Ok, who is this Tom dude... does he work for MS something?
-
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
Nobody should be sad! These consoles are super crazy powerful. Now it's down to all those great games, as always :)
He mostly does MS reporting.
FWIW, he was one of the most reliable sources for next gen rumors.
Yep, there's lots to be excited about and we haven't really seen anything yet, Cerny is a great architect but pretty bad at selling his ideas.
Unfortunately it's hard to get the average consumer to care all that much about audio improvements. I'm excited but who knows how it will play out upon release.
For those wondering about SSD size, this explains it very well:
reddit.com
Reddit - Dive into anything
reddit.com
Realize how that offloads they regular cpu too so gamers will notice it in zen 2 doing more in game computational tasks
Now Sony is free to go buck wild on new audio advancements without worrying about taking from the main cpu, no trade off equals win
Sorry but whats wrong with discussing possibilities, did I ever say that I'm stating facts? or do you think nothing should be discussed at this stage?
And are you saying that hardware with the problems I mentioned didn't exist before or that the people who designed them didn't have a decent idea about what they were doing?
There is no need to be overly defensive. I don't think me being worried about something or not fully being convinced by it affects you in any way.
Actually its not, and its a topic that has popped up multiple times today. That 10.28 TF is Max Boosted, but its not sustained performance. Series X is. We will likely need to see both in live situations to fully test this, but right now that is how its being explained from my understanding.
Tom Warren has been called out a few times on this site, but he has been reliable thus far which is far more than i can say about several "insiders" on this site.
Because PS5 will be at 10.3 most of the time and even if drop it's a 2% drop .
Was explain it the vid , if you think it won't be that way that is another matter .
Oh, sorry, thought I was following a particular piece of discussion. My mistake. Carry on.
No, he talked to dev.
Was it is good idea to do that before having a general audience presentation? Clearly not. But still, it happened.
An other one who have knowledge on the matter is excited! Go away, let me believe random poster who are comparing numbers they doesn't understand.
/s
Probably no, but are you allowed to say if you have devkits?
lel PS5 does not have advantages in rasterization or geometry stuff.
750 gb? thats it?For those wondering about SSD size, this explains it very well:
Reddit - Dive into anything
Noting wrong with being worried, or even discussing stuff. But you are say a lot of stuff as if it were fact. And outright saying stuff that would otherwise suggest that sony were lying, and based on what? How stuff works with PCs?
There's no reason to believe it will drop that low in performance. Cerny pointed out they only need to drop a few % in clock to drop 10% in power. Unless they completely screwed up the design, there's no scenario where they could grossly overshoot their power budget.
This completely stands to reason as they probably can drastically lower the voltage and only slightly back off on GPU clocks. Cerny makes it sound like they're operating on the hairy edge of static timing closure for the part.
$399$399$399$399
Seeming more like it, since he stressed cost effectiveness and also about thinking about gamers, for pricing.
Certain things do scale with speed , now we have get some info on certain things.
Still if it like all other GPU hardware it with scale with speed.
can you try and get an interview with cerny by any chance? i would love to hear some more details on this variable clock stuff. some of the math doesnt add up. how far would the cpu have to be throtlled back to hit 2.3 ghz? would it result in framerate issues? how can a 2% decrease in clockspeed or 44mhz result in a 10w increase in a gpu? cerny told DF it isnt linear so they must be cooking up something insane. why didnt ms go with this if its an amd solution?
can you also confirm if vrs and machine learning are in the gpu? cerny didnt mention it in deep dive.
So why not clock it at a stable 98%? Why introduce the complexity for a 2% gain, it makes no sense.
I'd point out that Mr. Cerny didn't compare PS5 to XSX. He compared two hypothetical machines with the same TF count, and then made the case that the version reaching that through higher clocks would be more performant. He didn't attempt to speak to how much clockspeed could close the gap toward a machine with higher overall compute, as XSX has. Obviously, there's a marketing implication here that some of the distance is covered...but he said nothing even implying how much, or how well.
I'm not going to argue against your preferences or experience. And it must be said that Mr. Cerny could be mistaken about the benefits or robustness of his approach. But I trust that he's not directly lying, and that he does believe in the efficacy of this design. An opinion formed through such expertise should be taken very seriously...as should the fact that he's far from the only individual involved. Mark Cerny didn't tinker away solo, he lead a large and presumably heavily-qualified and amply-resourced engineering team. Such an outfit can still come up with bad hardware, of course. But I know my own knowledge doesn't compare, and so I want to absorb their assertions first.
It has advantage over a GPU of similar configuration with lower clock speed (e.g. 5700) but not a bigger GPU, because the count and size of those special units also scale with CU count.
With a decent variance based on silicon lottery, which is also antithetical in the console space.
this might work out for them after this whole coronavirus ordeal. i suspect the economy will be in tatters come august and the recovery might be slow. come november, people will be too busy paying off bills and loans and might not be willing to spend an extra $100.
but that also applies to the lockhart which should only be a $299 console.
so im guessing the 256 bit gddr6 was chosen because it was cheaper?
where else can they save money to get to the $100 difference?
More CU or not don't matter .
GPU is Speed and CU count and both have affect on performance even if the GPU has diffrent CU counts speed still effect certain aspects .
Because it is dangerous to put stuff like that on twitter with the reach you have. If you had a source fill you in on "real PS5 GPU performance" then by all means go ahead. But, when it's not, you're only further muddying the waters by putting out information which is not confirmed. Yet it will be taken and paraded on the internet given where it emanated from.
They aren't saving $100, look at the specs, they are so similar. They just prioritized different stuff and as a result will have to eat a bigger loss on every SKU.
Some of this wasn't explained in enough detail, but I personally think the reality could be more than a 2% drop in those "worst case scenarios." We'll see later this year. I hope it runs as close to 10.3 teraflops as possible 99% of the time, as it's already 1.7 teraflops behind in performance and that could be a gap for some demanding titles when you start throwing in real-time ray tracing too.
Considering it will be extremely rare that a game, if any game at all, will need part of the 3.5GB as VRAM (and still, it's 336GB/s, faster than the 4K Xbox One, it's not like it's DDR4 or something. It's still usable as VRAM for lower priority uses), the XSX memory solution is much better than the PS5's but at the same time, it's more expensive. Not only that MS had to add another 64-bit worth of controllers on the APU, making it bigger, they also have to buy 10 chips instead of Sony's 8 chips. even though it's the same amount of RAM, MS is paying a bit more because they are buying more chips.
IMO that's the PS5's weak point, not the TF count. the PS5's GPU is more powerful than the 5700 XT and the 5700 XT has the same bandwidth, 448GB/s. At the same time, the PS5's 448GB/s will have to deal with 4K (while the 5700 XT is labeled by AMD as a 1440p card), RT (which is a big bandwidth hog and the 5700 XT doesn't have that either) and share it with a CPU. It probably won't be a big problem, but IMO this is the PS5's biggest weakness, not the TF count. In the end, it will probably just manifest itself in developers having a harder time hitting 4K, which I don't think is a big deal.
Like I've said before during the jolly Github days, I won't be surprised if the only difference between the PS5 and the XSX in 3rd party games will be 1800p VS 2160p and in reconstructed games 1800p reconstructed VS 2160p reconstructed. TBH, I can't tell the difference between 1800p and 2160p on my 4K 65" LG.
I only have one request Transistor, make mine the worst. I mean really bad, like worse than chris 1515.
The time has come! The end to this living nightmare of speculation is upon us!
ShadowKingpin
AndyD
MonsterMech
All three of you got lucky, threw a dart at a board, and picked the date it landed on! Because of this you three get blessed with a tag that the staff and I have agreed on!
And that tag is:
Mambo Number PS5
I'll be dishing out these tags to you shortly! Congratulations! Also, I'll be talking with our resident Doct0r about his promise to pre-order a PS5 for one of the lucky winners.
But Transistor.... What about those that picked a date AFTER today?
Well, that's a great question. Let's look at my list:
Lausebub, zephiross, ekim, jikevgw, Stripper13, Crumpo, Jeffries tube, TheCommonDan, InsaneTiger, sleepr, panda-zebra, Quintus, et3rn1tyGR, Adum, Civzy, FSmallhands, CD_93, Midas, Dest, KevdotL, Brown Intruder, hemo memo, Luck, SlipperyFishes, Kalasai, That1GoodHunter, meenseen84, Azurik, Xanfrabot, DrKeo, Hybrid Rainbow, Pharaoh, RoninStrife, Florin4k4, janusff, haugh645, Openrob, Searsy82, Jack-O-Lantern, ActusReusJB, Evolved1, TechnicPuppet, Bunta, groganos, DamnedLife, Cincaid, Reckheim, Blanquito, FacesAndAces, theusedversion, Joe White, jesu, Lostduke, MistaPropella, Sedated, i-Lo, Mitchman1411, Hamrub, MrDeveus, Sambodianninja, KingBae, Ganja, Isayas, zodiaq, Cyborg, Sense, Retsudo, Sojillo, KoRnTuNeS, andresmoros, Katzenbuckel, zeldor711, Stoopkid, john miller, nizerifin, Alandring, ZOONAMI, Andromeda, D BATCH, ____, EagleClaw, spookyghost, Trieu, Azdoune, Jdogg4089
For all of these souls? Well.... I have something special lined up.
Stay tuned....
I would argue that every PS5/XSX CPU core is more powerful than the whole of PS4's Jaguar CPU. They are similar in power, but a single core will outperform a multithreaded 8 core CPU with the same power because it has less overhead.
The only argument i've seen defending a higher price point is the SSD costing an arm and a leg.
No idea what the BOM cost is going to be but I doubt that the SSD will be more expensive than the main APU.
PCs have no guarantee of airflow or ambient temperature. That's not the case with PS5. They have control over that. As long as you're not running your PS5 in the Sahara, you should be fine (theoretically)
Less NAND, smaller die, less RAM, no vendor fee for SSD controller.
I expect what we'll see in cross-platform games is that higher quality textures get loaded more rapidly on the PS5, leading to less texture popping. Look at a game like Spider Man where they stream in a moderate quality version of content first, and then backfill with high quality textures over time. That's already a common practice and will simply work more seamlessly in one environment than the other.
... and of course the AAA exclusives will happen, and they're going to be the showcases that call for everyone to up their game. If they become the must-have visual benchmarks for the generation then that's all goodness from my perspective. They're often some of the titles I look forward to the most in any case. I probably get fewer titles a year for my Switch and I'm still happy with that purchase. YMMV.
It will be interesting to see, but I've certainly worked with silicon where this was absolutely the case. You had to design for the thermal extremes even though the kind of code that triggered them was vanishingly rare in practice. It's usually not a question of whether the CPU or GPU is kept busy, but rather whether the same specific functional blocks are continually stressed without a chance to cool. I worked closely with the teams who did this kind of work on device you've probably owned, so it's not just theoretical - this is actually how it often works in practice.
Somewhere in the 2-3% range sounds entirely plausible. When reaching the higher clock rates power draw scales with the cube of the clock frequency, so a 3% drop in clock speed could lower draw from a 114W ceiling to 104W, as just one example.
They face the exact same issues and made different design decisions, with Sony opting to push GPU clocks and come up with a dynamic clocking system that is still deterministic, which is quite clever.
We will see in due course, and it will likely be real-time gameplay rather than just in-engine trailers. There simply is no pressing reason to showcase everything six to eight months ahead of time. None. This clearly wasn't a games showcase, and I don't see any reason why you need to couple something like this with a games reveal. Instead, I expect each game will have its own trailer releases and information cadence leading up to launch. It's one of the advantages of not having to fill an E3 style press conference.
That was inevitable no matter what was shown. Expecting everything to be laid out this far before launch was simply not realistic, nor would it be wise for Sony. They want interest to peak at launch, not months beforehand.
They already save near $100 .
APU will be cheaper , so will ram and now SSD.
They could also save on size and other aspect like BD drive etc etc .
The same will be for lockhart which is why it will be $299.
You probably interpreted my explanation wrong. I meant, for example, PS5 may have 2x rasterization units running at 1x speed, but XSX has 3x raster units running at 0.8x the speed, the resulting throughput is still higher for XSX.
By your point, a 5500 overclocked to insanely high will run better than a 2080Ti, that's obviously not the case.
HahahaaaaXeontech, bro!
We had a good run didn't we? 36 CUs... Gotdammit
Doesn't feel real!
But there is some relief. Like an old pustual finally oozing out it's contents kinda relief.
Now, onto the games my friend.
Cerny on GPU performance expectations:
With regards to the capped boost frequency of 2.28Ghz / 10.3TF.
With regards to the capped boost frequency of 2.28Ghz / 10.3TF.
I stress that Cerny said "We had to cap the GPU clock because the logic couldn't go faster."
They're not operating on the edge of an intrinsic thermal limit.
i dont know how similar this is to rdna 1.0 cards, but didnt someone find that AMD's game clocks almost never hit their peak boost clocks?
for example, they said the 9.7 tflops 5700xt was a 1.9 ghz gpu but it averaged at 1.75 ghz or something like that for a total of 9 tflops.
That's RDNA 1. Based on the performance gains they saw with the new Vega APUs, I believe they could have made huge strides on efficiency.
The ability to install two extra games, or more than twice the speed?
I'm going with the much faster speed.
I'm much more annoyed by their storage solution. I liked MS solution better(adding more space). If I were to replace my drive, the default drive will be collecting dust in some room.
I appreciate your honesty, and I fully agree on the points you made here.
- Status