per watts improvement and a much higher frequency with new features too and probably other customization...

The improvement between RDNA and RDNA 2 is as big as between GCN and RDNA if we believe AMD.

 

Why thrown in performance per watt if you don't know the ps5's watt budget?

 

AMD described the architecture and said part of the improvement comes from improvement IPC and higher frequencies. Another part from thermal improvement. It means The PS5 GPU out the clock improvement and the improvement coming from new features will be better than a 5700/5700XT GPU at the same clock. A 10.28 5700XT is inferior to the PS5 GPU.

XSX and PS5 GPU are superior to all current AMD GPU, this seems crazy but this is the reality today if AMD said the truth.

 

It does? Thats news to me. Seems like both consoles a worthy next gen machines and far more of a jump in neccessary ways than last gen.

Seems like a waste of time and a divergence of resources. Thats why they failed with vita and nintendo consolidated their business.

 

After the rumored 64 CUs big Navi and 80 CUs Navi RDNA2 PC GPU will be above the next-generation console GPU. Some Turing GPU seems faster and they will probably be Amped down. I am sure everyone understands the reference.

 

The narrative with ps4/pro was that it had trash tier cooling so now that it's supposedly much better, people are making a big deal out of it.
As for it being underwhelming, I'm not sure what you're looking for to get you excited about the product.
Your outlook for RT from these consoles is much more positive than mine.

 

Positive isnt the word id use...overly optimistic....or unrealistic maybe, for both machines. RT is advanced stuff.

For the crowing about 120fps there will absolutely be a ton of 30fps games on these machines for software that push things to the limit, as is always the case on console.

 

The 5700XT is already bandlimited and weak with 256 Bit Bus and only 448 Gbyte/s and much more the Ps5 SOC , because you must share the Bandwidth with the Cpu and Tempest Engine .

Ps5 Architecture :

Total - 448 Gbyte/s

minus

Cpu - around 50 Gybyte/s
Tempest Audio Engine 20 Gbyte/s max.

Result : Only 378 Gbyte/s for the GPU and not the full 256 Bit Bus for Graphics.

This is a pretty bad and weak Design they have chosen. So your "proven concept" is the biggest Mistake Sonys Cerny have made it contradict the idea of a fast and efficient Hardwaredesign to eliminate Bottlenecks. Why running the GPU with such a high Clockrate at 2,23 Ghz and struggle on the other Side with pathetic small Datachannels?? For 1080p Resolution its ok but for 4k and Raytraycing i would not put not my Hands into the Fire for that. They can chose 18 Gbps per pin GDDR6 Type Memory with 576 Gbyte/s Busspeed or adding a big Cache to the GPU Frontend. So they going the cheap route again against the Progress of High Fidelity Gaming.

 

That's not how peak bandwidth works.

 

4 disabled CU's It's darn close all in all. Even in raw performance.

I would take that with a pinch of salt, like usual. If true, it would be a first.

Seems like the same debate as when Windows Central/MS said 'double the power of one x', then everyone went and said it must be less then 12TF because you know, maths and efficiency and all, that debate died quickly. On raw performance numbers, PS5 GPU (at max clocks) is ballpark 5700XT level performance.
On a note though, i certainly hope PS5 GPU will be more powerfull then a 5700XT as it is a 2019 mid-range AMD gpu by all means. But it won't be worlds apart in performance. There are certainly extra features like ray tracing though.Another note, a 5700XT can be clocked higher, too, if you'd want to.

Most of mid/high end turing products are faster then PS5 gpu.

As some noted, it seems the design has some PS4 Pro elements in it. Yes, clocks that high aren't favourable over going wider, as per the DF video, not with RDNA atleast. Like i said, Sony went with another design in mind, cheap to produce, most likely 399 again like PS4, it reflects on the whole hardware, ballpark 10TF, they aimed for mid range hardware like in 2013.

 

I dont really see it as 'midrange' or underwhelming hardware at all considering we're only talking about the GPU when referring to the whole system. The CPU and SSD alone are the lions share of the next generation and that's a night and day change compared to the strain on the hardware that jaguar and the HDD were coming into current gen. Even the GPU is roughly 6 or 7 times more powerful than the PS4's which is essentially the lead platform of most game design this gen at 1080p.

Yes bandwidth could be higher but i think if they have to go with what they have now for cost i think its a reasonable trade off. The resolutions of these machines will already be so high that scaling to a 4k screen will be fine even if certain games dont hit native 4k(not that i think either console will be trying to force native res over reconstruction, dynamic res and other more efficient methods to use GPU performance)

Tell me if im off base with any of that

 

Depends, compared to jaguar/2013 consoles, yeah they are more then lions. Compared to todays GPU's for pc it's mid range yes at 10TF.

 

Not it would not be a premiere they did it from GCN to RDNA.

 

Yes from a 2012 architecture to a 2019 one. Now it's on RDNA with one year between. Those percentages on big slides are mostly not to be taken too seriously, that goes both ways, it's the same for Nvidia's.

 

This is at logic. Without this reaching 2.23 GHz or 2 GHz inside something probably design as a classic console would have been impossible. AMD themselves told RDNA 2 is a multi Ghz architecture.

We need to wait and see the presentation of RDNA 2 before saying it is false. For the moment I trust AMD.

And the same for the frequency of XSX GPU, it is high for a 52 CUs GPU.

 

your right. i guess i should differentiate from midrange and underwhelming. both XBSX and PS5's GPU's may be midrange but i think they are worthy full gen upgrades

 

We have to see Ampere and the official Navi 2 offerings before we make that call

 

what do you mean? why do we need to see those details to know if these GPU's are strong compared to current gen base consoles? or are you referring to the 'midrange' part?