General Next Generation Rumors and Discussions [Post GDC 2020]

[Deleted member 7537]

they fixed it by shipping the largest console to date with an expensive cooling system and by increasing production of chips to make up for poor yields

Cooling is not going to improve manufacturing yields. If a chip doesn't meet specifications you are not going to fix it with additional cooling. If one CPU core is defective how does cooling matter? It may be give you additional room for chips that are not that thermal efficient, but that happens to PC components as well.

And that image is misleading, XSX is taller than the PS4 PRO (301mm vs 295mm).

 

[PSman1700]

Case size does matter though, it allows for better airflow and cooling. It's one of the limiting factors for a console design, PS5 could have been much more then 9/10TF if it where even bigger in size.

Personally it doesn't matter for me how big the consoles are, right now ive a CM cosmos besides the TV.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

they fixed it by shipping the largest console to date

In terms of room occupied. In terms of volume inside, there may not be much difference between it and XBSX. Hard to tell with those curves. Also, internal space doesn't really matter. It's airflow that affects cooling and size of heatsinks. Comparison of cooling dimensions doesn't really tell us about heat as we don't know fan speeds. Hypothetically, a smaller console with a smaller heatsink could generate more heat and just run the fans faster.

Edit: In addition, there's a noise factor to consider. If one equates size of box with ability to cool, and one looks at the PS4 and 4Pro being loud, a device no hotter than PS4Pro wanting to be quieter will have to use a larger box. Ergo, the size of PS5 might point just as much to the console being quiet as it might point to it being hot.

You might by right about Sony having to push the silicon past the point where it's happy, but size of the case doesn't prove that point.

 

[goonergaz]

I think it’s also why Sony are pushing a vertical console- the less contact with a surface the more chance for heat to escape....where’s the tear down!?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

they fixed it by shipping the largest console to date with an expensive cooling system and by increasing production of chips to make up for poor yields

Perhaps the rumour about yields was wrong. It seems frankly unbelievable, that with chip demand volume higher than ever that if TSMC/AMD had poor yields on Sony's chip that not only could TSMC ramp up production to compensate to meet the original target but ramp it up enough to double it.

This yield problem is difficult to reconcile with Sony's new PS5 production targets.

 

[eastmen]

Cooling is not going to improve manufacturing yields. If a chip doesn't meet specifications you are not going to fix it with additional cooling. If one CPU core is defective how does cooling matter? It may be give you additional room for chips that are not that thermal efficient, but that happens to PC components as well.

And that image is misleading, XSX is taller than the PS4 PRO (301mm vs 295mm).

You say it wont improve yields and then you go on to say it improves yields.


They had a tolerance level they wanted for good chips to make it into the console. They weren't getting enough so they changed the tolerances by increasing cooling cost and console size / cost to improve cooling. Thus they can use dies that they originally couldn't.

 

[cheapchips]

Maybe it was the 13Tf version that was having yield issues?

 

[eastmen]

Perhaps the rumour about yields was wrong. It seems frankly unbelievable, that with chip demand volume higher than ever that if TSMC/AMD had poor yields on Sony's chip that not only could TSMC ramp up production to compensate to meet the original target but ramp it up enough to double it.

This yield problem is difficult to reconcile with Sony's new PS5 production targets.

could be. we wont ever really know what happened behind the scenes. Will be interesting if we get reports of golden consoles where they run optimal and then we get problem consoles that draw more power and have other issues. Launches are always fun

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Have we ever had another post-console expose like the old Xbox 360 Uncloaked?

 

[BRiT]

I'm still waiting for that PS5 Tear Down that was promised months ago.

 

[iroboto]

Perhaps the rumour about yields was wrong. It seems frankly unbelievable, that with chip demand volume higher than ever that if TSMC/AMD had poor yields on Sony's chip that not only could TSMC ramp up production to compensate to meet the original target but ramp it up enough to double it.

This yield problem is difficult to reconcile with Sony's new PS5 production targets.

Box size matters. The bigger the box, the less you boxes you can ship in the same space. You think about the material costs, ie cooling down a bigger space is more expensive than cooling a smaller space, cost of defects, the cost of assembly, packaging, weight and shipping would be less with a smaller device; the smaller the box makes it more portable, and some cities were real-estate is limited, the smaller box is absolutely critical. They both know this; Sony wouldn't ship a console with such a large bounding box if they didn't have to. You're just absorbing unnecessary costs for no reason.

Anything is possible. No one is infallible to mistakes. MS made a bigger chip with less memory bandwidth, a bigger box and external PSU than their competitor and it still cost $100 more.
This time around MS made a more powerful chip, with more memory bandwidth, in a smaller case than their competitor. For MS, that's already considered a huge success for them, usually Sony has them pinned down badly on the hardware side of things.

tldr; if Sony could have shipped something smaller, they definitely would have. There is a reason they didn't ship one smaller. We just don't know precisely what that reason is but we can speculate on it.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

They both know this; Sony wouldn't ship a console with such a large bounding box if they didn't have to. You're just absorbing unnecessary costs for no reason.

They clearly have a reason because that's exactly what they've done. The bounding volume is vastly bigger than the internal volume. Sony could have gone with a cuboid to maximise spatial efficiency so either Sony are daft for making PS5 the shape it is, or they feel the gains outweigh the losses.

This isn't about size, but shape. If PS5 was of its bounding dimensions and a simple cuboid, there'd be the argument that that's as small as it'll go. But they didn't, they chose lots of empty space.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

could be. we wont ever really know what happened behind the scenes. Will be interesting if we get reports of golden consoles where they run optimal and then we get problem consoles that draw more power and have other issues. Launches are always fun

Because Sony's power profile is fixed, this type of issue should get picked up easily in QA. I hadn't really thought about in those terms, but that's a plus point for a constant power profile, you stress test your SOC and if it tries to pull more power than the profile, it's failed.

 

[iroboto]

Because Sony's power profile is fixed, this type of issue should get picked up easily in QA. I hadn't really thought about in those terms, but that's a plus point for a constant power profile, you stress test your SOC and if it tries to pull more power than the profile, it's failed.

off the top of my head, in theory you'd have more duds this way. If your chip needed more power to obtain the required frequency, then cooling could solve it (higher fan noise), fixed frequency scenario. But if you fixed the power draw, that chip is out even if it could make it.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

off the top of my head, in theory you'd have more duds this way. If your chip needed more power to obtain the required frequency, then cooling could solve it (higher fan noise), fixed frequency scenario. But if you fixed the power draw, that chip is out even if it could make it.

Yes and less bad consoles are sold to customers, which is good. Sony/TSMC/AMD's problems aren't my problems.

 

[iroboto]

Yes and less bad consoles are sold to customers, which is good. Sony/TSMC/AMD's problems aren't my problems.

fair enough, but at the same time, on the discussion of yields, then that would play some role (probably minor) in this discussion.

 

[iroboto]

Cooling is not going to improve manufacturing yields. If a chip doesn't meet specifications you are not going to fix it with additional cooling. If one CPU core is defective how does cooling matter? It may be give you additional room for chips that are not that thermal efficient, but that happens to PC components as well.

And that image is misleading, XSX is taller than the PS4 PRO (301mm vs 295mm).

on this note, there is a difference between a silicon defect (detrimental issue) and a parametric yield.
Parametric yield means that it's perfectly functional chip, but during testing it's unable to hit it's performance targets/functions for thermal/electrical reasons.
So redundancy doesn't solve this type of issue. Running the chip slower, and cooler will result in better yield. Over time, making changes to the silicon manufacturing process will improve parametric yield.

The way this is accounted for in the PC space is largely through binning.
The way this is normally account for in the console space is through redundancy cores for silicon defects, and then lowered fixed clocks for better parametric yields.

 

[Deleted member 7537]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1283506875976351745

Yields are bad but can double production. Only on B3D.

edit: sorry, increase it by 50%. Don't want to get called out.

 

[AzBat]

Yields change. Good yields now don't mean there wasn't bad yields before.

Tommy McClain

 

[DxCore]

The way this is normally account for in the console space is through redundancy cores for silicon defects, and then lowered fixed clocks for better parametric yields.

Lucky for Sony they don't have 'fixed clocks' to lower this gen