I get what you're saying but isn't this idea totally little insane? Makes no sense, AVX is useful and I don't believe the work to remove instructions from the transistors in the FPU isn't worthy.
Also, Zen 2's energy consumption on 7nm shouldn't be a problem on a high performing hardware.
Or maybe Fritz was drunk and shot the wrong die?
Man... the fanboys conservationists will have a field day with this. I can already hear they claiming PS5 not only uses RDNA1 for it's CPU, now the CPU was confirmed to be Zen 1.
No idea how can they justify the thing performing almost the same and some times better than the SeriesX however...
I think at the very least, this might take off the table all the other explanations that had to rely on phantom tech customizations not already mentioned by Cerny like the cache scrubbers or Cache Coherency Engines in the I/O block. THOSE things could still be aiding in relative performance parity between the platforms, and you don't need to jump to "secret sauce" like IC or unified L3$ when proof now seems to disprove either of those existing in the design whatsoever.
There's other factors that could also be logically reached to in order to explain relative performance parity: better I/O subsystem (this could particularly be true if parts of Xbox's Velocity Architecture are not readily available yet; DirectStorage for example, still isn't readily available on PC and closest availability is Nvidia's offshoot of GPUDirectStorage and even that doesn't seem to be fully ready yet), different teams handling different versions of the game for different platforms (the "A" team could be handling the PS5 version while the "B" team could be handling Series versions, for example. I remember this being a regular thing during the SNES/MegaDrive and later on PS1/Saturn/N64 eras and I'm suspecting it still occurs though with likely better parity between the teams handling the different versions), PS5's devkit tools being easier to work with (all word says they're basically supercharged PS4 dev tools), and yeah even the pseudo-meme of Series dev tools coming in hot (which again, some like DirectStorage aren't even readily available for usage yet; this is all Microsoft's "fault" but still...).
Those seem to be the best explanations going forward IMHO, and realistically it can usually be a mix of any of those. I guess a fourth potential explanation would be the segmented memory in Series systems having some higher-than-desired bandwidth access penalty when data spills out from the GPU-optimized pool, but a few people on the board here have already gone into that and indicate it seems to be an issue with GDK still being ironed out. Forgot the specifics, but they covered the possible issues there pretty well. Suffice to say, if it's mainly a software-related issue, then it's temporary and should be fixed sooner rather than later. Some of the new feature updates Microsoft will talk about later this month, I imagine at least some of these would not be worth discussing at this point if other things that could impact their usage within the GDK environment (such as the aforementioned memory allocation between the pools of memory) weren't at least tracking forward in being resolved internally through updates.
More views resulting in more money. PS is a gigantic brand and the PS5 topic gave them lots of exposure beyond their usual audience.
Definitely true. Gonna be fun to see how they pivot this to keep things flowing as they are. MLID had some topic on his whiteboard called "AMD vs Microsoft" and said he was waiting until 3P perf results from other games came out before committing to it later in the year.
Which could really just be them covering their bases with some grounds of supposed evidence for whatever topic they want to push as something real, though it very well could be through means of conflation on his end given proof now these die shots for PS5 aren't showing what he claimed with "insider knowledge" was there in the system.
It's all entertaining to watch for me I guess, and I guess given the amount of stuff online that's actually toxic, this type of stuff is essentially nothing. At the very least it lets us see how people can come up with semi-convincing narratives to drive engagement, even if they're only based on partial bits of truths (or fibbing through obfuscation/absence of details) xD
