Why did Sony stay with 36CUs for the PS5?


If it's "rdna1" but with features of rdna2 and on rdna2 tech process - it is rdna2
It depends. What makes RDNA2 RDNA2?

But I partly agree. PS4 Pro GPU had some feats from Vega (for example double speed with half precision (8bit I think, but Im not sure)), it wasnt only doubled PS4 GPU as many said.
Same is here. Sony built on top of RDNA1 own custom GPU. It sure can be on level of RDNA2 or maybe higher.
It can have some feats from RDNA1 , some from RDNA2 and some which are not used elsewhere.

But point was, if they built on RDNA1, maybe they accepted, that max.limit of CU is 40 and that could be a reason, they needed to boost clocks.
It makes sense - logically. But I dont say its truth. I really dont know. It depends how long Sony cooperated with AMD vs MS and AMD.
As much as we can speculate I think the time for these threads in now pointless, we have consoles releasing within 3 months or so, I’m sure we can hold off till actual analysis are done for multi-plat games etc.


I wrote they sold them cell with 3 main cores. What is contrdictive in this. Maybe I could write "cell with ONLY 3 main cores" to be perfectly acurate. If that is what was misleading, Im sorry for that.
Using the word "cell" implies they had the same technology - which is false as the xenon doesn't contain any of the Sony or Toshiba technology, such as the EiB, or ability for cores to work independently of the main core, after setup, which are the cell technology that could be paired with any brawny 2-way core at that capability.

In the highly parallel cell clusters the PPC cores - that are all the technology the Xenon has - are used in a support role.


CU's cost money, clock speeds are free. :messenger_winking:

To a certain degree until you have to spend money on a better cooling solution.


Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
I doubt it had much to do with BC, it was probably the number they landed on for die size, performance and cost. Only MS seems to be playing the TF game.
What you wrote means that means they could not clock it higher--otherwise the chip gets errors... This is when you stop overclocking.

Yes, I understand how if you clock too high, than you're asking the transistors to switch faster than they're actually capable, which causes errors. The point I was alluding to is that it wasn't simply a case of PS5 running too hot. Cerny said that it was capable of even higher speeds, but logic issues held them back. That means we're looking at an architectural issue, which is something AMD will probably address in RDAN3.
If you want the most powerful console you get the xbox series x pure and simple. Lots of people care about this sort of thing ( powerful cars, motorbikes, phones etc). Power is everything imo. Combine that with consumer friendly practices and the xbox game pass and it becomes impossible to justify a ps5.
Jesus Christ, what the fuck is this post?

Is this eastwood333's alt account?


Because they're the hotrod coming off the line with cylinders blazing.

And in three years when the cu count actually starts to matter when devs are actually starting to push the hardware ps5pro will be ready.

Invalid GR

Some of the truth might be in Cerny's presentation.He mentioned 36 PS4 CUs at higher clocks are better than 48 CUs at lower clocks.
Maybe they expected MS to equip XSX with 48 CUs.
It makes sense from a "TF" point:
48CUs@1.825MHz = 11 TF
36CUs@2.23MHz = 10.2 TF


Gold Member
They have already lost the power war, the real question is whether MS will undercut them and they will also lose the value war at the same time. MS has way more money to be able to take a loss if they want, should be interesting to see if they decide to do so or just continue keeping on.

The only thing Sony has lost is the TF number spec sheet war. From what we've seen so far, that has not translated into any visual advantages for XSX. Sony has, by far, shown off the best looking next gen games.

Of course, we haven't seen any direct comparisons of 3rd party games yet. But when we do, the differences are going to be much smaller than they were between XB1 and PS4 or between Pro and XB1X.

If we look only at TF numbers, the XSX advantage is 17-18%. PS4 vs XB1 is 38%, XB1X vs Pro is 43%. 18% is nothing, and then we're not even taking into account the fact that the higher clocks of the PS5 will give it advantages in other ways. Plus, all that custom I/O hardware Sony has built in to make the whole system run closer to its theoretical peak performance. TFs are not everything.

Overall, the difference is gonna be smaller than "12 vs 10.3 TF" makes it sound like, to the point of basically being unnoticeable. Maybe a 4K game with dynamic resolution will drop to a slightly lower resolution slightly more often in the most demanding scenes on PS5, and it will be subtle enough that nobody except pixel counters will even notice.
Last edited:
Top Bottom