Predict: Next gen console tech (9th iteration and 10th iteration edition) [2014 - 2017]
- Thread starter Shifty Geezer
- Start date
- Status
Tkumpathenurple
Veteran
Why a 384 bit bus? Would 512 bit be a waste of resources or impede chip shrinkage or something?
It's cost more than anything. Larger die needed for the interface, more traces on the board, and of course a higher minimum number of memory chips needed over the life of the console. 512-bit buses are saved for very expensive, high margin graphics cards which are pretty much the opposite of a console.
MS have really pushed the boat out with 384-bit, but it's for a $499 luxury halo product that will never hit mass market price points in it's current form.
In terms of capacity, with no large advances in HDD speed in the near term for mechanical laptop drives, and multiple terrabyte SSDs likely to cost prohibitive for a 2019/2020 system, huge amounts of GDDR6 would likely result in it being used as a very expensive cache. So we're back to the old idea of a HDD, reasonable amount of memory, and perhaps an intermediate cache of some kind.
I can't see a greater than 256-bit bus for a next gen system, unless there's a forked approach of a high end / lower end configuration in which case I think we might see something like a 192 / 384 choice.
MS have really pushed the boat out with 384-bit, but it's for a $499 luxury halo product that will never hit mass market price points in it's current form.
In terms of capacity, with no large advances in HDD speed in the near term for mechanical laptop drives, and multiple terrabyte SSDs likely to cost prohibitive for a 2019/2020 system, huge amounts of GDDR6 would likely result in it being used as a very expensive cache. So we're back to the old idea of a HDD, reasonable amount of memory, and perhaps an intermediate cache of some kind.
I can't see a greater than 256-bit bus for a next gen system, unless there's a forked approach of a high end / lower end configuration in which case I think we might see something like a 192 / 384 choice.
Tkumpathenurple
Veteran
A forked launch is exactly what I'd like to see at the launch of the next generation, although I'm not sure what differences I'd like to see.
Maybe a 1080p model and a 4K model? Certainly, 4K isn't necessary for plenty of people out there, but would a cut back version of a 4K console be practical?
What I'd most like to see is a base console focused on 4K and a high end model which is just two APU'S connected like SLI/Crossfire. So it can play two games simultaneously (couch co-op for any multiplayer game) or play a single game with a PS4->PS4Pro graphical difference. Anyone else eager for that sort of release?
Maybe a 1080p model and a 4K model? Certainly, 4K isn't necessary for plenty of people out there, but would a cut back version of a 4K console be practical?
What I'd most like to see is a base console focused on 4K and a high end model which is just two APU'S connected like SLI/Crossfire. So it can play two games simultaneously (couch co-op for any multiplayer game) or play a single game with a PS4->PS4Pro graphical difference. Anyone else eager for that sort of release?
Prophecy2k
Veteran
I'm curious, has there ever been a generational transition where there hasn't been an increase in memory bus width?
While I personally think a 256-bit bus with 16x GDDR6 chips would likely be a good cost effective solution, I wouldn't rule out a 384-bit bus width.
Also, there's no fathomable justification in my mind for beginning a new generation with two entirely separate console hardware configurations—certainly not ones with entirely different hardware configs, e.g. I could maybe see at a stretch a case for a "lower" end APU which just fuses off CUs on the GPU to improve yields at launch.
Otherwise, you're simply doubling up on engineering design costs, merely to achieve what? A cheaper, weaker "next-gen" console that only serves to lower the baseline for game development. I can't see why anyone would want that.
The only way I see two configurations happening is if it's a cut down version of the same SOC (like a 1070 and 1080). No one will be making two SOCs to start. I think the Pro was a onetime thing.
On the memory, my prediction is that its either 32GB 16 chips on a 256-bit bus of GDDR6 or 24 GB 12 chips on a 384-bit bus. I don't think they could go to 24 memory chips. I'm hesitant on the 256-bit bus since I don't think it can provide enough bandwidth. I believe Vega has scenarios where it's BW limited. The next consoles will probably have that level of performance so a similar BW, but shared with the CPU, doesn't seem sufficient.
The outside shot is a HBC setup. 8GB of HBM + 32GB of DDR4.
On the memory, my prediction is that its either 32GB 16 chips on a 256-bit bus of GDDR6 or 24 GB 12 chips on a 384-bit bus. I don't think they could go to 24 memory chips. I'm hesitant on the 256-bit bus since I don't think it can provide enough bandwidth. I believe Vega has scenarios where it's BW limited. The next consoles will probably have that level of performance so a similar BW, but shared with the CPU, doesn't seem sufficient.
The outside shot is a HBC setup. 8GB of HBM + 32GB of DDR4.
Yes please. I want to see a nig leap too. This gen still has legs. Devs are suffering much less with ps4/bone machines to hit their targets than they were with ps360 at the same age, and those two lasted a decade, and didn't get a pro/X to warm the market up mid-gen like wenow have. I say let ps5 in the oven enough for it to be considerably ahead.
Not enough memory if you factor into account the ram needed for the OS. Currently 3GB is reserved on PS4 for the OS. They'll need at least the double for PS5, easily (my bet is they'll reserve 8GB).
And I would say 24GB reserved for the games is the absolute minimum if they want a real next gen experience (native 4K and checkerboard 6K - 8K). But I think we'll get at least 32GB
Depends on how you define the generation in terms of bus widths, not that it's a useful benchmark, similarly "16x" memory increase. There's more to it than just looking at "tradition"
- PS2 had 32-bit (2chan) RDRAM bus. Xbox had a 128-bit DDR interface.
- Xbox 360 had a 128-bit GDDR3 bus. PS3 had a 64-bit XDR differential bus (effectively double wires) + 128-bit GDDR3.
Clearly, a 384-bit DDR3 bus for Durango could have had lol-huge impact to the motherboard either by needing an even fatter footprint, or more PCB layers, not to mention +50% chips to buy (in an era where MS execs were less focused on gaming performance). Looking at the size of the GDDR5 bus on Liverpool, it may not have been doable either at first glance, but if barry allen pulls another stunt, they might have gone with lower clocked GDDR5 with a +50% bus size anyway. Clearly, GDDR5 was costly at the time.
In terms of die shrinks, we can see from the Scorpio layout that it won't be as restrictive as what happened with say, Cell. It's pretty similar to Liverpool, and NEO probably shares the same overall layout philosophy, and while it might be years before the next major node transition, there's a sense it can still happen should they choose to shrink the mid-gen twins. e.g. PS4 Slim
Hypothetical. As I already mentioned above, this is not the clamshell variation. The point of the post was the overall configuration for die size, but I guess everyone seems to gloss over that...
Things may look different in 2-3 years time for sure, but post-4K is somewhat nebulous at the moment to speculate since we're barely getting 4K as is. It'll be interesting to hear from devs how they make use of Scorpio's 9GB title memory.
I'd be curious to know if 12_1 tier3 etc is enough to not make HW virtual texturing useless as it was for GCN2 (so next gen may be better off as well).
Last edited:
Prophecy2k
Veteran
I didn't gloss over it. It's just that the idea of a 15 TFLOPs, 90 CU GPU in PS5—when everyone on the internet has been telling me that 10TFLOPs is the max.—makes me giddy... so I held my peace
Prophecy2k
Veteran
Question... why?!
We already have 4k streaming on PS4Pro and XB1X with their 3/4GB OS allocations. Is there any reason to believe that there exists potential OS features that will require 8GB?
How much does Windows even use? Some Windows PCs don't even have more than 8GB of RAM.
From what I understand, most of the 3GB allocation for consoles is for applications to remain resident. There's probably a fair bit for various game box art tiles as well (store, library etc) though.
I hope ~ <1.5GHz GPU isn't too far fetched by then. :s
Mind you, it's with the assumption of the 7nm gen (non-Intel) given the roadmaps @ AMD, but who knows. From my understanding, 10nmFF is going to be skipped by most everyone except mobile, similar to 20nm planar, although it's not nearly *as bad*, just that the cost benefits might make it worth skipping for large chips again.I didn't gloss over it. It's just that the idea of a 15 TFLOPs, 90 CU GPU in PS5—when everyone on the internet has been telling me that 10TFLOPs is the max.—makes me giddy... so I held my peace
I hope ~ <1.5GHz GPU isn't too far fetched by then. :s
Mihailjones
Newcomer
I hope they wait few years and get 64-128Gb of ram.
Yeah, it is a lot/"too much", but in every gen the amount of ram have been something like 8-16 Times more than gen before it.
So 8x 8 = min 64Gb.
32Gb would be plenty too, probably enough for years. It just doesnt feel like next gen if leap is just 2-2.5x in ram and Tflops.
BECAUSE they waste the power in 4k anyway, while it is useless for many, and most sit too far away to see the difference anyway.
So having 2x the raw power would be almost eaten by going to native 4k.
I hope for 4x ps4 pro raw power as minium, with 32Gb or more of ram.
Yeah, it is a lot/"too much", but in every gen the amount of ram have been something like 8-16 Times more than gen before it.
So 8x 8 = min 64Gb.
32Gb would be plenty too, probably enough for years. It just doesnt feel like next gen if leap is just 2-2.5x in ram and Tflops.
BECAUSE they waste the power in 4k anyway, while it is useless for many, and most sit too far away to see the difference anyway.
So having 2x the raw power would be almost eaten by going to native 4k.
I hope for 4x ps4 pro raw power as minium, with 32Gb or more of ram.
Just making it bigger because you expect it to get bigger is poor engineering. How much memory will actually be needed, based on time to populate it and how much devs can spend to fill it? That there will give you the RAM requirement. I'd far prefer less RAM and an SSD, and I'm sure devs would too. Far more flexible.
For a lot of these, SMT included, could help speed development time since developers aren't wasting excessive time optimizing. They can focus elsewhere.
It also helps with teams who don't have the resources (indies, smaller studios)
I'm not a big fan of the 4K is wasted power narrative. Higher quality textures and more fine detail is what moves us to next gen among other details. Yes it's not as a big of a jump from lower levels, still a jump none the less.
There might be better areas to invest that power but I'm not necessarily sure if people would come to love the game more because of it.
There might be better areas to invest that power but I'm not necessarily sure if people would come to love the game more because of it.
Prophecy2k
Veteran
Tbh, with talk already about XB1X versions of games being in the 100GBs and with general HDD prices hardly moving, I'm not sure I'd want game assets to grow to an extent that we'd be limited to keeping 10 games max. on our console HDD. I feel as if storage space is the biggest issue with this for me.
- Status