Surely that same allocation can be applied to base PS5, and just isn't? There's nothing in hardware that'll explain this, right?
Surely that same allocation can be applied to base PS5, and just isn't? There's nothing in hardware that'll explain this, right?
Very likely no. Sony probably did the same thing they did with PS4 pro. Like Adding some DDR4 ram (there is already a 512MB DDR4 chip on PS5) and done some shenanigan with OS slow memory to use that ram instead of GDDR6 and increasing the amount of GDDR6 memory dedicated for games.Surely that same allocation can be applied to base PS5, and just isn't? There's nothing in hardware that'll explain this, right?
Please explain the tweet.
Please explain the tweet.
Most all the 40 series parts do have increased VRAM numbers. The 4060 and 4060Ti really should have been 4050 and 4050Ti at best though(and like $150 cheaper), at which point the 8GB would have looked perfectly reasonable. The 4060 is literally just a tiny, low end 146mm² part, for instance.It's an interesting conundrum, just like many of the RTX 40 cards having the same or even less VRAM than their predecessors despite some of the RTX 40 series' best selling points - even more RT, DLSS 3, and non-gaming AI workloads - increasing VRAM requirements.
AMD skipped versions 3 and 4 of their RT IP for some reason? There isn’t much we can infer from that even if it’s true.
I think what he is saying is that it's a huge jump for raytracing, not that rdna4 has magically got 3 new versions of rt cores all at once.So PS5 is a (slightly) earlier version of RT than RDNA2 and Xbox Series consoles. I thought it probably was based on how everything else appears to be pre-RDNA2.
You've got to give it to Sony, deciding to say PS5 was RDNA2 in response to Series X being marketed RDNA2 was both ballsy and very successful.
Version 3 could be, for instance, for some upcoming APU, with version 4 being for PS5 Pro. The PS5 Pro is clearly more advanced than RDNA3 but with the long development times of console APUs RDNA4 might be a little newer.
I think what he is saying is that it's a huge jump for raytracing, not that rdna4 has magically got 3 new versions of rt cores all at once.
He knows nothing his just a github lurkerThis stuff is so annoying to me. Kepler will know full well that people will be tripping over themselves trying to understand what he's actually saying and he's going to deliberately not clarify it because he enjoys that attention/intrigue.
You've got to give it to Sony, deciding to say PS5 was RDNA2 in response to Series X being marketed RDNA2 was both ballsy and very successful.
We're still doing this?
It is AMD who designed these systems that are making those claims.Well you are, against all evidence. And against all hardware features.
But was there any difference in practice? We didn't see any difference in RT unless I am missing somethingSo PS5 is a (slightly) earlier version of RT than RDNA2 and Xbox Series consoles. I thought it probably was based on how everything else appears to be pre-RDNA2.
You've got to give it to Sony, deciding to say PS5 was RDNA2 in response to Series X being marketed RDNA2 was both ballsy and very successful.
CUs from RDNA2 have int4 and int8. I'm sure that actual hardware designs are controband for believers.The evidence points to the PS5 using the backend from RDNA1 + CUs from RDNA 2. The version number of the RT unit is meaningless without an explanation of what it signifies.