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

[iroboto]

The real question is why the XSX needs that extra 1mm cube of space. Gaaah, it's maddening!

lol ummm..

hmmm
I think looking now at both designs carefully, cooling is the biggest concern.

In both XSX and PS5, they have designed the cases such that the air intakes and outflows cannot be blocked.
For XSX the foot cannot be taken off, and the exhaust port is curved so that there is always space for air to release even if you try to put something up against it fully.

For PS5, the console must sit on the stand, taking it off the floor. The fins stop you from placing things on top of the console in both horizontal and vertical setups, and on horizontal setups the PS5 can still breath below it because of the stand. So I believe those types of adjustments (them also running 300/350 W) the objective is to ensure the cooling cannot be obstructed.

 

[cheapchips]

In both XSX and PS5, they have designed the cases such that the air intakes and outflows cannot be blocked.
For XSX the foot cannot be taken off, and the exhaust port is curved so that there is always space for air to release even if you try to put something up against it fully.

I did think standing on carpet might do it for XSX, but it has the back inlets as well. It also has a slot outlet up top if something is placed on it.

 

[iroboto]

I did think standing on carpet might do it for XSX, but it has the back inlets as well. It also has a slot outlet up top if something is placed on it.

View attachment 4638

Yup that outlet is key

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

Now that specs are released:
https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/16/21438782/sony-ps5-size-specs-dimensions-console-huge-large-big

PS5: Approx. 390mm x 104mm x 260mm (width x height x depth)

PSU: 350W
(excludes largest projection, excludes Base)
PS5: 4.5kg
Clockspeed: 2230 Mhz
Processing Power: 10.23TF peak

PS5 Digital Edition: Approx. 390mm x 92mm x 260mm (width x height x depth)

(excludes largest projection, excludes Base)
340W for the DE.
PS5 Digital Edition: 3.9kg
Clockspeed: 2230 Mhz
Processing Power: 10.23TF peak

In comparison to Xbox Series X which is 300W and Series S that is
XSX: 301 mm × 151 mm × 151 mm

PSU: 300W
4.4KG
Clockspeed: 1825 Mhz
Processing Power: 12.10 TF

XSS: 275 mm × 151 mm × 65 mm

PSU: ? Help can't find
1.93 kg
Clockspeed: 1565 Mhz
Processing Power: 4TF

So bounding box volumes here, XSX is 65% the volume of PS5. XSS is 25%. The numbers are a little larger when comparing to the DE.
PSUs are about 20% better on XSX vs PS5. XSS is going to be likely much better probably in the 150 watt range
XSX is still lighter than PS5 as well.

I want to highlight in this thread, for some time, we talked about in great technical detail and length whether the high clocks leading to high power consumption and therefore more cooling required combined with the heat from high SSD and supporting cooling an external SSD at the same speed as well. The XSX ultimately is a larger chip by area, 20% more than PS5 and uses less power then PS5 due to much lower clocks. Therefore it's watts/mm^2 is significantly less and provides favourable cooling advantages combined with parametric yield advantages to XSX in this case. And I think the answer is clear, I cannot see another reason here but I think this discussion around this aspect is wrapped up.

It is likely that PS5 will cost more than XSX for these reasons on a straight BOM comparison. Packaging and shipping will also cost more given the bounding box volumes above.

At first, yes. But on future nodes - whether that be 5nm then 3nm, or just straight to the latter - the PS5 shouldn't require outlandishly expensive and sizeable cooling. They're choosing to eat the cost up front and recoup that later with one slim model or multiple. Microsoft have gone with a very sensible clockspeed and picked the requisite CU's to fit the XSX's target performance.

It'll be interesting to see which approach pays off in terms of pricing and profit/loss per console sold. Maybe they'll be much of a muchness.

 

[iroboto]

whether that be 5nm then 3nm, or just straight to the latter

Yea I'm wondering about this aspect as well.
I don't know if we will see revisions to be honest. These last few nodes are the end here and it may be too costly to make smaller node versions. It might be best to wait for 3nm and just release a new console.

 

[iceberg187]

350W on the PS5? PS3 OG like. Does anyone have numbers on the Series X|S and their wattages?

 

[iroboto]

350W on the PS5? PS3 OG like. Does anyone have numbers on the Series X|S and their wattages?

all there in my post above.
300W for X
I'm struggling to find the S wattage.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

Yea I'm wondering about this aspect as well.
I don't know if we will see revisions to be honest. These last few nodes are the end here and it may be too costly to make smaller node versions. It might be best to wait for 3nm and just release a new console.

Aye, that's certainly a possibility. However, I also see a possibility that this could be a very long lived generation: their CPU's, IO, GPU features, and memory amount will be competitive with PC's for years to come.

So I predict we'll see these consoles shrunk as much as possible, maybe even into different form factors eventually. I also predict that because of running into a wall with 3nm, the next, next generation will be heavily focused on fixed function hardware.

The XSS will do adequately for 1080p TV's for that entire time, while the PS5 and XSX will do adequately for 4K TV's. 4 or 5 years from now, "Pro" models of each could further evolve RT as well as service the wave of 8K TV's, whenever that is.

Sony will need a response to the XSS, as the Switch has proven that there are plenty of people who don't need bigger, higher resolution displays, and I predict the XSS will be very successful (I've long been a proponent of a two tier launch.)

My prediction here is that Sony release a PSTV type device, distinct from the PS4 & PS5, with a slower SSD than the PS5, 8GB of 14gbps GDDR6, an 8c16t variable CPU at up to 3GHz, and an 18CU RDNA2 GPU with a variable frequency up to something like 1.5GHz (whatever frequency doesn't require too much cooling on 5/3nm RDNA2.)

Games made for it would need to run on the PS5 at a higher resolution and framerate, but games could be made for the PS5 as the base console without having to consider this "PSTV." It would also need to be just as PS4-backwards compatible as the PS5.

At some point, both the XSS and this "PSTV" will either get a portable revision, or a screenless portable which locally streams to compatible devices.

 

[Lalaland]

I'm just not sure we're going to see those kinds of leaps in lithography over the next few years, we are going to be on nodes for longer and longer. Look at Intel's wretched experience with 10nm they tried to integrate a whole bunch of novel chemistry and a smaller node at the same time and it's cost them the process lead they used to enjoy over TSMC and Samsung. In the future I doubt we'll see multiple major die shrinks like we saw with PS3 (90/90nm -> 45/28nm CPU/GPU) with these consoles, in fact we only saw a single shrink during the last gen (28 -> 16nm FinFET) suggesting that with the slowing pace of shrinks we might not get any this gen at all.

 

[mpg1]

Isn't Apple already on 5nm?...

 

[Lalaland]

There is some wobble on what sizes anyone is at this point, depending on how fussy you are over various parts of the CPU being at larger nodes, Samsung has their 5nm, TSMC their 7nm (XBSX/SS & PS5), Intel has their 10nm all would quibble that theirs is the smallest really because of reasons I'm not expert enough to judge. It is generally accepted afaik that Samsung and TSMCs tech is equivalent to each other at the moment and that despite seeming bigger Intel's 10nm tech is ahead of both because almost all elements are 10nm and some advanced chemistry.

 

[Silenti]

Odd thought. Is MCM going to change your (Sony, MS, et. al.) direction on "die shrinks"? You wouldn't be able to take advantage of an MCM for a die shrink would you? That could be another factor that changes the math on "Shrink or go new" debate.

 

[chris1515]

That's the same guy who got banned from reset, after it was found that he was spreading completely made up 'info'. The guy is a total troll.

EDIT: never mind!

This was the same guys who told everyone PS5 will be more expensive than Xbox Series X.

 

[PSman1700]

their CPU's, IO, GPU features, and memory amount will be competitive with PC's for years to come.

Only IO so far, but already out matched in raw speed there too. GPU wise it's lower/mid tier at best, CPU is a downclocked zen2 3700x, were on zen3 soon, ram isn't so huge either. Competitive with pc's for sure, but in the mid range perhaps as of today. Years down the line.... nah.

 

[function]

So I predict we'll see these consoles shrunk as much as possible, maybe even into different form factors eventually. I also predict that because of running into a wall with 3nm, the next, next generation will be heavily focused on fixed function hardware.

I'm not so sure on the shrinks.

Designs are becoming ever more tied to the process they are manufactured on, and there comes a point where using new tech that has been designed for a smaller process becomes more cost effective and power efficient than paying to port old tech to a state of the art node.

MS actually alluded to this in their Hotchips presentation for XSX. Using new tech, and maintaining compatibility at least partially in the software layer plays better to new tech and new nodes, I think. Of course, you have to be sufficiently abstracted from at least some aspects of the underlying hardware.

 

[Pete]

Could we see an XSX slim/shrink with fewer, higher-clocked CUs? Would they need to maintain the "two tier" memory layout?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Isn't Apple already on 5nm?...

Yes, Apple confirmed the A14 chips were on 5nm.

Microsoft may have issues getting cost effective die shrinks whereas Sony may not. It's not just about the chip, it's about how many you're producing. Somebody will mention Azure at any minute, like Microsoft are rolling out tens of millions of Xbox Azure blades. I'm not saying this can't or won't happen, but it sure as hell won't happen until Microsoft know there is a proven demand for it.

 

[dobwal]

Yes, Apple confirmed the A14 chips were on 5nm.

Microsoft may have issues getting cost effective die shrinks whereas Sony may not. It's not just about the chip, it's about how many you're producing. Somebody will mention Azure at any minute, like Microsoft are rolling out tens of millions of Xbox Azure blades. I'm not saying this can't or won't happen, but it sure as hell won't happen until Microsoft know there is a proven demand for it.

MS doesn’t have to roll out a ton of Xbox azure blades to benefit from cost savings.

If you went to Toyota and stated you wanted 10k of each model, they aren’t going to negotiate each model purchase as isolated events unless you were naive enough to allow them to do so. You would base discounts off the total purchase.

If MS is sourcing large amount of AMD chips across different platforms, setups and specs, MS probably would enjoy a larger discount across all chips than would be possible from sourcing a smaller order related to one chip.

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/announcing-new-amd-epyc-based-azure-virtual-machines/

Large companies that purchase varying products from another company tend to have those purchases govern by large overarching contracts not a bunch of smaller ones revolving around individual products.

In terms of cost reduction, I think we should move on to a new topic. Do you know MS has been working on the ideal of more cost efficient production at smaller volumes.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/res...e-enabling-the-long-tail-of-hardware-devices/

 

[RobertR1]

Now that specs are released:
https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/16/21438782/sony-ps5-size-specs-dimensions-console-huge-large-big

PS5: Approx. 390mm x 104mm x 260mm (width x height x depth)

PSU: 350W
(excludes largest projection, excludes Base)
PS5: 4.5kg
Clockspeed: 2230 Mhz Peak
Processing Power: 10.23TF peak

PS5 Digital Edition: Approx. 390mm x 92mm x 260mm (width x height x depth)

(excludes largest projection, excludes Base)
PSU 340W
PS5 Digital Edition: 3.9kg
Clockspeed: 2230 Mhz Peak
Processing Power: 10.23TF peak

In comparison to Xbox Series X which is 300W and Series S that is
XSX: 301 mm × 151 mm × 151 mm

PSU: 300W
4.4KG
Clockspeed: 1825 Mhz
Processing Power: 12.10 TF

XSS: 275 mm × 151 mm × 65 mm

PSU: ? Help can't find
1.93 kg
Clockspeed: 1565 Mhz
Processing Power: 4TF

So bounding box volumes here, XSX is 65% the volume of PS5. XSS is 25%. The numbers are a little larger when comparing to the DE.
PSUs are about 20% better on XSX vs PS5. XSS is going to be likely much better probably in the 150 watt range
XSX is still lighter than PS5 as well.

I want to highlight in this thread, for some time, we talked about in great technical detail and length whether the high clocks leading to high power consumption and therefore more cooling required combined with the heat from high SSD and supporting cooling an external SSD at the same speed as well. The XSX ultimately is a larger chip by area, 20% more than PS5 and uses less power then PS5 due to much lower clocks. Therefore it's watts/mm^2 is significantly less and provides favourable cooling advantages combined with parametric yield advantages to XSX in this case. And I think the answer is clear, I cannot see another reason here but I think this discussion around this aspect is wrapped up.

It is likely that PS5 will cost more than XSX for these reasons on a straight BOM comparison. Packaging and shipping will also cost more given the bounding box volumes above.

Anyone who’s done any serious tuning/Overclocking knows how quickly power consumption scales up trying to chase frequency. Also frequency doesn’t always give linear performance gains if you hit other bottlenecks esp on GPUs in actual workloads vs synthetics. Good luck sustaining 2230

 

[Xbat]

Anyone who’s done any serious tuning/Overclocking knows how quickly power consumption scales up trying to chase frequency. Also frequency doesn’t always give linear performance gains if you hit other bottlenecks esp on GPUs in actual workloads vs synthetics. Good luck sustaining 2230

Yeah, at least them having a 350W power supply means that Cerny wasn't kidding when he said they are providing a pretty big amount of power budget to the APU.