Quantcast
PS5: Leaked Design And Technology [RUMOUR]

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS5: Leaked Design And Technology [RUMOUR]

CuCabeludo said:
Leaks have been very accurate in the past 2 generations.

I recall a lot of leaked pics of PS4 being fake.



Around the Network
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Dulfite said:
Speaking of hardware, today I had some students arguing about whether the PS4 or Xbox one was better. I simply looked at them and stated, confidentially, Nintendo. They lost their minds haha.

More proof the education system is failing

Yeah teachers aren't what they used to be.



Pemalite said: 
EricHiggin said: 

1550MHz seems too high, unless Navi has some voodoo magic or the PS5 is an XB1 at launch. XB1X is only 1175MHz, and that's with a vapor chamber heatsink.

7nm brings with it a slew of advantages in regards to power consumption and heat production.

Correct, depending on how many TF it ends up at overall. The higher the clocks the lower the CU count most likely, if it's going to fit in launch PS4 sized shell for cheap. If it can run at 1500MHz and hit around 10TF, that'll be pretty impressive.

Pemalite said: 
EricHiggin said: 

I'm not worried about Zen 2 in terms of design or being ready, I'm worried about price. How much is a 6 core Ryzen 2 going to cost on 10nm or 7nm by late 2019, and hot much cheaper will PS get it for? While it should be semi custom and not a full blown Ryzen 2, I see the price potentially being an issue, unless they scale back elsewhere, up the launch price, or eat some more cost. If they had a long enough lead over Scarlet, they could just go with $499 for the first 6 months to a year, especially with the 25th anni hype.

You can't just look at the off-the-shelf pricing and assume that is what Microsoft/Sony is going to pay.
Ryzen 2 should be cost competitive with current Ryzen chips anyway.
A 6-core Ryzen 2 is likely a reduced single CCX anyway if the CCX is boosted to 8 cores, more than possible for a monolithic console SOC.

I'm not, since it will probably be semi custom. 7nm apparently is still fairly expensive compared to 14nm, but I guess that could change between now and mid 2019. A custom 6 core CPU/APU would also mean more dies per wafer, so that would also save some on cost to manufacture. Still doesn't seem like it'll be cheap, or near as cheap as Jaguar would have been.

Pemalite said: 
EricHiggin said: 

The memory does seem off. Either a 20GB pool, or 16GB with separate OS RAM like you said.

Needs to be power of 2. Or split pools.
So... 16/24/32GB are the likely GDDR6 pools.
Or... 16GB GDDR6+4/8GB DDR4.

I don't see OS memory usage decrease over the prior generation... Don't think that has ever happened in any successive console release.

20 available to devs, 24 overall. My bad. I would think PS would follow the XB1 8GB to XB1X 12GB RAM approach (minus DDR/eSRAM) instead of PS4 to Pro when it comes to next gen. That would more easily allow the 16GB for devs at launch, then maybe 24GB for devs mid gen.

fatslob-:O said:
EricHiggin said:

1550MHz seems too high, unless Navi has some voodoo magic or the PS5 is an XB1 at launch. XB1X is only 1175MHz, and that's with a vapor chamber heatsink.

The memory does seem off. Either a 20GB pool, or 16GB with separate OS RAM like you said.

I'm not worried about Zen 2 in terms of design or being ready, I'm worried about price. How much is a 6 core Ryzen 2 going to cost on 10nm or 7nm by late 2019, and hot much cheaper will PS get it for? While it should be semi custom and not a full blown Ryzen 2, I see the price potentially being an issue, unless they scale back elsewhere, up the launch price, or eat some more cost. If they had a long enough lead over Scarlet, they could just go with $499 for the first 6 months to a year, especially with the 25th anni hype.

The GPU clock is possible since the AMD engineers behind the Zen CPU microarchitecture spent time on optimizing Vega's cache (that's where they blew most of the transistor budget on the new design) so that the whole GPU could achieve higher clocks and that's without using GlobalFoundries 12nm refresh node which is rumored for their upcoming new Polaris chip but that'll still probably clock lower compared to Vega ... 

Navi will probably be built on 7nm but we don't have any idea if Sony is prototyping with it or if it's final shipping hardware since the original Orbis prototype featured 3rd generation Terascale chip equivalent to an AMD Radeon 6950 instead of a customized 2nd generation GCN chip like we saw shipping on base hardware ... 

I'd assume that the architecture is still a moving target so that they can still bake in some more new hardware features though but the ballpark specs sounds fine for developing next gen games ... 

It's not so much that I think it can't hit 1500MHz, I just find it hard to believe it's going to do so, with a high CU count, at around 10TF, in a PS4 sized console. Maybe it will, and if it does, that'll be something to boast about, if the cooling system is remarkably quieter this time around that is.

Intrinsic said:
EricHiggin said:

While on one hand with XB trying to make all their consoles look similar so the customer can physically see the connection between them, PS has said they wish to remain with the typical generational change, which should mean a completely different looking console like in the past.

As for the specs, with a late 2019 25th anniversary launch, I'd say they probably wouldn't be all that far off at 6 Ryzen cores and Navi around 10TF, on 10nm-7nm, but I have a hard time believing it's Zen 2.  Ryzen, or maybe Ryzen+, but not Ryzen 2. That line of CPU's won't launch until early to mid 2019, so that would be way to new to go into a PS5 6 months or a year later. Also too many ports. Maybe for dev kits, but not for retail. 2TB should be the absolute min for the base console since Pro is already getting 2TB models. I'd also assume a $499 price unless PS eats $100 per unit.

errrr...... MS tried to make their consoles across generations look similar? I think you are wrong on that one. The XB looked totaly different from the 360 whic was totally different from the XB1. Hell we could even argue that the XB1s looks totally different from the XB1.

A ryzen 7 1800x cpu (8 cores and 16 threads, 14nm) currently retails for around $250. That means sony can get it for as little as $150 as an OEM or even less. And thats if they are building the PS5 to launch this year. And if you think the next gen consles will come with a 10TF GPU then you are in for a surprise.

Make no mistake, the PS5/XB2 will be using 7nm chips. AMDs range of chips are shifting to 7nm next year and the next gen consoles won't be coming till 2020. By the time the next gen consoles come along 7nm fab will already be a 12 to 18 months old. And before you talk about too early to go intop next gen consoles, think back at 2016. The PS4pro got a 16nm(14nm) chip less than 6 months after AMD started making them.

As for storage, I am almost convinced they are switching to an M.2 interface. Not just for future proofing but because right now everyone is usng them. You can currently get a 1TB M.2 sata drive for as little as $130 which means for an OEM they can get that for less tha half that and in 2020 even lower. 

Since XB1, and more so XB1S. XB1 was just a horrible design all around if your looking at a console consumer product. Phil even said they made sure XB1X resembled them so people would know they have compatibility.

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.

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.

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.



The Canadian National Anthem According To Justin Trudeau

 

Oh planet Earth! The home of native lands, 
True social law, in all of us demand.
With cattle farts, we view sea rise,
Our North sinking slowly.
From far and snide, oh planet Earth, 
Our healthcare is yours free!
Science save our land, harnessing the breeze,
Oh planet Earth, smoke weed and ferment yeast.
Oh planet Earth, ell gee bee queue and tee.

Pemalite said: 

 

Intrinsic said:

A ryzen 7 1800x cpu (8 cores and 16 threads, 14nm) currently retails for around $250. That means sony can get it for as little as $150 as an OEM or even less. And thats if they are building the PS5 to launch this year. And if you think the next gen consles will come with a 10TF GPU then you are in for a surprise.

1. Microsoft and Sony will not be buying CPU's off a shelve, it will be a semi-custom SOC design... Thus making your pricing redundant.
The most logical choice will be a single CCX. - So 6 cores.

Intrinsic said:

As for storage, I am almost convinced they are switching to an M.2 interface. Not just for future proofing but because right now everyone is usng them. You can currently get a 1TB M.2 sata drive for as little as $130 which means for an OEM they can get that for less tha half that and in 2020 even lower.

2. Don't think M.2 is going to happen... Unless they load it down with a ton of shitty QLC NAND.
I think a mechanical disk is still the way to go.

  1. I am aware that they won't be buying hardware off the shelf. But like you have already said these consoles are as close to off the shelf hardware as consoles have ever been. Simply looking at whts out there wll paint a clearly good picture of what can or will be possible. A 6 core 12 thread cpu sounds more like it though.

  2. I think they will go with the M.2 "interface". They will definately still be using SATA based SSDs but over an NvME M.2 interface. Its just future proofing and it takes up less space. No point putting a 2.5 SSD drive in there cause they cost the same as the sata basedm.2 drives. I think a mechanical drive will be prohibitively slow for the next gen consoles. Too much of a bottleneck to build into hardware that could very well be around till 2027. And by 2020 the can probably get SATA based M.2 drives of about 1TB fr under $40. 

    A mechanical drive just doesn,t make any sense with the direction the entire industry is going right now.  


Areaz32 said:
Pemalite said:

Not anymore they don't. They use PC derived hardware with maybe a couple of extra tricks sprinkled on.

You cannot buy an APU with the PS4 CPU + PS4 GPU.

You don't need to?

Areaz32 said:

Just because the different chips on the APU die are derived from chips sold on discrete desktop hardware, doesn't mean it isn't highly customized and extremely optimized.

It is not "Highly customized".
There is no secret sauce.
There is no capabilities of the PS4 SOC that cannot be done on PC.
The PS4 SOC isn't punching significantly above it's weight from comparable PC hardware.

Areaz32 said:

The mere reality of the APU design in the PS4 makes it able to be optimized way more than most other computer hardware out there. The unified memory is an example.

Nah.
PC has unified memory.
The PC has APU's which exceed the base Playstation 4. I.E. Ryzen 5 Pro 2400G.

It's nothing special.

Intrinsic said:
  1. I am aware that they won't be buying hardware off the shelf. But like you have already said these consoles are as close to off the shelf hardware as consoles have ever been. Simply looking at whts out there wll paint a clearly good picture of what can or will be possible. A 6 core 12 thread cpu sounds more like it though.

Difference is... There is no component consolidation or bulk buying to reduce price.

Intrinsic said:

I think they will go with the M.2 "interface". They will definately still be using SATA based SSDs but over an NvME M.2 interface. Its just future proofing and it takes up less space. No point putting a 2.5 SSD drive in there cause they cost the same as the sata basedm.2 drives. I think a mechanical drive will be prohibitively slow for the next gen consoles. Too much of a bottleneck to build into hardware that could very well be around till 2027. And by 2020 the can probably get SATA based M.2 drives of about 1TB fr under $40.
  1. A mechanical drive just doesn,t make any sense with the direction the entire industry is going right now. 

Yeah. But consoles don't care about industry direction.
They care about price/performance.

Mechanical drives still have the advantage in that regard, especially as game sizes continue to blow out... Forcing the requirement of multi-terabyte storage solutions.
Mechanical disks are also sufficient enough from a performance perspective as well for asset streaming into DRAM, provided they are sustained reads.

Keep in mind... Even by PC standards even the Xbox One X is using a slow mechanical disk.

There is a shift to QLC NAND at the moment which will apply cost pressures to mechanical disks... However. They are lacking in the performance department... And thus require an ample amount of DRAM and SLC NAND to fix the performance issue QLC NAND inherently brings.

EricHiggin said:
Pemalite said: 

7nm brings with it a slew of advantages in regards to power consumption and heat production.

Correct, depending on how many TF it ends up at overall. The higher the clocks the lower the CU count most likely, if it's going to fit in launch PS4 sized shell for cheap. If it can run at 1500MHz and hit around 10TF, that'll be pretty impressive.

That's just it. It's a balancing act between CU counts and clockrate... Get the right balance and you get an optimal performance/power consumption/die space target.

It's not overtly difficult to best even the Xbox One right now with mid-range hardware... 7nm should be able to increase that gap substantially.

Hopefully the hardware is more impressive than a 3640@1500mhz chip... Especially if we want to look at Ray Tracing which is inherently a compute limited issue.

EricHiggin said:

'm not, since it will probably be semi custom. 7nm apparently is still fairly expensive compared to 14nm, but I guess that could change between now and mid 2019. A custom 6 core CPU/APU would also mean more dies per wafer, so that would also save some on cost to manufacture. Still doesn't seem like it'll be cheap, or near as cheap as Jaguar would have been.

Newer fabrication processes are always more expensive than the older ones. Up to a point.
The larger the chip is, the more expensive it becomes... And the more sense it becomes to fabricate it at a smaller process.

However... AMD's approach is to de-integrate parts of the chip that doesn't scale downwards to smaller geometry's anyway and get cost savings that way, might be something that next-gen takes on.

Zen itself though is actually a very tiny tiny core. We are looking at 44mm2 for a quad core Ryzen 1 CPU @14nm. Or 11mm2 per core.
It's not as small as Jaguar though which is 3.1mm2 per core @ 28nm... But you also don't need 8 CPU cores+extra ARM cores (PS4 only) as it has more available CPU time to handle everything.

Jaguar was cheap, but also extremely nasty.

Ryzen on 7nm will be more tenable for next gen though from a costing point... Plus the consoles can consolidate parts of the chip (I.E. Sharing L2/L3 caches, I/O etc') between the GPU and CPU cores anyway.

EricHiggin said:

20 available to devs, 24 overall. My bad. I would think PS would follow the XB1 8GB to XB1X 12GB RAM approach (minus DDR/eSRAM) instead of PS4 to Pro when it comes to next gen. That would more easily allow the 16GB for devs at launch, then maybe 24GB for devs mid gen.

Xbox One X is a "premium" consoles with a higher price tag to match... Thus it could afford the wider memory bus in conjunction with more PCB traces and memory chips.
For a base console which is meant to drop to low price points, I just don't see anything more than 16GB being feasible.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network

 

Pemalite said:
Areaz32 said:

You cannot buy an APU with the PS4 CPU + PS4 GPU.

You don't need to?

Yes, you do if you want that same optimization potential.

Areaz32 said: 

Just because the different chips on the APU die are derived from chips sold on discrete desktop hardware, doesn't mean it isn't highly customized and extremely optimized.

It is not "Highly customized".
There is no secret sauce.
There is no capabilities of the PS4 SOC that cannot be done on PC.
The PS4 SOC isn't punching significantly above it's weight from comparable PC hardware.

The PS4 SOC IS punching above its weight significantly from comparable PC hardware. It is why most 3rd party devs aren't able to make a game that looks better than the first party games on the same system and even better on PC.

They are only able to make the game runs kinda bad on PS4 (in comparison to first-party titles) and then really well on PC. And that is because they have invested on a graphics architecture that has to just work reasonably well on a console while also working reasonably well on PC, and that results in PC always being better under those circumstances.

There is a reason why Quantum Break ran so poorly on PC, and that is because its engine was initially programmed to be highly optimized for the Xbox One hardware, and then the PC, in turn, had to run it in a very inefficient way.

Areaz32 said: 

The mere reality of the APU design in the PS4 makes it able to be optimized way more than most other computer hardware out there. The unified memory is an example.

Nah.
PC has unified memory.
The PC has APU's which exceed the base Playstation 4. I.E. Ryzen 5 Pro 2400G.

It's nothing special.

I don't think you understand. It is the reality of the Windows OS and their graphics API's that are in the way of letting PC's utilize APU's the same way the console (not sure about Xbox's because they recently mandated all games be made for PC as well) API's make it possible. It is a question of design not processing power. If graphics engineers are able to pull off a certain feature for their engine by utilizing the highly unified structure of the console hardware, then they wouldn't be able to get the same performance on the equivalent PC hardware. Some features done in console games are simply not as efficient on PCs.

Not only that, but the mere reality of being able to work on a fixed platform where you can literally calculate all of your engine features in their best and worst case scenarios allows for developers to pick the exact techniques that are best for the hardware and also perfectly budget the performance of said hardware. Not possible on PC.

It is simply a fact.  I mean the proof has been out there for a long time. Just look at the Sony first party games. They keep getting better and better looking as time goes on, on the same hardware. How else would this be possible?



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.



I guess PS5 will look like the original xbox one but with black color instead of white :). This is obviously fake, like 6-core cpu seems unlikely as we now know zen2 is 8-core ccx and this is what next-gen consoles will use. And DLSS is nvidia tech not AMD.

As what spec ps5 will have my new latest prediction is that Sony will aim for native 4k resolution and not some fake 4k with CB or temporal injection as I believed before. This will require a lot of Teraflops and memory bandwidth.

So the GPU will have 72-80 compute units clocked about 1500 mhz, this will give 15 TF. 72-80 compute units is twice the amount ps4 pro and xbox one X have so it's not unreasonable. The memory will be 12 Gb of ram Gddr6 in 384-bit bus and will give a total of 672 GB/s bandwidth. The console will have 4 GB of ddr4 ram to run the OS on.

2 TB mechanical hard drive with 128 GB super fast flash storage(3000 mb/s read and write speed) The flash drive will make up for the lack of Ram increased as it can be used to store textures, geometry, ai and other stuff someone else probably can explain better. 

I think both ps5 and next xbox will use something close to these specs and both will be very similiar, Sony and Microsoft will launch in 2020 for 399$.



"Donald Trump is the greatest president that god has ever created" - Trumpstyle

6x master league achiever in starcraft2

Beaten Sigrun on God of war mode

Beaten DOOM ultra-nightmare with NO endless ammo-rune, 2x super shotgun and no decoys on ps4 pro.

1-0 against Grubby in Wc3 frozen throne ladder!!

Areaz32 said:

There is a reason why Quantum Break ran so poorly on PC, and that is because its engine was initially programmed to be highly optimized for the Xbox One hardware, and then the PC, in turn, had to run it in a very inefficient way.

Quantum Break runs poorly on PCs?

You probably refer to benchmarks in Ultra setting or above in native resolution without the "temporal reconstruction" performance cheats.

If you choose similar settings to the Xbox One version or the Xbox One X version, the PC version delivers similar or even better performance.

My first playthrough was the 30fps-locked Xbox version. After playing it through again on PC I can't go back to the 30 fps.



I thought that DLSS is nVidia exclusive tech.