A 14TF Pro is too low of an upgrade, that's only 2 more TFLOPS vs the Series X.I'm kinda shocked some ppl would be disappointed in 14tf-18tf....for a mid gen refresh.
See, IMO comparing it to Xbox would be the first problem.A 14TF Pro is too low of an upgrade, that's only 2 more TFLOPS vs the Series X.
I don't know how to calculate TOPS but the FP16 numbers suggests 2.2 GHz if the Pro has 30 WGP or 60 CUs.A few ppl posted tweets in here.
I wasn't even gonna pay attention to that MLiD video until Kepler posted about it.
At the end of the day with all this jargon, there wouldn't be brand new games targeting the Pro to look like new gen games, right? The point of the Pro is just to increase quality of life features that are bed ridden under the current games? As well as increased framerate and graphical fidelity to what is already there?
I'm not sure what you are talking. If the FP16 performance of the Pro is 67.5 TFLOPS then the FP32 rate would be half of that.
The PS5 has 10 TFLOPS of FP 32 and It's FP16 performance is double that.
Not sure where you are getting the lol confidence from...the 7800xt is right about on par with 4070/3080 in raster benchmarks and it has 37tflops of fp32 compute compared to the pros 32.5, it has more bandwidth courtesy of dedicated ram and bus and all of those gpus provide significantly more performance than the 45% performance uplift stated for the pro in standard workloads. Now onto the comparison with the 3080/4070 not sure about you but I would be hesitant to claim that amd will be able to match let alone surpass nvidias current rt/ml architecture in their first try with dedicated hardware blocks.Lol nope.
That's only in terms of FLOPS, the various fill rates would be higher but the issue would be the numbers of ROPs,TMU and WGPs/CUs.See, IMO comparing it to Xbox would be the first problem.
I would compare it to the PS5.
Goes back to my post from Jan of last yearA 14TF Pro is too low of an upgrade, that's only 2 more TFLOPS vs the Series X.
Thats what I am hearing will be the buzzword to sell these pro machine, their performance in ray tracing and not overall teraflops this time.
tbf I don't his rasterization improvement seems way too low compared to other leaks and the rt improvement seems extremeAnd protip, don’t believe a word of what Moore’s Law is Dead is claiming. The guy just carpet bombs an entire area with info he finds over the web and claims he has "sources". He’s just a little better than RedGamingTech, which isn’t saying much.
What? People are definitely noticing those ugly FSR2 720p games upscaled to 1440p. A DLSS lite solution on a Pro model would be game changer for many.
its not 14tf, its 16.74tf if clocks are 2.18ghz, and 18.2tf if 2.45ghz (300tops info). Teraflop doesnt scale idealy and 45% improvement in raw perf. vs ps5 can be result of bandwidth limitation, cpu limitation (if they talking about fps in games not raw gpu power) etcA 14TF Pro is too low of an upgrade, that's only 2 more TFLOPS vs the Series X.
Not sure where you are getting the lol confidence from...the 7800xt is right about on par with 4070/3080 in raster benchmarks and it has 37tflops of fp32 compute compared to the pros 32.5, it has more bandwidth courtesy of dedicated ram and bus and all of those gpus provide significantly more performance than the 45% performance uplift stated for the pro in standard workloads. Now onto the comparison with the 3080/4070 not sure about you but I would be hesitant to claim that and will be able to match let alone surpass nvidias current rt/ml architecture in their first try with dedicated hardware blocks.
I would be extremely happy for the pro to prove me wrong and be amazing but from the information given to us so far its inferior to the 3080/4070 in GPU tech.
Dual-issue, of course.Yes i understand that.
I've been reading though that for the last year or so, Nvidia and (?) AMD are showing TF with dual issue shaders in mind.
So these 33.75TF for the Pro, are single or dual issue?
PT overdrive at 4k/30 DLSS Quality equivalent settings? I don't see that happening, not even a 4080 could do that. Maybe 1440p/30 with Quality upscaling.Depends on perspective, I guess. For example, would you consider running CP Overdrive at Circa 4k30 DLSS Quality Mode on a PS5 Pro groundbreaking (I would)? If so, I think you'll be happy; I don't see any reason why these specs couldn't accomplish this.
Dual-issue, of course.
Logical assumption. Single-issue would make 0 sense.Was that said in the MLID video or just a logical assumption?
TF is a meaningless number right now.A 14TF Pro is too low of an upgrade, that's only 2 more TFLOPS vs the Series X.
And?? If I'm building a gaming PC next year or in two years It will demolish the PS6 easily.It's about time we banned this clown, Moore's Bait Is Dead, as a source, here on GAF.
Game launches in September 2025.
PC + PS6 gen versions probably launch around march-june 2028.
PT overdrive at 4k/30 DLSS Quality equivalent settings? I don't see that happening, not even a 4080 could do that. Maybe 1440p/30 with Quality upscaling.
Where have you seen September 2025?It's about time we banned this clown, Moore's Bait Is Dead, as a source, here on GAF.
Game launches in September 2025.
PC + PS6 gen versions probably launch around march-june 2028.
Sounds more like cheating out while still making a 600+ consoleOG PS5 launched on 7nm, it is just the slim in 6nm right?
Yeah, it would mean a bigger chip edging to the size of the XSX one or bigger. The biggest problem would be the GPU new features backported to 6nm if they were to be designed for 5nm chips or below. It would explain why they did not move the Zen4c or something too though.
I’ve been saying they will start making premium consoles which is awesome for us console gamersTrue.
Point was more that some gaffers argued that PS4 Pro was released to prevent people moving to PC, but the situation today isn't the same and if that would be the reason, it wouldn't make sense as it would be a waste of investment for Sony.
Is that so?
It wasn't just some gaffers, Shawn Layden himself said as much.True.
Point was more that some gaffers argued that PS4 Pro was released to prevent people moving to PC, but the situation today isn't the same and if that would be the reason, it wouldn't make sense as it would be a waste of investment for Sony.
True.
Point was more that some gaffers argued that PS4 Pro was released to prevent people moving to PC, but the situation today isn't the same and if that would be the reason, it wouldn't make sense as it would be a waste of investment for Sony.
It was actually Andrew House who said itIt wasn't just some gaffers, Shawn Layden himself said as much.
Not sure what youre trying to argue here....the 3080/4070/7800xt are literally within 3-7% of each other in standard workloads, only the pro has less compute than the 7800xt and less bandwidth via shared bus. Not to mention its performance uplift in standard workloads is stated to be 45% which is again a sign its bandwidth starved.
I would be extremely happy for the pro to prove me wrong and be amazing but from the information given to us so far its inferior to the 3080/4070 in GPU tech.
I am doing both. PS5 Pro on launch, then build a PC 1+ year later when GTA6 finally releases on PC.The Pro better runs GTAVI at 60fps or theres no reason for me to buy It. Otherwise I'm building a new gaming PC just for GTAVI.
Ah, yeah, my bad. Mixed them up.It was actually Andrew House who said it
But yeah it wasn't some Gaffers who started that argument
One of the reasons why Sony is coming out with the PlayStation 4 Pro is to help keep gamers inside the PlayStation ecosystem instead of moving over to PC to find the high-end experience they're looking for. This is according to PlayStation president Andrew House, who shared his thoughts in a new interview.
"I saw some data that really influenced me," House told The Guardian. "It suggested that there's a dip mid-console lifecycle where the players who want the very best graphical experience will start to migrate to PC, because that's obviously where it's to be had. We wanted to keep those people within our ecosystem by giving them the very best and very highest [performance quality]. So the net result of those thoughts was PlayStation 4 Pro--and, by and large, a graphical approach to game improvement."
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/sony-explains-how-ps4-pro-may-help-keep-people-fro/1100-6443431/
I would hold my horses if I were you. There's absolutely no guarantee it'll be as performant as the 3080 in pure ray-traced workloads, let alone just below Lovelace. Up to 4x is the absolute max and we have to be very hopeful it'll ever translate to real-world performance. The figure said 2-3x and further (I heard up to 4x) or something along those lines. It's better to be conservative than to take the absolute maximum numbers. It's also difficult to know exactly how the ray-tracing numbers compare because we don't actually have pure ray-traced benchmarks on the regular PS5 to use as a baseline. So it's 2-4x from a relatively unknown number that I used the 6700 XT for comparison.1. Why are you conveniently referencing raster only workload when you claimed this:
PS5 Pro RT is cleary much more performant than 3080 RT tech maybe even a smidge degree above Lovelace with talks of up to 4x PS5 RT
quite good, rtx 3090 has 285tops tough rtx4070ti 641topsHow good is 300 tops anyway?
It'll varry because of architecture but that's a little under the RTX 4060 but more that the RX 6900XT .How good is 300 tops anyway?
This is literally the point I was making.With the PS5 Pro though? It's clear that their customers moving to PC is no longer a concern because they said that they would come to PC instead of trying to bring PC players to PlayStation. Xbox is a non-factor and the next-gen Nintendo console obviously won't be as powerful as even the base PS5. So what's the goal behind the Pro? It won't attract new customers or keep existing ones. It won't have high-profit margins. It won't drive subscriptions. So what's the objective?
It's leak week.
So what's the goal behind the Pro? It won't attract new customers or keep existing ones. It won't have high-profit margins. It won't drive subscriptions. So what's the objective?
The APU was fully leaked, though.
Not by much, assuming the two shade engine thing is real. 60/64 or 52/56 CUs is the likely amount of CUs we are getting,the issue would be clock rate and the minimum frequency is looking like it might be closed to the PS5.Not sure what youre trying to argue here....the 3080/4070/7800xt are literally within 3-7% of each other in standard workloads, only the pro has less compute than the 7800xt and less bandwidth via shared bus. Not to mention its performance uplift in standard workloads is stated to be 45% which is again a sign its bandwidth starved.
I feel like increasing the RAM would be a much better option than increasing the storage.Still think a lower-clocked Zen 4C + higher clocked 54CU setup would've made more sense, but based on more up to date rumour this is where I'm coming down at the moment..
I think this was the Gonzalo or Oberon thing? Forgot the name but as I recall, it was accurate except for the clocks.The PS5? Not really. There was something leaked to github that said PS5 had a 9tf GPU, but obviously that was wrong.
My only thinking is that while more RAM will be welcome and the chips themselves wouldn't be prohibitively expensive, the extra 64-bit (for 18GB over 320-Bit) or 128-Bit (for 20GB over 384-Bit) GDDR6 memory interfaces on the APU would add a lot of complexity and area to the Die. Sony seem to like the simple 256-Bit setup.I feel like increasing the RAM would be a much better option than increasing the storage.
Customers can easily slap in more storage space but the RAM is fixed and more advance ray tracing along with the rumored PSSR will eat more RAM.
hmm i doubt that
Sony said cost cutting was going to be very difficult
I’m not expecting any decreases in price this year
Ah......ok. I misread thicc_girls_are_teh_best then. So marketing bullshit has finally made teraflops completely meaningless, it would seem.
Because even in real-world performance this is looking like its going to end up inferior to a 3080/4070 which I thought was the minimum bar for a worthy mid gen upgrade. Its bandwidth starved, is quite limited in terms of a compute jump compared even to something like the ps4pro, and it would be optimistic to say its going to equal nvidia in reconstruction and rt In amds first real try with dedicated blocks.
The whole thing is odd and numbers do not fit. 300 tops 8bit is a lot and suggest 2450 Mhz GPU clock which doesn't fit with the rest. Why would they downclock the GPU when using 36CUs for PS5 BC?This should be the contrary.
For instance 2450 Mhz GPU would suggest +37 dual Tflops (+18 single tflops), not 33.
EDIT: Actually this would suggest a GPU clocked at 3.23 Ghz for PS5 BC.But still the 300 TOPs does not fit with the 33 tflops number
My only thinking is that while more RAM will be welcome and the chips themselves wouldn't be prohibitively expensive, the extra 64-bit (for 18GB over 320-Bit) or 128-Bit (for 20GB over 384-Bit) GDDR6 memory interfaces on the APU would add a lot of complexity and area to the Die. Sony seem to like the simple 256-Bit setup.
Might be better to offload as much of the 2.5-3.5GB OS footprint to cheap DDR ram with a small 16-32-Bit interface and then give that extra GDDR6 RAM back to devs to use.
A usable 16GB @ 576GB/s in the Pro would still be a decent (though not ideal) bump over the useable 12.5-13.5GB @ 448GB/s in the base system.
I doubt framebuffers will get much bigger and that extra RAM would be about right for larger RT BVH structures & AI/ML upscaling workloads.
The PS5? Not really. There was something leaked to github that said PS5 had a 9tf GPU, but obviously that was wrong.