Topic: PlayStation 5 --OT--

@JJ2 We won’t really know till the teardowns are in but at this stage it does seem rather like AMD sold the same chips to both Microsoft and Sony.

@Ryall It seems that both MS and Sony are going to be using the same Zen 2 CPU and Navi GPU BUT they will be different too and I am not talking about clock speed differences either. Both Sony and MS will have their own specs for the GPU. Its not like they will be taking the same Zen 2 CPU and Navi GPU off a shelf and putting them in their Consoles. The design of the APU can even look similar too but each will have their own specific design and features built in to.

For example, Sony may want their GPU to support FP16, Object tracking etc built in - like they did with the PS4 where as MS may decide that FP16 isn't worth it nor Object Tracking but may decide that the audio be handled by a dedicated part of the APU to free up more CPU processing and dedicated DX12 area too built in so whilst the two may have the same 'base' design, both are still custom and unique to each.

When Sony worked with AMD on their 'butterfly' design for the Pro (its basically 2 PS4 GPU's bolted together so that games that aren't Pro enhanced will only use 1 half like a regular Pro to enable perfect compatibility with the PS4), they also added things from Vega that were not on the Retail Polaris GPU. Its like building your own custom PC by adding things (like a Disk Drive, a second HDD etc) and not adding bits you don't want to build you own custom PC that has features you wanted and not adding things you don't need to build it at a cost you find acceptable.

Certain aspects may well be similar - at least on Paper. Both could have 16GB of RAM, but 1 could be using high bandwidth GDDR5 and the other GDDR6 with higher bandwidth. Both could offer 12Tflops of GPU processing power - 1 with fewer cores but higher clockspeed and the other with more cores but lower clockspeed to keep cooling requirements lower. Both may be using the same AMD core elements but still be very different because of what custom design elements each wanted.

I think we can safely expect both PS5 and Scarlett to go for $500 USD when they launch. We getting beefy bois.

@WebHead At the very least. Anyone expecting anything less than that is in la la land lol.

@WebHead @JohnnyShoulder It’s worth remembering the console are usually subsidised at launch. If you bought a day one PS4 Sony only broke even after you’d also bought a full price game and PlayStation plus. I would expect the PS5 to cost more to manufacture than the initial launch price.

@Ryall yeah sony is probably gonna sell at a loss but still. Its pretty evident they arent skimping. Things like hardware raytracing are not cheap.

@Ryall Good point, I would still be surprised if it came under 499 quid though.

@BAMozzy I guess if we looked at the original PlayStation 4 and Xbox One at the same level of detail as is currently available for the next generation consoles. I would probably conclude that they were pretty much identical to. But the finish product looked very different when they arrived.

@Ryall If you look at this Gen, then BOTH had a Jaguar CPU, both had 8GB RAM and Both had the same AMD GPU architecture too - obviously there was a BIG difference with Xbox adding ESRAM and having a higher clock speed CPU but the PS had a lot more Cores for its GPU and faster RAM too. At release, the PS4 GPU, as we know, was 1.84Tflops compared to the XB1's 1.32Tflops - a difference of 0.52Tflops or to put it another way, 520Gflops. That's more than double the Xbox 360's 240Gflops which had 9.6 more Gflops than the PS3

Its also more than the Switch offers too with the Tegra X1 in Switch running at 196/393 Gflops in portable/docked - of course, if you calculate the power using FP16 as opposed to FP32 like ALL the other consoles, you can double the Switch values which is where some sites will make the Switch seem even more powerful than it actually is. That being said, like the WiiU's 176 Glops which is often said to have 352 Gflops (FP16), it seems that Nintendo products are often given in FP16 (maybe because it makes them appear more on a par with Sony/MS?? the PS4 Pro can use FP16 and if you want to keep to the same system as Nintendo, that should be quoted as 8.4Tflops instead of the 4.2Tflops.

Anyway, the point is that because this generation is now using GPU's that are over 1000Gflops (1Tflop), A 'small' number like 0.52Tflops doesn't sound like its too much of a difference. Its nearly third of 1.84Tflops though but 520Gflops is more than 2 XB360's (the best GPU of last Gen), more than a Switch running Docked (in FP32 to keep it the same) and that's why its a BIG difference when it comes to games. 900p doesn't sound like much of a 'drop' from 1080p, its only 180p right? WRONG! its 2/3rds of the size of 1080p - like 540p isn't half of 1080p but 1/4 of 1080p, 6Tflops doesn't sound all that much more than 4.2Tflops - but that's a whole PS4 more or 1800Gflops or 7.5 XB360's more.

Tflops are not the be all and end all when it comes to Graphical performance of course. Even if you could break down 7.5 XB360's, combine the GPUs and plug that into a PS4 Pro to get to the 6Tflops, the old 360 GPU's would lack the efficiency and improved latency of the much newer Polaris GPU and still wouldn't measure up well against the 6Tflops of the X. No doubt if PS5 released with a brand new Navi 8tflop GPU for example, it may sound like its only 2Tflops more but the better efficiency and lower latency would get much better results than the X if they boosted the clock speed up to get 8Tflops. Both would appear to be on a par numerically, but the PS5 being newer (not counting the CPU and possible faster and more RAM too) would be superior. 12Tflops wouldn't be twice as good as an X despite having twice the compute power.

MS claiming there Scarlett is 4x the X doesn't mean that the GPU must be 24Tflops (4 x 6..). They could incorporate FP16 support and a 12Tflop (FP32) is also a 24Tflop (FP16) LOL but not every 'instruction' can be given in FP16. Of course Sony too could say their PS5 is 24Tflops and be quoting FP16 figures but even if neither uses FP16, both have the same numeric values or everything (RAM, Clock Speeds etc) and Architecture (both Zen2 and Navi), Different design features can make a difference too - like having a dedicated part of the APU handling Audio where as that is handled by CPU by the other thus using more CPU resources or one having dedicated Ray Tracing cores built in which may reduce the available die space for GPU or if the GPU's are the 'same', give that Console an advantage. Even OS can affect what is available for games too.

Anyway, it will be very interesting to see how things develop over the next 12-18months. There is no way that I want to be without either next gen consoles - even if there is a clear winner in terms of hardware specs. For all we know, one console could be quite 'light' on specs by comparison, deliver great 1080p performance offline but when connected, can use the power of the cloud to 'boost' performance beyond what the other does. Let the cloud handle some of the most intensive calculations. I will still want both because both will have unique software that I want regardless.

@BAMozzy yeah wehn they said 4x boost over one x for scarlett they pribably meant as a whole rather than just GPU.

Also I can see Sony calling PS5 just PlayStation or "The New PlayStation". Same with Scarlett just being called Xbox.

@BAMozzy next gen i don't think i'll be getting both (for the first time) as i don't feel i need both anymore and as long as i get to play FINAL FANTASY then i'm happy so i'll go where it goes which will probably be PS5 because of the FFVII Remake (which is confirmed for PS4 and PS5 and nothing else just yet)

still i think the next gen systems will be pretty even in terms of the tech they use (both using SSD's for example), it's going to be HOW they use that tech that's the difference

@BAMozzy
They said 4x purely from a processing perspective and it's interesting Spencer (and later AMD Lisa) emphasised the processor is co engineered with AMD that's where it maybe significantly different with PS5

@WebHead
PlayStation'S
Haha

I could see Ghost of Tsushima being held back for a cross gen launch in case Horizon 2 can't make it.

@WebHead I can see Xbox going that way - with maybe just a name instead of using numbers (even if the numbers don't follow an order). If they are going to be more of iterative format, with the games also working on 'older' systems, they will have to have some way to state a minimum console requirement to run. You can't just say 'Xbox' and someone with an S (or X even) not being able to play it because the game needs a decent CPU (at least Zen2) to work. There has to be some way to tell the purchaser that the game requires a 'minimum' hardware level - the same being true for Playstation uf they were to go that route too.

I can see Sony still calling its next Console PS5. What people may want, ie Buying a game like Death Stranding or Last of Us 2 on PS4 and then when the PS5 comes out, getting a 'free' update that takes it up to PS5 standard that a PS5 'Renastered' version would offer, and what they get (just the PS4 and/or Pro version) via BC we will have to see. It will also be down to the developer/publisher too to decide whether they will do a free update or sell a remastered version instead. They would have to draw a line somewhere too. If LoU2 gets updated free, should ND also update Uncharted 4 and Lost Legacy? What about Nathan Drake Collection and LoU Remastered? If ND do, what about 3rd Party devs and how far back? All the Pro Enhanced games? All games released from 2018 onwards? Just AAA games from 2018+?

You have to draw a line between old and new consoles - maybe not in the first year or two between games that need the new console to work properly and which won't. You also have to decide how to handle older games via BC - whether they will be updated or not. Its also made a bit more tricky by games using CB rendering rather than Native resolutions. Say a game on X is running with dynamic Native resolutions, on the next gen, the Dev perhaps doesn't 'need' to be involved as the extra power of the next Box means that game now runs Native at 4k - no dynamic scaling necessary where as a PS4 Pro with CB rendering would need a Patch to change that to render Natively. Its the same with Frame Rate Caps too - if they are capped at 30fps, without a dev raising or removing that cap, it will only run at 30fps max. Any changes to the method of rendering, the visual settings, the frame rate cap etc are all things that a Dev would have to patch in to change on the next gen hardware.

Moving forward, they would have to put in options for games that 'run' on older hardware - maybe frame rate caps, resolution caps, some basic visual setting options too for those still on Base consoles, mid gen consoles and those on the latest hardware - assuming that they publish games just as Playstation or Xbox rather than PS5 or Xbox Scarlett. Effectively, you are asking Devs to optimise their games now 3x instead of 2 as they have been doing or at least giving gamers the option to adjust the list of settings like a PC gamer has to optimise the games to run how they want because of such a wide range of specs that PC gamers have.

I can't see the Base XB1 being able to run games to any reasonable standard in a few years - its struggling now with basically ALL 3rd party games - 1st party though can ensure they build games to the base console, change things that are too intensive to hit 1080p where as 3rd Party games have to change the settings to keep parity across all platforms. I don't know how MS would handle that where a game can run more than adequately on an X - albeit at 1080p for example but on a base XB1 that is less than 1/4 the GPU power, would have to be at 540p (or worse because of RAM limitations too). With PS4 and PS4 Pro, those 2 are so much closer that if a game can't run at 720p on PS4, it won't run at 1080p on Pro either. Its easier to say to 'Pro' owners the game won't release because its not powerful enough to run at the 'minimum' standard (i.e Full HD - on a '4k' console) and not at 'minimum' for PS4 either than it is to say that a game that could run at up to 1440p (which is 4x 720p btw) won't release on that because the Base XB1 won't run it. Its unfair (in my mind) to release it on Base console knowing its way below 'standard' just to release it on X and unfair on X owners not to release a game because its locked to the base XB1. I know its a similar thing for PS owners but Sony made it clear that the 'minimum' level of the Pro is 1080p so if a game won't run at 1080p, its fair enough and it won't run at 720p either on base because they are much closer in specs.

The only way I can see Xbox just being Xbox is if they were to make the X the 'new' base console and then it can have 'different' software to the current Base XB1. By 2024, the X would be 7yrs old and that could be phased out with Scarlett, now 4yrs old, becoming the new base as a 'new' iterative Xbox releases. However, games will still need to have some way of notifying purchasers that the game has a minimum spec required to run well - like X is the minimum required Xbox so that base XB1/S/Digital owners are warned that their hardware is not adequate to run the software at a 'reasonable' standard - much like we see with PC games.

Its something that MS - and maybe Sony too depending on their approach - if they stick to the conventional generational format with PS5, its easier to have PS4 and PS5 releases with PS4 releases dropping off over time like any other generational system - but if not, how they 'phase out the weakest console, how they mark the minimum required hardware etc is something that they have to figure out. Drop the base and the owners may feel hard done by, drop both as a generational thing, the X owners may feel hard done by knowing their hardware should be 'adequate' for UHD gaming. Not my problem to figure out though...

Another thing to consider too is the possibility of Sony doing an Xbox All Access kind of program where you pay for the console through a couple years of monthly fees. Could see them partnering with best buy.

@JJ2 Sony's Processor and GPU is co-engineered with AMD too. Both have the 'same' AMD type Zen2 CPU and Both are using AMD's Navi architecture for their GPU. The difference though is much more likely to be the custom features that each will want built in. Xbox for example will want DX12 built in maybe have a dedicated Audio processor built in to its APU too - these are things that MS wanted for the X too so its not a far reach to think that these things may well be built into the APU that makes it a 'custom' order - something NO other APU from AMD can and would have. Sony may opt for FP16 support, Object tracking (although may not need this for PS5 as this was to help CB rendering as it tracked objects to better align with the 'gaps' left by CB rendering) as the did with the Pro. Sony may not have a dedicated Audio processor built in as they believe the CPU has enough resources to handle that but may have a dedicated AI handling chip built in to the APU instead to offload that from the CPU.

All of this is how they make a 'Custom' APU despite sharing the same Zen2 and Navi at its heart. The arrangement inside the chip could look similar but it could also vary a lot too. Its that 'design', the features that both Sony and MS want (which will be different) that makes these 'Custom' APU's and not something you can walk into a retailer and buy - even if they sell Zen2 CPU's and Navi GPU's. Like I said, MS may well move Audio processing from the CPU to a dedicated part of the chip which NO other CPU offers and its likely that MS will build DX12 into it and probably DXR too (that's DirectX Raytracing btw) where Sony may have a bespoke Vulcan and AMD Raytracing for their equivalent. Its all still Zen2 and Navi but can still be very custom and completely bespoke to each. PS4 Pro was based on Polaris but also had some elements of Vega built in - something NO other Polaris offered because its a bespoke and custom design - and that includes the 'butterfly' design to ensure it was compatible with PS4 by shutting off one 'wing' if a game was just PS4 - even dropping the clock speed of both the CPU and GPU until boost mode was added - that's still just using half of the GPU but not down clocking the CPU and GPU to match the base PS4. That had to be built into the design - not one block of 36cores but two blocks of 18cores. This is the type of thing that makes these 'custom' and bespoke to each even if they do end up with identical CPU & GPU Clock speeds and 'Tflops' How they handle Audio could be different, how they handle Ray Tracing could be different etc and its all down to the bespoke and custom design that both MS and Sony will of worked with AMD to produce.

@BAMozzy
I'm just saying that's what Spencer AND Lisa put the emphasis on

@JJ2 I wasn't arguing with you - I was just trying to put what they said into context, what that means. Both Sony and MS will sit down with AMD (metaphorically) and design (co engineer) their next APU. For MS, that's likely to be around DX12 and probably their own DXR Raytracing too and for Sony, they may have to rely more on AMDs design. Both will no doubt discuss how best to build the chip with the features they want to incorporate, inc any design like the 'butterfly' that Sony wanted for the Pro and X had something similar too believe it or not with the X. Combining a CPU and GPU into one APU with RAM split between System and Games, X also with how it uses the 'extra' allocated for gaming without ESRAM now, has to be figured out based on what Sony and MS want and/or need. Its not like they go to AMD and take a CPU and GPU off the shelf and slot those together in one APU. Therefore they are co-engineered because what works for a PC where you can unplug a 18core GPU and drop in a 36core GPU for example, where you can also get new drivers etc, a Console has to be engineered in such a way that 36cores can be split down to 18 for PS4 games but run at full capacity for Pro games.

I was in essence agreeing with you but just expanding on what that actually means.

@BAMozzy
Ok
So I'm thinking they said that for a good reason.
While Lisa worded it in the exact same way as Spencer, she mentioned the collaboration with Sony in a different way.