ANIMAL1975
Member
Nah =Tommy Fisher == TF
he's fisher like christ
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
- Status
he's fisher like christ
megreotsugua
Banned
Tommy Fisher
Banned
Tight NDA, Huge emphasis on SSD and Memory
ANIMAL1975
Member
ReRam and HBM3 you heard it first here folks.
megreotsugua
Banned
You don't have to divulge in detail. Is the "no loading times" real? Is there no gameplay or graphics advantage the SSD can give PS5? Is it all about that fast loading times?
FranXico
Member
$1000 console then.
Tommy Fisher
Banned
Loading time will be something of the past very soon. there won't be any loading screen anymore.
megreotsugua
Banned
Does it hint at something? Native 4K easily?
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Any info on when Sony might announce the reveal date, Tommy?
Ar¢tos
Member
megreotsugua
Banned
MS is saying mere seconds of loading times too. Are you confident Sony's solutions is better? Can you tell us how much better?
megreotsugua
Banned
FranXico
Member
The most likely is a simple GDDR6 setup. Come on, people.
FranXico
Member
Contact the mods with proof that he is lying then. He would be banned if that is the case.Hey. ReRAM may be cheap enough. Don't discount ReRAM yet. Tommy is lying.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Without something compelling to convince me otherwise, I agree. The Flute leak showed 16GB GDDR6 after all....
DJ12
Member
Nvidia 2080 to, 1080 ti and probably more had this exact number so not unusual at all.
It is however 24 more than the 5700 xt which again suggests that the GPU is not rDNA 1.
SmokSmog
Member
Last edited:
DJ12
Member
Why, all the numbers are correct for being 52 cus.
At least say what you think is wrong instead of indicating your current level of butthurt.
Ultradsa
Member
I'm curious what Sony is ok loosing on each console, It's almost certain that it will be sold at a loss but how much of a loss are we talking? I'm pretty sure PS3 was sold at a $300 loss per unit at launch and that was a time when Playstation wasn't Sony's main money maker. I'm guessing they could afford to take an even bigger hit now but god damn is losing $300 on every console sound insane.....yet it was done before!
vpance
Member
Actually it fits the ratio for PS4 /PS4 Pro
18 CU (32 ROPS)
36 CU (64 ROPS)
52 CU ( 88 ROPS)
Last edited:
megreotsugua
Banned
Sony won't do that insane ps3-level loss anymore. They don't have to. But a $100 loss in the first year I think is still possible.
vpance
Member
Anywhere from $20-$100 seems realistic this time. They're in a better position now to do so, more than MS may be willing to even.
Handy Fake
Member
I wonder if the investment in first-party studios is a means to lessen that impact. Like photocopier manufacturers actually making money from toner, or printers being dirt cheap because most money is made on ink refills.
Last edited:
I don't see the cost worth it right now. The estimates I seen are 80usd per 4gig plus 20-25 for imposer. If you only do 8 gigs your at 180 usd just for half the ram at launch and forcing back to split pool again. There is a good reason AMD ran from it except some of their enterprise cards they can charge through the nose for on the compute side.Sony has proven they love to surprise gen after gen. The smoke is building
PocoJoe
Banned
Right numbers proves nothing. Anybody whom knows how these specs are made aka how many of each one have to be compared to other can make it up.
vivftp
Member
Tommy Fisher
are you able to say anything about backwards compatibility on the PS5 beyond the PS4 BC that's already been confirmed? How about PS3 BC in particular?
ANIMAL1975
Member
I'm not serious of course, but it's not totally impossible. There was this post some time ago about Sony starting producing ReRam chips
https://tech.nikkeibp.co.jp/dm/atclen/news_en/15mk/092703022/
And HBM3 i remember people in here saying (even prior to the HBM2/DRAM combo leak) that it would be a better solution than HBM2 as secret sauce, because it is better in everything and because being the next step, its price will go down faster as it gets adopted and surpass soon the older HBM2 getting discontinued. So, going HBM, the smart solution for the future cut in components cost, is the more expensive in the present.
All of this is just my two cents on the subject. Like i said i was not being serious on my original post, but thought that could elaborate a bit on the subject for the sake of conversation.
Insane Metal
Member
I don't know what to say, it's too good to be true. That + that beastly SSD. OH GOD.
DJ12
Member
Yes they can, but it also means that he doesn't really need to 'try again' does it.
If nothing else his calculations are on point.
ResilientBanana
Member
Everyone just believes this guy now?
ANIMAL1975
Member
And where can we sell that kidney? I'm thinking Zona Industrial de Mindelo, to the Chinese.
Insane Metal
Member
No? It's basically a neogaf-owned pastebin lol.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
No. I just take it at face value without getting myself wound up. I have asked him questions he won't answer so right now he's given nothing to make me believe.
If the reveal is in February then the clock is ticking and if he turns out fake we'll never hear from him again.
Agnostic2020
Member
If we would believe him we would be dancing naked in this thread from the excitement yet here we are being all decent and not dancing
FranXico
Member
Hey guys, No one has disappeared. i'm ready to be verified.
He didn't get banned yet.
FranXico
Member
LOL I wouldn't count on it.
Ar¢tos
Member
Sony will setup harvesting tents next to every major retailer. You get a voucher to then trade for a ps5 at the store.
BattleScar
Member
52 CU would amount to about 325mm2 on current N7 (30% larger than Navi 10). If it uses N6 (which offers about 18% greater logic density without needing new photomasks as N7+ would) then that could shrink back down to about 270mm2. That's not Outlandish.
If it is indeed 52CU, then I would expect the full chip would be 60 with 6 disabled. Why 60? Cause that gives three shader arrays, each with 20CU with 2 CUs disabled per array. The various BC modes could use one or two of those shader arrays depending on whether it's in PS4 base or PS4 Pro mode.
A chip with 80 CUs (4 shader arrays) with 72 active could also work as it would take the same 'butterfly' strategy as the PS4 Pro (i.e use half the chip for PS4 Pro and a quarter for PS4). But that would be far too large and costly in terms of silicon.
If it is indeed 52CU, then I would expect the full chip would be 60 with 6 disabled. Why 60? Cause that gives three shader arrays, each with 20CU with 2 CUs disabled per array. The various BC modes could use one or two of those shader arrays depending on whether it's in PS4 base or PS4 Pro mode.
A chip with 80 CUs (4 shader arrays) with 72 active could also work as it would take the same 'butterfly' strategy as the PS4 Pro (i.e use half the chip for PS4 Pro and a quarter for PS4). But that would be far too large and costly in terms of silicon.
ANIMAL1975
Member
^Update:
@CameFromNearFuture and @XcloudTimdog have yet to provide any information.
Everyone can think for themselves and believe or not, but he wasn't banned nor "discredited (so no pile ons)"... that's mod of war words.
Kazekage1981
Member
I wish it was 64 CU instead of 52. Or better yet, 80-128 CU range. So here is my question:
Lets assume the following:
1) PS5 52 Compute Units at 2.0Ghz with Ryzen 2 3.2 GHz
2) Xsex 64 Compute Units at 1.6Ghz with Ryzen 2 3.6GHz
Which Console is better? People keep saying that the difference in TFLOPS would only be 5-10% range, but then whey were people shitting all over with Xbox One 1.3TFLOPS vs PS4 1.84 TFLOPS ?
Lets assume the following:
1) PS5 52 Compute Units at 2.0Ghz with Ryzen 2 3.2 GHz
2) Xsex 64 Compute Units at 1.6Ghz with Ryzen 2 3.6GHz
Which Console is better? People keep saying that the difference in TFLOPS would only be 5-10% range, but then whey were people shitting all over with Xbox One 1.3TFLOPS vs PS4 1.84 TFLOPS ?
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
it was actually 1.2 tflops at the reveal. they only went up to 1.3 tflops in august of 2013.
and 10% of the 1.2 tflops was reserved for kinect. so it was actually only 1.08 tflops. or 70% less powerful. 5-10% is nothing compared to the 70% at reveal or the 40% with esram they launched with.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Because PS4 was >40% stronger on the GPU. If there is only ~10% between XSX and PS5 it won't be noticeable.
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
He has no credentials and has been pulling their "info" from months-old Pastebins practically anyone can search up and research if they wanted.
As far as I'm concerned, they're no insider. This isn't a pile-on btw; just me stating my honest opinion on the matter.
Then what's holding up the approval process? I could speculate my thoughts on the matter but that'd be derailing the thread. All of the insiders I normally take some faith in are either verified or have some kind of proven track record to their name; someone who has neither is a lot sketchier, just saying.
This is just R&D research and testing talks. They have "produced" ReRAM chips i.e prototype chips aiming at certain targets, but nothing commercial has materialized, and we're heading into 2020. If they are doing this basically from scratch, even if they manage to commercialize in 2020 they won't have it in the capacities Optane is currently provided in.
In fact the only thing that makes me hopeful now that ReRAM (as a storage implementation) could happen next year is if Sony and Micron have worked out some kind of deal and Micron are taking their 3D Xpoint development towards ReRAM. The two are technically PCM technologies and share a lot in common, but there are still some key differences. Theoretically it's possible to "mutate" 3D Xpoint into ReRAM of some type given the similarites, but the differences would have to be addressed obviously in order for that to work.
So the question now is if they can make those changes successfully for a commercial ReRAM product at decent capacity sizes between now and, say, June of 2020. Which I assume would be the cutoff before they really need to start finalizing hardware specs and getting everything lined up for mass manufacturing in time for the launch.
Not even entertaining HBM3; it doesn't mesh with Sony's newer system design ideologies and likely also wouldn't be congruent with the larger gaming market (believe it or not platform holders do tend to design their systems with some relative compatibility of performance to competitor offerings these days since that makes things easier for developers to deploy on multiple devices and helps them with the production and workflow pipeline regarding things like costs). It would sooner show up in lower-end enterprise data servers than the PS5.
This whole "secret sauce" thing is just getting out-of-control and kind of unrealistic now. At least there is some basis for thinking ReRAM (or better to say, 3D Xpoint, even the persistent RAM variant) can happen; it's a semi-mature tech with some years in actual real-world operation in big data business markets and offers large capacities. They are also relatively cheap to produce per GB (very cheap to produce per GB, in fact), and in 3D Xpoint's case, cheaper than ReRAM will be whenever it is finally commercialized at near-similar capacities.
Basically, gotta tame those "secret sauce" expectations with some taste of realistic expectations
Last edited:
Ar¢tos
Member
You can't even compare...
1.3 to 1.84 is a lake in distance
12tf to 13tf is a puddle
The higher the base number, the bigger the diminishing returns are.
Kazekage1981
Member
Thats what I am having a hard time understanding. Both Xbox One (only in TFLOP terms) and PS4 have base of 1.0. Then numbers after the base is only a difference of 0.5. But now you guys are saying that if Xsex was 12 TFLOPS and PS5 was 13-14 TFLOPs with the difference in base range of 1-2 is only 10% difference in power. Yes I know there is a lot more that goes into graphics-performance than TFLOPS, but I am a noob.
Last edited:
- Status