Brigandier
Member
Are we expecting a better CPU than just an increase in clock speed?? I certainly am.
-
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.
Rumor: PS5 Pro Codenamed "Trinity" targeting Late 2024 (some alleged specs leaked)
- Thread starter MisterXDTV
- Start date
- Rumor Platform
Tams
Member
Well, I ain't reading all that.
All I know is that there's only been one substantial mid-gen refresh that's been marketed as being more powerful: the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X one.
All the others have just been either 'stealth' or at least come across minor improvements.
This is the first I've heard of the Series X/S being a 'mid-gen refresh', which if true, lol Microsoft.
All I know is that there's only been one substantial mid-gen refresh that's been marketed as being more powerful: the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X one.
All the others have just been either 'stealth' or at least come across minor improvements.
This is the first I've heard of the Series X/S being a 'mid-gen refresh', which if true, lol Microsoft.
Mr.Phoenix
Member
But this is just not true. And you can't say the outrage over their coverage is ridiculous when the actual games speak for themselves.
But more on the point of it not being true, if Nvidia and AMD have taught us anything, and why I used that reference, is that TF does not tell the whole story. There are things that the PS5 APU is objectively `factually` better at too. And when looking at a whole system, those things can come to bare.
A more objective way to look at this, if you are not being biased, is to simply point out that there are certain areas or types of games/engines that ones APU excels over the other and vice versa.
And on the outrage, this is also an obvious thing. Their coverage is very questionable when the very things they point out when comparing GPUs and CPUs on the PC side of things, and when they seem very well versed in the nuances of systems in the PC space... suddenly all go out the window and become distilled to being all about a TF number in the console space. That makes no sense at all. These are people that would even speak to the fact that one GPU vendor has better drivers than the other as an advantage, but then dismiss that PS5 has more mature tools and is easier to develop for as if that's not part of the strengths of a platform.
And lastly, if you read what I said, as I said it... what I said applies to anyone that is guilty of it. We just happen to be talking about Df here. You cannot be in the business of critiquing and analyzing the very companies that write your paychecks. And if you don't see the obvious pitfalls with that? Then I have to start wondering if you aren't on such a similar payroll. For your sake, I would hope that you are, cause if you weren't.. then your stance truly is sad.
Last edited:
Rykan
Member
What you're describing is not objective. It is a false balance narrative. Just because the PS5 GPU has certain advantages in certain scenarios does not mean that its performance is the same as the one in the series X overall.
How much did DF get paid for their coverage?
Mr.Phoenix
Member
again, there is a lot more to GPU than just the raw TF throughput. And the way the PS5 and XBX APUs are, is such that one is not all round just simply better than the other. And that shows in the games.
Case in point, look at the PS4 vs XB1 APU. The PS4 was just flat-out better. There is not a single case, where a game just performed better on the XB1 than it did on the PS4. On any metric whatsoever. The same cannot be said about the PS5 and XBX, there are games where the PS5 performs better in some shape or form. And this is oin at the analysis DF has done thus far of the games that have been released for them.
anyways, I am bowing out of this conversation. At this point, you are arguing to win and not to learn/share.
Rykan
Member
There is more to GPU factors than just raw TF output, but what you're doing is pretending that every factor is of equal value and importance, and that's simply not accurate.
It's interesting that you feel DF doesn't take every aspect into account when they come to the conclusion that Xbox has a better GPU, even going as far to call them biased, yet you point towards game comparison of multiplatform games as the definitive answer on GPU performance, despite the fact that there are loads of other factors at play.
Last edited:
You can't compare them tho.ps4 was a whole new generation with brand new game engines while ps5 is mostly cross platform and games made on ps4 engines upscaled. It's like having a runner start hundreds of feet ahead and saying look we won. When it was never the same start at all. Ps4 was a brand new generation while ps5 was mostly cross gen upscale. Ps5 Wil have metacritics higher because it is not really "brand new tech" on the ps5 games while ps4 was all new even so ps3 was not backward compatible with new liblary
Mr.Phoenix
Member
Dude pick one... do loads of factors at play matter or not?
You cant on the one hand dismiss that there are loads of factors to an APUs strengths and then the next second say there are loads of factors and that's why one platform sometimes performs better than the other.
Cause if thats the case then you are doin' the very same thing DF does.
And I am not nor have I ever spoken to the strength of these `factors`... I am simply saying, that if we are being objective here, the objective fact of the matter, I that almost 3 years into this gen, we are still seeing situations where some games perform better on the PS5 than on the XBX. That is just a fact. That such a fact exists means that it is unreasonable, and even biased, to talk or pretend like that is not the case or to dismiss it. You cannot come and authoritatively say, XBX is better than PS5 because the real-world data (the games) simply does not bac that claim.
again, look at the PS4 and XB1. PS4 APU is better than the XB1.... now, that is an objective, conclusive fact. It's not even an argument or discussion. The PS4 ran pretty much every single MP game better than the XB1. And yes.. you should point to MP games when doing comparisons... why the hell would I even need to explain why that would be the case? Do you know how Spiderman would run on the XBX?
Oh you wont? Why is it seeing more games with the quality of ue5 tech demo a pre-requisite?
Did the ps4 pro gimped the base ps4 version of God of War 2018? How about Spider-man? How about GoT? How about 3rd party games?
Be honest.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
A bit testy there, Pedro but yes, It is. As is always the case with these type of rumours the few percent of those that are really excited for an upgrade want a $1000 monster and don't mind paying for it.
That's fine but at the end of the day a PS5 Pro like the PS4 Pro before it is mostly a business decision from Sony to make even more profit and thus will provide a minimal/subtle upgrade for the most part (looks at TLOU 2).
James Sawyer Ford
Member
Ps4 pro was a significant upgrade imho. The resolution difference was extremely obvious from the get go
I do have my doubts about Tom and his hardware leaks. He has credibility but it is often close to release promotional leaks but for these hardware leaks he seems to come out at opportune times and they're yet to be proven. I'll hold judgment until after September.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Maybe there are some games with a significant resolution difference but the one comparison I can comment on is TLOU 2 running on a PS4 slim and Pro on a 55" Panasonic OLED. The difference was minimal with Pro being slightly sharper on my TV. That was the pinnacle PS4 game by arguably the best dev. Unfortunately I did no more comparisons as the fans on that thing were ridiculous and my brother got rid in short order.
Also, IMO, even a very noticeable resolution (or e.g. same graphics, double frame rate) bump alone doesn't justify buying a whole new system at the same price as the OG.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Give me locked games at 60 fps and minimum 1440p with the bells and whistles and I'm happy. Something I thought ps5 would offer but I'm in acceptance now.
Plus who doesn't like buying new hardware. Like I keep reiterating, make it 799 and a banger.
Plus who doesn't like buying new hardware. Like I keep reiterating, make it 799 and a banger.
manzo
Member
Like with PS4 Pro, it brings nothing to the table except better performance. Not needed but welcomed by enthusiasts. Your defacto FIFA/Madden/NHL people won’t care, but us board dwellers care.
The Pro console goes to living room, the previous console goes to kid’s room as a dedicated Minecraft machine.
The Pro console goes to living room, the previous console goes to kid’s room as a dedicated Minecraft machine.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Console generations were always the chance to do major deviations, they were not slapped together parts designed for a market that offers minor updates / constant iteration.
Look at PS4 Pro vs PS5, look at PS2 vs PS3, look at Xbox One and Xbox Series X|S.
Some features will be reused, many will be new as that is the entire point of the new generation reset: just enough backwards compatibility support to carry the digital library forward (plus some software enhancements you can layer on top), but the focus is to enable new dreams / new horizons (and some new puzzles) in a compact box that developers can optimise for years (that is how it punches above their weight, but being designed/customised at the architecture and components level for the problem at hand).
What major breakthrough created for PS4 Pro enabled PS5?
I am sorry, but I still see the main beneficiary of Pro consoles being the console manufacturer that manages to fill a gap now that console generations have gotten longer… cross generation support has grown and devs are spending (less incentive too) less and less time working on each box…
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
The PS4 wasn't backwards compatible. Unlike the PS5 which can play all the PS4 games.
Bo_Hazem
Banned
Don't know, man. Spider-man at 6K reconstructed from 4K looks better than life.
TheRedRiders
Member
REDRZA MWS
Member
Yes, and if console generations are going to be longer, we need Pro consoles. Im ok with it. A 400-500 dollar consile every 4-5 years, while not HAVING to upgrade to enjoy the generation of games, is a good thing. People upgrade their cell phones quicker than that and in many cases they are well over 1k.
REDRZA MWS
Member
I agree. A banger at 799 is like Steph burying a 3. Easy money.
ToTTenTranz
Banned
I'd guess it will use Zen 4c or 5c. Smaller footprint and better power consumption at lower clocks.
The console is always going to be GPU limited, there's no need for a big CPU boost.
Agree.
I always post about before 2013 I had no idea what a TF was. I always looked at ROPs, shaders, texture rate, fill rate, etc when looking at GPU's. Hell, for CPU's I was more interested in instruction set compatibility vs speed.
And this is coming from someone thats a layman to PC parts, info.
Interesting.....
Cannot wait for this to launch. I was one of those that said I was content, wouldn't care about a Pro model...until I got PSVR 2. And while it is fine as is....a lil extra oomph wouldn't hurt for VR.
Rykan
Member
What do you mean "Pick one"? At no point have I argued that different factors do not matter. In fact, I've said the exact opposite.
The PlayStation 5's GPU has advantages in certain scenarios, the Xbox Series X has advantages in others. What you're arguing is that this means that both GPU's are equal and anyone saying that the Xbox Series X GPU is better is therefore "Biased" or "paid off". The PS5's GPU's advantages only come to shine in very specific scenarios. In most regular cases, when strictly talking about GPU performance, the Xbox Series X has a more powerful and capable GPU. Their particular strengths aren't equal.
This approach only holds true if we disregard all other factors in game development, such as development tools and resource allocation, which play a significant role. Currently, the Playstation 5 is outselling the Xbox Series consoles by a significant margin. Moreover, Xbox Series Sales are divided between Series S and Series X. Most resource allocation for optimization would be directed towards the system with the highest install base, which is the PS5.
In fact, Digital Foundry, in the same video we discussed earlier, suggests that any differences between the two systems are likely due to software rather than hardware.
While the PS5 may have had certain advantages early in this generation, most games now tend to aim for parity between the two systems. For instance, in the case of Resident Evil 4 remake, the Series X version was actually downgraded post-release to match the PS5 version.
In other scenarios, the PS5 may have a slight lead in FPS, but the Series X often runs at a higher resolution due to its more capable GPU.
You absolutely can come and say that Xbox Series X has more capable hardware without the games showing that right now, because that opinion is based on years of experience analyzing video game tech and hardware, and not just result based analysis that ignores every single other aspect of game development that can impact performance.
Last edited:
PeteBull
Member
DF has proven to be biased towards microsoft mashines many times by now, just read their xss review when they praise it as some unimagineable sweetspot of power and value, and even casuals knew not to buy many of those(since worldwide ratio ps5 vs xss+xsx is 2:1 already;p).
Will be fun in 1,5year and onwards with ps5slim probably costing close if not same to current xss 1tb and much more expensive but vastly powerful ps5pr0 and 4way comparisions ps5slim vs ps5pr0 vs xss vs xsx and microsoft mashines losing badly on all fronts ;D
Those tears and excuses will be glorious
Well - to start with internet discourse ignored this argument for well - as long as console wars have been happening, so 40 odd years now - it's always been 'absolute truth of cross-platform titles' that is used as main tool-of-arguments.
The other thing is that statistical implications of development structure on end-results are incredibly poorly understood. Architecturally - starting with HD Twins software became really PC/DirectX centric, so anything that wasn't natively in that stack was automatically at a disadvantage from effort/optimization perspective. So extra spend (at least in early years) is necessary for some platforms irrespective of their market position. But that doesn't automatically lead to better results, sometimes it's there just to close the software gap.
And as you note later - software gap is where most of the differences are today - with hw so commonalized there are no functional differences left.
Sure - but we've had this song & dance many times before - Saturn, PS2, the first XB, PS3 etc. The delta just happens to be the smallest in history to date this time, so even taken at face value - it's kind of a nothing statement.
Horseganador
Member
PS5 PRO will be a system with twice the power and more modern architecture, ram with greater bandwidth and a slight overclock to the CPU for $499 for those who want something more powerful at the end of 2024 for $100 more, the vast majority will continue to buy the basic PS5, luckily the people who ask for $800-1000 machines are not CEOs because you don't see the economic disaster that would be, they would sell very little.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
I would think they would need to double CUs wouldn't they? Similar to ps4 to pro? So wouldn't that be 72 CU?
asdasdasdbb
Member
Doubling would have made some sense. But they don't have to. The PS5 Pro may end up being not that big of an improvement.
Bernoulli
M2 slut
you are not objective
when we compare GPU an RTX 4060 will never outperform an RTX 4080 in ANY case
the PS5 is outperforming the xbox in most games released, the performance is the same
that's why Mark cerny said to not rely on teraflops to mesure performance
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
I think people are going to be disappointed when they hear TFs for this machine as far as pure brute force power goes
Bernoulli
M2 slut
no point in relying on TFs
there are other parts to improve like clocks, memory speed but it all comes down to the software
as we have seen the 9TFs console performing the same or better than the 12tfs one
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
Exactly why they wont push that number this time around
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Ps5 is 10 tflops, not 9. And it performs like a 10 tflops console in many games where the 12 tflops console performs like a 12 tflops console.
In some Games it performs equal or better but that could be fire to the dx12 overhead and other engine limitations. Tflops are tflops. They are still the best way to measure the consoles graphics performance. Even with amd faking/inflating the tflops counts with rdna3 cards.
If tflops didn’t matter then the ps5 wouldn’t be dropping to 720p and sub 720p in games like ff16 and Star Wars. No amount of clock speeds or memory io utilization saved the ps5 there. They needed a more powerful gpu, plain and simple.
You guys need to stop falling for pr bs from these guys. Cerny said more cus isn’t the answer and yet with the pro he’s going to have 60 cus anyway. Gtfo. These guys are masters of pr and shouldn’t be trusted. Ps5 was based on rdna 2 6000 series cards and every single card from the 10 tflops 32 cu 6600xt to the 13 tflops 40 cu 6700xt to the 16 tflops 60 cu 6800 offered a more or less linear performance increase.
TLZ
Banned
Probably add another 18CUs to become 54CUs to keep PS4 compatibility (multiples of 18).
Crispy Gamer
Member
Fascinating conversation while I agree that a TF number isn't everything while evaluating performance it's still extremely important when marketing a new product it's why I think it'll be at least 20 TF even if in practice it's 3-4 times stronger due to efficiency than base PS5 that's hard to market to people outside of forums
asdasdasdbb
Member
Remember the dual shaders. But getting to 40 seems unlikely if it's only 50% more CUs.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
My guess is the headline TF figure will fall into the 13-15TF bracket and as Heisenberg says Sony will barely mention or talk about such metrics.
Gudji
Member
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Using the same clocks now, what would that translate into TF wise? Out of curiosity.
asdasdasdbb
Member
So the PS5 pro will have 96 ROPs,224 TMUs and 56 CU if that tweet is accurate.
The PRO TFLOPS should 31-32 tflops if the GPU stays the same or push slightly to 2.3 GHz,its paper specs are close to a rtx 3080 ti with the ti having a slight texture fill rate advantage if the 3080 is clocked at 1.9 GHz
The PRO TFLOPS should 31-32 tflops if the GPU stays the same or push slightly to 2.3 GHz,its paper specs are close to a rtx 3080 ti with the ti having a slight texture fill rate advantage if the 3080 is clocked at 1.9 GHz
Last edited:
I've held off buying a PS5 cos of the expectation of a Pro model (that and the fact it was nigh on impossible to buy one for the first 1 or 2 years). So if the Pro model exists/will exist, it'd be a day 1 purchase for me. Wet dream territory would be if it's smaller than the current PS5 without sacrificing thermal performance or noise!
Tripolygon
Banned
It's not a false balance narrative, this shit has been discussed to death. If you put the GPUs side by side and layout the specs, they trade blows in different areas which play out based on games. You see PS5 win some and XSX win some and they are equal in some. Yes, software plays a role in this as well.
If you go based on teraflops Series X is ~20% higher than PS5
PS5= 36 CUs x 64 x 2.23 GHz x 2 = 10,275GF or 10.28TF
XSX= 52 CUs x 64 x 1.825 GHz x 2 = 12,147 GF, or 12.1TF
If you go based on rasterization, PS5 is ~20% higher than Series X
PS5= 4 x 2.23 = 8.92 BT/s
XSX= 4 x 1.825 = 7.3 BT/s
Thats not a balanced narrative that's just objective facts based on math calculated from the specifications.
Loxus
Member
54 CUs active is more likely.
One WGP disabled for each Shader Engine.
Bry0
Member
Dual issue hasn’t meant jack on rdna 3 in game performance. Just want people to be cognizant of this. 30 (performs like ~15) lol
Last edited:
Mr.Phoenix
Member
Disagree. And Cerny didn't say more CUs are not the answer, he simply said it makes sense for them to use faster CUs than just use more CUs. And him saying that wouldn't mean that they would never increase the CU count. And in truth, if all they have done is increase it to 60CUs...just 8 more than the XSX, after3+ years, that means that his original stance still holds true. Focusing on faster CUs (assuming those 60CUs clock at over 2.3Ghz) as opposed to just having more of them.
And also... NO. I never felt TFs were the best way to measure performance and I still don't And I didn't need Cerny to say the same thing. I start thinking this was after the 2080 GPU. I mean, Sony could release a PS5pro with a 12TF RDNA 3+ GPU, 96MB of infinity cache and let's say for argument's sake 60 Ml core/units, and that system would run circles around the XSX. Even while having the same `TF` number.
At the same time, no one is saying TFs do not matter. What a lot of people are saying though, is that more than ever, especially when the TF number between the two consoles is not so vastly different... is that it's not `all` that matters. Eg... if the XSX was a 15TF console to the PS5s 10TF? There wouldn't be a single game out here where the PS5 performs better than the XSX. No matter how much better the tools are or whatever the inda IO the PS5 has.
I don't see that happening. Even if that GPU is clocked at 2200mhz (less than the clocks in the PS5, it's still going to be a 16.8TF GPU. If at 2300Mhz, that's a 17.6TF GPU, at 2400Mhz, that's a 18.4TF GPU.
Personally, I see it landing anywhere between a 17 - 18TF GPU. Just on the optics alone. It would kinda be stupid to release a Pro console whose TF number (which unfortunately is what everyone would see first anyways) is just 1-3TF more than the XSX. On the tech side of things though, I can see, and there is proof to back this, that on a 5nm node, they can easily hit clocks of over 2300Mhz.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll