I'm right here?
I was just clarifying for him what the files are or are not. I'm not sure what is incorrect about what I said? The GH tests were not exclusively Ariel/Oberon BC tests. Those were cases in the units.
From the beginning, I've held that I believe PS5 will be 40CU at 2GHZ (10.2) with the below PowerVR RT built in. This would let the APU punch above its TF weight as unlike XSX you aren't relying on the full 12TF to do the RT.
https://www.imgtec.com/news/press-r...nounces-ray-tracing-technology-for-licensing/
Right or wrong its what i'm expecting. If the two sides have different RT implementation (which I believe has been stated before) than I can't imagine they are both just using AMD's RDNA2 implementation. It would also tie into that Sony engineers comments on the RDNA 2's RT abilities.
In this setup, you maintain the hardware backcompat that you are comfortable with to ensure full BC (disable full WGPs and downclock) while you also get to have you custom RT solution that you have been working on because you weren't sure if AMD would ever get there. IMO Sony wanted to lean on RT and likely started down their own path to get there. There is also no need to add an extra WGP on chip if you have your own RT solution. That seems to be a big waste.
Also, focusing on hardware backcompat on a new architecture would require quite a bit of testing which makes sense as to why you would lock in the chip early and step often.
I just can't reconcile how both sides would have different RT results if they are effectively using the exact same chip and architecture. MS will be leaning on DirectX RT and I don't see why Sony would go that way. Also, if you aren't relying on AMD's RT you don't need the extra TF in the APU and you wouldn't see any AMD RT testing on the chips.