-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Coretek video about AMD strategy and the console
- Thread starter chris 1515
- Start date
The one thing this video does is help establish why IO is so important and backs it up with quotes from Nvidia, Lisa Su's career path, and even the creation of Zen / HSA / CELL.
He even has an AMD video demonstrating GPU advantages of a 5700xt against a 2080ti thanks to fast IO and PCIE 4.0
He even has an AMD video demonstrating GPU advantages of a 5700xt against a 2080ti thanks to fast IO and PCIE 4.0
So not giving him a click wasn't because you didn't like that point and discredited the entire video cuz of it?! It wasn't just me who through that, so maybe the way you wrote it didn't explain your thought as well as you think it did?
That's... An embarassing video. The thread couldn't get good from that as a base.
Alright first off:
1. PS5 magic SSD tech: There are already PCie 4.0 devices on the market. In fact, there are even cards to put even pcie 3.0 ssds in raid and reach 15GB/s through the second PCIe x16 port. People will be fine with regular fast NVMEs though. Even if PS5 has some kind of hardware to decompress data: You'll just load more assets into ram and VRAM on PCs. Plain and simple. Gotta fill those 16, 32 even 64GB of RAM. And when your midrange GPU will all feature 8GB, if not more, of VRAM, that's one less worry to have.
2. About Nvidia releasing a 700 dollars gpu on par with PS5... RTX 2080 is already under 700 dollars and is faster than PS5 GPU capabilities and SX is likely on par with it. You'll have to explain me how Nvidia's next GPU will only match that for the same price as a RTX2080 which is already under 700 bucks.
As for the whole "Alex lost, checkmate" whew OP. Tone down your console warrism. Not only your benchmark makes no sense, but you'll have to explain me how a Zen 2 CPU lower clocked than another Zen 2 CPU with a higher clocked outperforms it.
Alright first off:
1. PS5 magic SSD tech: There are already PCie 4.0 devices on the market. In fact, there are even cards to put even pcie 3.0 ssds in raid and reach 15GB/s through the second PCIe x16 port. People will be fine with regular fast NVMEs though. Even if PS5 has some kind of hardware to decompress data: You'll just load more assets into ram and VRAM on PCs. Plain and simple. Gotta fill those 16, 32 even 64GB of RAM. And when your midrange GPU will all feature 8GB, if not more, of VRAM, that's one less worry to have.
2. About Nvidia releasing a 700 dollars gpu on par with PS5... RTX 2080 is already under 700 dollars and is faster than PS5 GPU capabilities and SX is likely on par with it. You'll have to explain me how Nvidia's next GPU will only match that for the same price as a RTX2080 which is already under 700 bucks.
As for the whole "Alex lost, checkmate" whew OP. Tone down your console warrism. Not only your benchmark makes no sense, but you'll have to explain me how a Zen 2 CPU lower clocked than another Zen 2 CPU with a higher clocked outperforms it.
If you watched the Road to PS5 a developer doesn't need to optimize for the SSD. Most of these benefits are free and painless.
Because that statement is incredibly stupid. Is 5.5GB/s the magic cutoff point? Why wouldn't the demo be possible on a 2.4GB/s drive?
The XSX SSD is super fast. It just happens to be slower than PS5. This is nowhere near the difference between a HDD and a SSD.
HDD to SSD - ~100x increase
XSX to PS5 - ~2.2x increase
No one is denying it's important, but for multi-plats, they are going to target something much lower & PS5's weaker GPU is still a factor too, it's not 13-14 rdna3 tflops like Era was sure of a few weeks ago.
The whole thing, from the OP to the video, appears to be reactionary trying to stop the momentum that Series X might actually be more powerful. The only thing that I want to take away from it all is AMD forcing Nvidia to be more price competitive. Which I think everyone can agree on.
Yes, I linked to that AMD demo below. AMD said up to 69% graphics improvement PCI 4.0 is seeing over 3.0.
Here is the AMD demo at Computer highlighting the impact of PCI 4.0's high I/O capabilities on graphics/performance (video forwarded to 1:04:48) :
AMD keynote Computex 2019: Ryzen 3rd Gen desktop, RDNA architecture and AMD Radeon RX 5700
https://notebookitalia.it/amd-ryzen-3rd-gen-per-desktop-zen-2-7-nm-28397 https://notebookitalia.it/amd-radeon-rx-5700-gpu-rdna-7-nm-28398 AMD announces next-...youtu.be
this is not about the raw speed, at all. i am not sure why is this the number that always gets thrown around.
the real deal here is the IO die, its not what the SSD can reach in raw figures, its what you can do with these figures and how is your latency.
We have here Alex saying he saw CPU benches during the MS yet people ignoring and applauding a random video on YouTube (please check the rest of the YouTube channel and you will see why you should not take any info he says as a rule).
There are tons of YouTube videos about PS5 and Xbox doing futurology, should we open a thread for each?
There are tons of YouTube videos about PS5 and Xbox doing futurology, should we open a thread for each?
I watched it, and the Xbox Series X SSD will do the same. There won't be a difference. They will not create games that will only work with PS5 SSDs and will run much worse on all other SSDs. This doesn't make any sense.
The Memory Bandwidth, GPU and CPU will make a MUCH bigger difference.
eh. Even at super fast SSD speeds, you still need to be conservative with what you load into RAM. It's a limited resource which is why the console manufacturers are creating new APIs to work with it. However, it's by no means free to a developer and still requires deliberate choices.
He actually makes an amazing case why focusing on compute is a wreck less.
GPUs, in this video, are more than just Teraflops. He than goes onto show a presentation by Nvidia to acknowledge that.
His claim is that removing bottlenecks plaguing modern day development are more vital to efficiency than just raw compute. In fact he also says XSX will win in percentage points in resolution and framerate.
Once again check the video.
Because it's the new 8GB of GDDR5. It's the very same carnival of stupid.
"Wow ! 8GB of fast ram pool ! Not even PCs does have that ! Impossible to make on other platforms thanks to that ! The PCie bandwith of GPUs are a big bottleneck ! Thank god for Cerny's GDDR5 and hUma which will be a revolution in the industry".
Every single time a new console generation happens, you have users throwing buzzwords that happened to appear in a slide presentation. GPGPU, hUma, 8GB of GDDR5, ESRAM, SSD, 5.5GB/s.
It's like people never learns.
Are you a developer? Can you for certain tell us this? Because you already are presuming this has to do with ssd speed when the video makes it a point that its not about ssd speed but the way GPU CPU AND SSD communicate.
But if your developing a game and have first hand knowledge of this we are all ears.
Too many emotional people who have sided with one company since day one (of when systems were announced) that will obviously be the hardest to convince otherwise. I can't imagine any developer coming forward who is making games on both that will say one has a clear addvantage overall than the other, aside from those making exclusive games.
There is context here though, Nvidia has for at least a decade have done far worse in compute than AMD, they only caught up with Turing recently, of course Nvidia is going to play it off as it doesn't matter, likewise Sony who praised the advantages of compute in 2013 & even got 6 extra ACE's in the PS4 for that reason, are now saying it doesn't matter when Microsoft has the advantage. Corporations can be biased.
Really it's going to come down to the software & which platform developers choose as the lead.
Forget I said anything (not like it matters) - I think i am 100% done talking about next gen consoles here on ResetERA.
I don't get it. They suggest work from home. How can you not take every YouTube video as factual, especailly when you have all these armchair critics mixed in?
On a more serious note thank you for all your input and videos from DF, appreciate it.
I don't blame you man. You've had your credibility and knowledge brought into question time and time again here since the XSX/PS5 reveal purely because some of your statements don't align with others who worship their plastic box. This place is awful right now when it comes to these shitty console wars.
Wait am I missing something? I thought they were a pretty good site for this kind of stuff
Here is the AMD demo at Computer highlighting the impact of PCI 4.0's high I/O capabilities on graphics/performance (video forwarded to 1:04:48) :
AMD keynote Computex 2019: Ryzen 3rd Gen desktop, RDNA architecture and AMD Radeon RX 5700
https://notebookitalia.it/amd-ryzen-3rd-gen-per-desktop-zen-2-7-nm-28397 https://notebookitalia.it/amd-radeon-rx-5700-gpu-rdna-7-nm-28398 AMD announces next-...
Pcie 4 based system Above 60% more?
So that mitigates or even surpasses the compute deficit ?
Alex, I was just agreeing with you, I take your word because you saw it, you have concrete proof. Your are not random guy taking random guesses.
I'm sad that you will not participate more on this discussion but I understand, it's just too much noise and people with clear agendas just pushing the information that they want to be true (but are not).
I will look forward as always for your videos.
That's a shame but I guess when people practically harrass you with incessant tagging and scrutinize every possible sentence you write because it doesn't fit the narrative in their head, it's only natural to try and get as far away as possible.
For what it's worth, your input on this site is really appreciated.
I think that's a wise choice, you'll save yourself the headache.
Personally, I'm at a point where I just want to see the next-gen games. Both consoles are amazing, we could just leave it at that while we wait for the games to be revealed.
The guy in the Coretek video himself says he couldn't care less about who wins the "console wars." He's a PC gamer and is concerned with the PC industry and GPUs.
I am not the OP, but I did the summary of the video OP quoted. I am not trying to stop any "momentum" (Sony's marketing is already doing a good job with that), but instead it in some ways it's a validation of why Sony went with their I/O and bandwidth focused architecture design. Microsoft designed a more powerful system that is a direct descendent of the X1X/PS4 design philosophy, with a monster GPU/CPU that is probably better than what gamers were expecting of next-gen a couple years ago. And XSX obviously will enjoy the tremendous benefits its SSD will bring over the previous generation. Sony's design philosophy with the PS5 is shooting off into a new "line" in console design evolution with a focus on a more balanced system, less powerful but highly prioritizing I/O and removing bottlenecks. As for which direction future hardware will take, who knows, but it sounds like even Nvidia and AMD are suggesting more focus on bandwidth in the future and less on compute.
My take is that on games not designed to fully exploit bandwidth XSX will have better graphics but the difference will probably only be resolution or the time it can sustain max resolution if it's dynamic.
Most gamers out of the minority that check resolution / frame rate analisys videos wont be able to see much difference between both platforms on multiplatform games.
What is going to be more relevant than ever to atract people are exclusive games and I personally can't wait to see the first games that truly push both platforms.
This console power wars is going to be the silliest one ever but I'll watch it from the sidelines as it's always entertaining.
Most gamers out of the minority that check resolution / frame rate analisys videos wont be able to see much difference between both platforms on multiplatform games.
What is going to be more relevant than ever to atract people are exclusive games and I personally can't wait to see the first games that truly push both platforms.
This console power wars is going to be the silliest one ever but I'll watch it from the sidelines as it's always entertaining.
A poster whose username I can't recall right now responded to a platform wars comment with the incredible comeback "I can't argue with religion". Some people don't want to discuss or learn, they want to believe. You really are wasting your time with them. See you in the PC threads.
APU doesn't have an external IO die and that's why it's faster with memory accessing. Thus it doesn't need a large L3 cache like the desktop CPUs do. Alex might have been wrong on this, however the huge gap of frequency isn't something that you can simply get ignored of. 3700 CPUs can easily go for 4.2+GHz on all cores, meanwhile even the XSX can only do 3.8GHz and let alone the PS5@<=3.5GHz. A 500-800 MHz frequency gap for CPU is there. And yet era drove away another great editor that many of us supported.
I can feel you. It's annoying even being not involved it's cringe to see the constant highlighting.
I think it would probably be best to just save your energy for those excellent video's you guys make.
He just said he saw a bench of gears 5, XSX vs pc, during his visit to MS. Really don't understand this comment.
Uh, sorry, this video is kinda shit? And completely wrong and offbase? What is even going on here?
Like, it takes comments and statistics about how moving memory from RAM to cache (e.g. "from DDR4 to on-cpu-cache") is the most expensive operation you can do, in terms of latency and power consumption -- which are wholly accurate, and not even an exclusive focus for nVidia; everyone who cares about performance and power consumption knows about that, that's what AMD's experiment with HBM a few years back was all about -- and extrapolates that to I/O performance?? What kind of mental gymnastics are required to say "Well one console has slightly more memory bandwidth and you'd be hard pressed to tell the two apart" and then to hop over to the I/O bandwidth as saying "This is where things get interesting; Sony has won the console war right here"? On what grounds? By further misinterpreting a slide that talks about "low latency/high bandwidth access", which, again, is talking about loading from persistent storage to RAM, NOT RAM to cache, and doesn't directly affect things like CPU or GPU frametimes, and is cited as something that AMD's GPU architecture utilizes? Or, talking about how "computation in modern processes isn't the bottleneck, but actually communication" and seems to think the I/O performance is a direct link to that?! No. What? No!
And the compression and decompression that nVidia has is for a totally different use case than decompressing from persistent storage. Not all compressors and decompressors are the same, and the application that GPUs have for decompression are WILDLY different than the applications for loading game data off of a disk. Why would you conflate the two? HOW would you conflate the two?! And to further than state RDNA2 GPUs are also going to have zlib decompressors onboard as well? Why would you say that?
Oh my god, oh no, people are using this as an informative source? And saying it has a good attention to detail? All hope is lost.
Like, it takes comments and statistics about how moving memory from RAM to cache (e.g. "from DDR4 to on-cpu-cache") is the most expensive operation you can do, in terms of latency and power consumption -- which are wholly accurate, and not even an exclusive focus for nVidia; everyone who cares about performance and power consumption knows about that, that's what AMD's experiment with HBM a few years back was all about -- and extrapolates that to I/O performance?? What kind of mental gymnastics are required to say "Well one console has slightly more memory bandwidth and you'd be hard pressed to tell the two apart" and then to hop over to the I/O bandwidth as saying "This is where things get interesting; Sony has won the console war right here"? On what grounds? By further misinterpreting a slide that talks about "low latency/high bandwidth access", which, again, is talking about loading from persistent storage to RAM, NOT RAM to cache, and doesn't directly affect things like CPU or GPU frametimes, and is cited as something that AMD's GPU architecture utilizes? Or, talking about how "computation in modern processes isn't the bottleneck, but actually communication" and seems to think the I/O performance is a direct link to that?! No. What? No!
And the compression and decompression that nVidia has is for a totally different use case than decompressing from persistent storage. Not all compressors and decompressors are the same, and the application that GPUs have for decompression are WILDLY different than the applications for loading game data off of a disk. Why would you conflate the two? HOW would you conflate the two?! And to further than state RDNA2 GPUs are also going to have zlib decompressors onboard as well? Why would you say that?
Oh my god, oh no, people are using this as an informative source? And saying it has a good attention to detail? All hope is lost.
its been especially bad once it was revealed that Xbox Series X has higher specs than PS5 aside from SSD. It kind of reminds of early days of PS3 and 360.
I kinda wish that the PS5 had advantage in every spec so this forum could be back to normal.
There simply won't be a game that would fully exploit that bandwidth. The 10GB VRAM(ish) that XSX had is plenty enough for 4K gaming if the memory space was [optimized], and the devs were not out of their minds. And Microsoft provided a lot of ways, methods, to save memory usage by a large factor. It would never be the bottleneck of any game that is designed by a well and healthy mind.
Remember that we have merely 13.5GB of GDDR6 available, and many of them simply shouldn't be released unless you shut the whole game down (like assets of the main character).
What's more important is the memory gap.
As we have talked about, when Zen 2 had a slow IO die, they chose to upgrade the L3 cache. And they made it pretty good to mitigate performance issues. The thing is, it's always more optimal to upgrade the faster hierarchy when possible. If you had a faster or larger L3, you don't need to have a super fast DDR4 memory. If you had plenty of memory, you don't need to have blazing fast SSD.
Last edited:
Dude, there are a lot of us who enjoy your input and analysis, don't allow a few users here stop you from doing what you love. Most of us aren't even tech experts and most times reading your takes and input goes a long way in helping us better understand a lot of this stuff.
Dunning Kruger is very much a thing. Unfortunately these Pied Pipers have many children to follow them.
Nah, it's the same regardless of who's on top. The PS4/XB1 launch was just as bad because the 360 was so beloved. Microsoft fumbling that launch broke a lot of people.
That's console wars for you.
Why would SSD speed ever be something that prevents PCs from running games when we can just add more ram to our PCs, to act as a cache, which is even faster? Worst case scenario is that games would just require 16 to 32GB of ram as a minimum. Acting like SSD speed is a brick wall to PC gaming is silly.
XSX is 3.6 with SMT, so it's actually pretty close to PS5, it's the GPU that's the big difference obviously.
I do wonder if any devs will turn off SMT though.
I really need someone to explain how the XSX is not a balanced system. It seems like there was so much thought out into every component and everything is tuned toward the same performance goals.
it was bad, but Sony fans were over represented on both the old forum and here so it's more noticeable with the lead up to PS3/360 and the lead up to PS5/XSX
It's a very well balanced system. Much more balanced than it's opponent IMO. When you're being bottlenecked by the 446GB/s memory bandwidth and 10TF GPU ( for me, even 12TF isn't that futureproof ), a 5.5GB/s or 9GB/s blazing fast SSD is literally pointless when you have other choices like 3.6GB/s or 2.4GB/s, much cheaper parts to choose.
I study CS, write code, make games. And my graduate design of my university is a CPU with L1 & L2 caches. It's not much, but I was just showing that I know what I was talking about.
Oh and I forgot about one thing: universal engines like UE4 and Unity are still leaning on heavily on a "main thread" which usually cause a threading bottleneck. Especially for lower end CPUs. On high end CPUs, with higher frequency, the bottleneck thread won't be causing too much trouble, thus can make use of other threads more. So literally at least for games that we can make today, it's really not wise to enable HT and take a hit on frequency.
A scenario that I can think of which would make HT useful is about massive AIs. Or other massive scripted roles. Each script is relatively simple and they sync on a time based frequency instead of being dependent on each other. Some engines made use of this. Problem is that it makes more unexpected AI behavior sometimes... needs more debug investments.
Last edited:
I'm sorry, but i don´t agree with this. Believe what you want, but the next gen speculation thread was peaceful believing that XBOX was better until Reiner said that the PS5 was better, then hell broke down.
The problem is in both sides, not one.