Quantcast
View Post
EricHiggin said: 

That's another reason why I think it's not Zen 2. I would say as low as 8TF and as high as 12TF, if it's going to launch around late 2019. I myself however assume 10 since it seems to be the middle ground. I would much rather have a beefier CPU portion than GPU if it requires meeting a certain price point. Slightly better PS4/Pro graphics are fine as long as they lock it at 60FPS when devs want more than 30.

I believe it will be alot more than 10TF. I have my money on at least 14TF. When sony went from 28nm to 16nm, not only did their CU count double the GPU clock went up by around 15% from the base console. The XB1x (getting rid of their esram on SOC had more room to work with and of course usng a better cooling solution, they practically quadripled the amount of CUs in their GPU and ran it at an even higher clock. 

As cool as that sounds, the XB1x GPU has only 4 CUs more than the PS4pro but is just clocked much higher. So if you use the XB1X as the baseline, simply going from 14nm to 7nm and keeping the clocks the same will at the very least mean you are by default going from 6TF to 12TF and this is not considerring any other architectural improvements made. 

EricHiggin said: 

If PS5 uses 7nm at launch, they have to hope that 5nm isn't more than 3 or 4 years afterwards for a slim or upgrade though. Intel still stuck on 14nm makes me wonder. Pro and slim got 16nm chips fairly early, but those were from TSMC. AMD was using GloFo and 14nm. Mind you, AMD is now going to use TSMC for the majority if not all Zen 2, 7nm chips, so it's hard to say, depending on if PS5 uses Ryzen, +, or Zen 2.

No they don't. If 4nm doesn't come along soonish its not thje end of the world. And there are other ways or things that contribute to price reductions than just using a smaller chip.

 

EricHiggin said: 

M.2 might make sense based on the leak info. You could have a 2TB HDD model, and a 1TB M.2 model, and let the customer choose if they would rather have more storage or more speed. The customers who buy the 1TB model could then simply spend another $50 to $100 on a 4TB+ external HDD if they want more space for cheap. They could probably also spend more and get a 2TB to 4TB (or larger in the future) 2.5" internal HDD to keep things sleek and simple. Whoever buys the 2TB HDD model, may even be able to wait a year or two for M.2 prices to go down, while storage goes up, and install one themselves for more speed.

That is unnecesary. First thing here is the chosen interface. SATA or M.2? 

SATA will mean the best they could ever get will be around 400MB/s. And thats if they put in a SATA SSD in the console. SATA 3 is raed for 600MB/s but thats not areal world number per say. Anif they are gonn put in a SATA SSD from launch then they might as well just go with M.2.

M.2 wll mean the best they could get is around 2GB/S+ speeds. But it also mean they could use a SATA based M.2 ssd in there allowing those that want to go faster (going from aropund 400MB/s sata to around 1.8GB/s nvme) upgrade their drive.

They honestly don't hve to put in a HDD bigger than 1TB in the console. All they have to do is spport external HDDs from day one. Its just all round better for the platform as far as future proofing goes if they go with an M.2 drive. Honestly and this may sound crazy, I can even see them soldering their storage directly onto the PCB and just support external storage on day one. 

1TB pcie 3 based nand flash storage soldered onto the PCB. Will make it eve cheaer for them to do it.