By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Pemalite said:
DonFerrari said:
Don't think they are going for a beefy CPU. They rather put the budget on GPU and RAM.

Whilst the 4800H is beefy for a notebook, it's mid-range on the PC... And depending on clocks, maybe even low-end.

JRPGfan said:

Im not sure how big the chip is, or how much the iGPU portion takes up.
But Im sure once you cut cache abit, these 8 cores are probably not too big, or costly to have in a console.

AMD typically reserves up to 50% of the APU for the Graphics, that has been their design philosophy since they started making APU's with their Fusion initiative.

JRPGfan said:

There pretty energy effecient, and probably not overly expensive (im sure you ll see these in laptops that go as low as 600$).
With BoM on laptops being higher than consoles (overall) I dont see why you couldnt use this cpu in a console.

Probably energy efficient for an AMD mobile part... AMD has never had notebook CPU's with acceptable idle power, which isn't an issue for consoles or PC of course.
Intel however is still a step ahead of AMD in this aspect.

Intrinsic said:

The cache has already been cut down from the equivalent desktop part; basically its been quartered, from 32Mb down to 8MB. I

The hit to cache shouldn't have a corresponding hit to performance, the IMC and uncore is on die which will help massively with reducing latency, which is a big deviation from Zen on desktop.
With consoles also using the APU approach, I would expect to see similar for next-gen consoles.

Intrinsic said:

But even if  SMT is cut, that feature only adds about 30% to overall CPU performance anyways.

Sometimes it even reduces performance.

In saying that... SMT is mostly to ensure that the full CPU pipeline is being utilized fully rather than having parts of it idle.

JRPGfan said:

"Next-gen APUs will be in the 300mm2-405mm2 range, up from the 300mm2-360mm2 range of the current-gen chips. "

After Xbox showed off the photo of the chip, people have estimated it to be upwards of 420mm^2.
Supposedly its rumored to have 56 CU's (compute units) (3584 shaders) in the GPU portion.

Sony is only useing 36 CU's but running at higher speeds (smaller chip to save costs), downsize is its not as power effecient to do this.
Sony chip might be like ~270-280mm^2.

Higher clockspeeds but with a smaller chip doesn't mean it will be cheaper to produce.
Sometimes the opposite is true... Because you reach a point where the majority of chips won't hit a certain clockspeed without significant increases in voltage which then results in an acceleration of electromigration.

It's a balancing act.

So it is eligible to be on PS5/XSX =]

Good luck on your deployment.

HollyGamer said:
JRPGfan said:

So.... the 4800H is a 45w TPD part, that probably owes 10w of that TPD or so to the buildt in, GPU.
Its a 8core/16thread cpu with a base of 2.9GHz and a boost clock of 4,2GHz.

I can imagine next consoles to spend ~35watts of their power budget, on the CPU.
Which I believe a 4800H would be around.

So what does this all mean?
Well console CPUs are about to get pretty beefy.

Aparently one of these 4800H can beat a stock i7 - 9700k in firestrike physics (cpu) bench.

If you believe on flute benchmark that  supposed to be a PS5 prototype benchmark , it mentioned that it has a performance of Zen 1. Which is equal to ryzen 3700 with cut down cache  and run at  lower clock speed. I think we will get a cut down version of Ryzen 3700 or a mild modified version on it. It will be cheaper and will have better size to fit on an apu and to let more space  for more CU GPU on reasonable lower yield. 

But i am still not convinced that PS5 will have 9.2 teraflop GPU from 36 CU . It will have temperature problem and eat a lot of power. They probably will have more CU but run at mild clock speed to achieve 10 teraflop of performance. 

So i believe this is the CPU we will have or perhaps PS5 will have the same performance more or less with this one. 

It is confirmed to be Zen2 on the consoles.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."