Currently Online 
HollyGamer said:
It depend on what kind of customization they will do with zen 2, there is a rumor that it's not full Zen 2, instead a cutdown L cache and downlock core speed. I also used the CPU performance comparison between Xbox SX (Scarlet) CPU with Xbox One X mentioned by Spencer and by Xbox official. Phil said the jump from One X to Series X on CPu is around 4 times. I guess PS4 pro to PS5 will be even bigger due to Xbox One X CPU is faster than Jaguar on Pro. |
We already have Zen 2 with cutdown caches and various chips with differing clockrates.
The Ryzen 5 3500 has half the cache as the 3500X for example and the mobile Ryzen 4000 series has significantly less cache again.
Jaguar was AMD's absolute WORST CPU at a time when AMD's entire CPU lineup was garbage.
I would need a link to the Spencer quote... Because if he is using the Xbox One X as the comparison point, that likely includes all the improved CPU capability as Microsoft shifted a heap of processing to the command processor on the GPU portion of the SoC.
Not to mention there are some instructions that Ryzen can do that will simply be multiples better than Jaguar, things like AVX2.
| DonFerrari said: Ray tracing on PS5 is through a dedicated chip so shouldn't impact much the rest. |
Not a dedicated chip. It only has the one chip, the main SoC.
The Ray Tracing is done on dedicated Ray Tracing cores on the main chip, it's part of the GPU... Which is why Flops is a joke as Flops doesn't account for the Ray Tracing capabilities.
| SvennoJ said: There is no such thing as a ray tracing chip. There are many ways to do ray tracing, some faster, some with better quality. Some dedicated hardware can help but it's not magic. RTX cards still struggle with ray tracing. It will impact the rest, dedicated chip or not. |
Not entirely accurate.
Historically what the industry has done was made dedicated DSP/ASIC/FPGA as a separate chip (Aka. Ray Processing Unit) that handled Ray Tracing duties, granted this was for more professional markets... But the point remains.
Dedicated Ray Tracing chips have existed even as far back as the late 90's/early 2000's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray-tracing_hardware
| Eagle367 said: I mean, that's all theoretical and on paper values. But look at the law if diminishing returns. How much more effective is 4k vs 12k vs 30k? Or how much of a difference does one notice between 60fos vs 120 vs 240 vs 480? In practical terms, is there an advantage to go in that direction or are we gonna go just for the sake of going? |
We are nowhere near the limit of what we can perceive via framerates and resolutions.
Basically, the closer and larger your display, the higher the resolution you need.
Display sizes seem to have stagnated around the 65-75" mark in most market segments with even budget offerings coming up at 50-55" these days.
I think in general... For the 9th gen we should actually try and achieve 4k@60fps before we start worrying about more, the Xbox One X and Playstation 4 Pro weren't even able to guarantee those resolutions and framerates across every title, leave the higher end stuff to the PC.
www.youtube.com/@Pemalite
