No, you didn't. I've been crazy busy with work. It's coming.
Consider this a brief respite for those to be sacrificed.
-
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.
PlayStation 5 System Architecture Deep Dive |OT| Secret Agent Cerny
- Thread starter vestan
- Start date
- Status
Consider this a brief respite for those to be sacrificed.
It wasn't really a last minute change in fact.
They always wanted to have the 8GB GDDR5 but it takes times to negociate having it at the good price so they planned a "B plan" in case they negociation failed.
And while they speek with devs with the "plan B" just in case, they works in the 2 scenarios in the same time.
At last time, the negociation finally been sucessfull so they switch all to "Plan A" and put that RAM they always wanted to.
It was something they wanted to do, but it was a last minute push.
Mark Cerny "PS4 8GB GDDR5 RAM Was Decided in Very Final Meeting"
During an interview with Game Informer, PS4 lead architect Mark Cerny revealed the decision of the PlayStation 4 receiving 8GB of GDDR5 RAM was decided at the very final meeting. At first, it was going to only be limited to 4GB but Cerny knew that GDDR5 is far superior and made for the...
www.fraghero.com
I know it's hard to believe, but you'll just have to believe it : )
The gap between memory speed and CPU's speed is getting larger and larger, and to programmers RAM is nothing but an gigantic cache for the disk. If you turn off all the caches on your multi-thousand-dollar system all together, it'll feel like a 486.
All 10 GDDR6 interfaces operate simultaneously. At any given moment, say the CPU of XSX requests data reside on 2 chips, then the GPU will get to use
320 - 64 = 256 bits of bandwidth, for similar scenario on PS5, the GPU gets 256 - 64 = 192 bits of bandwidth.
Lady Gaia put my thoughts here better than I could ever do it.
Is that Tempest audio engine thing a discrete chip or something, or is it taking up silicon space in the main APU by sharing resources of the GPU or whatever?
In either case, I find it concerning that Sony would waste R&D resources and/or wafer acreage on audio matters, when that isn't even what the mainstream audience is going to care about as much as extra graphics power.
Could this audio engine investment be Sony's equivalent to Xbox One's Kinect camera and eSRAM follies/blunder? Are they not jumping through all these other hoops now, like variable frequency, just to contain costs and power budget? Sounds like something that could've been avoidable.
It would seem that Cerny's only ace in the hole really is this super fast SSD that makes it a Super PlayStation, and it's the only thing keeping me in the PlayStation camp; but I feel like this is going to be dangerously close to PS3 all over again where it will be an exclusives machine again and the exclusives are never even all that good because they don't have Zelda nor Mario.
So they have an ace in the hole, but their saving grace will be to not fuck up the marketing (by continuing to focus on games, games, games). Let's hope Sony can pull it off by just maintaining their current course. Just let Cerny continue to do all the talking, and lock down that Activision/Call-of-Duty marketing.
In either case, I find it concerning that Sony would waste R&D resources and/or wafer acreage on audio matters, when that isn't even what the mainstream audience is going to care about as much as extra graphics power.
Could this audio engine investment be Sony's equivalent to Xbox One's Kinect camera and eSRAM follies/blunder? Are they not jumping through all these other hoops now, like variable frequency, just to contain costs and power budget? Sounds like something that could've been avoidable.
It would seem that Cerny's only ace in the hole really is this super fast SSD that makes it a Super PlayStation, and it's the only thing keeping me in the PlayStation camp; but I feel like this is going to be dangerously close to PS3 all over again where it will be an exclusives machine again and the exclusives are never even all that good because they don't have Zelda nor Mario.
So they have an ace in the hole, but their saving grace will be to not fuck up the marketing (by continuing to focus on games, games, games). Let's hope Sony can pull it off by just maintaining their current course. Just let Cerny continue to do all the talking, and lock down that Activision/Call-of-Duty marketing.
I thought it was the opposite. From the onset 4GB was planned. Plan B was 8GB if price allowed. At the last minute, prices dropped and they pushed for 8GB
I don't think he's overstating the impact of cache. Comparing to GPU's constant stream of data, CPU's memory access still look few and far between. Even in bandwidth's terms, a high end quad channel DDR4 setup can achieve somewhere 70GB/s of bandwidth, say with a CPU running at 3.6 GHz, that gives you a quarter of a typical cache line accessed per cycle. Doesn't sound like a lot but it should already be an overkill for consoles, as I don't think anyone will be rendering 4K raw videos on their gaming consoles.
Last edited:
It was something they wanted to do, but it was a last minute push.
Mark Cerny "PS4 8GB GDDR5 RAM Was Decided in Very Final Meeting"
During an interview with Game Informer, PS4 lead architect Mark Cerny revealed the decision of the PlayStation 4 receiving 8GB of GDDR5 RAM was decided at the very final meeting. At first, it was going to only be limited to 4GB but Cerny knew that GDDR5 is far superior and made for the...
I know they finallywwas able to do that at the last minute but you do understand that it's absolutely different to hope for having 8GB since the beginning but plan also 4GB just in case and work on both possibilities during all the process.
Than change totally the final specs without any prior preparation and after the official announcement of this specs.
Just a point of vue, but the "Plan A" is supposed to be the better.
The key here is that they worked on both possibilities during all the process from the beginning.
That sounds like an unusual memory setup. When you say GDDR6 interfaces, do you mean every GDDR6 memory chip is addressed separately, like they each have their own memory controller? That's a bit surprising, and if you've got a link that details that I'd like to see it.
The Tempest Audio Engine is basically one extra compute unit, I doubt the customization added a lot of area. So it's less than 1/36 of the GPU area. MS has put R&D and silicon wafer area into audio on the XSX too from what I understand; and if not, it'll detract from their GPU/CPU advantage.
Read towards the bottom of the article and come to your own conclusions.
Inside PlayStation 5: the specs and the tech that deliver Sony's next-gen vision
Sony has broken its silence. PlayStation 5 specifications are now out in the open with system architect Mark Cerny deli…
www.eurogamer.net
I don't know about the controller situation, but at least the number of GDDR6 PHY(physical layer interface) on these SoCs and GPUs matches the number of GDDR6 memory chip they have.
edit: That's seems to be expected. I imagine the memory controller will hold a queue of request that can be dispatched to every physical interface in a parallel fashion, but I'll need to check about that.
Last edited:
Saw your wife is a nurse. Make sure to treat her extra nicely during these tough times. :)
And thanks for the update.
I don't recall SKHynix announcing 14Gbps 16GB ICs, and definitely not anything over 14Gbps, for 16Gbps and more you would only find Samsung ICs for both 8Gb and 16Gb, in fact, Digital Foundry showed the PCB memory layout for those wondering. However, both Micron and Samsung can equip the PS5 since it appears it's 8 ICs of 16Gb, 14Gbps.
The top 4 chips are 16Gb, on each side of 3, the top and bottom chips are 8Gb, the middle one 16Gb. So it does redirect some of the higher bandwidth ICs towards the GPU and the lower pool is mostly over the CPU controllers.
I agree with you that the GPU accessing all 10 ICs at 560GB/s will never happen (or at least 99.99999% of the time when the CPU uses any memory). However, I still don't know about the overall cost to CPU memory access, are we sure they use 32bit buses for all 6 2GB ICs ? There is a 2 channel (16 bits wide) mode on GDDR6, wouldn't it make more sense to have the GPU still access 2GB ICs with limited width ?
Something like:
- 1.75GT/s * ((32bits * 4) + (16bits * 6)) ~ 392 GB/s, even while the CPU is using memory,
- while 1.75GT/s * (16bits * 6)) ~ 168 GB/s for the CPU bandwidth.
The Tempest engine is an audio ASIC, from what I gather it must be part of the APU, much like all the dedicated I/O ASICs are embedded into the SoC of both consoles. I don't think it's part of the GPU, even it apparently is a repurposed RDNA2 CU.
I think the goal of all that dedicated hardware is to save as much CPU and GPU power as possible. ASICs should be a worthwhile investment if developers suddenly want to make use of all the new functionalities. While the CPU is free from handling I/O and compression/decompression and the audio doesn't need any GPU resources, all that power goes into holding >2.1GHz clocks. It's actually a guarantee that a lot of thought went into being as power efficient as possible, given that probably ~300mm² and a few ICs will burn ~250W of power.
GDDR6 ICs use 32 bits data buses to the memory controllers, so the SoC on both consoles has 10 or 8 32 bits GDDR6 controllers to handle them separately. They can also perform in 2 channel operations for 16bits wide transfers with little performance loss.
Scorpio did use something similar:
Scorpio Engine - Microsoft - WikiChip
Scorpio Engine is a 64-bit octa-core x86 SoC designed by AMD and Microsoft for their Xbox One X. The chip features eight Enhanced Jaguar cores operating at 2.3 GHz and a custom Arctic Islands-based GPU operating at 1.172 GHz. Fabricated on TSMC's 16FF+, this chip supports 12 (24 for Dev) GiB of...
en.wikichip.org
PS4 was a ram config and MB change, not a simple chip swap out.
They can change the ram modules up until production.
It was a change decided at the very last meeting. Do you have a source for the MB change?
Ah, ok. In that case, it is not a devastating investment at all. I am squarely back in the camp of PlayStation, then.
I like the sound of this even better.
Cerny remains GOAT.
Read towards the bottom of the article and come to your own conclusions.
Inside PlayStation 5: the specs and the tech that deliver Sony's next-gen vision
Sony has broken its silence. PlayStation 5 specifications are now out in the open with system architect Mark Cerny deli…
Thank you for this read. I made a big fuss about nothing. I can honestly say to myself that their SSD tech is worth the sacrifice of a couple extra teraflops.
Just saw this tweet by Brad Sams:
Pretty disappointing tbh. First he made up some conspiracy stuff about PS5 actually being 9.2 TFLOPS, and now he is implying that Cerny lied and that the raw SSD speed is actually lower. I always thought that he is one of the more reputable journalists, but he went full tinfoil hat console warrior with this crap. Shame.
Pretty disappointing tbh. First he made up some conspiracy stuff about PS5 actually being 9.2 TFLOPS, and now he is implying that Cerny lied and that the raw SSD speed is actually lower. I always thought that he is one of the more reputable journalists, but he went full tinfoil hat console warrior with this crap. Shame.
But I imagine the MCT should be able to dispatch requests in parallel.
Wait it seems you're right:
Brad Sams has been going full fanboy for a while now. Not that it's surprising.
The notion that dedicating less than 1/40th of your APU to an audio ASIC that'll get its own API so that every game can have quality positional audio is "a waste" should be offensive to anyone with a set of working ears, and comparing it to the band-aid of strategically compromised design that was DDR3+eSRAM is downright trolling.
Really? He seemed very biaised about anything MS related.
I mean, it's thurrott.com. Why should we expect anything but unofficial marketing from them?
Imagine having to stan a console that has "XBsX" as its acronym and you type it out shillingly and unironically. Tsk. Couldn't be me.
My bad, breh. I wasn't really keeping up on talking points until now. I feel much more reassured and secure in my Day 1 purchase of PS5 now.
idk who this person is and what his previous tweets were. But is it wrong to assume performance figures probably should be based on sustainable clocks or realistic scenarios ? Just like MS put forward 560 GB/s of memory bandwidth but can realistically only guarantee at least 224 GB/s to the GPU 100% of time and at least ~392 GB/s in CPU intensive workloads ?
It's not like only a few select audiophiles will get to enjoy it either. Anyone with a pair of headphones is getting support on day 1. Any decent binaural demo on YouTube should give you an idea of what it's like - although without the selectable HRTF that is frankly one of the most novel things about it.
Yeah, I read about that in the link that disco_potato shared, and I was thoroughly impressed and pleased simultaneously. I will finally join the ranks of an audiophile, with my headphones. Cerny has made it possible for me, while giving me the fastest SSD money can buy at console price. Win-win like no other forreal.
Last edited:
Why would he make such a claim? Is he saying that the given information is wrong?
It was a change to a butterfly design that allowed it, which doubled the number of modules they could use.
User Banned (5 days): Antagonizing other members; history of similar behavior.
Brad Sams is on here, care to comment Brad?
It's weird that MS basically has professional fanboys.
I thought they moved from 256 MB modules to 512 MB modules.
And still, it takes months to procure RAM shipments.
I'm curious about this too. I think its info that will come with a proper reveal. That GDC stream was just that, for GDC.
A proper consumer reveal should be coming sometime before launch. With features, UI, etc.
Interesting discussion about the split memory, That was one of the first things that caught my eye with the specs reveal.
Like it's been said, these consoles will have compromises. It's normal.
About that Sams tweet and that previous article. War never changes.
The audio stuff is the only thing interesting to me about the ps5 so far. It uses a modified cu that works similar to a cell spu
Y'all don't know brad Sams has the Ps5 already lol. I mean he's saying that people are downplaying Xbox specs yet he is downplays Sony's ssd 🤦♂️
It's their job. I remember Microsoft had paid astroturfers on the old site leading up to the launch of the Xbox One.
Honestly MS PR is pretty gross and IMO is detrimental to the Xbox brand.
I think that's clear for both consoles, as it lines up with the specifications that have been published. On PS5, it's 8 * 32 = 256 bit wide data bus, and on Series X it's 10 * 32 = 320 bit wide for 10GB, and 6 * 32 = 192 bit wide for the remaining 6GB. There's no ambiguity there that I've seen.
I'm fairly certain that wasn't the case. The dev kits used the same motherboard layout with 8GB, it was just a question of volume economics that made the decision for retail units difficult to commit to. Cerny's description of how it played out argued that it wasn't some breakthrough in production or availability, but arguing that it was necessary to accept the higher BOM to have a compelling product.
it is wrong to assume. the PS5 based on cernys demo will perform closer to the 10.28 than it would the 9.2 and he even said he liked GPUs at a higher frequency for a while and they even had to cap the GPU because it was going at too high a frequency if i remember correctly. any one that claims the 9.2 number doesnt really understand at all whats going on.
Man I remember the astroturfing on the old site. It was so obvious
I don't think that Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo pay any journalists under the table to run PR for them, and that's a really serious accusation to make (and it's been done repeatedly in this thread).
So you're saying Brad Sams knows more than Cerny about the PS5?
Claiming PS5 is 9.2TF isn't exactly "not agreeing". It's spreading FUD.
I'm more convinced Sony is trying to target $399. Or so least cheaper than $499.
Comparing it to Kinect would mean no dev would use it. Like someone tried comparing the SSD to Kinect.
All because teraflops.
I do think they made some decisions because of price and BC. We won't be able to compare anything to Kinect for the XBO until at least 2 years after launch.
We don't know until the consoles are out where the variable clocks will land most of the time
- Status