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
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. 



Around the Network
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

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.



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!



alexxonne said:
Pemalite said:

You actually know nothing.

You say you are a pc gamer, yet still don't understand lots of things.

Legacy software is run by using the new routines based on cycles(mhz) to match the older hardware. When the legacy software is incompatible or unstable it just doesn't work. It is the sole reason modern CPUs can be 10 times more powerful yet they run old software like crap. You need to equalize processing cycles to achieve true legacy interpretation. And not just the cycles, the instructions sets and features, all of them interpreted for a true legacy solution. Having multi-core and multi-threads processing helps, but is has been the sole reason for the difficulties in building an emulation profiles to run 360 games in xbox one. They needed to alter game routines in order to run them on a lesser cycle based processor, and test them on a one by one basis, it is a very time consuming, effort. As a PC gamer you should know that, VERY WELL.

You don't understand hardware my friend.

Gpu architecture design is dependent on patents, rights and other things. Microsoft needed a solution to survive their 2nd generation hardware because they failed with the OG xbox, and then designed the 360 to emulate Xbox games by brute force performance and commands interpretations, not legacy. In ATI's favor (now AMD if you didn't know) xbox og gpu was a just a modified geforce 3 card. Microsoft NT based OS for the OG xbox essentially converted all of the games for it into simple directX based routines (hence the X-box dumbass). ATI managed to assimilate lots of the routines, but not all of them. It is the same problems and issues when using and building emulators. You use a different and superior CPU to emulate a lesser CPU, but since processing cycles dominate half of the performance issues you need a faster (in cycles) processor and a better one (in architecture).  Just try comparing and airplane vs cargo ship.  A cargo ship has more capacity while the airplane has less, but one carries it's cargo faster. Old games were built with those differences in mind. Another issue is excessive performance , just take the ps2 for example. It doesn't like to read games from a hard drive, because it is just too fast compared to the optical drive. Lots of PS2 games were built using the native ps2 cd drive reading speed, so when you load games using a hard drive, most of them crash if you don't toggle the options to cap the transfer rate. Try reading about emulation, and backwards compatibility. Is just common sense.

Publisher rights for backwards compatibility is an issue from this generation, not older ones. This makes you a kid, by not knowing that. Not having your game running on the newer console back then (~2000-2008) was seen a failure for not reaching the entire gaming market, so most publishers were very supportive and some were forced (business wise) to help Sony and Microsoft, by having their games running in BC mode. PS3 sales failure at the beginning of the last generation (2006-2008) forced them to abandon BC and old game sales collapsed somehow, and the monetization scheme for BC changed into the "buy again" model this generation, mostly in Sony's side, while Microsoft absorbed their implementation. Essentially you buy the same game you have, but with a custom made profile to run in the newer console. Other options as porting and remastering were used. Being the latter the better approach for that kind compatibility.

For true backwards compatibility you need either a previous generation console CPU/GPU chip embedded along side the new console architecture or a legacy approach using a software interpreter, that can translate command by command. An interpreters is what was used for ps1 BC in the PS2 and PS3. The code is already built no need to re-invent the wheel. The same is for the PS2 up to an extent. But PS3 is massive and complicated system that needs lots of brute force processing. BC compatibility could have been announced for ps1/ps2 games without any issues, even the ps4 have a built in ps2 emulator that they use for the ps2 classics, and a game by game basis.

For a 4K gaming machine it will work great, but not for what we hoped for. This is almost a Slim ps5 solution not a robust one console. And until they finally launch the console, i will be hesitant about it because it simply doesn't make any sense. Sony built the PS5 for a 399 price point. Whether they lose some money or not by launch is another thing. But that is the reality of it. For a true PS4 successor Sony needed a machine in the same range or over Xbox SX.  I hate to see resources and money spent over an audio chip that no matter how great can be, it wil not change a bit how games are played. Audio immersion is so much diluted in gaming and diversified, that by the time PS5 arrives a gunshot, a punch, a crash, a scream will sound the same as in the xbox Sx, due to the use of the same crappy TV speakers everyone uses. 4K Gaming is about 4K not audio. That was a misfire from Cerny and Love the man but, hes out of his zone already.

Cerny was the underdog and lost, that was my point. He needed to counter act Microsoft approach and recent news of the new generation console but by simply stating teraflops aren't equal and not being relevant just undermined his own credibility. Is the same failed PS4 pro tactic as when he tried to prove that checkerboard rendering was in equal quality as native 4k rendering.

And as a PC gamer you should know very well that a teraflops is a theoretical performance measurement of Fp16/32 integers based on an specific hardware architecture, and will never be the same is given architecture changes. How THE HELL YOU DON'T KNOW THIS.? You need to study and fast.

True teraflops don't mean a bit if hardware architecture is different, but both console already announced they will use the same RDNA 2 architecture, just different configurations (CU's and clock). Any other difference would be less tangible.

Don' t get me wrong I LOVE Sony, but since the PS4 Pro, I'm hesitant to buy anything because of the approach Sony is using since then. But loving a brand involves criticism and not blindness.

Period.

I recommend you to read/watch about what is

- Legacy software

- Emulation / Interpreters

- Fp16/32 integers calculation and benchmarking

- Backwards compatibility PS1/PS2/OG XBOX

- History of Game Consoles

- PC hardware (CPU, GPU, Memory)

you get it.

**As a side note...I don't know why Sony (Microsoft too) doesn't just let people decide what content they want. They can use their generic emulators(ps2/ps1) with the respective compatibles games. An option for developers is to charge a premium for advanced solutions like internal resolution scaling or a higher resolution texture packs. There are options. Crowdfunding a title so it can be compatible or establishing funding goals to achieve compatibility options. There are lots of ideas and ways that can benefit users and developers alike. Imagine if you had the first Gran Turismo for PSX, with the options to be internally rendered at 4k with 4k textures, texture filters and AA options, all of it for just $1.99/2.99. If you don't pay then you run the game exactly as the ps1 the vanilla version. These features normally are just options in the emulation profile and it doesn't involve lots of money or time. Lets say 100,000 people buy the upgraded option, surely it will pay for the efforts and revitalizes monetization of old games versus full remasters. Leaving the user that bough the upgrade to tun off/on the individual features at will and decide what kind of experience they want. Maybe they can offer a backward compatibility option at a price, if you own the game pay 3.99, full game 9.99. Take for example Code Veronica for PS4, is just an emulated ps2 game, with some advanced options turned on. I own the game for ps2, still i had to buy it (2.99 if i remember well). OK. Why not offer me for free or at a very low price the vanilla version with the low resolution and assets as the original, and/or offer me as a side offer the advanced options for an additional price. That is pro consumer, you give power and options to the user, and with it additional income to the developers for those games not currently available.**

PS5 audio solution was decided exactly to take into account the very big number of people that play with regular grade headphones or TV speakers instead of dolby atmos soundbar/surround system. So the quality of the audio should be sensibly better.



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

Around the Network
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.

The image don't completely change every frame, and the RAM increased. We haven't seem yet how this balancing will work and how much constrain we will have at the end of the gen.

They are taking every step to minimize the RAM need for texture and others (like taking in consideration the distance draw for the quality of texture, only showing the visible part, not rendering what is behind you).

And on RTX Cerny mentioned that they have achieved some good results with little load, but of course it won't be full RTX for most games, it will vary depending on the other loads and intentions of the dev.



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

The_Liquid_Laser said:

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.

I don't think install times will be much better since it still use BD, the driver may be faster, the file sizes smaller and the selection of what needs to be installed and what order before play may be smaller as well. But I wouldn't bet in under 10min installation for most games. Sure if you download the game or patch the install after that may be very fast.



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

Pemalite said:
EricHiggin said:

Cerny mentioned that some SNY stuff ends up in RDNA period if AMD see's use in it elsewhere, and AMD has already said it will be using that tech for Laptops/PC's earlier this year.

Citation needed.

EricHiggin said:

I wonder if SmartShift actually came from SNY.

Nope. AMD invented it for it's notebook APU's. It's just better sharing of TDP between the CPU and GPU to drive up clocks... It's just a more refined technology to what was in Raven Ridge in 2018.

25:00 - 26:26

Cerny does say 'discreet GPU products around the time PS hardware comes out'. That would likely mean SmartShift isn't one of them as it's already out.



black8jac said:
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. 

"...Or clocked"



Cerebralbore101 said:
vivster said:

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

Actually the exact opposite. Because a powerful GPU has lots more to offer than an Xbox. No matter what the price.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.