By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Let's talk about Specs

 

You like Specs?

I love Specs! 16 40.00%
 
I kinda like Specs. 13 32.50%
 
Specs are for nerds! 2 5.00%
 
I don't care either way, ... 9 22.50%
 
Total:40
SvennoJ on 19 March 2020
Hynad said:
BraLoD said:

It reeks of bottleneck for me.

Sure it won't be now, but in the long run.

I'm very disappointed.

Reeks of bottleneck? The speed at which data transfers from read to memory is incredibly fast. RAM can be filled in two seconds. TWO SECONDS!

It gets unloaded, then loaded again in two seconds. Wrap your head around that! O_o

What good does that do when frames render in 16 ms. Wrap your head around that, it takes 120 frames to fill the RAM. One hundred and twenty!!!

Compromises will have to be made. 1080p SDR to 4K HDR is 8x increase in memory. Ray tracing is a memory hungry process. Procedural generation is a memory hungry process. Living/changing environments, very memory hungry. Persistent worlds (all changes stay) very memory hungry. More variation in assets and textures, need more memory. Megatexures, need a lot of memory. Longer draw distance, bigger fov, need more memory. Memory is one thing you can never have too much off and the one thing you can't upgrade during the gen. (Well you can, but it's pointless cause parity needs to be maintained)

The SSD can help, but it's still at least 50 times slower than memory, with compression.

It's enough to get what we're used to in 4K and HDR. But I wouldn't expect any revolutionary new dynamic worlds etc.



Around the Network
Hynad on 19 March 2020
SvennoJ said:
Hynad said:

Reeks of bottleneck? The speed at which data transfers from read to memory is incredibly fast. RAM can be filled in two seconds. TWO SECONDS!

It gets unloaded, then loaded again in two seconds. Wrap your head around that! O_o

What good does that do when frames render in 16 ms. Wrap your head around that, it takes 120 frames to fill the RAM. One hundred and twenty!!!

Compromises will have to be made. 1080p SDR to 4K HDR is 8x increase in memory. Ray tracing is a memory hungry process. Procedural generation is a memory hungry process. Living/changing environments, very memory hungry. Persistent worlds (all changes stay) very memory hungry. More variation in assets and textures, need more memory. Megatexures, need a lot of memory. Longer draw distance, bigger fov, need more memory. Memory is one thing you can never have too much off and the one thing you can't upgrade during the gen. (Well you can, but it's pointless cause parity needs to be maintained)

The SSD can help, but it's still at least 50 times slower than memory, with compression.

It's enough to get what we're used to in 4K and HDR. But I wouldn't expect any revolutionary new dynamic worlds etc.

You’re talking about the frame buffer. You don’t need to fill and empty the RAM for every frame. A lot of data can remain there and be used for different frame.



Cerebralbore101 on 19 March 2020
vivster said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

But what about $700 GPU that bumps your PC up to 30% stronger than consoles and lasts two years before being crushed on price to power by a new series of cards? 

Price/performance is not something we do here in #pcmasterrace.

Probably for the same reasons MS no longer talks about liftime sales of XB1. :P



SvennoJ on 19 March 2020
CGI-Quality said:
BraLoD said:

It reeks of bottleneck for me.

Sure it won't be now, but in the long run.

I'm very disappointed.

Unless you’re being sarcastic, nope.

You probably have some experience with this. How much does ray tracing affect memory needs? Google wasn't very helpful, only one game that recommended 12GB up from 8GB with RTX on.

I also wonder what will happen with game sizes. Now loading is much faster, even though ray tracing can help reduce pre baked lighting maps, it's also much faster to load in pre baked stuff to help out. Pre baked stuff can still look better in static scenes than the likely limited amount of ray tracing next gen consoles can do. A combination probably even better.



DonFerrari on 19 March 2020

I really liked the ability to boot a game in 1 sec and how that speed to fill the RAM will change game development.
Also really liked MS way of 4 games being able to instantly resume plus the "always playing the best version of the game".



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."

Around the Network
DonFerrari on 19 March 2020
Pemalite said:
Conina said:

Okay, let's talk specs.

I was wondering at first why Mark Cerny said that 825 GB are the "most natural size" for a 12-channel interface, although 825 does not divide very well by 12.

But gigabyte and terabyte are based on the decimal system (1 terabyte = 10^12 bytes = 1,000,000,000,000 bytes) and not on the binary system like RAM (1 tebibyte = 2^40 bytes = 1,099,511,627,776 bytes).

And 825 gigabytes = 768 gibibytes (or to be exact 768 gibibytes are 824.633720832 gigabytes, rounded up to 825 GB).

768 Gibibyte divided by 12 lines = exactly 64 gibibyte per channel.

You are reading to much into it.

There is likely some NAND reserved as spare area for various tasks to maintain performance that isn't accounted for.

alexxonne said:

Assuming my cheap calculations. If the PS5 GPU would had 42 CU or clocked at 2,670mhz, it could have achieved 12TFlops similar to Xbox series X. If the PS5 GPU were to have 52 CU as Xbox series X then it would have 14.82 Tflops. By contrast if XBox series X GPU were to be clocked similar to the PS5 GPU 2.23Ghz (2,283.5 Mhz ), then it would had 14.44 Tflops. What do you thinks guys?

The announced specs only makes sense if they are targeting a $400 price range. Perfectly for 4K gaming at 60fps, but not more than that. Also I'm sad they didn't talk about BC features for ps3/ps2/ps1.

Could the ps5 gpu be having several disabled CU and holding them until release? Is not unprecedented or unheard of.
In addition Cerny talked about using a GPU CU as a processing unit for audio. So...either games will use 35 CU or the PS5 GPU has more than 36 CU to be used.

I think you have placed far to much emphasis on flops rather than capabilities.

BraLoD said:
I still can't believe both stuck with those RAMs.
MS got fast and slow mixed, Sony got unified average. Both only 16Gb.
This seriously sucks.

Me and CGI called it years ago.

Our original predictions were... 16GB of Ram... Yet we still had people thinking 128GB or more. Was pretty funny at the time!

JRPGfan said:

ram was used to "store" data you needed quick access too, you couldnt affoard to wait on your slow mechanical hard drive to get.

Ram is still used to "store" data that is needed for quick access... Because we still cannot afford to wait on a slow SSD for data.

Ram is 500GB/s or more. SSD's are 1/10th of that.

JRPGfan said:

Thats no longer a issue, with how quick (esp sony's) SSD is.
This drastically reduces the amount of actual ram needed, when you run games.

It's still an issue, it's just much less of an issue.
You are right it should reduce the need for more RAM, but it doesn't remove the need for it entirely.

We will be RAM starved this generation, especially later on in the console cycle.

JRPGfan said:


It might even effect sizes of games, where they might have duplicates of data,
thats mixed in with differnt parts, so they "could" be loaded like this into ram.
Stuff like that will be gone with next gen.

They didn't duplicate data on a mechanical disk, that occurred with optical disks due to their much lower seek times.

JRPGfan said:


These SSD are almost like virtual ram in themselves, you just go directly to the SSD to load stuff, isntead of first loading it into your ram.

^ atleast I think thats what cerny was saying.

Not really. It's just "Virtual Memory". - Which is a technology that has existed for the last 30 years in various forms. Fuck. Even the Original Xbox used it!

Small correction, Cerny confirmed some data on the Spider-Man was duplicated over 100 times on the HDD. They were very splicit that game size would be reduced with the SDD solution.



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."

black8jac on 19 March 2020
alexxonne said:

Assuming my cheap calculations. If the PS5 GPU would had 42 CU or clocked at 2,670mhz, it could have achieved 12TFlops similar to Xbox series X. If the PS5 GPU were to have 52 CU as Xbox series X then it would have 14.82 Tflops. By contrast if XBox series X GPU were to be clocked similar to the PS5 GPU 2.23Ghz (2,283.5 Mhz ), then it would had 14.44 Tflops. What do you thinks guys?

The announced specs only makes sense if they are targeting a $400 price range. Perfectly for 4K gaming at 60fps, but not more than that. Also I'm sad they didn't talk about BC features for ps3/ps2/ps1.

Could the ps5 gpu be having several disabled CU and holding them until release? Is not unprecedented or unheard of.
In addition Cerny talked about using a GPU CU as a processing unit for audio. So...either games will use 35 CU or the PS5 GPU has more than 36 CU to be used.

If PS5 GPU had 42 CU and was clocked 2.67 GHz it would have 14.35TFlops not 12. 



DonFerrari on 19 March 2020
alexxonne said:
Pemalite said:

I think you have placed far to much emphasis on flops rather than capabilities.

I do emphasize in capabilities. By analyzing performance strategy we can assume the final product.

For example, to be able and run bc ps3 games, CPU must be at least 3.2 ghz. PS5 over delivered on that but...

The problem I see is GPU logical assets for it being nvidia in nature and not AMD. You can't freely create a 100% legacy interpreter without their support. So, the only option that remains is  to brute force performance to achieve compatibility. The more teraflops the gpu has, the better performance and stability it can give for running games in a "ps3" emulated OS. Similarly this is the main reason og games weren't 100% supported (461/1000) in xbox 360, and less supported (41/1000) in xbox one/x. So, even taking into account that 1 tflops from a ps5 may had 1.5-2 times more performance than 1 tflops from a ps4 architecture. I don't see to much sense on what has been shown to us. He didn't want to focus in teraflops, because his specs were lower. Simple as that.

I assure you that if they would have a ps5 with 13tflops he would have talked laser focused for over 1 hour about the teraflops and 2 minutes about the audio.

If they intend to sell the ps5 at $500 or over it, then I'm hesitant to believe these will be the final specs nor that backwards compatibility is for ps4 games only. Such strategy doesn't make sense. Specially when he Cerny talked more time about the audio solution than the GPU solution.

It's fishy.

Why not give price then, if all is set in stone? Not much can be done, so much closer to launch window.

To me only two options emerge. Either the PS5 have higher hidden specs or, sony want the ps5 as a cheap solution entry level platform for the new generation and will bring a PS5 pro later on.

I'm a sony guy, all my life has been one. Probably im already over 100 ps4 games by now. I skipped xbox one this generation.  And surely I will buy ps5 day one.

But for the offered full capabilities for gaming like 4k 60+ fps, 8k or ps3/ps2/ps1 bc, 10.28 Tflops are not enough.

Month ago they said price isn't final as they see the refinement on cost structure and think about competition. So yes I expect they to try lowest possible and undercut MS.



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."

The_Liquid_Laser on 19 March 2020

Count me as one of the people who only kinda care about specs.  I used to really care about 25 years ago, but the standards of what matters change every few years in the IT world.  That made me stop caring as much.  I also don't really think graphics need to improve.  I think they are good enough and improving graphics is a waste of resources.

However, two things that irritated me a lot with PS4 games were load times and especially install times.  There seems to be a lot of talk lately about load times, but I am willing to bet the SSD would shorten install times as well.  That sounds good to me, but I would have to see it on an actual game to know how good it is in practice. 

The other nice thing about faster load times is that it can potentially inspire new types of games.  For example the PS2 had much faster load times than the PS1 did.  The PS1 was great for huge, slow turn-based RPGs like Final Fantasy 7, but the PS2 could play huge open-world action games like GTA3.  I don't think open world action games could have been possible without faster load times.  It will be interesting to see if PS5 actually has new (non-VR) types of gameplay.  PS4 didn't really have new types of gameplay.  PS4 mostly had PS3 style games with better graphics.  Meh.



curl-6 bet me that PS5 + X|S sales would reach 56m before year end 2023 and he was right.
My Bet With curl-6

My Threads:
Master Thread, Game of the Year/Decade
Switch Will Be #1 All Time
Zelda Will Outsell Mario (Achieved)
How Much Will MH Rise sell?
My Bet With Metallox

super_etecoon on 19 March 2020

S.Peelman said:
Let's talk about specs, bay-bee
Let's talk about you and me
Let's talk about all the good things
And the bad things that may-bee
Let's talk about specs

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to drop the lyrics. Well done!