Quantcast
Speculation - 4800H cpu is what next gen consoles will have.

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Speculation - 4800H cpu is what next gen consoles will have.

Do you think this will be the case?

Yeah, think so. 8 72.73%
 
Nah, not happending. 3 27.27%
 
Total:11
JRPGfan said:
trunkswd said:
How much does that CPU cost? Price will obviously drop a bit by the time the Xbox Series X and PS5 launch, and Microsoft and Sony buying them in the millions will get a discount.

Their the brand new thing, and the best performance in laptop possible atm.
And theres 799$ laptops comeing with Radeon RX 5600M GPUs / Geforce 2060's.

Theres no "if you buy them bulk direction from amd, they cost such and such" info anywhere I can find.

So Im not sure, but I think they make alot of sense for a console.

Thank you for the information. Looking more likely PS5 and Xbox Series X will launch at $499 at the cheapest and possibly even as high as $599. 



VGChartz Sales Analyst and Writer - William D'Angelo

I stream on Twitch and have my own Youtube

Writer of the Gap Charts | Weekly Hardware Breakdown Top 10 | Weekly Sales Analysis | Marketshare Features

I also post daily news on the Video Game Industry.

If you want to contact me, send me a PM on here or tweet me @TrunksWD

Around the Network

I know that both consoles will have an 8-core CPU, but will it really use SMT and have 16 threads? Given the huge performance increase both consoles would have just from going from Jaguar to Zen2, the extra threads may not be needed, maybe even making development a tad more easier.

In any case, and whether they go with and 8/8 or an 8/16 design, I agree that this chip could be very similar to the one they'll use.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

trunkswd said:
How much does that CPU cost? Price will obviously drop a bit by the time the Xbox Series X and PS5 launch, and Microsoft and Sony buying them in the millions will get a discount.

Looking at "prices" is always a flawed approach when it comes down to hammering the price down on these things. Especially when consoles are concerned with the custom chips and 7yr+ deals.

Whats more important is the actual size of the silicon, cause at the end of the day that's what dictates the price that console OEMs will be paying. I see that CPU taking up no more than 60mm2 on a die, that's reasonable being that the full desktop ryzen 7 8C/16t chips with their 32Mb of cache was under 80mm2, but those full desktop chips had a separate I/O die built at 14nm. 

The next-gen consoles wouldn't do that so both their CPU and i/o would be built to the same fab process and all be in one chip along with their GPU. So its more relevant looking at what the total chip size of the next-gen consoles will be, and what a chip that size currently cost to make after factoring in yields. 

Next-gen APUs will be in the 300mm2-405mm2 range, up from the 300mm2-360mm2 range of the current-gen chips. My estimates are that it will cost them anywhere between $95-$130 for the APU alone from AMD, which puts it in the ballpark but higher, than what they were spending for their APUs back in 2013.

JEMC said:
I know that both consoles will have an 8-core CPU, but will it really use SMT and have 16 threads? Given the huge performance increase both consoles would have just from going from Jaguar to Zen2, the extra threads may not be needed, maybe even making development a tad more easier.

In any case, and whether they go with and 8/8 or an 8/16 design, I agree that this chip could be very similar to the one they'll use.

Everything thus far suggests that its an 8/16 CPU. Unless the sample chips being tested over the last year ae all for naught. We even have sample chips that were tested with the exact cache allotment seen in this 4800H CPU but paired with a beefier and unknown GPU. But even if  SMT is cut, that feature only adds about 30% to overall CPU performance anyways.

Last edited by Intrinsic - on 08 January 2020

"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.

Not sure if that alone is enough to account for a 100$ differnce in price, but it could.

To put things into perspective:
PS4 die size at launch was 348mm^2
XB1 die size at launch was 363mm^2

PS4pro = 325mm^2
XB1X = 359mm^2

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 08 January 2020

I'd really like to see how this chip stacks up to 3600X and 3700X. Those CPUs are way cheaper than Intel and way better at pretty much everything. Of course AMD's mobile chip beats Intel's one year and three month old chip. AMD has been crushing Intel for a while now.

IMO 2.9 ghz base clock speed isn't very good. Boost clock speed is important, but in my experience with mobile chips, the boost clock doesn't last long.



The sentence below is false. 
The sentence above is true. 

Around the Network
Cerebralbore101 said:
I'd really like to see how this chip stacks up to 3600X and 3700X. Those CPUs are way cheaper than Intel and way better at pretty much everything. Of course AMD's mobile chip beats Intel's one year and three month old chip. AMD has been crushing Intel for a while now.

IMO 2.9 ghz base clock speed isn't very good. Boost clock speed is important, but in my experience with mobile chips, the boost clock doesn't last long.

It can beat a i7-9700k, in 3Dmark Firestrike Physics (cpu bench).
Its good enough :)

"I'd really like to see how this chip stacks up to 3600X and 3700X."

Giveing what we know, I attempted to do that for you :)

Amd 3700x = ~23,700
i7 - 9700k = ~18,650

going by the picture amd showed, that should put this 4800H cpu around ~20,600.
(if im not failing at the math of it)

source for numbers:  https://benchmarks.ul.com/hardware/cpu/Intel+Core+i7-9700K+Processor+review

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 08 January 2020

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 270mm^2.

Not sure if that alone is enough to account for a 100$ differnce in price, but it could.

There is absolutely nothing to prove nor confirm what sony is going to use with regards to their CU count.

The only thing that the leaks really suggest is that sony had dev kits or engineering samples out there earlier. That's not indicative of final hardware, but just saying that sony wanted devs to be able to get on actual next-gen development earlier and test out other more exotic components of their hardware.

If you ask me, my money would be on the GPU CU count in the PS5 being at something like 40(44) or 44(48). I expect MS to go with a 52(56) layout.

It just makes no sense that there could b such a discrepancy in CU count between the two to the tune of 36(40) and 52(56). Even if Sony is going the higher clocks route. The only way that makes sense is if they are also going the $399 route.

I also expect Sony to go with overall less RAM than whatever MS goes with, so something like 16GB for sony vs 20GB for MS, and sony's reason for this would because they would have the better or faster SSD. I expect Sony to go with faster GDDR6 chips than MS though.



Intrinsic said:
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 270mm^2.

Not sure if that alone is enough to account for a 100$ differnce in price, but it could.

There is absolutely nothing to prove nor confirm what sony is going to use with regards to their CU count.

The only thing that the leaks really suggest is that sony had dev kits or engineering samples out there earlier. That's not indicative of final hardware, but just saying that sony wanted devs to be able to get on actual next-gen development earlier and test out other more exotic components of their hardware.

If you ask me, my money would be on the GPU CU count in the PS5 being at something like 40(44) or 44(48). I expect MS to go with a 52(56) layout.

It just makes no sense that there could b such a discrepancy in CU count between the two to the tune of 36(40) and 52(56). Even if Sony is going the higher clocks route. The only way that makes sense is if they are also going the $399 route.

I also expect Sony to go with overall less RAM than whatever MS goes with, so something like 16GB for sony vs 20GB for MS, and sony's reason for this would because they would have the better or faster SSD. I expect Sony to go with faster GDDR6 chips than MS though.

Two Options:

A) it doesnt mean anything, and maybe Sony is pulling a fast one to trick others ect.
(Or testing multiple routes of things, what leaked was just one such.)

B) it does mean something, and your right, it ll likely be like 100$ cheaper than the XSX.



JRPGfan said:
Cerebralbore101 said:
I'd really like to see how this chip stacks up to 3600X and 3700X. Those CPUs are way cheaper than Intel and way better at pretty much everything. Of course AMD's mobile chip beats Intel's one year and three month old chip. AMD has been crushing Intel for a while now.

IMO 2.9 ghz base clock speed isn't very good. Boost clock speed is important, but in my experience with mobile chips, the boost clock doesn't last long.

It can beat a i7-9700k, in 3Dmark Firestrike Physics (cpu bench).
Its good enough :)

How does it stack up vs a 2700X in gaming? How about a 3600 in gaming? I'm worried that by the time late 2020 rolls around this mobile chip will be equal to a $150-$200 desktop CPU. A.K.A. mid to low end weakness. 



The sentence below is false. 
The sentence above is true. 

Cerebralbore101 said:
JRPGfan said:

It can beat a i7-9700k, in 3Dmark Firestrike Physics (cpu bench).
Its good enough :)

How does it stack up vs a 2700X in gaming? How about a 3600 in gaming? I'm worried that by the time late 2020 rolls around this mobile chip will be equal to a $150-$200 desktop CPU. A.K.A. mid to low end weakness. 

A ryzen 5 3600 does ~19,062
A ryzen 7 2700x does ~20,100

A 4800H would be faster than either of these, by a small amount.

JRPGfan said:
Cerebralbore101 said:
I'd really like to see how this chip stacks up to 3600X and 3700X.

"I'd really like to see how this chip stacks up to 3600X and 3700X."

Giveing what we know, I attempted to do that for you :)

Amd 3700x = ~23,700
i7 - 9700k = ~18,650

going by the picture amd showed, that should put this 4800H cpu around ~20,600.
(if im not failing at the math of it)

source for numbers:  https://benchmarks.ul.com/hardware/cpu/Intel+Core+i7-9700K+Processor+review