By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Rumor: PS5 announcement coming mid 2019 and more info at PSX 2019

Pemalite said:
EricHiggin said:

The Subor also doesn't have the same low level API the consoles have, which would lead to more power consumption to get the same results. Put a comparable 2TF PC up against a PS4 and not only is it going to struggle to try and match it, it's going to do so at a much higher price, while consuming more power. Navi will definitely improve on performance per watt, and probably more than you would expect if PS is directly involved, otherwise PS5 might as well just use Polaris or Vega.

Can't forget the Power Supply efficiency as well. If the Subor has an 70% efficient unit and the Xbox One has a 90% efficient unit, that can account for 20-30w of power right there as wasted.

Forget? LOL. Another good point though. While I can't find the PSU spec for the Subor, with Pro having a 4.2TF GPU spec with a 310w PSU, and XB1X having a 6.0TF GPU spec with a 245w PSU, it probably fits somewhere in that range of efficiency vs performance. It is important to point out that yes, that can make a pretty big efficiency difference with just one component like the PSU, since those two consoles use pretty similar hardware, with XB1X having more premium components and a clear performance advantage, yet a much smaller peak PSU output. While the Subor uses Ryzen, and Polaris with some Vega baked in, Zen 2, Navi, GDDR6, etc, if they ended up in next gen consoles, would be that much more efficient vs their gains in performance. Like you say, the marketing numbers only tell a fraction of the story.

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 27 November 2018

Around the Network
LipeJJ said:
I think we'll all be surprised (again) once they reveal the actual console. It's always more powerful than people expect, and with time the exclusives start to show the difference also stronger than people anticipated. It's always like that, and I doubt this time will be different.

Btw, I hope they charge $500 so they can pack in better stuff. That said, they should also have a $450 SKU with only 500GB HDD or something to offer a better price for those who want it.

Since the consoles settled on X64.... its now kinda easy to estimate just how powerful they can be. There are components we can't possibly guesstimate though, like RAM type and quantity and storage type and quantity but we can make a pretty solid guess on the APU if using a $150 as a ceiling. To put it into perspective the 28nm APU in the PS4 back in 2013 cost around $125. 

And the 16nm APU in the PS4pro probably also cost around $130. Its safe to conclude that a 7nm APU in the PS5 that has at least double the power of the PS4pro will also cost around $130. 

I say at least double because said APU will also be ale to run at much higher clocks and so on.  

EricHiggin said:
Pemalite said:

Can't forget the Power Supply efficiency as well. If the Subor has an 70% efficient unit and the Xbox One has a 90% efficient unit, that can account for 20-30w of power right there as wasted.

Forget? LOL. Another good point though. While I can't find the PSU spec for the Subor, with Pro having a 4.2TF GPU spec with a 310w PSU, and XB1X having a 6.0TF GPU spec with a 245w PSU, it probably fits somewhere in that range of efficiency vs performance. It is important to point out that yes, that can make a pretty big efficiency difference with just one component like the PSU, since those two consoles use pretty similar hardware, with XB1X having more premium components and a clear performance advantage, yet a much smaller peak PSU output. While the Subor uses Ryzen, and Polaris with some Vega baked in, Zen 2, Navi, GDDR6, etc, if they ended up in next gen consoles, would be that much more efficient vs their gains in performance. Like you say, the marketing numbers only tell a fraction of the story.

Technically speaking, the PSU sec doesn't really say much about the console efficiency. 

Both the PS4pro and XB1x use around 90W when running games. PS4pro uses 2W when its asleep and XB1x uses 11W. 

How much power is allotted for USB ports and stuff are factors to consider when looking at the PSU. 



Pemalite said: 
DonFerrari said:
I agree 400 USD is a good pricepoint and that it isn't good business decision to have it cost you 800 USD, still it didn't prevent Sony from doing it and along the gen cutting down cost.

But they did pay for their mistake with the Playstation 3 early on... Ironically, the Xbox One made a similar mistake at $500 USD, hopefully Microsoft learned from that for next gen.
Sure Sony paid for it. But it still doesn't invalidate that companies not always look at the cheapest or most cost concious solution, and you including MS with X1 (which was more due to Kinect than the rest of the HW anyway) shows that isn't even exclusive to Sony.

DonFerrari said:
Sure Sony could, but SW and OS isn't their core business, they don't have the expertise and the expense wouldn't bring any additional revenue, so pretty pointless effort (even more when you talk about chosing the least expensive stuff).

Allot of emulators have already been built, the Playstation Classic for example is using an Emulator that wasn't developed by Sony.
Why not leverage that? Why not work with an emulator group and hire them to build an emulator?


Because that would diminish their sales of remasters/remakes, not bring any extra HW sales. So why waste money on it?

DonFerrari said:

Exaggeration on finding a second job. It isn't really something that expensive, people buy 1000 USD phones every two years.

And people took out of context and distorted. He was more like saying that the PS3 was so good and had so much value that people would WANT (not SHOULD) to work more to buy it and that would improve economy in the world.

I have 4x Jobs, so it's not really applicable to me anyway.
However his statement was in poor taste, regardless of how you try and spin it. - He could have probably worded it a little differently so that he didn't come off as arrogant.

Totally agree on it, but pushing it as intention was another thing is just pushing a false narrative. Plus the person is from another culture where the meaning of what is said is also very different.

DonFerrari said:

No, you accepted it later when pointed out, your initial post was that NEVER done it.

False.
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8924040

And I quote: "The price on launch day important. No longer will Sony or Microsoft make a gamble like Sony did with the Playstation 3... And have a stupidly expensive console on launch."  - I reiterated that point a couple times.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8923611 you posted this before "Price is the most important factor to building a console, they are cost sensitive devices that cannot have high-end components."

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8922586 "Performance is secondary to cost in the console space, that's the reality of the situation."

You were putting as absolute rule without any caveats at first, and your quoted is from what you where telling Intrinsic afterwards of even the replies you gave me.

DonFerrari said:

Still DVD drive was more expensive than keeping CD, but they chose DVD for PS2 as they chose CD for PS1 when it was still more expensive than other solutions, because they had a target. Also PS2 launched for much less than it costed to produce. Up until now every console Sony made costed them more at launch than it was sold at, with PS4 being the one with the smallest GAP and fastest to be profitable on the HW itself. You can check if you wish.

I haven't disputed any of that. In-fact I agree (And recognized earlier in the thread) that sometimes the cost to manufacture exceeds to the sales price.
But, that doesn't mean you are going to get $1,000 worth of console hardware for $100, doesn't make business sense.
You are putting a very grave exaggeration to try and dismiss the point.
It isn't even sometimes, Playstation had ALL 4 consoles cost exceeding pricetag, ALL 3 Xbox were as well as I remember.

And the point in this is that they had much cheaper options and still didn't chose those, while you pointed that they don't do it. Sure you later made the caveat that they don't go scratch bottom, but still choosing BD drive at a time BD players retailed more expensive than PS3 itself certainly isn't choosing even the cost conscient solution.



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."

Intrinsic said:
EricHiggin said:

Forget? LOL. Another good point though. While I can't find the PSU spec for the Subor, with Pro having a 4.2TF GPU spec with a 310w PSU, and XB1X having a 6.0TF GPU spec with a 245w PSU, it probably fits somewhere in that range of efficiency vs performance. It is important to point out that yes, that can make a pretty big efficiency difference with just one component like the PSU, since those two consoles use pretty similar hardware, with XB1X having more premium components and a clear performance advantage, yet a much smaller peak PSU output. While the Subor uses Ryzen, and Polaris with some Vega baked in, Zen 2, Navi, GDDR6, etc, if they ended up in next gen consoles, would be that much more efficient vs their gains in performance. Like you say, the marketing numbers only tell a fraction of the story.

Technically speaking, the PSU sec doesn't really say much about the console efficiency. 

Both the PS4pro and XB1x use around 90W when running games. PS4pro uses 2W when its asleep and XB1x uses 11W. 

How much power is allotted for USB ports and stuff are factors to consider when looking at the PSU. 

XB1X has as many USB ports and more ports overall. If both consoles have similar hardware, use around the same amount of power, and have about the same amount of ports, then their PSU's should be fairly similar as well, yet the XB1X has more performance and it's PSU based on it's peak rating is about 20% lower than the Pro PSU. Some of this could be PS wanting extra longevity, and also the XB1X 'hovis method' power management system they have in place, but some of it is no doubt PSU efficiency rating based on the overall XB1X capabilities. Now whether the efficiency difference for the PSU itself is really 10% or 20% we don't know exactly, but it still proves the point that the PSU design and quality matters.

The point was about how much power the Subor is pulling from the wall, and what that means compared to the existing consoles and where they can go in the future. Well if the existing consoles have more efficient power supplies, then more of that power is going into actually feeding the hardware and not being wasted in the PSU conversion process. With a more efficient PSU, instead of pulling 185 watt from the wall, the Subor could possibly pull 150 watts instead let's say, which would mean headroom for extra hardware performance to bring it back up to 180w, with a more efficient PSU. It's also possible the Subor has a high end high efficiency PSU and it's totally maxed out, but we don't know that, and that's typically not the case as PC's get cheaper.

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 27 November 2018

Intrinsic said:

Technically speaking, the PSU sec doesn't really say much about the console efficiency. 

Both the PS4pro and XB1x use around 90W when running games. PS4pro uses 2W when its asleep and XB1x uses 11W. 

How much power is allotted for USB ports and stuff are factors to consider when looking at the PSU. 

It does influence power consumption at the wall.

For instance... You can have two PC's each having components drawing 500w. - If one PSU is 70% efficient then it would need to draw 650w from the wall.
If the other is 90% efficient then it will draw 550w from the wall.

The reason for that is that the Power Supply is converting electricity... And that is where the laws of Thermodynamics comes into play... In short electricity is wasted as heat during the conversion.

DonFerrari said:
Sure Sony paid for it. But it still doesn't invalidate that companies not always look at the cheapest or most cost concious solution, and you including MS with X1 (which was more due to Kinect than the rest of the HW anyway) shows that isn't even exclusive to Sony.

Again, I have already agreed with you on this.

All consoles have a budget, consoles are cost sensitive devices. - The fact that the Xbox One or Playstation 3 had a higher hardware budget doesn't negate my statements.

DonFerrari said:
Because that would diminish their sales of remasters/remakes, not bring any extra HW sales. So why waste money on it?

Consumer good will? In Microsoft's case it makes Xbox an attractive platform to some users... And considering all Xbox Games with Gold games are all backwards compatible going forward, it's an attractive scheme for Xbox 360 users migrating over, in short it helps lock Xbox gamers into the Xbox ecosystem as they have already made the investment.

DonFerrari said:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8923611 you posted this before "Price is the most important factor to building a console, they are cost sensitive devices that cannot have high-end components."

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8922586 "Performance is secondary to cost in the console space, that's the reality of the situation."

And I stand by those statements. You are not going to have a $1000 USD console with $2000 worth of components.

Jaguar was a compromise of cost over performance.
The GPU in the Xbox One and Playstation 4 were not high-end GPU's. - Again... A compromise of cost over performance.

The Xbox One X and Playstation 4 GPU's are not high-end GPU's. Again... A compromise of cost over performance.

The fact that Microsoft managed to squeeze in some eSRAM and Sony 8GB of GDDR5 in the budget just means they prioritized a couple of components over another.


DonFerrari said:


You are putting a very grave exaggeration to try and dismiss the point.
It isn't even sometimes, Playstation had ALL 4 consoles cost exceeding pricetag, ALL 3 Xbox were as well as I remember.

And the point in this is that they had much cheaper options and still didn't chose those, while you pointed that they don't do it. Sure you later made the caveat that they don't go scratch bottom, but still choosing BD drive at a time BD players retailed more expensive than PS3 itself certainly isn't choosing even the cost conscient solution.

Doesn't matter if the hardware costs exceeded the price tag. They still need to adhere to a budget.


EricHiggin said:

XB1X has as many USB ports and more ports overall. If both consoles have similar hardware, use around the same amount of power, and have about the same amount of ports, then their PSU's should be fairly similar as well, yet the XB1X has more performance and it's PSU based on it's peak rating is about 20% lower than the Pro PSU. Some of this could be PS wanting extra longevity, and also the XB1X 'hovis method' power management system they have in place, but some of it is no doubt PSU efficiency rating based on the overall XB1X capabilities. Now whether the efficiency difference for the PSU itself is really 10% or 20% we don't know exactly, but it still proves the point that the PSU design and quality matters.

The point was about how much power the Subor is pulling from the wall, and what that means compared to the existing consoles and where they can go in the future. Well if the existing consoles have more efficient power supplies, then more of that power is going into actually feeding the hardware and not being wasted in the PSU conversion process. With a more efficient PSU, instead of pulling 185 watt from the wall, the Subor could possibly pull 150 watts instead let's say, which would mean headroom for extra hardware performance to bring it back up to 180w, with a more efficient PSU. It's also possible the Subor has a high end high efficiency PSU and it's totally maxed out, but we don't know that, and that's typically not the case as PC's get cheaper.

The Xbox One X's PSU is an efficient unit that is 90% efficient at 50% load, I would be surprised if the Playstation 4 Pro even comes near that.

Last edited by Pemalite - on 28 November 2018

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

Around the Network
Pemalite said:
EricHiggin said:

XB1X has as many USB ports and more ports overall. If both consoles have similar hardware, use around the same amount of power, and have about the same amount of ports, then their PSU's should be fairly similar as well, yet the XB1X has more performance and it's PSU based on it's peak rating is about 20% lower than the Pro PSU. Some of this could be PS wanting extra longevity, and also the XB1X 'hovis method' power management system they have in place, but some of it is no doubt PSU efficiency rating based on the overall XB1X capabilities. Now whether the efficiency difference for the PSU itself is really 10% or 20% we don't know exactly, but it still proves the point that the PSU design and quality matters.

The point was about how much power the Subor is pulling from the wall, and what that means compared to the existing consoles and where they can go in the future. Well if the existing consoles have more efficient power supplies, then more of that power is going into actually feeding the hardware and not being wasted in the PSU conversion process. With a more efficient PSU, instead of pulling 185 watt from the wall, the Subor could possibly pull 150 watts instead let's say, which would mean headroom for extra hardware performance to bring it back up to 180w, with a more efficient PSU. It's also possible the Subor has a high end high efficiency PSU and it's totally maxed out, but we don't know that, and that's typically not the case as PC's get cheaper.

The Xbox One X's PSU is an efficient unit that is 90% efficient at 50% load, I would be surprised if the Playstation 4 Pro even comes near that.

Especially considering that the very recent 7200 Pro model has had some sort of change to the PSU. Even though when tested, all Pro models pull very close to the same amount of power from the wall. The first 2 iterations had the 3 prong power plug, and the new model has the dual prong like all PS4's have. I remember reading an article way back, that the PS engineers were pushed to keep the supply wattage down and efficiency up as much as possible so the two prong plug could be used. This was due to electrical safety standards of certain countries. The wattage they had to remain below to accomplish that was 250 watt, which was the exact size PSU they used with the first 2 iterations of PS4, before dropping down to 230 watt for the 1200 series. This leads me to believe the newest Pro model must have a PSU peak of 250w or lower now, which would allow them to use the two prong plug. So PS seems to have gotten rid of any overkill they may have had on the earlier Pro models, while also increasing the PSU efficiency considerably.

https://www.dualshockers.com/youll-never-guess-why-sony-kept-the-ps4s-power-consumption-under-250-watt/



There has been a lot of leaks/rumors lately about desktop zen2 and Navi. It happened yesterday from a youtuber named adoredtv, he leaked the entire Zen 2 lineup along with it's Apu's, he also leaked Navi cards. One thing to note is that adoredtv think all these are chiplet designs but his source would not confirm this.

Now you might be sceptical but this information has been confirmed by Kyle Bennet he knows everything but says there's some minor errors. I'll post the most interesting stuff:

Ryzen 3 3300G - 6C/12T/Navi 15CU - Base Clock 3.0 - Boost Clock 3.8 - TDP 65W - $129

Ryzen 5 3600G - 8C/16T/Navi 20CU - Base Clock 3.2 - Boost Clock 4.0 - TDP 95W - $199

Radeon RX 3060 (Navi12) $129 - 4GB GDDR6 - 75W TDP (Radeon 580 performance)
Radeon RX 3070 (Navi10 or Navi12) $199 - 8GB GDDR6 -120W TDP (Vega 56/geforce 1070 performance)
Radeon RX 3080 (Navi10) $249 - 8GB GDDR6 - 150W TDP (geforce 2070 performance)

 

This is really bad news for us, I'm expecting the ps5 to have a Ryzen 3 3300g chip but with a cut-down radeon 3080 gpu. We have gone from expecting ryzen 2700 cpu performance to ryzen 2600 performance and 30%+ performance of a geforce 1080ti to vega 64/geforce 1080 gpu performance.

SHORT VERSION:

Expect a 6core zen2 cpu (2 cores will be deactive for better yields) with about ryzen 2600 performance and a gpu with geforce 1080/vega64 performance. The information about desktop zen2 and navi should be confirmed at Ces between 8-12 jan if true or not.

I'm slightly sceptical what cpu we will get as it will probably be very hard to do backwards compatibility for PS4 games with only 6 cores.

 

Sources:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCdsTBsH-rI  (youtube link)

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-specs-prices-leaked-upto-16-cores-5-1ghz-on-am4/  (desktop zen2 lineup)

https://hardforum.com/threads/adoredtv-discusses-the-recent-amd-ryzen-and-radeon-3000-series-leaks.1973015/  (kyle bennet confirms at post #6 "There is a whole lot of reality in that video. A lot. There is a little wrong, but not a lot.")

Last edited by Trumpstyle - on 05 December 2018

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!!

Trumpstyle said:

There has been a lot of leaks/rumors lately about desktop zen2 and Navi. It happened yesterday from a youtuber named adoredtv, he leaked the entire Zen 2 lineup along with it's Apu's, he also leaked Navi cards. One thing to note is that adoredtv think all these are chiplet designs but his source would not confirm this.

Now you might be sceptical but this information has been confirmed by Kyle Bennet he knows everything but says there's some minor errors. I'll post the most interesting stuff:

Ryzen 3 3300G - 6C/12T/Navi 15CU - Base Clock 3.0 - Boost Clock 3.8 - TDP 65W - $129

Ryzen 5 3600G - 8C/16T/Navi 20CU - Base Clock 3.2 - Boost Clock 4.0 - TDP 95W - $199

Radeon RX 3060 (Navi12) $129 - 4GB GDDR6 - 75W TDP (Radeon 580 performance)
Radeon RX 3070 (Navi10 or Navi12) $199 - 8GB GDDR6 -120W TDP (Vega 56/geforce 1070 performance)
Radeon RX 3080 (Navi10) $249 - 8GB GDDR6 - 150W TDP (geforce 2070 performance)

 

This is really bad news for us, I'm expecting the ps5 to have a Ryzen 3 3300g chip but with a cut-down radeon 3080 gpu. We have gone from expecting ryzen 2700 cpu performance to ryzen 2600 performance and 30%+ performance of a geforce 1080ti to vega 64/geforce 1080 gpu performance.

SHORT VERSION:

Expect a 6core zen2 cpu (2 cores will be deactive for better yields) with about ryzen 2600 performance and a gpu with geforce 1080/vega64 performance. The information about desktop zen2 and navi should be confirmed at Ces between 8-12 jan if true or not.

I'm slightly sceptical what cpu we will get as it will probably be very hard to do backwards compatibility for PS4 games with only 6 cores.

 

Sources:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCdsTBsH-rI  (youtube link)

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-specs-prices-leaked-upto-16-cores-5-1ghz-on-am4/  (desktop zen2 lineup)

https://hardforum.com/threads/adoredtv-discusses-the-recent-amd-ryzen-and-radeon-3000-series-leaks.1973015/  (kyle bennet confirms at post #6 "There is a whole lot of reality in that video. A lot. There is a little wrong, but not a lot.")

No it isn't.... and for a lot of reasons.

  1. You are looking at retail prices. Sony is not buying these chips using retail pricing, they buy as an EM and use bulk contract pricing. They can basically take a $200 CPU/GPU and get them from AMD at under $100 each.

  2. These prices are expected to be for 2019. The console doesn't come till 1H 2020 at the earliest. So even at EM pricing sony is not going to be paying what an OEM would have paid in 2019.

  3. You are also ignoring the most obvious fact. We have already seen what can be accomplished from a die shrink having gone from the PS4(28nm) to the PS4pro(16nm). While the CPU was left untouched the CU count in the GPU doubled from 20CU in the PS4 (2CU for redundancy) to 40CU in the PS4pro (4CU for redundancy). And the overall die size dropped from 348mm2 in the 28nm PS4 to 321mm2 in the 16nm PS4pro.

    The takeaway here is that going from 16nm to 7nm and keeping the die size at around 350mm2; sony will at the very least be able to fit a GPU with 80CU - 88CU and ryzen CPU in there too. At the very least.

  4. Now also consider the efficiency and thermal gains on a smaller manufacturing node too. Which means that clocks can be higher than at least what we have now. But also lower than the advertised margins from what the chips are based on (because consoles and no room for throtling) so think around 20-30% slower clock speeds. So if the parent CPU runs at 3GHz expect it to run at around 2.5Ghz in the console....etc.

  5. Lastly..... custom chips and hardware especially when ordered in the scales of consoles is a totally different kinda business. But lets talk about costs here. If sony intends to come in at $399 then expect the APU budget to be no higher than $150 (again remember the PS4pro at 16nm and its APU budget was around $130). If they are looking at a $450/$499 price point then the APU budget can be anywhere from $200 - $250. 

    Either way you are looking at a massive step up from what is currently in the Pro/X.


Intrinsic said:
Trumpstyle said:

There has been a lot of leaks/rumors lately about desktop zen2 and Navi. It happened yesterday from a youtuber named adoredtv, he leaked the entire Zen 2 lineup along with it's Apu's, he also leaked Navi cards. One thing to note is that adoredtv think all these are chiplet designs but his source would not confirm this.

Now you might be sceptical but this information has been confirmed by Kyle Bennet he knows everything but says there's some minor errors. I'll post the most interesting stuff:

Ryzen 3 3300G - 6C/12T/Navi 15CU - Base Clock 3.0 - Boost Clock 3.8 - TDP 65W - $129

Ryzen 5 3600G - 8C/16T/Navi 20CU - Base Clock 3.2 - Boost Clock 4.0 - TDP 95W - $199

Radeon RX 3060 (Navi12) $129 - 4GB GDDR6 - 75W TDP (Radeon 580 performance)
Radeon RX 3070 (Navi10 or Navi12) $199 - 8GB GDDR6 -120W TDP (Vega 56/geforce 1070 performance)
Radeon RX 3080 (Navi10) $249 - 8GB GDDR6 - 150W TDP (geforce 2070 performance)

This is really bad news for us, I'm expecting the ps5 to have a Ryzen 3 3300g chip but with a cut-down radeon 3080 gpu. We have gone from expecting ryzen 2700 cpu performance to ryzen 2600 performance and 30%+ performance of a geforce 1080ti to vega 64/geforce 1080 gpu performance.

SHORT VERSION:

Expect a 6core zen2 cpu (2 cores will be deactive for better yields) with about ryzen 2600 performance and a gpu with geforce 1080/vega64 performance. The information about desktop zen2 and navi should be confirmed at Ces between 8-12 jan if true or not.

I'm slightly sceptical what cpu we will get as it will probably be very hard to do backwards compatibility for PS4 games with only 6 cores.

Sources:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCdsTBsH-rI  (youtube link)

https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-3000-specs-prices-leaked-upto-16-cores-5-1ghz-on-am4/  (desktop zen2 lineup)

https://hardforum.com/threads/adoredtv-discusses-the-recent-amd-ryzen-and-radeon-3000-series-leaks.1973015/  (kyle bennet confirms at post #6 "There is a whole lot of reality in that video. A lot. There is a little wrong, but not a lot.")

No it isn't.... and for a lot of reasons.

  1. You are looking at retail prices. Sony is not buying these chips using retail pricing, they buy as an EM and use bulk contract pricing. They can basically take a $200 CPU/GPU and get them from AMD at under $100 each.

  2. These prices are expected to be for 2019. The console doesn't come till 1H 2020 at the earliest. So even at EM pricing sony is not going to be paying what an OEM would have paid in 2019.

  3. You are also ignoring the most obvious fact. We have already seen what can be accomplished from a die shrink having gone from the PS4(28nm) to the PS4pro(16nm). While the CPU was left untouched the CU count in the GPU doubled from 20CU in the PS4 (2CU for redundancy) to 40CU in the PS4pro (4CU for redundancy). And the overall die size dropped from 348mm2 in the 28nm PS4 to 321mm2 in the 16nm PS4pro.

    The takeaway here is that going from 16nm to 7nm and keeping the die size at around 350mm2; sony will at the very least be able to fit a GPU with 80CU - 88CU and ryzen CPU in there too. At the very least.

  4. Now also consider the efficiency and thermal gains on a smaller manufacturing node too. Which means that clocks can be higher than at least what we have now. But also lower than the advertised margins from what the chips are based on (because consoles and no room for throtling) so think around 20-30% slower clock speeds. So if the parent CPU runs at 3GHz expect it to run at around 2.5Ghz in the console....etc.

  5. Lastly..... custom chips and hardware especially when ordered in the scales of consoles is a totally different kinda business. But lets talk about costs here. If sony intends to come in at $399 then expect the APU budget to be no higher than $150 (again remember the PS4pro at 16nm and its APU budget was around $130). If they are looking at a $450/$499 price point then the APU budget can be anywhere from $200 - $250. 

    Either way you are looking at a massive step up from what is currently in the Pro/X.

One of the points made about AMD's supposed new design, is that they will likely use 7nm chiplets and interconnect them all through a 14nm I/O die and an interposer. It's explained why this makes sense through comparing yields for chiplets vs APU's and the ability to have many different SKU's, mixing and matching chiplets and I/O dies without having to design a bunch of custom APU's or chips in general. This would likely make it extremely easy to offer an upgraded console at launch or down the road. Just swap out the base GPU chiplet for an upgraded one, maybe even the CPU. No need to design another new custom APU. This should also help in terms of thermals as well.

By using only 6 cores, they could get away with higher clocks which are more important for CPU's when gaming. The 3.0GHz range, give or take, with 6 Ryzen cores, will be plenty to hold 60fps. It'll likely be an 8 core die with one core disabled and the 7th core will be OS only. That would leave 6 dedicated cores for games, which is all the PS4 had for a couple of years before PS eventually opened up the 7th core to devs for games. MS waited almost as long to open up XB1's 7th core as well.

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 05 December 2018