Support NeoGAF

[SonGoku]

Ok, now just take everything you said and scrap it. That doesn't apply to sony or MS.

Sony or MS are not making or building any of these APUs from the ground up. They are buying them from AMD. Let me try and explain this...

AMD, does all their R&D for their respective technologies. The CPU, GPU, RDNA, infinity fabric, infinity cache, 3D cache, chiplets, ACE....etc. AMD is doing all that not even for Sony/MS (SMS), but because they make CPUs and GPUs. Now, SMS, comes in, and tells AMD that they want an APU. Mind you, AMD makes APUs too.. their xxxxG series of CPUs and what typically goes into AMD-powered laptops. So AMD will give them access to all their available technologies, we have this, that, that, this and that...etc.

All SMS are doing, is picking and choosing from already existing AMD technologies on what they want. The R&D cost to SMS here, is the amount spent buying one-off chips that ultimately doesn't make it into the final console. Eg. The chip you see in the PS5 on launch day, may very well have been revision 5 of that same chip. Now each revision would require at least one wafer of chips to be ordered. Sony can be paying AMD $18-25K for each of those wafers with about 80-100 chips on it. They put those chips through all sorts of testing, and can get back to AMD and say, hey can you swap the GPU from RDNA1 to RDNA2? AMD says fine, and the new wafer is paid for... designated revision 2....etc.

There may be a little extra spent here and there based on some very specific customizations, but nothing to the tune of $100s of millions.

So its not that you are wrong, its just that what you are saying doesn't apply to SMS. AMD could have spent $100s or millions developing RDNA, or RDNA3 or Zen...etc, but all SMS is doing is just buying the chip. Kinda the same way tesla could have spent hundreds of millions building or developing battery tech, but all you do is just buy a car.

I agree with everything you said except that i did not mean Sony does the actual APU R&D
Of course AMD is in charge of designing the APU and footing the R&D bill. AMD then takes all the expenses involved in the chip design and manufacturing to set a price they will sell to Sony/MS the wafers/apus. Depending of the contract they make with AMD (how many million units) they get a better price

So now that that's clear let me rephrase my argument:
Say Sony approaches AMD for the Pro & Slim APU, the end price of each APU could end up slower than if Sony ordered a single APU because 1. The chip design cost will be shared and 2. Sony will order more units

 

[paolo11]

Of course. Performance modes in those titles are GPU bound, so the Pro should be able to get offer higher resolutions at 60fps without breaking a sweat, at least as long as Square Enix does their job right.

I can’t wait for ps5 pro then. Those titles deserve quality mode 60fps

 

[Vr46]

TSMC N4P
8 Zen 2 cores, max 4.2 Ghz (same as Slim except 20% higher)
56 or 60 RDNA3 CUs, except it has a custom version of it with the RDNA4 Raytracing IP, max frequency unknown but unlikely to be that high
16 GB of 18 gbps GDDR6, 256-bit (same as Slim with 28% higher speed)
Presumably everything else (SSD, IO, etc) is the same as the Slim
Estimated to be $599 without the drive. Like the Slim you could buy the drive.

Can't really compare it to the 7700/7800 XT since there is no Infinity Cache.

ok but why no 7900xtx gpu?

 

[ChiefDada]

TSMC N4P
8 Zen 2 cores, max 4.2 Ghz (same as Slim except 20% higher)
56 or 60 RDNA3 CUs, except it has a custom version of it with the RDNA4 Raytracing IP, max frequency unknown but unlikely to be that high
16 GB of 18 gbps GDDR6, 256-bit (same as Slim with 28% higher speed)
Presumably everything else (SSD, IO, etc) is the same as the Slim
Estimated to be $599 without the drive. Like the Slim you could buy the drive.

Can't really compare it to the 7700/7800 XT since there is no Infinity Cache.

Meh, cache coherency engines and scrubbers are close enough to address same problems IF was designed to solve. HW accelerated AI upscaling (pretty much confirmed atp) alone will effectively allow PS5 Pro to trade blows with 7800xt in terms of perceptual image quality. If ray traversal unit is also packed in, then might as well forget about the RDNA 3 lineup altogether.

 

[asdasdasdbb]

If ray traversal unit is also packed in, then might as well forget about the RDNA 3 lineup altogether.

Thing is, most games that have some sort of RT in it don't really use it all that well. I think best case, a few first party games will take advantage of the RT. But most games won't.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Man I pray this is true. If ps5 pro can run 60 ps quality mode for ff7 trilogy and 16, I’ll be so happy

If that's not the target then that would be the most stupid thing of all the stupid things Sony can do.

 

[MisterXDTV]

ok but why no 7900xtx gpu?

Navi 31 chip is too big to fit in a console

Navi 32 size is perfect for the target and has 60 CUs like the leak suggested.

 

[Loxus]

Next-gen could be base off the ZenC variant, so don't completely rule out a ZenC variant in the Pro.


No 3D Cache for next-gen, so don't expect the Pro to have it.


Normal L3 Cache takes up to much die space. That's why consoles cut down the L3 Cache.

Best bet is Zen4/5c if more Cache is needed. It's Cores and L3 Cache is optimized to be dense. The die area saving ZenC gives is to good to ignore for a console chip.

8 Zen4c cores have 16MB of L3 Cache vs PS5's 8MB L3 Cache.

For me, I take all leaks as rumors. So the Pro having Zen2 Cores is just a rumor and not confirmed in my eyes.

 

[asdasdasdbb]

Best bet is Zen4/5c if more Cache is needed. It's Cores and L3 Cache is optimized to be dense. The die area saving ZenC gives is to good to ignore for a console chip.

Zen 2 would still be smaller I think. Even then, Zen 4 would worth it... which leads me to believe that something else that led them to stick with Zen 2. Possibly the Custom Jaguar BC mode that Sony had requested.

 

[paolo11]

If that's not the target then that would be the most stupid thing of all the stupid things Sony can do.

Agreed. I so can’t wait for ps5 pro if that’s the case.

 

[GoldenEye98]

I'm skeptical there will be much of significant change to the CPU/memory etc. It will just be enough to accommodate a larger GPU like the PS4 Pro.

 

[Papa_Wisdom]

That cat is adorable!

We can all appreciate an adorable looking pussy.

Especially when shaved

 

[Panajev2001a]

Next-gen could be base off the ZenC variant, so don't completely rule out a ZenC variant in the Pro.


No 3D Cache for next-gen, so don't expect the Pro to have it.


Normal L3 Cache takes up to much die space. That's why consoles cut down the L3 Cache.

Best bet is Zen4/5c if more Cache is needed. It's Cores and L3 Cache is optimized to be dense. The die area saving ZenC gives is to good to ignore for a console chip.

8 Zen4c cores have 16MB of L3 Cache vs PS5's 8MB L3 Cache.

For me, I take all leaks as rumors. So the Pro having Zen2 Cores is just a rumor and not confirmed in my eyes.

Not sure why people are so in love with Zen4c core unless further modified. They will consume a lot more power at 3+ GHz than Zen4.

“Zen 4c needs a higher core voltage to reach the same clock speeds as Zen 4. The VID (voltage identification definition) charts revealed that Zen 4 hits the Vmin (the minimal voltage that a processor requires for a workload at a particular frequency) at 2.3 GHz. In contrast, Zen 4c arrives at the Vmin below 1.5 GHz. The V/F (voltage-to-frequency) curve for both cores overlaps at 1.5 GHz. Zen 4c's power efficiency resides in between 1.5 GHz and 2 GHz. Zen 4c consumes less power despite the higher recorded voltage due to the more compact design.”

From Tom’s Hardware review.

Increasing voltage to enable faster clock speed leads to far greater than linear increases in power consumption (square of the voltage, P = CV2 f).

 

[winjer]

Not sure why people are so in love with Zen4c core unless further modified. They will consume a lot more power at 3+ GHz than Zen4.

“Zen 4c needs a higher core voltage to reach the same clock speeds as Zen 4. The VID (voltage identification definition) charts revealed that Zen 4 hits the Vmin (the minimal voltage that a processor requires for a workload at a particular frequency) at 2.3 GHz. In contrast, Zen 4c arrives at the Vmin below 1.5 GHz. The V/F (voltage-to-frequency) curve for both cores overlaps at 1.5 GHz. Zen 4c's power efficiency resides in between 1.5 GHz and 2 GHz. Zen 4c consumes less power despite the higher recorded voltage due to the more compact design.”

From Tom’s Hardware review.

Increasing voltage to enable faster clock speed leads to far greater than linear increases in power consumption (square of the voltage, P = CV2 f).

That is incorrect. Just because a CPU has greater voltage usage, does not mean it uses more power.
Power = Voltage X Amperage. So without knowing the current, we can't know the power, just with voltage.
You omitted this sentence from that review: "Zen 4c consumes less power despite the higher recorded voltage due to the more compact design."

Also, that test from Tomshardware is pretty bad.
The methodology, the hardware used, the software and things reported are very incomplete, and in several cases inconsequential.
Seriously, he is comparing a handheld console to a laptop. He doesn't show graphs for clocks over time, power usage, etc.
We need someone professional to do a proper comparison.

 

[marquimvfs]

Where are the spec leaks?

 

[winjer]

Where are the spec leaks?

There aren't.

 

[blastprocessor]

Where are the spec leaks?

Maybe GDC.

 

[Panajev2001a]

That is incorrect. Just because a CPU has greater voltage usage, does not mean it uses more power.
Power = Voltage X Amperage.

Edit: yeah great, sure not if it runs at a lower frequency. So? The point was that scaling it to 3.5-4.0+ GHz for say a PS5 Pro or PS6 (so well above that maybe could be a decent target) might necessitate voltage increases making the power consumption story worse than Sony getting a customised Zen 4 core and moving from there, like they did for Zen 2.

That is not how a CMOS circuit works anyways: https://www.ti.com/lit/an/scaa035b/scaa035b.pdf

Power Consumption in CMOS Circuits

In this chapter, we explain the two types of power consumption found in a complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) circuit. In general, a CMOS circuit tends to dissipate power at all times—be it active or inactive. The power consumed by the circuit when it is performing computational tasks...

www.intechopen.com

When you are talking about a switching circuit frequency and voltage come into play as CMOS draw most power when you are switching state (so you look at static and dynamic power consumption). What the article says is that the core requires a higher minimum voltage to reach a certain frequency or inversely that you cannot raise frequency above a certain threshold without increasing voltage at which point you are paying each voltage increase dearly as power consumption is directly proportional to V^2 for a switching transistor.

 

[winjer]

That is not how a CMOS circuit works: https://www.ti.com/lit/an/scaa035b/scaa035b.pdf

Power Consumption in CMOS Circuits

In this chapter, we explain the two types of power consumption found in a complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) circuit. In general, a CMOS circuit tends to dissipate power at all times—be it active or inactive. The power consumed by the circuit when it is performing computational tasks...

www.intechopen.com

When you are talking about a switching circuit frequency and voltage come into play as CMOS main power consumption happens when you are switching state. What the article says is that the core requires a higher minimum voltage to reach a certain frequency or inversely that you cannot raise frequency above a certain threshold without increasing voltage at which point you are paying each voltage increase dearly as power consumption is directly proportional to V^2 for a switching transistor.

P=V X I is still the basis for all of that.
And you are not the only one to know that frequency vs power scales in a geometric way.
Besides, Zen4 and Zen4c use the same process node. One just has a much more dense library and cells.

And that test shows no result for power usage. Shows no scaling with frequency. Nothing.
The hardware isn't even similar, as a handheld will be affected by power and temperature limits, in different ways to a laptop or desktop.
That test was a shoddy work, with no point.
Until we have proper benchmarks with Zen4c, made by a professional, we can't really know how much power it saves.

 

[Panajev2001a]

P=V X I is still the basis for all of that.
And you are not the only one to know that frequency vs power scales in a geometric way.

I am not sure I was claiming I was Shockley 2.0, what is your problem today? You are being unnecessarily aggressive.

Are you arguing that the scaling of power consumption is not more heavily impacted by unit changes in voltage than frequency? Ok, stay on that hill .

Find me a source that refutes the core claim, that Zen4C is able to sustain the same clock speed at the same voltage as Zen 4 or let’s move on.

Anandtech had reported something similar too:

The Zen 4c core has been redesigned to have the same functionality but offer more density combined with a different power/performance point on the voltage frequency curve. This is going to affect power consumption, efficiency, and likely the range of frequencies available.

AMD Gives Details on EPYC Zen4: Genoa and Bergamo, up to 96 and 128 Cores

www.anandtech.com

 

[winjer]

I am not sure I was claiming I was Shockley 2.0, what is your problem today?

Are you arguing that the scaling of power consumption is not more heavily impacted by unit changes in voltage than frequency? Ok, stay on that hill.

Find me a source that refutes the core claim, that Zen4C is able to sustain the same clock speed at the same frequency or let’s move on.

I never claimed that power usage scales more with voltage than with frequency.
What I said is that voltage is only one part of the equation for power. Please don't distort what I said.

The info we have from AMD is that Zen4C, at equal clocks, use slightly less power than Zen4. Asides from AMD, we still don't have any reliable source for power scaling.
They are the same CPUs, with the same ISA, same instruction sets and the same IPC, using the same process node.
But Zen4c uses higher density cells to save space. This reduces die space, but also concentrates heat and reduces clock speeds.
But because it has less cache and the sram cells on Zen4c are 6T. Unlike the 8T in Zen4.
So it uses fewer transistors and uses a bit less power.

Remember that the goal of Zen4c is not to have an ultra low power core, like Intel's Gracemont.
It's to save a ton of die space, while maintaining the full instruction compatibility. Avoiding the mistake that Intel did with non-sense like AVX10.
For that matter, like people already proposed in this thread, a Zen4c or Zen5c based CPU for a PlayStation 6 would be a great solution, as it saves a ton of die space for other things.

 

[Gaiff]

Where are the spec leaks?

Right here, little buddy.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I never claimed that power usage scales more with voltage than with frequency.
What I said is that voltage is only one part of the equation for power. Please don't distort what I said.

The info we have from AMD is that Zen4C, at equal clocks, use slightly less power than Zen4. Asides from AMD, we still don't have any reliable source for power scaling.
They are the same CPUs, with the same ISA, same instruction sets and the same IPC, using the same process node.
But Zen4c uses higher density cells to save space. This reduces die space, but also concentrates heat and reduces clock speeds.
But because it has less cache and the sram cells on Zen4c are 6T. Unlike the 8T in Zen4.
So it uses fewer transistors and uses a bit less power.

Remember that the goal of Zen4c is not to have an ultra low power core, like Intel's Gracemont.
It's to save a ton of die space, while maintaining the full instruction compatibility. Avoiding the mistake that Intel did with non-sense like AVX10.
For that matter, like people already proposed in this thread, a Zen4c or Zen5c based CPU for a PlayStation 6 would be a great solution, as it saves a ton of die space for other things.

I do not disagree that Sony would want to conserve die space and loves lower power consumption which is why they went to town with AMD on the AVX/FPU units of Zen 2.

The point is that this may sacrifice frequency and available data that we have right now indicates that for the core to clock at the same peak frequencies to Zen 4 you need to increase minimum voltage. Period. If that is wrong it is wrong fine, but until we see AMD pushing it to the same clock speeds and we see power consumption (comparing Zen 4 and Zen 4c like for like, same manufacturing process too) it supports that argument too.

We will see with Zen 5 and Zen 6 which are more likely candidates for PS6, PS5 Pro is unlikely to go with anything but a higher clocked Zen 2. Same custom core they have now.

Btw, I far prefer having the same ISA and the same core features set over the BS Intel is pulling with their E cores and AVX.

 

[Panajev2001a]

The info we have from AMD is that Zen4C, at equal clocks, use slightly less power than Zen4

Is this with Zen 4 running at the (lower) clockspeeds we see Zen 4c at or the other way around?

 

[winjer]

I do. It disagree that Sony would want to conserve die space and loves lower power consumption which is why they went to town with AMD on the AVX/FPU units of Zen 2.

The point is that this may sacrifice frequency and available data that we have right now indicates that for the core to clock at the same peak frequencies to Zen 4 you need to increase minimum voltage. Period. If that is wrong it is wrong fine, but until we see AMD pushing it to the same clock speeds and we see power consumption (comparing Zen 4 and Zen 4c like for like, same manufacturing process too) it supports that argument too.

We will see with Zen 5 and Zen 6 which are more likely candidates for PS6, PS5 Pro is unlikely to go with anything but a higher clocked Zen 2. Same custom core they have now.

But console CPUs, for the past couple of gens, have had low clock speeds. The Zen2 on consoles only run at around 3.5Ghz. And the Jaguar cores were even lower.
A Zen5c PS5 running at 3.5-4Ghz is feasible. And it would save a lot of die space.
And whether Sony wants to save more space by cutting down on the AVX or FP units, is a choice they can make. But a "c" variant will already save space by using smaller 6T sram cells and smaller cells for the rest of the CPU.
This is die space that can be used for things like a bit more cache. Or more CUs for the GPU part. Or more RT units.

Remember that when it comes to consoles, those SoCs always sacrifice the CPU part. That's why the Zen2 on these consoles have only4+4MB of L3. And have lower clocks. And the memory controller is configured to access high bandwidth and high latency GDDR6.
For a company like Sony and MS, they consider this a worthy compromise, because consoles don't target frame rates as high as PCs. They have their own custom compilers. And consoles have lower level APIs that hit the CPU a bit less.

 

[playsaves3]

Dont do this to yourself, you are setting yourself up for disappointment
RDNA4 yes if its on the menu you can rest assured the PS5 Pro will get it

Thats a monster upgrade imo
RTX 4070 can pull off max settings with Path Tracing at playable framerates (30-40 fps) using DLSS quality. If the PS5 Pro has same RT capabilities and similarly good AI upscaling, it will be a really good upgrade

Why is zen 5 so extreme the zen 2 in ps5 is like a paired down 3700x I assume the zen 5 equivalent would be like an 8700x cut down why couldn’t the pro use it that cpu upgrade could guarantee 60fps on any ps5 game and 120fps on 90% of them

 

[playsaves3]

Of course. Performance modes in those titles are GPU bound, so the Pro should be able to offer higher resolutions at 60fps without breaking a sweat, at least as long as Square Enix does their job right.

Not all performance modes are gpu bound for example digital foundry heavily suspects rift apart performance rt mode is cpu limited in various spots

 

[playsaves3]

But console CPUs, for the past couple of gens, have had low clock speeds. The Zen2 on consoles only run at around 3.5Ghz. And the Jaguar cores were even lower.
A Zen5c PS5 running at 3.5-4Ghz is feasible. And it would save a lot of die space.
And whether Sony wants to save more space by cutting down on the AVX or FP units, is a choice they can make. But a "c" variant will already save space by using smaller 6T sram cells and smaller cells for the rest of the CPU.
This is die space that can be used for things like a bit more cache. Or more CUs for the GPU part. Or more RT units.

Remember that when it comes to consoles, those SoCs always sacrifice the CPU part. That's why the Zen2 on these consoles have only4+4MB of L3. And have lower clocks. And the memory controller is configured to access high bandwidth and high latency GDDR6.
For a company like Sony and MS, they consider this a worthy compromise, because consoles don't target frame rates as high as PCs. They have their own custom compilers. And consoles have lower level APIs that hit the CPU a bit less.

Also the ps6 would be using zen 7 if not zen 8

 

[playsaves3]

TSMC N4P
8 Zen 2 cores, max 4.2 Ghz (same as Slim except 20% higher)
56 or 60 RDNA3 CUs, except it has a custom version of it with the RDNA4 Raytracing IP, max frequency unknown but unlikely to be that high
16 GB of 18 gbps GDDR6, 256-bit (same as Slim with 28% higher speed)
Presumably everything else (SSD, IO, etc) is the same as the Slim
Estimated to be $599 without the drive. Like the Slim you could buy the drive.

Can't really compare it to the 7700/7800 XT since there is no Infinity Cache.

I agree with most of the specs but for the cpu the clocks stay the same as the original but it’s zen 4 3d or zen 5

 

[playsaves3]

Im surprised there is no mention of SSD upgrade, since it was the center focus point for PS5

Gen 5 support would be interesting but I actually believe that’s far more likely to cause compatibility issues than using a zen 5 chip

 

[playsaves3]

+Better be 60fps on the Pro.

Fully depends on what cpu the pro is using if the pro uses the cpu I’ve envisioned it should use since 2022 60fps is not only guaranteed they could likely do a lower res 120fps mode

 

[Perrott]

Not all performance modes are gpu bound for example digital foundry heavily suspects rift apart performance rt mode is cpu limited in various spots

Yeah, I know that, but in my post I was only talking about the Final Fantasy games, which going are indeed GPU bound as evidenced by, for instance, FFXVI having to drop resolution down to 720p for its performance mode to be able to hold 60fps.

 

[Kazekage1981]

Gen 5 support would be interesting but I actually believe that’s far more likely to cause compatibility issues than using a zen 5 chip

Why is backwards compatibility always an issue with Playstation but not Xbox? MS is going full blown next gen specs for the next box (skipping the pro) and backwards compatibility will most likely not be an issue, and Sony better damn well be going full blown next gen for PS6 but they always have to be careful that if they give the new console too much power it will not be compatible with previous gen games which to me is total bullshit. What gives?

Sony Might as well make an Ultra-Violet Ray Disk for PS6 according to Toms Hardware:
Toms Hardware Article on 125TB Optical Disks

and Sony could potentially use 3-D V-Cache for SSD's with a bandwidth close to DDR6 RAM which is faster then PCIE Gen5 and PCIE Gen6 (for PS6)!
AMD 3-D Vache Enables RAM disk to hit 182GB/second

 

[skit_data]

Plz.. specs leak soon...

I'm so damn tired of opening this thread in hope of something concrete and tangible but all we get are Redgamingstechs "I'm hearing"-speculations

 

[Celcius]

Gen 5 support would be interesting but I actually believe that’s far more likely to cause compatibility issues than using a zen 5 chip

My concern with gen 5 pci-e would be how hot gen 5 ssd’s run. They often use active cooling.

 

[asdasdasdbb]

Why is backwards compatibility always an issue with Playstation but not Xbox? MS is going full blown next gen specs for the next box (skipping the pro) and backwards compatibility will most likely not be an issue, and Sony better damn well be going full blown next gen for PS6 but they always have to be careful that if they give the new console too much power it will not be compatible with previous gen games which to me is total bullshit. What gives?

Sony did insist on having AMD make a special Jaguar compatibility mode. Now that could just end up meaning that the PS6 will only have PS5 BC at best.

 

[AGRacing]

Why is backwards compatibility always an issue with Playstation but not Xbox? MS is going full blown next gen specs for the next box (skipping the pro) and backwards compatibility will most likely not be an issue, and Sony better damn well be going full blown next gen for PS6 but they always have to be careful that if they give the new console too much power it will not be compatible with previous gen games which to me is total bullshit. What gives?

Sony Might as well make an Ultra-Violet Ray Disk for PS6 according to Toms Hardware:
Toms Hardware Article on 125TB Optical Disks

and Sony could potentially use 3-D V-Cache for SSD's with a bandwidth close to DDR6 RAM which is faster then PCIE Gen5 and PCIE Gen6 (for PS6)!
AMD 3-D Vache Enables RAM disk to hit 182GB/second

Sony hates writing emulation software. They will clearly do anything to avoid it. They don't even like paying other companies to do it.

 

[Loxus]

Sony did insist on having AMD make a special Jaguar compatibility mode. Now that could just end up meaning that the PS6 will only have PS5 BC at best.

Nope, I believe backwards compatibility is guaranteed going forward as long as they stay with AMD.

Form Road to PS5.
"One way you can achieve backwards compatibility is to put the previous consoles chipset in the new console like we did with some PlayStation 3s."

"But that's of course extremely expensive."

"A better way is to incorporate any differences in the previous consoles logic into the new consoles custom chips."

"Meaning that even as the technology evolves the logic and feature set that PlayStation 4 and PlayStation 4 Pro titles rely on is still available in backwards compatibility modes."

"One advantage of this strategy is that once backwards compatibility is in the console, it's in."


The real issue was clock speeds.
Road to PS5
"Running PS4 and PS4 Pro titles at boosted frequencies has also added complexity. The boost is truly massive this time around and some game code just can't handle it. Testing has to be done on the title by title basis.


Sony managed to solve that by running PS4 and PS4 Pro titles at their native clock speeds of 1.6 GHz for PS4 (2.13 GHz for PS4 Pro).
PlayStation 5 uncovered: the Mark Cerny tech deep dive
PlayStation 4 Pro was built to deliver higher performance than its base counterpart in order to open the door to 4K display support, but compatibility was key. A 'butterfly' GPU configuration was deployed which essentially doubled up on the graphics core, but clock speeds aside, the CPU had to remain the same - the Zen core was not an option. For PS5, extra logic is added to the RDNA 2 GPU to ensure compatibility with PS4 and PS4 Pro, but how about the CPU side of the equation?

"All of the game logic created for Jaguar CPUs works properly on Zen 2 CPUs, but the timing of execution of instructions can be substantially different," Mark Cerny tells us. "We worked with AMD to customise our particular Zen 2 cores; they have modes in which they can more closely approximate Jaguar timing. We're keeping that in our back pocket, so to speak, as we proceed with the backwards compatibility work."

 

[playsaves3]

My concern with gen 5 pci-e would be how hot gen 5 ssd’s run. They often use active cooling.

Yeah and again it’s the last thing that should be upgraded far more important to upgrade the cpu and memory

 

[playsaves3]

I never claimed that power usage scales more with voltage than with frequency.
What I said is that voltage is only one part of the equation for power. Please don't distort what I said.

The info we have from AMD is that Zen4C, at equal clocks, use slightly less power than Zen4. Asides from AMD, we still don't have any reliable source for power scaling.
They are the same CPUs, with the same ISA, same instruction sets and the same IPC, using the same process node.
But Zen4c uses higher density cells to save space. This reduces die space, but also concentrates heat and reduces clock speeds.
But because it has less cache and the sram cells on Zen4c are 6T. Unlike the 8T in Zen4.
So it uses fewer transistors and uses a bit less power.

Remember that the goal of Zen4c is not to have an ultra low power core, like Intel's Gracemont.
It's to save a ton of die space, while maintaining the full instruction compatibility. Avoiding the mistake that Intel did with non-sense like AVX10.
For that matter, like people already proposed in this thread, a Zen4c or Zen5c based CPU for a PlayStation 6 would be a great solution, as it saves a ton of die space for other things.

Zen 5 is not good enough for the ps6 it’s using zen 7 or zen 8 depending on what year it releases

 

[playsaves3]

Next-gen could be base off the ZenC variant, so don't completely rule out a ZenC variant in the Pro.


No 3D Cache for next-gen, so don't expect the Pro to have it.


Normal L3 Cache takes up to much die space. That's why consoles cut down the L3 Cache.

Best bet is Zen4/5c if more Cache is needed. It's Cores and L3 Cache is optimized to be dense. The die area saving ZenC gives is to good to ignore for a console chip.

8 Zen4c cores have 16MB of L3 Cache vs PS5's 8MB L3 Cache.

For me, I take all leaks as rumors. So the Pro having Zen2 Cores is just a rumor and not confirmed in my eyes.

To make sure I’m reading you right your not saying the ps6 will be using… zen 4 right? I’d hope it’s using zen 7 or 8

 

[playsaves3]

I'm skeptical there will be much of significant change to the CPU/memory etc. It will just be enough to accommodate a larger GPU like the PS4 Pro.

I don’t believe they will follow the same design philosophy as the ps4 pro

 

[playsaves3]

O

Yeah, I know that, but in my post I was only talking about the Final Fantasy games, which going are indeed GPU bound as evidenced by, for instance, FFXVI having to drop resolution down to 720p for its performance mode to be able to hold 60fps.

Oh yeah agreed there so they can easily make it 60-120

 

[playsaves3]

Why is backwards compatibility always an issue with Playstation but not Xbox? MS is going full blown next gen specs for the next box (skipping the pro) and backwards compatibility will most likely not be an issue, and Sony better damn well be going full blown next gen for PS6 but they always have to be careful that if they give the new console too much power it will not be compatible with previous gen games which to me is total bullshit. What gives?

Sony Might as well make an Ultra-Violet Ray Disk for PS6 according to Toms Hardware:
Toms Hardware Article on 125TB Optical Disks

and Sony could potentially use 3-D V-Cache for SSD's with a bandwidth close to DDR6 RAM which is faster then PCIE Gen5 and PCIE Gen6 (for PS6)!
AMD 3-D Vache Enables RAM disk to hit 182GB/second

I don’t actually believe Sony is having that many compatibility issues I always believed it was cost the ps5 backwards compatibility revealed it’s not compatibility related

 

[Vr46]

why anyone won't leak the spec? there are only a few months left, we are in march and there is no real leaks

 

[Clear]

why anyone won't leak the spec? there are only a few months left, we are in march and there is no real leaks

To be honest I don't recall the PS4 Pro specs leaking ahead of time either. Maybe I've forgotten, but all I recall is the reveal and people trying to figure out what Sony had done after that.

I suppose you could argue that keeping secrecy for an augmented model is more important than for a successor device, given that in the former (this) case the base unit is still selling at high demand and therefore needs to be protected more.

 

[Fafalada]

Sony hates writing emulation software.

I'd like to see receipts for that, because history says otherwise.
Ps2 had ps1 emulation software from day 1, and added to it through its life. Psp added it 2 years in.
Ps3 added sw layer 3 months in, which continued to evolve for 10 years.

It wasn't until ps4 that we got a break in bc and sw emulators at launch, that's a far cry from "sony hates it".

 

[JerryinSoCal]

My guess is they don't want to put a feature into the console unless they can make sure it works properly for everything.

 

[Proteus Maximus]

Ignore

 

[Proteus Maximus]

why anyone won't leak the spec? there are only a few months left, we are in march and there is no real leaks

Time machine?