General external expansion discussion? *spawn*

[iroboto]

Rubber feet will increase airflow and reduces vibration. And because of the grid-like bottom, they'll be easy to shape and fit.

oh you're going all the way, I thought you're just removing it, I didn't think you were modifying it for your own desires.
Okay, yea, post a video, would love to see this play out.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Rubber feet will increase airflow and reduces vibration. And because of the grid-like bottom, they'll be easy to shape and fit.

The problem I have rubber feet (and this happens frequently for me) is that once the system is under load the adhesive starts to liquify a bit (from the heat) which means that rubber feet have a tendency to "stray" if I adjust the position of the case after a gaming session. You should see my Silverstone case (which fits in my backpack), none of the rubber feet on the bottom are in the same place as when I bought it.

It's like they're alive and just randomly move around.

Now if you are screwing those feet into the case, that's the way to go. Then those suckers won't move around.

Regards,
SB

 

[dobwal]

Series X has a stand for vertical orientation that literally cannot be removed in horizontal orientation.

Personally, I consider this a day one challenge, that thing is coming off.

What gets me is that it seems like that stand is the reason the XSS has a big black circle for an intake port. Why? Its makes the XSS look like an intercom box. It makes me hate the stand even more.

 

[dobwal]

I don't quite follow what you're saying here. The big round disc (the stand) on the bottom of Series X (when vertical) seems to impede airflow. I'm curious why the stand is needed given Series X (when vertical) is short and squat and doesn't seem to require a stand for stability (unlike PS5) and I feel that four removable rubber feet would serve better here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Its only saving grace. Its swivel so you can easily turn the back of the console forward (Well as easily as the wires leading from the back of the console will allow). But it's such an eyesore when you lay it horizontally.

 

[goonergaz]

Do you also remember the reason that Cerny stated for why they capped it at 2.23 GHz? It's an important detail.

It's almost like... #gasp# they are 2 different chips. If the PS5 could hold the GPU at that speed all the time (it likely can if...) while also holding the CPU at 3.5 GHz all the time (it likely can if...) at the power targets that Sony have then they would have done it. But it can't at the power target that Sony chose in all cases, so we have variable clocks if the power budget is reached while a game is running.

What the exact breakdown is while running a game, none of us know. People speculating it's at 2.23 almost all the time are just as correct as people speculating it's near 2.0 GHz much, but not most, of the time. Cerny only stated it was at or close to 2.23 GHz most of the time.

The last I read (Digital Foundry article) most developers were choosing to throttle the CPU in order to ensure that the GPU doesn't throttle. Will that be the case throughout this generation? Or will developers find ways in which to use the CPU such that they will willingly sacrifice GPU speed in order to have sustained max CPU speed?

What happens if XBSX becomes the lead platform for a multiplatform developer and they push both the CPU and GPU? Do they decide that sustained GPU performance is most important or do they decide that sustained CPU is most important?

Regards,
SB

It’s almost like #gasp# Cerny said they had to restrict the speed to 2.23 so clearly could have gone faster, therefore they are not running to breaking point.

Regarding implying the GPU will run at 2ghz most of the time being accurate (let me kill 2 birds with one stone here)...

Eh?

Cerny's statement. At or near 2.23 GHz most of the time.

• At or near 2.23 GHz > 50% of the time.

Speculation. At or near 2.23 GHz almost always...qualifies for the above statement by Cerny.

Speculation. At or near 2.0 GHz much, but not most of the time...qualifies for the above statement by Cerny.

Neither contradict what Cerny stated. If you want to blame anyone for holding various viewpoints, then blame Cerny for being deliberately vague on details.

But I don't necessarily blame Cerny for this. If it's up to a developer to determine whether they wish to throttle CPU for sustained GPU performance or whether they wish to throttle GPU in order to have sustained CPU performance, or if they want a variable combination of the two, it's up to them. Thus Cerny can't state with any certainty what the clocks will be all time or even at any given time in any given game.

Regards,
SB

...it’s almost like you guys do t want to believe it, you didn’t want to believe the SSD now you don’t want to believe the PS5 will be at 2.23 most of the time - I’ve linked to sources claiming that it drops at worst 2-3 % for just a couple of frames.

Now you guys don’t want to believe Sony might have considered the SSD heat issues with ones added into the system post launch.

Really, do you believe the earth is flat until you go into space or high enough to realise it’s not?

I’m sure you’d have been much happier if Sony released a proprietary SSD for more than MS because at least that’d be good for the consumer...right.

 

[manux]

It’s almost like #gasp# Cerny said they had to restrict the speed to 2.23 so clearly could have gone faster, therefore they are not running to breaking point.

Cerny specifically said the internal gpu implementation limited higher clocks. He said pushing more power in would not lead to higher clocks.

 

[dobwal]

It’s almost like #gasp# Cerny said they had to restrict the speed to 2.23 so clearly could have gone faster, therefore they are not running to breaking point.

Regarding implying the GPU will run at 2ghz most of the time being accurate (let me kill 2 birds with one stone here)...


...it’s almost like you guys do t want to believe it, you didn’t want to believe the SSD now you don’t want to believe the PS5 will be at 2.23 most of the time - I’ve linked to sources claiming that it drops at worst 2-3 % for just a couple of frames.

Now you guys don’t want to believe Sony might have considered the SSD heat issues with ones added into the system post launch.

Really, do you believe the earth is flat until you go into space or high enough to realise it’s not?

I’m sure you’d have been much happier if Sony released a proprietary SSD for more than MS because at least that’d be good for the consumer...right.

I'm willing to believe it. Ultimately, it will or it won't. But I won't be surprised if it doesn't. "Dropping frequency 2-3% will lead to a 10% drop in power" doesn't mean that a 2-3% frequency drop and a 10% drop in power will allow a workload's power requirement to drop below the power limit of the console.

Sony adopted this model because of its inability to properly forecast how hard some devs would push the PS4. Some devs may be able to push the PS5 so that it regularly drops and at a much greater frequency drop than 2-3%. But devs will work around it and we the gamers probably won't even notice. The console will at least remain quiet, which I bet is what most PS5 gamers want.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

It’s almost like #gasp# Cerny said they had to restrict the speed to 2.23 so clearly could have gone faster, therefore they are not running to breaking point.

Regarding implying the GPU will run at 2ghz most of the time being accurate (let me kill 2 birds with one stone here)...


...it’s almost like you guys do t want to believe it, you didn’t want to believe the SSD now you don’t want to believe the PS5 will be at 2.23 most of the time - I’ve linked to sources claiming that it drops at worst 2-3 % for just a couple of frames.

Now you guys don’t want to believe Sony might have considered the SSD heat issues with ones added into the system post launch.

Really, do you believe the earth is flat until you go into space or high enough to realise it’s not?

I’m sure you’d have been much happier if Sony released a proprietary SSD for more than MS because at least that’d be good for the consumer...right.

Whoa! Don't get so defensive.

I don't really care where it ends up. If it's at exactly 2.23 most of the time, that's cool. It's not at 2.23 most of the time, it's cool. If it's at or near 2.23 most of the time, that's cool as well. If it's at 2.0 or near 2.0 much but not most of the time, that's cool as well.

All I care about is seeing where it ends up when developers attempt to push the machine. Which choice are they going to make? Max GPU or Max CPU? Will it be the same throughout the generation? What are the internals like? I want to see the cooling. I want to see how they plan to cool the NVME, assuming they even try to cool the NVME. I'm interested to hear their audio system (the thing I'm looking forward to the most other than how the base SSD will get used).

You seem to think people hate the PS5 for some weird reason. I like it as a machine. So does Iroboto, he's preordered one.

But neither of us are going to blow smoke up our own butts by claiming things that Cerny never claimed. We're both waiting to actually see the machine in action. To see a teardown. To see ANYTHING hardware related for the PS5 other than the outside shell.

Regards,
SB

 

[iroboto]

Whoa! Don't get so defensive.

I don't really care where it ends up. If it's at exactly 2.23 most of the time, that's cool. It's not at 2.23 most of the time, it's cool. If it's at or near 2.23 most of the time, that's cool as well. If it's at 2.0 or near 2.0 much but not most of the time, that's cool as well.

All I care about is seeing where it ends up when developers attempt to push the machine. Which choice are they going to make? Max GPU or Max CPU? Will it be the same throughout the generation? What are the internals like? I want to see the cooling. I want to see how they plan to cool the NVME, assuming they even try to cool the NVME. I'm interested to hear their audio system (the thing I'm looking forward to the most other than how the base SSD will get used).

You seem to think people hate the PS5 for some weird reason. I like it as a machine. So does Iroboto, he's preordered one.

But neither of us are going to blow smoke up our own butts by claiming things that Cerny never claimed. We're both waiting to actually see the machine in action. To see a teardown. To see ANYTHING hardware related for the PS5 other than the outside shell.

Regards,
SB

yup. In just about every way except for SSD speed, it's pretty inferior hardware from XSX. It didn't stop me from buying it.

Coming from XBO, lol nothing about the hardware would stop me from purchasing ps5. I'm there to play the games first and foremost, but I don't want to also just ignore things in a technical discussion to make the PS5 seem better than it is, it just seems like it's not the right thing to do. I have no issue in believing what Cerny and team have set out to do, PS4 was the perfect marriage of price performance and I know many expect that to happen again. But there's been so little communicated about the hardware, I just don't want to assume it's great, I rather have Sony tell me why it's great. And even if it's not, I still got one anyway - and I'm still going to play all those exclusives you guys keep raving about.

As great as XSX may be, or as bad as PS5 might be, PS5 is likely to sell to more, a lot more; there's nothing we could say or do here at B3D that would change the trajectory of PS5, only Sony can do that.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

yup. In just about every way except for SSD speed, it's pretty inferior hardware from XSX. It didn't stop me from buying it.

Coming from XBO, lol nothing about the hardware would stop me from purchasing ps5. I'm there to play the games first and foremost, but I don't want to also just ignore things in a technical discussion to make the PS5 seem better than it is, it just seems like it's not the right thing to do. I have no issue in believing what Cerny and team have set out to do, PS4 was the perfect marriage of price performance and I know many expect that to happen again. But there's been so little communicated about the hardware, I just don't want to assume it's great, I rather have Sony tell me why it's great. And even if it's not, I still got one anyway - and I'm still going to play all those exclusives you guys keep raving about.

As great as XSX may be, or as bad as PS5 might be, PS5 is likely to sell to more, a lot more; there's nothing we could say or do here at B3D that would change the trajectory of PS5, only Sony can do that.

We don't know much about either audio subsystem yet, however. We have a tiny bit more details on the XBSX audio blocks, but it still isn't much.

As well, I expect that both the PS5 and XBSX GPUs differ in slight but potentially significant ways. It's too early to say whether one has better features than the other.

It's only when comparing pure clock speed and bandwidth that the XBSX has a clear advantage. Well, and slightly more available storage space.

All said and done, they're still remarkably similar, however.

Regards,
SB

 

[Eolirin]

We don't know much about either audio subsystem yet, however. We have a tiny bit more details on the XBSX audio blocks, but it still isn't much.

As well, I expect that both the PS5 and XBSX GPUs differ in slight but potentially significant ways. It's too early to say whether one has better features than the other.

It's only when comparing pure clock speed and bandwidth that the XBSX has a clear advantage. Well, and slightly more available storage space.

All said and done, they're still remarkably similar, however.

Regards,
SB

52 vs 36 CUs is a big difference, even if it's partially mitigated by lower clocks.

The XSX is also quite a bit smaller.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

The problem I have rubber feet (and this happens frequently for me) is that once the system is under load the adhesive starts to liquify a bit (from the heat) which means that rubber feet have a tendency to "stray" if I adjust the position of the case after a gaming session.

You need to use a heat cure epoxy, it's designed for this.

 

[goonergaz]

All this complaining at lack PS5 h/w details yet we’ve hardly seen any XSX actual gameplay and we’re 6 weeks from launch!

We’re still yet to see all this extra power they kept banging on about...why is that?

Point is that it’s a small minority that care about h/w most just care about games.

 

[B-Nice]

All this complaining at lack PS5 h/w details yet we’ve hardly seen any XSX actual gameplay and we’re 6 weeks from launch!

We’re still yet to see all this extra power they kept banging on about...why is that?

Point is that it’s a small minority that care about h/w most just care about games.

If you look at the Console forum as one big therapy session, it all makes sense.

98% of all posts in this forum about the PS5 refer to what it can’t do, even when evidence to the contrary is presented. I’ve never seen so much effort go into discrediting anything remotely positive about the machine. Hundreds of posts, thousands of paragraphs all aimed at running down any aspect of the spec and games.

When it comes to actually discussing what it can do, well, it’s dismissed as simply marketing and respected industry professionals(not insiders)are suddenly denigrated and dismissed like GameStop employees with itchy Twitter fingers.

I find it interesting for example, that it’s blindly accepted that the Unreal 5 demo runs much better on pc/nvme, with no evidence provided, and no evidence requested.

Nvidia puts a couple of slides up and that’s gospel but Ratchet and Clank and Demon’s Souls portals are gimmicks. Nvidia only make Switch hardware in the console space, yet they’ve become key to once again to explain how the PS5 inferior.

This takes me back to my initial point about therapy!

It’s been very important to many on here to establish just how inferior the PS5 is in all aspects, using dodgy formula, deliberate misunderstandings and literally, ‘Once time at band camp, I overclocked my gpu and it flat out told me Mark Cerny is a fraud!’.

When do we get to the stuff about what you’ve actually been shown and talk about that?

 

[goonergaz]

Cerny specifically said the internal gpu implementation limited higher clocks. He said pushing more power in would not lead to higher clocks.

He said that the clock could run faster - they had to limit it to 'ensure the on chip logic worked'.

 

[BRiT]

Can we get back to the topic? General external expansion for consoles.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Cerny's statement. At or near 2.23 GHz most of the time.

• At or near 2.23 GHz > 50% of the time.

Speculation. At or near 2.23 GHz almost always...qualifies for the above statement by Cerny.

He also used the "2% downclock = 10% lower power" statement, pointing to 2.19GHz core downclock when a 10% power reduction is needed, but obviously this isn't important to remember anymore.
What matters to is to keep believing and suggesting the console will be at 2GHz most of the time, right?

The variable clock 'concern trolling' was in direct refute of PS5 being able to hold those clocks _while_ sustaining a form of cost superiority over their competitor.

Who said this was ever in Sony's plans? Do you have any statement from Sony claiming they aimed at making a cheaper platform than Microsoft?

It would seem really odd to me that this was the case. If they wanted to make the cheapest console then they wouldn't have ordered a custom SSD with a 12-channel controller that you currently only find on HPC, with a performance that is only leveled by >$200 NVMe drives, plus a bunch of dedicated logic on the SoC to maximize IO throughput. Whereas Microsoft is using a SSD with a performance and volume equivalent to current $100 drives.

A smaller chip.
A higher PSU
The largest volume in a box
With less component ability on the CPU, on the GPU , less Memory bandwidth

Can you point me to evidence of chip size? How much smaller are we talking about BTW?
Higher PSU (as in a 35W difference or a whopping 11% higher) doesn't necessarily mean the SoC consumes more power. For all we know, Sony can just be using a higher rated but less efficient PSU.
And/or Sony just wants to leave more headroom to the USB ports so they can power more advanced accessories, like e.g. a VR headset. And/or they just went to market and the best offer they got was this 350W PSU, for their predicted volume while 300W offers from other brands would be more expensive.

BTW, what is the "less component ability on the CPU"? 3.5 vs. 3.6GHz?
Wow, Sony really failed on that front /s.

The 5700XT by default has a max speed of 2150 Mhz in its Powerplay table, according to TPU. Its advertised "boost clock" was more than 10% lower than this figure. Its advertised "game clock" was 1755 mhz, nearly 20 % lower.

2150MHz in the stock 5700 XT is simply how far you can put the clock slider in the drivers.
TPU has the same info as everyone else for the 5700XT, which is 1605 base / 1755 game / 1905 boost. In the reddit powerplay leak, right next to Navi 21 and Navi 22 there's a Navi 14 GPU clocking up to 1900MHz which might be a 5500XT or a 5300XT considering the memory clocks. Those advertise boost clocks up to 1850MHz but you can slide all the way up to (i.e. max clock) 2200MHz, not 1900MHz like what you see on that table.
Using the Navi14 values, that table is referring to very achievable clock values and not the maximum value you can slide towards in the adrenalin overclocking tool, which is what you're suggesting.

AMD stated they're getting 50% higher efficiency than RDNA1 cards in part from higher clocks, and leaks/rumors of RDNA2 chips going well over 2GHz are on the dozens now. And we also have a console officially reaching 2.23GHz.
2.5GHz boost clocks on a desktop card shouldn't be anything preposterous for RDNA2, and Cerny did say if AMD released a Radeon card close to the PS5's release with similar specs then it wouldn't be a coincidence.

Actual gaming clocks on Navi 22 will be well below 2500 mHz and quite possibly go under the PS5's 2.23 gHz, and I'd bet on that.

Oh it's on.
$15 of B3D donation that the highest-end Navi 22 GPU will average at or above 2.23GHz in a game.
(EDIT: sorry for the offtopic but I had been writing this on the span of several hours, I propose a topic for the bet).

 

[goonergaz]

He also used the "2% downclock = 10% lower power" statement, pointing to 2.19GHz core downclock when a 10% power reduction is needed, but obviously this isn't important to remember anymore.
What matters to is to keep believing and suggesting the console will be at 2GHz most of the time, right?




Who said this was ever in Sony's plans? Do you have any statement from Sony claiming they aimed at making a cheaper platform than Microsoft?

It would seem really odd to me that this was the case. If they wanted to make the cheapest console then they wouldn't have ordered a custom SSD with a 12-channel controller that you currently only find on HPC, with a performance that is only leveled by >$200 NVMe drives, plus a bunch of dedicated logic on the SoC to maximize IO throughput. Whereas Microsoft is using a SSD with a performance and volume equivalent to current $100 drives.




Can you point me to evidence of chip size? How much smaller are we talking about BTW?
Higher PSU (as in a 35W difference or a whopping 11% higher) doesn't necessarily mean the SoC consumes more power. For all we know, Sony can just be using a higher rated but less efficient PSU.
And/or Sony just wants to leave more headroom to the USB ports so they can power more advanced accessories, like e.g. a VR headset. And/or they just went to market and the best offer they got was this 350W PSU, for their predicted volume while 300W offers from other brands would be more expensive.

BTW, what is the "less component ability on the CPU"? 3.5 vs. 3.6GHz?
Wow, Sony really failed on that front /s.





2150MHz in the stock 5700 XT is simply how far you can put the clock slider in the drivers.
TPU has the same info as everyone else for the 5700XT, which is 1605 base / 1755 game / 1905 boost. In the reddit powerplay leak, right next to Navi 21 and Navi 22 there's a Navi 14 GPU clocking up to 1900MHz which might be a 5500XT or a 5300XT considering the memory clocks. Those advertise boost clocks up to 1850MHz but you can slide all the way up to (i.e. max clock) 2200MHz, not 1900MHz like what you see on that table.
Using the Navi14 values, that table is referring to very achievable clock values and not the maximum value you can slide towards in the adrenalin overclocking tool, which is what you're suggesting.

AMD stated they're getting 50% higher efficiency than RDNA1 cards in part from higher clocks, and leaks/rumors of RDNA2 chips going well over 2GHz are on the dozens now. And we also have a console officially reaching 2.23GHz.
2.5GHz boost clocks on a desktop card shouldn't be anything preposterous for RDNA2, and Cerny did say if AMD released a Radeon card close to the PS5's release with similar specs then it wouldn't be a coincidence.




Oh it's on.
$15 of B3D donation that the highest-end Navi 22 GPU will average at or above 2.23GHz in a game.
(EDIT: sorry for the offtopic but I had been writing this on the span of several hours, I propose a topic for the bet).

I've given up, but the one thing I totally don't get is the dig at price. We don't even know the BoM - what's to say Sony are breaking even and MS are losing money per box? Shall we start ripping into Nintendo if we're bringing price into the equation!? It's a business, Sony know they can sell more units at the same price so have matched their price to maximise profits/minimise losses.

It really is that simple and nothing to do with Sony producing an underpowered box at 'only' the same price.

 

[BRiT]

Can we get back to the topic? General external expansion for consoles.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Get back to the topic! General external expansion for consoles.

FTFY.