PS1, PS2 might be tough but should be possible. PS4 should be given. Don't hold your breath for PS3. It's honestly not even worth the effort.
-
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.
Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation launch thread |OT8| - The Dark Tower (See Staff Post)
- Thread starter Mecha Meister
- Start date
- Status
So if I'm following the discussion properly HBM RAM has fallen quite a bit in the past year or two which means someone may have placed a large order for some. Do we have any theories on who that someone would be? Do we know of anyone who could potentially order larger volumes of the stuff than Sony for the PS5 and PS Now servers?
I know Stadia is using HBM2, but realistically are we expecting that their order would have caused this drastic drop in price?
If, hypothetically it was Sony who placed such an order then I understand the people who say the decision would have had to be made years ago when the prices were very high and it would have been a huge gamble. But wouldn't Sony have been able to assess the market and run projections on what their investment in this memory type would do to its price by the time the PS5 launched?
I am of the impression that every mention of HBM thus far with regards to the PS5 hints at there being more than one pool of RAM. So it's going to be HBMand DDR4. And mostly 8GB of HBM and 12-16GB DDR4.
I am also of the impression that having 8GB of HBM and 12-16GB of DDR4 is a lot better than having one pool o 16GB of GDDR6.
Honestly i could see MS do this, based on the same initiative they did with the BC of 360 and OG xbox games (4K upscaling, etc..).
I just wish / hope that Sony at least take's a second look at this and start doing something similar, would be such a waste to not ever be able to play those games.
True but both of them have been playing things different so far .
They might want to hold there cards until the last possible time.
I doubt both companies will talk about Teraflops much.
The most common complaint I hear about the current gen console experience isn't the lack of Teraflops or graphical power, it's the long install times, long load times, etc. Improving these things and making them even "instant" will do more for me than harping on about Teraflops. Everybody already expects better looking games, but nobody really expected SSDs. It's going to be great to see these consoles improve so dramatically in that area and no matter how ugly or pretty a game is, you can bet it won't make the user suffer through long load times, which makes the SSD a top priority to showcase IMO.
I'm sure there'll be Ray Tracing tech demos and stuff to highlight what the GPUs are capable of, and I'm sure we're going to say "wow" when those 1st party games are shown off in all their glory, but after suffering through Anthem and Destiny's long load times this gen, I'm going to appreciate the I/O in next gen consoles the most.
The most common complaint I hear about the current gen console experience isn't the lack of Teraflops or graphical power, it's the long install times, long load times, etc. Improving these things and making them even "instant" will do more for me than harping on about Teraflops. Everybody already expects better looking games, but nobody really expected SSDs. It's going to be great to see these consoles improve so dramatically in that area and no matter how ugly or pretty a game is, you can bet it won't make the user suffer through long load times, which makes the SSD a top priority to showcase IMO.
I'm sure there'll be Ray Tracing tech demos and stuff to highlight what the GPUs are capable of, and I'm sure we're going to say "wow" when those 1st party games are shown off in all their glory, but after suffering through Anthem and Destiny's long load times this gen, I'm going to appreciate the I/O in next gen consoles the most.
I'd like to see a side by side comparison where they show a 5 or 10 second clip where data is being loaded into the RAM or something like that. On one side is the setup of the PS4 and the other side is the PS5 and in the end we see the PS4 was able to move xxx MB of data, and the PS5 was able to move xxx GB of data. That'd be a quick way to hammer home how much faster this solution is.
To be more clear on GT Sport, the Iris rendering system bakes ray tracing using 8 rendering servers with a total of 320 cores.
www.gtplanet.net
Polyphony Digital Reveals GT Sport's "Iris" Ray Tracing System at CEDEC 2018
Since Polyphony Digital first launched Gran Turismo, the company has been creating some of the most graphically impressive titles in the video game industry. Detailed car models and beautiful lighting has been a hallmark of the series for more than 20 years. It's a bit of a mysterious art, though
www.gtplanet.net
I'm hoping the ssd can help with huge transitions like that. (Ps I don't know anything)
I doubt it. For one, why do what MS is already doing for them on X? Second, MS does it as a passion project. I doubt it fills their bottom line. There's a reason Sony said the customer demand isn't there. Sony just came to realize that the most vocal consumers are the ones that do care.
Why would a huge order lower prices? Wouldn't someone gobbling up most capacity have a negative impact on pricing, at least in the short term?
Also, stadia is maybe what, 100k nodes? Sony wants to sell 100x that in one year alone.
PS1 and PS2 BC are trivially easy for them. As for the PS3, I've gone into the reasons I think they'll include BC for it many times but the biggest is to save tens of millions of dollars by not having to support and manufacture PS3 hardware in PS Now. On top of that it'll earn them a shitload of goodwill, the PS3 games will continue to help bolster the PS Now catalog and they could even make so e extra cash from players picking up older games from PSN.
Whatever it costs them to create an emulator for PS3 games on the PS5 is almost certainly a LOT cheaper than having to support PS3 hardware on PS Now.
#Think
I want that people think about HBM and what other impacts it actually has, other than cost.
Just to be prepared for the responses I expect: I am fully aware of that 3D stacking cooling patent but currently 2.5D is still standard or is anyone expecting a console would be the front runner for 3D stacking, an even more expensive method to build a console chip? Nope!
Means, adding HBM 2.5D stacked to your console SOC you add another source of heat near the CPU/GPU cores on the same interposer. Guess what this does to your attempt to achieve high clock speeds: It makes it even more challenging because you have to handle an increased heat dissipation for your package because of that HBM memory. That combined heat is now also on a smaller area compared to what you would have to handle with memory outside the SOC package like with GDDR6. And we all know cooling is more challenging with a small area that produces a large amount of heat.
So for all those high clocked PS5 dreams HBM is actually counter productive when applied by 2.5D stacking.
#MerryChristmas
I want that people think about HBM and what other impacts it actually has, other than cost.
Just to be prepared for the responses I expect: I am fully aware of that 3D stacking cooling patent but currently 2.5D is still standard or is anyone expecting a console would be the front runner for 3D stacking, an even more expensive method to build a console chip? Nope!
Means, adding HBM 2.5D stacked to your console SOC you add another source of heat near the CPU/GPU cores on the same interposer. Guess what this does to your attempt to achieve high clock speeds: It makes it even more challenging because you have to handle an increased heat dissipation for your package because of that HBM memory. That combined heat is now also on a smaller area compared to what you would have to handle with memory outside the SOC package like with GDDR6. And we all know cooling is more challenging with a small area that produces a large amount of heat.
So for all those high clocked PS5 dreams HBM is actually counter productive when applied by 2.5D stacking.
#MerryChristmas
Last edited:
Let's not bring any more of this fanboy stuff in here. MS have new studios and more competent devs than we can imagine.
Honestly I want to know more about the additional custom hardware, that stuff is where sony and ms shine
I was under the impression that more money being poured into that memory type would help it by expanding capacity and improving yields over time as some of that money goes towards increasing efficiency.
Yes, but that wouldn't be immediate. We're hearing prices already dropped.
True, but if these negotiations were done 2+ years ago could the expansion have begun at that point to prepare for the volume the PS5 will need, and by extension affect the price in the meantime?
Factories take years to build. They would have had to commit way ahead of time. Maybe that happened and Cerny has been conceiving of this since the Pro was finalized.
I've also been rethinking the whole reram thing. I was originally thinking that Sony would want to do everything in-house for their semicon division, but what if their role in this is more like AMD with their chips where they design everything and then actual manufacturing is farmed out to whoever? From what I understand reram can be manufactured at existing NAND facilities without requiring any major retooling. So in this case what if Sony is utilizing someone else like Samsung to get the massive volumes of chips they'd need?
I'm not sure if Sony has existing facilities that could make ReRAM and AFAIK none have been announced to be under construction. If they are planning to roll it out in 2020 then I guess that does mean they are utilizing a partner with existing infrastructure. For example we know Sony's building a new facility for image sensors but that won't be ready til 2021, not a peep about a facility for reram.
I'm not sure if Sony has existing facilities that could make ReRAM and AFAIK none have been announced to be under construction. If they are planning to roll it out in 2020 then I guess that does mean they are utilizing a partner with existing infrastructure. For example we know Sony's building a new facility for image sensors but that won't be ready til 2021, not a peep about a facility for reram.
Other than raytracing, has there been any news on major improvements we can expect to see in graphics pipelines? Will there be anything that makes as large of a difference as PBR has?
Well if the HBM theory is true I'm guessing that's how it would have played out.
Anyways, even if they go GDDR6 it'll be great. I think some folk are hoping for some slightly more exotic tech to help differentiate both next gen boxes.
Also, more reddit stuff:
Running the games, sure, but verifying legal ownership is a different story. Requiring a drive that can verify the physical security mechanisms used for PS1 and PS2 would impact the ability to source the drive inexpensively, so I don't believe it'll happen. It would be a different story if PS1 and PS2 libraries were digital purchases all their customers already had associated with their accounts - but they're not, and so I'm not expecting anything but PS4 compatibility. They'd get so much more mileage out of any improvements they can deliver on PS4 titles (including PS2 and PS3 ports) that it's simply not worth thinking about anything else. IMHO, of course.
Global illumination and soft area lights can be achieved in a variety of ways that don't require brute-force raytracing, and it would definitely have a dramatic impact on the look of games. Volumetric effects for smoke and fire should take a huge step forward. There are plenty of other techniques that are well understood but poorly approximated in current generation games due to lack of computational muscle - expect shader complexity to take a step forward for water, hair, skin, and other materials that we thought looked acceptable this generation but were really fairly half-baked.
We're not prepared for what's possible, and everyone who expects current generation graphics at higher resolutions and frame rates is setting their sights way too low. Image quality has a long way to go, though we'll be able to soak up extra GPU power fast enough to push games right back to 30fps with temporal injection at sub-4k resolutions in order to look their very best.
thanks to flutter, we know navi 10 lite wasnt 40 cus.
its been reported multiple times that navi 12 was the 40 cu part that got released as a navi 10 5700.
wccftech reporeted a 40 cu navi 12 back in november of 2018.
here is komachi saying that navi 10 lite and navi 10 are completely different.
long story short, the ps5, just like the scarlett, was always based on the bigger navi gpu just like wccftech reported. navi 12 became navi 10 but the ps5 gpu remained navi 10 lite.
here are some more of his quotes in replies to that tweet.
Mark Cerny told the PS5 R&D began before the PS4 Pro release on 2015 and the first SSD patent was filed in 2015.
Sony has actually teamed up with Micron to make ReRAM chips.
Here's the argument Mark Cerny presented at Gamelab 2013 about their choice going with 256-bit GDDR5 @ 176 GB/s vs 128-bit GDDR5 @ 88 GB/s + small eDRAM @ 1088 GB/sec (over 1 TB/s).
Starts at 38 minutes 54 seconds in.
On one hand, that might also make for an argument against using High Bandwidth Memory in PS5. However, unlike the typical embedded memory which would be limited to the tens of MegaBytes (i.e. 32 MB eDRAM in Wii U GPU, 32 GB ESRAM on Xbox One GPU and 64-128 MB eDRAM with Intel integrated GPUs) the HBM would be in the GigaBytes (i.e. 8 GB, at least).
Starts at 38 minutes 54 seconds in.
On one hand, that might also make for an argument against using High Bandwidth Memory in PS5. However, unlike the typical embedded memory which would be limited to the tens of MegaBytes (i.e. 32 MB eDRAM in Wii U GPU, 32 GB ESRAM on Xbox One GPU and 64-128 MB eDRAM with Intel integrated GPUs) the HBM would be in the GigaBytes (i.e. 8 GB, at least).
Here's the argument Mark Cerny presented at Gamelab 2013 about their choice going with 256-bit GDDR5 @ 176 GB/s vs 128-bit GDDR5 @ 88 GB/s + small eDRAM @ 1088 GB/sec (over 1 TB/s).
Starts at 38 minutes 54 seconds in.
Wanted to get something straight. So what Cerny is saying here is that if you have a large amount of memory but it's running at slower bandwidth, and you have a smaller amount of very fast memory, you can add those two numbers together to represent the total memory bandwidth. Got it.
Just wanted to make sure because I remember hearing from a lot of posters that wasn't possible... once upon a time.
/s
Here's the argument Mark Cerny presented at Gamelab 2013 about their choice going with 256-bit GDDR5 @ 176 GB/s vs 128-bit GDDR5 @ 88 GB/s + small eDRAM @ 1088 GB/sec (over 1 TB/s).
Starts at 38 minutes 54 seconds in.
On one hand, that might also make for an argument against using High Bandwidth Memory in PS5. However, unlike the typical embedded memory which would be limited to the tens of MegaBytes (i.e. 32 MB eDRAM in Wii U GPU, 32 GB ESRAM on Xbox One GPU and 64-128 MB eDRAM with Intel integrated GPUs) the HBM would be in the GigaBytes (i.e. 8 GB, at least).
Had they gone with 128-bit bus they might have ended up with 4GB GDDR6 total ram, and that would have been after a last minute density increase!
I recall Major Nelson / Larry Hryb made the same comparison between Xbox 360 and PS3 bandwidth by adding Xbox 360's GDDR3 and EDRAM bandwidths together.
When it's only 32MB and it's not particularly fast, aggregating the bandwidth is pretty meaningless. I think Sony was probably looking at something in the order of 256MB of EDRAM at the time. The EDRAM scenario would have been far less limiting at that size while actually providing a tremendous bandwidth advantage rather than simply representing the missing bandwidth GDDR would have provided...
Indeed there are a lot of variables involved in BC and it really depends on whether Sony are willing to invest the time and money to make it happen with those older systems. Ideally what I'd like to happen is full BC with all the previous gen consoles (maybe even some handheld games) and then they'd use AI upscaling to improve both the resolution and texture quality. It'd give old games a new lease on life, PS Now could benefit from the mammoth amount of games that could be added from this list and owners would be very happy with these additional options. Maybe we won't get full BC at launch, but I'm hopeful that it'll eventually be there.
I believe their partnership with Micron ended years ago. Since then Sony announced they're going at it alone and have talked about their 128 GB and 256 GB chips
Good day to you sir. If you don't mind I'd like to pick your brain about the general concept of having a cache like ReRAM between the SSD and RAM. Given the limited info we have so far 128 GB of ReRAM has a speed of 25.6 GB/s and 256 GB has a speed of 51.2 GB/s. How much of a difference do you think such a cache would have on actual performance in games and what developers could do in their games? Are we talking about a decent bump to what they could conceivably do, or is this a "throw the rule book out the window" sort of jump?
Keep in mind of course that we have no clue if ReRAM will make it into the PS5 and if it'll achieve those speeds, but I was wondering if you had any insights to this hypothetical scenario given your knowledge of the industry.
Thanks :)
User Banned (3 Days): Hostility to other members. Platform warring
Yeah, also remember someone saying there was no way ms would give up a 30% power advantage to sony and that people will have a hard time over the next 10 years dying on that power gap hill because MS created DirectX. So spot on.
So people posting things on the internet can be wrong. We agree!
The master plan...to create the perfect console...
I'm not a storage or data-transfer expert so hard to give any good insight beyond what's been posted before. Historically most drives (even SSD I believe) had some onboard memory to help with data transfer. I'm not sure however if it's as necessary with NVME drives. Seems like interesting tech and surely Sony is investing here.
Lmao damn it's getting hot in here. Good thing I'm on the hype train
Many NVMe drives have local DRAM and configure a portion of the drive as SLC cache for faster access. The former isn't necessary as they can use system RAM.
Can we just leave Albert alone about that shit. At this point he is just another member of the forum. Is there any point messing with him about that stuff.
Hmm, was rewatching the Persistent Memory Summit 2019 stream where the Sony rep was discussing ReRAM:
(ReRAM talk begins at 7:34:00)
At the start of the Q&A session afterwards when the host asks about the major focus for product and market, this is where he confirms they've accelerated their plans to 2020. Regarding the subject of product and market focus for the tech he says:
"I followed the Intel Optane solution, so customer needs a second solution right? To expand a new architecture for DRAM and NAND, between the DRAM and NAND solution the customer needs"
So it seems they were talking about using ReRAM as a cache here. Still really curious about this because estimates from random people online have 128 GB of ReRAM costing maybe 40 dollars or so, and they're preparing the tech for a 2020 launch. They've talked about sticking it right between the NAND and DRAM which is absolutely perfect for the PS5 as well. Unless there are reasons to believe they can't manufacture enough ReRAM chips I can't see any reason why they wouldn't be putting it in the PS5.
(ReRAM talk begins at 7:34:00)
At the start of the Q&A session afterwards when the host asks about the major focus for product and market, this is where he confirms they've accelerated their plans to 2020. Regarding the subject of product and market focus for the tech he says:
"I followed the Intel Optane solution, so customer needs a second solution right? To expand a new architecture for DRAM and NAND, between the DRAM and NAND solution the customer needs"
So it seems they were talking about using ReRAM as a cache here. Still really curious about this because estimates from random people online have 128 GB of ReRAM costing maybe 40 dollars or so, and they're preparing the tech for a 2020 launch. They've talked about sticking it right between the NAND and DRAM which is absolutely perfect for the PS5 as well. Unless there are reasons to believe they can't manufacture enough ReRAM chips I can't see any reason why they wouldn't be putting it in the PS5.
Iirc, Sony generally produces their own drives, probably a large part of the reason the PS4 Pro didn't support UHD discs was Sony didn't have an in- house drive ready yet. The disc verification method used on PS1 and PS2 is fairly simple and was implemented on the PS3's blu-ray drive. Keep in mind it was a method that dirt cheap PS1 and PS2 slims could implement, and still works pretty good.
Newer drives might not be optimized for random access anymore, on the other hand. But there there'll be enough RAM to cache any PS1 or PS2 disc in RAM, and the faster read speeds should make up for it.
If PS5 has a SSD with 4~5GB/s and even 20GB RAM (games), RAM can be filled up in less than 4~5 sec. Why does PS5 still need ReRAM?
Well for 128 GB ReRAM they could fill the RAM in under a second and with the 256 GB variant they could fill it in under half a second. I'm sure devs could figure out some unique and useful ways to take advantage of that huge speed boost to stream in assets.
My thinking is Sony is launching a brand new business segment with ReRAM and by having PlayStation as a customer that immediately gives it a mammoth contract. The PS5 and its extreme speeds could be used as a demonstration to other potential buyers of their ReRAM tech for their own applications.
Here's the argument Mark Cerny presented at Gamelab 2013 about their choice going with 256-bit GDDR5 @ 176 GB/s vs 128-bit GDDR5 @ 88 GB/s + small eDRAM @ 1088 GB/sec (over 1 TB/s).
Starts at 38 minutes 54 seconds in.
On one hand, that might also make for an argument against using High Bandwidth Memory in PS5. However, unlike the typical embedded memory which would be limited to the tens of MegaBytes (i.e. 32 MB eDRAM in Wii U GPU, 32 GB ESRAM on Xbox One GPU and 64-128 MB eDRAM with Intel integrated GPUs) the HBM would be in the GigaBytes (i.e. 8 GB, at least).
And out of a few Vega Cards,the 2080 Ti and some Titan GPU, all GPU card are 8 GB or less it means before game engine are made for exploit virtual texturing and tailor streaming around fast storage it is a viable RAM size.
Last edited:
- Status