Pemalite said:
thismeintiel said:
As was the GPU that the PS4 used. It needs to be if it's going to be in a $399 box.
|
It actually doesn't though.
Besides... When the Playstation 4 launched we only had Graphics Graphics Core Next 2. There wasn't a massive feature set divide at an architectural level. (The Playstation 4 adopted some improvements anyway.)
Vega is a 2017 part.
2018 we get Navi.
2019 we get something else.
2020 when I expect next gen consoles to drop... We should have something else again.
thismeintiel said:
To make the PS5 with the specs I'm expecting, a Vega 64, at least a Ryzen 1700
|
Ryzen 1700 ain't happening.
People expecting Ryzen with the Xbox One X. The Xbox One X was timed right, it had a higher price, there were potential "hints" like Microsft showcasing Xbox next to Ryzen... And I was right then that Ryzen wasn't happening. And I doubt it will happen next gen either.
thismeintiel said:
No one is paying that much for a console, as history continues to show us time and time, again. Give it another two years and all those prices will be at least cut in half.
|
Hardware itself doesn't dramatically change in manufacturing costs.
In a few years, AMD will have more efficient, faster and cheaper hardware at various price points than Vega.
fatslob-:O said:
Eh, it will be fine ...
Vega 10 is 484 mm^2@14nm so it'll be a long while that sort of performance will become mainstream. The only reason to prefer newer GPU microachitectures is from a feature set perspective rather than a performance perspective ... (render target reads (Gen 9), independent thread scheduling (Volta), underestimate conservative rasterization (Gen 9/Vega), or maybe even GPU software rasterization(programmable rasterization stage!))
PS5 wishlist should include the following ... (EUV should be cost efficient by then)
built on Samsung's 4nm MCBFETs (APU should be produced for 2021 release and should give 4x density improvement)
20 TFlop/s
16GB HBM (gen 3)
2 TB/s bandwidth (quad channel)
Don't feel like we need much more DRAM capacity anymore since memory bandwidth is a big bottleneck going into the future with things such as incoherent ray traversal for ray tracing or volumetric rendering ...
|
By 2020, I would be hoping to be staring down the barrel of Direct X 13 with hardware feature sets to match.
We already know that Graphics Core Next falls short in the efficiency stakes as well, Vega does try and make amends in that aspect, but it's still not going to be beating nVidia... Let alone hardware in 2020.
Bofferbrauer2 said:
Not with that power consumption it won't. That's just too much for a console. They would need to bring clock speeds down to about 800-900 Mhz to tame that beast into a console, and by that point it wouldn't even have twice the power of a PS4 Pro anymore.
|
Well. Depending on binning they could retain higher clock rates than that and still result in less power consumption.
For example... Take the Fury X. AMD took that 275w GPU @ 1050Mhz, dropped the clocks by a only 50mhz and managed to shave 100w off the power consumption at 175w.
In-fact, the Nano was not only faster than the base Fury, but used less power than that as well... And they were the same chips. - Base fury even had parts of the chip disabled.
AMD took only the best chips that would operate at a high clockrate with low voltages.
Of course, that does increase costs as well.
But these are all high-end parts. Consoles can't afford to have high-end parts.
Bofferbrauer2 said:
I'd rather say it will be based on Navi, Vega's sucessor. It could use 64 NCU but at a much lower clock speed (I guess around 1000 Mhz) unless Navi clocks much better than it's predecessors
|
Agreed. Navi or newer makes far more sense.
Slap&Ride said:
Yes to all You wrote. SSD for games of over 100GB size is expensive. Load times are a factor, and HDD is slow. And yes 16GB is ok for a console. But if 1080p games need 8GB, then 4k games might need 16GB of ram. But that’s only for games with the same amount of assets, same size of landscape, same amount of objects in the environment. With only the texture resolution higher. The next gen needs more then just 4k. Hope for 64GB… and a price below 699;)
(640K Ought to be Enough for Anyone)
|
SSD Caching might be a thing/Hybrid Drive. Use a mechanical drive for sheer storage capacity, SSD caching to bolster performance.
Hopefully they use faster optical drives, install times are so painful on consoles, it's retarded.
16GB would seem pretty inadequate next-gen in my eyes. It's only a 30% increase over Scorpio, I would not be surprised if we see 24-32GB of total Ram next gen.
Need to remember that System Memory and Graphics Memory is shared in console land.
On the PC, 6-8GB GPU's are becoming the norm today in the mid-range with 16GB system memory backing that up.
In a few years time I would expect GPU's to trend towards 12-16GB in the mid-range.
|
Next consoles will most probably use Ryzen. There's just not much else to choose by then, the only other possibility is an ARM based chip
Will there ever be a DX 13? By the way Microsoft is handling DirectX right now 12.x versions seem sadly more likely.
The Fury Nano couldn't hold those 1000W unless undervolted and with much better cooling, most of the time the cruise speed was actually more like 900-950 Mhz with most Fury nano cards out of the box. Also note that the Nano was very rare because AMD needed to go cherry-picking quite a lot to get chips who actually did drop as much in power consumption for the Nano. Considering the wide range between base clock and turbo clock I do expect a similar thing to happen with Vega, and that the Sweet Spot for Vega is actually still below that base clock speed. While I agree it's higher than I anticipated in my previous post (because I didn't know the clock speeds back then), I still think it's somewhere in the 950-1100 Mhz range
RAM is expensive. Not just right now, but for a console manufacturer in general. There's a reason why the PS360 had such severely limited amounts of RAM. While 16 GiB seems as not enough by then, do remember that the same was already said when the PS4 and Xbox ONE where revealed. Only if RAM prices drop by a lot (like, 16GiB for less than or about 50$ on consumer market lot) will there be a real chance of more memory for the next next next gen consoles. I'm hoping for 32 GiB too by then (24 is an odd number in terms of RAM), but there's no guarantee an that just yet.
SSDs are still too expensive for consoles, so I don't expect them to sport one unless they become less expensive than HDDs. An SSHD might be a possibility though, but since those are very rare and seemingly on the way out I don't expect that to happen either.
