alexxonne said:
Perhaps you're the newbie. because you're arguing with no facts and without knowing the manufacturing process of a cpu or gpu. I'm not spreading anything that top magazines, tech experts and Cerny haven't said. Don't you know that whenever a new cpu/gpu comes, the die is unstable and a lot of testing must be done to correct instability issues and with it the base clock frequency can go up or down? All cpus/gpus need to pass this manufacturing process. That is how we were able to see PS5 leaks with a gpu clock as low as 1ghz to 1.8ghz and 2ghz respectively. Jesus Christ READ!! Even Mark Cerny first presentation mentioned it. "...Running the GPU at 2ghz was looking like an unreachable target with the old frequency strategy with the new paradigm we're able to run way over that, in fact we have to cap GPU freq. at 2.23ghz..." And with the Df article, again, " The Gonzalo leak back in April suggested that PlayStation 5 would feature a Zen 2-based CPU cluster running at 3.2GHz paired with a Navi graphics core running at 1.8GHz.' If we go by your speculation, You need a lot of reading. If you Actually READ the article it wasn't a 5700 card, the specifications in the leak were the same as the revealed PS5 specs. With the sole exception of the clocks, clearly something that Cerny confirmed they managed to increase it (CPU/GPU). All these leaks come from testing different frequencies and stability targets, before mass producing them. Even when they are already made, some companies lower the base clock, because they're faulty or not stable enough. That is how CPU specs codes are made. Sometimes improvements are made, better clock or new instructions, etc. MAN YOU NEED TO READ A LOT. Hence my educated guess, based on what Cerny said that 2ghz was becoming unreachable. So at the time, meaning that a GPU with a lower clock (<2ghz) would result in a slower performing card with less than 9.2TF at some point. So my point has all the sense of the world if every tech magazine is talking about it, specially the top one. And those are FACTS, deal with them. If you wanna marry a PS5 console, you have my blessing, but my love for the brand doesn't go that far. So , I doubt you laughing now, Next one... |
For someone claiming others have reading comprehension problems you seem to be the one with it.
He said that with previous paradigm on GPU development 2Ghz was unreachable (not that PS5 couldn't reach it, but that GPUs didn't get that far, just look at Xbox for examples, or current gen or all other GPUs). But they were able to work around that paradigm and get over 2.23 (it can go further but then it would be unstable, so you also got your answer of it being able to run at 2.23 most of time, and they can't say if it is 50, 80 or 99% of the time because that will be a game by game depending on the developer not the HW).

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."







