Actually I don't think the new games are leveraging most Series X or PS5 features at all. We know most Series games aren't using DirectStorage, for example, because DirectStorage isn't even available yet on PC and these are mainly cross-gen games with PC ports in mind, so no need to develop them with features like DirectStorage in mind, yet.
Most games are barely using hardware features like VRS, either. Same can be said of the cache scrubbers in PS5, tho I'm not 100% sure how those actually work (i.e are they something that automate themselves or do developers have to target use of them. I'm guessing if the latter they would have to use demand scrubbing; given the scrubbers are in the caches IIRC devs would have to issue the command to scrub cache from the frontend of GPU).
Any ideas on what type of hardware would need to go into an embedded design for neural network support? I read somewhere that there's a memory technology that was being tested for use as array representations of neural networks. I can't recall where I first read about this, but doing a quick search I came across this research document testing MRAM-DIMA:
http://shanbhag.ece.illinois.edu/publications/ADP_ISCAS_MRAM_2019.pdf
It's meant to be a physical implementation of a DNN as opposed to a digital one, and give better performance. Technologies like MRAM show a lot of promise and companies like Everspin already produce chips of...decent capacities (if a few 4 MB is considered decent), though prices are still prohibitive. Maybe as costs come down on technologies like MRAM or FRAM, we can see more of it in embedded console designs for DNNs?
Although I was also thinking to some extent FPGA logic could be integrated into embedded console designs and you can leverage LUT RAM and BRAM there and configure the logic cells to replicate DNNs physically (among other uses). I don't know exactly how "powerful" (I guess in terms of logic cell count) of FPGA slices/cores/whatever you would need for this to be done.
I think PS5 should be capable of things vaguely similar to Mesh Shaders with its Primitive Shaders, but clear and away better? No. I try keeping in mind that in all likelihood, Sony started development on PS5 earlier than Microsoft did the Series systems, which means things like deciding between the Primitive Shaders (which IIRC AMD could not get functioning properly in Vega, hence why they retooled with Mesh Shaders, that way they could get certified as being DX12-compliant) or Mesh Shaders would've came up likely early on.
Basically, if Sony came up with some crazy stuff for Primitive Shaders, would AMD not have had enough time to look at that and try bringing that into RDNA 2 GPUs via the Mesh Shaders? I get that Sony and Microsoft had their own separate AMD teams helping to design their systems, but AMD had been working on RDNA 2 for a while by the time core aspects of PS5's design were being wrapped up. Or maybe it'd of been too late to go back in on RDNA 2 design blueprints and work in customizations Sony did with Primitive Shaders into the batch of GPUs which've since been launched?
In any case, I think whatever Sony have done with their Primitive Shaders should be good enough to bring general performance parity in terms of feature support with the Mesh Shaders, tho some of it might have to come in through the Geometry Engine as well. But I'm not expecting customizations on the Primitive Shaders front a generation ahead of things already on the market; when Cerny spoke of GPUs bearing witness to fruitful collaborative efforts coming to market, his timeline seemed focused on RDNA 2 GPUs, not necessarily RDNA 3 ones. Though since RDNA 3 will repurpose a lot of features designed for RDNA 2, on a technical level they would be correct
