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

Discussion in 'Console Technology' started by Proelite, Mar 16, 2020.

  1. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    10,783
    Likes Received:
    10,798
    Location:
    The North
    I'm only talking about PS5. There's no issue with XSX. It's just going to keep trying harder to cool the unit until it fails to and then stops running. This is typical behaviour for a console to protect the hardware.

    How could spikes in CPU and GPU power cancel each other out? What are you referring you?
     
    AzBat, BRiT and PSman1700 like this.
  2. psorcerer

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    134
    There was nothing in the current gen games that should have prevented Jaguars from running smoothly.
     
  3. PSman1700

    Veteran Newcomer

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2019
    Messages:
    2,684
    Likes Received:
    895
    Isn't that what DF/Alex said?
     
  4. TheAlSpark

    TheAlSpark Moderator
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    21,705
    Likes Received:
    7,337
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    It's breathtaking.

    I guess it makes sense that L1 would thrash more with hyperthreading? Then L2 is per core, but L3 is shared amongst all, and then DRAM is hit harder.

    Kind of curious to see how console Zen 2 will fare with the huge bandwidth available along with not having to traverse RomeI/O. Infinity fabric will be handling cache snooping etc. now too instead of Garlic and Onion.

    I'm sure betanumerica brought up that curiosity already.
     
    #964 TheAlSpark, Mar 24, 2020
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2020
  5. psorcerer

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    134
    For example when GPU's in high load, CPU is not, and vice versa.
    Assume that the power shift happens with a frequency of ~1000Hz, for example.
     
  6. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    10,783
    Likes Received:
    10,798
    Location:
    The North
    There has to be a limit to how low you will allow the CPU and GPU to run at otherwise other issues start to crop up.
    There is a base clock speed for both. Either GPU or CPU should not drop below their base clock as a result of the power shift.

    Under heavy contention both will need to reduce in frequency.

    The absolute worse case scenario (full contention) the GPU and CPU will be running at their base clocks.
     
    PSman1700 likes this.
  7. BRiT

    BRiT Verified (╯°□°)╯
    Moderator Legend Alpha

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    15,896
    Likes Received:
    14,800
    Location:
    Cleveland
    I wouldn't say that a Teeter Totter has both sides canceling each other out.
     
    CeeGee and PSman1700 like this.
  8. Globalisateur

    Globalisateur Globby
    Veteran Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    3,493
    Likes Received:
    2,189
    Location:
    France
    I don't think you understand what high load means here. It's not about frequency. It's about some jobs that make work the GPU (and CPU) much harder than others, even if the GPU or CPU are 100% busy in a profiling chart.
     
  9. psorcerer

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    134
    Yep. That's obvious.
    The question is: how often it happens?
    I know from PS2 days: at the end of the generation VU1 was used at 90% and VU2 at ~70%.
    I think with each later generation the under-utilization was bigger and bigger.
    Do you have any data?
     
  10. TheAlSpark

    TheAlSpark Moderator
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    21,705
    Likes Received:
    7,337
    Location:
    ಠ_ಠ
    pshaw, 14 CPU threads + 4 GPU contexts.

    The math checks out.
     
  11. Mitchings

    Newcomer

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2013
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    175
    Regarding BC for PS3, call me crazy but couldn't Sony port the IP of the CELL BE to modern nodes? I understand the porting process in itself may be pricey and their may also be some licensing concerns with IBM/Toshiba, but I'd think the eventual unit cost would be incredibly cheap, it'll draw tiny amounts of power and the die would be absolutely minuscule. It could simply be placed on the motherboard and like any chip, over time; it could continue to be shrunk with future nodes.

    As it is now and assuming we don't get legacy PS support on PS5, I feel like Sony is just kicking the can down the road and all these things will eventually be lost in time; or they'll have to scramble down the road if ever they have a change of heart. The sooner they get this all done now, the less they may have to think bout it later. For PS2 I'd suspect they have the brute force power and resources to emulate it by now and as for PS1 emulation they could just include a potato and some jumper cables at this point.

    PS Now would stand to benefit from all of this too, they wouldn't require racks of old PS3s anymore. I just think its important they make a concerted, focused effort to get PS1, PS2, PS3 BC integrated in their ecosystem sooner rather than later.

    I'm aware there's a cost benefit ratio but I feel supporting your legacy, showing you care about it and carrying it forward is a very positive thing, it's good publicity and fosters good will amongst your audience.

    I guess it's great at least that PS4 BC is inherent to the PS5 architecture which should make it easier to carry that forward in future generations.

    Anywho, back to the technical angle... Is there any real issue why a tiny CELL BE couldn't be recreated today outside the porting cost and licensing?

    This, of course assuming Sony don't pull a rabbit out of a hat and find a way to emulate it..
     
  12. Rockster

    Regular

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2003
    Messages:
    973
    Likes Received:
    129
    Location:
    On my rock
    I don't think it's going to be as simple as shifting CPU and GPU load. The impression I got from Cerny if you listen carefully was that it just another tool to afford the GPU more power. But in general, the CPU is relatively low powered vs the GPU and it has to function in some capacity, so SmartShift in and of itself probably not enough. I'd expect additional GPU downclocking necessary, even if shifting some CPU power in high-load scenarios.

    Not sure where techpowerup gets their info but everything looks pretty accurate and they list the PS5 GPU base clock at 1750MHz and game clock at 1900MHz. https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/playstation-5-gpu.c3480
    My guess, and we'll see when the dev docs are available, is that the scheduler is constrained in some way at higher clocks if Dictator is right with his reporting that there are power profiles the developer chooses from.
     
    PSman1700 likes this.
  13. iroboto

    iroboto Daft Funk
    Legend Regular Subscriber

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2014
    Messages:
    10,783
    Likes Received:
    10,798
    Location:
    The North
    I'm well aware of what high load means. And that is _exactly_ what I'm referring to.
     
    BRiT and PSman1700 like this.
  14. mrcorbo

    mrcorbo Foo Fighter
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    3,947
    Likes Received:
    2,690
    I just don't think it matters very much. They are all theoretical numbers anyway. Eventually we will have side by side comparisons of these systems running the same game and be able to see how the hardware differences manifest as actual performance differences.
     
    DSoup, tinokun, BRiT and 1 other person like this.
  15. psorcerer

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    134
    80 ROPs for XBSX? They are smoking a pretty good shit.

    These are the numbers for RDNA1.
    And a pretty low ones at that.
     
    #975 psorcerer, Mar 24, 2020
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 24, 2020
    szymku and Mitchings like this.
  16. PSman1700

    Veteran Newcomer

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2019
    Messages:
    2,684
    Likes Received:
    895
    The PS2 was a complete different beast to handle. I dont think a valid comparison can be made.
     
  17. psorcerer

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    134
    It can. PS2 was milked DRY by this generation standards.
    There will be nothing that even comes close to that amount of power/perf draw from the hardware.
     
    Mitchings likes this.
  18. AbsoluteBeginner

    Regular Newcomer

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2019
    Messages:
    770
    Likes Received:
    985
    Exactly, because they have been made for Jaguars, not the other way around.
     
    PSman1700 likes this.
  19. psorcerer

    Regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Messages:
    732
    Likes Received:
    134
    I'm not sure what should game run on the CPU to claim that Jaguar is not enough? Please think about Doom Eternal@60fps, before answering. :)
     
  20. PSman1700

    Veteran Newcomer

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2019
    Messages:
    2,684
    Likes Received:
    895
    Then think for a sec, what they could have achieved with more powerfull CPU's.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...