(Wired) EXCLUSIVE: WHAT TO EXPECT FROM SONY'S NEXT-GEN PLAYSTATION

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by Snowdog, Apr 16, 2019.

  1. Youn

    Youn [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,310
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    They tried it with UT3, not sure why they can't just group k/m users together, separate from gamepad users
     
  2. SomeoneElse

    SomeoneElse [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,745
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    What if Sony comes out at E3 time and says guess what the PS5 is ready in November, just to throw everyone for a loop?
     
    Armenius and scojer like this.
  3. Nolan7689

    Nolan7689 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,301
    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2015
    Well it’d be real weird with Death Stranding releasing then as well. I don’t see them splitting the game between two platforms at launch when they can just “remaster” it later for sales on the PS5. They ain’t Nintendo releasing a new Zelda on two systems at once.

    But it could happen
     
    Geforcepat likes this.
  4. scojer

    scojer 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,909
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    They did practically confirm PS4 games will run on the PS5.
    I hope PS1-PS4 will (they did file a patent for it)
    But I'm not holding my breath.
     
    Armenius and lostin3d like this.
  5. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    They're using AMD because they're not giving AMD a lot of money, and because they don't want to pay for better quality Intel and Nvidia parts.
     
    vegeta535, odditory and GoldenTiger like this.
  6. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    At this point, with Sony's proprietary sourcecode, an seamless emulator for PS1 - PS3 should be doable. PS4 games should obviously run natively.
     
    scojer likes this.
  7. Nolan7689

    Nolan7689 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,301
    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2015
    Hey now, it can be argued that AMD parts are just as high quality.

    But I may be odd in the sense that quality to me is not a measure of performance. More reliability in a way I suppose. Which outside of drivers and the test escapes debacle I’d hardly determine any of them to be more or less reliable than the others. Iunno, I’m just arguing for the fun of it.
     
  8. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Well, to continue for the fun of it ( ;) ), I think I used the wrong word. AMD ships quality parts. However, if Sony and MS were willing to pay for it, they'd be able to get more performance elsewhere if they so desired.

    Though they'd need to as for significantly more performance than they are offering for this next generation of consoles for it to be outside of AMD's capabilities. Intel could get them higher single-core performance at a lower wattage, and Nvidia could get them more rendering performance at a lower wattage and bring hardware ray tracing to the table. You know, if anyone was up for a US$2,000 console :D.
     
    Nolan7689, GoldenTiger and lostin3d like this.
  9. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,522
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    After they told their investors that it won't be out until later next year? Won't happen. Beyond that, it would be completely impossible to do as they haven't had enough time to build enough systems. Assuming AMD is mass producing the new PS5 APUs, and they might not be ready to, they wouldn't have been doing so for more than a month or so.
     
    lostin3d likes this.
  10. FlawleZ

    FlawleZ Gawd

    Messages:
    790
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    I think it's very possible with Zen 2 that AMD will be the faster single thread.
     
  11. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    ...than Skylake that is five years old, possibly. We're still waiting for independent reviews, but we can say with high certainty that they're 'close enough'.

    However, Intel could offer Ice Lake, given the release window involved, and AMD hasn't produced a part that could compete with Intel in the lower wattage envelopes desirable for consoles since Intel released the original Core / Pentium M processors. And when you cap wattage, on consoles the same as with laptops (and phones and tablets and...) the variables change.

    From a requirements perspective, Intel could absolutely deliver a faster console CPU. The only problem is that they'd charge for it.
     
  12. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,522
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Plus, its a lot less complicated (read: expenensive) to design a cooling system for a single chip than two separate chips, which is something they'd need if they went with an Intel CPU. There's also the fact that Nvidia seems to have managed to piss off both Microsoft and Sony to the point where those bridges are effectively burned in terms of consoles. So they'd have to go with Navi anyway and, at that point, it just makes a heck of a lot more sense to do a custom APU.
     
    Darth Kyrie and Red Falcon like this.
  13. Brian_B

    Brian_B 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,718
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    I didn’t think consoles were necessarily trying for much faster CPUs, as they are usually Graphics and Energy constrained
     
  14. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    They did go after CPUs, for a while- the raw computing needs of current games in a console environment are satisfied in a large part by current CPU performance. At the same time, if one wanted to crank stuff like environment destruction, do significant amounts of audio processing, and perhaps do it at 120FPS or faster?

    Well, then you buy a PC :).

    So no, they really aren't targeting faster CPUs, but that's largely due to self-imposed limitations. The main point is that if a certain power target were set, Intel (and Nvidia) could deliver higher performance.

    I'm skipping over the 'burned bridges' because all parties involved would get over their differences if the demand was there. Beyond that, there's no technical reason that Intel and Nvidia couldn't co-design an SoC to be produced by TSMC and used in a console, again, if the demand was there.

    I'll note that I'm quite aware that the demand for such a console doesn't exist- at the unit cost involved, let alone the cost of designing and licensing, they'd never ship enough units to make a profit.

    But if Sony and Microsoft wanted a console that could push out a steady 120FPS (read: sub 8ms frametimes) for 4k and for VR, well, such a beast could certainly be built today.
     
    Red Falcon likes this.
  15. Geforcepat

    Geforcepat Gawd

    Messages:
    895
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2012
    Yeah that would throw everyone for a loop alright. but no.
     
  16. Nobu

    Nobu 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,018
    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    I'd go so far as to say there is potential for a market with such a product, but the demand is already met by the PC market, and they would likely lose money even if it weren't stupid expensive.
     
  17. RobCalleg

    RobCalleg Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    129
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2018
    Uhhhhhh
     
    Armenius likes this.
  18. RobCalleg

    RobCalleg Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    129
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2018
    Everything you post is wrong or misinformation. All of it.

    They aren’t targeting faster CPUs?
     
  19. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Solid refutal!

    Nope. They have requirements that limit power usage, just to start, and that's for the whole SoC, and then there are costs. Throw power limits and cost out of the window and they could get a significantly faster product (from AMD or Intel / Nvidia).
     
  20. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,522
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Apparently you haven't been paying attention to this entire generation of consoles. The PS4, PS4 Pro, XB1, and XB1X all had solid GPUs and were fine when it came to energy consumption. The major problem with all four of them were the abysmal Jaguar CPU cores. Sony and MS consoles had severe CPU bottlenecks. This has been a problem with them since day 1. The XB1 also had some major bandwidth limitations due to their bad memory set up compared to the PS4. Despite the PS4 and XB1 being not terribly far apart in terms of CPU and GPU power, the XB1's bandwidth bottleneck caused the system to end up being a lot weaker.
     
    Darth Kyrie, Armenius and GoldenTiger like this.
  21. Brian_B

    Brian_B 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,718
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    So I’m not convinced

    Let’s look at PS4 vs PS4 Pro

    CPU clock went up by 30%. That’s a decent bump. So sure, they could use a bit more CPU.

    Graphics power, however, went up by a almost a factor of 4x.

    That shows me where the priorities lay.
     
  22. next-Jin

    next-Jin [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,146
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    I mean it’s fairly obvious there are limitations on consoles. They have to meet a sub 500 price point and there’s not a chance in hell it happens with a hybrid Intel/NVidia setup. Be it a single APU or multi chip setup.

    AMD has far more authority in the single SoC designs that meets the requirements for Sony/MS. It’s the right choice especially now with Zen 2, Navi, PCIe 4, etc.
     
    Darth Kyrie likes this.
  23. GoodBoy

    GoodBoy [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,329
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Can it play Crysis?
     
    Krenum likes this.
  24. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,522
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    They could only increase the CPU so much without replacing it. Doesn't change that the system is still CPU bottlenecked.
     
  25. next-Jin

    next-Jin [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,146
    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Not really priorities, more like realities of the situation. There was 0 point adding a different CPU.
     
  26. Brian_B

    Brian_B 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,718
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    CPU went from 1.6 to 2.4 GHz. Seems like there’s still plenty of clock there if you wanted to throw TDP budget at it and it was the biggest bottleneck. But instead the engineers decided to triple down on graphics.

    That’s before even talking about changing uArch.
     
  27. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,522
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Throwing more money at it isn't an option as they had a price point to hint. Getting a brand new CPU wasn't an option either as it would require a ton of work within the OS and API, also increasing cost. Both Sony and MS did they best they could within the constraints of a mid-generation update. If Sony didn't care about CPU power they wouldn't be paying for a Zen 3 based APU. It seems like they're trying to remove as many bottlenecks as possible, so they don't have the same issues that plagued the PS4/Pro.
     
    Darth Kyrie, Armenius and GoldenTiger like this.
  28. Brian_B

    Brian_B 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,718
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    I never said they should or would change the CPU. I am implying they could have bumped the CPUclock a lot more than they did instead of a going from 1.8 to 4.2 gflops on the graphics... if you really think cpu is the biggest bottleneck there.
     
  29. Red Falcon

    Red Falcon [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,871
    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    It was actually ~2.13GHz on the PS4 Pro.
    Even if they clocked it to 3GHz, it would still be quite the bottleneck, but all of this is being fixed by using Ryzen 2, and should absolutely no longer bottleneck the GPU on higher-end games with high resolutions and higher frame rates.
     
  30. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Yeah, they'd need to include a much beefier GPU to bottleneck the CPU that they're using. Makes you wonder if they haven't planned that out for the inevitable 'Pro' release, where a die shrink a few years down the road will let them up the clockspeeds and bolt on a larger GPU without increasing the per-unit cost significantly.
     
    kamikazi, lostin3d and Red Falcon like this.
  31. vegeta535

    vegeta535 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,942
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2013
    It is more that AMD is selling comparable hardware for less. Nvidia might of offered something but wanted say $100 more then what AMD offers at similar performance or maybe even less. You see the crap Nintendo got for cheap from Nvidia. Sure AMD might not make much off each sale but they have sold over 100 million console between Sony and MS.
     
  32. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    If you take off the cost requirement, Nvidia has the faster solutions, and at any target power envelope.

    Nvidia's mobile SoCs are pretty successful, far more successful than AMD's, and again, at a target power envelope, Nvidia can provide a higher-performance part.

    They're doing well if they break even. We can't know how much they're making, but given the margins in the console market, they're likely only getting a tiny slice of the pie. Aside from the recognition, much of the benefit to AMD comes from R&D dollars and having a volume product being produced at TSMC.
     
  33. RobCalleg

    RobCalleg Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    129
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2018
    Noooooooo
     
  34. kamikazi

    kamikazi Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    204
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    IIRC, original Ryzen/Epic beat the pants off everything else performance/watt wise in the low to mid 3 GHz range. To me that sounds like a very nice range for a console processor that will run heavily optimized code. If Navi is at least good on the performance/watt scale, it seems like a winner to me for the SOC.
     
    Darth Kyrie likes this.
  35. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    If you're considering desktop parts and performance envelopes, it did pretty well. Still short of what Intel was doing for mobile parts though, and that's what they could have targeted for the PS5, which is the point I made above.

    I'll also repeat that for the purpose, I don't find Zen2 to be insufficient at all for the PS5 :)
     
  36. lostin3d

    lostin3d [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,995
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2016
    Some would perceive that as planned obsolescence but I see it as smart, cost effective, forward thinking. Not much different than what some of us do for our more extreme builds in picking core parts that will continue for many gens of gpu or storage upgrades.
     
    GoldenTiger likes this.
  37. kamikazi

    kamikazi Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    204
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    I'm expecting this 3rd iteration of Ryzen with it's IPC gains since original Ryzen while within the same power envelope to be a great, not just sufficient, console chip clocked around 3.2 GHz Time will tell.
     
  38. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    I use the word 'sufficient' because it's 'more than enough'. I don't use the word 'great' with consoles because... they aren't ;)
     
  39. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,522
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    For the price point and the kind of performance/graphics than can be pulled out of the weaker hardware they definitely approach great. They'd qualify for "great" if not for the long ass load times and how common frame rate issues are in games.
     
    IdiotInCharge likes this.
  40. IdiotInCharge

    IdiotInCharge [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,240
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Not going to disagree on the outset.

    It's more that what would now be considered a mid-range CPU, which beats the pants off the Jaguar crap they used for the current generation, which you also note, works, may not be enough going forward.

    I'm mostly picking on consoles being underpowered. And I wonder if it will be enough to toss in a mid-range desktop part, this time, noting that cranking the clockspeed isn't really going to be able to be ramped up, and that the computing landscape looks to change significantly this coming generation.