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:



"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." - Permalite

^ a by-product of the infinity fabric design they choose.   (race to idle, wasnt something AMD was good at)

This will be my last post for about a week or so as I am going on deployment.

The infinity fabric isn't what it is holding AMD's idle power consumption back, it plays a part... Sure.

AMD has *never* been competitive with Intel on Idle power, even during the Turion era.. AMD isn't as aggressive as Intel on power states, doesn't power gate parts of the chip as aggressively as Intel.

This has been a theme for AMD's mobile efforts for over 15~ years.

JRPGfan said:

However they are aware of it, and have worked at it.
Supposedly they "fixed" this issue (alot of it is apparently how fast/slow it enters/exits idle/turbo, which is now x5 faster):
That and 20%+ lower soc powerdraw (reduced how low things can go and funktion), ontop of 2x power effeciency (mostly from 7nm node)...

Of course they are working on it, but Intel has invested extensively in reducing idle power... To the point where they are even working with display manufacturers to decrease panel power consumption with Intels chips.

AMD will still have a long way to go on fixing their idle power consumption woes, even after Ryzen 4000 series drops... But without question, they will likely have the performance edge either way.

JRPGfan said:

Edit:

Also Remember this for a console part (plugged in).... that really doesnt have any barring on Xbox Series X or Playstation 5.
However I remember there was some talk about next gen consoles being alot more "green" in that idle power / sleep modes, would be drastically improved.

That is why I stipulated prior that it's not really a big issue for consoles or PC.

JRPGfan said:

Also with the 3000U series, AMD idle power wasnt so bad (they improved it a decent bit, with the 3000 series).
Something like the ThinkPad X395, with a 3700U has 14,5+ hours battery life (while running MobileMark 2014).
(yes supposedly the intel version ( i7-8565U) of the laptop with same battery, lasted like 17hours)

Still any laptop that can run 14,5hours straigth in a benchmark, has decent enough battery life no?

I have a Ryzen 2700u, the 3000 series was essentially just a die shrink of that, the idle power was still shit, I could go more in depth, but I am running out of time.

14.5 hours is good, that is decent battery life, but you could potentially achieve that with better power characteristics and a smaller battery which could potentially lower costs and thus the price... Or give you more battery life overall.

Fact is, Intel will be beating AMD's 7nm chips whilst still stuck on 14nm on the power consumption side of the equation, AMD will of course win in CPU performance and absolutely dominate in GPU performance.
Not entirely sure what the video engine is on the refined Vega GPU with Ryzen either, could have a few caveats there.



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

Around the Network

Doesn;t really matter in the llong run if developers aren't even taking full advantage of current hardware as the old jaguar, besides a few AAA exclusives.



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.

Don't know an exact price but let's look at it this way: There was a Laptop at CES (think was from Lenovo, but not sure) with that chip and it's Intel counterpart... and the AMD one was a whooping $300 cheaper.

4800H would be a good contender for the CPU part, but the 4800 could also be a possibility, though more remote (base clock of 1.8Ghz is awfully low for gaming). Still, it shows that at low core utilization, the CPU in the consoles won't consume much either way.



Pemalite said:

This will be my last post for about a week or so as I am going on deployment.

Good luck!

Really wondered how it was that you were still posting, as I thought Australia already had mobilized every firefighter against the bushfires. Kudos to you for doing what you are doing and stay safe out there!



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.

These Ryzen 4000 mobile chips go into laptops with way worse cooling compared to desktops and consoles. Now some high end gaming laptops have decent cooling, but it's still not anywhere near what the consoles will able to provide in terms of cooling performance. This will be a major benefit to the consoles. It's also why we've been constantly seeing the leaks of 3.2GHz for the CPU. Instead of 2.9GHz like in the laptops, it'll probably be 3.2GHz, with up to 4.2GHz boost, which will be sustained for much much longer because of the console cooling capability. Especially in the XBSX based on it's design.

We'll see with the PS5, but the dev leaks have said the devkit it another jet like PS4. Now I've also seen a few suggestions based on leaks, that the 36CU GPU at 2.0GHz is actually the RDNA 5700 Series clocked up as high as it will go with extra cooling capabilities, and is only for late stage dev kits. The thought process is just to give devs RDNA hardware asap to get them as far ahead as possible for the 2020 launch, while the real GPU arch get's finished for final dev kits later on. I wouldn't be surprised if this is true because 36CU's seems like a 2019 launch choice.



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.

Around the Network

Ryzen mobile 4000 is also still entirely Vega I believe, just significantly optimized apparently, and 8CU's max. RDNA is quite a bit more power efficient than GCN, or was, so 45w is higher than it should be if this was the same chip using RDNA. The die size should also be smaller if it was using RDNA should it not?

I'm starting to believe the rumors of SNY helping to fund RDNA. Possibly even MS as well. Why would AMD still be using Vega and GCN for their APU's? Could be manpower and time, but it wouldn't surprise me if part of the deal is that Navi RDNA has to launch on console APU's first, before desktop or laptop APU's. This would allow AMD to launch the RDNA 5000 Series discrete GPU's last year and this year, but they would have to hold off on RDNA APU's until next year, after the consoles launch holiday 2020.

*Smart shift tech for AMD APU's should also help. Being able to shift and focus resources from CPU to GPU and vice versa should allow for even better overall performance from the hardware that ends up in the consoles.

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 08 January 2020

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.

EricHiggin said:

Ryzen mobile 4000 is also still entirely Vega I believe, just significantly optimized apparently, and 8CU's max. RDNA is quite a bit more power efficient than GCN, or was, so 45w is higher than it should be if this was the same chip using RDNA. The die size should also be smaller if it was using RDNA should it not?

I'm starting to believe the rumors of SNY helping to fund RDNA. Possibly even MS as well. Why would AMD still be using Vega and GCN for their APU's? Could be manpower and time, but it wouldn't surprise me if part of the deal is that Navi RDNA has to launch on console APU's first, before desktop or laptop APU's. This would allow AMD to launch the RDNA 5000 Series discrete GPU's last year and this year, but they would have to hold off on RDNA APU's until next year, after the consoles launch holiday 2020.

*Smart shift tech for AMD APU's should also help. Being able to shift and focus resources from CPU to GPU and vice versa should allow for even better overall performance from the hardware that ends up in the consoles.

Well, RDNA is just an evolution of GCN and based on the GCN instruction set. It just got heavily optimized and overhauled at some places, especially code scheduling, most notably on the Wavefront: The Wavefront shrank from 64 to 32 threads (64 threads is still supported) for better utilization and can now add new instructions every cycle to it instead every 4 cycles, and 2 CU are grouped together into a Work Group Processor, but it's base is still GCN. I thus believe that the Vega in the 4000 APUs are actually closer to Navi, just don't go all the way and are thus still called Vega.

And the reason why the amount of CU got dropped to 8 could also be in part simply because the bandwidth limitations are choking bigger chips anyway, so only putting 8 of then onto the chip makes them significantly smaller without hampering the graphics performance much.



EricHiggin said:

Ryzen mobile 4000 is also still entirely Vega I believe, just significantly optimized apparently, and 8CU's max. RDNA is quite a bit more power efficient than GCN, or was, so 45w is higher than it should be if this was the same chip using RDNA. The die size should also be smaller if it was using RDNA should it not?

I'm starting to believe the rumors of SNY helping to fund RDNA. Possibly even MS as well. Why would AMD still be using Vega and GCN for their APU's? Could be manpower and time, but it wouldn't surprise me if part of the deal is that Navi RDNA has to launch on console APU's first, before desktop or laptop APU's. This would allow AMD to launch the RDNA 5000 Series discrete GPU's last year and this year, but they would have to hold off on RDNA APU's until next year, after the consoles launch holiday 2020.

*Smart shift tech for AMD APU's should also help. Being able to shift and focus resources from CPU to GPU and vice versa should allow for even better overall performance from the hardware that ends up in the consoles.

These APUs (4800H or 4800U) are still useing Vega, but its a much improved version, useing some of their findings from RDNA.
Supposedly these vega parts give +59% better performance than old Vega cores.

Which is why you see them say 8CU, will give higher performance (~30%) than last gens 11CU's.



Lol, my CPU power requirements go through the roof. But seriously, it will 3.5ghz at most.



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