No worries when you are the hardware king of video gaming.
Mark Hargett (Former PS5 Principal Software Engineer) on Variable Clocks
No you are reading it WRONG.
The PS5 has a power budget that power budget is in place for that reason,the PS5 doesn't drop performance based on thermal heat it does so based on workloads.
I understand what you're saying but I think Cerny is taking you for a ride with word play. We shall see very soon as his assertions will be thoroughly tested and he will be wrong (IMO). If true, then every other Architect at AMD /Dell/Intel/ MS/Apple need to quit as they've been outsmarted by simply shifting power based on need..... Do you really not think that no one else has thought about Sony's approach?
From your own link.
No it will not and you can fit with jobs 36CU easier than you can fit more jobs on 52CU.
You are been intentionally dishonest specially trying to compare it with AMD smart shift on a laptop
I only looked at Smart Shift because it was mentioned earlier (see earlier posts).
@i_own_u_4ever: It will hold devs back, if they have to think about one 4TF machine, and one 12TF machine. Devs would have to make the game work on the worst machine first and them port it to the best one. You'll get 120fps games on the XsX for sure, but no real next gen games. Next gen games will push a lot more polygons than last gen, but if the Lockhart machine isn't capable it'll just be a pain in the ass for devs.
@Martin_G_N said:
@i_own_u_4ever: It will hold devs back, if they have to think about one 4TF machine, and one 12TF machine. Devs would have to make the game work on the worst machine first and them port it to the best one. You'll get 120fps games on the XsX for sure, but no real next gen games. Next gen games will push a lot more polygons than last gen, but if the Lockhart machine isn't capable it'll just be a pain in the ass for devs.
Actually this may not be the case. If the 4TF has the same basic architecture then they just need an engine that scales with Assets /Physics /Light etc. This is only targeting 1440p so it doesn't need to be a monster. This could be the reason that they could not just have the OneX as the smaller machine. It wouldn't scale properly as the architecture and IO is too different... Therefore the new system needs to have
- Same SSD speed
- Velocity engine
- Similar IO
- Similar GPU (cut down version)
- Similar CPU (cut down version)
SSD and Velocity engine are key as without that then the game could really break as it may be designed around a set IO performance.
@ttboy said:
No you are reading it WRONG.
The PS5 has a power budget that power budget is in place for that reason,the PS5 doesn't drop performance based on thermal heat it does so based on workloads.
I understand what you're saying but I think Cerny is taking you for a ride with word play. We shall see very soon as his assertions will be thoroughly tested and he will be wrong (IMO). If true, then every other Architect at AMD /Dell/Intel/ MS/Apple need to quit as they've been outsmarted by simply shifting power based on need..... Do you really not think that no one else has thought about Sony's approach?
From your own link.
No it will not and you can fit with jobs 36CU easier than you can fit more jobs on 52CU.
You are been intentionally dishonest specially trying to compare it with AMD smart shift on a laptop
I only looked at Smart Shift because it was mentioned earlier (see earlier posts).
So what you are saying like @Pedro is that you chose to believe from Cerny what serve you best.
So if he say clock are variable that = true but if he say the PS5 performance is not based on heat but on workloads that = a lie.
I don't get it the damn xbox sries X has 52 CU active which produce more heat and i don't s you crying about the xbox,all systems produce heat,the PS5 use a systen that is quite novel and allow for much higher clocks to be use,because they tested a speed for the cooling solution they had so the GPU keep costant speed without affective thermals and in the case the CPU requires more power the GPU power is lower.
@tormentos said:
@ttboy said:
No you are reading it WRONG.
The PS5 has a power budget that power budget is in place for that reason,the PS5 doesn't drop performance based on thermal heat it does so based on workloads.
I understand what you're saying but I think Cerny is taking you for a ride with word play. We shall see very soon as his assertions will be thoroughly tested and he will be wrong (IMO). If true, then every other Architect at AMD /Dell/Intel/ MS/Apple need to quit as they've been outsmarted by simply shifting power based on need..... Do you really not think that no one else has thought about Sony's approach?
From your own link.
No it will not and you can fit with jobs 36CU easier than you can fit more jobs on 52CU.
You are been intentionally dishonest specially trying to compare it with AMD smart shift on a laptop
I only looked at Smart Shift because it was mentioned earlier (see earlier posts).
So what you are saying like @Pedro is that you chose to believe from Cerny what serve you best.
So if he say clock are variable that = true but if he say the PS5 performance is not based on heat but on workloads that = a lie.
I don't get it the damn xbox sries X has 52 CU active which produce more heat and i don't s you crying about the xbox,all systems produce heat,the PS5 use a systen that is quite novel and allow for much higher clocks to be use,because they tested a speed for the cooling solution they had so the GPU keep costant speed without affective thermals and in the case the CPU requires more power the GPU power is lower.
Cerny is a smart Developer but I don't trust the way he framed the discussion about the clocks. Variable clocks is nothing new so that actually makes sense, however his claim that the GPU will spend most of its time near max frequency is where eyebrows are raised. If he has an amazing cooling system then he is right and you will be right, but when you consider what that would mean it starts to fall apart. Basically for him to be right it would mean we have some stupid folks at all other consumer electronic companies who have been trying/failing to solve this performance /heat problem for ages.
I did say that Xbox isn't immune to heat problems. Their solution is to have a low enough fixed GPU/CPU clock to handle heat issue in most conditions. But like anything in Development there is always a situation that breaks your testing so you have to have a shut down mechanism.
I actually hope you are right because Cerny would've done something no one else has done. We will see in a few short months...
@ttboy said:
@tormentos said:
@ttboy said:
No you are reading it WRONG.
The PS5 has a power budget that power budget is in place for that reason,the PS5 doesn't drop performance based on thermal heat it does so based on workloads.
I understand what you're saying but I think Cerny is taking you for a ride with word play. We shall see very soon as his assertions will be thoroughly tested and he will be wrong (IMO). If true, then every other Architect at AMD /Dell/Intel/ MS/Apple need to quit as they've been outsmarted by simply shifting power based on need..... Do you really not think that no one else has thought about Sony's approach?
From your own link.
No it will not and you can fit with jobs 36CU easier than you can fit more jobs on 52CU.
You are been intentionally dishonest specially trying to compare it with AMD smart shift on a laptop
I only looked at Smart Shift because it was mentioned earlier (see earlier posts).
So what you are saying like @Pedro is that you chose to believe from Cerny what serve you best.
So if he say clock are variable that = true but if he say the PS5 performance is not based on heat but on workloads that = a lie.
I don't get it the damn xbox sries X has 52 CU active which produce more heat and i don't s you crying about the xbox,all systems produce heat,the PS5 use a systen that is quite novel and allow for much higher clocks to be use,because they tested a speed for the cooling solution they had so the GPU keep costant speed without affective thermals and in the case the CPU requires more power the GPU power is lower.
Cerny is a smart Developer but I don't trust the way he framed the discussion about the clocks. Variable clocks is nothing new so that actually makes sense, however his claim that the GPU will spend most of its time near max frequency is where eyebrows are raised. If he has an amazing cooling system then he is right and you will be right, but when you consider what that would mean it starts to fall apart. Basically for him to be right it would mean we have some stupid folks at all other consumer electronic companies who have been trying/failing to solve this performance /heat problem for ages.
I did say that Xbox isn't immune to heat problems. Their solution is to have a low enough fixed GPU/CPU clock to handle heat issue in most conditions. But like anything in Development there is always a situation that breaks your testing so you have to have a shut down mechanism.
I actually hope you are right because Cerny would've done something no one else has done. We will see in a few short months...
SmartShift adjust power based on load of each component, not how hot they are. That's why the cpu and gpu will be at max clocks for the majority of the time. If a game becomes gpu bound, it will shift power to the GPU and away from the CPU and vice versa. That's really it. It has nothing to do with thermals like traditional PC hardware without smartshift.
@Zero_epyon said:
SmartShift adjust power based on load of each component, not how hot they are. That's why the cpu and gpu will be at max clocks for the majority of the time. If a game becomes gpu bound, it will shift power to the GPU and away from the CPU and vice versa. That's really it. It has nothing to do with thermals like traditional PC hardware without smartshift.
That makes no sense. If they are both at max, what is the purpose of power shifting? What would they shift to if they are both at max?
@Pedro: That’s a good point. But that’s how smart shift works according to AMD. It’s not about thermals but about load.
@Pedro said:
@Zero_epyon said:
SmartShift adjust power based on load of each component, not how hot they are. That's why the cpu and gpu will be at max clocks for the majority of the time. If a game becomes gpu bound, it will shift power to the GPU and away from the CPU and vice versa. That's really it. It has nothing to do with thermals like traditional PC hardware without smartshift.
That makes no sense. If they are both at max, what is the purpose of power shifting? What would they shift to if they are both at max?
Yeah why would they have smartshift to begin with. To keep things cool they will allow a small percentage drop in power for gpu. Which cerny claims the hit to performance will be very very very small. When it comes to it smartshift comes in where the cpu will be sacrificed to insure the gpu stays withing those parameters. (something that was reported devs are already doing that basically) they cant say things will stay at max on variable clocks they cant guarantee that. Its just that the gpu is the priority they will keep it as close as possible.
@Zero_epyon said:
@Pedro: That’s a good point. But that’s how smart shift works according to AMD. It’s not about thermals but about load.
You are correct about the thermals but you don't powershift if both CPU and GPU are running at max. You would not have room to push either further.
@ttboy said:
Cerny is a smart Developer but I don't trust the way he framed the discussion about the clocks. Variable clocks is nothing new so that actually makes sense, however his claim that the GPU will spend most of its time near max frequency is where eyebrows are raised. If he has an amazing cooling system then he is right and you will be right, but when you consider what that would mean it starts to fall apart. Basically for him to be right it would mean we have some stupid folks at all other consumer electronic companies who have been trying/failing to solve this performance /heat problem for ages.
I did say that Xbox isn't immune to heat problems. Their solution is to have a low enough fixed GPU/CPU clock to handle heat issue in most conditions. But like anything in Development there is always a situation that breaks your testing so you have to have a shut down mechanism.
I actually hope you are right because Cerny would've done something no one else has done. We will see in a few short months...
Again you ar been intetionally dishonest,so should i doubt MS claim about hardware? They lie about DX12 and their cloud for the xbox one.
They deny a 40% gap as well,so should we believe anything they say about hardware?
Basically you chose to believe MS cooling solution work while cerny one will not.
Cerny? you are crediting MS and sony to much for AMD tech,sure they have a weight into what goes into each console because is the solution they see fit for their product,but lets not forget here who is behind this tech is AMD not sony or MS.
@Pedro said:
That makes no sense. If they are both at max, what is the purpose of power shifting? What would they shift to if they are both at max?
Because both can't be sustained indefinitely?
Again Boost on PC will run and stop running is not sustained,but is not the same as saying it will never boost.
So maybe both can reach max speed but can't be sustained.
@Pedro said:
@Zero_epyon said:
@Pedro: That’s a good point. But that’s how smart shift works according to AMD. It’s not about thermals but about load.
You are correct about the thermals but you don't powershift if both CPU and GPU are running at max. You would not have room to push either further.
This also bring some question.
"The CPU and GPU each have a power budget, of course the GPU power budget is the larger of the two," adds Cerny. "If the CPU doesn't use its power budget - for example, if it is capped at 3.5GHz - then the unused portion of the budget goes to the GPU.
Tell me how you can read this,i am not been sarcastic or anything tell me if i am wrong honestly asking.
Doesn't this read as the PS5 CPU not using all its CPU power budget while it run at 3.5ghz?
He say if the CPU is capped at 3.5ghz the unsed part goes to the GPU,but 3.5ghz is the ceiling isn't? So is it that CPU can go over 3.5ghz if power is shifted from the GPU side? Beause i can undertand logic been a problem with the GPU going over 2.23ghz speed but rising over 3.5ghz should cause no problems for the CPU.
@tormentos said:
Because both can't be sustained indefinitely?
Again Boost on PC will run and stop running is not sustained,but is not the same as saying it will never boost.
So maybe both can reach max speed but can't be sustained.
No they can't. They are using AMD Smartshift which is based on shifting power between the CPU and GPU depending on demand. This means that they cannot run at max frequency at the same time otherwise there is no point using Smartshift and there is no point having variable frequencies.
@tormentos said:
This also bring some question.
"The CPU and GPU each have a power budget, of course the GPU power budget is the larger of the two," adds Cerny. "If the CPU doesn't use its power budget - for example, if it is capped at 3.5GHz - then the unused portion of the budget goes to the GPU.
Tell me how you can read this,i am not been sarcastic or anything tell me if i am wrong honestly asking.
Doesn't this read as the PS5 CPU not using all its CPU power budget while it run at 3.5ghz?
He say if the CPU is capped at 3.5ghz the unsed part goes to the GPU,but 3.5ghz is the ceiling isn't? So is it that CPU can go over 3.5ghz if power is shifted from the GPU side? Beause i can undertand logic been a problem with the GPU going over 2.23ghz speed but rising over 3.5ghz should cause no problems for the CPU.
Cerny is using a hypothetical in this scenario and not directly relating it to the system. If he is, then he is purposely misleading the audience. Power is needed to increase the frequency. If both have a power budget that allows the CPU and the GPU to run at max frequency what is the point of power shifting? What would that additional power do when both are running at max frequency? The whole point of Smartshift is to work with a fixed power budget that is shared between the CPU and the GPU. Because its shared, it allows for lower overall power consumption and consistent thermals, that is why its debut was on a laptop. When more power is required by one of the two processors, one is throttle and the other is boosted. You can't overclock the GPU if its already running at max frequency.
Loading Video...
@Pedro said:
@tormentos said:
Because both can't be sustained indefinitely?
Again Boost on PC will run and stop running is not sustained,but is not the same as saying it will never boost.
So maybe both can reach max speed but can't be sustained.
No they can't. They are using AMD Smartshift which is based on shifting power between the CPU and GPU depending on demand. This means that they cannot run at max frequency at the same time otherwise there is no point using Smartshift and there is no point having variable frequencies.
Cerny is using a hypothetical in this scenario and not directly relating it to the system. If he is, then he is purposely misleading the audience. Power is needed to increase the frequency. If both have a power budget that allows the CPU and the GPU to run at max frequency what is the point of power shifting? What would that additional power do when both are running at max frequency? The whole point of Smartshift is to work with a fixed power budget that is shared between the CPU and the GPU. Because its shared, it allows for lower overall power consumption and consistent thermals, that is why its debut was on a laptop. When more power is required by one of the two processors, one is throttle and the other is boosted. You can't overclock the GPU if its already running at max frequency.
I actually know what smart shift is.
Is the answer he gaves,and what he say about both reaching max speed at once,is a pretty clear argument he is making.
Now i don't know if that will hold up and it sure be stupid of him to claim that both can run at max speed when they clarly can't and that would come back to hunt them.
@tormentos said:
I actually know what smart shift is.
Is the answer he gaves,and what he say about both reaching max speed at once,is a pretty clear argument he is making.
Now i don't know if that will hold up and it sure be stupid of him to claim that both can run at max speed when they clarly can't and that would come back to hunt them.
No, it wouldn't hurt him or Sony because it would not be something that someone can easily verify. The fact of the matter is that the GPU and CPU would not be running at max at the same time.
@Pedro: Cerny specifically said they could be running at max at the same time.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://wccftech.com/playstation-5-cpu-gpu-limits/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjZwvnl4qzqAhWNTt8KHeuRDhwQFjAEegQIBRAJ&usg=AOvVaw1R2cdWcnNRmTJBDsjVfl1A&cf=1&cshid=1593631215352
@joshrmeyer said:
@Pedro: Cerny specifically said they could be running at max at the same time.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://wccftech.com/playstation-5-cpu-gpu-limits/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjZwvnl4qzqAhWNTt8KHeuRDhwQFjAEegQIBRAJ&usg=AOvVaw1R2cdWcnNRmTJBDsjVfl1A&cf=1&cshid=1593631215352
It can only run either the CPU or the GPU at max. AMD explained how their Smartshift technology works and what it is used for. You don't power shift if you have the power budget to run both at max speeds. Tell me, what would be the purpose of the technology that allows for the overclocking of either the CPU or the GPU when both are already at max?
@Pedro: What you say makes sense. I'm just quoting what Cerny said. He was specifically asked about this. Maybe it's an efficiency thing and not a requirement that one or the other can't be at max. I'm no expert here.
@joshrmeyer: The following is speculation and is not being claim to be a fact.
I believe that the GPU was initially clocked to be lower and with the reveal of the Series X specs they explored their options which lead to the inclusion of Smartshift. This allows it to shrink the GPU gap between the PS5 and the Series X without changing much to the core system. So, now developers can get the extra performance where they need without needing to change the existing cooling system they had already designed.
Yes, everyone but rabid cows already knew this... hence why the XsX will have the superior versions of games. And the gap will probably widen as the gen goes on.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment