-
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.
Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation launch thread |OT7| - nm
- Thread starter Mecha Meister
- Start date
- Status
A lot of stuff will come down to tooling, DirectX, and the XDK. The tooling won't be final until summer, so there's definitely a ways to go. We're a year away from launch :)
I can understand it having less RAM (assuming it's a unified memory architecture) since running games at lower resolutions doesn't require as much VRAM, but a lower CPU clock doesn't make any sense to me.
He said same CPU coming here for me GPU, RAM size and bandwidth can be different this will have a minimal impact. Here it means the third party will design the game around the Lockhart CPU. Yikes...
Well it will get easier as the gen goes on since they always trying to make tools better even all during the gen .
There it is.
For those coming in to complain, the lower targeted resolutions don't need the extra RAM of the 4K versions. They can both have the same amount of RAM used for actually running the games and the scope and not need the RAM.
Can someone explain to me why they think a 1080 or 1440p console needs the same RAM as 4K?
the 4K console and a lower specced one can still Draw on the same amount of Ram for actual gaming thus not reducing scope.
You haven't heard ? They will reduce resolution and everything will work even cpu related tasks according to some here ;)
When you keep mentioning "please read properly" but then fail to properly read a quote that you accuse someone of saying, that's pretty sad.
This reasoning is nonsensical for the PS5. They don't have to concern themselves with a lower specced system. They're free to use the RAM for whatever they wish to use it for. Maybe it will be simply higher resolutions, maybe not.
But I'm not on board with the reasoning that "the engineers aren't idiots and have thought of all this! they wouldn't make a bad product!"
1.) Marketing and "business decisions" often guide product decisions that don't make a lot of sense. This isn't restricted to gaming hardware.
2.) Speaking of consoles and gaming hardware EXCLUSIVELY, boneheaded hardware decisions aren't exactly rare and engineers put together bad product ALL THE TIME. The PS3 specifically was an overdesigned mess that should have had a way less complex CPU than it did, a way more capable GPU than it did, and a unified pool of inexpensive RAM instead of the expensive split ram setup that it ended up with.
Were the engineers who designed it morons? No- but "business decisions" and a not insignificant amount of hubris led to a crazy expensive system that was only on par with a competitor hundreds of dollars cheaper that launched a year earlier- but far more difficult to develop for. And this is RECENT history- Nintendo, Atari and Sega's boneheaded hardware choices could fill a book.
Attempting to highlight an appeal to hypocrisy by making an appeal to hypocrisy.
At least it seems the number of core and thread is the same but this is not very good. I hope the clock difference will be minimal.
The problem is thinking that devs always going to target 4k.
They could target 1440p on higher end systems .
When it comes to making games look better res is always the first things that goes.
He's seriously started going off the rails after the Lockhart news...........SERIOUS BUSINESS.
Now I expect there will be a flood of posts about how CPU speed doesn't really matter either.
Since the lockhart news there has been a lot of console warring going on.... But i do the same as you slowly move out and just read the thread since i don't want to be involved in console warring. Me personally think this thread has become a sad state of affair.
PS. It's not like we don't know what users are overly involved with there "beloved" company
There is an additional CPU requirement with increased resolution. That's why the Pro and X both had higher CPU clocks over the base systems.
Question is how much lower clocked. Do you really need the exact same clock for a lower target for the gpu. Aren't you feeding less out?
As tom said it's around design.
I'm leaning harder on this being binned Scarlett chips. I know Komachi says otherwise but until I hear someone explain how they are running two APus at once and can start and stop on a whim on design I will say that one is a binned version of the other.
Have you made a single post in this thread that isn't a comment on other people's emotional states?
I don't understand. In today's news we heard the exact same from Jason and Tom:
GPU less, CPU less frequency, RAM less. The exact same.
Additionally, both believe this is not the end of the world, by far not, and say that the increase in RAM and storage is more important.
In yesterday's news Matt said he is still hyped and people are overreacting. Yet here we go again.
Think the question we should be asking now is how good is the RT hardware in next gen consoles.
One reason why we think it's going to be 1440p upscaled is because we cant see if a good ray traced game can be made without dropping the game into sub-native 4k.
Lockhart could also go with 1440/1080p with less RT implementations or none at all I guess.
It's not about 120 FPS (games running at that framerate will be few and far between). It's with CPU-bound games with a 30 FPS target where this becomes a problem. A CPU-bound game that targets 30 FPS will either need to be built with Lockhart's weaker CPU in mind or it will see performance issues on Lockhart. It's an example of where the weaker system could hold back the more powerful ones, but it depends on what the actual difference is in CPU clocks. I guess it suggests that MS is going with a cheaper cooling system for Lockhart. But if all games have to run on both systems, what's the point of one having a faster CPU than the other?
This thread is a Shame...and it will end with the same result that the infamous 20 million Nintendo's forecast thread, killing an insider
He posted here later and it confuse me. See his history.
Last edited:
Probably not. It's hilarious to me, I guess. And mildly entertaining in a perverse way.
Carry on.
Instead of that annoying DS4 light, you can now have it shine in your face while gaming!
That bakes in some assumptions and depends on a lot of things we don't know yet. Chiefly how much less RAM Lockhart has, and further, on individual game's data use. And further again, the degree to which the SSD changes things.
In other words, things developers will know best, individually, for their game. Things some devs are complaining about. And others, I presume, aren't.
Back of the napkin stuff, but assuming the same OS memory allocation as this gen, and if e.g. Anaconda/PS5 have 20GB of RAM, I'm not sure Lockhart should have less than 16GB of RAM if it wants to avoid, more or less in the general case, an impact on non-graphics memory allocations - even accounting for a 1080p/4K split (which is itself an assumption wrt resolutions Anaconda/PS5 will universally target or not). If it was - say - down at 12GB of RAM, I wouldn't be so confident talking in absolutes about there being no shortfall relative to Ana/PS5 for non-graphics data.
Those games are going to be PS5 exclusives only (not on PC either), and I don't think MS will have a problem with that.
I am almost confident enough to say that we won't see a single 30fps AAA game on Anaconda next generation.
Give me that $299 next-gen console with Game Pass:). Can't wait to see what kind of impact it has on the market, it's going to be an extremely appealing combo. Makes me more likely to eventually get a PS5 down the line too.
Well yeah, that's what I mean. 10.2TF isn't the correct guess.
That would impact lockhart not anaconda, unless you're a lockhart owner shouldn't really be concerned about the performance of the game. Lockhart will go between 1080p and 1440p
That is what i thinking they will drop Res to have better RT and we all know RT is a power hog .
I don't think anyone going for the highest end graphics is going to decide that they want 1440. Seems like a waste if your extra work.
Unified RAM scales with required throughput for GPU.
I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why both consoles need the exact same RAM when one has absolutely no need for it and would never use it.
can someone please explain to me why a 1080 console needs the same bandwidth and VRaM amount?
Indeed. I don't know for sure on RT, but you only have to look at how good 4K was on PS4 Pro / Xbox One X to answer it. Consoles always aim for unbelievable targets, and never really reach them every generation. Sony made 1080p a selling point for the PS3, and most devs targeted 720p. If we can get games that are consistently above 60fps and that load titles v.fast then I think that will be a bigger improvement than what RT can offer in current hardware form right now.
The 5500m is only 120 mm2 right? Zen 2 is 70 mm2 at full cache. 40 mm2 at 1/4 cache. At that point How much tdp are you really saving by cutting clocks down a bit. And why would you? How small is this console going to be? With no disc drive, tiny apu, smaller ssd, this will be a tiny console. I'm thinking wii u size.
But what's the point of reducing cpu and ram if the idea isn't to save costs? I wouldn't be surprised if they go with a smaller cpu instead of an underclocked one to save costs. A 6 core 12 thread cpu should be enough to compliment a 4 tflops gpu with 8gb ram.
When did that happen for PS4 in early years? I remember the complete outrage when AC:Unity was not native 1080p but 900p.
I'm betting this is going to be less of an issue than people are going to make it out to be in this thread. The clock difference is going to be minimal and solely done as a means for cost purposes. It's not going to be 50% or even 20% slower. It's going to be something like 5%.
I think that depends on how much they want to push RT .
We know RT uses a lot of power .
Lower clocked CPU means lower overall console TDP, so less spent on cooling.
You need to do more than just cut the GPU down by 2/3 in order to make a significant difference in BOM to market a value console. These are the compromises MS needs to make for a Lockhart to exist.
Many of us here have been saying this for a while.
Please explain, because everything I know about GPUs and how they work says otherwise.
Your wife must be a lovely and very likeable woman ;)
Colbert, my man, i swear you annoy me more than my wife.
im serious, lets discuss what i wrote. i pride myself on being open minded if not downright suggestible, lets see if you can convince me that this lockhart is a good idea. i have voiced a lot of concerns, pick one and lets discuss.
I really do not want to convince you that Lockhart is a thing for you. It isn't a thing for me either as I am a proud owner of a LG OLED 65 C9. I will go with Anaconda.
I just do not share all the concerns are made: Like a whole generation is hold back by Lockhart. Jeez. And I get it there are Devs that have that concern too. But I know Devs that don't have that concern at all. A single Dev is not representative of all devs and for sure not for the publishers that are in this for the money.
Lockhart is a decision tied to the strategy MS/Xbox is executing. Gaming anytime and anywhere. The market is segmented into different layers: All Digital, Mobile Gaming, Living Room Gaming,, 1080p Gaming, 4K Gaming, 60fps Gaming, 144fps Gaming, Subscriptions, owned games. They want to address all those segments if possible, and they don't get this done with only a higher priced console.
About all the concerns people should think about if they really thinking ...
... that Playstation exclusives are impacted on anything that Xbox does or does not?
... that Publishers and Devs don't want to showcase their game in the best possible way they can? (Like at the beginning of this gen they showcased on the PS4 and later after the mid-cycle updates they showcased on the Xbox One X)
- Status