Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
It will not, unless you choose to get the 10% CPU clock boost.
-
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.
Digital Foundry - Playstation 5 Pro specs analysis, also new information
- Thread starter Gaiff
- Start date
MisterXDTV
Member
This console is under NDA, it has not even been announced, let alone tested....
And I read this...
Physiognomonics
Member
Do you see the 67ms frame-time spike and the CPU threads going from 15% to 84%? This is bad CPU optimization. A 30% better CPU wouldn't help the Pro here. And again consoles (notably PS5) have very different APIs than PC. We have seen games with plenty of "CPU" problems on PC running fine on PS5.Talking about CPU limited games:
Half of 3080 is used here, game it bottlenecked by 5800x3D - cpu that is much better than Zen 2.
Last edited:
TheRedRiders
Member
I reckon CPU concern trolling will be the dominant narrative leading up to the launch regardless of how much each side labours their points.
Loxus
Member
I still think this part of Road to PS5 speaks volumes.
"First, we have a custom AMD GPU based on their "RDNA2" technology. What does that mean? AMD is continuously improving and revising their tech for RDNA2. Their goals were roughly speaking, to reduce power consumption by re-architecting the GPU to put data close to where it's needed. To optimize the GPU for performance and to add new more advanced feature set."
"But that feature set is malleable, which is to say that we have our own needs for PlayStation and that can factor into what the AMD roadmap becomes."
"So collaboration is born."
"If we bring concepts to AMD that are felt to be widely useful, then they can be adopted into RDNA - and used broadly, including in PC GPUs."
"If the ideas are sufficiently specific to what we're trying to accomplish, like the GPU cache scrubbers I was talking about, then they end up being just for us."
"If you see a similar discrete GPU available as a PC card at roughly the same time as we release our console, that means our collaboration with AMD succeeded."
"In producing technology useful in both worlds, it doesn't mean that we, as Sony, simply incorporated the pc part into our console."
The fact that PS5's GFX is 1000, makes me believe the PS5's GPU is the first of RDNA architecture.
It's not based on anything.
The PS5's GPU was then revised, adding RT.
I would assume the same with the PS5 Pro.
It's GPU isn't based on RDNA3 or 4.
It's it own architecture, that add features due to collaboration.
The same can be said for the PS5 Pro CPU.
Sony would then call it whatever due to marketing.
"First, we have a custom AMD GPU based on their "RDNA2" technology. What does that mean? AMD is continuously improving and revising their tech for RDNA2. Their goals were roughly speaking, to reduce power consumption by re-architecting the GPU to put data close to where it's needed. To optimize the GPU for performance and to add new more advanced feature set."
"But that feature set is malleable, which is to say that we have our own needs for PlayStation and that can factor into what the AMD roadmap becomes."
"So collaboration is born."
"If we bring concepts to AMD that are felt to be widely useful, then they can be adopted into RDNA - and used broadly, including in PC GPUs."
"If the ideas are sufficiently specific to what we're trying to accomplish, like the GPU cache scrubbers I was talking about, then they end up being just for us."
"If you see a similar discrete GPU available as a PC card at roughly the same time as we release our console, that means our collaboration with AMD succeeded."
"In producing technology useful in both worlds, it doesn't mean that we, as Sony, simply incorporated the pc part into our console."
The fact that PS5's GFX is 1000, makes me believe the PS5's GPU is the first of RDNA architecture.
It's not based on anything.
The PS5's GPU was then revised, adding RT.
I would assume the same with the PS5 Pro.
It's GPU isn't based on RDNA3 or 4.
It's it own architecture, that add features due to collaboration.
The same can be said for the PS5 Pro CPU.
Sony would then call it whatever due to marketing.
Last edited:
Mr.Phoenix
Member
I am sorry but I just cant take these things seriously. And I feel the exact same way about stuff like this when gaming on a PC. The problem is not the CPUs, it's the fucking devs. Just look at that video you posted, the CPU has all 12 cores just sitting at around 11-25% then one core maxing out at 89%+. Then we use that and talk about CPU bottlenecks. I see that and all I see is poor optimization.
And as I have said before, a console will never take the brute force approach. That's a luxury only PC gamers have, as far as I am concerned the devs should do a better job. And I am sure stuff like this informs sonys choices. They have data they can use and track CPU utilization on any number of games. And I am certain, that just like with this video you have posted here, all that data comes back showing them that the CPU is on average running at like 35% all cores combined or some shit like that.
I guess this was always going to happen, and that its happening now is probably a sign that we are at least going in the right direction. Albeit 5-6 years late.
This reminds me of when the 20xx series GPUs came onto the market and compared to the 10xx series before it, everyone thought it was an underwhelming improvement. Because their brains couldn't see nor understand this thing called RT and DLSS.
Thats whats happening now, people like you are looking at this and saying... meh, its only 60%+ better in raw compute than the PS5, but not seeing the 2-4x better RT and the fact that this now has ML-based reconstruction with PSSR. I guess to make people like you happy, Sony should have used up their silicon budget to just add more CUs instead of having better Rt cores and adding AI units in each CU. And that is something no one should have to tell DF. I mean they have been championing DLSS for ages, haven't they?
Last edited:
Bojji
Member
Obviously Capcom is to blame here, game runs terrible on all common hardware and doesn't look next gen at all. But what we can do? Games like that happen and and pro console won't help them in any way.
If GTA6 is limited like that it will be stuck to 30FPS, and GTA is doing FAR more than this game...
PS5 runs this game like shit. And supposed Pro CPU uplift is 10%.
YOU PC BRO?!
Member
Damn, people in here are really trying to suggest that an 8/16 Zen 2 cpu is the limiting factor when going from 30 => 60 fps. I can see a potential issue at 120fps but there's no way, unless a game is terribly unoptimised that the PS5 cpu is going to hold back anything at such low frame rates.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
1.5% only if you enable the high frequency CPU mode. So DF is off their rocker here…
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Has anyone leaked if Cerny is the architect of this system?
MisterXDTV
Member
Actually no, PS5 Pro GPU seems to be clocked at 2.18 Ghz, -2.2% compared to the 2.23 Ghz of the base model
Unless the 33.5 Tflops number is wrong
Last edited:
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Even if… whoa… slow and wide
… come on, it is hardly a design switch even if it were the case.
James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
He’s on the up scaling patents
MisterXDTV
Member
That tells you everything you need to know about the DF crew bias...
Series X is clocked well under 2 Ghz @ 1.825 Ghz
Last edited:
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
DF have the tech credentials of a crackhead superhero team.
The 33.5 TF figure is dual-issue, and to reach it you'd need a GPU clock of about 2.34 GHz. 56 CUs * 64 Shader Cores * 2 * 2.34 GHz = 16.7 TF * 2 (dual-issue mode) = 33.5 TF.
Exactly the figure in the papers.
So a supposed "tech-literate" channel can't even calculate TFs for AMD GPUs or tell the difference between single-issue and dual-issue TFs? Or know that if it's a 60 CU chips then 4 CUs are likely disabled for yield purposes because that part of the APU is likely monolithic?
Like did they "conveniently" forget this just to push a smear campaign against the Pro using FUD? Not a single person corrected them that they should've calculated the numbers by disabling four CUs like with the PS5 & Series X? I'm pretty sure people like Kepler were saying there'd be disabled CUs on the chip so not all 60 are active.
What a clown show DF have become.
Radical_3d
Member
So, what’s the big idea here? Upgrading to a top of the line CPU isn’t doing much, is it? Do you want Sony to try and design a monster tower 4.000€ PC so people that can’t multi thread has more room in their CPU budget and still fail? People do get that this stuff still has to sell to a somewhat mass market appeal price, do they?Dragon's Dogma 2 currently has high demands on hardware, with the Steam Deck struggling to run at playable rates and even high-end machines of an RTX4090 paired with an AMD 5800X3D CPU can drop into the 30s whilst in the denser populated towns.
I’m not ruling out that we spend the rest of the rest of the generation with 1943 graphics at 30fps. What I’m saying is that the solution proposed is not reasonable for a niche mid range update. You don’t want your barely better PS5? That’s fair. But think about the value, potential target and price when criticising.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Wait, I thought the rumour was 60 CUs but at a slower 2.18ghz?
MisterXDTV
Member
According to the Spec it's a 64 CU chip with 4 disabled= 60 CUs Active
But we will have to wait for confirmation
Last edited:
Zathalus
Member
Funny that you are so condescending in this post when the leaks say it is a 64/60 design. So DF were right on the money.
Physiognomonics
Member
A PC CPU runs this like shit. 50% overclock wouldn't be enough for it to run at 60fps on console. A 5800x3d wouldn't be enough for it to be a solid 60fps game on PS5 Pro. Sony design is perfectly fine with their goal.
But that's not what DF are saying. they are saying they are disappointed by the 10% overclock saying it's not enough to double FPS. It's just unrealistic goal if you need a $500 CPU upgrade to not even accomplish that for one unique unoptimized game out of 500 games. Just BS narrative from them. Look at how the CPU threads are running, 50% average for both CPU and GPU with very disparate min and max on CPU threads. The game is just badly optimized.
Did they complain like crazy when their X1X was still using that piece of shit of Jaguar? did they made paragraphs, articles about articles about those "CPU limited games" that will plague the X1X generation and limit its potential? they are just Xbox and PCMR warriors out there to play with an unique goal to spread FUD after FUD against Sony next console. They are now 100% doing that and they'll do that until next Xbox. They are just become full propagandists for Microsoft. It's pathetic.
Last edited:
Elysium44
Banned
Why in your opinion is Starfield 30fps on Xbox but any half decent CPU from the last five years can run it at 60+ ?
MisterXDTV
Member
Actually they parrotted that "Jaguar Evolved" thing that Microsoft wrote in the spec sheet for X1X
LOL
Pure comedy, they should go back to talk about teraflops, that's their thing
TheRedRiders
Member
This.
FrankWza
Member
Series s
TheRedRiders
Member
Lmao no way??
Snake29
RSI Employee of the Year
They will be called out hard when GTA 6 just has a 60fps mode on both next and current gen consoles.
Zathalus
Member
Relax bro, it was a single section in a video about how the CPU is a bit underwhelming. Not a fucking witch-hunt.
Again,the Pro is likely to have 64 CUs work because you have 60 CUs work 2 shader engines if that's real.
Also,in the chart comparison that DF made,they compared the number of active units on the PS5 vs the Pro.
MisterXDTV
Member
Find the differences:
Inside the next Xbox: Project Scorpio tech revealed
Digital Foundry has the specs, has seen it running, and has talked to the people who built it.
www.eurogamer.net
"All signs point to the upclocked Jaguar cores we find in Xbox One, and Scorpio's CPU set-up is indeed an evolution of that tech, but subject to extensive customisation and the offloading of key tasks to dedicated hardware."
Scorpio is console hardware pushed to a new level
Opinion and analysis from Digital Foundry's Rich Leadbetter.
Scorpio is console hardware pushed to a new level
Opinion and analysis from Digital Foundry's Rich Leadbetter, based on our exclusive deep dive with Microsoft on the next Xbox's tech.
www.eurogamer.net
Last edited:
TheRedRiders
Member
Christ, can’t even make this shit up.Find the differences:
Inside the next Xbox: Project Scorpio tech revealed
Digital Foundry has the specs, has seen it running, and has talked to the people who built it.
"All signs point to the upclocked Jaguar cores we find in Xbox One, and Scorpio's CPU set-up is indeed an evolution of that tech, but subject to extensive customisation and the offloading of key tasks to dedicated hardware."
Scorpio is console hardware pushed to a new level
Opinion and analysis from Digital Foundry's Rich Leadbetter.
Scorpio is console hardware pushed to a new level
Opinion and analysis from Digital Foundry's Rich Leadbetter, based on our exclusive deep dive with Microsoft on the next Xbox's tech.
Salty Popsicle
Banned
The only difference is that you are emotionally invested in the Sony console and it hurts your feelings when they are not impressed by the Pro specs.Find the differences:
Inside the next Xbox: Project Scorpio tech revealed
Digital Foundry has the specs, has seen it running, and has talked to the people who built it.
"All signs point to the upclocked Jaguar cores we find in Xbox One, and Scorpio's CPU set-up is indeed an evolution of that tech, but subject to extensive customisation and the offloading of key tasks to dedicated hardware."
Scorpio is console hardware pushed to a new level
Opinion and analysis from Digital Foundry's Rich Leadbetter.
Scorpio is console hardware pushed to a new level
Opinion and analysis from Digital Foundry's Rich Leadbetter, based on our exclusive deep dive with Microsoft on the next Xbox's tech.
MisterXDTV
Member
Microsoft Xbox One X: the Digital Foundry verdict
The workmanship that's gone into Microsoft's latest console is exceptional. To quadruple graphics power over the original model but to retain essentially the same form factor and the same acoustics points to a level of engineering that really does take console design to the next level. Xbox One X is a beautifully designed little box that does the job assigned to it without taking up much space or making much noise - the latter being our biggest bugbear with PlayStation 4.Beyond that, what we can definitely say is that the machine is a love letter to the core gamer, with many forward-looking features. The implementation of FreeSync support - something we didn't have time to fully test - is the kind of feature we didn't expect to see until at least the next console generation. Meanwhile, the backwards compatibility features really are superb - if you've stayed with Xbox across the generations, you're in for a real treat here. There's a sense that Microsoft is paying homage to its roots, honouring its past successes and making genuine efforts in curating a great library - all at no cost to the user.
Now PS5 Pro is a piece of shit, of course...
They are not getting an exclusive teardown from Sony as Cerny doesn't give a fuck about Digital Foundry
Last edited:
Codeblew
Member
The PS5 has shared memory so neither the CPU or the GPU has to decompress anything, the custom hardware does it. You think the engineers just put the custom hardware in the PS5 for nothing?
Salty Popsicle
Banned
Your words, not theirs...
Last edited:
Elysium44
Banned
Series S CPU is the same as the X (and PS5). Also there is nothing stopping the X version having a performance mode and not the S, if the X were capable.
playsaves3
Member
The pro had one job and one job only double the framerate of each mode if it can’t do that it’s a failure of a console that shouldn’t be supported
Zathalus
Member
No. I never said anything of the sort. The I/O block is a great addition to the PS5 that allows for rapid decompression of assets. But you don't need 9 CPU cores on PC to do that, it can be done on the GPU with minimal overhead.
Last edited:
YOU PC BRO?!
Member
Are you really gonna hit me with Creation Engine 2 here. Steve from gamers nexus released an excellent video analysing cpu bottlenecks in Starfield. It was indeed pretty damning. A 4090 paired with a AMD 3600 cpu lost around 50% of its perf (though still > 60fps). It’s only a 6/12 chip but likely somewhat comparable to the Zen 2 8/16 with lower clocks. This was an extreme scenario running at the lowest in-game settings. The More you stress the GPU the less the CPU becomes the bottleneck. That’s why games when benchmarking different CPUs show little difference at higher resolutions.
With the above, the majority of games are nowhere near as heavy on the cpu as Starfield. For the vast majority of games, the cpu is not the limiting factor going from 30fps => 60fps. It’s almost always GPU limited. Why is that statement controversial at all?
James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
But it’s not next gen unless I can store 1,364,554 hot dog buns in my ship’s closet
James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
No mention at all of Xbox one X’s biggest bottleneck, the CPU they didn’t change…..
MisterXDTV
Member
Codeblew
Member
It decompress at the speed of 9 Zen-2 CPU cores doesn't mean you "need" 9 cores to decompress. Still the point being, you cannot compare apples to apples between PC and PS5 with similar cpu/gpu specs. PS5 is much more efficient with its custom hardware designed specifically for gaming workloads. This includes the PS5's SOC and motherboard design as well.
When PS1 launched in 1994, its R3000 CPU@33mhz was about 5x slower than the fastest P5 Pentium (100mhz) available.
3 years in(to compare a similar point in time to today) - PII 300Mhz got to the market, which would be something like 18x faster.
N64 fared marginally better with a 100mhz R4300 (4xxx series wasn't really a major generational uplift - still single issue, in-order, but it did reach much higher clock speeds) - but that was also bottlenecked pretty badly due to botched memory subsystem. And by the time we were 3 years into N64 launch, Athlon CPUs were on the market so things only looked worse from there.
I don't have direct comparison with this gen consoles as never benchmarked a PS5 hands-on. But I also take issue with benchmarks taken on different codebase and different architecture - that just can't be a reliable methodology if the goal is to measure architecture performance.
What I can say is that PS4 Pro CPU scaled nearly linearly with Mhz, compared to PS4, without any special optimisations taken. So at least that class of CPUs was not memory access bottlenecked.
Now - as I stated before - not every console was this lucky - in fact if we look back, PS3/360, PSP and N64 all fared really poorly, performing well below their on-paper spec.
The PPC architecture in PS3/360 was so problematic - I remember pathological cases where a PS3 CPU could actually run certain things slower than the PS2.
PS2/DC/PS1/XBox were 'ok' (more cache would have helped - but nothing dramatic). GCN performed well.
SonGoku
Member
Bigger change from? Remember Pro is a new design not a shrink so might as well invest the extra R&D for cost savings down the line on cooling and die size
I doubt its on 6nm theres nothing on its leaked specs that scream 6nm its just conjecture from DF, but we'll see I guess.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
Only about 8 more months of this back and forth
playsaves3
Member
All of this is correct the could shove a 4090 in here it won’t matter cause of that cpu what an awful console
Mr.Phoenix
Member
You realize DF did a test using the exact XSX CPU think its called the 4700s kit) and paired it with a 6700 GPU and ran Starfield right? And the game was GPU bottlenecked on that set up not CPU bottlenecked. And ran an average of 40fps and in some cases even 60fps. Using FSR quality 4K. When they switched it to FSR quality 1440p, it was mostly 60fps everywhere.
And that aside, this is also one of those games that are just not very well optimized, optimization has never been Bethesda strong suit.
My issue with this whole CPU bottleneck argument is that these CPUs are not even really being used properly. As I said previously, you have these situations where an 8c/16t CPU, has like only two threads clocked at 90%+ utilization, and the rest of them are averaging sub 25% utilization. That is just flat-out poor optimization. And some of you expect sony to do what? Give devs a CPU that can clock to like 5GFhz to make up for their inability to optimize for multicore processors properly.
If you are a system architect, and you are compiling usage data of your current hardware from hundreds of games to determine which areas need improvement. On the CPU side of things, you are not seeing games struggling at 30-40fps. What you are seeing sis CPU utilization. If you see that those games that are averaging 30-40fps have an average utilization of 40%... how in your right mind do you decide that what you need is a faster CPU?
Last edited:
Imtjnotu
Member
bullshit lol. xbox will be dropping more info on their nextbox around the launch of this machine.Only about 8 more months of this back and forth
its a never ending rotation lol
Similar threads
- Locked