Current Generation Hardware Speculation with a Technical Spin [post launch 2021] [XBSX, PS5]

[chris1515]

So, the first die shots of the PS5 APU are available

https://twitter.com/x/status/1360994406434807809

Fritzchens Fritz auf Twitter: "A first quick and dirty die-shot of the PS5 APU (better SWIR image will follow). It looks like some Zen 2 FPU parts are missing. https://t.co/PefXCxc3G1" / Twitter

Spoiler: Big Pictures

Maybe someone can point out, what is which part of the GPU, CPU, ...

Edit:
seems like caches are still split, so no infinity-cache (never really expected that).

Great we will see the truth.

 

[iroboto]

So, the first die shots of the PS5 APU are available

https://twitter.com/x/status/1360994406434807809

Fritzchens Fritz auf Twitter: "A first quick and dirty die-shot of the PS5 APU (better SWIR image will follow). It looks like some Zen 2 FPU parts are missing. https://t.co/PefXCxc3G1" / Twitter

Spoiler: Big Pictures

Maybe someone can point out, what is which part of the GPU, CPU, ...

Edit:
seems like caches are still split, so no infinity-cache (never really expected that).

what was the infinity cache theory? That the L3 on CPU was shared with GPU? Or was it just a separate large cache for the GPU to serve as L3?

 

[Skaal]

wow only Days after i made the Thread on Neogaf why we do not have them yet, since the Console is publicly available. I even asked him about the chances on that he will make those himself. At 8th of Feb he replied that he doubt it that he makes them soon since he did not even make a PS5 preorder in time. I suggested he contact some of those cocky youtubers you released those infamous PS5 destruction vids just after launch. Maybe that was the way...

Any way - iam particular intrested to see if there is indeed a hardware based Geometry Engine - instead of the software one wich is implemented in RDNA1 i guess.. Also we could now more precise claim what iteraration of RDNA would fit best for that DIE.
But those images are not very clear - but he announced better ones .. i hope someone with deep technical knowledge makes a video about what we see here...

 

[AbsoluteBeginner]

wow only Days after i made the Thread on Neogaf why we do not have them yet, since the Console is publicly available. I even asked him about the chances on that he will make those himself. At 8th of Feb he replied that he doubt it that he makes them soon since he did not even make a PS5 preorder in time. I suggested he contact some of those cocky youtubers you released those infamous PS5 destruction vids just after launch. Maybe that was the way...

Any way - iam particular intrested to see if there is indeed a hardware based Geometry Engine - instead of the software one wich is implemented in RDNA1 i guess.. Also we could now more precise claim what iteraration of RDNA would fit best for that DIE.
But those images are not very clear - but he announced better ones .. i hope someone with deep technical knowledge makes a video about what we see here...

GE is, at this point I am 99% sure, exact same HW part as in RDNA. Where they finally got primitive shaders to work, and which they promised back in 2016 with Vega announcement.

PS5 will still be better at geometry processing then XSX because it has same front end, but higher clocks. Although how it compares once MS are exposed we will have to wait and see, maybe there will be support for it in some way with PS5, but I think it doesnt have mesh shaders, and likely part from RDNA2 are CUs.

 

[Skaal]

GE is, at this point I am 99% sure, exact same HW part as in RDNA. Where they finally got primitive shaders to work, and which they promised back in 2016 with Vega announcement.

PS5 will still be better at geometry processing then XSX because it has same front end, but higher clocks. Although how it compares once MS are exposed we will have to wait and see, maybe there will be support for it in some way with PS5, but I think it doesnt have mesh shaders, and likely part from RDNA2 are CUs.

if it is the same as the one we have since vega i would ask why Mark Cerny himself found it neccessary to file a Patent for his own Geometry Engine. And since you cannot patent something that someone else already has the patent on it must be different.
And since it is not just anyone but Cerny who filed it i believe it is more efficient and more fitting than AMDs own solution.

here is his patent btw (if you dident saw it yet) http://images2.freshpatents.com/pdf/US20180047129A1.pdf

 

[Skaal]

Locuza´s weigh in..

https://twitter.com/x/status/1361026970893627398

so if hes right, and usually he is - i would assume that the secret of PS5s competitiveness lays in its I/O Array. Wich is the most sophisticated out there even beating server rack throughput.
Also the transfer of data withhin the architecture was accelerated with the cache scrubbers. As i understood it - transfer of data was and will be the one area where architecture improvements materialize. From Vega to RDNA1 for example.

So one could make the bold assumption that by adding the cache scrubbers they basicly created their own RDNA3.
Something like that..

 

[function]

Patents aren't the same thing as products. And while Cerny is a fantastic chap to lead console development, to blanket believe that anything he comes up with is automatically better than what AMD's engineering teams can come up with is veering a little into idol worship territory.

Most of his job is balancing tradeoffs. And that's a really, really critical thing to do well.

 

[iroboto]

Patents aren't the same thing as products. And while Cerny is a fantastic chap to lead console development, to blanket believe that anything he comes up with is automatically better than what AMD's engineering teams can come up with is veering a little into idol worship territory.

Most of his job is balancing tradeoffs. And that's a really, really critical thing to do well.

looks like AVX1.

Still good that they have it... I was worried it didn't have AVX support entirely.

 

[Shortbread]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1361028267629817856

Glad to finally see some die shots.

 

[Ronaldo8]

if it is the same as the one we have since vega i would ask why Mark Cerny himself found it neccessary to file a Patent for his own Geometry Engine. And since you cannot patent something that someone else already has the patent on it must be different.
And since it is not just anyone but Cerny who filed it i believe it is more efficient and more fitting than AMDs own solution.

here is his patent btw (if you dident saw it yet) http://images2.freshpatents.com/pdf/US20180047129A1.pdf

This patent has nothing to do with geometry engines. It is really about varying level of geometry being rendered based on projection of the desired viewport onto a surface representing an HMD. Basically foveated rendering. There is also a companion patent for varying shading rate based on same type of projection (a limited form of VRS).
For info, the relevant patent for primitive shaders (geometry engines of RDNA 1) was filed by AMD back in 2014/15. I linked to it in a previous post but is not arsed enough to look for it now.
On a more funny note... Surprise surprise...Mr RDNA 3 was talking BS the whole time about infinity cache.

 

[Skaal]

Patents aren't the same thing as products. And while Cerny is a fantastic chap to lead console development, to blanket believe that anything he comes up with is automatically better than what AMD's engineering teams can come up with is veering a little into idol worship territory.

Most of his job is balancing tradeoffs. And that's a really, really critical thing to do well.

not neccesarily better than AMDs solution but maybe just more fitting for their Console. And they have it in - cerny talked about it in his deep dive talk.. so its not one of those cases where someone files a patend but it later is not used.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Do RDNA2 GPUs have space dedicated to a type of geometry engine or are other solutions more software based?

 

[Proelite]

RGT is probably the best sourced youtuber but he got the unified ZEN 3 cache wrong.

 

[function]

not neccesarily better than AMDs solution but maybe just more fitting for their Console. And they have it in - cerny talked about it in his deep dive talk.. so its not one of those cases where someone files a patend but it later is not used.

I've watched Road to PS5 a couple of times. When did Cerny talk about his screen area patent thingy being in PS5? I really don't remember that.

 

[Ronaldo8]

RGT is probably the best sourced youtuber but he got the unified ZEN 3 cache wrong.

He was ( and mostly still is) one of the best sources on discrete PC architectures in the amateur space along with rogamevand other dataminers. He just chose to engage in console wars because he figured out than fanboys will give him easy clicks. Disappointing.

 

[function]

RGT is probably the best sourced youtuber but he got the unified ZEN 3 cache wrong.

Also the upgrade to 38CUs, upgrade to 16 gbpp GDDR6 iirc.

He has an AMD source (at least one, maybe more) , but apparently not in the chip design area. Some of the PS5 secret sauce "leaks" he's been peddling for clicks didn't even make sense.

 

[Ronaldo8]

I've watched Road to PS5 a couple of times. When did Cerny talk about his screen area patent thingy being in PS5? I really don't remember that.

He never did. He was talking about the new capabilities of the RDNA geometry engines which are yet to be used due to games being built around older gpus/PS4/X1.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Do RDNA2 GPUs have space dedicated to a type of geometry engine or are other solutions more software based?

Also, how does the proportional space dedicated to the GE compare with the space on Nvidia for their AI deep learning die space? I wonder why Sony chose to dedicate so much space to the GE when they could have used something similar to Nvidia...

 

[Skaal]

I've watched Road to PS5 a couple of times. When did Cerny talk about his screen area patent thingy being in PS5? I really don't remember that.

This patent has nothing to do with geometry engines. It is really about varying level of geometry being rendered based on projection of the desired viewport onto a surface representing an HMD. Basically foveated rendering. There is also a companion patent for varying shading rate based on same type of projection (a limited form of VRS).
For info, the relevant patent for primitive shaders (geometry engines of RDNA 1) was filed by AMD back in 2014/15. I linked to it in a previous post but is not arsed enough to look for it now.
On a more funny note... Surprise surprise...Mr RDNA 3 was talking BS the whole time about infinity cache.

he talked about "a" Geometry Engine in the PS5 in his talk. Did not say "his" Geometry Engine though, sure.
@ Ronaldo8 : It is not named as a "geometry engine" in that patend but it shows all what we would think a geometry engine would do - culling of geometry early in the render process as a main funktionality.
And there were some rumors about sony having the more sophisticated Geometry Engine.. but iam to lazy to digg them out now.

In general - what we have here cannot "reverse deny" PS5s performance advantages so far. Meaning if there ARE some major Architecture disadvantages in comparision to Series X there MUST be something to make up for it or we would live in a impossible timeline..
maybe more clear Photos will make more sense in that regard.

 

[AbsoluteBeginner]

RGT is probably the best sourced youtuber but he got the unified ZEN 3 cache wrong.

He gets info by piecing the bits he hears over internet + fishing for it via DMs. Believe me, he doesnt know much.