Did Goosen say that though? I don’t recall tbh.
I could see them only confirming it for xsx, but weird that they went further than just mentioning that game will be out on ps5.
However I just remembered something: Ubisoft openly held back PS4 and then X1X versions of the games for parity sakes. They were saying that they didn’t want one version to look better than the other. But at the same time, if I remember correctly they had games on x1 at 900p and 1080p on PS4 so idk.
I think you are misunderstanding what Im saying. I never said one would not have RT support. But one has invested way more in RT than the other and has far better RT perf and all and no it is not marketing speak at all. The gears dev dev said dedicated hardware RT not harware RT it is not the same thing. Semantics are important here.
The powerpoint doesn’t show also 100% of the XSX too for comprehension purposes and nda stuff.
How can it be misleading (as it is not my intention at all) if we quote exactly what the Xbox System Architect said? Who knows more about tf compute perf? Us or the guy behind the XSX?
1 Like
I know all RT isn’t equal. The loss in quality is due to the gap in the number of CU since that’s where the RT hardware is located.
Yeah it’s in the post The_Xboxer created above.
1 Like
That is the exact quote from andrew Goossen Xbox System Architect
“Without hardware acceleration, this work could have been done in the shaders, but would have consumed over 13 TFLOPs alone,” says Andrew Goossen. “For the Series X, this work is offloaded onto dedicated hardware and the shader can continue to run in parallel with full performance. In other words, Series X can effectively tap the equivalent of well over 25 TFLOPs of performance while ray tracing.”
1 Like
Ok well I agree that is misleading then. It can’t run the texture units in the CU’s while doing RT I think? Or am I missing something?
Can do both with dedicated hardware as he said
A bit of reading for a better understanding
What’s the Difference Between Hardware- and Software-Accelerated Ray Tracing?
Hardware acceleration makes a big difference. But the real distinction isn’t between hardware and software, but between GPU acceleration with and without dedicated RT Cores.
To add on what I said earlier regarding Crytek’s RT tech in their demo, that was running at 1080p. A huge difference from a game running at 4K60.
So what do they mean when they say each CU can perform four texture or ray ops per clock?
That means 208 Ray-tracing operations per clock if Im not mistaken.
It means they can’t do ray and texture ops at the same time like you claimed.
Ah didn’t read well the “OR” (semantics) indeed not at the same time you are right on that I give you that. If we can have more clarification later then good. But I stand corrected on dedicated rt cores lol till we see more on this side.
1 Like
But even the ps5 should have more rt cores than say a 2060, or better said, if ps5 doesn’t have enough cores to match a 2060, SX wouldn’t be able to do much rt wise either.
Not to mention other areas such as bandwidth where both are ahead of a 2060.
And I mean, a 2060 is enough to run all RT effects of Control at 720p60 (at the same 540p as ps5 demo it would be super locked at 60), with way way way higher quality than the rt reflections on Gt7.
Sorry, I’m not sure I understand. Both the PS5 and XSX have more RT units than the 2060 but RT performance can’t be measured one to one between both architectures. The Nvidia solution is more capable than AMD’s. BVH traversal is handled by the tensor cores for example while that operation has to be done by the shaders on both the XSX and PS5.
The 2060 isn’t meant to target the same resolutions as the PS5 and XSX though, so it’s not really of a problem that it has less memory bandwidth than either next gen console.
From what I gather bvh traversal is done by the cores on SX too (though you can come up with your own implementation and bypass the hardware though), what is done in the shaders is a simple decision make for intermediate hits.
What I meant to say was that not even matching a 2060 would be imo, terrible for those consoles. And while Minecraft on SX was well above what a 2060 can pull already, RT reflections on GT7 were super compromised in ways not even a 2060 needs to.
And for BW my point was just that Ps5 should have enough so that it shouldn’t be more compromised than what you get on a 2060, even if it’s targeting 4k60 (even more so because the render is relatively simple, it already runs at checkerboard 4k60 on a Pro for instance)
According to the patents and Microsoft’s own slide, the BVH traversal is handled by the shaders, not the RT hardware in the GPU. The BVH intersection computations is what’s handled by the RT hardware in the GPU.
We really don’t know what specs Minecraft were running on when rendered on the XSX. The only thing that’s clear from the footage is that it takes a performance hit. I would actually expect RT performance of both consoles to be between 2060 and 2070 levels in performance. I also don’t think anyone can say that the RT reflections in GT7 were compromised in ways that would not be needed in a 2060 because games don’t run at 4K60 with RT on a 2060 at all.
Regarding your comment on bandwidth, the PS5 memory bandwidth isn’t more compromised than what’s seen in the 2060 (448 GB/s vs 336 GB/s respectively), so I’m not sure what you mean here. The last GT doesn’t run at 4K60 CBR on the Pro, and even doubling the pixel count of a game increases the work load of a magnitude larger than the pixel throughput would have you think.
We can wait for official confirmation, though that will likely have to come in the form of leaks since I don’t expect Sony to ever confirm actual figures or configurations, but I would bet anything that the RT units in the PS5 are pretty much exactly like what we see in RDNA2 and the XSX outside of some slight customizations for specific instructions support, similar to what allows devs to “write to the metal” regarding the RT hardware in the XSX.
1 Like
Even nvidia RTX have RT core inside there SM.
Isn’t Texturing and shading two different things?
It’s more like shading and BVH traversal can be done in parallel which could mean a peak performance of 25 TF.
Texturing and BVH traversal may not be done at same time.
I also think Texturing and BVH traversal occur at different time? I don’t have complete knowledge of the graphics pipeline. Maybe someone can explain.
My point is : Even if the game is targeting 4k60, since the RT is targeting 540p it shouldn’t be as compromised as it was. A 2060 is handling way higher quality RT implementation at that level.
Of course the rest of the game would target 4k,but that’s what’s the extra oomph of the consoles over a 2060 is for.
However, GTSport being 1800pCBR muds my argument a bit, it can be the case of Ps5 simply not having much bandwidth left after bringing the game to native 4k.(Though similar reductions were seen in Ratchet).
And as a counter point. Forza is also targeting 4k60 but didn’t have any of the compromises, and had higher quality assets to boot.
I dunno if the RT hardware gap alone (from 52 to 36CUs) is enough to go from a 540p RT buffer, that skips objects at a distance, switch to lower lods for more complex objects, has no roughness to another one that was seemingly way higher resolution, reflected every object on screen even thin objects like cables, and the correct lods even for more complex objects, and had less mirror like reflections. This is a substantial difference for just 18% less hardware per frame.
1 Like
PS5 clocks being higher means the cycle is fair amount shorter timeframe though. Or did ya mean per frame?
1 Like