-
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.
PlayStation 5 System Architecture Deep Dive |OT| Secret Agent Cerny
- Thread starter vestan
- Start date
- Status
Sorry to hear that.
Also, thanks for all your contribution to this site. Hope people can be more polite.
I dont know him personally but from his posts james-sawyer-ford was always one of the most level headed posters on here.
No need to shit on him just because he got a short ban.
Great loss for this forum, quite disgusting actually to misrepresent and attempt to character assassinate truly informed contributers because their opinion rattles your perceptions.
You're input is always greatly valued, ignore the fanboys that can't deal with uncomfortable information regardless of which topic is being discussed, they contribute nothing. You do.
My comment was made before the ban and it wasn't leveled only at that user.
I really appreciate your input here and I'm sorry you have to deal with things like that. (I remember seeing on your twitter that you were sick or something so I hope you get well soon.)
Here's a third possibility:
Maybe MS actually put out 2x power of X1X and not RDNA to devs and thus ppl claimed PS5 RDNA would be more powerful? We did also hear how Navi was made for Sony with Sony so it could be the case. We were hearing how MS is behind on Dev kits and not open/communicating with Devs. We also see how they tried being deceiving with actual Dev kit looking almost identical to X1 Dev kit. To me all of this is pointing to that MS was hiding things even from devs and then dropped a bombshell that it's RDNA 12TF.
In what world does SSD speed change graphics that GPU is able to push? Does RTX2080TI paired with NVMe drive all of a sudden get TF boost compared to being paired with HDD? If HDD is able to feed 2080TI 4k graphics then what amount of data is such GPU actually able to handle and at what point does it not make any difference?
Here's an example using GTX1080 with SSD and NVMe, notice the actual read speeds.
Way I look at it is if you have 100GB/s drive and your GPU is only able to render 20GB/s worth of textures your remaining 80GB/s would serve no purpose/benefit for game rendering.
I just see 10GB/s way excessive for what GPU might ever need in this gen. It is however possible that the only way Sony could get lets say 1GB/s random 4K read speeds was to have 10GB/s NVMe drive in there and MS had a different target in mind.
So... PS5's $399 right?
I can't find a single reason for Sony to sell for more than that in these trying times, justifying a $449 console or more this year after COVID causes some serious unemployment sounds like a feat of PR strength, hell it even makes me think that a $399 PS5 might be even too luxurious for people, although i doubt they'll ever sell it for less than $399.
In fact i wouldn't be surprised if the original price was say $449 but the coronavirus pandemic caused some last minute changes in the consoles price.
I can't find a single reason for Sony to sell for more than that in these trying times, justifying a $449 console or more this year after COVID causes some serious unemployment sounds like a feat of PR strength, hell it even makes me think that a $399 PS5 might be even too luxurious for people, although i doubt they'll ever sell it for less than $399.
In fact i wouldn't be surprised if the original price was say $449 but the coronavirus pandemic caused some last minute changes in the consoles price.
Truth is the big thing about the SSD is going to be about how it helps ram management in consoles .
So it will take a while before we see what that going to bring and even SC won't show the full picture.
User Banned (Permanent): Troll Account
We have SSD bandwidth number, but if I remember correctly they never stated actual sustained numbers like what happens when NVMes are throttled due to heat. Also what are random 4K read speeds, which Alex said are what games actually use.
I'll try to address each your thoughts, matched bullet-for-bullet along with your conclusion:
- Various devices use different strategies to dynamically adjust frequencies. Some do it to maximize battery life, others to maximize performance. PCs typically try to maximize performance, and only reduce clock speeds when they can't sufficiently cool themselves. Different processor generations have had various creative approaches to trying to hit as high a clock speed as possible, typically by ramping up clocks on a subset of cores to grind through heavy workloads that aren't written to take advantage of multiple cores. Sustained, heavy parallel workloads typically result in clock speeds coming down to keep the processor within an acceptable operating temperature range.
- Consoles have historically had fixed clock speeds, because games are timing sensitive and you want every player to have the same experience. What's being done in the PS5 is a departure in varying clock speeds when particularly heavy loads come along, but doing it in a way that guarantees that every PS5 responds the same way to the same workload by analyzing code as it runs rather than simply responding to thermal measurements. This guarantees that speed code runs at is deterministic, executing at the same speed regardless of environmental conditions.
- I think you've got it more or less correct here, though the goal isn't to keep power consumption constant but rather to ensure that it never exceeds the level where the cooling solution can keep up. Light workloads can always consume substantially less power as both GPU and CPU are pretty efficient at doing nothing. They have explicit idle states that are quite different from clock speeds (you don't slowly ramp down to a low frequency, you bring execution to a dead halt until there is work to be scheduled.)
- Worst case scenarios will drop frequencies to avoid exceeding whatever threshold has been set. How often that happens in practice isn't something we can say for certain. We have only Mark Cerny's suggestion that these conditions should be relatively rare.
Less than $399? No way.
$399 is questionable. That SSD is not cheap. If they go for $399 then with a rather big loss.
$450 with a loss per unit like PS4 is what Im banging on.
Why does random 4k speed matter when both consoles will be able to switch enough data fast enough just one faster than another .
Something tells me that Sony are willing to take an even bigger loss per console on the PS5 then what they lost on the PS4, mainly because of the growth of their Playstation network services such as PSNow and their PS Plus subscription in recent years compared to their 2013/14 forecast.
I could see Sony eating that loss and selling the PS5 at $399 in order to increase its install base year one and making their now back from their PSN revenue and a mixture of their PS4/PS5 games selling on the PS5, Sony's always said that they wanted a fast transition to their next gen :
Sony Wants A Faster Shift From PS4 To PS5 Than In Previous Generations
The PS4 has been a huge success, but Sony wants to make sure that players are quick to migrate to the PS5 when it launches.
www.gamespot.com
What better way to ensure a faster transition than selling their new console at the exact same price that ensured the success of their PS4 and will sell like hotcakes, especially after the upcoming recession, something that'll be hard to justify a $449 console.
So to clarify, it's ok for anyone to criticise/generalise Era mod staff and call Era utter trash—as long as you've been antagonised you won't cop a warning or ban?
Or is this privilege only reserved for verified folks?
Let's be honest, we've seen bans and warnings handed out for less.
Some ppl in this thread definitively espousing knowledge of what all devs would need now and for the next 7 years..... Despite Cerny touring first third party devs for years for feedback.
Shame that Mark Cerny failed in his mission when he didn't consult and collaborate with certain illustrious ResetERA members when designing PS5. A great shame.
Of course, SC isn't being built around MS's 4.8-6GB/s or PS5's 8-9GB/s throughput or microsecond response time (well, the latter is less of an issue in the grander scheme of things). It will take a while before the new normal sets in and devs push things to the limit once more.
Lady Gaia has been made some very informative posts pertaining to both her analysis as well as expounding on Cerny's messaging pertaining to the ramification of the storage solution(and it's applicable to both consoles in the greater scheme). Given her background in tech, I'd read what she had written here and in the NXGamer thread (if you were interested).
Personally, I have said it once before and I will say it again: Out of the gate, the first games to exploit the newfound SSD response time and bandwidth beyond simply loading games faster, would come from Sony's first parties given the lack of mandate of having to support PS4 for a specified amount of time after PS5's launch.
On a side note: While it wouldn't surprise me at all to see enhanced versions of current late gen exclusives like TLoU Pt 2 and Ghost, I do hope MS's attitude forces Sony's hand so that the devs release a free upgraded asset patch for folks who already bought the games for PS4 when they migrate to PS5.
Shame that Mark Cerny failed in his mission when he didn't consult and collaborate with certain illustrious ResetERA members when designing PS5. A great shame.
Of course, SC isn't being built around MS's 4.8-6GB/s or PS5's 8-9GB/s throughput or microsecond response time (well, the latter is less of an issue in the grander scheme of things). It will take a while before the new normal sets in and devs push things to the limit once more.
Lady Gaia has been made some very informative posts pertaining to both her analysis as well as expounding on Cerny's messaging pertaining to the ramification of the storage solution(and it's applicable to both consoles in the greater scheme). Given her background in tech, I'd read what she had written here and in the NXGamer thread (if you were interested).
Personally, I have said it once before and I will say it again: Out of the gate, the first games to exploit the newfound SSD response time and bandwidth beyond simply loading games faster, would come from Sony's first parties given the lack of mandate of having to support PS4 for a specified amount of time after PS5's launch.
On a side note: While it wouldn't surprise me at all to see enhanced versions of current late gen exclusives like TLoU Pt 2 and Ghost, I do hope MS's attitude forces Sony's hand so that the devs release a free upgraded asset patch for folks who already bought the games for PS4 when they migrate to PS5.
Not after the economy tumbles, $499 will look like a premium luxury.
Thank you very much. I'll wait until more info is out there to talk about TFs with my friends. I really hope it turns out the best way, so everyone benefits. 🙂
Yeah, we're getting a much better deal this time around. I'm not worried about the specs of any of the systems, we got some mind blowing games on what was considered to be not so good hardware.
Faf as dev also give some insight to how crazy fast these system will be in terms of switching data and i can't wait to see devs mess around with it.
To quote him .
Something tells me that Sony are willing to take an even bigger loss per console on the PS5 then what they lost on the PS4, mainly because of the growth of their Playstation network services such as PSNow and their PS Plus subscription in recent years compared to their 2013/14 forecast.
I could see Sony eating that loss and selling the PS5 at $399 in order to increase its install base year one and making their now back from their PSN revenue and a mixture of their PS4/PS5 games selling on the PS5, Sony's always said that they wanted a fast transition to their next gen :
Sony Wants A Faster Shift From PS4 To PS5 Than In Previous Generations
The PS4 has been a huge success, but Sony wants to make sure that players are quick to migrate to the PS5 when it launches.
What better way to ensure a faster transition than selling their new console at the exact same price that ensured the success of their PS4 and will sell like hotcakes, especially after the upcoming recession, something that'll be hard to justify a $449 console.
IIRC Someone from Sony already told in an interview that PS4 will be the main revenue source on the first year of the new generation, or something like that. I take that as a hint to Sony taking a loss with the PS5, but no one can be sure.
EDIT: PS4 as buying games and subscriptions from the PS Store.
Last edited:
Out of everything im more curious how they'll prevent it from thermal throttling. Those PC NVME have some monster heatsinks for 4.0 drives.This is made even more interesting since we will be allowed to put our own drives in it albeit certified. Can't wait for the teardown of the PS5.
Yup, same $399 price, with a better overall "ecosystem" at the get-go, and a better launch lineup than PS4 would do the trick.Sony Wants A Faster Shift From PS4 To PS5 Than In Previous Generations
The PS4 has been a huge success, but Sony wants to make sure that players are quick to migrate to the PS5 when it launches.
What better way to ensure a faster transition than selling their new console at the exact same price that ensured the success of their PS4 and will sell like hotcakes, especially after the upcoming recession, something that'll be hard to justify a $449 console.
Why? Cerny clearly had a certain vision of next-gen gaming in mind when he decided to push for those high numbers. Why is an arbitrary number like 2.4 GB/s or 4.8 GB/s good enough, but 9-22 GB/s is somehow "too much"? That makes no sense.
Same for the notion that developers will ignore that the market-leading platform has an 130% advantage in SSD performance. There is a lot of talk about the "common demoninator". But there is also the reality of the market, and PlayStation has consistently very high sales. I wouldn't be surprised if PS5 will be the target platform for next-gen. When developers want new hardware, it's because it allows new possibilities. The ultra-fast SSD in the PS5 does exactly that.
How? PS4 sales are going down like hell. They would need a cheaper model and sell it at like $200.
You can't say they are market leading platform when it hasn't been released yet. You can say Sony is the market leader currently but as for next gen they're currently tied 0:0
Even with PS4 sales slowing down the revenue from PS+ and PSN from PS4 going to be times that of PS5 the first year.
🤦♂️ Can you guys stop obsessing over that DF guy for a while? I swear you want to remove him from the site so badly. He's being hounded across multiple threads, and he apologized for what he said about the mod team.
I never really get this magic price point mentality. What makes a 499 console a premium luxury when a 399 one isn't?
Exactly, the PS4 with a huge price drop, PSN, upcoming PS4 games, multiple sources of revenue to justify taking a bigger loss on the PS5 than they did with the PS4, remember that the only reason Sony didn't take a bigger loss than normal on the PS4 was because SIE was still recuperating from the PS3, they wanted a safe console with a safe cost, hence a $399 PS4, PS5 n the other hand is coming off the heels of the highly successful PS4 and a really successful generation of console services, more reason to go more bolder in their losses then this gen.
We are re living in the age of the PS3's launch lead up after the highly successful PS2 all over again.
A better launch line up than the PS4 would be a blessing for the PS5, kinda hard to justify moving a new console with Killzone:SF lol, not that the game was bad or anything.
But yeah that $399 price point, good games and PS4 BC will make this a smooth launch, what Sony intended to do from the start.
Saying the currently tie won't be right either .
Things are to complex to boil things down to make it so simple .
In comparison to a $399 console, It's a price point that has worked for Sony for their current gen console and it's mid gen refresh, especially after the $499/$599 PS3 fiasco, and not to mention the pandemic we face, which do you think will fare better after this recession? a $100 dollar difference to the competition means life or death for a consoles year one sales.
I will be surprised if both consoles will launch on the same price point.
Everything Sony did with PS5 points to them aiming to undercut XSX pricing this time. (Or maybe it's MS going all out on h/w with no second thoughts about pricing, whatever suits your agenda.)
You do realize that selling consoles isn't where the money is made right?
Or you think the10M+ people that own a PS4 would just stop buying games overnight?
I'm asking a question about moderation. I've no idea what's going on across other threads so please don't make such accusations. Thanks.
It doesn't matter a whole lot, 4k reads are not "most common" case in existing game streaming, as they crater performance even worse on other drives than ssd.
That said they "could" be a thing on new consoles as sdd actually makes them usable, and Sony patent did speak directly to how sustained peak speeds with small random reads would work.
But if I had to guess I'd expect small read sizes closer to gpu page size(65kb or so).
I remember seeing an article from a year or two in South Korea talking about how a limited time holiday price drop of the PS4 literally created lines outside the store for a few days just to get their hands on the console.
If Sony decides to drop the PS4 to say $199, mark my words it'll sell like hotcakes.
EDIT: found the article from January 2019
South Korea Goes Crazy for Cut-Price PS4
Stock selling out as Sony slashes prices
www.pushsquare.com
Il give you a single reason - the components of the ps5 will cost much more than 399. They have gone for much higher end parts than the PS4 (the gpu and cpu were comparatively much weaker(&cheaper) and there was nothing equivalent to the cutting edge tech in the ps5 SSD). If they launch at 399,they will be losing hundreds of dollars on each console, that is not sustainable.
He definitely sees some of the worst tendencies to try to weaponize his words. I'm sure it's not fun. It would still be nice if he didn't so pointedly leave out any kind of apology regarding referring to the entire community as trash. That really was uncalled for.
If they BOM is $450 and they sell it for $399 the lost would about $100 or little more than that .
The question is if the willing to eat the $100 and truth is they in a much better place to do that with PS+, PSN etc etc.
In fact TLOU2 would most like cover a few hundred million losses.
No problem! And now you do.
I think people need to grow thicker skin. Generalizations about the community after constant harassment is nothing. There's a ton of stuff, discussion wise, surrounding these consoles that is trash.
OT: I can't see the two systems being a whole $100 apart in price. The BOM difference was like $50 right?
Here's what I found. Beware, it's old.
gamesindustry.biz: Sony gaming revenue and profit on the decline as new console generation looms
I don't know guys, but for me this is a big hint on selling the PS5 at a loss.
gamesindustry.biz: Sony gaming revenue and profit on the decline as new console generation looms
I don't know guys, but for me this is a big hint on selling the PS5 at a loss.
The parts are not that high end by the time PS5 comes out .
For eg the PS5 GPU is 36CU and XSX one is 52 CU by the end of the year AMD will have GPU that bigger than even 52.
Zen 2 has been out for a while .
The most cutting edge thing is the SSD and even that is not as big as some people though it would be .
Plus you have to take into mind how fast the will be able to cost cut by going on a new node.
That's another technie member whose input I take with sincerity.
If I am understanding him correctly, he is saying that brand new data could be loaded for every 4th frame for a 30fps game (given 30fps equates to 33.33ms frame time persistence for each frame) and 7th frame for 60fps game. If, IF, that's the case then it's abso-fucking-lutely insane. I have no idea whether this would cause bottleneck elsewhere after a certain period of time or not or whether there are better and more sustainable methods of exploiting the storage- but even if it's for one off occasion like teleportation or fast travel, the ramification for this throughput is in-fucking-sane.
So, let me do my uncultured and overly simplified math calculation for a sec:
From the data given, let's say that the throughput for PS5 when reading sequentially yields a sustained data rate of 8GB/s (lower end, post decompression) and discount the microsecond seek times:
8GB/s equates to 0.008GB/ms which yields ~0.799GB/s or ~819.12MB/s of data in that 100ms
For reference, Spider-man's streaming system was designed around 20MB/s... yea.
And Cerny's claim pertained to having the game being able to load new data from the SSD to the GDDR6 to be rendered for a player turning around 180 degrees within 0.5s which is 500ms, sounds even more reasonable than Fafa. Overall it's was about stuffing the RAM with things that player would need a few seconds into the future rather than approximately having to account for 30 seconds of it like they do today.
Perhaps the most realistic and immediate example that comes to mind (given folks are talking about loading), are the portals between worlds in God of War. Suffice it to say, next time, Kratos would literally see into the destination whenever he summons a portal and pass right through.
I highly doubt that it'll be hundreds of dollars per console, Bloomberg had an article saying that total component cost for the PS5 totals at $450, and add other expenses like shipping, packaging etc for $50 i'm just seeing a $100 loss per console, something that i posted above justifying why Sony would be willing to take that big of a loss as opposed to their PS4 losses, just a quick rundown PSN is huge right now compared to 2013, a majority of SIE's finances comes from PSN, and given how successful the PS4 was compared to the PS3 Sony could be even bolder with their losses.
Sony makes a bulk of the money from services and games, they will most likely want to move as many units as possible in year one to increase the install base hard for future game releases, i mentioned most of this in my posts above as to why a $399 console seems more likely.
- Status